Borowitz: Largest Climate-Change March in History Unlikely to Convince Idiots

[GliderGuider]

3. The issue is not proof.

There's plenty of proof. Instead, the issue is that entrenched belief systems that are simply not accessible to "proof". In this situation, what is needed is to give the impression of a large group of people who are already convinced. That activates our evolved 'group membership" instincts, which in turn shift our beliefs closer to those of the group. It's a well-known norming effect also seen in groupthink situations. The change of their belief system permits new group members to adopt the proofs, which are now seen as confirming their beliefs rather than challenging them. In contrast, a shift in a person's belief system as the result of being presented with a new piece of factual evidence is relatively rare.

This is a psychological issue, not one of scientific proof per se. Proof is not very persuasive on its own, because persuasion is largely an emotional rather than a factual event. So from that point of view, the march was a good idea - it gives the emotional impression of a growing groundswell of opinion on the pro-AGW side. This also is why the notion of a 97%+ scientific consensus is so powerful.