Climate Change: If We Can't Go To Hell, Let's Bring It Here

I wonder what percentage of us are merely espousing our beliefs on human-driven climate change, not science? My guess is that the majority of us have never done any serious research or comprehensive scientific reading.

And those of us who have done a lot of varied reading on the subject have probably gathered our information from sources that match our own present beliefs, dismissing opposing views.

Is anyone else out there scared of people who speak about topics from which they received their education solely from partial corporate-funded media, hand-me-down beliefs from relatives or the church, and adamant opines from the vocal?

Like so many significant topics, climate change is a 'change-by-pain' issue. When/if we start feeling enough collective pain in our health/bank account, then we will rally to make a behavioral change.

I know it is more comforting when I think of our planet as strong and mighty, isolated from any catastrophic harm. I know that I feel better when I think of myself as a good person who is nice to others; I would never be an accomplice to ecological murder. Look around me: I have a healthy family, I eat well, have a good education, good job... my life is good, so how could any of this looming disaster stuff be true?

"The earth is invincible to humans" is a long-held belief. But let's keep in mind that just a few hundred years ago some of us wanted to behead a man for his radical belief that the earth orbited around the sun. How dare he say that we were not at the center of the universe, in control of all of our surroundings?

And many of our ancestors would point and laugh at their neighbors who were in the "round world" bandwagon conspiracy. It's obvious that those nut jobs just wanted to cause civil unrest for personal financial gain.

Finding Our Way

Writer Peter J. Boyer from the New Yorker:

Kieth Olbermann’s success, like Bill O’Reilly’s, is evidence of viewer cocooning—the inclination to seek out programming that reinforces one’s own firmly held political views. “People want to identify,” Phil Griffin says. “They want the shortcut. ‘Wow, that guy’s smart. I get him.’ In this crazy world of so much information, you look for places where you identify, or you see where you fit into the spectrum, because you get all this information all day long.”

"Viewer cocooning" refers to homophily, a psychological concept I am interested in. I don't know if he created the nickname, but I like it.

Consider how homophily both combats and complements learning. Finding something we like can lead us to learn about other things we like. On the other hand (I have five fingers), what are the ideas and who are the people we shut out in order to create a life experience that better matches our current world view, our present understanding? The latter reminds me of a life run on auto pilot.