In early November 2024, I sat with some friends on the stairs at Columbia University’s Low Library and felt the sun hit us in a t-shirt and summer dress. It was a whopping 70 degrees Fahrenheit.
“It shouldn’t be this warm,” we all agreed.
My sister called from the UK to relate to her recent conversation with our parents. “They said climate change is not real. Well, it’s not. Not realbut it’s natural and not as serious as people say it,” she complained.
I closed my eyes and took a deep breath. I’m in New York, studying at climate school, and I devote my life to understanding and fighting the crisis, but my own parents don’t think it’s a big deal.
I’m sure most people have this kind of person in their lives. The uncle of conspiracy theorist, the skeptical cousin, and the grandmother who shares YouTube videos are grandmothers who claim that global warming is fake news. 2020 investigation We found that about 25% of the US population expressed some kind of agreement with the sentiment that climate change is a hoax.
Recently I’ve been a bit obsessed with climate conspiracy. Douglas and Sutton We define conspiracy theory as “the belief that two or more actors have secretly adjusted to achieve the outcome and that their plot is not public knowledge.” Science is so complex that climate change is the fertile foundation of these theories. It is full of complex models, ranges of probability, and uncertainty, and it requires understanding of long-term trends rather than immediate causes and effects. Scientists warning about changes in jet streams, ocean currents, and radiative forcing are expected to trust scientists, but fossil fuel lobbyists, podcast hosts and social media can push simpler and more engaging stories. That’s everything hoax.
Therefore, conspiracy theory provides simple and emotionally satisfying answers to complex problems. Instead of facing the reality of climate change or facing their own accomplice, people can choose a different story. Climate disasters are manipulated, scientists are corrupted, and the crisis is exaggerated for political gain.
After Hurricane Helen landed in the US in the fall of 2024 and killed over 100 people in North Carolina alone, I scrolled through Twitter and was shocked to see the thread after accusing the thread of manipulating the storm. According to these Postsit was a manufactured catastrophe designed to punish the Red State before elections, accessing important minerals, or even as a divine punishment for democratic policies such as abortion. If it wasn’t that dangerous, it would laugh.
As climate change intensifies, the resulting disasters will also intensify. Conspiracy thrives in disaster zones. When something big happens, people look for answers and, more importantly, someone takes responsibility. They are drawn to the idea that a powerful group secretly manipulates the world around us. the study Conspiracy theory shows that by keeping people away from climate-friendly behavior, it actively undermines environmental policy. In the wake of major hurricanes, misinformation can undermine public confidence in disaster response agencies, causing people to refuse evacuation orders or government assistance. There are also online conspiracies Inspired real-world threatsFEMA officials are subject to death threats to their supposed role in “weaponization” in natural disasters. meanwhilemeteorologists are harassed and even doxxed for being thought to “push the climate agenda.”
Certainly, conspiracy theory is intensifying as quickly as the storm itself, and spreading even faster. Conspiracy theory is most powerful when exploiting deep-seated fear and anxiety. That’s the basic human motivation Self-reinforcement – The need to feel good about yourself and maintain self-esteem. People also want to believe they are heading for a good future, and they believe their outlook is safe. Climate change presents Existential threat These beliefs include not only the individual morality, but also the legitimacy of society as a whole. To recognize the scale of the crisis means to consider unpleasant truths. Our way of life is unsustainable, and the systems we rely on are deeply flawed, and the powers fail us, and the future is fundamentally different. For many people, it’s easier to deny reality than to face it.
So, what do we do?
When my sister called me in November, she asked Mom and Dad what to say. She is only 16 years old and doesn’t know all the science behind climate change yet. I wanted to start talking to her about the carbon cycle and the feedback loop, the ocean currents and tipping points, and all the catastrophes that are coming. But instead, I told her to take a deep breath and go back downstairs and enjoy dinner with her parents. Because here is the truth. Discussing with stubborn conspiracy theorists will not change their minds.
“Some of the most powerful climate action comes from productive tensions not from perfect ideological alignment, but from partnerships that are likely to find a common foundation.”
Instead of wasting the energy to discuss people who refuse to listen, we need to focus on a much larger middle ground. Those who are skeptical, uncertain or liberated. Many people feel psychologically distant from climate change and view it as a problem for others or an abstract problem that does not affect everyday life. Other people, especially in wealthy countries, experience a dislike of solutions. They fear that climate solutions are worse than climate change itself, and they fear that they will sacrifice lifestyle and freedom. And there are people who feel helpless. Crises build up, disasters get worse, and we start to feel like we’re doing nothing. This fate is as paralyzed as completely denial.
But there is hope here too. This midpoint can be fine-tuned towards your actions. This is where we need to focus our attention as climate communicators.
If you want to move across the middle ground, it must last. Be kind. be patient. And most importantly, we are willing to work with people we don’t fully agree with. Some of the most powerful climate behaviors come from productive tensions, not from perfect ideological alignment, but from partnerships that are likely to find a common foundation despite differences. You don’t have to agree to everything to make progress.
Climate scientist Katherine HayhoeThey argue that these conversations need to be started with shared values. Instead of hitting people with facts, we should start with what we agree with. For example, energy is a common basis. We all want reliable, affordable power. And converting energy systems is the fastest way to reduce emissions. The same applies to water. Everyone wants safe, clean and intact water. These are the openings for entry points, discussions, not just climate change itself, about the future we want to build.
No, hurricanes are government-controlled weapons, even my own family, I don’t spend time. Instead, I continue to talk about the climate with everyone else who listens, finding a common foundation and changing perspective. I recommend you do the same. Because to participate in this battle, every country and every industry needs as many people as possible.
Rosie Semlyen is a graduate student at the Columbia School of Climate and a research assistant at the National Center for Disaster Response, specializing in disaster risk management and climate policy.
The opinions and opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the Columbia School of Climate, the Institute of Earth, or Columbia University.
