[Bill Hopkins] Good afternoon. If I could urge you to start moving
towards your seats. My name is Bill Hopkins. I'm a professor in the
Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation and the College of Natural
Resources and Environment, and I also serve as director of the Global Change
Center at Virginia Tech. I'd like to welcome all of you today to another
installment of our Global Change lecture series. These events are one of a number
of things that we do as we try to outreach into the community and engage
the community in a variety of discussions around topics of
considerable societal importance, things like climate change. And it's wonderful
once again to see a strong turnout for this important event. Before we get
started, I want to thank folks who help to make this possible.
First of all, Fralin Life Science Institute. As many of you know, this is
the home of the Global Change Center. They support us financially but also
logistically and have been supporters basically from the beginning, so big
thanks to them. The Virginia Tech Graduate School, who funds our
interdisciplinary graduate education program. You've seen some of the ushers
running around, those are some of our graduate student fellows. So thank you to
them and also the Fralin Life Science Institute staff and in particular Jess Zielske.
I'm not sure where she is right now but she is the one who handled all
the logistics for the event and a lot goes into making these sorts of things
possible so a big thanks to her. And last but certainly not least the Lyric Theatre.
We are very very fortunate to have this community theatre here.
We've been working with the Lyric now for I think about five years and we are very
very we just feel very very fortunate to have them as a partner and so it's great
to see you here supporting the Lyric as well as what we're trying to accomplish
as well so thanks to the Lyric and thanks to Fralin and the Graduate School.
[Applause]
So before we get started, three quick housekeeping items. First of all if you
haven't already please turn off your cellular devices. Nothing worse than
being that person that has their phone ring during the middle of one of these
discussions, so please turn this off now. At the end there will be time for
questions and answers. This is probably in many cases one of the best parts of
these events, so I hope that people will stick around and engage and ask
questions too with our speaker. There are two microphones that we ask that you
step up to to use those when you're asking questions and if if you're not
comfortable doing that, please stand and just really make sure you project so
that we can hear you. Afterwards there will also be books on sale. You saw that
probably, in the lobby and our speaker today will be available to sign books.
We've got to get out of here by 5:30 so we'll be sort of urging folks to move
into the lobby for the book signing and then out of the building by 5:30 so the
Lyric can set up for their next event. Okay, so with that I have the pleasure
today to introduce our spring 2019 distinguished lecturer, Dr. Andrew Hoffman.
He is the Holcim Professor of Sustainable Enterprise at the University
of Michigan. This is an endowed professorship and it's a
unique joint appointment in two academic homes. He's appointed in both the
Ross School of Business as well as the School of Environment and Sustainability.
Dr. Hoffman has a fascinating background. Although he holds appointments in the
schools associated with business and natural resources, he actually has a
strong engineering background. His bachelor's degree is in chemical
engineering from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. He has a
master's degree in civil and environmental engineering from MIT and
he has joint degrees also from MIT in management and civil and environmental
engineering. Prior to academics he worked for the US EPA, Metcalf and Eddy
environmental consultants, TNT construction and design, and Amoco
Corporation. And as you will see today all of these experiences
have contributed to his very broad worldview. In his current position at
Michigan as a researcher and as an educator, Dr. Hoffman uses
organizational behavior models and theories to understand cultural and
institutional aspects of environmental issues like climate change that we're
going to be discussing today. He's published over 100 articles and book
chapters, as well as 14 books -- I have no idea how you do that -- which have been
translated now in five languages. And if you look at the title of his books I
think this is a pretty telling exercise you begin to understand just how broad
his perspective really is and that scholarship moves across a variety of
disciplines. Just a couple quick examples: he's probably most accomplished in the
area of writing about sustainability in business, including titles such as From
heresy to dogma: an institutional history of corporate environmentalism,
the Oxford Handbook on business in the natural environment, and Carbon
strategies: how leading companies are reducing their climate change footprint.
Recently he's been writing more about the role of academics in society which
is a very timely topic I think given the current state of affairs including his
book Academic engagement and public and political discourse. And he has even
written multiple books about personal growth that seek to inspire individuals
to find fulfillment and direction in their career path. One of those you'll
see out there today is the Builders Apprentice, which is actually a story
about his own personal journey during years practicing his craftsmanship as a
carpenter. Yes he was also a carpenter in a former life, so you can see he's
clearly a man of many talents and interests. A few of his books are in the
lobby so please stop as I mentioned already and spend a little time and say
hello to Dr. Hoffman on your way out. His work, his books in particular, have been
covered by a number of media outlets including the New York Times, Scientific
American, Time, The Wall Street Journal, National Geographic, the Atlantic and
National Public Radio. He also frequently provides his expertise on numerous
advisory boards and also research committees. I won't go into all those but
he's been heavily involved with the National Academies of Sciences
as well as the Johnson foundation. In recognition of
his contributions, Dr. Hoffman has received an incredible list of honors.
It is a very long list and I'll name just a few of those. He was recently awarded the
Aspen Institute faculty Pioneer Award. They apparently at the Aspen Institute
recognized his talents very early on because 13 years prior to that they had
actually awarded him the Aspen Institute rising star award so it looks like they
were right. The American Chemical Society's national award, the Maggie
award, the Connecticut Book Award, the Aldo Leopold fellowship, the Manos Paige
prize, the Cleggerman award, and the Rachel Carson book prize. Clearly Dr.
Hoffman is an extremely busy individual and so we're very very grateful to have
you here today thank you for taking time from your schedule to share your
perspective and if you will please join me in welcoming him to Blacksburg.
[Applause]
[Andrew Hoffman] That was embarrassing. I guess you can hear me okay hold on [mic feedback] okay
Okay thank you Bill that is a very, very generous introduction, I really
appreciate that. It's a pleasure be here. I've never been to Virginia Tech
and what a beautiful place. Next time I come I have to spend more time and hit
those mountains and see more of the countryside, it looks spectacular.
