Analysis: Tactics Of Social Media Climate Deniers Have Shifted

There's still a TON of climate denial videos on
YouTube a recent studies says, but the tactics of
this crowd have changed. 

 YouTube can be a real cesspool at times, and so it is with climate change denial. 

As CNN reports, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) has their hands full studying climate denial on YouTube.   

Although, in what could be a tiny victory of sorts, at least the fact that climate change is actually real is acknowledged by these deniers, but it doesn't really help much.

Says CNN:

"Where once climate deniers would outright reject climate change as a hoax or scam, or claim that humans  were not responsible for it, many are now shifting to a different approach one which attempts to undermine climate science, cast doubt on climate solutions and even claim global warming will be beneficial at best, harmless at worst"

 That's not to say outright climate deniers have entirely gone away from social media. .When I"m on X, formerly Twitter, and want to do hashtag #ClimateChange or #ClimateCrisis, the algorithms on X always try to prompt me to write #ClimateHoax or #ClimateScam.

Sigh. 

An example of what CCDH is talking is cited in their report.  Glenn Beck always used to say the climate change is nonexistent. Now there's been a subtle change. Disasters widely believed to be worsened by climate change in Beck's mind have nothing to do with a warming world.  Beck said climate change did not cause "Maui's wildfires or ANY wildfires."

See the sleight of hand there?  It's actually true that climate change did not strike the match that set off these wildfires. So climate change did not "cause" the fires. But the reality is the wildfires would not have been anywhere near as disastrous without climate change. 

The slight shift in tactics on YouTube is probably less about acknowledging climate change and more about YouTube video creators trying to get around the social media company's ban on monetizing climate denial. It's all about fooling the algorithms. 

Here are the receipts from CCDH, as reported by CNN: 

"'New denial content - attacks on solutions, the science and the climate movement - now makes up 70 percent of all climate denial claims posted on YouTube, according to the report, up from 35 percent in 2018.

Assertions that 'global warming is not happening' one the main 'old denial' claims the analysis focused on, declined from 48 percent of all denial claims in 2018 to 14 percent in 2023, the report found. Claims that climate solutions won't work, however, soared from 9 percent to 30 percent over the same period."

The bottom line, says CCDH, YouTube is making up to $13.4 million a year from ads  on videos that have this new brand of climate denial.   

Glenn Beck and his Blaze TV on YouTube is one of the
leading purveyors of "new climate denial" on 
YouTube, which seeks to cast doubt on climate solutions.

The new climate denial is all about clicks, too.  The more "engagement" you get on social media, the more money you make. 

Climate denialists - and much of the right wing in general - LOVE conspiracy theories. Oh, and you get those with the new climate denial!   Here's Glenn Beck again, courtesy of a YouTube video by Beck highlighted in CCDH's report:

"In this video Glenn Beck, the founder of BlazeTV, claims that President Biden's government is using climate change as a cover to push for a great reset and government control. He states: 'They don't care about saving the planet. They know climate change is not going to kill millions around the world, this is all about gaining power and control over you......they are using this so-called emergency to justify a reset.'"

 The irony is climate change could conceivably and eventually have more control over your life than any current government attempts to blunt the effects of that climate change. 

In a statement to CNN, YouTube officials said they allow debate and discussions of climate change topics, including around public policy and research.

Sure, all that is fine. We should be debating public policy on climate change. But where do you draw the line?

I think it's easy to draw the distinction between public policy debate and gaslighting. For instance, during a January Arctic cold snap, there was a lot of social media and news discussion about how EV technology isn't good enough yet to make them efficient in cold weather. 

That to me is a valid enough topic. That's a far cry from the opposite extreme, which would be something ridiculous like stating we should ban research on any technology that would combat climate change. Or worse, just forget about doing anything about the problem. 

Yes, I suppose people in the United States do have the First Amendment right to lie. But is it ethical given the dangers posed by climate change?  

Dumbest Religious Climate Takes Will At Least Entertain Us

The dumb hot climate takes just keep on coming. Photo
by Pete Foley/Getty Images/Flickr RF

 I've gotten used to some really, really dumb takes on climate change. 

Everything from bringing a snowball into the U.S. Senate on a chilly February day to "prove" climate change doesn't exist to hapless Pennsylvania man who said an increase in tornadoes in the eastern United States is due to the proliferation of roundabouts that are replacing four-way intersections. 

Sadly, I am not making this up. 

The most strident climate deniers more often than not invoke God and the Bible in their "solid proof" of climate change being a hoax. 

Most seriously religious people are pretty intelligent and have a good grasp on reality. Some on the other hand, oy vey. 

I got a couple new ones that really have me shaking my head. 

As JoeMyGod and others reports, Pennsylvania GOP state Rep. Stephanie Borowicz tells us we have nothing to worry about climate change, because it doesn't exist! The Bible says so! 

Here's what she said: 

"When Democrats are pushing bills like banning gas-powered mowers and gas powered stoves in New York City, all under the name of a climate control agenda, we can all see that is really going on here.

The truth is, is in Genesis 8:22 it says, 'as long as the Earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease.'

I'll say that again, 'will never cease.' Of course, we are to be good stewards of God's creation, but not through a forceful climate control global agenda."

I'm losing brain cells doing this, but I'll spell it out for our friend Stephanie. Whoever wrote that Bible passage was being Captain Obvious. There's winter and summer. You plant seeds in the spring and you harvest crops toward autumn. It's daytime unless it's night. 

Is she saying climate change doesn't exist because there are seasons? Or it doesn't exist because winter is colder than summer?  Is it just me or am I not following her leaps of logic? 

Probably my favorite response to her nonsense was a comment on X by somebody with the handle @SkyWasYellow:

"So, by the word of Genesis, harvests could drop to such low levels that mass starvation occurs, but since they didn't 'cease' all is well? And cold and heat still exist as extreme droughts and blizzards, as a result of climate change, but all is well because it didn't 'cease'?"

There was another religious hot take on climate change in the past week, too. 

The esteemed climate expert and Illinois Rep. Chris Miller, a Republican announced the other day that climate change doesn't exist because God made trees.

Said Miller: "We're not having a climate crisis.....Green leafy plants actually absorb carbon dioxide and produce oxygen. It's the way God made it.'"

I'm picking on the dude, but let's be clear: I'm not picking on trees. I love trees. And they do absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen. Trees are our allies. 

But there's only so much trees can do. Before we started burning fossil fuels like crazy, trees were part of the system that kept the world's climate relatively stable. 

Besides, if Miller is such a fan of trees, why isn't he upset that humans are mowing down the Amazon forest?

These shysters always invoke God. Many people are serious about the Bible, for good reason. But you know somebody is bullshitting you when they do more flips in their mind to "explain" the Bible than the real physical flips the cast of Circ du Soleil perform. 

It's their lame way to think they have the final word. They make up something out of thin air they claim that God and the Bible said. And that's supposed to be the final word because Jesus. Or something.  

Or they are grifters using the tried and true method of using a false god to gaslight people. 

This isn't a rant about religious people. It's the  ones who yell and scream about how pious they are that sends my bullcrap meter into overdrive. The truly religious lead their lives in concert with their beliefs and not take talking points from the fossil fuel industry bosses.

So here's my question: What would Jesus do?