Climate Sceptic Or Climate Denier? It's Not That Simple And Here's Why

Climate Sceptic Or Climate Denier? It's Not That Simple And Here's Why There’s a difference between not believing and denying the science on climate change. Shutterstock/nito

Climate change is now climate crisis and a climate sceptic now a climate denier, according to the recently updated style guide of The Guardian news organisation.

The extent to which the scientific community acknowledges climate change is very close to the extent to which it also sees it as a crisis. So the move from “change” to “crisis” recognises that both rest on the same scientific footing.

The Guardian’s editor-in-chief, Katharine Viner, said:

We want to ensure that we are being scientifically precise, while also communicating clearly with readers on this very important issue.

But the move from “sceptic” to “denier” is more interesting.

Sceptics need to earn the name

Many people who do not accept the findings of climate science often mark themselves as “sceptics”. It is, in part, an attempt to portray themselves as champions of the Enlightenment: imagining that they refuse to believe something based solely on the word of others, and opt to seek the evidence themselves.

It is true that scepticism is an essential component of science – indeed, one of its most defining characteristics. The motto of the Royal Society, perhaps the world’s oldest scientific institution, is “nullius in verba” or “take nobody’s word for it”.

But scepticism has two imperatives, each buttressing the other. The first is the imperative to doubt, so nicely captured in the above motto. The second is the imperative to follow the evidence, and to give more credibility to claims that are well justified than those which are not.

In other words, it’s fine to ask questions, but you also have to listen to the answers.

Too often, so-called sceptics do not want to have their views challenged (let alone changed) and do not wish to engage with the science. Even worse, they may choose to adopt any number of justifications for rejecting science, not from their own free inquiry but from a ready-made selection provided by commercially or ideologically motivated industries.

This move away from “sceptic” might, therefore, be seen as simply an improvement in accuracy. But the move to “denier” might be seen as derogatory, especially as the term is associated with nefarious stances such as holocaust denial.

But is it, at least, accurate?

Three categories of climate science disbelief

Let’s consider three possible categories of people who do not accept the consensus and consilience of human-induced climate change:

  1. those who engage in scholarly disagreement through the literature

  2. those who are not engaged with the debate and have no clear view either way

  3. those who associate climate science with conspiracy, wilful ignorance or incompetence (or even see in it an unpalatable truth).

The first category is the rarest. Several papers with reliable methodology unchallenged in the literature show an enormous majority of climate scientists agree that the planet is warming and humans are largely responsible.

But contrary positions are not unknown. Some questions regarding the credibility of some aspects of climate models, for example, exist for some working academics.

While these scientists do not necessarily doubt all aspects of climate science, issues of reliability of methodology and validity of conclusions in some areas remain, for them, alive.

Whether they are correct or not (and many have been responded to in the literature), they are at least working within the broad norms of academia. We might call these people “climate sceptics”.

The second category is quite common. Many people are uninterested in science, including climate science, and have no real interest in the debate. This attitude is easy to criticise, but if there are pressing concerns regarding the availability and security of food, health and safety in your life, you may be preoccupied with these things and not marching for action on climate science.

Others may simply not spend much time thinking about it, nor care very much one way or the other — such is the nature of voluntarily participatory democracy. They might not believe in climate science, but that doesn’t mean they have rejected it. We might call these people “climate agnostics”.

The third category is the most problematic and arguably the most high-profile. It could be subdivided into:

  • people convinced of the incompetence of scientists and having a naïve view of their own analytical powers (or common sense)

  • folks motivated to reject climate science because of its implications for social or economic change, who consequently see climate science as a conspiracy of social or political engineering

  • those accepting of climate science but not caring about the consequences and seeking only to maximise their opportunities in any resulting crisis - which may include continuing existing business models based on fossil-fuel technologies (and hence encourage those who reject the science for social reasons).

Let’s call these subdivisions, in order: climate naives, climate conspiracists, and climate opportunists. Certain combinations of the above are also possible and are probably the norm.

The term “contrarian” is also a common one, but since it basically means only to go against public opinion, it seems a bit shallow in this analysis.

What is it to deny?

The definition of denialism is not uniform. In psychology it is to reject a widely accepted claim because the truth of it is psychologically discomforting (to that extent, there are many aspects of reality we all deny, ignore or minimise for the sake of our sanity).

In popular culture, including discussions of history and climate science, it is an active act of rebellion against the consensus and consilience of experts, often motivated by ideological factors. These are quite distinct and it may not pay any persuasive dividend to blur them together.

