What Science Says We Can Do About Climate Change

Recycling is dead and it wasn’t enough in the first place. Science points to key actionable steps we can take as individuals to help mitigate climate change and build a healthier future. According to science, we CAN mitigate climate change, we just need to act quickly and as a community. The following is a list of actions for individuals to take that will make the most impact. Let’s do this y’all. And remember, ultimately, the most important change that needs to be made is systematic. It’s not just a burden that should be held on the individual level, but those individual changes can be catalysts to sparking systematic change.

Note: We recognize that many of these actions require privilege, monetary and otherwise, so rather than judge yourself (or others… mind your own sustainable beeswax wrappers!) for what you can’t do, focus on what you can do. And remember: the best things we can possibly do are to vote and to consume what we need, not everything we want.


Photo by Laura Mitulla on Unsplash

Eat more plants

Healthy bodies are awesome, but what you eat affects the planet way more than it affects your body. In fact, limiting animal product consumption is considered to be the best way to help save the planet and decrease carbon emissions (source). And no, you don’t have to be a Hardcore Henry and buy all the foofoo organic greens from Whole Foods.

According to the UN, the production of animal products is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than the transportation sector- aka your car (source). This means that eating a steak produces more emissions than driving to and from work. That’s WILD. But it makes sense when you think about the 7.5 billion people that need to be fed and the processes that put meat, eggs, and cheese on grocery store shelves. 

Producing meat typically requires deforestation to provide land for housing or grazing livestock, which releases massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere (source). This is why the burning of the Amazon for cattle farming was such a huge deal. Then there’s the supply chain, which at its basics includes cutting the meat with machines, transporting the meat in vehicles, and storing it in refrigerators under fluorescent lights, all of which require burning fossil fuels. So, yeah. It makes sense that animal products account for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions (source), which is a lot since most emissions are produced by big industry. This also signifies that there is no possible way to significantly reduce individual greenhouse gasses without decreasing our animal product consumption. 

Theoretically, you can reduce your carbon footprint by 73% by switching to a vegan diet (source). But let’s be honest: although a vegan diet is cheaper than a carnivore diet (source), veganism is a privilege because many people do not have access to inexpensive fruits and veggies year-round. Luckily, we can still greatly reduce individual emissions by eating 90% less meat and 60% less dairy, which is equivalent to eating animal products for one meal a day (source). Yes, this will require some lifestyle changes, but plenty of people have done it before. There are many ways to decrease our animal product consumption, you just need to find a way that is right for you. Here’s a fun blog post on how to get started!

Support reproductive justice

One of the best things we can do, according to data, is to have fewer children (source). This is a complicated topic, but we need to talk about it because climate change isn’t giving us time to beat around the bush. 

We don’t believe in telling people what types of families to have or not have, so we want to offer a way to think about this commonly discussed climate mitigation strategy that doesn’t infringe on individual rights. One of our fave organizations, the SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, gives us this definition of reproductive justice that we can use to frame our conversation: “the human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy, have children, not have children, and parent the children we have in safe and sustainable communities.” Let’s break that down while thinking about climate change.

“The human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy, have children, [or] not have children”:

Telling people to have fewer children to save the planet not only infringes on reproductive justice, but can get, well, eugenics-y. Instead of telling people what to do, we need to vote and advocate for access to education and tools that people need to make the best reproductive choices for themselves. In some cases, this includes having access to resources that allow them to not have children.

“…parent the children we have in safe and sustainable communities”:

Further, supporting reproductive justice means voting and advocating for the enactment of environmental regulations to protect the health of our children. This is especially important in areas that have minimal resources because these communities are often near environmentally unsafe living conditions, whereas communities that have more privilege can avoid those areas (source). 

In short, while having fewer humans on the planet does reduce resource use, everyone should be free to have the type of family they want, free from judgment.

Turn off the lights & take the bus

During World War II, CO2 emissions seriously dropped it like it’s hot (source). This is surprising for a time when the production of planes, tanks, and bombs was at an all-time high. The reduction in CO2 emissions was in part due to citizens turning off their lights at night to prevent an enemy attack. Although we are no longer living in war times, we are facing serious environmental catastrophes, which can also be solved by turning off the lights–and taking the bus, driving instead of flying, putting on a sweater instead of turning up the heat, or being as cool as Greta Thunberg and traveling by sailboat around the world (source). 

Our energy consumption in the form of electricity, gasoline, and natural gas produces carbon emissions, the major cause of climate change. Yet, there are such simple ways individuals can limit their emissions. Turning off the light when you leave the room isn’t that hard, taking the bus lets you people watch and listen to a podcast all at the same time, and guys, have you ever seen Brianna Madia’s smile while driving? It’s obviously way more fun than flying. Plus, you get to see all the beautiful landscapes the world has to offer. 

