Denialism

Denialism is the refusal to accept well-established theory, law, fact, or evidence. The word "denialist" has pejorative connotations.
In scientific contexts, the denialist can deny a cause (carbon dioxide does not cause global warming), an effect (the Earth is not warming), the association between the two (CO2 levels are rising and the Earth is warming, but not because of the carbon dioxide), the direction of the cause-and-effect relationship (carbon dioxide concentrations are increasing because the earth is warming), or the identification of the cause-and-effect relationship (other factors than greenhouse gases are causing the Earth to warm). Often denialists practice minimization ("the Earth is warming, but it's not harmful") and use misplaced skepticism to give an unwarranted veneer of scientific thinking.
Major scientific targets of denialism include evolution, global warming, the link between HIV and AIDS, the link between smoking and lung cancer, and evidence that there is no correlation between vaccination and autism. Often, self-interest is the motivation behind denialism, hence politicization or financially motivated arguments often come into play. For example, tobacco companies denied the smoking-lung cancer link (even though they were well-aware of it for decades) as it would have hurt their profits. Likewise, Andrew Wakefield had a strong conflict of interest in ensuring that people didn't take established and effective vaccines. Similarly, global-warming denialists tend to oppose solutions which aim to address the problem (see the logical fallacy of argument from adverse consequences), and get support from energy conglomerates and others who could lose financially from reductions in fossil-fuel use. Because of financial incentive, denialism can take the form of the accounting known as (a form of negative externality), , someone else will pay for the costs while the company/denier takes the profits — a future generation, a different stock holder, the government, or an innocent bystander.
Politicians use variations of the phrase "I'm not a scientist but…" to proclaim that they are proudly and willfully ignorant of science while at the same time sportingly showing willingness to offer policy opinions in other areas where they also have no expertise, especially economics or religion. The proudly ignorant have included a frightening cast of Republicans, including Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, John Boehner, Rick Scott, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry, and Marco Rubio.Why Do Republicans Always Say "I'm Not a Scientist"? by Jonathan Chait (May 30, 2014) New York Magazine.Texas' Perry on reparative therapy: "I don't know": The "I'm not a scientist" meme appears to have unusually broad applicability. by Steve Benen (June 16, 2014, 1:59 PM PDT) MSNBC."I'm Not a Scientist" Know Your Meme.n DC, Gov. Rick Perry talks 2016, Ted Cruz, climate change, border security by Todd J. Gillman (12:51 pm on June 19, 2014) Dallas Morning News (archived from August 18, 2014).When It Comes to Climate Change, GOP Candidates are the Mad Not-A-Scientists Hillary Clinton Campaign (archived from February 9, 2016).
Denialism on the left has also been a serious problem, albeit primarily focusing on those oh-so-evil "GMO"s and other supposed threats to public health while extolling anything and everything that is (often vaguely defined as) "natural"."Democrats have a problem with science too. Politico Magazine. Published on June 1, 2014. Accessed on June 23, 2021. For instance, Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) infamously championed a wide variety of medical quackery and forced the Office of Alternative Medicine, which became the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), into the National Institutes of Health. The NCCAM has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars in fruitless efforts to "validate" the patently absurd which have nevertheless given much credence to medical quackery and even the licensure of acupuncturists, naturopaths, and other quacks. Gorski, David. "Senator Tom Harkin: 'Disappointed' that NCCAM hasn’t 'validated' more CAM". Science-Based Medicine. Published on March 1, 2009. Accessed on June 23, 2021.
Denial of fact is one of the foundations of woo. Denialism can also fill a deep psychological need, as in the question of why one's child has autism — since in reality there is no known easy answer.For a brief discussion of this, along with some commentary from the psychological literature, see MacKenzie, Debora. "Whose conspiracy?" New Scientist 15 May 2010, 38-40.
==Methods==
Mark and Chris Hoofnagle at Denialism Blog use their "Denialists' Deck of Cards" seriesThe Denialists' Deck of Cards: An Illustrated Taxonomy of Rhetoric Used to Frustrate Consumer Protection Efforts by Chris Jay Hoofnagle with Mark Hoofnagle (February 9, 2007) Science Blogs (archived from August 8, 2014). to describe how denialists of all stripes use remarkably similar tactics. Denialists often claim that an established set of knowledge or scientific theory is not proven or "sound" and lacks evidence (or enough evidence). They say it is a controversy, requires balance, or requires both the strengths and weaknesses to be considered. These tactics make the denialists appear "fair" (and those who oppose them not) and implies doubt in what is being denied with no consideration of evidence. Denialist groups also produce competing evidence through their own "research", which is often poorly performed (if at all), as it often is done by public relations firms with no technical expertise. They encourage people to form their own opinions or do their own tests, rather than relying on studies with appropriate methods and controls. Lists of experts (who may have no credentials in the area) are compiled as testimonials, or public relations campaigns are used to improve denialists' images (and slime legitimate scholars). Actual errors in mainstream science will often be blown out of proportion.Common Denialist Tactics Defined and Destroyed by emilskeptic (November 10, 2011) Debunking Denialism. Most denialist rhetoric is focused at the layperson and not the expert, and usually paints a contrast between two positions rather than being about one point-of-view. The use of self-generated content on the Internet ("Web 2.0") unfortunately contributes to the dissemination of denialist arguments.Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm – An overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement by Anna Kata (2012) Vaccine 30(25):3778-3789. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.11.112.
