Climate Change Denial Books and Conservative Think Tanks

Abstract

The conservative movement and especially its think tanks play a critical role in denying the reality and significance of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), especially by manufacturing uncertainty over climate science. Books denying AGW are a crucial means of attacking climate science and scientists, and we examine the links between conservative think tanks (CTTs) and 108 climate change denial books published through 2010. We find a strong link, albeit noticeably weaker for the growing number of self-published denial books. We also examine the national origins of the books and the academic backgrounds of their authors or editors, finding that with the help of American CTTs climate change denial has spread to several other nations and that an increasing portion of denial books are produced by individuals with no scientific training. It appears that at least 90% of denial books do not undergo peer review, allowing authors or editors to recycle scientifically unfounded claims that are then amplified by the conservative movement, media, and political elites.

The ‘Alice in Wonderland’ mechanics of the rejection of (climate) science: simulating coherence by conspiracism

“…Unlike mainstream science, which is regularly summarized in the IPCC's Assessment Reports, contrarian positions are more diverse, and are spread across a multitude of sources-from internet blogs, to reports produced by "think tanks" (Jacques et al 2008), to popular books (Dunlap and Jacques 2013). Although this diversity makes it challenging to identify the over-arching level of abstraction at which contrarian positions may achieve the coherence that is lacking in their (pseudo-) scientific arguments, there is little doubt that the common denominator among contrarian positions is the conviction that climate change either does not exist or is not human caused, and that either way it does not present a risk (or if it does, then adaptation will deal with the problem).…”

“…There are people who deny scientific facts, but they are not "deniers"-they are people who choose to engage in a particular behavior. economics, people whose identity and worldview centers around free markets are particularly challenged by the findings from climate science (e.g., Dunlap and McCright 2008;Dunlap and Jacques 2013;Lewandowsky et al 2013a, c;McCright et al 2013McCright et al , 2014.…”

Conflicting Climate Change Frames in a Global Field of Media Discourse

“…Debate and opposition comes from a culturally defined cluster of Anglo societies-first and foremost the United States, but also Canada, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand (Dunlap and McCright 2015;Painter 2013;Stern 2016). U.S. discourse is highly influenced by conservative think tanks financed by the fossil fuel industry to produce doubt about climate science, and this influence has spread to other English-speaking societies (Dunlap and McCright 2010;Dunlap and Jacques 2013;Farrell 2016). This clustering may also indicate a common cultural preference for laissez-faire market systems and rejection of state policy interventions (Dobbin 1994).…”

Climate skepticism and the manufacture of doubt: can dissent in science be epistemically detrimental?

“…There is now a sophisticated, privately-funded network for disseminating results that contradict the hypothesis of anthropogenic climate change. Oreskes and Conway (2010) examine the role of the conservative Marshall Institute in promoting and disseminating contrarian claims, and Dunlap and others highlight the importance of conservative think tanks more generally in propagating climate change denialism (e.g., Dunlap and Jacques 2013;Elsasser and Dunlap 2013;Jacques et al 2008). The strategies of dissemination developed by these foundations have been effective in identifying dissenting research, targeting prominent media outlets, and ensuring that the dissenting research is discussed positively in those outlets.…”