{"id":302871,"date":"2024-02-18T14:35:54","date_gmt":"2024-02-18T13:35:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=302871"},"modified":"2024-02-18T14:35:57","modified_gmt":"2024-02-18T13:35:57","slug":"we-the-arbiters-of-truth-are-working-really-really-hard-to-understand-those-stupid-lying-climate-denier-liars","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=302871","title":{"rendered":"We, the Arbiters of Truth, are Working Really Really Hard to Understand Those Stupid Lying Climate Denier Liars"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sigh, another in a long line of \u201ctrying to understand\u201d the motivations and reasoning for people who disagree with them, but in reality are likely more informed than them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41598-023-50591-6<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I don\u2019t have much to say about this ugliness, but I\u2019ll let their writing speak for itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Abstract<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Using data from Twitter (now X), this study deploys artificial intelligence (AI) and network analysis to map and profile climate change denialism across the United States. We estimate that 14.8% of Americans do not believe in climate change. This denialism is highest in the central and southern U.S. However, it also persists in clusters within states (e.g., California) where belief in climate change is high. Political affiliation has the strongest correlation, followed by level of education, COVID-19 vaccination rates, carbon intensity of the regional economy, and income. The analysis reveals how a coordinated social media network uses periodic events, such as cold weather and climate conferences, to sow disbelief about climate change and science, in general. Donald Trump was the strongest influencer in this network, followed by conservative media outlets and right-wing activists. As a form of knowledge vulnerability, climate denialism renders communities unprepared to take steps to increase resilience. As with other forms of misinformation, social media companies (e.g., X, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok) should flag accounts that spread falsehoods about climate change and collaborate on targeted educational campaigns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Climate change denialism persists in the United States, with estimates ranging from 12% to 26% of the U.S. population1<\/a>,2<\/a><\/sup>. It is more pronounced in some states and regions3<\/a><\/sup>. Reasons for this denialism are multifaceted: Political affiliation and ideology, income, education, and exposure to extreme weather events are all important factors4<\/a>,5<\/a>,6<\/a><\/sup>. Denialism is more prevalent where local economies are highly dependent on fossil fuels7<\/a><\/sup>, in rural communities, and in populations where mistrust in science is pronounced8<\/a>,9<\/a><\/sup>. Social media reaches millions of users, providing a key mechanism for influencers to spread misinformation10<\/a><\/sup>. The ability of social media to influence and harden attitudes was apparent in the response to COVID-19 vaccines11<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Understanding how and why climate change opinion varies geographically and documenting it at an actionable scale is crucial for communication campaigns, outreach, and other interventions12<\/a>,13<\/a><\/sup>. Most estimates of the extent and geographic configuration of climate change denialism rely primarily on national surveys, with the Yale Climate Opinion Survey being the only dataset that provides estimates at the state and county levels for the entire U.S.3<\/a><\/sup>. These survey efforts, however, are time-intensive and expensive and are therefore destined to cover short time spans and, often, limited geographic extent. The Yale Survey combines data from more than 2500 national surveys and uses multinomial regression modeling to downscale estimates to subnational levels. Independent representative surveys conducted in states and metropolitan areas validate the predictions from the Yale Survey models3<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mining social media data (e.g., Facebook, YouTube, and X, formerly Twitter) is a tantalizing alternative to survey-based approaches14<\/a>,15<\/a><\/sup>. X is a social media platform with an extensive data repository. By adjusting for the skew toward certain demographic groups in users, data from this platform is useful for estimating public views on an array of topics, such as politics, social issues, and COVID-19 vaccination rates16<\/a>,17<\/a><\/sup>. Data from Twitter has also been used in predictive modeling of election outcomes18<\/a><\/sup>. Account holders can misuse it to oppose scientific knowledge and spread misinformation19<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This study used Twitter data (2017\u20132019) to: (i) estimate the prevalence of climate change denialism at the state and county levels; (ii) identify typical profiles of climate change deniers; (iii) understand how social media promulgates climate change denialism through key influencers; and (iv) determine how world events are leveraged to promulgate attitudes about climate change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We used a Deep Learning text recognition model to classify 7.4 million geocoded tweets containing keywords related to climate change. Posted by 1.3 million unique users in the U.S., these tweets were collected between September 2017 and May 2019 (see Online Methods S1<\/a>). We classified these tweets about climate change into \u2018for\u2019 (belief) and \u2018against\u2019 (denial). Our analysis resulted in a profile of climate change deniers at the county level, provided insight into the networks of social media figures influential in promoting climate change denial, and generated insight into how these influencers use current events to foster this denial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After confirming the validity of using social media data instead of information collected through surveys to capture public opinion on climate change at policy-relevant geographical scales, we found that denialism clusters in particular regions (and counties) of the country and amongst certain socio-demographic groups. Our analysis reveals how politicians, media figures, and conservative activists promulgated misinformation in the Twittersphere. It maps out how denialists and climate change believers have formed mostly separate Twitter communities, creating echo chambers. Such information provides a basis for developing strategies to counter this knowledge vulnerability and reduce the spread of mis- or disinformation by targeting the communities most at risk of not adopting measaures to increase resilience to the effects of climate change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Results<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Where in the U.S. is climate change denial prevalent?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Our study found that 14.8% of Americans deny that climate change is real (Fig.\u00a01<\/a>A), a percentage consistent with previous national studies (Fig.\u00a0S4<\/a>). Using geolocation information, we determined that denialism is highest in the Central part of the U.S. and in the South, with more than 20% of the populations of OK, MS, AL, and ND consisting of deniers. Along the West and East Coasts and New England, belief in climate change is highest. However, climate change denial varies substantially within states, often clustering in geographic swaths across multiple counties (Fig.\u00a01<\/a>B). For example, in Shasta County, California climate change denial is as high as 52%; yet overall less than 12% of the population of California does not believe in climate change. Similarly, the average percentage of deniers is 21% in Texas, but\u00a0at the county-level\u00a0this ranges from 13% in Travis County to 67% in Hockley County.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41598-023-50591-6<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41598-023-50591-6\/figures\/1<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The full study can be found here.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

