It was my first year as an atmospheric science professor

at Texas Tech University.

We had just moved to Lubbock, Texas,

which had recently been named the second most conservative city

in the entire United States.

A colleague asked me to guest teach his undergraduate geology class.

I said, "Sure."

But when I showed up, the lecture hall was cavernous and dark.

As I tracked the history of the carbon cycle

through geologic time to present day,

most of the students were slumped over, dozing or looking at their phones.

I ended my talk with a hopeful request for any questions.

And one hand shot up right away.

I looked encouraging, he stood up, and in a loud voice, he said,

"You're a democrat, aren't you?"

(Laughter)

"No," I said, "I'm Canadian."

(Laughter)

(Applause)

That was my baptism by fire

into what has now become a sad fact of life here in the United States

and increasingly across Canada as well.

The fact that the number one predictor

of whether we agree that climate is changing,

humans are responsible

and the impacts are increasingly serious and even dangerous,

has nothing to do with how much we know about science or even how smart we are

but simply where we fall on the political spectrum.

Does the thermometer give us a different answer

depending on if we're liberal or conservative?

Of course not.

But if that thermometer tells us that the planet is warming,

that humans are responsible

and that to fix this thing,

we have to wean ourselves off fossil fuels as soon as possible --

well, some people would rather cut off their arm

than give the government any further excuse

to disrupt their comfortable lives and tell them what to do.

But saying, "Yes, it's a real problem, but I don't want to fix it,"

that makes us the bad guy, and nobody wants to be the bad guy.

So instead, we use arguments like, "It's just a natural cycle."

"It's the sun."

Or my favorite,

"Those climate scientists are just in it for the money."

(Laughter)

I get that at least once a week.

But these are just sciencey-sounding smoke screens,

that are designed to hide the real reason for our objections,

which have nothing to do with the science

and everything to do with our ideology and our identity.

So when we turn on the TV these days,

it seems like pundit X is saying,

"It's cold outside. Where is global warming now?"

And politician Y is saying,

"For every scientist who says this thing is real,

I can find one who says it isn't."

So it's no surprise that sometimes we feel like everybody is saying these myths.

But when we look at the data --

and the Yale Program on Climate [Change] Communication

has done public opinion polling across the country now for a number of years --

the data shows that actually 70 percent of people in the United States agree

that the climate is changing.

And 70 percent also agree that it will harm plants and animals,

and it will harm future generations.

But then when we dig down a bit deeper, the rubber starts to hit the road.

Only about 60 percent of people think it will affect people in the United States.

Only 40 percent of people think it will affect us personally.

And then when you ask people, "Do you ever talk about this?"

two-thirds of people in the entire United States say, "Never."

And even worse, when you say, "Do you hear the media talk about this?"

Over three-quarters of people say no.

So it's a vicious cycle.

The planet warms.

Heat waves get stronger.

Heavy precipitation gets more frequent.

Hurricanes get more intense.

Scientists release yet another doom-filled report.

Politicians push back even more strongly,

repeating the same sciencey-sounding myths.

What can we do to break this vicious cycle?

The number one thing we can do is the exact thing that we're not doing:

talk about it.

But you might say, "I'm not a scientist.

How am I supposed to talk about radiative forcing

or cloud parametrization in climate models?"

We don't need to be talking about more science;

we've been talking about the science for over 150 years.

Did you know that it's been 150 years or more since the 1850s,

when climate scientists first discovered

that digging up and burning coal and gas and oil

is producing heat-trapping gases

that is wrapping an extra blanket around the planet?

That's how long we've known.

It's been 50 years since scientists first formally warned a US president

of the dangers of a changing climate,

and that president was Lyndon B. Johnson.

And what's more, the social science has taught us

that if people have built their identity on rejecting a certain set of facts,

then arguing over those facts is a personal attack.

It causes them to dig in deeper,

and it digs a trench, rather than building a bridge.

So if we aren't supposed to talk about more science,

or if we don't need to talk about more science,

then what should we be talking about?

The most important thing to do is,

instead of starting up with your head, with all the data and facts in our head,

to start from the heart,

to start by talking about why it matters to us,

to begin with genuinely shared values.

Are we both parents?

Do we live in the same community?

Do we enjoy the same outdoor activities: hiking, biking, fishing, even hunting?

Do we care about the economy or national security?

For me, one of the most foundational ways I found to connect with people

is through my faith.

