In recent years, the spread of conspiracy theories amid escalating climate disasters and their aftermath has become a concerning trend. 

 

During the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season in the United States, misinformation and disinformation about Hurricanes Helene and Milton circulated widely on social media, falsely alleging they were “geo-engineered” and intentionally aimed at predominantly Republican regions. These baseless claims fueled confusion, toxic online debates, and impeded relief and recovery efforts. 

 

Similarly, as wildfires continue in Los Angeles, Americans are witnessing a surge in rumors, half-truths, and conspiracy theories. 

 

In Canada, the situation is equally troubling. Conspiracy theories have surfaced accusing “green terrorists” of causing the worsening wildfire seasons. During the 2024 Jasper wildfire, some users on X (formerly Twitter) alleged that the disaster was part of a scheme by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to control Albertans. 

 

These widespread conspiracy theories represent an evolved form of climate change denialism and highlight the growing challenges faced by scholars and practitioners in climate change communication. 

 

As researchers specializing in climate change communication and environmental sociology, we aim to analyze the rise of online climate conspiracy theories fueled by denialism and propose ways to combat misinformation. 

 

Climate Change Denialism ‘

 

Psychological theories like identity-protective cognition and system justification suggest that people are inclined to accept information aligning with their existing beliefs, cultural norms, and identities while rejecting evidence that contradicts them. 

 

Politically, climate mitigation has often been framed by right-wing populism as a political agenda imposed by “elites” (such as climate advocates and experts) to undermine the will of “the people.” This framing polarizes climate change, making it a divisive issue tied to broader ideological divides. 

 

Elaborate conspiracy theories complicate distinguishing between credible and unreliable information sources. They erode trust in scientists and scientific evidence, impede public acceptance of climate science, and hinder the adoption of mitigation strategies. Moreover, such beliefs deepen distrust in institutions and governments, obstructing collective action needed to address climate change effectively. 

 

Comparative Context: Canada and the United States 

 

While political leanings significantly shape climate change beliefs and trust in information sources in both Canada and the United States, Canada-specific factors also play a role. Regional attitudes toward climate change are closely tied to economic interests, particularly those of the fossil fuel industry. 

 

For example, sociologist Timothy J. Haney’s research on the 2013 southern Alberta flood found that victims often doubted the scientific consensus on climate change and defended the oilsands industry. Similarly, political scientist Louis Massé’s research highlights how Alberta’s regionalism fosters skepticism, suppressing discussions about comprehensive climate and sustainability policies. 

 

Additionally, corporate power in Canada’s fossil fuel sector has been a significant force in maintaining the status quo and resisting climate action. The higher degree of corporate concentration in Canada compared to the U.S. has enabled a small number of companies to exert considerable influence, delaying government efforts to address climate change. 

 

Challenges in Climate Change Communication 

 

The rise of conspiracy theories presents significant hurdles for effective climate change communication. Communicating climate science in a clear and accessible way is vital but insufficient for two reasons. 

 

First, online harassment, trolling, and even death threats targeting climate scientists discourage their public engagement. Second, platforms like X and Meta have weakened their fact-checking mechanisms, making them breeding grounds for misinformation and extremism. 

 

For instance, Meta recently announced it would replace its collaboration with third-party fact-checkers with a community notes system. However, similar tools on X have proven inadequate in curbing viral misinformation. Additionally, some platforms’ algorithms, such as TikTok’s, have been accused of amplifying conspiracy theories, as seen during the L.A. wildfires. 

 

Policy and Public Action 

 

To combat climate change denialism, proactive policy interventions are essential. Governments must adopt measures to reduce political divisions and rebuild public trust in experts and institutions. 

 

A survey by think tank The Dais revealed strong public support for government action against online harms, including misinformation and disinformation. Canada’s proposed Online Harms Act, aimed at regulating harmful online content, is still under parliamentary review. However, the bill has faced criticism for not holding social media companies sufficiently accountable for the damage caused by false information. 

 

While legislative solutions face challenges, climate communication experts can play a critical role in promoting digital literacy. Initiatives should encourage individuals to verify information, cross-reference sources, and critically evaluate emotional appeals. These steps are crucial for mitigating the harmful impact of conspiracy theories during climate disasters.