The Brief

In 1995, a leading group of scientists convened by the United Nations declared that they had detected a “human influence” on global temperatures with “effectively irreversible” consequences. In the coming decades, 99.9 percent of scientists would come to agree that burning fossil fuels had disrupted the Earth’s climate.

Yet almost 30 years after that warning, during the hottest year on Earth in 125,000 years, people are still arguing that the science is unreliable, or that the threat is real but we shouldn’t do anything about climate change. Conspiracies are thriving online, according to a report by the coalition Climate Action Against Disinformation released last month, in time for the U.N. climate conference in Dubai. Over the past year, posts with the hashtag #climatescam have gotten more likes and retweets on the platform known as X than ones with #climatecrisis or #climateemergency.

By now, anyone looking out the window can see flowers blooming earlier and lakes freezing later. Why, after all this time, do 15 percent of Americans fall for the lie that global warming isn’t happening? And is there anything that can be done to bring them around to reality? New research suggests that understanding why fake news is compelling to people can tell us something about how to defend ourselves against it.

People buy into bad information for different reasons, said Andy Norman, an author and philosopher who co-founded the Mental Immunity Project, which aims to protect people from manipulative information. Due to quirks of psychology, people can end up overlooking inconvenient facts when confronted with arguments that support their beliefs. “The more you rely on useful beliefs at the expense of true beliefs, the more unhinged your thinking becomes,” Norman said. Another reason people are drawn to conspiracies is that they feel like they’re in on a big, world-transforming secret: Flat Earthers think they’re seeing past the illusions the vast majority don’t.

The annual U.N. climate summits often coincide with a surge in misleading information on social media. As COP28 ramped up in late November, conspiracy theories circulated claiming that governments were trying to cause food shortages by seizing land from farmers, supposedly using climate change as an excuse. Spreading lies about global warming like these can further social divisions and undermine public and political support for action to reduce emissions, according to the Climate Action Against Disinformation report. It can also lead to harassment: Some 73 percent of climate scientists who regularly appear in the media have experienced online abuse.

Part of the problem is the genuine appeal of fake news. A recent study in Nature Human Behavior found that climate change disinformation was more persuasive than scientific facts. Researchers at the University of Geneva in Switzerland had originally intended to see if they could help people fend off disinformation, testing different strategies on nearly 7,000 people from 12 countries, including the United States, India, and Nigeria. Participants read a paragraph intended to strengthen their mental defenses — reminders of the scientific consensus around climate change, the trustworthiness of scientists, or the moral responsibility to act, for example. Then they were subjected to a barrage of 20 real tweets that blamed warming on the sun and the “wavy” jet stream, spouted conspiracies about “the climate hoax devised by the U.N.,” and warned that the elites “want us to eat bugs.”

The interventions didn’t work as hoped, said Tobia Spampatti, an author of the study and a neuroscience researcher at the University of Geneva. The flood of fake news — meant to simulate what people encounter in social media echo chambers — had a big effect. Reading the tweets about bogus conspiracies lowered people’s belief that climate change was happening, their support for action to reduce emissions, and their willingness to do something about it personally. The disinformation was simply more compelling than scientific facts, partly because it plays with people’s emotions, Spampatti said (eliciting anger toward elites who want you to eat bugs, for example). The only paragraph that helped people recognize falsehoods was one that prompted them to evaluate the accuracy of the information they were seeing, a nudge that brought some people back to reality.

Conspiracy theorists protest at busy roundabout in the village of Martlesham in Suffolk, England, Sept. 18, 2022.

(

Geography Photos / UCG / Universal Images Group via Getty Images

)

The study attempted to use “pre-bunking,” a tactic to vaccinate people against fake news. While the effort flopped, Norman said that doesn’t mean it shows “inoculation” is ineffective. Spampatti and other researchers’ effort to fortify people’s mental defenses used a new, broader approach to pre-bunking, trying to protect against a bunch of lines of disinformation at once, that didn’t work as well as tried-and-true inoculation techniques, according to Norman.

Norman says it’s crucial that any intervention to stop the spread of disinformation comes with a “weakened dose” of it, like a vaccine, to help people understand why someone might benefit from lying. For example, when the Biden administration learned of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin’s plans to invade Ukraine in late 2021, the White House began warning the world that Russia would push a false narrative to justify the invasion, including staging a fake, graphic video of a Ukrainian attack on Russian territory. When the video came out, it was quickly dismissed as fake news. “It was a wildly successful attempt to inoculate much of the world against Putin’s preferred narrative about Ukraine,” Norman said.

