Conservation Comment: Sceptics trying to trump science

Philip McConkey

By Philip McConkey

AS MOST of us are aware, United States party conventions have been taking place over recent weeks. Among the many revelations has been Donald Trump announcing again that climate change is a "hoax".

Like most of his statements, no evidence is produced -- they are the "shoot from the mouth" variety. But apparently all but one of the 19 original contenders for the Republican nomination actually agree with him.

It seems extraordinary to me that so many political leaders (of a particular persuasion) can fly in the face of the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary. For example, they can apparently trust the the scientists of Nasa to land a rocket on a rock out in space, yet disbelieve the same scientists when they confirm human-created climate change, with the mountains of evidence they have gathered.

English physicist Brian Cox put it this way: "Being an expert does not mean that you are someone with a vested interest; it means you spend your life studying something. You're not necessarily right, but you're more likely to be right than someone who hasn't spent their life studying it."

A researcher at the University of Canterbury has recently gone so far as to say that "the term 'climate sceptic' is now interchangeable with the term 'mindless fool'. It ought to be seen as a crime!"

I'm sure that our local sceptics and deniers would assert the reverse to be true. It is we who are the fools -- even though we have a huge body of scientific opinion on our side.

So what is going on? With all the evidence -- which grows by the day -- why is there still so much denial and so little action?

Some of the explanations might include the following: It's too big to contemplate, so best to ignore or deny it. Facing it requires too big a shift in our current way of doing things. It clashes too starkly with our personal or collective beliefs about how things are. Scientists have been wrong before, so they could be now. Doing something will cost too much. We just need to be patient -- science will come up with an answer.

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that the reality of climate change is so often portrayed in such catastrophic terms. We're all doomed! We should know by now that scaring people usually turns them off. So we have to give people something to look forward to, some light at the end of the tunnel. We also need to understand that if we want the facts of climate change to be accepted we must realise that people interpret those facts according to their values -- what's most important to them. How the facts are presented, including the solutions, must include how everyone gets something out of the deal. Finally, those of us who are trying to lead the change must demonstrate the change ourselves (for example, stop flying, or give up our cars). Too often we don't and we, too, stay in the safety of what is most convenient and comfortable.

It is becoming pretty obvious that there has been enough talk. Change requires action.

� Philip McConkey has worked in the care professions most of his life, as a social worker, counsellor and family therapist. He is the father of three daughters and has five grandchildren. He is active in the Green Party because he accords with its values.