'We have a target on our backs': Scientists dread new era of Donald Trump's climate denialism

The president-elect has called climate science a 'giant scam' and when last in office sought to gut US scientific funding and sidelined or even punished scientists deemed unfriendly to the interests of the chemical and fossil fuel industries
'We have a target on our backs': Scientists dread new era of Donald Trump's climate denialism

Driven Scientific Ideologically More A Sort Vucci Staff The Firing Budgets Administration Mass America’s And Given Munity Collective Ap/evan Federal Prospect An Trump Slashing Attack Has Of Picture: Of Anxiety Even

As the world’s largest gathering of Earth and space scientists swarmed a Washington venue last week, the packed halls have been permeated by an air of anxiety and even dread over a new Donald Trump presidency that might worsen what has been a bruising few years for science.

The annual American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting drew a record 31,000 attendees this year for the unveiling of a slew of new research on everything from seismology to climate science to heliospheric physics, alongside a sprawling trade show and bouts of networking as scientists jostle to advance their work.

As students and grizzled researchers huddled around pin-boarded presentations in a cavernous exhibition space, however, one person dominated muttered conversations: Trump. The president-elect has called climate science a “giant scam” and when last in office sought to gut US scientific funding and sidelined or even punished scientists deemed unfriendly to the interests of the chemical and fossil fuel industries.

The prospect of an even more ideologically driven Trump administration slashing budgets and mass-firing federal staff has given America’s scientific community a sort of collective anxiety attack. 

“We all feel like we have a target on our backs,” said one National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist, who added agency staff were already seeking to “pivot” by replacing mentions of the climate crisis with more acceptable terms such as “air quality”.

'Some of the signals coming out right now make people nervous about what’s going to happen to their jobs, their livelihoods, let alone what their science.'
'Some of the signals coming out right now make people nervous about what’s going to happen to their jobs, their livelihoods, let alone what their science.'

“My god, it’s so depressing,” said another federal scientist about the incoming administration. A doctoral candidate, when asked about entering the workforce under Trump, simply puffed her cheeks and groaned. 

“If someone offered me a departmental position now, I’d jump,” said one Nasa researcher. “It’s hard, particularly for younger people. Hopefully we will survive it all.” 

The challenges posed by the incoming administration barely featured in the official AGU programme, which was more focused on highlighting new research — from a dire new warning about the melting Arctic to innovations that leverage artificial intelligence — and general boosterism of the value of science to our lives. But the leadership of the organisation acknowledged there was a sense of unease.

“Some of the signals coming out right now make people nervous about what’s going to happen to their jobs, their livelihoods, let alone what their science is,” said Ben Zaitchik, a climate scientist who will be president-elect of the AGU next year. 

“You could say people are feeling beleaguered or besieged, but many are also motivated. At the same time, it’s a time of transition. So we just don’t know.” 

Trump — through his alteration of hurricane maps with a Sharpie pen, staring with uncovered eyes at a solar eclipse and suggestion disinfectant injections could cure covid-19 — is seen by many at the meeting as a catalyst of scientific contrarianism.

This has been underscored by the nomination of Robert F Kennedy, who holds an array of conspiracy theories about vaccines, wind farms and chemtrails, as the nominee for the US’s new health secretary, as well as Trump’s promise this week to cast aside environmental reviews for “any person or company investing ONE BILLION DOLLARS, OR MORE, in the United States of America”.

But scientists in the US face a broader crisis beyond the next president, amid a swirl of misinformation and declining trust in the profession among the American public. Overall, trust in scientists has fallen by 10% since the pandemic, polling has shown, with a growing partisan gap emerging in how science is viewed; nearly four in 10 Republicans now say they have little to no confidence in scientists acting in the public’s best interests.

“When we get that kind of polling data, it is concerning,” acknowledged Lisa Graumlich, a paleoclimatologist and the current AGU president. 

Gone, it seems, are the halcyon days of celebrity 19th-century scientists such as Charles Darwin and Alexander von Humboldt, or even the reception to the polio vaccine in the 1950s, which was greeted with ringing church bells, with its inventor, Jonas Salk, routinely being greeted with applause and handshakes when he was seen in public.

Anthony Fauci, the face of the US response to the covid pandemic, requires round-the-clock security protection due to ongoing death threats, even after his retirement. Picture: AP /Jacquelyn Martin
Anthony Fauci, the face of the US response to the covid pandemic, requires round-the-clock security protection due to ongoing death threats, even after his retirement. Picture: AP /Jacquelyn Martin

By contrast, Anthony Fauci, the face of the US response to the covid pandemic, requires round-the-clock security protection due to ongoing death threats, even after his retirement. Climate scientists and meteorologists, too, have faced threats and harassment.

“The conspiracy theories are out there, the misinformation is there,” said Graumlich. 

Social media engines and the algorithms can take a person that isn’t necessarily prone to a conspiracy mindset and have them end up in this rabbit hole of misinformation.

Some researchers believe scientists should adapt to this hyper-partisan environment by sticking to unadorned facts, rather than anything that could be seen as campaigning. “We have been come to be seen as just another partisan lobbying group,” said Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist.

“I want us to get back to a point where scientists are seen as the establishers of facts rather than arguing for policy. We need to get back to a situation where we have a shared set of facts.” 

Others are determined to press the case for science to guide decisions, if not in the White House then with Congress, which previously thwarted major Trump-demanded cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency and Nasa’s Earth science work.

Even if Trump does follow Florida’s lead by deleting all mention of the climate crisis within the federal government, an oblivious world will continue to heat up regardless, bringing disasters and rising costs to Americans. Scientists say they will still be there when such truths become politically palatable again.

“We are sober about the future, but we’re not daunted,” said Graumlich. “The facts are still facts, science is still science. The fight is bigger than just one political cycle, I’ve been doing this for 40 years. We’re not backing down.”

Guardian

CLIMATE & SUSTAINABILITY HUB

More in this section

Cookie Policy Privacy Policy Brand Safety FAQ Help Contact Us Terms and Conditions

© Echo Examiner Group Limited