As a Christian, I believe that God created this incredible planet that we live on

and gave us responsibility over every living thing on it.

And I furthermore believe that we are to care for and love

the least fortunate among us,

those who are already suffering the impacts of poverty,

hunger, disease and more.

If you don't know what the values are that someone has,

have a conversation, get to know them, figure out what makes them tick.

And then once we have,

all we have to do is connect the dots between the values they already have

and why they would care about a changing climate.

I truly believe, after thousands of conversations that I've had

over the past decade and more,

that just about every single person in the world

already has the values they need to care about a changing climate.

They just haven't connected the dots.

And that's what we can do through our conversation with them.

The only reason why I care about a changing climate

is because of who I already am.

I'm a mother, so I care about the future of my child.

I live in West Texas, where water is already scarce,

and climate change is impacting the availability of that water.

I'm a Christian, I care about a changing climate

because it is, as the military calls it, a "threat multiplier."

It takes those issues,

like poverty and hunger and disease and lack of access to clean water

and even political crises that lead to refugee crises --

it takes all of these issues and it exacerbates them,

it makes them worse.

I'm not a Rotarian.

But when I gave my first talk at a Rotary Club,

I walked in and they had this giant banner that had the Four-Way Test on it.

Is it the truth?

Absolutely.

Is it fair?

Heck, no, that's why I care most about climate change,

because it is absolutely unfair.

Those who have contributed the least to the problem

are bearing the brunt of the impacts.

It went on to ask:

Would it be beneficial to all, would it build goodwill?

Well, to fix it certainly would.

So I took my talk, and I reorganized it into the Four-Way Test,

and then I gave it to this group of conservative businesspeople

in West Texas.

(Laughter)

And I will never forget at the end,

a local bank owner came up to me with the most bemused look on his face.

And he said, "You know, I wasn't sure about this whole global warming thing,

but it passed the Four-Way Test."

(Laughter)

(Applause)

These values, though -- they have to be genuine.

I was giving a talk at a Christian college a number of years ago,

and after my talk, a fellow scientist came up and he said,

"I need some help.

I've been really trying hard to get my foot in the door

with our local churches,

but I can't seem to get any traction.

I want to talk to them about why climate change matters."

So I said, "Well, the best thing to do

is to start with the denomination that you're part of,

because you share the most values with those people.

What type of church do you attend?"

"Oh, I don't attend any church, I'm an atheist," he said.

(Laughter)

I said, "Well, in that case, starting with a faith community

is probably not the best idea.

Let's talk about what you do enjoy doing, what you are involved in."

And we were able to identify a community group

that he was part of, that he could start with.

The bottom line is, we don't have to be a liberal tree hugger

to care about a changing climate.

All we have to be is a human living on this planet.

Because no matter where we live,

climate change is already affecting us today.

If we live along the coasts,

in many places, we're already seeing "sunny-day flooding."

If we live in western North America,

we're seeing much greater area being burned by wildfires.

If we live in many coastal locations,

from the Gulf of Mexico to the South Pacific,

we are seeing stronger hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones,

powered by a warming ocean.

If we live in Texas or if we live in Syria,

we're seeing climate change supersize our droughts,

making them more frequent and more severe.

Wherever we live, we're already being affected by a changing climate.

So you might say, "OK, that's good. We can talk impacts.

We can scare the pants off people, because this thing is serious."

And it is, believe me. I'm a scientist, I know.

(Laughter)

But fear is not what is going to motivate us

for the long-term, sustained change that we need to fix this thing.

Fear is designed to help us run away from the bear.

Or just run faster than the person beside us.

(Laughter)

What we need to fix this thing is rational hope.

Yes, we absolutely do need to recognize what's at stake.

Of course we do.

But we need a vision of a better future --

a future with abundant energy,

with a stable economy,

with resources available to all,

where our lives are not worse but better than they are today.

There are solutions.

And that's why the second important thing that we have to talk about

is solutions -- practical, viable, accessible, attractive solutions.

Like what?

Well, there's no silver bullet, as they say,

but there's plenty of silver buckshot.

(Laughter)

There's simple solutions that save us money

and reduce our carbon footprint at the same time.

Yes, light bulbs.

I love my plug-in car.

I'd like some solar shingles.

But imagine if every home came with a switch beside the front door,

that when you left the house, you could turn off everything except your fridge.

And maybe the DVR.