For climate change, that approach might not succeed — decades of oil-funded disinformation campaigns have already infected the public. “It’s really hard to think about someone who hasn’t been exposed to climate skepticism or disinformation from fossil fuel industries,” said Emma Frances Bloomfield, a communication professor at the University of Nevada, Los Vegas. “It’s just so pervasive. They have talking heads who go on news programs, they flood media publications and the internet, they pay lobbyists.”

Bloomfield argues that disinformation sticks for a reason, and that simply telling the people who fall for it that there’s a scientific consensus isn’t enough. “They’re doubting climate change because they doubt scientific authorities,” Bloomfield said. “They’re making decisions about the environment, not based on the facts or the science, but based on their values or other things that are important to them.”

While political identity can explain some resistance to climate change, there are other reasons people dismiss the evidence, as Bloomfield outlines in her upcoming book Science v. Story: Narrative Strategies for Science Communicators. “In the climate change story, we’re the villains, or at least partially blameworthy for what’s happening to the environment, and it requires us to make a lot of sacrifices,” Bloomfield said. “That’s a hard story to adopt because of the role we’re playing within it.” Accepting climate change, to some degree, means accepting inner conflict. You always know you could do more to lower your carbon footprint, whether that’s ditching meat, refusing to fly, or wearing your old clothes until they’re threadbare and ratty.

By contrast, embracing climate denial allows people to identify as heroes, Bloomfield said. They don’t have to do anything differently, and might even see driving around in a gas-guzzling truck as part of God’s plan. It’s a comforting narrative, and certainly easier than wrestling with ethical dilemmas or existential dread.

Protesters march after a demonstration near Heathrow Airport west of London, Aug.20, 2007.

(

Ben Stansall

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

Those seeking to amplify tensions around climate change or spread doubt, such as fossil fuel companies, social media trolls, and countries like Russia and China, get a lot of bang for their buck. “It’s a lot easier and cheaper to push doubt than to push certainty,” Bloomfield said. Oil companies including Shell, ExxonMobil, and BP spent about $4 million to $5 million on Facebook ads related to social issues and politics this year, according to the Climate Action Against Disinformation report. To sow doubt, you only need to arouse some suspicion. Creating a bullet-proof case for something is much harder — it might take thousands of scientific studies (or debunking hundreds of counterarguments one by one, as Grist did in 2006).

The most straightforward way to fight disinformation would be to stop it from happening in the first place, Spampatti said. But even if regulators were able to get social media companies to try to stop the spread of conspiracy theories and falsehoods, dislodging them is a different story. One promising approach, “deep canvassing,” seeks to persuade people through nonjudgmental, one-on-one conversations. The outreach method, invented by LGBTQ+ advocates, involves hearing people’s concerns and helping them work through their conflicted feelings. (Remember how accepting climate change means accepting you might be a tiny part of the problem?)

Research has shown that deep canvassing isn’t just successful at reducing transphobia, but also that its effects can last for months, a long time compared to other interventions. The strategy can work for other polarizing problems, too, based on one experiment in a rural metal-smelting town in British Columbia. After convincing several local governments across the West Kootenay region to shift to 100 percent renewable energy, volunteers with the nonprofit Neighbors United kept running into difficulties in the town of Trail, where they encountered distrust of environmentalists. They spoke to hundreds of residents, listening to their worries about losing jobs, finding common ground, and telling personal stories about climate change like friends would, instead of debating the facts like antagonists. A stunning 40 percent of residents shifted their beliefs, and Trail’s city council voted in 2022 to shift to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050.

Both facts and stories have a place, Bloomfield said. For conservative audiences, she suggests that climate advocates move away from talking about global systems and scientists with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — a “nameless, faceless, nebulous group of people” — and toward local matters and people they actually know. Getting information from friends, family, and other trusted individuals can really help.

“They’re not necessarily as authoritative as the IPCC,” Bloomfield said. “But it helps you connect with that information, and you trust that person, so you trust that information that they’re resharing.”

President Trump once insisted he had "nothing to do with Project 2025," the right-wing policy plan that became a key flashpoint during the presidential campaign.

The Democrats tried to turn the 900-page Heritage Foundation-led blueprint to remake the government into a political boogeyman, and succeeded to some degree, but it wasn't enough to win the election.

