Don’t they understand climate science? Reflections in times of crisis in science and politics

During the 2016 US presidential election, the majority of discussion on the social website ‘I fucking love science’ claimed that ‘climate change is a matter of science, truth and facts but “they”, the deniers, do not understand the science’, invoking a polarized version of the modern model of legitimation, entangled with the deficit model. This article challenges this narrative to open a dialogue space and identify criteria for dealing with the climate issue under conditions of high uncertainty and complexity. Analysis reveals how the dialogue might experience a stalemate when criticisms against this narrative are based on the need to show an inflicted harm for which this narrative can be blamed. Simultaneously, the same condition of uncertainty disarms a core principle from the modern model—that legimate action is to be based on predicting catastrophe in climate change. At stake is an essential part of the present: our praxis.