In a 2013 article, Dana Nuccitelli described the “five stages of climate denial”, which in brief are:
Stage 1: Deny The Problem Exists
Stage 2: Deny We Are The Cause
Stage 2b: Consensus Denial
Stage 3: Deny It’s A Problem
Stage 4: Deny We Can Solve It
Stage 5: It’s too Late
In the Notes, I give my take on these 5 stages.
What is perhaps not surprising, but is nevertheless deeply depressing, is that the Telegraph (which I use as a collective term covering the daily and Sunday print publications, and online content) has succeeded – in the ensuing 13 years – to cover each of these 5 stages of denial. I will share some examples (but there is a huge catalogue to choose from).
I am not suggesting a consistent linear progression through these stages. The paper’s commentariat has, between them, produced examples of every stage, jumping back and forth over time. However, the centre of gravity of these pieces has broadly drifted over time, moving from a focus on attacking climate science, to a focus on attacking climate solutions. Only in 2026, prompted no doubt by the unprecedented multiple heatwaves, was there an editor-level piece that reached Stage 5.
Telegraph’s Stages of Denial
I give some examples and in each case provide a rebuttal and comment. Some links (underlined text) are included.
Stage 1: Deny The Problem Exists
20 Nov 2009, James Delingpole, “Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?” —
This article, which coined the term “Climategate,” was based on a falsehood that twisted the words and scientific jargon used in some stolen emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (a pioneer in climate data reconstruction). Investigations exonerated the scientific work done. Further research has completely vindicated the key findings, in particular the hockey-stick graph that was the target of fossil fuel interests.
Stage 2: Deny We Are The Cause
15 Oct 2019, Sarah Knapton, “Climate change: fake news or global threat? This is the science” —
A piece that used the tactic of suggesting there are valid alternative ideas, giving space to solar activity and natural variability claims alongside the mainstream consensus. The sun is not the cause (its output is actually not changing significantly over the recent period when global warming has been accelerating), and other possible causes have also been eliminated. Yet the Telegraph continued to give prominence to outlier science under the guise of ‘false balance’.
There are many lines of science, over 200 years, that are woven together to bring us the overwhelming IPCC conclusion “It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land.” (IPCC Working Group I, 2021)
Stage 2b: Consensus Denial
23 July 2013, James Delingpole, Telegraph blogs — “97 per cent of climate activists in the pay of Big Oil shock!” –
Was a direct attack on the seminal Cook et al. (2013) consensus study, with an eye-catching headline. The study was found to hold up very well.
Despite many claims that there is debate amongst scientists about the fundamental cause, a major study published in Environmental Research Letters (Lynas, Houlton & Perry, ERL 2021) examined tens of thousands of climate papers and found that agreement on human-caused climate change is well over 99.9% (this is effectively 100% and above the oft quoted figure of 97% from the Cook study).
Stage 3: Deny It’s A Problem
22 Nov 2020, Matt Ridley, “Ten reasons why Boris’ green agenda is just plain wrong” —
As he has done on several occasions Matt Ridley claims that because plants use carbon dioxide to grow, it is good for the planet. This conveniently obscures the fact that plants also need other things. They need warmth, but not an exceptional heatwave, and water, but not an exceptional deluge, both of which are made much more likely by increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Farmers battling crop failures after repeated heatwaves might beg to differ with Ridley’s narrowly framed agronomy.
There is a broader denial. A 2°C rise in the global average really is a big deal. Extremes become much more likely, as we are already seeing, and then risk of tipping points being crossed increases.
Stage 4: Deny We Can Solve It
30 Apr 2025, Allison Pearson, “Spain’s disastrous blackouts are proof of the follies of net zero” —
Is an example of a biased hit piece – just 2 days after the blackout – from someone who has no background in how electricity grids are managed, how they are evolving, or even having the temerity to wait for an expert analysis of what actually happened. The expert report concluded that the blackout resulted from a combination of many interacting factors. Carbon Brief looked at the frenzied media response, much of which had tried to put the blame on renewables.
One of the popular attempted ‘gotchas’ used by solution deniers is that renewables, unlike gas turbines, lack the ‘inertia’ needed to stabilise grid frequency. This is an example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. Synchronous Condensers (SCs) are spinning bits of metal that provide inertia independent of generating capacity. These will replace the inertia currently provided by Gas Turbines (alongside other technologies, such as ‘grid forming inverters’).
The report on the blackouts found that the multiple issues related to the grid would not have been solved with less renewables. Others have noted that they can be fixed, and will be.
Stage 5: It’s too Late
29 Jul 2026, Allister Heath (Telegraph’s editor), “We’ve lost the war against climate change. Time to scrap net zero” —
Argues Britain produces only ~0.8% of global emissions so mitigation is “trivial” whatever we do, and that money should go to adaptation (air conditioning, irrigation, water infrastructure) instead.
Actually, because carbon dioxide is a long-lived greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, we have to look at cumulative emissions, and include those we have been responsible for (not just territorial emissions). Carbon Brief estimates it would be between 3% and 5%, depending on how much is included. In any case, as one school teacher noted, if a child dropped litter in the park, you wouldn’t say “it’s ok, because it’s only 1% of the litter”. That would be pretty lousy ethics. And are we happy with 1% of the avoidable deaths and 1% of the lost glaciers and … you get the picture.
