No one knows more about atmospheric chemisty and geology than Donald Trump, no one. So when he declares that, you know, the earth may be warming but it probably isn’t due to humans and will likely correct itself, the scientific community should pay attention to the pre-eminent scientfic mind of our generation. We should adopt proven forest management strategies like leaf raking to limit any adverse effects of raging fires that may accompany this inexplicable climate blip.
Ok, sarcasm is oozing off my keyboard. Many politicians and quasi-scientists have doubted the consensus scientific view that humans are causing global warming and climate change so it is maybe unfair to blame it all on Trump. I would call climate denial a pattern among certain political demographics but obviously those who deny climate science don't believe in inference from patterns.
Something I find funny albeit simultaneously depressing is that there are many more outlandish scientific claims that I have never heard challenged by a single politician.
1. A photon until measured can exist In two places at once.
2. It’s impossible to go faster than light
3. Matter cannot be destroyed only converted into energy
4. Objects bend space and space curvature is what we experience as gravity
5. There are more particiles of water in a gallon of water than there are gallons of water in all of the earth’s oceans (by a rather big factor).
Ok, add your own. They are likely better than mine. But I would find climate change deniers as possessing a bit more integrity (albeit still dead wrong) if they adopted a more pan-skeptical approach to the science paradigms of the day. The politician that rejects climate science should also voice their disagreement with the tenets of quantum mechanics, relativity and obviously string theory. That the vibations of of primordial strings gave rise to matter and the physical constants of the universe? That seems a no-brainer to reject for someone who is a climate change denier.
What about dark matter and dark energy? That the bulk of the universe’s mass is composed of stuff that no one can see and we can only infer its presence through gravitational effects? If a politican stood up and said, “Look I understand there’s lots of scientists who believe in dark matter, but I’m just not buying it” I would have a little sympathy with that position. You either accept that the scientific method and scientific project gives rise to genuine knowledge or you don’t.
Of course, most of us already know climate change denial has nothing to do with doubting science and everything to do with money. If you are going to doubt one scientific theory due to epistemic grounds it surely should not be climate change.