Theodota Nantsou’s Post

"If you consider yourself a climate science supporter, you probably wouldn’t think simple exposure to a skeptic’s claim could shift your views. Our new research has produced worrying findings. Climate misinformation may be more effective than we’d like to think because of a phenomenon called the illusory truth effect. In short, we are more likely to believe a lie if we encounter it repeatedly. Worse, the effect works immediately — a lie seems to be more true even after just one repetition. As our social media feeds fill up with AI-driven bots, sheer repetition of lies may erode the most essential resource for action on climate change — public support. Traditional media has a different problem — in their commitment to presenting both sides, journalists often platform climate skeptics whose untrue claims add to the repetition of misinformation."

For all the educators and climate communicators who encounter audiences that still doubt climate change to be 'real' or caused by humans, this study's findings suggests that a consensus message (e.g., did you know that more than 97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and human-caused) can help move the needle on climate beliefs! This is a non-polarizing approach that has been found to be effective across different audiences, without causing blowback! https://lnkd.in/gmRQH3_7

The 10 New Insights in #Climate #Science series is an annual effort of science synthesis and science communication, aimed at highlighting key recent advances in climate change research, on time for the UN Climate Change COP. The ultimate purpose is to equip #policymakers and other decision-makers with essential knowledge to make sense of and confront the climate emergency. Contribute and share.

Last week governments and climate scientists met in Istanbul for #IPCC60 to decide on key outputs for the next few years. Want to know what they agreed and why? Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Uta Klönne and Alexander Nauels break down the outcome in our new blog.

“Discussion and argument are essential parts of science; the greatest talent is the ability to strip a theory until the simple basic idea emerges with clarity.” — Albert Einstein —  A third of UK teenagers believe climate change is “exaggerated”, a report has found, as YouTube videos promoting a new kind of climate denial aimed at young people proliferate on the platform. Previously, most climate deniers pushed the belief that climate breakdown was not happening or, if it was, that humans were not causing it. Now, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) has found that most climate denial videos on YouTube push the idea that climate solutions do not work, climate science and the climate movement are unreliable, or that the effects of global heating are beneficial or harmless. https://lnkd.in/dvR_HgGC

When the scientific community appears to agree on climactic events, it would seem wise to take action. But there also appears to be a “catch-22” within the scientific community surrounding climate science. Because, if you go against the climate narrative that is popularly portrayed in the media or according to the media-claimed scientific consensus, you are often labeled as a climate “skeptic” or climate “denier.” Any video on YouTube with the word climate change will result in a context flag from the United Nations declaring what they believe climate change is. Is the scientific consensus that the media so often points to about climate science legitimate? Is the scientific consensus that the media so often points to about climate science legitimate? Are political leaders, celebrities, and climate activists facing the “threat” of the “climate crisis” with courage and honesty? Let’s examine a few popular claims about the supposed climate crisis and look at what the science shows regarding these claims. https://lnkd.in/dYrdDy2X

Some positive news from the online newsletter Anthropocene: People underestimate scientific consensus on climate. Correcting the record goes a long way. Communicating the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change – at least 97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is happening and human activity is the main cause – can strengthen people’s climate beliefs, according to a massive new study with global reach. Read the rest of the story here: https://lnkd.in/e-rwwRUm

CLIMATE THE MOVIE (THE COLD TRUTH) DIRECTOR MARTIN DURKIN PRODUCER TOM NELSON This film exposes the climate alarm as an invented scare without any basis in science. It shows that mainstream studies and official data do not support the claim that we are witnessing an increase in extreme weather events – hurricanes, droughts, heatwaves, wildfires and all the rest. It emphatically counters the claim that current temperatures and levels of atmospheric CO2 are unusually and worryingly high. On the contrary, it is very clearly the case, as can be seen in all mainstream studies, that, compared to the last half billion years of earth’s history, both current temperatures and CO2 levels are extremely and unusually low. We are currently in an ice age. It also shows that there is no evidence that changing levels of CO2 (it has changed many times) has ever ‘driven’ climate change in the past.   Why then, are we told, again and again, that ‘catastrophic man-made climate-change’ is an irrefutable fact? Why are we told that there is no evidence that contradicts it? Why are we told that anyone who questions ‘climate chaos’ is a ‘flat-earther’ and a ‘science-denier’?   The film explores the nature of the consensus behind climate change. It describes the origins of the climate funding bandwagon, and the rise of the trillion-dollar climate industry. It describes the hundreds of thousands of jobs that depend on the climate crisis. It explains the enormous pressure on scientists and others not to question the climate alarm: the withdrawal of funds, rejection by science journals, social ostracism.   But the climate alarm is much more than a funding and jobs bandwagon. The film explores the politics of climate. From the beginning, the climate scare was political. The culprit was free-market industrial capitalism. The solution was higher taxes and more regulation. From the start, the climate alarm appealed to, and has been adopted and promoted by, those groups who favour bigger government.   This is the unspoken political divide behind the climate alarm. The climate scare appeals especially to all those in the sprawling publicly-funded establishment. This includes the largely publicly-funded Western intelligentsia, for whom climate has become a moral cause. In these circles, to criticise or question the climate alarm has become is a breach of social etiquette.   The film was shot on location in the U.S., Canada, Israel, Kenya and UK.   The film includes interviews with a number of very prominent scientists, including Professor Steven Koonin (author of ‘Unsettled’, a former provost and vice-president of Caltech), Professor Dick Lindzen (formerly professor of meteorology at Harvard and MIT), Professor Will Happer (professor of physics at Princeton), Dr John Clauser (winner of the Nobel prize in Physics in 2022), Professor Nir Shaviv (Racah Institute of Physics) and others. https://lnkd.in/ecGYMWCS

"By not calling out the incontrovertible realities, mainstream climate scientists are at the risk of becoming the new climate deniers". To much surprise to me, this quote originates from Jonathan Porritt’s article "Mainstream Climate Science: The New Denialism?". There, he displays the state our climate system is currently in, and the way information about it is disseminated. He does this in a blunt but, as I find, nevertheless compelling way.   Here his executive summary:   1.   The speed with which the climate is now changing is faster than (almost) all scientists thought possible. 2.   There is now zero prospect of holding the average temperature increase this century to below 1.5°C; even 2°C is beginning to slip out of reach. The vast majority of climate scientists know this, but rarely if ever give voice to this critically important reality. 3.   At the same time, the vast majority of people still haven’t a clue about what’s going on – and what this means for them and everything they hold dear. 4.  The current backlash against existing (already wholly inadequate) climate measures is also accelerating – and will cause considerable political damage in 2024. Those driving this backlash represent the same old climate denial that has been so damaging over so many years. 5.   The science-based institutions on which we depend to address this crisis have comprehensively failed us. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is incapable of telling the whole truth about accelerating climate change; the Conference of the Parties (under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) has been co-opted by the fossil fuel lobby to the point of total corruption. 6.  By not calling out these incontrovertible realities, mainstream scientists are at risk of becoming the new climate deniers. Despite his compelling narrative and great writing, I do not entirely agree with his conclusions. I am curious about what people think about this, especially No5 of his executive summary.