Why do people willingly jump from a plane as a hobby? Doesn’t it sound like a dangerous thing to do? Still, parachuting is a trendy sport nowadays. And it probably has to do with how they communicate how certain you are not to die on your jump.
I have a few friends that today have a license on parachuting. I was, of course, curious about how they came to the realization that jumping off a plane was safe enough to do it by yourself, more than 25 times. When they told me about it, I realized that the first lesson on parachuting is used to communicate all the certainties. They start by specifying the engineering behind the equipment, the studies on air dynamics with it, and just about everything that you need to know to understand how safe it is to do it. Then, of course, they do communicate the risks too. Still, if you ever ask one of my friends: why on Earth would they jump? They will tell you about the certainties, not the uncertainties of it, leaving you with a sense of peace on the matter and an impulse to do it. When communicating on the climate crisis, how often do we begin with the uncertainties?
For example, the BBC News article about the recent floods happening in Germany. First of all, the heading: ‘Top climate scientists have admitted they failed to predict the intensity of the German floods and the North American heat dome.’ The first piece of information is about the failure in science’s ability to make a correct statement. Then the rest of the article discusses the urge for better computers for more accurate forecasting. It then argues on the cost of the computers to do so. Finally, it compares the considerable cost of those computers with the unpreparedness of society for extreme events. And it argues that unless having those models, science will continue to underestimate these events.
Reflecting upon this article. When I first heard the flooding news, I was without any space for doubt linking this to climate change and truly felt an URGE for action. But after reading this article, I once again feel like we still need to wait for science to get better. How can this be? This is CLEAR; people are dying. But, of course, this is just one article. There have been others that clearly link the flooding with action on climate protection as of today. But this article is an excellent example of how communication can turn clear evidence of the need for action into a ‘we need to keep waiting for science to get better’.
How can I be so quickly convinced into jumping off a plane, giving me peace of mind with a scientific basis that my life is virtually not at risk? And how could communication on climate change convince stakeholders to jump into action?
As we saw in the guide for communicating climate change, uncertainty should not prevent science from focusing on the certainties to establish an understanding with the public.
BBC NEWS Article: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-57863205