How Once Hardcore Climate Alarmist Lucy Biggers Realized It Was All A Scam, Brainwashing

From the NoTricksZone

By P Gosselin 

Climate alarmists have been brainwashed to feel existential dread, says ex-climate activist Lucy Biggers in a new interview.

Ms. Biggers, once a leading climate activist until recently, provides the details regarding why she changed her mind and views on current climate alarmism, discussing a progressive timeline between 2020 and 2025 where she deprogrammed herself from climate alarmism.

Schellenberger and Koonin

One of the major turning points came around 2020, when she began secretly reading books that directly challenged the apocalyptic climate narrative. Specifically, she cites Michael Shellenberger’s Apocalypse Never and Steve Koonin’s Unsettled, the latter of which opened her eyes to the idea that extreme weather patterns are not matching the catastrophic claims pushed by the media.

Glimpse at dystopia

Secondly, the 2020 lockdowns provided a massive wake-up call regarding what “Net Zero” measures actually look like in practice. She realized that despite the global economy completely shutting down and individuals losing their freedoms, global carbon emissions only dropped by about 5%. This made her question the authoritarian nature and feasibility of the movement’s goals.

Realization it’s a destructive mindset

Thirdly, having her first son in 2022 forced her to establish healthier emotional boundaries and take stock of her values. She realized she did not want to pass down a destructive mindset of existential dread and perpetual guilt for consuming resources in a modern world to her children.

What’s really driving the alarmists?

Lucy notes several overlapping psychological, social, and ideological reasons why activists adopt an alarmist mindset, explaining that within left-wing spaces, the prevailing narrative is that being Western, white, or privileged makes you inherently complicit in historical oppression. For many activists, the climate movement serves as a psychological mechanism to “atone for the sins of their birth” by fighting for oppressed or indigenous groups against “evil fossil fuel companies.”

Attention-seeking

Another factor is social pressure and the algorithmic fgeedback loop: Social media and workplace communication tools (like Slack) create an intense “groupthink” environment. Activists get hooked on a constant dopamine feedback loop of validation, moral superiority, and professional accolades when they post alarmist content.

I just started covering that as a 25-year-old… and all the videos that I made went really viral and so there was a feedback loop of I’m getting a lot of professional success from this and so I just made climate change my kind of whole personality and beat for my 20s…”

Conversely, pushing back causes severe social anxiety and the fear of being ostracized as an “enemy.”

Addiction to self-importance

Lucy highlights that the apocalyptic thinking has deep religious undertones, satisfying a modern craving for meaning and legacy. Activists become “addicted to the nihilism” and the intoxicating self-importance of believing they are saving the world from an end-times scenario.

…you get the nihilism, you get addicted to the nihilism, you get addicted to your your own sense of self-importance, you get addicted to the fact that you are right and other people are wrong and then the engagement you receive on social media—it’s a constant feedback loop.”

Biggers adds:

I remember anytime I used to get a critique when I was still in this groupthink, I would spiral… because my sense of self was built on sand. Like I truly was just constantly pinging the group to be like ‘What are my opinions, am I a good ally, am I a good ally, am I doing everything right to show that I’m like part of this movement?’ And it was so exhausting…”

Gore’s propaganda led to “existential dread”

According to Lucy Biggers, her intense anxiety and worry about the climate at an early age was triggered by watching the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore, explaining that she was a sophomore in high school (16 years old) in 2006 when her school played the film during a widespread high school assembly. Lucy describes the overwhelming psychological impact it had on her, which included existential dread and the feeling of having been handed a death sentence

Based on what she took away from the movie, she calculated a timeline for her own survival, stating, “I’m 16, I have till I’m 26… I have 10 years to live… I was racked by anxiety like in my nervous system”.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
4 4 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
KevinM
May 16, 2026 10:31 pm

Makes me wonder – once it is well known that their entire generation was lied to, what do they do? My only reference is cold war Russian kids.

Laws of Nature
May 16, 2026 10:40 pm

I never head of her, but it sounds she was actively misleading people.

As penance, I suggest her speaking out publicly about current problems with climate alarmism, like

– the latest RealClimate article using the same measured data with and without confidence intervals in different graphs and model data without them, they seem strangely optional there.

– there seem to be significant problems modeling solids in the atmosphere (there are recent articles about falling ice and dust size distribution:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2025GL120130
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2025MS005420
these are two easy examples how science progressed in ways not foreseen in older models causing the need to reevaluate even the latest CMIP6 models.

– older model results are presented in the way they were calculated years ago, but resolution and physics has improved and we now know better.
The world needs advocates to remove or correct obsolete climate publications!

(For example there were five or six articles about the rcp8.5 being implausible on here in the last two weeks, when in fact CMIP6-models clearly show -without any doubt or wiggle room- that all CMIP5 and older models significantly lack resolution and physics, which requires a reevaluation of their results!)

– and my all-time favorite, the potential proxy selection bias McShane and Wyner discuss in their rejoinder,
https://www.blakemcshane.com/Papers/aoas_rejoinder.pdf

“”the application of ad hoc methods to screen and exclude data in-

creases model uncertainty in ways that are unmeasurable and uncorrectable””

which seems to be a problem for literally any of the many ten thousands of publications using proxy reconstructions. It would be great to task someone to get a scientific answer to that problem from Mann, Bradley, Hughes and the likes ..

Tusten02
May 16, 2026 10:47 pm

I can also recommend research and publications by MIT-Professor Richard Lindzen and Princeton-Professor William Happer!

Admin
May 16, 2026 11:47 pm

Simple questions led me to understanding. “If climate change is an existential crisis, why do greens have such a problem with nuclear?” – A simple question which exposes the cultist heart of the movement.