Global Warming: It's All In Your Head

It's Not A Question Of Facts, But Perceptions, Says CBSNews.com's Dick Meyer

(CBS)  This commentary was written by CBSNews.com's Dick Meyer.

---

There's big news on climate change: Global warming is all in your head. The thing is, that's bad news for the planet.

How so? Well, as much as you would like to think that your opinions on the risks and realities of climate change are based entirely on your rational and purely objective assessments of scientific evidence, they aren't. They are shaped by primordial human brain wiring and anthropological patterns of behavior.

The most basic "facts" of climate change are what they are and the disputes on those basics are relatively narrow in the scientific world. How people perceive those "facts" — the threats or non-threats they inspire — varies wildly and for entirely nonfactual, emotional reasons. (Interestingly, the most animated disputes generally are poorly informed battles allegedly about what the facts are.) And if you aren't prepared to entertain that notion, this column will irritate you immensely.

So what is it that makes some human brains dismiss or ignore global warming and others, far fewer, feel worried, threatened and called to action? Answering this question properly is probably far more important to future behavior and policy than endless arguments about how hot it will be in Cincinnati in 2077.

Charles Darwin explains a lot of this. Global warming simply does not present the kinds of stimuli that the human nervous system evolved to respond to in order to survive threats from bears, lightning, rolling boulders and mean cavemen.

Daniel Gilbert, a Harvard psychologist who wrote "Stumbling on Happiness," summed up evolutionary psychology's perspective by noting how global warming lacked four traits "the human brain evolved to respond to."

First, the threat is not human and we "social mammals" are especially sensitive to dangers from other humans — and dangers that are intentional (terrorism) rather than accidental (floods). Similarly, homo sapiens respond with greater instinctive power to threats that violate group sensibilities or "moral emotions;" global warming doesn't spawn visceral feelings (for most) of something "indecent, impious or repulsive."

Third and most obvious, the threat of global warming is far, far away, not immediate, not something that makes you duck or twitch. In fact, a person really has to use the analytic brain hunks to get in a global warming lather, not the affective or emotional mechanisms that detect common threats and risks. As another scholar said, "risk is a feeling." Statistics and reports don't enter the brain through feeling portals. So after Hurricane Katrina, polling found concern about global warming ticked up.

Similarly, climate change is gradual. Indeed it is invisible; there are no "affective" sights and sounds to switch on the neurological special alert system — no infernos, poxes, pests and plagues.

The problem with the Darwinian angle here is that it doesn't explain why some human brains do feel threatened and worried by global warming and some don't. The biggest variable here is probably simple anthropology: as social mammals, we use the group to survive and thus tend to share the beliefs of our own group.

In modern society, groups are intangible and amorphous; they aren't discrete tribes gathering walnuts and spearing bison. Group ties are as often emotional or even ideological as geographic or even familial. You may identify, with varying degrees of self-consciousness, as a Catholic, a Green, a Jew, a small businessman, an African-American, a geek, a recovering alcoholic, a Republican, a liberal, a lesbian, an Italian-American, a Blue Blood, a Texan, an artist or a stamp collector. Most people cross-pollinate.

But these group affiliations are likely to be a strong determinant of your feelings about global warming (feelings you will call a "position"). Do you think global warming is an urgent problem because you are a Democrat or are you a Democrat because you think global warming is an urgent problem? Some variant of the former is most likely, I'm sorry to report.

Scandinavians and Germans have been the most alarmed and politically active about global warming. Why? Diet? Too much existentialism?

Compared to other countries, Americans display an unusually large disconnect in describing themselves as environmentalists by being broadly unwilling to support voluntary restraints and vigorous laws and regulations. (This comes from a paper called "The American Paradox" by Dale Jamieson of New York University, part of a fascinating collection of papers on "Global Warming: The Psychology of Long-Term Risk" in the July 2006 edition of a journal called, "Climactic Change.")

Group identification not only orients specific positions but what might be called the distribution of alarm. Elke Weber, also writing in "Climactic Change," notes that societies have a "finite pool of worry." Neither a group nor an individual can stay at red alert about terrorism, salmonella, bird flu, identity theft and global warming. We don't prioritize threats and risks rationally; we do it emotionally and through the genius or dumbness of crowds.

