Know What We Need To Fight Hotcoldwetdry? Better Communication!

No, seriously, you guys, because they haven’t been attempting to communicate for over 25 years on the subject

Improved communication between experts and the public key in winning battle to curb climate change, claims expert

Scientists need to become more humble and to completely re-think the way they communicate if the battle to curb climate change is to be won, one of the world’s leading climate experts has warned.

Lamenting what he calls a “mismatch” between the state of climate science and the needs of society, Professor Chris Rapley called on his colleagues across the world to throw off the shackles of tradition and engage in a radically different approach to their discipline.

Climate scientists need to be more critical about their own research, more open to the work and views of other people and to communicate much more clearly with the public, said Professor Rapley, of the University College London.

Wait, wait, that didn’t go quite the way I thought, via the headline. Professor Rapley is correct in that regard. Of course, Warmist scientists and “scientists” won’t listen.

At the same time, they need to defend their work more robustly against climate sceptics and, in a recommendation many may find surprising, rely less on scientific fact and more on narrative techniques such as personal anecdotes, emotion and rhetoric to make their points, he added. (snip)

The report (by Rapley’s group), entitled Time for Change, concluded that to communicate much more “powerfully” with the public, scientists need to personalise their story, drawing on emotions and expressing their opinions – an approach it concedes is “contrary to long-standing tradition” but which, with mainstream audiences, is more effective than piling on ever-more facts to make a point.

Now that is more what I expected. Science be damned, we have a narrative! We can preach it, baby!

Best comment

This is either a very condescending report (the general public are too thick to understand what we say), or its a very nice way of saying the science behind climate change has failed so now we have to put spin on it to keep the gravy train a rollin’.

However Marsinah, or Kependeal, or whatever the hell she’s calling herself these days likes to dress it up, if a researcher says they have to ‘rely less on scientific facts’ to put their argument across, then they are asking for faith in an idea. Which is more commonly known as a religion. You’ll forgive me for not bending my knee before this particular altar.

All of the above.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Know What We Need To Fight Hotcoldwetdry? Better Communication!”

  1. John says:

    Seriously Teach do you think you have a better grasp of the science than the USNavy ?
    Even the freakin Pope knows that people are impacting the climate

  2. gitarcarver says:

    Seriously john, why is it that you agree with the Pope only on some issues?

    The Pope is against homosexuality. Are you now against homosexuality? The Pope is against sex outside of marriage. Are you against sex outside of marriage? The Pope is against abortion. Are you against abortion now?

    Please tell us when you started to recognize, believe and most importantly follow the Pope’s teachings or instructions in your life?

    As for the Navy and the “science….”

    The Navy has a responsibility to have the meanest, baddest, most effective Navy in the world. When the “green movement” starts to affect that directive and mission, the Navy’s direction must be questioned.

    Secondly, you should be aware of this:

    Retired officers poised to profit after Pentagon’s alarmist climate change report
    Urgent Obama call can funnel funds to projects

    Retired military officers deeply involved in the climate change movement — and some in companies positioned to profit from it — spearheaded an alarmist global warming report this month that calls on the Defense Department to ramp up spending on what it calls a man-made problem.

    The report, which the Obama administration immediately hailed as a call to action, was issued not by a private advocacy group but by a Pentagon-financed think tank that trumpets “absolute objectivity.” The research was funded by a climate change group that is also one of the think tank’s main customers.

    When the report on the “science” has a built in bias, there is good reason to not only doubt, but to throw away the “expertise” in the area.

  3. jl says:

    John, to answer your question, yes, he seriously does.

Pirate's Cove