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

PLOS One | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334544 November 12, 2025 17 / 23 Fig 2. Anti-Reflexivity in Climate Denial Books. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334544.g002 Using existing theory to identify climate denial claims in the books [29], we confirm the major denial claims reported in the literature. We find that while the two most frequent claims are attribution denial and policy denial, a majority of the books exhibit most of the types of AGW denial—even as they are modified somewhat in reaction to scientific and societal events. This indicates a robust consistency and durability of denial themes across more than three decades. The most important findings are from our analysis of the semantic ecosystems in which these long-known catego- ries of climate science and policy rejection exist where we discover new lines of reasoning, in particular strident anti- environmentalism. We find support for the findings of Boussalis and Coan [24] and other recent studies that AGW denial includes systematic attacks on the integrity of science and scientists, here framed as a branch of impact science. While Boussalis and Coan correctly note that this theme has grown stronger in the overall body of denial literature (reports, policy briefs, PR releases, etc.) used in their large computational studies, it was present in a few denial books from the beginning. We add to this an extreme opposition to environmentalism that has not been accounted for in the literature.

Together, the opposition to the global environmental movement and attacks on impact science constitute the core ele- ments of “anti-reflexivity” [35]. Anti-reflexivity is a powerful defensive mechanism employed by dominant interests to