"Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas" is a meme that has been around for at least 15 years (I first heard it from people in the automotive industry), although I thought it had run its course by now. There are plenty of websites that offer factual responses (one example is http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate-change-Water-vapor-makes-for-a-wet-argument.html), but they often take the form of a counter-argument and thus are perceived as "political." And too often they're a slog for non-scientists.
As a science journalist, I'd love to hear some fresh ideas about how to "show" scientific concepts like positive feedback loop to the general public. (Journalism is all about showing, rather than telling.) Here are a few things to keep in mind: - Images and graphs are seen as less political than words. - Stories are more memorable than numbers. - Analogies and metaphors can be powerful. - Examples from everyday life can help make science relevant. - Humans tend to be interested in other humans. - Cultural affiliation affects how people perceive certain types of information and sources. - Humor is usually appreciated. - Journalists have a different role than educators and researchers. I enjoyed reading about the creative, respectful ways that some of you respond to individuals you meet. How can those approaches be applied to larger audiences? And which scientists out there are doing the best job of communicating with the general public about climate change? Dawn Stover Independent Writer & Editor 1208 Snowden Road White Salmon, WA 98672 tel: 509 493 3652 email: [email protected] web: www.dawnstover.com Contributing Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Contributing Editor, Popular Science
