Will appealing to human emotions "save the environment"?fresh trove of embarrassing emails.
Meanwhile conservationists and environmentalists are now looking at marketing, neuroscience and emotional PR to sell their argument:
Conservationist Wallace J. Nichols, known for his work protecting sea turtles and the ocean, argues that environmental problems should be addressed using neuroscience and empathy, in addition to the existing facts, figures and statistics. He says people make decisions based on various emotions (product marketers certainly can attest to this), but environmentalists don’t really speak to those emotions in their work. “We should be using words like happiness and love,” he says. “Not in the hippie way but in the neuroscience way.”Read the rest: Will appealing to human emotions save the environment?
It’s funny how dis-attached conservationist Wallace J. Nichols is. Can you remember ever NOT seeing an "emotionally charged" campaign for greenpeace, against global warming or by the WWF? You certainly know about the theme we’ve seen in the last few years, a polar bear clenched on top of or swimming towards a lonesome floating ice block.
It’s one of the most loved memes of the environmental movement. It’s all designed to apeal to your emotions.
More sad polar bear images
It’s now also been discovered by CRED (Center for Research on Environmental Decisions) that appealing TOO MUCH to your emotions might be a bad thing. So to get "through" your rational barrier, they will need to "go easy" in order to successfully manipulate you with their message:
It may be tempting to conclude that an effective way to communicate climate change information is to place agreater emphasis on its possible consequences. Some goeven further, accentuating the risks by declining to mention the uncertainties involved. Such an approach evokes strong reactions in audiences, including fear of worstcase climate change scenarios and even heightened interest in what can be done to avoid them. But while an emotional appeal may make people more interested in apresentation on climate change in the short run, it may backfire down the road, causing negative consequencesthat often prove quite difficult to reverse.Read more here: Beware the Overuse of Emotional Appeals (pdf)
The point here is not whether the conservationists or the conservatives are right or wrong. The problem is that "truth" can no longer be spoken about this issue ... the true data it’s no longer "enough". Appealing to your rationality is not enough. Why?
The fact is that you’re not getting the correct science about climate change/global warming and you’re no longer permitted to make up your own mind about the issue. It tells that something more sinister is going on behind the green movement.
Think about it. Why would they otherwise need to manipulate you with marketing strategies, invasive neuroscience and emotional PR to sell their fraudulent argument?
Red Ice Radio
Robert Felix - The Coming Ice Age
Tim Ball - Climategate & The Anthropogenic Global Warming Fraud
James Follett - The Church of Global Warming