Simple steps can be taken to reduce emissions. Not all climate change mitigation steps have to be complicated, just turn off the damn lights. 

Photo by Josh Carter on Unsplash

Vote & call your representatives

According to the 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, we only have ten years to cut emissions in half before climate change causes irreversible effects (source). This means that a candidate’s position on climate change needs to be our top priority when voting because once legislation is finally put into action, those ten years will be coming to an end. Yeah, it’s scary but as difficult as politicians make environmental policy change seem, we’ve done it before.

Since the industrial revolution, there has been one major climate change success — the shrinking of the ozone hole over Antarctica. The main purpose of the ozone layer is to absorb harmful UV rays that cause cancer, cataracts, and limit plant growth among other things. But, we carved a big a$$ hole in it when we started producing chemicals with big scary names like Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) (source). These chemicals were actually very common and found in aerosol sprays, refrigerators, and air conditioners, and break down the protective ozone layer in the stratosphere. 

Then the Montreal Protocol came along. Enacted in 1989, the Montreal Protocol On Substances that Deplete the Ozone is an international treaty that phased out the production of CFCs, HCFCs, and other chemicals (source). Since then, the ozone layer has begun to recover and is estimated to reach 1980’s levels between 2050 and 2070 (source here and here).

So go call your senators and representatives and tell them that climate change is a BIG DEAL. Vote in your local, state, and national elections for policies and people who will get the job done (learn more about that via OIA’s Vote the Outdoors campaign). Share with your mom, your friends, and your co-workers why voting is important. We CAN mitigate climate change. We’ve done it before and we can do it again. 

Other steps to take

This is where we talk about privilege, because it’s a major problem in advocacy and environmental justice. Not all people have the resources to live sustainably because fossil fuel consumption is ingrained into our society. The following are actionable steps we need to take when we have the resources to do so. 

Boycott fast fashion: The textile industry is the most polluting industry in the world (source). So, although the the super cute dress from H&M–or Old Navy, Gap, Forever 21, Urban Outfitters, etc–looks really cool, it is NOT cool for the environment. Instead, you can purchase clothing second hand on websites like Poshmark and Facebook Marketplace or buy from companies committed to sustainability and transparency such as Toad & Co. and Prana. 

Buy local: Supply chains are dirty and food, furniture, household products, and other everyday items have a massive carbon footprint (source). Buying local produce and other products limit carbon emissions from transportation, while also stimulating your town’s economy. It’s a win-win for everyone.

Avoid plastic packaging: Plastics are made of fossil fuels and we’re not really sure if they break down in landfills (source). Yet, almost everything we buy is wrapped in it. Avoiding plastic packaging on food and other household products by buying local or in bulk will limit your carbon emissions and keep waste out of landfills. 

Go outside: No, seriously go outside. Advocacy and environmental justice are emotionally and physically draining, and therefore we need to remind ourselves what we’re fighting for. So go run, hike, bike, kayak, snow shoe, motto, ski, climb, wakeboard, paraglide or whatever makes you feel re-energized. This won’t look the same for everyone and that’s okay because we are all on the planet’s side. And we are one hell of a community.

<strong>Savannah Adkins</strong>
Savannah Adkins

During some daylight hours, Savannah is a climate change scientist studying how dirt makes all of our lives possible. But her real profession is as a house plant addict, mountain biker, & attempter of skiing down mountains. In her free time, Savannah enjoys dancing around the house, drinking wine, and listening to the Grateful Dead. Oh, and making poop jokes… always making poop jokes.

<strong>Chiara Forrester</strong>
Chiara Forrester

Chiara is happiest when she’s in the mountains on skis, a bike, or running. She also loves Ariana Grande (117 hours this year, thanks Spotify), making dinner with friends, and laughing too loudly at her own jokes. An ecologist who’s passionate about science communication and increasing diversity in STEM, Chiara is currently a PhD candidate in Boulder, CO, studying alpine plant ecology, undergraduate education, and the use of science in federal land management.

How Climate Change Affects More Than Just the Weather

So, you get it. CO2 levels are increasing, global temperatures are rising, and weather patterns are changing. But, these aren’t the only reasons climate change is such a big deal. Climate change is affecting every aspect of our lives from the food we eat and the air we breathe to the health of our beloved wild spaces. Below is a shortlist of how climate change affects us, our food, our water, and plants and animals. It is far from exhaustive because climate science is forrealz complex. So if you take anything away from this article, make sure you know that climate change is affecting everything on earth.

