Skip to main content
Book cover

Climate Change Science: A Modern Synthesis pp 445–466Cite as

Understanding Climate Change Denial

Abstract

At its heart, climate denial is the rejection of the scientific consensus that humans are disrupting the climate. Denial of a consensus can be identified by five telltale characteristics: fake experts, cherry picking, logical fallacies, impossible expectations and conspiracy theories. These techniques are observed in the tactics and strategies of the climate denial movement, disseminated by ideological think-tanks, some conservative governments and vested interests through a range of media streams. The key to responding to climate misinformation is to provide alternative narratives that are more compelling than the myths they replace.

Keywords

  • Climate denial
  • Denier
  • Consensus
  • Peer-review
  • Uncertainty
  • Fake experts
  • Cherry picking
  • Logical fallacies
  • Impossible expectations
  • Conspiracy theories “Climategate”
  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC
  • Conservative ideology
  • Media balance-as-bias
  • Conservative think tanks
  • Government
  • Corporate vested interests
  • Internet
  • Misinformation
  • Refutation
  • Backfire effect

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-5757-8_23
  • Chapter length: 22 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-94-007-5757-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   149.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 23.1
Fig. 23.2

Additional Readings

  • Anderegg, W. R. L., Prall, J. W., Harold, J., & Schneider, S. H. (2010). Expert credibility in climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 107, 12107–12109.

    CrossRef  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Avery, D. (2007). 500 scientists whose research contradicts man-made global warming scares, Heartland Institute website. Captured on 1 June 2012 from http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/21977.pdf

  • Bedford, D. (2010). Agnotology as a teaching tool: Learning climate science by studying misinformation. Journal of Geography, 109(4), 159–165.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14, 125–136.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bray, D. (2010). The scientific consensus of climate change revisited. Environmental Science & Policy, 13(5), 340–350.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, J., & Lewandowsky, S. (2011). The debunking handbook. St. Lucia: University of Queensland. Nov 5. ISBN 978-0-646-56812-6. http://sks.to/debunk

  • Correia, V. (2011). Biases and fallacies: The role of motivated irrationality in fallacious reasoning. Cogency, 3(1), 107–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diethelm, P., & McKee, M. (2009). Denialism: What is it and how should scientists respond? European Journal of Public Health, 19, 2–4.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, D., Maibach, E., Zhao, X., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2011). Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement. Nature Climate Change, 1, 462–466.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Doran, P. T., & Zimmerman, M. K. (2009). Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. EOS, 90(3), 21–22.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Freudenburg, W. R., Gramling, R., & Davidson, D. J. (2008). Scientific certainty argumentation methods (SCAMs): Science and the politics of doubt. Sociological Inquiry, 78(2), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenpeace (2011). Koch industries secretly funding the climate denial machine. Captured on 5 June from http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/Global/usa/report/2010/3/koch-industries-secretly-fund.pdf

  • Hamilton, L. (2009). Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for interaction effects. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. doi 10.1007/s10584-010-9957-8.

  • Hansen, J. (2009). Storms of my grandchildren. New York: Bloomsbury. p. 304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: The case of belief in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 38, 48–71.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hoggan, J. (2009). Climate cover-up. Vancouver: Greystone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoofnagle, C., & Hoofnagle, M. (2007). What is denialism?. Captured on 16 Apr 2012 from http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/about.php

  • Inhofe, J. (2012). The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future(WND Books, Washington, DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacques, P. J., Dunlap, R. E., & Freeman, M. (2008). The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism. Environmental Politics, 17, 349–385.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, C. (1998). How many climate researchers support the “Leipzig Declaration”?. Captured on 4 June from http://naturalscience.com/ns/letters/ns_let08.html

  • Johnson, T. J., Bichard, S. L., & Zhang, W. (2009). Communication communities or “cyberghettos?”: A path analysis model examining factors that explain selective exposure to blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, 60–82.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan, D., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (2007). Culture and identity-protective cognition: Explaining the white-male e_ect in risk perceptions. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4, 465–505.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan, D., Jenkins-Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 147–174.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, P., et al. (2009). The credibility project. Captured on 1 June 2012 from http://www.centerforinquiry.net/opp/news/senate_minority_report_on_global_warming_not_credible/

  • Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., & Smith, N. (2010). Climate change in the American Mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in June 2010. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Available at: http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/ClimateBeliefsJune2010.pdf

  • Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, C. E. (in press). NASA faked the moon landing-therefore (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. Psychological Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindzen, R. S., & Choi, Y. S. (2009). On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data. Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L16705. doi:10.1029/2009GL039628.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Malka, A., et al. (2009). Featuring skeptics in news media stories about global warming reduces public beliefs in the seriousness of global warming. Palo Alto: Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, M. (2012). The hockey stick and the climate wars: Dispatches from the front lines. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2010). Anti-reflexivity: The American conservative movement’s success in undermining climate science and policy. Theory Culture & Society, 27, 100–133.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2011). Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States. Global Environmental Change, 21, 1163–1172.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Morano, M. (2008). More than 650 international scientists dissent over man-made global warming claims. Captured on 1 June 2012 from http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6

  • Nisbet, M. C., & Myers, T. (2007). The polls – trends – twenty years of public opinion about global warming. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71, 444–470.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • OISM (1999). Captured on 1 June 2012 from http://www.petitionproject.org/

  • Oreskes, N. (2004). Beyond the ivory tower. The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306:1686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prasad, M., Perrin, A. J., Bezila, K., Hoffman, S. G., Kindleberger, K., Manturuk, K., et al. (2009). “There must be a reason”: Osama, Saddam, and inferred justification. Sociological Inquiry, 79, 142–162.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Reisman, J. P. (2011). Exposing the climate hoax: It’s all about the economy. Lyra Books (http://www.lyrabooks.com/about/).

  • Seitz, F. (1996). Major deception on global warming. Wall Street Journal, 12 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talisse, R., & Aikin, S. (2006). Two forms of the straw man. Argumentation, 20(3), 345–352.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Farmer Enterprises, Las Cruces, NM, USA

    G. Thomas Farmer

  2. School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia

    John Cook

Authors
  1. G. Thomas Farmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Farmer, G.T., Cook, J. (2013). Understanding Climate Change Denial. In: Climate Change Science: A Modern Synthesis. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5757-8_23

Download citation