Climate deniers or climate skeptics are on the agenda. Presenting pseudo-scientific information claiming that the climate crisis does not actually exist, climate deniers often rely on conspiracy theories. So, could climate change really be a conspiracy? Prof. Dr. İbrahim Özdemir, President of Üsküdar Üniversitesi Environmental Ethics Forum, addressed the issue in Perspektif.
Here is Özdemir's article:
For over thirty years, I have been teaching courses on environmental philosophy, environmental ethics, and climate ethics. I have participated in hundreds of scientific meetings on the subject both in Turkey and abroad. I have had the opportunity to listen to and read the world's leading experts on climate change. A frequent topic raised in these meetings concerned climate deniers and conspiracy theories. Like many of my colleagues, I primarily try to understand the concerns and questions within climate change conspiracy theories. I believe that some conspiracy theories – when properly understood – can sometimes offer certain benefits by challenging societal dogmas. Therefore, I do not agree with the demonization and belittlement of those who believe in and adopt conspiratorial theses. Moreover, some conspiracy theories can bring societal issues that need addressing to the forefront. It might even be possible to view the conspiratorial mindset as an important element of democratic discussion, provided we do not neglect to use the analytical and critical thinking skills offered by our philosophical heritage. Climate denial or skepticism also expresses doubt or disbelief regarding the consensus on the climate crisis. The arguments put forward by climate deniers can generally be classified as rejecting, or at least questioning, the evidence for climate change, the seriousness of its impacts, humanity's role in climate change, and the effectiveness of proposed solutions. Let's first look at the conspiracy aspect of this issue.
Understanding Conspiracy
Academics define conspiracy as 'a secret plan by two or more powerful actors.' Generally, conspiracy theories attribute blame to a group of powerful individuals secretly operating to create hidden plans that benefit themselves and harm the public interest. Conspiracy theories sometimes emerge when official explanations are insufficient or when social mistrust rises. These theories can also be a product of people's attempt to make sense of complex events during periods of uncertainty. Furthermore, some conspiracy theories can bring issues that are often overlooked or not sufficiently discussed to the agenda. In this sense, instead of completely disregarding them, it might be more useful to examine why they are popular and what gaps they fill in society. There are epistemic, existential, and social reasons underlying the proliferation of conspiracy theories. Epistemically, people have a desire to create meaning and order in the world. They seek simple and intuitive explanations instead of analytical and critical perspectives that require effort to attribute meaning to chaotic and incomprehensible events. Existential motivations, on the other hand, arise from the need to make sense of the world and cope with uncertainty, especially in situations of lack of control or perceived threat. Such theories also work psychologically to provide individuals with a sense of having some degree of control over events occurring in the world. Conspiracy theories, especially during periods of intense social tensions and conflicts, strengthen the distinction between 'us' and 'them' and, in some cases, can become a tool for blaming specific groups or individuals. Faced with the complex social and political problems encountered by modern societies, individuals seek easy and explanatory answers, and thus, conspiracy theories offer an attractive alternative. They also spread rapidly with the influence of social media. Even scientists without a background in philosophy and critical thinking can become part of the allure of conspiracy theories. In the face of widespread misinformation and conspiracy theories surrounding climate change, utilizing tools such as critical thinking, offered by our philosophical heritage, can serve as a powerful antidote in combating falsehoods and promoting informed discourse. Moreover, by encouraging rational inquiry, logical analysis, and moral reasoning, it can enable individuals to distinguish truth from fiction and understand complex issues more deeply. Some thoughts on how critical thinking and philosophy can help us overcome, or at least minimize the impact of, climate denial and conspiracy theory rumors can be summarized as follows.
Evaluating Evidence
Critical thinking encourages individuals to critically evaluate the evidence supporting various claims, including those related to climate change. By assessing the reliability, validity, and credibility of sources, individuals can distinguish between reputable scientific research and unsubstantiated rumors or conspiracy theories. Socrates (399 BC) can help us in this regard. More precisely, his imperative to 'follow the evidence wherever it leads' has been a powerful source of attraction throughout the history of Western philosophy. The method of critical thinking and questioning everything has influenced many philosophers and scientists throughout history. Socrates decided to follow the evidence, even if it meant admitting his own ignorance or changing his views. He believed that the pursuit of wisdom and knowledge was the ultimate goal of human life, and that the only way to achieve it was through careful reasoning and questioning. In his philosophy, he emphasized the importance of self-examination and questioning one's own beliefs until his last breath. This philosophical approach had a lasting impact not only on Western thought but also on other philosophical traditions. I believe that 'following the evidence' is an important tool for understanding the conspiratorial mindset. The first Muslim philosopher Al-Kindi (d. 873), interpreting Socrates' understanding with Islam's concept of 'the pursuit of wisdom,' adopted the following principle in his book Al-Falsafah al-Ula: 'We should not be ashamed to accept the truth, even if it comes from distant nations and societies different from our own, and to embrace it wherever it comes from. For to the seeker of truth, there is nothing more valuable/prioritized than truth.' I believe the impact of these words on the formation of Islamic thought tradition is not sufficiently emphasized.
Underestimating the Seriousness of the Danger
Some skeptics accept climate change but argue that its effects are exaggerated or too uncertain to warrant action. They may even suggest that higher temperatures could bring benefits, such as longer growing seasons in some regions. However, this perspective ignores the broad consensus that negative impacts, such as more frequent and severe natural disasters, biodiversity loss, and rising sea levels, far outweigh any localized benefits.
