Cosnpiracy theorists

Climate-denialist theories are usually based on a notion of conspiracy or fraud. In this view, the idea of human-caused climate change is the result of a secret agreement between scientists and politicians aimed at controlling or even exterminating humanity. Conspiracy narratives are very often directed against supranational institutions, such as the EU, the UN or the Club of Rome. In the Czech context, organizations such as Reformy.cz or NWOO have profiled themselves in this way, united by the idea of fighting the so-called New World Order. According to this interpretation, the concept of global warming was invented by representatives of the Club of Rome as an effective tool to control humanity and limit the sovereignty of nation states.

A particularly influential conspiracy theory was the so-called Climategate (2009), when excerpts from leaked emails of scientists were used by climate change deniers to portray a large-scale plot in which climatologists allegedly manipulated scientific findings in order to enrich themselves and gain prestige. Emails taken out of context were meant to discredit climate science as well as the non-profit sector as a whole.

Conspiracies as such are difficult—if not impossible—to refute, yet they can have a significant impact. Not necessarily a direct one (in the sense that audiences always believe them), but rather an indirect one: by undermining trust in institutions or reducing the willingness to support measures tackling climate change.

Conspiracy theories may employ a number of logical fallacies from our taxonomy; for example, in the case of Climategate this involved quote mining, i.e. taking quotations out of context.

Variants of Conspiracy Theories

Contradictory

Belief in ideas or theories that contradict one another.

Example:
Temperature records have been falsified by scientists… temperature records show cooling.
(The author distrusts temperature records but relies on them when they appear to support their fixed idea of cooling.)

Overriding Suspicion

An entrenched scepticism toward any official explanation. As such, it reliably prevents acceptance of any explanation that does not fit the given conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theorists typically distrust state or scientific institutions, which applies not only to climate change (e.g. the IPCC or national academies of science), but also to other areas such as healthcare (ministries of health or public health authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic).

Example:
Show me a single piece of evidence of climate change… oh, those pieces of evidence are falsified!

Nefarious Intent

The assumption that any alleged conspiracy is driven by malicious intentions, for example by elites, scientists, and similar actors. According to this narrative, climatologists or supranational institutions may be motivated by power, money, control or extermination of humanity, restriction of freedoms, and so on.

Examples:
Climatologists promote the climate crisis because they want money and power.
It is simply part of their job description, and of their grants, that they must raise awareness of climate change – which means that their sponsor has essentially prescribed the conclusions they are supposed to reach in their research. And that is simply wrong.

Something Must Be Wrong

The speaker insists that “something must be wrong” and that the official explanation is based on a lie or fraud—even when individual elements of the conspiracy theory become untenable.

Example:
All right, I acknowledge that 97% of climatologists agree that global warming is caused by humans, but that is only because they stick to the party line.

Persecuted Victim

The perception and presentation of oneself as a victim of systematic persecution. Climate deniers very often describe themselves as victims, claiming they are being silenced, ridiculed, threatened, not invited to the media, and so on.

Examples:
They claim that we are de facto denialists. It is only a matter of time before this is banned in the same way as doubting the victims of the Holocaust.
I think that especially Al Gore initiated a situation in which there is only one correct opinion and it is not really open to discussion.

Immune to Evidence

A strategy in which evidence that refutes the conspiracy theory is labelled as part of the conspiracy itself.

Example:
Investigations that found that climatologists had not acted improperly were part of the conspiracy.
(A similar argument appeared in criticism of the Climategate investigations—namely that scientists were cleared because they were investigated by their acquaintances and allied institutions.)

Re-interpreting Randomness

A strategy in which any random event is labelled as part of a conspiracy.

Example:
A NASA satellite exploded? They were surely trying to hide inconvenient data!