I'm going to start my talk tonight with a joke, and there's a reason, I'll explain why in
a second. But I have to start with a joke, otherwise it startles people if I
start this way without warning you. At the University of Michigan we have an
undergraduate, a freshman class, it's 500 students and no one likes to teach
it because you get no personal time of the students you don't get to meet them
you don't get a feel for them, but there's one professor, one professor who
signs up for this class every year because it allows him to embed his
sadistic tendencies and scare the daylights out of these young impressionate
freshmen. So one year he was teaching the class the treatment is working very well
in fact there's one student - I have to stay right here-
there's one student who the treatment's working extremely well on, and he is so
scared of his professor. He sits in the back row, he never makes a sound.
You'd never know he was there. It comes time for the final, the student
studies all night, comes in, sits down. The professor comes into the final room
hands out a blue book sits down and says this exam
begins promptly at 12:00 and ends promptly at 2:00, at 2 o'clock I'm
walking out of the room. The exam begins, 2 o'clock comes, the professor has a stack of exams
is about to walk out but he realizes one student's still in the
audience. It's the student who hasn't made a sound all semester. So he decides
to wait, he's going to have one last little bit of fun before the semester ends.
So he sits back and waits, five past two, ten past two, 15 past two, suddenly of the student
realizes what's going on, runs up on the stage to hand in an exam and
the professor just leans back and says "what do you think you're doing?" and the
students says "well, I'm handing in my exam" and the professor says "I'm sorry your exam
is late. You flunk the class. I'll see you next semester."
The student says "do you know who I am?" The professor says "doesn't matter who
you are, you flunk the exam." The student held his ground and says "but do you know
who I am" and the professor gets angry and says "no I don't know who you are."
The student says "precisely," slides his exam into the middle of the stack and walks out of the room.
[Laughter]
Now, what is a joke? A joke is telling the story and that's what I want to
convey upon you tonight is that to tell about climate change, tell about any
scientific issue, it helps to tell a story. And the beauty of the joke is I'm
telling you a story but I had to be keenly aware have yet I want you to hear
because I'm not sure burned today over here and a pencil and is over there
that's what makes a joke work and if I they're too slow you last see this
unattested joke much too slowly and the audience anticipates we're going and the
joke is band so I have to be very very met audience when I'm telling the story
the same is true that climate change when you're talking about climate change
you have to be aware of your evidence be aware of who you're talking to and I'll
add that many academics are not very good at this academics are very good at
lecturing but in that in virtually engage a understanding the audience is
key so when I want to talk to you tonight about is how do you talk to
people about climate change specifically people who are skeptical of the science
and so I didn't be able to do this type property if I weren't able to
demonstrate and ability to speak and so telling a joke is a great warm-up an
audience different country immediately come to me with you but then again all
the way through here I'm gonna tell you stories I'm now so therefore I'm gonna
tell you exactly what I'm gonna do I'm gonna be very transparent about my talk
I'm gonna tell you in a minute area then a minute area then I'm gonna tell you
what I told you and this is a really helpful device if you have to give a
talk to the students that they're a faculty that there is a very important
advice for getting a point across now you don't repeat yourself you find
many ways to tell so I'm gonna open it a story
I'm gonna close with a story in the middle I'm going to do that address of
what I want you to hear and then we'll wrap it up so there's the structure of
my type no surprises no clear bells that's going to do it
so what I'm going to talk about is how culture shapes the climate change I'm
going to tell you what I'm going to and I'm gonna tell you the story amended
years ago I was called never development house at the University of Michigan
we're not in a joke that is a true story and they said we have a potential donor
he has a lot of money he is interested in business to stand early without study
we journey to them and they read and get a gift and I'm sure when you hit
Virginia Tech has its development officers who are very good at their job
and know how to do this and so I agreed to meet with this potential donor it is
7 o'clock in the morning see anytime I had free and I'm in a conference room at
the business school big beautiful them they asked behind the campus beyond I
under the room so crater in epic a feast a trial date back across the taters the
potential donor to the salary today as the development officer the fear I sat
down the potential donor said that's what you know I think the scientific
review process is correct Fischer is opening words also we do you
forgive the university of based on that system he says I think that university
is corrupt as well he ran on to say that he thought climate change was a hoax we
talked about sunspots and his stuff about solar flares and volcanoes mchip
that around for a while and then he turned his sights on me and he said now
can you explain to me why you hit capitalism and I want to destroy the
market by teaching environmental issues in a business school we keep that after
a and then he said now do you know that Earth Day is on the day of Tom and I
have become pretty punchy by when I said no I don't you 2008 days on the day of
town he says because it's Karl Marx's birthday
Eternia diamond officer and I said Whizzer agenda here this morning and the
potential donor jumped in and said I want to buy you a ticket to the headline
conference which if you're not familiar is another one climate sceptics
conference in the country so this scared in that calendar in my head I found out
a conflict I said I can't make it the meeting ended and I left switch and I
happened change was as big a wedge issue as abortion which is quite astonishing
when you talk to scientists about this issue how did this happen so that got me
stranded and I'm sure there's a lot of academics in a.m. or a future academics
but the oil works is you develop a resource room and you have a paper and
another paper and you develop the body of your building on others and you can
culminate in something like a book like this I'm gonna tell you your thrust of
that work the thrust is this the debate over climate change and the public and
political sphere is not just about co2 is not just about climate models it's
about conflicting worldviews the people fear are threatened by an acceptance of
this issue and if you do not recognize that subtext of the debate you can keep
on bucking heads with people on this issue and you'll make no headway will
talk about past each other there's my talk I just told you that I want to tell
you if you want a better sleep now
that's true
this is the scientists that don't do science what they do is they volunteer
their time and they clear that all the research has been done and they come to
up to Utley the consensus document what does the research tell us and then make
a consensus statement and it's become an increasingly better over time where the
IBC is getting stronger and stronger I do remember in their first coming over
they will save a ton of they're very cautious in Santa Miranda and more
recently they become big blunt and quite direct that consensus document has been
endorsed at over 200 scientific agencies around the world including every one of
the g8 + 5 countries if you agency ways of practicing plan of scientists that
stresses practicing plan of scientists people who do this for a living and ask
them do you think climate change is real do you think humans are doing that you
