Climate Change Denial Arguments Debunked No.5 – It’s A Conspiracy!!

Climate change is a problem, and it is bad! Global warming isn’t just happening, its being denied by those with vested interests.  So we thought we would address the common poor arguments against ‘Man-Made’ climate change. We will also give you an evidence based answer, and explain the fallacy. Today it’s;

”Climate Change is a Conspiracy.’

Climate Change Isn’t A Conspiracy

Climate change, like other complex issues, is based on evidence. This evidence is gathered in a scientific way, with inferences made, hypotheses tested and results explained. As we have previously described, climate change happens naturally, is neither good nor bad inherently, but has been accelerated demonstrably by human activity. So, in the spirit of science, lets debunk this claim. A conspiracy relies on a set of assumptions and premises used to justify a conclusion, in this case;

  1. Energy companies are at risk if climate change is real, as is our national security (?!)
  2. People have vested interests in renewable and green energies
  3. Limiting fossil fuel burning will damage the economy, and risk our national security (?!)
  4. Climate change is bogus

Addressing each point sequentially. (1) is false, as energy companies can switch to renewable sources and many are doing so. (2) is true, but does not provide a logical premise for (4,) you can have vested interests in renewable energies and climate change can be real. (3) is possible, but that depends on where money is invested, but does not logically dictate (4) to be true. But we can debunk things even more simply though an argument from plausibility.

This means looking at all the evidence available, and drawing a conclusion that seems the most probable. A valid conclusion (a scientific one,) is backed up by the evidence. An invalid conclusion (a pseudoscientific, fallacious or simply wrong one,) must adjust itself or add new layers of premises to seem valid.

The Arguments Just Fall Short

In classical science to debunk a theory is very easy. If the hypothesis is refuted on any piece of its argument it must be abandoned. Equally, if an argument cannot actually be refuted because there is no way of refuting it with evidence, it can also be discarded (examples include Freudians theory of Dream Analysis.) So if we say ‘Climate change is a conspiracy’ then we only need to debunk one of the supporting arguments to defeat it. I have done that above. But lets consider the two possible hypothesis based on the climate change evidence;

Hypothesis: Climate change is a conspiracy.

Evidence claimed for: The sun solely causes global warming (debunked,) its cold outside so global warming isn’t happening (debunked,), the ice cores aren’t reliable (debunked,) its volcanoes (debunked)

Evidence considered against : Ice core greenhouse emission counts are wrong, accelerated rise in global temp, sun cooling, known physics and chemistry of greenhouse emissions, physics, chemistry, geology, switch by large energy suppliers toward green energy…. (the list goes on and on.)

One example of debunking: it’s cold outside, so global warming isn’t happening.

Outcome: from plausibility climate change is not a conspiracy. The evidence is clear.

Why The Skeptics Are Wrong

I need not go into too much detail here, as I am confident that the idea has is bogus. However, lets take a moment to address how this has come about. It will be useful in future. It is an example of two major fallacies, the ‘false association’ and ‘black and white.’ In a false association fallacy, the premises of an argument do not link to their conclusion. For example;

  1. All dogs are mammals

  2. Colin is a dog

  3. Colin smells bad.

Its rather maudlin, but nothing about (1) or (2) proves (3.) Colin could smell fine. When applied to the ‘climate change conspiracy’ this fallacy becomes clear.

  1. Climate change has a wealth of supporting evidence

  2. Fossil fuel levies will damage the economy, also ‘China’

  3. The climate change evidence must be false and therefore a conspiracy.

Neither (1) nor (2) prove (3.) The second fallacy is the ‘black and white’, where a situation is only described as  having two explanations when there are often more. For example;

  1. People who smoke are at a higher risk of cancer

  2. If you don’t smoke, you won’t get cancer

  3.           No-one should get cancer

(2) is false, as only 1  case of a non smoker getting cancer nullifies it. There are a multitude of other ways people can get cancer. So lets apply it to climate change;

  1. Climate change has a wealth of supporting evidence

  2. Fossil fuel levies will damage the economy, also ‘China’

  3. The climate change evidence must be false and therefore a conspiracy

There are plenty of ways you can make conclusions from (1) and (2.) But the simplest refutation is this; both can be true. On a personal note, I will add that this particular myth is the most asinine and paranoid of all of them. So next time someone says ‘Climate change is a conspiracy’ you can simply  say;

‘Climate change has  a wealth of evidence to support it. Arguments claiming conspiracy ignore this evidence and add a layer of unprovable assertions to justify it. These are logically false and risible.’


Help PORP to Help Us

  1. Read more about why Climate Change may be disastrous 
  2. Please donate to help us fight science illiteracy and poor politics.
  3. Read more through  PORP Science and Dr Janaway
  4. Follow us on Twitter to keep up to date.
  5. Share!!

Share this article

Leave a comment