Foundations of climate change denial: Anti-environmentalism and anti-science

PLOS One | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334544 November 12, 2025 10 / 23 LSA assumes that the mind or brain applies essentially the same method to mapping the meaning of words (and other experiences) into semantic space. It starts with rough estimates of closeness in the form of local temporal associations, then finds a way to fit them together [82]. Take for example, a denial code from stage one from a section by Glover and Economides (2010) in a chapter called “The Pseudo-science War on Carbon and Climate:” But the global mean temperature has not continued to rise. The natural explanation is that CO2 emissions are not the causal factor when temperature rises. But, once again, the “natural” explanation is not acceptable to AGW-theorists. Too many science grants and personal reputations are now staked on high-profile alarmist predictions. The reality is that CO2 emissions are continuing to rise around the world while the global mean temperature has remained static for over a decade, and may even have fallen. (p. 98, emphasis in original). Then reading around this quote in stage two coding in the subsequent paragraph, are attacks on the integrity of a science where scientist are accused of ignoring facts to advance an environmentalism that is “anti-human” and a dogmatic religion: That should be enough to ‘hole’ AGW-theory below the waterline. And if we were dealing with real science it would, and the vilification of CO2 would be at an end (or at least suspended pending further investigation). But we are not dealing

with pure science. We are rather dealing with science suffused with a strong, anti-human, eco-faith agenda. Facts and data are ultimately, for AGW activists~ non-essential elements of their faith (Ibid). Thus, the denial claim is narratively related to the paragraph after it (together, the textual unit), using the indicator “That should…” to indicate a successive point and the semantic connection between nodes articulated directly in the text. The codes are related to each other through the coding frame of “what denial” and “why denial.” This interrelatedness is usually observed in stage one but not analyzed until stage two reading and coding. Through this process, we are able to analyze the larger narrative beyond the simple denial claim to get at the narrative’s “DNA.” Another example illustrates anti-environmentalism in stage one coding identifying impact and policy denial: Second, and more important, we know by now that a warmer climate is a better one, most certainly during the early stages which we might observe during the next decade. Therefore, the most likely outcome of an ongoing trace-gas build-up is not a catastrophic event but a beneficial one. Taking out insurance and paying premiums against coming changes for the better seems to be the height of folly… Luckily we know that there is not going to be any damage to prepare for at this time (Weber 1991, p. 136-137). The following paragraph connects the denial claim to the larger rationale for denial discovered in stage two coding where

the author directly and semantically connects the denial claim to a larger rationale, “But now we come to an additional point of overriding importance” which are the “ulterior motives” and “ the plans of some of the environmentalists, who are against anything that has to do with industrialization and comfort provided by technological progress” (Weber 1991, p. 137, emphasis added). This passage is written proximately to the above denial claims to explain the reason for the denial claims—AGW science is unsound but that does not matter to environmentalists who advance the issue because AGW fits the environmentalists political agenda: These groups are obviously not very interested in questioning the scientific basis of the global warming/ greenhouse hypothesis, because that would be self-defeating to advancing their ulterior goals, so in order to add weight to their demands, they make the whole matter look as bleak as possible, regardless of the scientific soundness (p. 137-8).