Thread by @KHayhoe

For the last few years, “climate activists are setting the wildfires” (to fake climate risks?!) was the dominant denial talking point; but now it’s gone even further…claims that the fires were set to clear areas for wind farms, critical mineral extraction, and more. (contd)

As @JustinWorland discusses here, there’s a psychological effect: the more obvious and dangerous, the impacts become, the stronger and more forceful the pushback to deny the urgency of action. (contd) time.com/6298586/extrem…

@JustinWorland Why? Because climate denial was never about a lack of scientific facts or unawareness of the risks of inaction. It was always about solution aversion. Watch:

So what can we do about it? For the 10% or so who are truly dismissive, only this.

https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/1235204287891988481?s=20

But for the vast majority of people, most of whom are worried but don’t know what to do, we must couple negative info about the risks with positive info about solutions, 50-50 instead of the usual 99-1 ratio you see in the news and on social media. ted.com/talks/katharin…

Our goal is not to have everyone in the world paralyzed with fear. Our goal is to have us all motivated to act. But in order to do that, we must understand BOTH the risks of inaction as well as the possibilities of action. Here’s a great place to start!

https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/1678118380786659329?s=20