CLIMATE ANXIETY: A manufactured crisis fueled by fear and propaganda
By willowt // 2025-01-27
Copy
 
  • A study published in The Lancet Planetary Health claims that climate change is causing widespread anxiety among young Americans, with 85% of respondents reporting moderate to severe worry. However, critics argue that the study is more about advancing a political agenda than presenting scientific facts.
  • The study, which surveyed over 15,000 individuals aged 16-25, relies on self-reported data and convenience sampling. Critics argue that this approach fails to produce a representative sample and conflates ordinary weather variability with long-term climate trends.
  • Critics contend that the mental health issues reported in the study are more a result of fear-driven messaging from media, education systems, and social media, rather than actual climate phenomena. They argue that relentless climate alarmism is leading to an exaggerated sense of crisis among young people.
  • The study’s funding from the Avaaz Foundation and its emphasis on aggressive climate policies and corporate/government responsibility raise questions about its political agenda. Critics see it as a tool for political manipulation rather than a genuine scientific assessment.
  • The study is seen as part of a broader trend of using fear to manipulate public opinion. Critics argue that young people need to question these narratives, separate facts from propaganda, and reject the idea that more regulations and taxes are the only solutions to their worries. They contend that the real crisis is the exploitation of climate change for political gain, rather than the issue itself.
A recent study published in The Lancet Planetary Health has sparked debate over the mental health impact of climate change on young Americans. Titled “Climate emotions, thoughts and plans among US adolescents and young adults,” the research claims that climate change is causing widespread anxiety, despair and fear among youth, with 85% of respondents reporting at least moderate worry and 57.9% describing themselves as “very” or “extremely” worried. While critics argue that the study is less about science and more about advancing a political agenda, proponents point out that junk science and a biased media are brainwashing people, using fear as a tool to manipulate behavior. The study, which surveyed 15,793 individuals aged 16 to 25, relies heavily on self-reported data and convenience sampling, raising questions about its validity. While the authors assert that their findings reflect a growing mental health crisis tied to climate change, skeptics contend that the results are more indicative of a successful propaganda campaign than an objective assessment of reality.

Feelings are not facts

The study’s methodology has drawn sharp criticism for its reliance on self-reported data and a non-representative sample. Conducted through the Cint digital marketplace, the survey fails to ensure that its sample reflects the actual distribution of political ideologies or geographic diversity in the U.S. population. Respondents were asked to recall their exposure to severe weather events, such as heatwaves, floods and wildfires, with 93.2% reporting at least one such event in the past year. However, the study did not verify these claims against actual weather data, instead taking participants’ perceptions at face value. This approach, critics argue, conflates ordinary weather variability with long-term climate trends, creating a distorted picture of reality. “The study’s reliance on self-reported data leads to absurd leaps of logic,” said one critic. “Reporting sadness about the future isn’t the same as being clinically depressed, but the study makes no effort to separate the two.” However, with brainwashing and indoctrination now a standard part of public school curriculum, kids are becoming programed by the feelings though they may not hold onto the facts. That's what makes them active advocates when they get older, and why they don't question if 'the science' is biased.

Role of media and messaging

The study’s findings suggest that climate change is a significant driver of mental health issues among young people, with 42.8% reporting that it negatively affects their mental health and 38.3% saying it disrupts their daily lives. But critics argue that these feelings are less a product of actual climate phenomena and more a result of relentless fear-driven messaging from media, education systems and social media. “When you spend years telling kids the world is ending because they used a plastic straw, don’t be surprised when they start crying into their oat milk lattes,” said one commentator. The survey questions themselves appear designed to elicit dramatic responses. For example, respondents were asked to rate their agreement with statements like, “Climate change will threaten my life” and “Do you believe the U.S. government is betraying you and/or future generations?” Such leading questions, critics say, validate the authors’ predetermined narrative rather than yield meaningful data.

Political agenda

Beneath the veneer of academic rigor lies a clear political agenda. The study emphasizes respondents’ desire for “aggressive climate policies” and their tendency to vote for candidates who support such policies (72.8%). It also casts corporations and governments as villains, with 82% blaming corporate greed for their distress and 81.8% declaring the U.S. government is “failing young Americans.” “This isn’t science; it’s a roadmap for political manipulation,” said one critic. “The authors argue that youth distress will only subside when corporations and governments ‘act at the necessary scale’ to address climate change. Translation: More regulations, higher taxes and more power handed to unelected bureaucrats.” The study’s funding source has also raised eyebrows. It was supported by the Avaaz Foundation, a group known for its climate advocacy. Critics liken this to Big Tobacco funding research that concludes smoking relieves stress.

Alarmism as a tool for control

The use of fear to manipulate public opinion is not new. From the Cold War-era “Duck and Cover” drills to the Y2K panic, history is replete with examples of alarmism being used to shape behavior and policy. The current climate anxiety narrative, critics argue, is simply the latest iteration of this tactic. “The greatest driver of youth anxiety isn’t climate change — it’s the relentless messaging that they are powerless victims of an imminent apocalypse,” said one commentator. “Young people don’t need more fear. They need the courage to question these narratives, to separate facts from propaganda, and to reject the idea that the only solution to their worries is to hand over their freedom to those selling the panic.” As one critic commented about the study: "This is pure religion, of the bad kind. Not one word of it is true. What is true is that young minds have been addled and punished by decades of idiot propaganda screaming the sky the falling."

Separating fact from fiction

While the Lancet study paints a dire picture of youth mental health in the face of climate change, its findings are better interpreted as a reflection of the effectiveness of climate alarmism than as a meaningful assessment of reality. The study’s reliance on self-reported data, its biased sampling methods, and its clear political agenda undermine its credibility. As one critic put it, “The world isn’t ending. The kids are alright—they just need to turn off the noise.” In an era where information is abundant but truth is often elusive, it is more important than ever to approach such studies with a critical eye. The real crisis may not be climate change itself, but the fear and manipulation being used to exploit it for political gain. Sources include: WattsUpWithThat.com Substack.com TheLancet.com
Copy