A year later, many of the policies have been implemented, from cracking down on immigration to dismantling the Department of Education.

"A lot of the policies from Day 1 to the last day and in between that the administration has adopted are right out of Project 2025," said Rob Bonta, the attorney general of California, who has used Project 2025 to prepare legal papers against the administration.

Concerns about the project started to bubble up over the spring of 2024, but really caught fire a few months later when actress Taraji P. Henson singled out Project 2025 while hosting the BET awards.

"Pay attention. It's not a secret. Look it up!" she said, speaking directly into the camera during the show. "They are attacking our most vulnerable citizens. The Project 2025 plan is not a game."

'Ridiculous'

Then-candidate Trump tried to dismiss the hysteria, calling the ideas "ridiculous" — and claiming he did not know who was behind it — even though key people involved in developing the plans served in his first administration.
And when it was clear the firestorm would not go away, Trump went on the attack against those allies who wrote the playbook.

"They're a pain in the a--," said Chris LaCivita, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign, who tore into the organizers of Project 2025 at an event hosted by CNN and Politico during the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.

"Look, I think that in the perfect world, from their perspective, they would love to drive the issue set, but they don't get to do that," he added.

Yet days after winning, Trump tapped Russell Vought, an architect of Project 2025, to lead the Office of Management and Budget — considered the nerve center of the White House. Other contributors followed.
Trump soon unleashed a flurry of orders reshaping the government, many of which were outlined in Project 2025.

"As of today, it will henceforth be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female," he said during his inaugural address.

Trump ended diversity, equity and inclusion programs. He launched massive immigration enforcement and took the first steps to overhaul the federal workforce.

Bonta, the attorney general of California, said Project 2025 defined Trump's first year back in office. The country's 23 Democratic attorneys general studied Project 2025, consulted with each other and, he said, prepared a response for every potential action should it be taken.

"The existence of Project 2025 was the Trump administration telling us exactly what they were going to do and sending it to us in writing," Bonta said.

Bonta has filed or joined lawsuits that have successfully blocked Trump's policies requiring states like California to join his immigration crackdown, freeze of domestic federal funding and layoffs at agencies such as the U.S. Department of Education.

The White House dismissed concerns about Project 2025, calling them irrelevant theories from Beltway insiders.

"President Trump is implementing the agenda he campaigned on and that the American people voted for," said Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman.

Jackson said the president focused on implementing the agenda he campaigned on — lowering gas prices, accelerating economic growth and securing the border.

Fueling controversy

Trump may have actually fueled the controversy by rejecting Project 2025 during the campaign, said Tevi Troy, a presidential historian and former White House aide to George W. Bush.

"I would say that Project 2025 was largely standard conservative fare, but with a bit more of a MAGA flavor than previously."

Troy sees little difference between what the Heritage Foundation did with Project 2025 and what think tanks on the left and right have been doing for years compiling policy proposals for incoming presidents.

He pointed to the personnel and policy ideas of the Hoover Institution that helped shape the George W. Bush administration and the Center for American Progress' influence on the Obama administration.

"If the Trump campaign had leaned into it and said, 'sure, this is an agenda that has been put out as a think tank. This happens all the time. We will look at them in due time when the election is over,' " said Troy. "By criticizing and disavowing Project 2025, it suddenly became more radioactive."

Paul Dans, the director of Project 2025, says he never took the attacks personally, which he chalked up to political calculus. 

He likened watching the president sign executive orders and directives that first came across his desk to being an animator who watches his or her sketchbook come to life on the big screen.

"I believe the proof is in the pudding," said Dans, who also served in the first Trump administration. "Every day that President Trump rolls out another Project 2025 item, it's really an endorsement of our work, myself and the work of thousands of patriots who came together."

Dans is now highlighting that work in a run for the Senate, against Trump-ally, Republican Lindsey Graham.

Trump did eventually embrace Project 2025 during the shutdown fight last fall.

He boasted of meeting with "Russ Vought, he of PROJECT 2025 Fame," while threatening to dismantle federal agencies.

"I can't believe the Radical Left Democrats gave me this unprecedented opportunity," he said.

Copyright 2026 NPR

President Trump says his controversial push for U.S. control of Greenland comes after he failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize last year, adding he no longer feels obliged to think only of peace.

In a message to Norway's prime minister Jonas Gahr Støre on Sunday night, Trump criticized the European country for not giving him the prize.

"Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America," Trump said in the message.

"The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland," Trump added.

