Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Otheus (talk | contribs) at 18:39, 28 February 2007 (nominated for deletion: see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Denialism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Misplaced Pages's deletion policy.
You may share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.
Please improve the article if possible, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion.

Steps to list an article for deletion: {{subst:afd}} • Preloaded debate OR {{subst:afd2|pg=Denialism|cat=|text=}} ~~~~ • {{subst:afd3|pg=Denialism}} log

Denialism occurs when government, business or interest groups purposefully seek to publicly deny or discount the findings of social or scientific research, and influence the way the research is disseminated, reported, interpreted and acted upon in the formulation of public policy. Common forms of denialism are holocaust denial, AIDS reappraisal, global warming controversy, and the creation-evolution controversy.

Introduction

Denialism is a form of propaganda, and covers a spectrum of activities from simply like-minded individuals signing letters of dissent to elaborate and professional grey or black propaganda campaigns that incorporate legitimate advertising and marketing agencies using false flag tactics.

Denialism can arise from personal ideologies, corporations seeking greater profits or to safeguard profits, industry groups seeking to protect markets from damaging facts and information, political groups seeking to further agendas, or combinations of these working in concert as interest groups on issues of mutual interest. Despite the disparity between these groups and the motives behind them, the tactics used by denialists are largely similar. Common features include:

• Conspiracy - Such as suggesting scientists have an ulterior motive for their research or they are part of some hidden plan or agenda.
• Selectivity - Relying upon discredited or flawed work supporting their idea while dismissing more credible work or presenting discredited or superseded papers to make a field look like it's based on weak research. The selective use of evidence by denialists includes quote mining and cherry picking.
• False experts - Citing paid, partisan scientists or self-appointed 'experts,' often from an unrelated field, inflating favorable 'evidence' while discounting the contradictory, often while misrepresenting the significance of each.
• Impossible expectations - Seeking to prevent the implementation of sound policies or acceptance of a theory by citing the absence of 'complete' or 'absolute' knowledge.
• Misrepresentations and logical fallacies - Denialists sometimes employ one or more of these logical fallacies: red herring, straw man, appeal to consequences, and argument by metaphor. An example of the misuse of metaphors and analogies is the watchmaker analogy. An example of an appeal to consequences is the common neo-creationist claim that an acceptance of evolution (or Darwinism) leads to social ills such as the atrocities committed by Hitler's Nazi regime.

Additional denialist techniques that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid include: flag-waving, glittering generalities, intentional vagueness, oversimplification, rationalization, slogans, stereotyping, testimonial, unstated assumption.

Ideological denialism

Ideologies that conflict with commonly accepted scientific theories or facts can drive their holders to engage in personal forms of denial to favor personal beliefs or to avoid having to reconcile those beliefs with evidence that contradicts them.

Common forms of denialism arising from ideologies are holocaust denial, AIDS reappraisal, and the creation-evolution controversy.

Corporate denialism

This type of denialism often is the most elaborate form, involving the setting up of fake citizens' groups and bogus scientific bodies and the publishing and marketing of their 'findings' and activities. A notable form of denialism associated with a particular industry is the Global warming controversy, where energy sector interest groups and corporations have sought to sow doubt about whether serious action needs to be taken on climate change in an attempt to safeguard the industries' profits.

Political denialism

Some consider the current Bush Administration's replacement of previous science advisors with industry experts or scientists tied to industry and its refusal to submit the Kyoto Protocol for ratification due to uncertainties they assert are present in the climate change issue as examples politically-motivated denialism.

Cranks

Denialism is also a trait common to cranks. This form of denialism of takes the form of conspiracy theories, such as the government blew up the World Trade Center, not terrorists, and the Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations.

See also

• Anti-intellectualism
• Astroturfing
• Disinformation
• False flag
• Fear, uncertainty and doubt
• Politicization of science
• Politics of global warming
• Propaganda
• Revisionism

References

1. Denialists Give Up Blog, September 19, 2006.
2. Does Darwinism Devalue Human Life? Richard Weikart. The Human Life Review. Discovery Institute, March 1 2004.

External links

• The denial industry, The Guardian, 19 September 2006
• ExxonSecrets.org, Using data found in Exxon official documents, this site lists those organizations that have either taken money from Exxon or that work closely with those that have, and which present unfavorable findings from other organizations as "junk science" while labelling the findings they welcome as "sound science"
• Denialists Give Up Blog.
• The Denialists' Deck of Cards explains how corporate lobbyists use denialism tactics to defeat reform legislation.

• Politics by issue
• Science in society