The latter definition does not seem appropriate for climate sceptics or for climate agnostics. But for the rest of the disbelievers, it does seem to resonate. So let’s try it here for a moment.

This taxonomy of disbelief is not built on any psychological model, but is simply descriptive.

In summary, three categories of climate science disbelief are: sceptic, agnostic and denier. Three subdivisions of deniers are: naive, conspiracists and opportunists.

Is The Guardian right to use the blanket term “deniers” instead of any of the above? Arguably, they have a technical case in some instances, but I would say not in others.

What’s wrong with calling someone a climate agnostic instead of a climate denier, if that is a better description of their state of belief?

But for those who are deniers – and let’s be clear, the evidence is bearing down on all humans like a freight train – then a failure to act is more than negligence, it is a failure of moral courage. I would not want to be remembered as someone who denied that.The Conversation

About The Author

Peter Ellerton, Lecturer in Critical Thinking; Curriculum Director, UQ Critical Thinking Project, The University of Queensland

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Related Books

Climate Change: What Everyone Needs to Know

by Joseph Romm
0190866101The essential primer on what will be the defining issue of our time, Climate Change: What Everyone Needs to Know® is a clear-eyed overview of the science, conflicts, and implications of our warming planet. From Joseph Romm, Chief Science Advisor for National Geographic's Years of Living Dangerously series and one of Rolling Stone's "100 people who are changing America," Climate Change offers user-friendly, scientifically rigorous answers to the most difficult (and commonly politicized) questions surrounding what climatologist Lonnie Thompson has deemed "a clear and present danger to civilization.". Available On Amazon

Climate Change: The Science of Global Warming and Our Energy Future second edition Edition

by Jason Smerdon
0231172834This second edition of Climate Change is an accessible and comprehensive guide to the science behind global warming. Exquisitely illustrated, the text is geared toward students at a variety of levels. Edmond A. Mathez and Jason E. Smerdon provide a broad, informative introduction to the science that underlies our understanding of the climate system and the effects of human activity on the warming of our planet.Mathez and Smerdon describe the roles that the atmosphere and ocean play in our climate, introduce the concept of radiation balance, and explain climate changes that occurred in the past. They also detail the human activities that influence the climate, such as greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions and deforestation, as well as the effects of natural phenomena.  Available On Amazon

The Science of Climate Change: A Hands-On Course

by Blair Lee, Alina Bachmann
194747300XThe Science of Climate Change: A Hands-On Course uses text and eighteen hands-on activities to explain and teach the science of global warming and climate change, how humans are responsible, and what can be done to slow or stop the rate of global warming and climate change. This book is a complete, comprehensive guide to an essential environmental topic. Subjects covered in this book include: how molecules transfer energy from the sun to warm the atmosphere, greenhouse gases, the greenhouse effect, global warming, the Industrial Revolution, the combustion reaction, feedback loops, the relationship between weather and climate, climate change, carbon sinks, extinction, carbon footprint, recycling, and alternative energy. Available On Amazon

From The Publisher:
Purchases on Amazon go to defray the cost of bringing you InnerSelf.comelf.com, MightyNatural.com, and ClimateImpactNews.com at no cost and without advertisers that track your browsing habits. Even if you click on a link but don't buy these selected products, anything else you buy in that same visit on Amazon pays us a small commission. There is no additional cost to you, so please contribute to the effort. You can also use this link to use to Amazon at any time so you can help support our efforts.

 

