Denunciation of alleged “climate deniers” encourages disinterest in environmental protection
Advisory center: “Arrogant instruction and education destroys the motivation to participate!”
The tone against alleged “climate change deniers” is becoming harsher. Some television programs are now trying to change viewers’ mindsets by using language to educate them – and to convince all skeptics and doubters of the threat posed by the change in temperatures, now referred to as global warming.
This top-down, patronizing form of education does a disservice to the actual goal – namely to encourage a more conscious lifestyle and participation in community change. This view is shared by Dennis Riehle (Constance), head of the consultancy for sustainable development and change management, who explains: “I myself have always emphasized that I am very committed to environmental protection and sustainability. But not because of hysterical climate activism, whose supporters are primarily concerned with self-profiling – and who intend to impose their radical minority opinion on the majority of society in order to drive forward a change in the representative system towards oligarchic structures.
In a nutshell, you could say that the ‘Last Generation’ – spoiled by overprotection and prosperity – is trying to realize its prepubescent desire for attention through infantile and meaningless protests. But the community cannot take the blame for a laissez-faire upbringing.
Technology – not paternalism
There is no doubt that we have lived beyond our means in the industrial age and exploited nature. Putting this damage into perspective and getting used to new circumstances seems to me to be our main task, which we can accomplish with innovation and confidence in research and technology, but certainly not with paternalism and prohibitions. We should be concerned with acclimatization and convergence rather than fighting against a development whose multifactorial causes we still know all too little about.
Accordingly, investing vast sums in the desperate attempt to influence evolution seems rather absurd. Rather, prevention and adaptability are needed, because we as humans are by no means helpless. It is worth continuing with approaches such as water management and geoengineering,” explains the 38-year-old psychological consultant and coach from Lake Constance.
“Considerable deficits in objectivity”
“I cannot recognize a significant connection between the CO2 hypothesis and global warming – which I do not deny in principle, but which I place in a much larger temporal frame of reference than the now rather tendentious science. I see considerable deficits in objectivity, especially with regard to the inductive inference techniques used by the IPCC, among others, which on the one hand arrive at a trend statement from the stringing together of individual observations and computer modeling, the reliability of which must be questioned quite clearly in view of empirical reflection, but on the other hand also focus solely on the last 100 years and thus reduce the extent of the planet’s gigantic history to a snapshot. There is a lack of common sense and logic.
And, of course, other factors have so far been completely ignored – from hydrogen and methane to solar activity and the interactions between natural anomalies. The exclusive focus on man-made carbon dioxide emissions was therefore not open-ended – which is why an essential principle of serious scientific work has already been violated here.
Ultimately, the current narratives are only suitable for manipulating civilization in order to get it to think and act in an ideologically desired way – and to bring a transformation to its knees that not only lacks pragmatic foresight and economic and social compatibility, but also puts populations worldwide in a destructive state of panic and uncertainty,” concludes the consultant for sustainable development and opportunity management.