How to Talk with Climate Change Skeptics in Your Church

More than 97 percent of climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is happening here and now. Yet many Americans are unaware of this scientific consensus.

Meanwhile, evidence of climate change is mounting—rising seas, retreating glaciers, and extreme weather—as are their effects on human health and well-being, everything from more lung disease and vector-borne illnesses to injuries and deaths from extreme weather events.

In the face of these sobering realities, the Trump administration is taking steps to reverse progress the U.S. has made on carbon pollution by eliminating the Clean Power Plan, radically shrinking the Environmental Protection Agency, reversing environmental safety regulations, and potentially withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement.

However, we are not helpless, and the situation is not hopeless. In many ways, the prospects for progress in combating climate change are good. The costs of clean, renewable energy, such as solar and wind, are dropping precipitously, and a large majority of Americans want us to transition quickly away from fossil fuels, regulate carbon emissions, and abide by the climate agreement reached in Paris last year. National environmental organizations are seeing rapid increases in donations and volunteerism from those who oppose federal efforts to dismantle environmental protections. But it’s not enough.

Building a strong national movement to protect the climate requires many voices. The voices of Christians are especially needed. And many are speaking up. “The poor, the disenfranchised, those already living on the edge, and those who contributed least to this problem are also those at greatest risk to be harmed by it. That’s not a scientific issue; that’s a moral issue,” wrote Katharine Hayhoe, a renowned climate scientist and evangelical Christian, on The Conversation website. She has noted that, “As scientists we don’t know a lot about suffering, but as Christians we do. And we know that part of the reason we’re here in this world is to help people who are suffering.” Pope Francis has made the case that climate change is one of the principal challenges facing humanity and that it is a moral imperative for Christians to rise to the challenge.

Scientific research demonstrates that climate change disproportionately affects the world’s poor. The 2014 U.S. National Climate Assessment, for example, concluded that “certain people and communities are especially vulnerable, including children, the elderly, the sick, the poor, and some communities of color.” Caring for the poor and vulnerable is a biblical mandate, from the Hebrew scriptures through the New Testament. The same love of God that compels us to share the good news of Jesus Christ propels us to take seriously the suffering that human-caused climate change is inflicting on these most vulnerable of populations.

What can I do?

It is easy to feel swamped by the enormity of climate change. However, there are many things individuals can do.

• First, identify and investigate your own questions. Do you feel uncertain about how climate change works or to what extent humans have contributed to the problem? Do you understand the ways that the most poor and vulnerable are affected? Online sites such as the National Climate Assessment, NASA’s Global Climate Change, and Skeptical Science are excellent tools to bolster your climate knowledge.

• Second, break the climate silence. Initiate conversations about climate change. Surveys by George Mason University and Yale on climate communication consistently show that family and friends are among the most trusted sources Americans rely on to learn about the climate. In fact, only climate scientists are trusted more than family and friends as sources of information about climate change.

However, the research also shows that seven in 10 Americans rarely or never discuss global warming with family and friends; only one in five hear people they know talk about it at least once a month. The research also shows that Christians—especially evangelicals—are among the least likely to be convinced that serious, human-caused climate change is occurring. Therefore, it is crucial that Christians who are concerned about the impact of climate change on the poor and vulnerable talk with—and listen to—their family and friends. It is not necessary to be an expert on climate change to initiate these conversations. Rather, sharing what you have learned, why you are convinced (along with any ongoing questions you have), or how you are taking action can all kick-start a conversation that does not descend into polarized conflict.

The ‘six Americas’ of global warming

For the past eight years, a team of scientists at George Mason’s Center for Climate Change Communication has partnered with Yale's program to research U.S. public opinion on climate change. We have identified six distinct groups—what we call “Global Warming’s Six Americas.” These groups range from the “alarmed,” who are most convinced of the urgent nature of the problem, to the “dismissive,” who are least convinced that climate change is real or a threat to the well-being of the earth and its people.

Many Americans think that climate opinion is black and white—like the two ends of the spectrum. But in reality, only 18 percent of Americans belong to the “alarmed” group and only 9 percent to the “dismissive” segment. Another 5 percent (the “disengaged”) hold virtually no beliefs about the issue, while 11 percent (the “doubtful”) aren’t sure whether climate change is happening but are convinced that if it is happening, humans aren’t causing it—it’s just a natural cycle. Just over half of Americans fall into either the “concerned” (34 percent) or “cautious” (23 percent) groups. These people think that human-caused global warming is occurring, but aren’t entirely sure and aren’t doing much about it.

Understanding this diversity of opinion enables varying entry points into conversations with friends and family members: Investigate where they stand, ask how they arrived at their conclusions and questions, and proceed from where they are, rather than from where you want them to be.

For some, especially those in the “doubtful” and “dismissive” segments, the conversation need not be about climate change per se; indeed, that might not be the most productive conversation. Research sponsored by ClearPath, an organization founded to “spur conservatives to be leaders on clean energy,” strongly suggests addressing climate change by actively taking it out of the conversation. Instead, you could talk about clean energy and the many good reasons for embracing and transitioning to it in your home, town, state, and nation. Nearly all Americans, on the left and the right, see the value of a clean-energy future. These conversations can acknowledge climate change as one of the good reasons to make this transition, but they should not lead with climate change.

For example, you might say: “We should expand the use of clean energy regardless of the debate over climate, because it will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, reduce air pollution, and improve public health.” Embracing clean energy is something that everyone can do. Many homeowners can get solar panels installed at no cost, and save themselves a bundle, or buy wind energy for a very small premium. Businesses and municipalities can do the same. You might suggest these ways of embracing clean energy to your neighbors, your congregation, your employer, the companies you patronize, and your municipal, state, and federal representatives.

Our conversations should stress comprehensive solutions to address climate change, because “We are faced not with two separate crises, one environmental and the other social, but rather with one complex crisis which is both social and environmental,” as Pope Francis put it. “Strategies for a solution demand an integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same time protecting nature.” For example, two endeavors in West Virginia—Solar Holler and the Coalfields Development Corporation—take seriously the hardships endured by communities transitioning away from fossil fuel.

Actions are contagious

The best way to lead is by example. If you use clean energy sources, improve the energy efficiency of your home, buy green products, and support environmentally responsible political candidates, your actions give you something to talk to others about and also make you a more convincing agent of change.

People tend to act in the same ways as those around them. Your actions can influence even people you’ve never met. Studies of social networks by Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler, authors of Connected, have shown that action is contagious and spreads through communities from person to person with about three degrees of influence—from you to your friend, to your friend’s friend, to your friend’s friend’s friend.

Joining local efforts by organizations such as Citizens’ Climate Lobby and Interfaith Power and Light is an effective way to work together to propel action on climate change. Seek guidance from leaders in your local faith community about ways to tackle the issue, including talking about the moral implications of climate change.

By breaking the climate silence, Christians can bring light, compassion, and determination to the national conversation on global warming: Light, by helping people understand the gravity of the threat; compassion, by recognizing that those most harmed are innocent victims who deserve our protection; and determination, by refusing to accept any future that is not sustainable.

We have a moral imperative to take action on climate change. All of us are called to act.

The Consensus Grows

A survey conducted in November after the election asked U.S. registered voters for their views on current and proposed global warming and clean energy policies.

69% of respondents said the U.S. should participate in the Paris agreement to limit climate change, compared with only 13 percent who said the U.S. should not.

66% said the U.S. should reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of what other countries do.

62% said the president and 63 percent said Congress should to do more to address global warming.

72% said corporations and industry should do more to address global warming.

66% supported requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and using the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount—often referred to as a “revenue neutral carbon tax.”