Photo by Massimo Rivenci on Unsplash

People

We recognize that this needs an entire article, and we’re working on it! Here’s our summary in the meantime: Climate change is and will continue to have overall negative impacts on human health. As weather patterns change and pollution continues to increase, water and land availability are affected, both of which are essential to growing food, breathing clean air, and drinking clean water. Since food, water, and clean air are vital to human health, climate change has the strongest health impacts on those that are poor, elderly, young, and chronically sick. In the U.S., communities of color are disproportionately impacted because they are more likely to live near environmentally unsafe living conditions, whereas communities that have more privilege can avoid those areas. Globally, climate change will most severely impact communities that are dependent on fishing and hunting, or located in already food-insecure areas, water-scarce regions, and small island states.

Plants

Plants are a crucial part of our ecosystem because we eat them and breathe in what they “breathe” out. With climate change, plants everywhere are greening up and blooming earlier and earlier each year. This can affect their relationships with pollinators (potentially causing them to interact less often if their life cycles are out of sync), but also can serve as a very helpful indicator to scientists of the areas that climate change is most affecting. Not all plants are responding in the same way, with some experiencing population decline and some (often invasive species) responding positively. 

Animals

The biggest problem animals face when it comes to climate change is the loss of inhabitable land. As temperatures warm, species have to move to higher elevations to reach environments similar to their original homes. As of 2011, half of all species (including plants) have moved over 10 miles per decade (source here and here) to more suitable land. But, there is only so much land available at these elevations, which causes crowding and creates competition for food, water, and territory. There are winners and losers in this search for a new home and when a species is outcompeted, they are more likely to go extinct. 

Soil

Soil is the source of all life on land. Nutrients in soils are absorbed by plants, incorporated into leaves, fruit, bark, and roots, and then eaten by animals (including humans). These nutrients such as, such as nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, potassium, and calcium are ultimately incorporated into DNA, muscle, bones, and other tissues vital to life. But, humans have significantly altered the nutrients available in soils by draining the soil of nutrients through over-farming and through causing excess nutrients to accumulate through over-fertilizing. This either depletes the soil of nutrients or acidifies it, respectively, both of which limit plant growth and ultimately limit food sources for animals.

Oceans

The ocean is really taking a hit when it comes to climate change because it soaks up excess heat and CO2. This limits the effects of climate change for us on land, but only for a limited amount of time and at huge costs. The ocean is becoming warmer and more acidic, which is leading to sea-level rise (warm water expands, and land ice is melting which is projected to cause 1-4 feet of sea-level rise by 2100) and extremely negative impacts on ocean life which then reduces fish stocks, food security and income from tourism. 

Biodiversity

The term biodiversity describes the variety of life on earth, which is important because plants, animals, bacteria, and fungi are all interconnected *cue the Circle of Life*. No organism can all alone, and (generally speaking) the more diverse an ecosystem is, the more resources there are. Climate change causes a decline in biodiversity in many ways, but the biggest threat to biodiversity is the loss of habitat. Rises in temperature, extreme weather, and urban sprawl destroy the homes of organisms and force them to move to another similar environment. It’d be all fine and dandy if there was unlimited space for organisms to move to, but there isn’t. The limited environments for certain species to live happily ever after means that some species don’t make it, which creates a snowball effect for all other organisms on earth.

Food Availability

Excess atmospheric CO2 can be taken up by plants and in theory, this is a great tool we can use to help mitigate climate change, except for when it comes to our food. When plant growth increases due to higher levels of CO2,  they incorporate less nitrogen, magnesium, calcium, and other minerals into their leaves, fruit, and roots, all of which are essential to bone, muscle, and brain function (source here, here and here). This means the crops we grow are less nutritious and we will need to eat more to get the nutrients we need, which causes another issue: there is a limited amount of viable land to use for agriculture. 

Water Quality

When water gets warmer there is typically less oxygen in it, which leads to negative effects on aquatic life, and can lead to the excessive growth of algae that degrade water quality. More precipitation is expected to occur in the form of rain rather than snow (in areas that typically get snow). More rain means that more pollutants get picked up from areas surrounding bodies of water, and then carried into the water we consume. 

Chiara Forrester
Chiara Forrester

Chiara is happiest when she’s in the mountains on skis, a bike, or running. She also loves Ariana Grande (117 hours this year, thanks Spotify), making dinner with friends, and laughing too loudly at her own jokes. An ecologist who’s passionate about science communication and increasing diversity in STEM, Chiara is currently a PhD candidate in Boulder, CO, studying alpine plant ecology, undergraduate education, and the use of science in federal land management.

