Video description

Attacks on scientists and their research are very common in the public debate surrounding global warming. It doesn't matter if these attacks have merit or make sense, just as long as they confuse the public it's considered a success. Especially the papers that communicate the science very clearly or highlight the tenuous position of science deniers get attacked.

In this arena two papers by Stephan Lewandowsky stand out by the sheer tenacity and vitriolic nature of the attacks. In this interview Stephan tells about the results he and his co-authors found and how science deniers responded to these papers. The story about how the journal handled the backlash from science deniers is chilling for its implications for scientific research.

Sources

1. NASA Faked the Moon Landing − Therefore, (Climate) Science Is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science
2. Recursive fury: Conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation (hosted by University of Western Australia, includes their statement)
3. Recursive fury: Conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation (archived)
4. Retraction: Recursive fury: conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation (archived)

Media resources

Interviews filmed in collaboration with University of Queensland and Skeptical Science. Full interviews available April 2015 in 'Making Sense of Climate Science Denial'.

Camera B interview footage provided by Peter Sinclair of Climate Denial Crock of the Week and Yale Climate Connections.

1. Stars by Thomas Bresson (archived)
2. good season to see moon by harum.koh (archived)