On top of all this very cool psycho-babble are some common-sense factors that keep global warming from triggering our inner worry monkeys. It's a hard problem to solve; OK, the world is warming, but it's not like you can go out and buy a Glock, duct tape or Cipro and do anything. Global warming is also the classic other guys' problem: leave it for the next generation; let the Chinese cut their pollution then we'll talk. It is also susceptible to optimism: American ingenuity will fix it.

"Global warming is a deadly threat precisely because it fails to trip the brain's alarm, leaving us soundly asleep in a burning bed," Daniel Gilbert wrote.

Scientists, economists and "ists" of all sorts have probably done all they can do to trigger our humanoid alarm systems. American politicians will probably hurt, not help. Bizarre and inconvenient as it sounds, effective and affective warnings and information about global warming will likely come from novelists, moviemakers and comedians.

---

Dick Meyer is the editorial director of CBSNews.com, based in Washington.

E-mail questions, comments, complaints, arguments and ideas to
Against the Grain. We will publish some of the interesting (and civil) ones, sometimes in edited form.

[homespunlady]

wow! this article explains a lot and clearly too. The comments are informative and reenforce the very thing the author spoke about. It certainly explains why I didn't check the sump pump in the basement until I heard the flood alarm. Thank goodness I at least had the presence of mind to put an alarm in place. Maybe it's a case of some hear the alarm and others ignore it. Personally I suspect there'll be a big change as soon as the people that believe they control the world economically have safely locked up for profit all the alternative energy solutions. I was receiving notices from that group years ago concerning buying up fuel cell technology and buying out water rights here in the states is their current infatuation. Waste Management is huge and growing. They're touting potential profit from their service and products both incoming and outgoing. When recycling becomes more profitable than wholesale waste the denyers will jump wholeheartedly on the bandwagon. For now, being pretty poor my carbon footprint is lower than most and I'm actively looking to lower it more. If the "sun is putting out more" group is right, I need more solar panels!

[gaye5]

Thanks katg21, and no it isn't a forum for forum for scientific experts, although some would like to think they are. I dont think that there is any on here who know the full reason for global warming, some think that they have all the answers and belittle those who have a different view, but....
I believe that if we tackle only one aspect of the problem we will be in big trouble, there are a few possibilities and I dont believe that anyone has all the answers yet, but of course as you can see when people think that they are knowledgably and think that they know what is real, they do not have the ability to make sure that there isn't any other aspects of the problem thus they ridicule the scientists and anyone who don'tt believe what they do..
In one of my other posts I quoted how satellites revealed a large change in the earth's gravity field, and I am wondering if this is the reason that the Larsen B ice shelf recently collapsed and headed out to sea, but at the same time, five other ice sheets that have been studied for years seem to be increasing in size. SEE the article...Top Story - SATELLITES REVEAL A MYSTERY OF LARGE CHANGE IN EARTH'S ...
Top Story. Goddard Space Flight Center ... Observations of the Earth's gravity field show that some phenomena are counteracting the gravitational effects of.

[katg21]

rubbrbiscuit, thank goodness someone is thinking out there... we have had warmer and colder periods many times before, and they will come again even if the human race has gone... yes it is warmer, it is 3pm here in Australia and it is 29c a bit cooler now thank goodness, and we are dry and running out of water, so although I have said all I have, any blind freddie can see that we are warmer, but WHY...
I dont believe that CO2's are the only reason.. is it the earth just going through the usual cycles, is it the sun heating up, is it the cutting down of our forests, is it CO2's, or a combination of all???
Posted by Gaye5 at 12:03 AM : Feb 24, 2007

Amen!

[katg21]

Oh, are we on a forum for scientific experts only? I guess that makes you one, huh? I'll concede that I am not an expert; I do however listen to both sides of every issue and come to my own conclusions. Whether I'm wrong or right is not for you to decide. What I do believe is that our climate is cyclical and that yes, humans are a very small contributing factor to global warming. I don't believe that just changing the type of light bulb I use will save the planet. I'm a realist. I drive a fuel efficient car; always have, don't smoke, recylcle, don't fly, blah, blah, blah. I wonder how much damage your a-list celebrity global warming spokesmen are doing flying their private jets back and forth from New York to L.A.? Oh, no they drive the Prius, that makes it okay. I think maybe you should research the lifestyles of the people feeding you all of the global warming ***; see how much money they're making, see how much their electric bills are on their 5 mansions. How many Escalades to their one prius, huh. I look at these people and see right through the spoon fed ***. I don't need to regurgitate anymore senseless, totally fabricated "facts" about global warming; seems you have a handle on it.

