Detect Climate Science Denial

Detect Climate Action Denial

One form of climate denial is rejecting scientific evidence that global climate change is occurring.

To identify climate science denial, we can use the FLICC model (see the impressive work of scholar, John Cook and is colleagues!)

F- fake experts

L- logical fallacies

I- impossible expectations

C- cherry picking

C- conspiracy theories

See if you can identify FLICC in a Facebook video! (after viewing video, see analysis below :)

Another form of climate denial is the unwillingness or inability to take necessary climate action.

The primary goal of this type of denial is to delay the necessary action to address our climate crisis. So, we need to identify delay tactics, techniques, or “discourses” such as:

  • redirecting responsibility from oil and gas companies to individuals

  • pushing non-transformative solutions

  • emphasizing downsides of moving away from fossil fuels

  • greenwashing

(see work of William Lamb and colleagues and Geoffrey Supran & Naomi Oreskes!)

See if you can identify delay tactics in this YouTube video! (after viewing video, see brief analysis below :)

Analysis of the video

Fake experts: claim in video that Richard Tol is “one of the world’s top United Nations’ scientists is misleading. He is an economist not a climate scientist.

Logical fallacy: video uses oversimplification and mis-representation. For example, climate scientists do not argue that “CO2 alone controls the climate.” They are aware many factors affect the climate.

Cherry picking: narrator ignores more comprehensive and extensive evidence about consensus of climate scientists.

Conspiracy theories: narrator suggests that Democrats use climate science to make “political statements” and perpetuate “myths”

Analysis of YouTube video

Greenwashing: nature landscapes throughout and statements like “Trees are vital in the fight against climate change.”

Individualized responsibility: Shell wants to “harness nature” to “make it easier for customers to tackle their own emissions.”

Paltering: (when companies make true but misleading claims) in this case Shell is investing in renewables but continues to increase its fossil fuel production disproportionately and not at scale and speed necessary