Savannah Adkins
Savannah Adkins

During some daylight hours, Savannah is a climate change scientist studying how dirt makes all of our lives possible. But her real profession is as a house plant addict, mountain biker, & attempter of skiing down mountains. In her free time, Savannah enjoys dancing around the house, drinking wine, and listening to the Grateful Dead. Oh, and making poop jokes… always making poop jokes.

Photo by Jason Blackeye on Unsplash

Climate Science 101

Climate Science can get extremely complicated and it’s easy to get bogged down or overwhelmed by the details. So, without further ado, here are the very basics of climate science and how it’s affecting our planet:

Climate change is happening because we are throwing the Earth’s carbon cycle out of wack. Carbon is an element that is essential to life because we eat it, incorporate it into our bodies, poop it, and breathe it out. For us humans, carbon makes up about 18% of our bodies, and our food is made of 50% carbon (source). When we eat and digest this food, our bodies break the food down into less complex molecules, which produces energy that we use to run, dance, skip, and even Netflix and Chill. 

Lots of other organisms do this too. On Earth, carbon moves between the atmosphere, soil, and oceans because plants and animals transform carbon from one type of molecule to another (source). In essence, the CO2 we breathe out is used by plants to make sugars to grow (through photosynthesis) (source). Yes, plants literally turn air into food and it’s rad AF. Animals then eat that fruit, leaf, bark, or root and transform the carbon in the plant into different molecules that provide energy. During this energy-making process, CO2 is made as a waste product and humans, worms, tigers, bacteria, and almost any other living animals breathe it out for plants to use again. Pretty cool, eh? And since there are billions of plants and animals on earth, massive amounts of CO2 are taken up by plants and released by animals every day. 

At one point in time, the amount of carbon dioxide released into the air through animal respiration was roughly equal to the amount of CO2 taken up by plants (source). 

It looked a little something like this: 

But then we found fossil fuels and we threw the carbon cycle out of wack. Fossil fuels made our modern-day lifestyles possible. Clothes no longer took weeks to make by hand, traveling 25 miles no longer took an entire day on horseback, and when your best friend Sofía moved three states away, she was no longer gone forever. Fashion, entertainment, travel, and freedom to do as we please are what fossil fuels brought us, but there’s a trade-off for these luxuries.

Fossil fuels are made of carbon, just like you, me, the plants, and the bees (source). But, fossil fuel carbon was hidden underground for millions of years until we started extracting it (source). When we burn fossil fuels to run our cars, turn on our lights, and make our clothes, large quantities of CO2 are released into the atmosphere. This means that there is now more CO2 in the atmosphere than plants can absorb, which changes more than we could have ever imagined (source). 

Excess CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat from the sun — instead of heat from the sun bouncing out of our atmosphere, it bounces right back toward us, which causes global temperatures to rise (we’re talking the whole world here, folks, not just the city you live in). Higher global temperatures increase the amount of water in the air because more evaporation occurs — you’ve seen this happen when water droplets form on the inside of a lid covering a hot pan. More water in the air forms more clouds and ultimately alters weather patterns, which causes extreme events like droughts, floods, hurricanes, and wildfires (think Australia, California, and Puerto Rico). Extreme weather affects not only humans but plants, animals, our food and water supply, air quality, sea-levels (they rise), and more.

The new carbon cycle that includes fossil fuels looks like this:

These are the very basics of climate change. Not everyone has the time to know every intricacy of climate change, but we all need to know the basics to take action. At the end of the day you, me, the government, and big industry are all on the hook for this, but you, me, the government, and big industry can make the carbon cycle balanced again.

For actionable steps to take against climate change, read: What Science Says We Can Do About Climate Change.

If you want a fabulous visual of climate change, watch this Bill Nye the Science Guy video.

PS: If you can’t access any of the primary sources we’ve cited in this article, reach out and we’ll send you a copy!

Savannah Adkins
Savannah Adkins

During some daylight hours, Savannah is a climate change scientist studying how dirt makes all of our lives possible. But her real profession is as a house plant addict, mountain biker, & attempter of skiing down mountains. In her free time, Savannah enjoys dancing around the house, drinking wine, and listening to the Grateful Dead. Oh, and making poop jokes… always making poop jokes.

Chiara Forrester
Chiara Forrester

Chiara is happiest when she’s in the mountains on skis, a bike, or running. She also loves Ariana Grande (117 hours this year, thanks Spotify), making dinner with friends, and laughing too loudly at her own jokes. An ecologist who’s passionate about science communication and increasing diversity in STEM, Chiara is currently a PhD candidate in Boulder, CO, studying alpine plant ecology, undergraduate education, and the use of science in federal land management. 