can see the numbers in red they're very very hard and I stress practicing kind
of scientist not for example for a street journal had a letter to the
editor a couple of years ago signed that 15 scientists saying that the science is
not clear whenever there's a marketing professor from the Riordan Business
School one of them in research and development director at ExxonMobil I'm
talking about practicing climate scientists if you look at the
the nature and power change is pretty conclusive that something is happening
here and the first one abstracts of twelve thousand abstracts find that 97%
endorsed this consensus a position on Iran out highlight this one for one
second because this has been misquoted by many people staring at Barack Obama
of Georgetown when he first laid out his policy proposals on climate change
he said 97% of scientists say that climate change is real that is not true
that is not what this paper says they looked at all the papers on climate
change 97% of them indoors the consensus position is something's happening I want
to bring that up in case you wanna throw that number out there ninety seven
percent you'll get handed be ready get it right then your interest quite clear
and at the end of the day the National Academy of Sciences and the triple-s
usually of consensus describe the state of the science there's one side of the
issue divided on the other side do people think in the United States
between scientists areas is happening two thousand Americans believe them and
the majority of Americans don't think the scientists think this happening I
don't care where you stand on this issue sociologically this is fascinating the
red is going on how can we understand this this is called a research agenda
and I get started and so then I'm going to talk about today on communicating
climate change it applies to a whole host of scientific issues today which
have become extremely embedded within the culture wars the partisan divides
the cultural debate within this country Pew Research Center and on the other
hand side you ever wrote bad that's the survey of triple LS Santis on
the left-hand side you're about that and that's public opinion and you could see
climate change right there you have a thirty seven point gap but look at all
the other issues we have big gaps between the consensus of science and
public opinion and I call attention to the top one there's a 51 point gap
between the other it's safe to eat genetically modified foods now I want to
point this to out because it's um very important point in this talk while it's
mostly conservative Republicans we're pushing the gap back against the science
of climate change it's mostly little Democrats who think it's unsafe to eat
your nose it's mostly Liberal Democrats who also choose not to vaccinate their
children for fear that autism even though the science is quite clear this
is not happening this is equal opportunity of distressing the science
when it challenges your internal beliefs that's some important point years
everyone to examine both the people are talented but also examine your own
beliefs where they come from as I go through my remarks ok let's start and I
want you to figure climate change is a cultural issue about a set of values
around beliefs and I want to point out the difference between a scientific
consensus and a social consensus a scientific consensus has reached by
scientists using the scientific method publishing in peer-reviewed journals
speaking at conferences writing books a social consensus involves a much larger
array of people not always using completely rational means it's a very
emotional debate so a social consensus politicians matter sports figures
matters movie stars matter clergy matter the diagram the road matters
your mayor matters everybody is part of this debate and it takes a lot longer to
reach a social consensus than a scientific consensus and I found too
many scientists who said you know the day to say this I have people accepting
it well this is a and it takes us time to come to terms
with the shift in reality the climate change presents have an advisor and I
was a Baptist student who is an expert on nuclear waste repositories he came
back from Washington Montana is elated because he was followed in his
congressional testimony than Indian chief who's ran the race for grocery to
get to Yucca Mountain he didn't understand who I was chief
would be part of this conversation and I was amazed because he is part of the
conversation we all have a conversation and a social consensus takes time think
about the example cigarettes in cancer for decades the American public was told
by scientists that cigarettes cause cancer
for decades the American public rejected that position and continued to smoke
there's a whole history reasons why they get information that values their holds
and so forth and you can see you get in a steady barrage and they left their
Baptist smoke camels than any other cigarette on a road no scientist
meditators know Kent with a microlight filter and the middle of your dentist is
actually recommending you smoke less raise people our finest or it's people
even thought cigarettes are good field and they were sexy how things have
changed we now have a social consensus that cigarettes cause cancer how do you
know you have a social consensus because you're not afraid to talk about it with
a total stranger because you know that's the proper way to think and understand
about the world around us I merely to bet that if you sat down for breakfast
with your son or daughter and they looked at a pack of cigarettes and said
I've decided to start smoking you have a conversation with him do you understand
what you're doing I understand what you're doing to your
health I think is a bad idea I'm even going to bet that if you're sent about a
niece or nephew that offended that he we've never met before
we've got a path as soon as I said I'll decide to stop smoking you have the
exact same conversation or them unison in doing understand why you're doing
this to understand the implications because we had this is a social fact a
social consensus around this issue social factors it turned by Emile
Durkheim a sociologist from there nineteen hundred's we accept this as
true we don't have a social consensus on climate change because people need
friends or family that is jiaying the ranch's sex politics and religion is
something you don't talk about in polite company
because your real identify position how many people experience a situation where
we're out of dinner or the cocktail party or something on top of the climate
change comes up and you decide not to engage because you do not want to make
it men pleasant atmosphere it is your head okay if there's a common experience
if it's a sign of hope this has been pretty static 75% until this year he
registered their recent study and they found that number drops 60% more people
are starting to speak up and say I'm sorry climate change is real I'm sorry
I'm gonna stand up for this where's this going I don't know I'll give you some
other examples there's been a sudden blip this year that may give you hope
I'm thinking going forward no how can we understand positions on climate change
climate change is not just a band-aid binary yes-or-no people have a range of
positions on this issue which are scientists crazy when a reporter put
some motifs on space and says do you believe that ant energetic where the
woman is true I mean you jam together a whole bunch of different questions and
they're different shades of grey in the LEM there's some a nice work and they do
a segmentation analysis at the American public it's called the Six America study
they do it every year they do multiple countries and they're both people in
different categories on their left is around this is a catastrophe this is a
calamity we got to do something about it on the right is dismissive this is a
joke this is a hoax James Inhofe this is the greatest hoax
ever perpetrated on the American public and in the middle of varying degrees of
not sure which way to go there's a couple things I want you to draw from
this one
pillars on either side they've made up their mind and say listen Laimbeer and
