ИСТИНА

In our study we interviewed ten Russian scientists who are known as climate skeptics. The questions were formulated in order to evaluate whether their arguments belong to science or conspiracy theory. Our ultimate conclusion is that the argumentation of climate sceptics is closer to conspiracy theory than science. However, some rationality can be found in Russian tradition of Earth scientists to focus entirely on natural processes. They are rather preservationists than conservationists. All interviewees recognized importance of different environmental threats to wildlife such as deforestation but did not believe in human impact on global climate. Our questions for the climate sceptics were the following: Do you think that the steady growth of global temperature (since the 1880s) by 0.8ºC is a scientifically-based observation? How do you find the IPCC's argument that 13 of the 15 warmest years have bee observed in the beginning of the 21st century, while the statistical probability of this being a coincidence is negligible? Do you believe that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere hit the record 400 ppm due to anthropogenic emissions? Do you have an alternative explanation for the permanent growth of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere? What do you think about the declared consensus in international science on anthropogenic climate change? Have you ever used IPCC reports in your work? Do you think that some countries support global climate policy in order to obtain certain economic or political gains? What are national interests of the Russian Federation in global climate policy?