NOTE: THIS IS A LIVING RESOURCE! As with all resources on Outdoor Advocacy Project, there is always room to continue the conversation, add a new perspective, bolster the resources, and share new findings. Got something you want to add, change, challenge or amplify? Let us know in the comments, or e-mail team@outdooradvocacy.com to write your own.

How to Talk to Climate Skeptics – and Understanding Who They Are

It feels really good to have people agree with you. In fact, it feels so good that we tend to only surround ourselves with people who have the same viewpoints as us. But when we come across someone who doesn’t agree with us, our natural instinct is to become immediately defensive and double down on our own opinions. It’s challenging to have conversations outside of our comfortable social bubbles, but to fight climate change, we need support from more than just the people who look like us and talk like us. In this article, we hope to provide you with a better understanding of why people think the way they do and equip you with some tools to engage in a constructive climate conversation. 

We all agree with each other more than we think.

Most people generally do believe in climate change – that fact probably isn’t very surprising. The data actually tell us that only about 16% of Americans don’t believe in climate change. Right now you might be thinking you’ve got a pretty good idea of who to blame for that 16% (other than Obama; thanks Obama). But as it turns out, we’re pretty bad at trying to predict who the climate believers and skeptics are. Us believers might assume that skeptics aren’t as highly educated or informed, but that’s not the case: general attitudes about global warming are unrelated to scientific literacy and education. You might be thinking, “what about… Republicans?” Wrong again! Data from multiple surveys actually show that the majority of Republicans believe in climate change. 

Why are people resistant to climate change policies even if they believe the science?

If majorities of both Republicans and Democrats believe in climate change, then what’s holding us back from coming together on climate issues? The answer, per usual, is each other. Republicans might not be skeptical of climate change, but they are skeptical of Democrats – and Democrats, in turn, are skeptical of Republicans. Psychologists have repeatedly shown that individuals tend to favor party over policy. That is, voters are more likely to support policies that are put forward by their own political party and reactively reject policies that are put forward by the opposing party, with little regard for the policy itself.  Unfortunately, these partisan allegiances seem to extend to climate policies as well, with Republicans opposing climate policies in large part because they are often proposed by Democrats. 

But there’s hope in this big ol’ mess. People cannot and should not be reduced to simply “Republicans” and “Democrats” – we are all so much more than that. And a path forward is right in front of us: if we’re able to distance ourselves from political labels and traps, we can uncover our commonalities and focus on solving this gigantic problem together. Of course, this is easier said than done. But a better understanding of the human mind and motivations for why people oppose climate policy can help us empathize with others, and offers us a much better chance at a constructive conversation.

Cognitive dissonance and the psychology of climate policy resistance

Now for the fun part: Let’s learn about a neat little psychological trick that, if you’re like me, will have you questioning nearly every decision you’ve ever made and shake you to your core: cognitive dissonance theory! 

Let’s unpack this theory with a simple example: Chiara’s a huge BBQ fan. She loves herself a fat slab of ribs with a side of corn dogs. As a scientist, she’s well aware that the meat industry is a huge contributor to climate change, but every week she heads to the butcher anyway. That mental discomfort she feels when a belief she holds (knowing that eating a lot of meat is bad for the planet) contradicts her actions (eating meat anyway) is what we refer to as cognitive dissonance. And people hate being in a state of dissonance. It’s sort of like being super hungry. It’s uncomfortable, we hate it, and the longer it persists the more motivated we are to get rid of it.

So how can Chiara reduce her dissonance? She can either change her actions to align with her beliefs, or she can change her beliefs to align with her actions. The first option means she has to quit eating meat, but she really doesn’t want to do that. The second option requires her to change her underlying beliefs about eating meat. To justify her actions, she can tell herself things like “my meat consumption won’t make a difference in the long run” or “I drive a Prius to work so I don’t need to stop eating meat”. If she’s feeling a particularly large amount of dissonance, Chiara might even seek out information that claims the meat industry isn’t contributing to climate change, or even that climate change itself isn’t real. By altering her beliefs about climate change, Chiara can keep eating meat without experiencing dissonance. And just like that, we’ve taken one of the authors of this article and turned her into a climate change skeptic (don’t worry, she’s not). 

This theory is powerful because it not only explains why Republicans are more likely to oppose climate change policy but also why anyone else whose values or actions are discordant with climate policy proposals might oppose them. For example, consider the case of Frank, a landowner in northern Texas who’s fallen on hard times. He’s approached by an oil and gas company to install a natural gas well on his property in exchange for royalties that will allow him to provide for his family. Though he was previously sympathetic to climate policy, Frank now finds himself in an elevated state of dissonance, where his family’s livelihood is intimately tied to the fossil fuel industry. To reduce his dissonance, Frank will likely start to downplay his beliefs around climate change.

