|
I recently discovered that a number of my friends are avowed climate sceptics. Not an earth-shattering revelation but it made me think. They’re not card-carrying placard-waving zealots, just, well, sceptical. They don’t claim to grasp the science – but then how many of us really do? It wouldn’t make much difference anyway. Scientists and experts of all kinds change the orthodoxy from time to time – once upon a time, smoking was good for you. I think it’s down to the fact they don’t want to feel like they’re being told what to think. In our professional studies as communicators, this crops up a lot. Neuroscience tells us people don’t really make decisions or form opinions by weighing up the evidence and arriving at a conclusion. They follow their instincts, largely emotional, and then they post-rationalise a sensible supporting argument later. All this led me to a subject I often get back to – why do we believe what we believe? And if it’s all so irrational, where does that leave climate science? According to a documentary I stumbled upon over Christmas, apart from the oil lobby, the biggest impediment to climate science in the US was the evangelical Christian church. Which struck me as ironic – the group that reportedly dismisses Darwin and evolution leads the debate on science. But that’s to miss the point too. It is actually about faith – who do you believe? Or perhaps who do you believe in? Which isn’t so different to my friends back in London. And it occurred to me that I do believe the climate science, without having the confidence of having done the experiments myself. Why? Could it be because we need something overwhelming to believe in? I don’t have God so maybe that’s why I have climate change? Makes you think.
|
