The Psychology of Climate Change Denial

Imagine my surprise when my own father, an intelligent, rational man who used to share his New Scientist magazines with me on the drive to school - expressed his doubts about the seriousness of global climate change and the accuracy of the scientific "evidence". Let's call them findings. What has Dad been reading? Who has he been listening to, I wondered. He was quick to tell me he was not a climate-change sceptic, he just doesn't think it's anywhere near as bad as we are making out, nor is mankind really having much impact on what's just a naturally occurring thing.

I had also, that same week, been slightly miffed and surprised when I tried to distribute Walk Against Warming flyers in the street. The number of people who rebuffed me was very high.

It's led me to wonder about the psychology behind this attitude. Science tells us a global crisis is looming. Some even say the crisis is already here. So why choose to ignore it, or dismiss it as an unlikely, unproven, alarmist theory?

I think Al Gore hit upon it many years ago: It's inconvenient. People don't want to think the worst, it makes them uncomfortable.

People like my dad don't want to have to give up their cars, and other modern comforts and don't want to live with guilt. They, naturally, don't want to be made to feel like "greedy pigs" for their level of consumption.

Nor do they want to live the misery of dread of the future. People don't want to worry. It's easier to think everything's rosy.

Then a friend pointed me to a couple of sites exploring the psychology of climate change denial.

There is a category of deniers who do not deny climate change is real but who are scared or apathetic. Some people are "so upset (or hopeless) about climate change they can’t bear to think about it" Peter M. Sandman.

There's also the problem of cognitive dissonance, where it is easier on the psyche to believe global warming is an unproved hypothesis than to change one's own lifestyle and ideology.

There's a good 10 minute roundup to listen to.

And Peter M. Sandman's article is a real insight into how, by changing our messaging from fear-mongering and guilt tripping, we can better communicate with sceptics and the public at large.

"...even if you’re telling people you’re certain, I would point out that they don’t have to share your certainty to support your action agenda."

He recommends focussing not on how certain you are about global warming but rather on how foolish it would be to wait for certainty before taking action against such horrific possibilities.

Why wait, indeed?