An important takeaway here is that people who are acting to reduce dissonance by justifying their actions or a choice they made aren’t intentionally lying to you. Rather, they’re lying to themselves. This can all come off as very condescending, so it’s important to keep in mind that we are all guilty of this same conduct. For instance, you might really care about a farmer’s ability to support themselves, but then find yourself in a state of dissonance when that farmer’s choice to frack on their land clashes with your stance on environmentalism. To reduce dissonance, you’ll recharacterize the farmer as an ignorant and greedy opportunist. This doesn’t mean that you don’t understand the farmer’s financial motives, it just means you’re making it easier for yourself to sleep at night when you later vote to remove his access to that type of revenue. 

Now that we can understand a bit more about where people are coming from, and recognize what we have in common, what are the key ingredients to a constructive conversation?


Do it face to face. People have better first impressions, less conflict, feel more emotionally connected, and are more vulnerable when having conversations in-person rather than online. 

Paint a picture of a more positive future. Most narratives around climate change solutions paint a painful picture of a difficult future that will require substantial individual sacrifices. But if we do things right, the changes we make to address climate change could lead to a healthier, less expensive, more equitable, and guilt-free future. And while we understand why you want to convince Uncle Joe that climate change is scary and real, focusing on positive solutions is more effective in engaging people. It’s also critical in breaking down the cognitive dissonance that arises when we tell people that if they care about climate change, they’ll have to settle for a lower quality of life. Instead, focus on how policy and economic shifts could give us a better life even in a world undergoing climate change. We highly recommend listening to Ezra Klein’s conversation with Saul Griffith on this topic.

Leave party politics at the door. Like we said above, people tend to interpret information as positive or negative depending on which party presents it, so the less political you can remain the better. Further, using language like carbon “offsets” instead of carbon “taxes” can make people more amenable to your argument.

Use personal anecdotes and story-telling. Using stories, anecdotes, or narratives is an effective way of communicating science with non-experts, and local stories can make people want to engage more. Content presented in this format is also easier to understand.

Demonstrate vulnerability and show that making mistakes is okay. We need to do a much better job of normalizing the idea that it’s okay to make mistakes and change our minds – we’re all human! Most importantly, we must learn to forgive people when they do admit a mistake, and allow them space to change their minds. Attacking others for their views will only cause them to become more entrenched. Be vulnerable yourself; maybe share a story about a time you experienced dissonance and justified a poor choice, but were later were able to admit to yourself that you were wrong.

Show empathy and actively listen. Remember that you need to have a conversation with this person rather than direct your best monologue at them. Take a breath and prepare to actively listen. Remember that you have other things in common with them and that you both have reasons to hold the opinions you do (see all of the above). Going on a tirade that makes the other person feel steamrolled, misunderstood, or patronized will not be productive. People typically stick with the common opinion of their social group, so to reach someone, it’s important to maintain a positive relationship with them. Treat them with respect and kindness and show gratitude when they are willing to engage in a conversation with you. 

Talk about how strong of a consensus there is about climate change among scientists. Simply talking about how almost all climate scientists (97% to be exact) agree that climate change is real, pressing, and human-caused has been shown to increase climate change acceptance across party lines. 

Provide a brief mechanistic explanation of the greenhouse effect. Giving a brief explanation of the greenhouse effect increases climate change acceptance. You can even show them a fun video with Bill Nye. If you want to explain it yourself, here’s our two-liner: We’ve thrown our carbon cycle out of whack by burning fossil fuels, which means that we are now releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Excess CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat from the sun — instead of heat from the sun bouncing off the Earth and back out of our atmosphere, it bounces right back toward us, which causes global temperatures to rise. Check out our Climate Science 101 article for more, or if the person you’re talking to has misconceptions about the science of climate change, check out our article on addressing specific climate change misconceptions

<strong>Shane Schwikert</strong>
Shane Schwikert

Shane is a teacher, researcher, and data enthusiast at the University of Colorado in Boulder, where he wailed his way to a PhD in Psychology, Neuroscience, and Cognitive Science. His hobbies range from dirt biking to backcountry skiing to gold panning, and he is an avid rock collector known for assembling his treasures in strategic piles throughout his apartment.

Chiara Forrester
Chiara Forrester

Chiara is happiest when she’s in the mountains on skis, a bike, or running. She also loves Ariana Grande (117 hours this year, thanks Spotify), making dinner with friends, and laughing too loudly at her own jokes. An ecologist who’s passionate about science communication and increasing diversity in STEM, Chiara is currently a PhD candidate in Boulder, CO, studying alpine plant ecology, undergraduate education, and the use of science in federal land management.