I'm telling that plan to change if you find yourself having someone dismisses
category my best advice is talk about football tavern have something else
they're not there for an honest conversation they later in if you enjoy
that kind of debate go for it I personally don't I really do it for an
audience if there are people listening that I think can hear and listen to the
debate I will do that but you know if you hit a sit-down of Rush Limbaugh
James Inhofe that matter do you think you're gonna get any headway it's
debatable and so many people on the other end that this is an extreme
situation that the world is going to end tomorrow engage if you wish and cautious
the undecided middle that's where the energy and the effort needs to be
directed how do you get people to sway and move who am not clear on this issue
now again I hope so fine this is from 2013 notice the distribution of the
surveys and then 2018 is definitely pushed to the left now and more people
are moving to the left and starting to see this is something that is really
happening again a sign of hope that did the bait is starting to shift and I'll
talk a bit more about that now how do you ever stand any people fit on this
spectrum how can we make sense out of this well there's certain demographic
variables that a general alarm we've concern to the Ameri it's women
more than men it's even more than era it's the coasts made in the middle its
educated more than less so it's a little more than less so if Democrat more than
Republican it's liberal more than conservative on climate change all the
demographic value of this very rare and the number one call it was sometimes
brief on climate change is there a political party affiliation here's some
who have been that I on the credit and rally done well on the scale if you can
see it is 2001 to 2010 the red line is Republican to be honest Democrats same
on top the red line is conservative the blue
as liberal and what you can see over 10 years is Republicans and conservatives
believe unless Infanta changed Democrats and liberals believe in more in climate
change to me this is the smoking ban that is a cultural question have
Democrats and Republicans talk about science in any different way no do they
have a particularly weird um lands that are the native certain issues and see
something different yes how can we understand that worldview and try and
make some headway to move beyond it and an interesting point the way to be
interested in this kind of stuff I presume your absence here here if you
move back this way these lines meet in 1997
now why was 1997 important that's the year of the Kyoto treaty that's the year
they an issue there was primarily a scientific issue now became warm of
importance the powerful political and economic interests and then mobilized
and they responded as scientists were flat-footed the joke became is that the
Marines going against those doubts they were totally outgunned they were not
prepared for their back they're quite naive when they start to
put their ideas out there the scientists tend to do that my research isn't
political I hear that so many times and my answer is if you asking people to
change their beliefs or their behavior it is political by definition when you
ask people to change our beliefs or their behavior they will push back
people don't like to be told this and that's what this work is doing now there
is a turn around 2009 is starting to come back that among
Republicans you can see in 2013 about 50% and then again this latest survey
68% of liberal moderate Republicans think for everyone and is happening
that's a 14-point jump and 55% of liberal and moderate Republicans think
it is mostly caused by humans an interesting point when you ask people
why you changed the position on climate change what's the answer then we would
rather heaven the wildfires in California at the hurricane in Houston
Puerto Rico the flooding in the Midwest right now it's changing people's
thinking on this issue the weird weather so maybe that's a sign of hope there are
others Israel years gotten quite excited about the
results of the latest study in the decision 2013 to 2018 consistently up
there trends I think it's happening I'm made about it f it is hearing calls
the real han Americans that fit most scientists agree it's happening they
will hand me personally that's very interesting or the harmony person is
typically climate change like it's going to happen to somebody else
same place as far into the future it's happening now
to people you know may be happening to you it's important to me personally our
Valley experienced its effects there's a shift there's growing how can they
understand us so that Iran Iraq 2 is 3 points 4 points is social science and
painting you accept something if it confirms a review you reject it if a
challenges your view will be at least initially Jonathan Haidt if you've
really and is with happiness hypothesis he talks about this that when they faced
the challenge of information that were unfamiliar the challenges I read you I
emotions kick in and really fast well history reasons we'll explain in a
second but our motions come in really fast and our reason comes in a very
distant second so you're like to say when the hennas on issues like this we
don't behave that scientists would behave like the lawyers who's made a
conclusion and that the transformation just support that conclusion and if we
could slow down our motions maybe use our reason better we can move forward
then we are do it we didn't simply as we do in complex ways I'm driving that path
is a rally in the red corner right front quarter where does not burying them in a
literal information to confirm the conclusion that I don't
to a mechanic and spend money on this town visit standing at our there's a
loose belt we all do it now which we
knew from Michigan to Texas I watched his politics slowly swing to the right
because he was surrounded by an environment in which those politics are
real it's important message to undergrads and master students or anyone
really you'd be able to accompany as best you can take a little closer look
at that culture because sooner or later that culture will have its way no one is
the supreme individual to resist those kinds of pressures and so motivated
reasoning and cultural cognition is what it's called
literally associated also we trust he is a representative our tribe we do trust
for information I offer you two days I've been do this to any audience any
political party affiliation one run chances are you are not dressed well Al
Gore that's Linda which one represents your tribe who do
you trust does the other one someone you don't trust which news sources do you
listen to which ones do you trust Fox News MPL there's actually research data
to show the main US Fox News the less you believe in climate change may listen
your NPR some may believe in climate change so will you get your information
the diet you get social media business as well who do you send on Facebook
LinkedIn or Twitter or into the other platforms
which I'm not completely familiar defend their people that share we read you how
many people in this audience have ever unfounded someone or unfollow someone
because they've posted or continue to post positions that you found contrary
to your LG raise your hand you have gathering information to you that you
confirm they read you and you have filtering out information that will
challenge it a picture's worth a thousand words and there's some such
that the ABC of Indiana bit study to illustrate what I'm saying right here
before the midterm elections they ran an algorithm the Cody the liberal
conservative and then they look at who retweeted here and this is where it
shows you get a very clear in the real conversation and a very clear
conservative conversation this is what social media is guarantee us this is
what social media is doing to opponent discourse and they all feed into it I
didn't mean to shame anybody asking raise our hand because I've done it
myself we've all done it this manifests itself
into a political situation that is quite complicated for us right now this where
Tina from the Pew Research Center in 2017 in there to see in 1994 the
