New research shows how 'teleological thinking' means that conspiracists are more likely to also be creationists.
The environmental responsibility some businesses say they embrace is only a veneer.
A scholar of climate misinformation campaigns explains how, in part, the large gap in public opinion on global warming emerged since a scientist's landmark clarion call for action.
Facts will only get you so far when it comes to climate change. To get conservatives on side, climate communicators must focus on the values conservatives hold dear, such as preserving the status quo.
Why do some people reject scientifically accepted ideas? A psychotherapist points to black-and-white thinking as part of the explanation.
Most of us lack the expertise to evaluate climate science, but there are ways anyone can spot a badly reasoned argument.
While Tony Abbott's London climate speech has been widely criticised, research suggests his views have long had a sympathetic ear in Australia's coal heartland.
Tony Abbott will deliver a speech to the Global Warming Policy Foundation. Has the human weathervane stopped spinning? What does it mean for climate politics?
Some claim that scientists avoid publishing results that go against the consensus on man-made climate change. But this is simply untrue.
It would take a lifestyle upheaval to drop most Australians' household emissions to a sustainable level. Even many of us who urge equitable action on climate change act as if this doesn't apply to us.
A new study confirms what many already know: Exxon for years sowed uncertainty and doubt about climate change in the public. Should scientists reject certain funding sources?
While climate denialism impedes policymaking in both the US and Australia, there are key differences in their political and public cultures.
People universally believe scientists' solar eclipse calendars, but vaccine warnings or climate predictions are forms of science that strangely do not enjoy equivalent acceptance.
Three years ago The Australian newspaper launched a broadside at the Bureau of Meteorology. But when it did it again this week, it seemed to get less traction from the top echelons of government.
The undermining of environmental science, and the creation of lies and bribes to distort public policymaking, is as old as industries that know their products do harm, but lie to keep them in use.
If the G20 is to remain relevant in the quest for more inclusive and fair global governance, Africa offers an historic opportunity for collective action, despite the absence of the US under Trump.
While many people are willing to happily gamble with pharmaceuticals, which may offer the most trivial of benefits, they are not ready to believe the facts on climate change.
Does science have an answer to science denial? Just as being vaccinated protects you from a later full-blown infection, a bit of misinformation explained could help ward off other cases down the road.
Insisting that science has a monopoly on the truth invalidates dissent and undermines what should be an open dialogue between science and society.
What if extreme weather events could be attributed to human-induced climate change with confidence?