But to most people, 133 years is plenty of time to correct the climate change trend. And that I feel is the main problem both the sciences and other climate change advocates fail to recognize is that by listing what is forecasted to happen by 2150 or 2200, it gives this false impression that while climate change is important it’s not urgent. And our society is all about resolving things at the last moment. We don’t react unless things are important and urgent or if their neither important nor urgent.
And so DWW’s The Uninhabitable Earth article fails on both sides. Scientists cry that his forecasts are “inaccurate” and the other side sees that as a sign that climate change isn’t important or it’s not an urgent matter.
In my opinion, the best way to argue towards action about climate change is how Pope Francis did in his environmental encyclical: argue it’s important and urgent from the standpoint of what else is important to him and the members of the Catholic Church in general. Couple this with how an Obama White Paper evaluated what damage climate change has already caused without looking at any forecasts is a great one-two punch. Let others see how climate change impacts what they fear and let them kind of figure out on their own how this will impact their own lives in the immediate future. A lot of this is the old adage about leading a horse to water. We’re finding out that you can argue with stats, data, and observations from both sides all you want and it’s not enough for many people to come to their own conclusions, so we shouldn’t try to make it for them.
I view all of this as Al Gore is about to release a follow up documentary about what’s happened since his Inconvenient Truth, called An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power. I hope he won’t argue quite the same way that he did when it was first released. People are much more wary or savvy about our climate data and are just as like to view the emotional sense of their experiences as important or more than what climate databases are recording.
In many respects, most people won’t consider something a crisis until they see it at their front door. They have to experience or see the problem with their own senses. Ask any emergency management personnel during tornado or hurricane season and this is their main concern. It’s why in a weird sense, people need the outdoor sirens even though meteorologists and emergency managers hate it. The sirens is that point where they know to take it seriously, and often that counts for more than all the weatherperson’s warnings on television, radio, and twitter combined.
It’s just as bad to overplay a situation than is to underplay it, and that’s what meteorologist and climatologists are concerned with the article but do not see it with their own climate forecasts. Better to inform the public of the damage that’s already done, let them know how much the climate has changed, argue how these changes have already impact on their own lives and hope that it’s enough to convince them how important and urgent climate change is. And honestly, that’s all you can do.
