When we interviewed scientists in San Francisco in December, John Cook
had the brilliant idea to ask each of them one last question –
“Ok, you’re getting on an elevator with someone, and they say, –
“So you’re a climate scientist – what’s all this about climate change and
global warming?”
“You’ve got 10 floors. Go.”
We got a range of answers from some of the best known minds in the
world, as well as a number of ‘not the usual suspects”.
I’ve pulled together two of these so far, and have posted Katharine
Hayhoe’s first, here.
More to come…
open to suggestions about frequency.
Reblogged this on jpratt27.
Great idea
Reblogged this on Joe's Notepad.
“More to come…open to suggestions about frequency”
Hayhoe did a great job here, and this is something all Crockers can use in the “close combat” situations many of us find ourselves in when the conversation turns to AGW at things like weddings or retirement parties—-you know, someone brings it up, the willfully ignorant go nuts with their denial BS, and the conversation quickly moves on before fists start flying.
It would be great to have a repertoire of “quick moves” to throw at the fools in that short interval where communication (even if weak) is still open. I have had only a few AGW discussions with the unwashed that didn’t quickly turn into knife fights or sullen disengagement, and they stayed alive only because we got into something that caught their interest (or values, as Hayhoe suggests).
Bring on the Elevator Pitches!—-one or two a week works for me.
Just posted a reply—-where the heck did it go?
I like this new approach. So often the word ‘science’ produces a glazed look on an average non-nerd – but almost everyone has concerns with some aspect of climate change. Talking to people about their concerns will hold their attention for the duration of an elevator ride. And likely give them something to think about for a much longer period.
Regarding frequency, all of them once a day would be good. Easier to keep track of once they are posted.
Great pitch, and right on the money.
I coach high tech entrepreneurs on how to pitch to investors, customers and others and I’ve been trying to figure out how to apply what I know to changing the conversation about climate change for those who are not trained in science. It’s quite a challenge. If you’d care to weigh in or just get some professional advice, read on. Otherwise, apologies for the super-long post.
*******************************
Most scientists (and that includes me, BS Physics MIT, PhD MS&E Stanford) hate the idea of pitching, because we associate it with sleazy used car salesmen or internet get-rich-quick scams. The fact is, we all pitch every day: any time you ask someone to do anything they weren’t already planning to do (e.g., buy into the concept of anthropogenic climate change), you are pitching to them.
The best pitches do 3 things:
– Help the audience relate to the speaker as a person
– Share a vision for the future that the speaker and the audience (can) buy into
– Ask the audience to do something they can and want to do
(I didn’t say it was easy – my company name is Plano & Simple because pitching well is simple, not easy.)
What you should get out of those three points is that you have to understand your audience, and you need to be pitching something you believe in personally (it’s obviously possible to succeed in the short term without the latter, but we’re not in this for the short run, are we??).
As for understanding your audience, here’s how I coach my entrepreneurs to think about their audience:
Investors are basically very simple creatures. They make up their minds based on just two things: Fear and Greed. Now, if I’m going to be fair, we all make up our minds this way, it’s just a matter of what we’re fearful of and greedy for (doesn’t have to be money; could be greed for a carbon-free world and fear of endless drought). In an initial pitch, you don’t have time to teach anyone anything, all you can do is get them so excited about what you’re doing that they can’t wait to learn more. So everything you say should either increase greed or decrease fear or preferably both, or it doesn’t belong in an initial pitch.
The reason the above is accurate if not particularly flattering to the human race, is that we are wired to make decisions based on emotion first and then rationalize that decision with logic. In science, we learn to use rational processes and thought to overcome emotional initial reactions, but there’s a reason that double blind studies are an essential part of that process.
Breaking down Katharine’s comments, she has exactly the right idea that the typical approach doesn’t work.
“It’s real, it’s bad, it’s us, but there are solutions.” assumes that the audience has the same emotional reaction to information as a scientist does: “OK, those are the facts, let’s get to work.” Instead, as we have all heard a million times (paraphrasing), “It isn’t real; you’re fudging the data”, “It’s bad, but it’s happening in spite of us.”, “No way is it us! It’s nature, happens all the time.”, and “Those solutions mean I have to change my way of life and I’m not doing it.”
“I care about Texas and I care about the future” – better, but I’d rather she started out by asking the other person what they care about, and focused on mutual goals. You can assume you know what the other person cares about and you might be right, but you’re better off getting to know the person better first.
In other words, to be more successful, be able to say “You and I care about Texas and about the future” with *credibility*. Or, “When was the last time you were able to water your lawn in the summer?” or “Can you believe how high our water bills are getting?” (I have no idea if these are issues in W Texas – I live in Boston, currently getting hammered with snow and rain… just trying to make a point.)
When your audience is on board with you for the premise, you can move on. “We don’t have a future with[out] water. Climate change is going to make water more scarce.” I’d actually go with something less science and more personal/economic “The cost of water is going up because we’ve had so much drought – this one has lasted longer than any in memory, right?” (Getting agreement on anything is helpful in allowing the audience’s mindset to be open to new ideas.)
OK, I’ve just realized I’ve gone on and on and on and have no idea as to whether anyone is interested in what I’m writing. I care about this subject – I’ve even broached it with Peter – but my ideas need more testing and polish before they should really be published. If anyone has made it this far into the post, let me know and I’ll continue. Otherwise, I’ll keep developing my ideas and write something more coherent in a few months.
In the mean time – keep up the great work with Climate Crocks – you (c)rock!
“….have no idea as to whether anyone is interested in what I’m writing”?.
You’re getting some “Thumbs up”—-some of us are apparently listening. Keep going.
Excellent short video and it’s reassuring that so many gifted folk are putting so much effort into this.
I understand some of this footage will be used in a 7 week MOOC course hosted by the University of Queensland. I find these online courses very valuable at increasing knowledge and confidence to air the topics, and thanks the various tutors and establishments for sparing time and effort.
Free MOOC course… Making Sense of Climate Science Denial
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial.
https://www.edx.org/course/making-sense-climate-science-denial-uqx-denial101x#.VBxNu-c0phE