difference in the moon between Democrats or Republicans very tight stay tight
2017 you look at the day divided and look at the chasm in between and that
when we're baking them they're different trials and I also look at that no wonder
is it possible to legislate from the middle right now I don't know I really
don't know and but this would say no probably because we are dividing into
groups that source our information trust our information in different ways now
you put these two together so obviously exactly idea a cultural identity will
overpower scientific reasoning psychologists have to say we are
cognitive misers we have a certain amount of cognitive ability and we spend
it though miserly and get annoyed when you have to
spend it unnecessarily I remember vividly the first time I went into an
organic food store and there was previously an automatic decision that
Venice Arab you had mature is a rapid air and I had to spend five minutes
figure in a not too bad I'm not that bad the closest thing that what to choose I
did not want to spend cognitive energy and that I saw is a fairly simple
decision buying materials we all do this so you can read all the scientific
reports on climate change come to your conclusion where you may say you know
George Santa Street he seems pretty knowledgeable about this kind of stuff
and George says it's true so I'm down the jurors that makes sense well in a
pastor of our church she seems to really understand these issues and she says
it's not true I'm going with going to the pastor and they find shortcuts to
get ourselves through this a famous sociologist from the turn of the last
century Max Weber has a really nice idea and we get through a day by activating
black boxes if you didn't activate bad boxes you couldn't get through your day
then explained I give in that pattern it on I've been the house engine works but
it gets me where I need to go if I couldn't get out of my driver
if you open every single box you become an emotional cripple you can't do it you
can't get to your day and I really and many people do not open the bat box of
science the National Science Foundation to the survey of the American public
from the two-thirds of the American public
do you not understand science or the scientific process and yet if you look
at surveys the American public heads of 80 to 90 percent think they understand
climate science so they don't open the backpacks that they make opinions that
make decisions based on shortcuts and it's where we are do we have to do it
together and our position aligns with our cultural identity providing
additional scientific data can make us more resolute enlisting resistant
conclusions for their advance for their cultural beliefs what that means is you
need someone who says climate change is a hoax what do you do well you rip out
your powerpoint deck and you start to give them a science lesson away hearing
I've never seen the science I'm not buying it given their silence well in a
second this person thinks I'm an idiot what are they doing they're digging
their heels and their founding the conversation sparring in your nightmare
yeah because to you the science is clear to them they've already rejected it then
they rejected their fill whole host of reasons and if you don't go there you're
stuck they don't trust the challenge and communication is overcoming distrust and
that's been a gonna focus the rest of my remarks on that I want to take one move
detour and add a source hint to those being on the public
discourse and that is a political economy and a confused public debate
creates resistance and inertia for change there are people who lose money
or political power over this issue and they are confusing the debate we have
news national geographic urban area Orchestra and they are on sand there
Jenny McCarthy is also joined by Bobby Kennedy jr. by the way is saying that
vaccines are dangerous ExxonMobil fifties I wanna pay you
attention to these two on the Left Cirrus and David journals are
proliferating and the American public can't tell the difference the can't ever
dips are good signs of bad science you can pay any amount of money right now
and find a journal to publish anything you are a scientist trying to prove this
is true so publish the paper maybe you can't see it - clearly it's right there
you can look it up on the web but tell them to pay is take me off your effing
Marianist the paper is merely a repeat of that sentence over and over again it
even has a chart take mass that's obviously bogus the relators coming out
that aren't obviously bogus that are confusing people on this issue and
leading to a punch line falling away they left all scientists agree about
Braddock Bailey Wrentham this is a bill but that in a very sarcastic quotes it's
produced by we're not called the IPCC but group called the nipcc renowned and
abet mental panel on climate change it's actually produced by the Heartland
Institute they published 125,000 copies of this book and the decision to K
through 12 science teachers trying to influence the parallel curriculum and K
through 12 science classes this is what's going on who has a responsibility
to fight this who has a responsibility to educate the public on science I
believe it says I believe that academics have an obligation a responsibility to
step into public and political discourse and engage the
to become their science teachers on these issues if we don't do it we will
suffer both attacks on the institutions of the Academy and they will suffer from
appellate debate that is totally misinformed the problem is that most
academics don't think it's their job
this or talking to you K through 12 students or a town hall they even had a
peds 10-year review promote for the most part they were G for 11 publications
there's something amiss there's something wrong and there are changes
afoot to try and change that the staff it about the engaged scholar different
matters of how to be a professor including alerting people for engaging
the public and political discourse and the hope I have that the Academy will
change comes from young people I see young people coming into the field young
PhD students that want to have an impact in their work they are not going to be
satisfied with citation counts and h-index
as a measure of their impact they actually want to share their actual and
have an impact in the real world and I see a lot of exciting stuff coming from
young people at the University of Michigan you had a group of square
doctor students and postdocs the family that's it the Ripper so if you never
teach us we're going to teach ourselves and it created this group that we're
late and it's an awful happen in which I can never remember research and lay a
bet that there are creative courses for themselves how you develop a social
media presence how do you talk to join us are you type of government how do you
have to business people how do you engage in community-based research
they're teaching each other an interesting thing I've talked to many of
the organizers and they afraid to tell their value they're doing it because
they didn't want their advisor to punish them for their stuff outside what
they're supposed to do as PhD students I think that is changing slowly and now
the universities flow behind them get funding from the University and now
that it's successful their visors are stopping another back good job but
they're genuinely nervous because the years of academia are in flux and we
don't know where they're going that young people I believe will change the
Academy and that gives me hope so I just want to add that there's a short side on
the rail of academics have to play and trying to change public discourse it's
our obligation so responsibility my editorial opinion not necessarily rather
than a university although I've actually as the president has been pushing this
idea now going back narrative distrust what I want to do is after your friends
are distrust for ways to overcome them and then as I told you I'm going to tell
you it attacked oh yeah I'm going to end a little story let's begin imitating
imitating climate change is somebody and even not through any one of these the