[gaye5]

According to proponents of the Global Climate Treaty, a consensus within the scientific community supports the view that human-caused global warming is occurring and that it threatens human health and well-being.... Nothing could be further from the truth. Far from viewing the existence of global warming as %u201Csettled,%u201D MOST atmospheric scientists and climate specialists hold that the global warming issue should be considered %u201Cunfinished business%u201D requiring much further research.

The models used as a the basis for the proposed Kyoto treaty predict that the polar regions, both North and South, would be the first to see increased warming due to greenhouse gases. But now apparently the opposite is true, at least for Antarctica.
Capitalism Magazine Science Climate...Antarctica Is Cooling?
by Herbert Inhaber (July 27, 2002)

As a footnote to all this, the Larsen B ice shelf recently collapsed and headed out to sea, producing crows of "I told you so" from global warming scaremongers. But at the same time, five other ice sheets that have been studied for years seem to be increasing in size. Since most of the continent is getting colder, the total amount of ice apparently is increasing, not decreasing, regardless of what one ice shelf does or does not do. ........
Antarctica Gives Mixed Signals on Warming
Bijal P. Trivedi
National Geographic Today...January 25, 2002

[gaye5]

triassic, in my search, I have not found any reference to Fred Singer being corrupt, in fact I have found the opposite..eg (%u201CThe scientific urge to consensus on the greenhouse issue tends to compromise away dissent. Fred Singer, with impeccable credentials, does not compromise.) ...
he is an atmospheric physicist at George Mason University and founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, a think tank on climate and environmental issues. Singer has been a leading sceptic of the scientific consensus on global warming. He points out that the scenarios are alarmist, computer models reflect real gaps in climate knowledge, and future warming will be inconsequential or modest at most. You will find that he is but only one of the many scientists who dont believe in the GW theory...

[gaye5]

triassic, if you haven't been reading my posts, I am not going to waste everyone's time by going into it all again...
perhaps you dont realise this but when America is awake we here in Australia are asleep...and when it is daylight here some of us have to work and have visitors.. it has been a day of people in and out, and buying more land to build houses on..this is my business, I organise people to build homes for me, I then do the interior decorating etc..

[gaye5]

grumpas you said that....Most of the one's who don't think we have global warming are the same one's who don't see the hazards of over-population! etc...
grampas that is a really wild supposition, I for one, my husband, our friends and colleagues sure dont fall into your category.. and I believe that there is many causes for global warming and that CO2's is only one comparatively small reason. The sun which is heating up is a major concern, one that we can do nothing about where as the CO2's we can...

[davwein]

Atmospheric Destablization, would be better or something like it ,global warming, is dumb as it dose not describe the problem.

[triassic-2009]

Gaye5:

Still waiting on your list of alternate theories...

[gaye5]

rubbrbiscuit, thank goodness someone is thinking out there... we have had warmer and colder periods many times before, and they will come again even if the human race has gone... yes it is warmer, it is 3pm here in Australia and it is 29c a bit cooler now thank goodness, and we are dry and running out of water, so although I have said all I have, any blind freddie can see that we are warmer, but WHY...
I dont believe that CO2's are the only reason.. is it the earth just going through the usual cycles, is it the sun heating up, is it the cutting down of our forests, is it CO2's, or a combination of all???

[triassic-2009]

Follow the money. These are the professional skeptics.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/skeptic-organizations.html

[triassic-2009]

Fred Singer. Ha!

Google Fred Singer and see what you find. He is a corrupt scientist who has been funded by the oil and tobacco industry for many years. He is one of a handful of "professional skeptics," and is held in very low regard in the scientific community...

[gaye5]

triassic,
National Assessment of the Potential Impact of Climate Change (NACC): Climate Change Impacts on the United States.
Hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Testimony of Prof. S. Fred Singer July 18, 2000 President, The Science & Environmental Policy Project, http://www.sepp.org Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,
My name is Fred Singer. I am Professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia and the founder and president of The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) in Fairfax, Virginia, a non-partisan, non-profit research group of independent scientists.