The message was reported by PBS NewsHour, and was later confirmed by Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre in a statement.

Gahr Støre said he received the message on Sunday in response to a text he and Finland's President Alexander Stubb had sent to Trump, in which they had conveyed opposition to Trump's proposed tariff increases on eight European countries over the recent Greenland dispute.

In their message to Trump, according to The New York Times, which received a copy of the exchange from the Norwegian prime minister's office, Gahr Støre and Stubb wrote: "We believe we all should work to take this down and de-escalate — so much is happening around us where we need to stand together."

The pair suggested a joint call.

"Norway's position on Greenland is clear. Greenland is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark, and Norway fully supports the Kingdom of Denmark on this matter," Gahr Støre said. "We also support that NATO in a responsible way is taking steps to strengthen security and stability in the Arctic."

Gahr Støre also pointed out that while President Trump claimed that Norway "decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize," the government of Norway is not responsible for the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded by a five member Norwegian Nobel Committee since 1901.

The Danish navy's inspection ship HDMS Vaedderen sails off Nuuk, Greenland, on Sunday.

(

Mads Claus Rasmussen

/

Ritzau Scanpix Foto / Associated Press

)

The Peace Prize, which was last awarded to Venezuela's opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, is also awarded for the previous year. That means the most recent prize was awarded for 2024, before President Trump commenced his second term of office. Machado gave Trump her prize last week as a symbolic thank you for his recent actions in Venezuela.

In a phone interview with NBC News on Monday, Trump again claimed that the Norwegian government has control over the Nobel Peace Prize. "Norway totally controls it despite what they say," he said. Trump also said he would follow through on his threats to impose further tariffs. When asked whether he would use force to seize Greenland, the president replied: "No comment."

The European Union is set to hold an emergency summit on Thursday, in which attendees will discuss how to respond to the threats. In a statement on social media, the EU's foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said the bloc had "no interest to pick a fight" but would "hold our ground."

Trump's message to Gahr Støre comes as tensions rise between Europe and the United States over the status of Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark that is strategically important and rich in resources.

On Monday, the World Economic Forum said officials from Denmark would not be attending the meeting in Davos, Switzerland, this week. "We can confirm that the Danish government will not be represented in Davos this week," a spokesperson, Alem Tedeneke, told NPR.

On Sunday, in a collective rebuke to President Trump, the leaders of Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement condemning recent U.S. tariff threats. The eight countries, which are all members of NATO, said that Trump's proposed tariffs "undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral."

On Saturday night, President Trump had written on his Truth Social social media platform that he would impose tariffs on imports from the countries, after they had deployed limited military personnel to Greenland to participate in a Danish-led Arctic exercise known as 'Arctic Endurance.'

Trump said America would levy a 10% tariff on goods from the eight countries starting on Feb. 1, which would rise to 25% on June 1, and remain in place "until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland" by the United States.

The open dispute comes after weeks of increasingly assertive U.S. rhetoric regarding Greenland, in which Trump has repeatedly said that Greenland is strategically vital to U.S. national security, citing its location and untapped mineral deposits.

In his text message, Trump questioned Denmark's right to claim Greenland. "Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a 'right of ownership' anyway? There are no written documents, it's only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also," Trump said.

Trump made similar comments last week, saying "the fact that they had a boat land there 500 years ago doesn't mean that they own the land," drawing mirth on social media, with comedians like Jon Stewart noting on The Daily Show "how do you think we got our land?"

Copyright 2026 NPR

The Martin Luther King Jr. Day holiday weekend is typically busy for the Inner City Youth Orchestra of Los Angeles. On Monday, the orchestra finished its third performance of the weekend at the California African American Museum, which included a musical rendition of the civil rights leader’s seminal “I Have a Dream Speech.”

It was flautist Tionna LeSassier’s first time playing with the orchestra on the federal holiday. Tionna said she began playing flute when she was 12.

“I feel really relieved that I was able to accomplish such a big performance for a really big holiday,” Tionna, who has been playing flute for more than two years, said. “I cannot believe I’m here playing with these amazing musicians.”

The orchestra’s performance, which included pieces like “We Shall Overcome” and the “Afro-American Symphony,” capped off the museum’s annual “King Day” celebration.

The event is held on the federal holiday that honors the legacy of the Baptist preacher whose nonviolent protests and eloquent speeches helped shift American attitudes about race in the 1960s and beyond and lead to landmark Civil Rights legislation.