Allister Heath’s piece is possibly the most egregious take on climate change ever published in the Telegraph, which is quite a feat, given the paper’s dismal record.
Every tonne of emissions matters. Mitigation and adaptation must go hand in hand.
It is never too late to stop it getting worse.
No Apology
After covering each stage, the Telegraph has not to my knowledge ever acknowledged they were wrong (I’d love to be corrected on this).
The opinion pieces they publish are not too embarrassed to revisit previous stages from time to time, underlining glaring inconsistencies.
The thing that permeates many of the Telegraph opinion pieces on climate change, through all of these stages is an arrogant and snide tone, and a lack of any genuine curiosity. This is the level that has infected this once respected paper.
Trust in the Telegraph generally (not specifically concerning climate coverage) fell from 55% in 2018 to 36% in 2022 — a 19-point drop, making it, at that point, “the least trusted broadsheet in the UK” (Reuters Institute Digital News Report).
It seems to be as much about clicks and building a cadre of readers who enjoy the partisan attacks, rather than helping a wider readership – that might be attracted to a more trusted form of journalism – to navigate a credible path to a safer future.
(c) Richard W. Erskine, 2026
. . . o o O o o . . .
NOTE – My take on Nuccitelli’s 5 stages.
Stage 1: Deny The Problem Exists – Which requires someone to deny overwhelming evidence of global warming evident in melting glaciers; warming oceans; receding tree-lines; and not to forget, the trend in global mean surface temperature. There are literally thousands of independent lines of evidence that demonstrate that the world is warming.
Stage 2: Deny We Are The Cause – Which requires denying the impact of emissions of greenhouse gases from human activity, principally carbon dioxide from fossil fuel burning, but also methane from deforestation (and loss of peat bogs), nitrous oxide from agriculture, and so on. It also required down-playing the projections based on the physics of the greenhouse effect, which have proven to be highly reliable (including Hansen’s testimony to Congress in 1988). It requires embracing junk science such as attributing warming to changing solar output, long disproven, to account for the warming we see. There are many lines of science over 200 years that are woven together to bring us the overwhelming IPCC conclusion “It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land.” (IPCC Working Group I, 2021)
Stage 2b: Consensus Denial – Which attempts to suggest there are ‘both sides’ to the alleged ‘debate’. There is no debate amongst the vast majority of climate scientists about the science around man-made global warming. There is a kind of ‘Authority Complex’ because those with no skill in climate science are effectively claiming the ability to decide that a few scientists they select (who are outliers at best or completely unpublished in the field) are the ones to listen to.
Stage 3: Deny It’s A Problem – Which involves cherry picking or distorting the evidence to suggest that the global warming we see is nothing to concern us. They play on the fact that people naturally are unaware that warming the whole planet by a few degrees in just 200 years is unprecedented. Today’s rate of carbon release is roughly 10 times faster than during the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), the fastest known natural warming event in the last 66 million years (Zeebe et al. 2016). Human society has flourished since the start of the Holocene about 12,000 years ago (after the last ice age glaciation had receded). It was able to do so due to a stable concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and consequently a stable climate.
Those that deny that man-made global warming is an issue, that should concern us, might be advised to talk to farmers in the UK experiencing terrible harvests, or survivors of washed away villages in Nepal.
Stage 4: Deny We Can Solve It – Which involves denying that renewables can deliver the energy we need. I always ask the question: ‘Since the Sun delivers 10,000 times as much energy on the Earth as humanity is likely to need even in 2050, are people really suggesting we do not have the ingenuity to harness that vast over abundance of energy?’. Renewables have become cheaper and more successful, and so called ‘flexibility’ in the system has been demonstrated to not only cater with the variability of renewables, but also to enable deeper roll-out of renewables. Perhaps that’s why the attempts to claim renewables cannot deliver 100% of our electricity have become more shrill. It does need to be acknowledged that considerable investment in long-duration storage technologies, to complement battery storage, will be needed in due course, but this is both doable and essential if the UK is to achieve energy independence.
Renewables, EVs, Heat Pumps, Induction Hobs – anything that will get us off burning fossil fuels – are under persistent attack by the Telegraph, maybe because they are showing that moving away from fossil fuels is not only possible, it’s already well under way!
Stage 5: It’s too Late – Argues that we just have to accept the consequences, and adapt accordingly. This is such an immoral and disingenuous argument. Having passed through all the previous stages of denial, the deniers now say “it’s too late”, with the sub-text being, we might as well keep on drilling and burning fossil fuels. This all ignores the fact that the more we burn, the greater the concentration of carbon dioxide in atmosphere, the greater the impacts. It’s like a ratchet, because carbon dioxide is a “long-lived greenhouse gas” the best we can and should do is simply stop burning fossil fuels sooner. We then will stop turning the ratchet on impacts. Every tonne of emissions matters. So it is never too late, to stop it getting worse.
EssaysConcerning 