NOTE: THIS IS A LIVING RESOURCE! As with all resources on Outdoor Advocacy Project, there is always room to continue the conversation, add a new perspective, bolster the resources, and share new findings. Got something you want to add, change, challenge or amplify? Let us know in the comments, or e-mail team@outdooradvocacy.com to write your own.

How to Talk to Your Family about Climate Change

We’ve all experienced it. Maybe you’re in an Uber making small talk with your driver, out at a bar talking to new friends, or at the dinner table with your family. The conversation is running smoothly, and then they say that they don’t believe in climate change. As someone who understands the realities of climate change, what do you do next?

First, and most importantly, remember that you need to have a conversation with this person rather than direct your best monologue at them. Take a breath and prepare to actively listen. Remember that you have other things in common with them and that you both have reasons to hold the opinions you do. Going on a tirade that makes the other person feel steamrolled, misunderstood, or patronized will not be productive. Research shows that people typically stick with the common opinion of their social group, so to reach someone, it’s important to maintain a positive relationship with them. Treat them with respect and kindness and show gratitude when they are willing to engage in a conversation with you. 

Now that we’ve gotten that jargon and gibberish out of the way, here are some ways to respond to common misconceptions about climate change with scientific accuracy: 

They say: “Climate change models are possibilities, not realities.”

You say: 

Some models you may know (besides Kylie Jenner) are the Netflix algorithm that helps you find your new binge favorite, the weather app on your phone, and the distance that Google Maps calculates to help you find the ice cream store that’s open the latest. 

Here’s how climate models are created and why we can trust them:

  1. Data on factors like CO2 and temperature can be related to one another mathematically – you’ve done this with equations like the Pythagorean theorem (a2 + b2 = c2) when you relate the sides of a triangle to each other.
  2. These mathematical relationships can be used to build a model that describes complex situations between things like human population growth, land use, economics, and atmospheric conditions. Each factor used in a model has been created and refined by groups of informed scientists; they are very much not wild guesses.
  3. After a new model is created, scientists test it by first using it to “predict” the past. The results of the new model are then compared to previously collected data. If the model results are pretty dang close to the actual historical data, then we can assume that the model will be pretty dang accurate predicting the future.
  4. After checking that we can trust it, the model can then be used to describe *big booming movie voice here* the future
  5. Models, and results from these models, are sent to multiple scientists (who are not related to the project) who then anonymously evaluate whether the model is accurate.

And it works–models from as long as 50 years ago accurately predicted today’s climate!


They say: “There’s no consensus among scientists that climate change is human-caused.”

You say: 

97% of publishing (that is, actively working) climate scientists agree that climate change is being caused by humans. Additionally, scientists with more climate expertise are more likely to agree that climate change is human-caused. Those with low expertise (i.e. non-scientists or scientists who don’t typically publish on climate research) are less likely to agree. Also, just saying, 97% of people who are all trained to constantly say “it depends” agreeing is pretty damn high.


They say: “The climate is cooling.”

You say: 

This comes down to the distinction between climate and weather. The simplest way to describe this difference is that the climate is like your closet and the weather is your clothes that make up that closet. Weather refers to short term events, like cold snaps, hurricanes, and monsoons. Weather events vary by location, and different areas have features that alter how the weather is experienced there. For example, morning fogs in the Bay Area of California would never occur in the plains of Wyoming because of the unique topographic/ecological features that cause the fog to be generated and trapped. 

Climate, on the other hand, refers to overall trends and patterns. Therefore, climate change describes increases in global temperature. So, while your city may have a cold snap or not be experiencing as dramatic of temperature increases, the global average temperature is increasing. The ocean is also soaking up a lot of the heat that’s being trapped by greenhouse gases, which means that air temperatures aren’t reacting as quickly as we might expect – but this is still a huge issue as warmer oceans will lead to ocean acidification and sea-level rise.


They say: “Animals and plants can adapt so why does it matter?”

