For most of the population their only daily contact with a STEM person is the TV weatherman who typically goes to great wishy washy lengths to explain that tonights snow fall or last weeks record high are not the sole or most significant primary proof of the truth or falsehood of global warming. Meanwhile clickbait and disaster pr0n movies for generations have implied we all gonna die due to climate change yet for generations life has gone on, and in fact will continue to go on, and the alarmists are looked with contempt similar to pseudo-Christian preachers and cult leaders announcing the end of the world, admittedly for differing strategies but identical reasons, gaining money and power (edited)
So everyone knows most STEM people are honest and that honesty results in our admittedly pretty awesome modern world, while simultaneously their personal daily experience of a climate expert is at best extremely wishy washy and the scam of begging for money and control via the impending apocalypse goes back millennia before modern "climate change" and most people very wisely scoff at it.
The results make sense that most scientists are technically trustworthy, as opinion leaders their politics are less influential than your average plumber's opinions, and apocalyptic preachers have always been full of it and always will be.
For political reasons and tribal reasons, many will have to pretend to be surprised to signal that they're in the in group and the out group suxs, but we all know the above is how the world really works.
I posit that none of you have any daily experience with science, otherwise you'd appreciate that 95 percent of PhDs dare not stand up against the groupthink. You would also appreciate how much if clumate science is total garbage.
What an echo chamber. Thankfully, the political pressure to accept climate orthodoxy is currently waning.
And i give a damn about your downvotes, or your unqualified replies.
An EE calculating a resistor for a circuit has a certain applied relative honesty such that either he's truthful about 2+2=4 and the circuit works or he lies and the 2+2=5 and the circuit doesn't work. That times 300 days/year time millions of engineers times centuries of progress equals our pretty freaking cool miracle of a modern world. Some individuals sometimes cheat when they play poker, or lie about politics, whatever.
On the other hand consider a line of work inherently relatively on average dishonest like marketing a dish soap via TV commercial method of marketing. No amount of extra lying will eventually construct Hoover Dam or land men on the moon.
> Half of the participants got a future-focused message, like “Looking forward to our nation’s future, there is increasing traffic on the road.” The other half were given a past-focused message, such as “Looking back to our nation’s past, there was less traffic on the road.”
> After reading the message, the participants took a survey about it and their opinions on climate change and the environment. Participants who reported that they were conservative rated the past-focused message more positively and showed more pro-environmental attitudes in the survey.
"{0}% of all US scientists believe global warming is real, it is almost entirely man-made and a grave threat to humanity".
Fill in {0} with 95 or whatever the real number would be after a survey.
Their key documents address the issue of how best to tell people something they really don't want to hear, etc: http://www.theclimatemobilization.org/key_documents
Changing people's minds 'for their own good' is a really hairy problem.