Humanity's Role
Climate deniers often dispute the extent to which human activities contribute to climate change, suggesting that factors like solar radiation and volcanic activity play a more significant role. While it is true that these natural phenomena affect the climate, scientific research has shown that the dramatic increase in greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution, specifically since 1840, is the primary driver of the current warming trend.
Criticizing Solutions
There are also doubts regarding the effectiveness and economic impacts of climate change mitigation strategies. Critics argue that proposed solutions, such as transitioning to renewable energy, are too costly and could harm economies. They often advocate for adaptation rather than mitigation. While economic concerns are valid, the cost of inaction due to the effects of uncontrolled climate change is projected to be far higher. Investments in renewable energy also create new economic opportunities and job sectors.
Climate deniers and conspiracists often argue that scientific data on climate change is unreliable or has been manipulated. They may claim that the climate has always changed throughout Earth's history and that current changes are part of natural cycles. However, this argument ignores the overwhelming evidence from ice cores, sediment layers, and other geological data, which indicate that the current rate of climate change is unprecedented in the context of human civilization. Furthermore, numerous independent scientific organizations confirm the upward trends in global temperatures.
The overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that climate change is real, caused by human activities, and poses significant risks to the environment and humanity. Research by James McDonald from Stanford University also confirms this. According to him, despite a small number of studies suggesting the contrary, decades of research show an almost complete consensus on the reality of global warming. Surveys among the authors of relevant articles reveal that 99.96% of authors accept global warming, and 97% believe it is human-caused.
Science historian Prof. Dr. Naomi Oreskes from Harvard University examined the ISI (Institute for Scientific Information) database in 2004. Oreskes's review showed that none of the 928 articles written on human activities and global warming contradicted the widespread scientific consensus. These data were further supported by reviews in subsequent years. For instance, independent studies conducted in 2016 and 2021 similarly showed a consensus of over 97%.
Climate deniers often tend to misunderstand the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC is an organization established by the UN in 1988. Governments and climate experts from around the world nominate scientists for IPCC authorship. For example, the Sixth Assessment Report published in 2021 was compiled by 751 experts from over 60 countries (31 coordinating lead authors, 167 lead authors, 36 review editors, and 517 contributing authors). The authors collectively referenced over 14,000 scientific articles. In other words, the IPCC reports themselves are a comprehensive and reliable statement of consensus on the state of climate science.
Support for Climate Skepticism by Large Corporations
The role of capitalism and large corporations in financing and supporting climate denial movements has always been a critical element in shaping public discourse and policy on climate change. Historically, some large corporations, particularly those in the fossil fuel industry, have heavily invested in campaigns to cast doubt on climate science. They established panels of scientists. They waged a major struggle to protect their economic interests and delay policy changes that would affect their profits.
These companies contribute to the spread of misinformation about climate change in various ways, such as financing research that questions the scientific consensus on climate change, supporting think tanks and NGOs that promote climate skepticism, and lobbying against environmental regulations. The involvement of some scientists as consultants for these companies plays into the hands of climate deniers.
The book Merchants of Doubt (Pegasus, 2021), co-authored by Prof. Dr. Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, documents how a small but influential group of scientists, funded by corporate interests, obscured facts on various public health issues, including climate change. Furthermore, it reveals how these industries attempted to erode public trust in scientists by disseminating the idea that there was significant disagreement among scientists on climate change, contrary to the overwhelming consensus that actually existed. They are conducting a campaign similar to the one they previously ran concerning tobacco products, but now on climate.
Potential Benefits of Conspiracy Theories
As I stated earlier, I do not agree with the demonization and belittlement of those who produce and believe in conspiracy theories. When we listen to them carefully, I believe there are some legitimate and positive aspects. When used effectively, these theories can allow people to challenge and question existing power structures and authority hierarchies. Thus, demands for transparency regarding the policies of powerful groups, such as the state, may increase. Furthermore, by exposing contradictions and inconsistencies in official statements, they can open up discussions on issues often overlooked. They can expose collaborations and deceits made behind closed doors with large corporations, who are the true culprits of climate and environmental problems. Conspiracy theories can function as cognitive tools that help individuals understand complex social and political orders and can sometimes be considered a means to hold authorities accountable. In this context, we should be able to discuss conspiracy theories with a critical understanding, on a transparent and democratic platform with all parties, following the 'follow the evidence' approach. However, the harmful effects of conspiracy theories should not be ignored either. When these theories spread, they can lead to negative consequences in social, health, and political spheres, and can cost human lives. An important point here is to distinguish the fine line between denial and doubt. Methodical doubt is the first step of philosophy and science. Denial, however, is a matter of belief and ideology.
In conclusion, analytical and critical thinking can offer invaluable resources for confronting climate denial and conspiracy theories. Intuitive thinking, on the other hand, can help us sense the unseen, perceive dangers, and provide an initial reaction. One is the response of our mind, the other of our heart. In an era grappling with misinformation and polarization, it is essential to leverage the power of critical thought and philosophy, interpreting it with the legacy of our wisdom tradition, to base our understanding on science; to advance scientific understanding and address the urgent challenges posed by climate change.
Long before modern environmental problems emerged, Muslim societies built a civilization centered on mercy, in peace and harmony with nature and all creatures, guided by the Quran and Sunnah. Today, I see it as the duty of Muslim intellectuals to find solutions to the problems faced by Muslim societies and the world with a new spirit, without being enslaved by a conspiratorial mindset.