We hold a skeptical view on the climate science that forms the basis of the National Assessment because we see no evidence to back its findings; climate model exercises are NOT evidence. Vice President Al Gore keeps referring to scientific skeptics as a "tiny minority outside the mainstream." This position is hard to maintain when more than 17,000 scientists have signed the Oregon Petition against the Kyoto Protocol because they see "no compelling evidence that humans are causing discernible climate change."

Al Gore, Global warming, Inconvenient Truth
Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe
"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists

By Tom Harris...
Monday, June 12, 2006

[triassic-2009]

Gaye5:

Provide a concise list of your alternate theories, and I will be happy to explain why each one is not valid.

[gaye5]

and triassic respect is not achieved by belittling others, I suggest that you study on what scientists are saying about the sun and why the sun is also heating the planets...You see triassic, if we dont study all aspects of the problem it could mean that if we are wrong that we die, because we didnt see the punch coming from the right. I have read extensively of the CO2' theory and went on to look outside the square...
I feel that the scientists whose studies that I am quoting from are just as justified in their opinions from their research as yours are, and it is a shame that you think some scientists reports are just theories while the scientists who say what you believe to be true, are scientific.
triassic if you read my posts, I am not saying that humans are not responsible for the cause of the increase in CO2's I live in Australia and I know that tempatures are rising just as they have done before, all I am saying is that along with CO2's that there are also other causes and thoughts out there..
We can all find research to back our opinions, thus I like to look at all corners of an argument and after reading the CO2 theory I went on to look at other scientific ideas on the issue..If the powers to be had of insisted that global warming was because of the sun, then after reading the arguments I would have looked for what other scientists were saying.

[triassic-2009]

Gaye5:

Sorry, but respect must be earned. The various theories you posted are easily dismissed with a little research.

[gaye5]

triassic it is not worth showing up ones intellect by being nasty.. no one here has proof of your credentials...if any...just as you have no proof that some of our colleagues and friends are scientists, (which they are)..
It is a shame that people feel so insecure or threatened by others and their ideas that they have to belittle the thoughts or knowledge of others.... There are so many good comments on both sides of the equation on this site, some I dont at this stage agree with and some have made me think, but there is no way that I would belittle theirs especially as one day they might be right and me wrong...
People must show respect for the ideas of others whether they feel that, that person is right or wrong... Scientists once said that the earth was flat and it was said of those who said it was round that they were stupid also... Dr's once said that it was not necessary to wash hands after touching the sick, etc... When humans lower themselves to nasty bully comments like you did, it does not help your cause...

[gaye5]

triassic ... the article that you recommended for me to read is very interesting and pouts respect even though it says it is open to all Members of the UN and of WMO.
I dont trust the UN as far as I could kick them... But you have to realise that there are many world renowned scientists who dont believe that the reason for the earths problem is solely our fault, one example is that there is evidence to support that in the last 3.6 million years, Earth's magnetic field has reversed nine times. Why this reversal occurs is unknown, but the planet's magnetic field NOW is over 6% weaker than the magnetic field of the late 1890's. This means that we may be undergoing another reversal. Satellite data since 1998 indicates the bulge in the Earth's gravity field at the equator is growing, and scientists think that the ocean may hold the answer to the mystery of how the changes in the trend of Earth's gravity are occurring. taken from TOP STORY Goddard Space Flight center NASA. An article on this NASA-funded study appears in the August 2 issue of the journal Science. Could this, along with the sun heating us also effect our weather????..

[rheola-2009]

As it appears, global warming is a fact, no matter how much you wish to defend your materialistic lifestyle, with no care or concern for your children and grandchildrens future, in order that you can selfishly continue to destroy this world of ours by your greed and blind stupidity.
Thankfully the Europeans and many others are not so selfishly inward looking as is the average American, also thankfully there are many amongst us who can see beyond their noses, and are not blinded by stupidity and materialistic greed.

Even that meglomaniac Bush is beginning to see that a massive problem exists, or is he just being opportunistic by having a little each way, to cover his backside for when, even the blind fools will have to admit Global warming is a massive Global problem.