first people distress the messengers the messengers is important is the message
on climate change we are the camera messages on climate change Democratic
politicians environmentalists and scientists and there are people in the
American public that distrust one two or three of those groups benefit
politicians that's pre straightforward that people don't trust Democrats then
they hate the most how they are manufactured this issue in
order to make himself rich this is a joke I did a study looking at a tourism
on climate change Kota members over prayer measure an T of those alien
entities 75% mentioned Al Gore and not in a nice way they'd like to take shots
at them so that is fairly straight for the environmentalists I should point out
that when I talked to my backhoe student and told her about my meeting of the
potential donor and the invitation about the home Institute and I said I couldn't
go well I'll get up and said I'll go and so she went and she listened to the talk
she read the literature and we paper and the bow my friends they use
within a half an inch to conference Howard a fairness issue and one thing
she found was the deep distrust for environmentalists they're an expression
of a mentalist with their animal they're green on the
outside but on the inside they're socialists borderline communists they
want to use the government to infringe upon their freedom and control your eyes
they don't trust them listen to a talk show on the radio past Michigan which
can get amazing so saying they all know the environmental movement is pagan at
its core didn't skip a beat and they just kept on going they don't trust them
and then third scientists and I want a scientist really about this but this is
not new the book for one appeared surprise in 1964 is called anti
intellectualism in America now Jim hosta I wrote it very plain today there's a
lot of people distress scientists they sit in ivory tower
sitting there operated using language at understand talking about concepts I
can't comprehend and we have a disproportionate influence on the
political process that interests them the answer happened
their deity religion they also happen to lean left I distrust them even more
there is a survey of Republican voters last year they found that two-thirds of
registered Republican voters think that universities have a negative influence
on society that's what we're dealing with that's what's going on so we have
trustees boobs so what do you do about it
well you find climate brokers if you're engaging in debate on climate change do
not invoke out there do not invoke at EPA invoke people that they trust
satis for example when the CEO of cargo says that climate change is real and if
you don't do something about it we have food sugars in the short to medium term
that has power to influence people that if any often said it would be a totally
different story suddenly Battaglia demonstrate this is
CEO Cargill when Republican politicians come out and say this is real that has a
power they reach an audience that is different than what a democratic
politician can reach Bob Inglis has been real making it his mission to get the
Republican Party to be honest it's a very conservative Republican when the
Pope comes out with an insuperable letter saying that we need to do
something about this he can reach audiences at all from a secular
University cannot these are Baker's that you can invoke and we need men we need
workers from the market to say we can do this without destroying the economy and
our quality of life we need mail breakfast from the conservative right I
want evangelicals to hear from um Joker's that they trust businesspeople
to hear from business people that they trust I want people to hear from people
that they trust figure for each other to figure out who they trust and vote those
kind of people so there's fan of distrust number one number two they
distrust the process of created the message and I talked about this the
beginning they don't trust the scientific process the lab it is that
you and your funding if you satisfy the political interests or funders you only
get publisher he says for the political interests a relative's
those of us who do this no that's not true but that's at play that my
potential donor started in that that's very strong and a lot of them
interesting leonesse fear that the university got broken with the
foundation the National Science Foundation in 1940s after year they're -
there's a question of what do we do with all this scientific work that is done to
help us when the real that's China to society and the deadness over funding
research and people think once that happened University just became another
political interest with their hands out from the government send any money and
their objectivity became questioned and they certainly don't trust the United
Nations and they do not trust the IPCC that's a threat to our national
sovereignty so that's at play so what do you do about that but it is a strong
correlation between belief in the science and belief
in that the scientists believe this is true and Abbey's and climate change so
when people say the planet change is not true to me
I do not debate sunspots and solar flares or volcanoes or any of the other
theories they have also stated this chocolate 200 scientific agencies say
this is real what do you know that they don't know I trust the institutional
science I believe things even though I'll never be able to prove them I
believe for example is something called an atom I believe it has neutrons flying
around electrons travel around the center I believe this body has known
upper billions of these I will never see one but I believe it's true because
trust the institutions of science and that's the way I play it forward and so
that's for that hang on and if you can get people to recognize your scientist I
pretty clear on this one open stuff they can start to get some chipping away like
the position and then separate the problem from the station so and they say
Adam David climate change because we're gonna destroy the economy by these crazy
environmentalists to the fishes maybe an honest statement so I believe climate
change is real but we just don't care people coming over the solution that
will not end their life as we know that would be an honest statement but
separate the problem from decision very far in distress and they distrust the
method itself and they are dispersed will climate scenarios how many be there
to say the maybe the day after tomorrow raise your hand like that this is
without a doubt the worst way to do those people the climate change is real
the idea of Manhattan in the water if Manas
she's meeting on Madison Avenue people see this nice thing this is preposterous
people actually think the world is a good place
it's interesting when people actually experience extreme weather hurricanes
and things like that they start to disrupt that's called they're just weird
theory but for the most part believe people believe the world is a good place
and so when you start to present these doomsday scenarios it starts to
demoralize people that start to shut down like his miniature book and daddy
and his no never senior moment but at Oxford here's a book on climate change
and he has two appendices that I really like the first one is red can of
skeptics Owen isn't really over but the other one is this is a clan of
extremists Eddie this is our area and in terms of climate porn it's extreme it's
meant to excite it's titillating and it's false and a lot of people is there
to this to try and scare people into mobilize around climate change is not a
very good way to go there's an interesting debate right now on this
topic and you can fire in 2017 there's a cover story in magazine did is he took
all the scary look at the sense condition and the letters to the editor
is a fascinating debate the people coming in saying we shouldn't do this
you shouldn't scare the bejesus out of people it shuts them bad and he holds
his ground says that you've got to give people the range of the spectrum
possibilities you have to tell in the worst case in order for people to make
informed decisions psychologists disagree about that look at it is bad