You say:

Resilience is rad, and there are definitely animals and plants that can adapt. A lot can’t though. There are a few reasons for this:

  1. Adaptation takes a lot of time. Adaptation requires many generations, because it is driven by the survival (and reproduction, wink wink – pass down those traits honey) of individuals that live through harsh conditions. Climate change is happening very quickly, and changes are more dramatic than populations have experienced before. If individuals of a given species have a long life span, that species is going to take a very long time to adapt to global change because makin’ those babies take a hot minute. 
  2. Climate change has both speed and scale on its side. If harsh conditions are only occurring on a local scale, then populations can migrate to buffer the effects on total species survival. For example, trees might move to cooler places (higher latitudes and elevations) to escape warming, but this takes decades and they are in a race against climate change. While there are areas that will experience less climate change that will hopefully provide safe spots for species, the pace and scale of climate change would require species to adapt at a rate that is not possible for most species.
  3. Warmer temperatures aren’t the only thing stressing out plants and animals. Species are up against a whole host of tough new conditions. These include rising temperatures, habitat loss, and habitat fragmentation, invasive species, overexploitation, and pollution. These threats play off of one another and make it extremely difficult for species to move or adapt. If you only have one problem, it’s easier to find a solution than if you’re inundated with multiple problems that all exacerbate each other. 

They say: “We don’t know that climate change is human caused.”

You say:

This is getting to a key scientific concept that is completely fair to bring up: causation versus correlation. For example, you can often find a relationship (correlation) between unrelated factors, like rock music quality and US oil production – we can all agree that these two factors are not related, but they show extremely similar trends over time. We don’t have another planet where we’re not adding CO2 at unprecedented rates to see if it affects the climate, so how do we know for sure that COis what’s causing temperatures to rise?

The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere is tightly related to increasing temperatures and has been for a very long time. We also understand on a fundamental level how the two are intertwined physically and chemically. There is no question that we are pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere, and there is no question that this will cause the Earth to warm. 

Lastly, other factors, like energy from the sun, have been ruled out as driving factors of temperature increases here on Earth. The energy coming from the sun has remained constant since 1750, and warming is happening only in the lower parts of the atmosphere and at the Earth’s surface – both pointing to the fact that changes in solar radiation cannot explain rising temperatures. 


They say: “The climate has changed before.”

You say:

Totally! The difference is that the climate is now changing much more, and much more quickly. The fluctuations that have occurred over the past 1,000 years were much slower and far less dramatic than the fluctuations we see now. We are now seeing the highest temperatures and atmospheric concentrations of CO2 that we have ever seen. So, while the climate has changed before, it is truly incomparable in scale and magnitude to the changes we are now seeing.

Rapid climate change is already happening in multiple ways

  1. Global temperature rises – almost 2 degrees F since the late 19th century, with most warming occurring in only the past 35 years, and the warmest 5 years on record happening since 2010.
  2. Warming oceans – oceans are trapping the heat that’s bounced back by greenhouse gases, which has resulted in a 0.4 degrees F increase since 1969. This has caused the global sea level to rise 8 inches in the last century. The rate of sea-level rise has nearly doubled over the last two decades, with that rate becoming faster each year.
  3. Ocean acidification – CO2 emitted by humans is being absorbed by the upper layers of oceans which causes acidification, in turn negatively impacting ocean life.
  4. Shrinking ice sheets – the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased significantly in mass, with the rates of Antarctic ice mass loss tripling in the last decade alone.
  5. Decreased snow cover – the amount of snow in the Northern Hemisphere is decreasing, and it’s melting earlier in many locations.
  6. Extreme events – there have been a rising number of extremely hot days and of intense rainfall events.

They say: “The climate is changing, but it won’t be as bad as scientists say it will be.”

I say:

Scientists don’t like to be wrong. Because it’s a scientist’s actual worst nightmare to publish something that is later found to be incorrect, we are very conservative in what we state to be true. For example, reports published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been found to actually underestimate how bad the effects of climate change will be. Further, there is a high degree of agreement among climate change models created and tested by multiple independent researchers, leading to a high degree of certainty among the scientific community.

Now that you’ve got science to back up your next challenging climate conversation, let’s revisit those basics. Remember this:

You need to have a conversation with this person rather than direct your best monologue at them. Take a breath and prepare to actively listen. Remember that you have other things in common with them and that you both have reasons to hold the opinions you do. Treat them with respect and kindness and show gratitude when they are willing to engage in a climate conversation with you. 


Chiara Forrester
Chiara Forrester

Chiara is happiest when she’s in the mountains on skis, a bike, or running. She also loves Ariana Grande (117 hours this year, thanks Spotify), making dinner with friends, and laughing too loudly at her own jokes. An ecologist who’s passionate about science communication and increasing diversity in STEM, Chiara is currently a PhD candidate in Boulder, CO, studying alpine plant ecology, undergraduate education, and the use of science in federal land management.

NOTE: THIS IS A LIVING RESOURCE! As with all resources on Outdoor Advocacy Project, there is always room to continue the conversation, add a new perspective, bolster the resources, and share new findings. Got something you want to add, change, challenge or amplify? Let us know in the comments, or e-mail team@outdooradvocacy.com to write your own.