Leah Ceccarelli describes the rhetoric of denialists: 
Diethelm and McKee introduced the five tactics of denialists, originally described by Mark Hoofnagle,About by Mark Hoofnagle (April 30, 2007) Denialism Blog. into the scientific literature:Diethelm, Pascal; McKee, Martin. "Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?" European Journal of Public Health 2009(19): 2-4.
#The identification of perceived conspiracies. This includes belief of corrupted peer review and inversionism (, attributing some of one's own characteristics and motivations to others).A detailed account of conspiracies in science can be found in EMBO Reports: Goertzel, Ted. "Conspiracy Theories in Science." EMBO reports (2010) 11, 493-499.
#The use of fake experts (often with the of real experts).
#Selecting or cherry picking sources: picking the weakest papers or only ones that are contrary. Particularly worrisome is looking at only a single study, especially in medicine, as one study rarely conclusively proves something.Kalichman, Seth. "Denying AIDS Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience and Human Tragedy". Chapter 6. Text provided on www.thebody.com Others note that this includes anecdotal evidence and quote mining.The denialists by PZ Myers (September 19, 2006 10:00 AM) Pharyngula (archived from March 7, 2007).
#Demanding impossible standards for research.
#Use of fallacy, including misrepresentation and false analogy.Denialists (September 19, 2006) Give Up Blog. Informally, this can include a witch's brew of half-truths and sob stories. and/or spin to try to force the public to ignore an important issue.
An example of AIDS-HIV denialist rhetoric is from Herbert Vilakazi:
==Plausible deniability==
Plausible deniability is a method used to evade blame, wherein the perpetrator gives a statement that claims innocence, preferably using the fallacy of ambiguity, so as to allow deniability. The political use of this strategy was explicitly formulated by Lee Atwater in developing the Southern Strategy used by the GOP.
Historian Timothy Snyder suggested that Vladimir Putin's "direct assault on factuality might be called implausible deniability." By denying what everyone knew [about the Russian invasion of Ukraine], Putin was creating unifying fictions at home and dilemmas in European and American newsrooms."The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America by Timothy Snyder (2018) Tim Duggan Books. ISBN 0525574468. The reason that Putin's assault on truth was a dilemma for legitimate journalists was because journalists expect their news sources to "accept the factuality of the world and interpret the same set of facts", they are therefore trained to report on multiple sides of a story. When one side of a story has disregard for the truth and is spreading disinformation, it becomes the balance fallacy. The intent of implausible deniability is generally in the furtherance of fake news, and is one of the primary rhetorical instruments of RT.
==Denialism vs. skepticism==
It is possible to conflate skepticism and denialism, as proponents of both seem to "deny" that something exists until they're convinced otherwise. Denialists themselves often claim to be skeptics, and very rarely self-identify as denialists. But to say that a skeptic is a homeopathy denier and that a Holocaust denier is skeptical would be wrong. 
While both have a negative or critical tone, the positions are different in how they view and acquire and interpret data. Skepticism is a method while denialism is a position. The opposite of "skeptic" is not "believer", and it is possible to embrace something while remaining skeptical. This is an essential part of the ethos of science as it suggests new experiments to strengthen or falsify a proposition. Skeptics look at experiments to ensure that they were performed properly with the appropriate controls, proper data analysis, and so on. The skeptical method involves examining all data and coming to a conclusion that it produces. Denialists, on the other hand, view data slightly differently, as a means to a predetermined end – minimizing its importance if it goes against their opinion, highlighting it if it supports them, or just plain misrepresenting it for their own purposes. Skeptics keep an open mind until data shows that a hypothesis is invalid, while denialists start with the conclusion and look for support. To put it another way, denialism embraces confirmation bias while skepticism seeks to avoid it.
One blogger put it this way:
And another blogger:
The scientific community's response to the possibility of an arsenic-based life form is a current example of skepticism.Of arsenic and aliens: What the critics said by Carl Zimmer (December 8th, 2010 4:57 PM) Discover Magazine (archived from November 30, 2011). Take Carl Zimmer:
Denialism also differs from legitimate historical revisionism in that the latter acknowledges that a historical event occurred, but uses a different interpretation of evidence. Denialism is usually historical negationism.
==See also==
==External links==
*Michael Specter's TED talk on science denial
*Denialism blog's list of denialist organizations
*Naomi Oreskes on denialist tactics and global warming
*The Science of Why We Deny Science by Chris Mooney
*Skepticism and Denial by Steven Novella, compares AIDS denial, mental illness denial, evolution denial/creationism, and Holocaust denial.
*Science Controversies Past and Present by Steven Sherwood in Physics Today
*5 Characteristics of Scientific Denialism, Skeptical Science
*Ahmed Ezz el-Arab, leader of the Egyptian party Wafd, denies the reality of the Holocaust, the authenticity of The Diary of Anne Frank and the authenticity of Babylonian exile antiquities uncovered in an archaeological excavation beneath the al Aksa Mosque
*Climate of Doubt, a Frontline report on climate change denialism
*How to be a Real Sceptic at RealClimate
==Notes==
==References==
 
Category:Anti-intellectualism
 
Category:Pseudoscience