Thoughts on climate science denial

Some decades ago, anti-social movements and vested interests realised that climate change was such a huge problem it needed a societal solution. That was when villians energised - not to do scientific research, not to figure out ways to mitigate global warming, but to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt with the aim of stopping or at least slowing progress.

Climate science disinformers have it easy. Unlike dedicated scientists, they don't have to spend years collecting and analysing data or going to dangerous places to observe what is happening. All they have to do is make up stuff to amplify the fears of the already fearful. Deniers are not interested in science or knowledge. All their efforts go into denying the hard irrefutable evidence that human activity is causing global warming.

A few years ago I'd scarcely have believed there are people whose job is persuading everyone to destroy this precious planet. Then I discovered there is a ready audience: what used to be a scattered underworld of isolated wacky people who believe all sorts of weird and woeful conspiracy theories. The Internet is wonderful but has a dark side. It has allowed the nutters who used to live in isolation on the fringes of society to find each other and take delight they are not alone. The world has always housed a small percentage of strange folk. These poor souls are fodder for evildoers who make a living out of telling lies.

Attributing motives is difficult at the best of times and of questionable value at the individual level. (Is Donald Trump a sociopath, a narcissist or a pathological liar? Does it matter?) Nevertheless, after observing climate science denial for a few years now, it seems to me there are not all that many forces driving the scoundrels who prey on the deluded. It's generally one or a combination of money, power, misplaced ideology, fame or pure mischief.

• Money: There are people who will lie for money. It's their job as paid lackeys in dubious "think tanks" or sensationalist gutter press, or they eke out an existence as freelance writers and bloggers after all their other endeavours have failed.
• Power: Some people lie for political or ideological purposes - they think the short term benefits to them from their lies outweigh the short and long term damage to humanity as a whole.
• Misplaced ideology: Others believe their god will step in at some stage and protect them from the worst impacts of climate change, so they might as well deny it's happening.
• Fame: Some people found fame of a sort being a fish in the small pond of climate science denial; so now they are stuck, gasping for attention and vying with other deniers to see who can promote the most ridiculous ideas.
• Pure mischief: Some people are just wicked for the sake of it and take perverse delight in twisting facts.

Climate disinformers, whatever drives them, have a core audience of willing dupes. There exist people who, no matter how much evidence they see (or deliberately avoid seeing) maintain a state of wilful ignorance. They have been commenting on climate conspiracy blogs for years so they have no excuse. I'm not referring to people who've never bothered to investigate, so remain ignorant. I'm talking about people who have had to work extremely hard to build up an immunity to facts. These people are like the hard-core evolution deniers, anti-vaxxers, and flat-earthers who refuse to accept what's right in front of them. They excel in seeking out comforting lies and avoiding reality. I've blogged about this in an article: Marginalised, alienated and put upon: climate science deniers are not innocent.

As with any affliction, the first step in recovery is admitting you have a problem. It's also the hardest step, which explains why the wilfully ignorant remain so.

Don't wait - act now

There is no quick fix. No magic wand. Just small steps, big steps and giant leaps.

There is a lot to do. The ultimate goal is to stop the world from heating up. The safest way to do this is, arguably, to get to the stage where we put no more CO2 into the air than is removed by natural processes. That means cutting current emissions by 70% or 80% or maybe more, depending on how badly deforestation continues. If we fail, our descendants (and maybe some of you) will be faced with the prospect of using geoengineering, with all the associated unfathomable risks.

As individuals we can take steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emissions for which we are responsible. Some of us can install solar panels or wind turbines. We can use fossil-fueled transport more sparingly. Maybe there are times we can use public transport instead of the car, the train instead of the plane, video-chat instead of travel. We can replace equipment, appliances and lights at home and at work with more energy efficient options. If you're wealthy maybe you can be an early adopter of new, clean technology, helping to bring down the price more quickly so everyone can afford it. In your job you can influence decisions and directions, prompting your organisation to see that it is in its best interest to be a clean green business or government agency. Then keep pushing for more.

As individuals we can support businesses and political aspirants who are working to mitigate global warming. We can write to newspapers, comment under media articles, write and call politicians, local councils and others to urge more decisive action to stop global warming. A government minister I knew maintained that a single letter represented a thousand voters. Let people know what you think.

We can also join with other people to take action, whether it's taking part in a march, attending a rally, going to a talk, joining an action group or investing in R&D for solutions.

Governments are often the slowest to act. In government, decisions are made by committee after consulting with multitudes of stakeholder groups, all of which takes time. If enough people who want to stop global warming come together, the government will view them as a "stakeholder" group that demands attention and, eventually, will see they represent the majority. Few politicians are prepared to look beyond the three or four year election cycle and too many have no interest except self-interest. They need prompting. (There used to be more statespersons who had vision and were able to lead rather than follow the hoi polloi. Now people are putting populist charlatans in positions of power. History repeats, despite advances in education.)

Many businesses get impatient with government flip-flopping from one policy direction to another. They recognise the necessity of a future that rids itself of the chains to self-destruction - aka fossil fuels. Electricity providers are investing more in solar and wind power. Computer companies are promoting themselves as using clean energy - either by using renewable electricity or offsetting dirty energy by planting trees or some other action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In the end it will be a change in societal behaviour that matters. A change in attitude leads to behaviour change. A change in behaviour leads to attitude change. Social norms shift over time. Driving petrol-fueled cars will, in a few short years, be widely regarded as being much more despicably anti-social than smoking tobacco. People who spew fossil fuel will be viewed as pariahs, held in the same contempt with which climate science deniers are held today.

So what to do? Well, it's up to each of us to decide what we can do, and do it. Then try a bit harder and aim a bit higher. Not all of us can aim for the stars. In any case, I like it here on Planet Earth :).