Earlier in the day, museumgoers listened to and reflected on a recording by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. from 1967. Nearly 60 years later, event participants said, the words still feel fresh.

“When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, economic exploitation and militarism are incapable of being conquered,” King said in “The Three Evils of Society,” his keynote address at the National Conference on New Politics in Chicago.

Cameron Shaw, executive director of the Exposition Park museum, told LAist on Monday that the speech has “incredible relevance to the political and social moment and what we’re going through as a people today.”

In a brief discussion after the speech, one attendee spoke about the need to interrogate racism as a systematic ill, not just as one-off acts, and another commented on the importance of standing up to injustice.

Shaw says the museum’s celebration on Martin Luther King Jr. Day has evolved over the last several years, but one of the main throughlines she sees is the continued message of “speaking truth to power.”

“When we celebrate Dr. King today, we celebrate all of the folks past and present who have been brave enough to speak truth to power,” Shaw said. “That is something we truly need.”

Monday’s event also featured a faux stained glass workshop inspired by an exhibition the museum has on display about architect Amaza Lee Meredith.

The museum’s King Day event was one of several celebrating the Civil Rights leader this weekend in L.A.

In South L.A., an annual parade drew thousands of people, with a march concluding in Leimert Park. "It was a wonderful and powerful tribute to Dr. King’s memory to march down MLK Boulevard alongside so many friends and community members in the historic Leimert Park neighborhood," L.A. Mayor Karen Bass said in a statement.

A report of a stabbing marred the end of the event. Bass' statement said city officials were investigating and ensuring people got home safe. She added that "Los Angeles has zero tolerance for this type of violence."

Italian fashion designer Valentino died Monday at his Roman residence. He was 93. His foundation announced his death on Instagram.

Dubbed an "international arbiter of taste" by Vogue, notable women wore his designs at funerals and weddings, as well as on the red carpet. He dressed the likes of Audrey Hepburn and Jackie Onassis, as well as modern stars, including Anna Wintour to Gwyneth Paltrow and Zendaya.

The image of style and lavish living, Valentino's signature features included crisp suits and a "crème brûlée" complexion — due to his fervor for tanning. He was heavily inspired by the stars he saw on the silver screen and had a lifelong fixation with glamour.

"I love a beautiful lady. I love a beautiful dog. I love a beautiful piece of furniture. I love beauty. It's not my fault," he said in The Last Emperor, a 2008 documentary about him.

In the world of haute couture, Valentino embraced sophistication, elegance and traditional femininity through his dresses and trademarked a vibrant red hue. His work embodied romance, luxury and an aristocratic lifestyle.

He was born Valentino Garavani and named after the silent movie star Rudolph Valentino. A self-described spoiled child, the designer acquired a taste for the expensive from a young age; his shoes were custom-made, and the stripe, color and buttons of his blazers were designed to his specifications.

His father, a well-to-do electrical supplier, and his mother, who appreciated the value of a well-made garment, catered to their young son's refined palate and later supported his fashion endeavors, sending him to school and financing his early work.

Growing up in the small town of Voghera, Italy, he learned sewing from his Aunt Rosa in Lombardy. After high school, he moved to Paris to study fashion and take on apprenticeships.

Valentino owed much of his success to his former lover and business partner, Giancarlo Giammetti. The two met in a café on the famed Via Condotti in Rome in 1960, where Valentino had opened his first couture studio.

They founded Valentino Company the same year, and its first ready-to-wear shop opened in Milan in 1969. Together, the pair built a fashion empire over five decades.

They separated romantically when Valentino was 30 but remained business partners and close friends. Valentino knew little about business and accounting before meeting Giammetti; together, they formed two parts of a whole — Giammetti the business mind, and Valentino the creative force.

"Valentino has a perfect vision of how a woman should dress," Giammetti told Charlie Rose in 2009. "He looks for beauty. Women should be more beautiful. His work is to make women more beautiful."

They sold the Valentino company in 1998 for nearly $300 million. It made $1.36 billion in revenue in 2021, according to Reuters.

Even after his retirement in 2008, he couldn't completely leave fashion behind and continued to design dresses for opera productions.

Once the fashion world became more accessible to the public, millions of aspiring fashionistas bought jeans, handbags, shoes, umbrellas and even Lincoln Continentals with his gleaming "V" monogram. By the peak of his career, Valentino's popularity would rival that of the pope's in Rome.

Copyright 2026 NPR