Establishing the Right Misinformation
The role of the Government Office for Science
Posted on 31 Jul 25
by John RidgwayIn Uncategorized
What impact do climate change misinformation and disinformation have? The only reason why I ask is because the UK government is confident it knows the answer and I was just wondering whether you do too. I am guessing that you don’t. After all, how could you, given that you weren’t there back in June 2023 to attend a Government Office for Science meeting specifically convened to answer that very question? Meetings such as these, in which a selected few scientists are invited to brief the government, are actually a very common practice – governments just love their scientific advisory boards. How else do you think the UK managed to steer its path through the minefield that was the Covid-19 pandemic without putting a foot wrong? And how else do you think they are going to deliver Net Zero and save the world with nary a false step to be taken? Yes, they are going to call lots of Mt Sinai style meetings, attended by the lucky few who get to thrash out the approved scientific doctrine and then etch it in stone for the benefit of any government that has a penchant for claiming a scientific basis for its latest madcap impositions.
So what of this June 2023 meeting — you know, the one convened to ask what impact do climate change misinformation and disinformation have? Exactly what pearls of wisdom were passed from its lofty height down to us mere mortals? Who exactly were the scientific high priests convened for this occasion and what body of evidence did they summon? Well, if you want answers to these questions you need to consult the government’s own Government Office for Science website. Alternatively, you can place your faith in my pledge not to misinform you, and just continue reading this article. I promise you, I will only miss out the boring and less relevant stuff.
Firstly, I’m going to skip over a number of ‘key points’ relating to “Evidence for the impact of misinformation and disinformation”, since I feel they are rather uncontroversial. For example, I do not intend disputing that there have been examples of misinformation that have had serious consequences. And when they say that finding a correlation between misinformation and behavioural change isn’t proof of causation, how could anyone disagree? Behaviours have a number of drivers and it is all rather a complicated business. They also point out that most of the research has been based in the West, particularly the US, and so it may not readily transfer. Other non-contentious claims include the insight that the influence of misinformation depends upon an individual’s susceptibility. Who knew? In fact, there was quite a bit that came out of the meeting that didn’t appear to require professorial levels of attention. So far, I don’t think the attendees have even earned the finger buffet that was no doubt laid on for them.
The more interesting stuff comes under the heading “Misinformation, disinformation, and the climate”. But before I get into that, I think it is high time that we took a look at some of the stars of the show.
https://cliscep.com/2025/07/31/establishing-the-right-misinformation/