enafarzh-CNzh-TWdanltlfifrdeiwhihuiditjakomsnofaplptruesswsvthtrukurvi

follow InnerSelf on

facebook-icontwitter-iconrss-icon

 Get The Latest By Email

{emailcloak=off}

EVIDENCE

Why You Shouldn't Use
Why You Shouldn't Use "Weather" And "Climate" Interchangeably
by Jennifer Fitchett
As January 2019 entered its third week, huge swathes of the US are blanketed with snow, and winter storm warnings were…
Evidence Shows Warming Forces World Of Ice Into Retreat
New Evidence Shows Warming Forces World Of Ice Into Retreat
by Tim Radford
New evidence from the air, space, atmospheric chemistry and old records is testament to global warming impacts on the…
Why We Know California Wildfires Will Get Even Worse
Why We Know California Wildfires Will Get Even Worse
by Kevin Stacey
The severity of wildfires in the Sierra Nevada region of California has been sensitive to changes in climate over the…
New Research Shows How Much Methane Goes From The Ocean To The Atmosphere Each Year
New Research Shows How Much Methane Goes From The Ocean To The Atmosphere Each Year
by Lindsey Valich
New research uses data science to determine how much methane goes from the ocean and into the atmosphere each year.
How Much Of Climate Change Is Natural? How Much Is Man-made?
How Much Of Climate Change Is Natural? How Much Is Man-made?
by Mark New
As someone who has been working on climate change detection and its causes for over 20 years I was both surprised and…
Why Some People Still Think Climate Change Isn't Real
Why Some People Still Think Climate Change Isn't Real
by David Hall
At its heart, climate change denial is a conflict between facts and values. People deny the climate crisis because, to…
Europe's Most Iconic Mountain Is A Climate Change Warning
by ABC News
ABC News' James Longman reports from Mont Blanc, where a glacier on the Italian side of the mountain is breaking apart…
Science Counts Humankind’s Carbon Output
Science Counts Humankind’s Carbon Output
by Tim Radford
We leave the planet’s volcanos far behind on greenhouse gas emissions: humankind’s carbon output can exceed theirs by…

LATEST VIDEOS

South Africans Are Feeling The Heat In More Ways Than One
by eNCA
Load-shedding combined with soaring temperatures are a bad combination.
Why Uncertainty Can Actually Boost Trust In Climate Science
Why Uncertainty Can Actually Boost Trust In Climate Science
by Melissa De Witte
The more specific climate scientists are about the uncertainties of global warming, the more the American public trusts…
How World Conflicts Are Influence By The Changing Climate
How World Conflicts Are Influence By The Changing Climate
by John Vidal
The relationship between a heating planet and violent clashes is complex — and critical. “This is where I keep my…
Emergency Medicine For Our Climate Fever
by Kelly Wanser
As we recklessly warm the planet by pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, some industrial emissions also…
What Extinction Rebellion climate activists are demanding from governments
by Democracy Now!
More than 700 climate activists were arrested in 60 cities worldwide in a global effort aimed at urging governments to…
Can Nature Repair The Planet From Climate Change?
by The Economist
A closer look at one of the most familiar responses offered to the climate crisis.
How Climate Change Is Threatening Homes In Mumbai
by South China Morning Post
Lowland cities and islands such as the Indian city of Mumbai may face increasingly frequent floods and storms
This is Not A Drill: 700+ Arrested as Extinction Rebellion Fights Climate Crisis With Direct Action
by Democracy Now!
More than 700 people have been arrested in civil disobedience actions as the group Extinction Rebellion kicked off two…

LATEST ARTICLES

How Divergent Goals Hinder The Fight Of The Climate Crisis
How Divergent Goals Hinder The Fight Of The Climate Crisis
by Pascale Dufour
Nearly half a million people demonstrated in Montréal to demand climate action on Sept. 27. It was one of the largest…
Why You Shouldn't Use
Why You Shouldn't Use "Weather" And "Climate" Interchangeably
by Jennifer Fitchett
As January 2019 entered its third week, huge swathes of the US are blanketed with snow, and winter storm warnings were…
South Africans Are Feeling The Heat In More Ways Than One
by eNCA
Load-shedding combined with soaring temperatures are a bad combination.
Iowa's Farmers – And American Eaters – Need A National Discussion On Transforming Us Agriculture
We Need A National Discussion On Transforming Agriculture
by Lisa Schulte Moore
Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses bring the state a lot of political attention during presidential election cycles.
Can We Deal With The Climate Crisis Without Having A Financial Chaos?
Can We Deal With The Climate Crisis Without Having A Financial Chaos?
by Geoff Dembicki
Communities face a tricky dilemma as climate changes: How to prepare for impacts without scaring away homeowners and…
Should Science Must Be Mobilized Like World War Ii To Fight The Climate Crisis
Should Science Must Be Mobilized Like World War Ii To Fight The Climate Crisis
by Tom Oliver
We’ve all but won the argument on climate change. The facts are now unequivocal and climate denialists are facing a…
The IEA Projects Global Renewable Energy Capacity to Rise by 50% in next 5 Years
The IEA Projects Global Renewable Energy Capacity to Rise by 50% in next 5 Years
by Jessica Corbett
However, the deployment of renewables "still needs to accelerate if we are to achieve long-term climate, air quality,…
Evidence Shows Warming Forces World Of Ice Into Retreat
New Evidence Shows Warming Forces World Of Ice Into Retreat
by Tim Radford
New evidence from the air, space, atmospheric chemistry and old records is testament to global warming impacts on the…