and he got rather sadly more advanced to turn that out up into a book which just
came out so you can buy the book welfare's neva neva the magazine I'm
version but it's a very interesting debate and does it help people to scare
them psychologists send out yeah this one is a very important and if
you if this if nothing else convinces you if there's a subtext on this issue
that keeps people from being in the chime climate change this should do it
there are people who'd believe that you cannot believe in climate change and
even though at the same time rush that limb by the very entire show to that
very statement the idea is this hubris for humans to think we are so filled
that we've been acting available climate we are now sure that their God is in
charge out there was someone holding a Bible he said God promised no you have
never fled the eighth again the seas cannot be rising this is what you're up
against this tomorrow nine demonstrates the seriousness of this debate you're
actually challenging people's belief in God with the idea of climate change I
gave a talk once anyone who came up to me she was quite upset she said I
believe in science I'm a scientist myself having bad just
but it come from a very conservative tradition traditional Christian family
and they look at climate change through the lens of Revelations graduation says
there is going to end there for climate change certainly looks like the girls
going to end their father maybe as far as where I farted then you say to that I
tried I said ran like that maybe got a little
too flippant I said maybe that's kind of saying is saying they're all gonna die
when they say why not get again and hasten the process that in order to well
I said well you know the road is not going to end tomorrow and it'll cause
great suffering mostly for people who didn't do this people in low-lying on is
a Bangladesh in other places is that consistent with your Christian energy to
protect the poor and that's the only different headway but they've been
downsized for me to think that I as a professor from and out of all places
could actually change millennia of Christian religious belief
on this issue again that's where the Pope's encyclical letter comes in
because he said something very important where he said we've been misinterpreting
the Genesis mandate for millennia that we are not here to dominate nature they
were supposed to be stewards to keep him till he said it is known to ask to be
handed on to the next generation and desire to say to pollute and damage this
environment is theft for future generations there is a culture shift I
find that intriguing of just thinking differently about morality
that's what evidence verifying Berger frames this is the most powerful power I
can think to try and help you communicate climate change find a way
that will convince the people that you're talking to in Iran if they will
understand so I do taxi business audiences all the time I gave a
chaplains to a group called the Michigan Manufacturers Association and I find an
often invited to business groups by the head of the trade association because
trade associations typically follow the lowest common denominator and so they
weren't excited to hear from me let's just say that defendants have began
agenda came in and a slap the book on the table and the book was called the
climate hoax so how kind of New Year's questions we're going to go now my talk
is regulation is going to drive us consumers care about this insurance
companies are changing their premiums or coverage investors the impact investment
is huge supply changes shifting I don't talk about co2 Adel I talk about market
shifts so when he interrupted me he said this is all nonsense this is climate
change is a hoax what about saying I said all don't care he could be mastered
about the science of climate change still see as a business issue regulation
of change of market consumers will buy your products or not buy them supply
chains of shifting insurance companies are moving and investors care about this
what could he say I put it in his language conversation over off we go
there are many frames you can say this is an issue is simple
risk management saying they say yeah climate change is real but the impacts
of enemy mana you can imagine say okay you have to feel wrong because we do in
those kinds of your screen a very high consequence events by the time arrives
I have fair insurance on my house the advert of burning down a low the impact
on my finances would be devastating I'll take that insurance insurance on climate
change is investment in technology and behavior change hmm what if you're wrong
well we've invested in some insurance that's been insurance is about you don't
always make a claim that works you define this as national security the
group is retired army generals is said of climate change happens we have
destabilized regions around the world the military will have to be on a handle
it it's an issue of national security you define this as national
competitive's time Friedman's been doing this for a long time saying if we don't
develop enough technologies and mobility the naval energy Germany and China will
do it we'll buy the technology from them is that what you want that can get some
traction the lancet has called this the member on health risk for this century
and now you've done something very important you have made a personal
salient one of problems of climate changes I can't see co2 I can't feel
mean temperature doing that but if you can make it personal and health makes it
personal with elevated temperatures happen in urban centers evaluate our
population will get sick they would die as this happened in Chicago Paris and
Ezra who are those people they're our grandparents and our
grandchildren they're people who care about and now people start to matter
personal and now they start to care about it here's one that I really like
if you're talking to some of hero's baseball
he's our informant Jared chunka chunka Lady Jane Lubchenco tell me this one she
was talking to a congressman when she was head of NOAA and there's a hurricane
and the congressman said can you tell me that hurricane is climate change and she
said no I can't but think about it this way I know you like baseball so if
you're a baseball player takes steroids they hit a home run without him one
caused by the steroids no probably not that mr. clay is batting
average and home an average spike that here went up higher than all the other
years before that can you bear in that installer it's that
probably every climate changes weather on steroids here isn't find a burger
friend put it in their language that the audience you're talking to can grasp and
understand and they'll get much further than just hammering in the data and a
very cataclysmic scenarios are very the day after tomorrow even if it may be
true swear to give an inundated with water it's still be on the grass with
many people's imagination and they'll just start to shut it off so use that
finally to discuss the solutions that come from a message you know so we
should have a carbon price right well a carbon price is a very intrusive
government program into all aspects of the economy and if you haven't noticed a
raging debate in that country right now is about controlling the size of
government so you've messed up that air month and
then you may go further and say but you know carbon price should be grow this is
you at a very low carbon price and Mary really stepped in I am a girl who's been
do maybe the UN so I would move in twenty one world government certainly a
raging debate in this country is about the OD ISM versus nationalism and so
this plays into it in a very powerful way so what do you do well first of all
Nubia and the negative don't try and scare people there is an
essay that came I remember years ago got the death of environmentalism and they
took a crack at the environment and even saying they always focus on the negative
the trans scared people away from the negative and it doesn't work people
motivate a better positive destroy of aspirational goals and they make the
point in a very clever way you say when the most inspirational speeches of that
time was not paid out at a nightmare it was called I have a dream that motivates
