I've heard that before but is it confirmed anywhere?
If so it doesn't seem like a very good analogy. In GoT the characters almost all ignore the white walker threat because they don't believe it exists. But most people do agree that climate change is real and will get worse. The apparent lack of action is not due to lack of belief but rather, lack of any obvious options for how to address it that aren't as bad or worse than the effects of climate change itself, i.e. massive shutdowns of industry and transport that would just as apocalyptic in impact as a rise in sea levels would.
If Martin wanted his story to be a metaphor for climate change (which I personally doubt, maybe he retconned that later), then he should have been depicting his characters as mostly believers in the threat even when they couldn't see it, because books told them it'd happen, and the arguments would all be about how to defend the kingdoms. Instead he wrote a story where the game of thrones continues so long because they don't really believe the white walkers exist at all until they literally turn up at the wall. Speaking of which, what's the wall meant to be a metaphor for, if it's about climate change? I can't think of anything we've built that's meant to stop climate change but which turns out to be ineffective.
I can’t answer as to Game of Thrones, but with regard to people believing in climate change, it is useful to consider what changes they have made to their lives or compromises they have made to see whether they really believe it.
So for example, some friends who are big believers in climate change, tell people that they make the sacrifice of buying a Tesla and a Prius, and bought their “retirement” house directly in the middle of an area that is directly in an area that is likely to have flooding issues in the 30y timeframe. They are both late thirties.
Do they believe in climate change? Or do they say they do?
> But most people do agree that climate change is real and will get worse.
President Trump does not believe that burning fossil fuels contributes to climate change. He may not be "most people" (in fact most US voters voted against him) but he is the one setting policy, and his efforts right now are on combating the Democrats, not climate change.
If so it doesn't seem like a very good analogy. In GoT the characters almost all ignore the white walker threat because they don't believe it exists. But most people do agree that climate change is real and will get worse. The apparent lack of action is not due to lack of belief but rather, lack of any obvious options for how to address it that aren't as bad or worse than the effects of climate change itself, i.e. massive shutdowns of industry and transport that would just as apocalyptic in impact as a rise in sea levels would.
If Martin wanted his story to be a metaphor for climate change (which I personally doubt, maybe he retconned that later), then he should have been depicting his characters as mostly believers in the threat even when they couldn't see it, because books told them it'd happen, and the arguments would all be about how to defend the kingdoms. Instead he wrote a story where the game of thrones continues so long because they don't really believe the white walkers exist at all until they literally turn up at the wall. Speaking of which, what's the wall meant to be a metaphor for, if it's about climate change? I can't think of anything we've built that's meant to stop climate change but which turns out to be ineffective.