Why does organized opposition to climate science persist long after the scientific consensus has become clear? This project examines the experiences, political networks, and institutional interests that keep skepticism politically consequential.
Debates over climate change are also contests over expertise, political identity, economic interests, and the authority of institutions. Green Deceit asks how expert and nonexpert dissenters can become part of the same public countermovement—and why these arguments continue to shape political choices.
The book project brings together the backgrounds of climate contrarians, Americans’ formative experiences with science and government, the organizations that amplify dissent, and the policy stakes of sustained controversy.
Memories, movements, and money are treated as connected lines of inquiry—not as a single explanation that applies to every skeptic.
Formative experiences—from the atomic age and the Vietnam War to Watergate and environmental crises—may shape later perceptions of scientific and governmental authority. The project considers collective memory alongside age, identity, and worldviews.
Contrarian arguments move through think tanks, advocacy groups, ideological communities, public signatories, and political communications. The project traces the relationships that allow expert and nonexpert voices to reinforce one another.
Industry affiliations, organized funding, and political incentives help situate climate dissent in a broader system of influence. The project examines connections rather than assuming every individual is motivated by the same interest.
The project draws on political behavior, survey research, the study of organized dissent, and historical analysis. Its starting point is a published study of individuals endorsing public statements that challenge the climate-science consensus.
Related work explores how views of scientific expertise differ across people and generations. Draft chapters extend this discussion to collective memories and the political consequences of contrarian advocacy.
Political and scientific events that can shape perceptions of authority.
Prior knowledge, ideological commitments, and confidence in institutions.
Networks, funding, and strategic communication that circulate claims.
The conditions under which public controversy affects policymaking.
This sequence illustrates the book's questions; it does not assert that each link has been established as causal.
One draft chapter follows climate advocacy and obstruction through the international climate-negotiation process and U.S. environmental politics. It asks how organized opposition influences the terms of debate, the design of agreements, and the political space available for mitigation.
The larger question is not whether scientific consensus exists. It is why consensus alone is often insufficient to produce a common public understanding or a durable policy response.
Who is recognized as a credible scientific voice, and on what grounds?
How do existing experiences and group identities shape the reception of scientific claims?
How does organized debate affect the timing, scope, and feasibility of climate-policy choices?
The book grows from a peer-reviewed study by Laura D. Young and Erin B. Fitz. The published article is distinct from the book manuscript, which remains in development.
Young and Fitz examine signatories of climate-contrarian statements, assessing relevant expertise and connections with organized groups and industries. Their analysis finds that only a small fraction of signatories in the documents studied met the climate-expert criteria used in the paper. This is a finding about that selected sample of signatories, not a statement that 3% of all scientists reject climate science.
Open the published journal article ↗Green Deceit: The Memories, Movements, and Money Behind Climate Change Denial is a book project developed by Laura D. Young and Erin B. Fitz. The public overview above is based on working proposals and chapter drafts; the draft materials are not presented as finished or published scholarship. For information about the project, contact Laura D. Young.
← Return to selected research projects