people to act can you envision area bits better with us addressing climate change
I can with the shifts in our culture economy shifts and mobility autonomous
driving I can figure the whole host of ways walkable cities New Urbanism a
whole host of ways where a world in which were addressing climate change
can be better and connected American ingenuity and competitiveness I call ins
when I hear people's ideas these people believe in climate change they're so
that posture pessimistic about the economy now I'm optimistic I'm
optimistic that we can solve this problem I am optimistic that we have the
ability to sadness get that message out I believe in American ingenuity and we
can tackle climate change and now you get something so this is what's on the
table hmmm in your data you're not talking to
all if you could find a way through overcoming any one of these forms of
distrust you look much more headrail in the conversation there's I just told you
now I'm going to tell you and I'll tell you I'm gonna wrap it up for the story
so any money dynamics I'm sure you've never heard of it much less read it and
it has a pay rise and I wouldn't recommend buying it it's a very
theoretical paper just trying to lay the foundation but then literature and
culture institutions connecting a climate change but I had two paragraphs
they two analogies in a race Wars but I left a minute
the first one is cigarettes in human health now I'll tell you about that the
culture shift the change we had to go through to come to a social fact let's
see this guy's cancer there's a couple of other entry points about that story
one is a lot of people say you can't do in a climate change into it and the
proverbial smoking done definitive proof that this is happening hey it's never
going to happen because in the proper experiment we need a control with
another planet earth that's not going to be available to us on cigarettes I
cannot prove to you if they will cause cancer I could do an experiment I
couldn't that I could try and get on you stop smoking some of you get cancer some
of you are the Surgeon General's report the first came and said cigarettes cause
cancer said epidemiologic a we can show you how it can happen statistically we
can to happen a quote unquote in the end
it's a matter of judgment and yet we have a social consensus that cigarettes
cause cancer and their link between second-hand smoking cigarettes and
cancer is even more tenuous and yet we are smoking bans and restaurants we can
come to a social consensus without the proverbial smoking gun
so lay that out there then I said how big is a culture change on climate
change and I said it's as big as your address or slavery now caveat so unfair
comparisons the wanton cruelty of one race against another they were
problematic on this issue but there are some interesting parallels in area when
addresses students frequently remnants of the uh Tobias lady people said yeah
man you know the economy is based on it that was true and today people are
sitting on the street cones are won in New York and said you have to best
pacifism people say you're out of your mind you can learn quality that the
attack on is based on it there are powerful economic interests that stood
to lose by abortion slavery and yet we did it and then it is done through
peaceful means the United States has done through a violent war that we did
it in the time of slavery many did not see a math problem uh that there's a
really great book called bear the chains about the audition movement and invent
and there's a scene in it that just just riveted me where he's describing a slave
ship coming from Africa people down below shame against their real sense it
some day some of them dead terrified what's going on on deck the captain is
giving better lessons to his crew and no one's saying a problem with it his back
their slaves in the Bible this is part of the mail order and now we look at the
idea of slavery devotion can you imagine a day when even you're mainly look at
the emission of co2 or greenhouse gases with even there are no more overtones we
look at slavery I bet you can't and that's how big the culture shift is
before us my mowing my lawn and a matter Michigan has import for the people of
low-lying there is a man there bitch are you ready for a more cold like that I
don't think so but that's how big the challenges before us so I read the paper
and then to some scale Journal and then the New York Times family edition
argument and they wrote about it and then Time magazine picked it up
scientific America rep and I'm getting excited you know a context where people
actually really give me kinda buzz that I was new to this debate and a friend
emailed me and said I see Marc Morano has taken this hiss at you and I said
who's Matt Morano instead he used to work for Western values work for James
Inhofe and now as a webpage climate depot about comma I will think you
better go look at it so good and this is what I found and here's my picture on
the lower right picture on the lower left and here's the cottage in the
arable climate skeptics or the moral equivalent of days of defended slavery
and there's my email address and so the emails start coming in and they're not
nice I have a favor for hey Mel and mine is Tim if you want to see nasty
stuff Katherine here at Texas Tech really office stuff our treasure days
and they typically go after people and more aggressive fashion if they think
available women get it more than men minority women get it more so that's
better again so it's better coming in and I stand and I was really struggling
what to do it and it's an important lesson if you do engage in the public
today if you're saying something important you're going to tip people off
and you have to learn that that wasn't ready for it and a friend of mine gave
me a quote you come down and listen Church 11 to verify but is a very poor I
commend it to you if you're not offending anyone you never took a stand
you write your paper you do your editorial if there's silence crickets
coming back trust me you didn't say any impairment if people that have said
you're challenging how they think and behave
I found a net it goes from Paul Newman the actor said if you don't have enemies
you don't have character I like that quote although I've stopped there people
have enemies that deserve them but if you have character you will have enemies
I heard my just like a month ago a friend of mine said
repeat that please and he goes you ain't get shout out if you're over the target
so if you go into the public debate this is new for academic so you can emanate a
public debate you just put a day's on your chest and
you're going to get shot at get ready for it
thicken your skin it's a different game than the seminar room which can both be
quite nasty so this definitely willing to do anything on a social scientists
are cold them and satify fancy science on a criminal a suit to his plan treaty
and mel and si tu savais just arrived you self-appointed overseers expect
aspirins will take you and your fellow scientists seriously your scientist I
don't trust you that's a play here they discussed my idea I'm doing a rep for
sailing on a green Terrace I must be a secular evolutionist if I
didn't climate change and must not believe in God I must believe in
evolution you are not part of my tribe you are a different tribe that's what's
happening here I'm trying to raise to dismiss we live in a time right now
where people don't debate your ideas the question of motives think about that
okay third they distrusted impact the I BR the first United States and they were
sitting reading didn't pursue your fantasies where did you develop the real
to push us backwards greetings comrade Radu at Marxist destruction of
civilization and must be one of those we Ottomans I must be one of those being
terrorists now I just want to conclude on this point why would people send
emails like this to summon a demo over scientific issue it's because for them
it is not a scientific issue for them they are defending values that they
heard deal that they feel are threatened by an existence acceptance of climate
change thank you very much
you