H\/T mark-blr<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sigh, another in a long line of \u201ctrying to understand\u201d the motivations and reasoning for people who disagree with them, but in reality are likely more informed than them.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":302877,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Sigh, another in a long line of \u201ctrying to understand\u201d the motivations and reasoning for people who disagree with them, but in reality are likely more informed than them.","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691827001,691827000,691820528,691819484],"class_list":{"0":"post-302871","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-change-believers","9":"tag-climate-change-denialism","10":"tag-misinformation","11":"tag-social-media","13":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/0The-Science-of-Zombies.jpg?fit=1600%2C883&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1gN1","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":256518,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=256518","url_meta":{"origin":302871,"position":0},"title":"Reasoning about Climate Change","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/05\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Why is disbelief in anthropogenic climate change common despite broad scientific consensus to the contrary?","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0killer-clowns.jpg?fit=1200%2C747&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0killer-clowns.jpg?fit=1200%2C747&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0killer-clowns.jpg?fit=1200%2C747&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0killer-clowns.jpg?fit=1200%2C747&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0killer-clowns.jpg?fit=1200%2C747&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254219,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=254219","url_meta":{"origin":302871,"position":1},"title":"UNSW: Psychological Distance is Not Necessarily a Barrier to Climate Motivation","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"23\/04\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The\u00a0Australian Psychological Society\u00a0argues psychological distance can be a barrier to climate action. But UNSW professor Ben Newell counters that the evidence is unclear.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate argument\"","block_context":{"text":"climate argument","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-argument"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/01984-header.jpg?fit=1200%2C540&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/01984-header.jpg?fit=1200%2C540&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/01984-header.jpg?fit=1200%2C540&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/01984-header.jpg?fit=1200%2C540&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/01984-header.jpg?fit=1200%2C540&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":245480,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=245480","url_meta":{"origin":302871,"position":2},"title":"Climate Uncertainty & Risk: the presentation","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"25\/02\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Even people that don\u2019t know much about climate science have heard that 97% of climate scientists agree.\u00a0 But exactly what do they agree on?\u00a0 Not nearly as much as is portrayed in the media.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-769.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-769.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-769.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-769.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/image-769.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":203291,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=203291","url_meta":{"origin":302871,"position":3},"title":"Bill Gates to Elon Musk: My Climate Virtue is Bigger than Your Climate Virtue?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"06\/06\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Essay by Eric Worrall A bizarre online argument has erupted between Bill Gates and Elon Musk, over who has done the most to prevent climate change. Bill Gates says he\u2019s given more to climate change than Elon Musk, who replies: \u2018Sigh\u2019 Ryan Hogg\u00a0\u00a0Jun 5, 2022, 7:09 PM Bill Gates told\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-29.png?fit=749%2C469&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-29.png?fit=749%2C469&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-29.png?fit=749%2C469&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-29.png?fit=749%2C469&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":261654,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=261654","url_meta":{"origin":302871,"position":4},"title":"Friday Funny: Captain Santer and the Great White Fingerprint of Human Influence on Climate","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Santer has been searching for proof of the human fingerprint for close to three decades. He has a lot time invested in finding it, from 1996","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/00LG-GOAT-FRIDAY-1024x1024-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/00LG-GOAT-FRIDAY-1024x1024-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/00LG-GOAT-FRIDAY-1024x1024-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/00LG-GOAT-FRIDAY-1024x1024-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260830,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=260830","url_meta":{"origin":302871,"position":5},"title":"Climate fearmongering reaches stratospheric heights","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A new paper by Santer et al. provocatively entitled \u201cExceptional stratospheric contribution to human fingerprints on atmospheric temperature\u201d goes where no serious climate scientist should go: it has conflated stratospheric cooling with global warming.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0Screenshot-2023-06-05-210250.png?fit=845%2C712&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0Screenshot-2023-06-05-210250.png?fit=845%2C712&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0Screenshot-2023-06-05-210250.png?fit=845%2C712&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0Screenshot-2023-06-05-210250.png?fit=845%2C712&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/302871","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=302871"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/302871\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":302879,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/302871\/revisions\/302879"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/302877"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=302871"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=302871"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=302871"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}