2024 marked a year of destruction wrought by natural disasters and severe weather across the globe. These events were often accompanied by a surge in climate mis- and disinformation and conspiracy theories across mainstream and alt-tech platforms. Beyond undermining public trust in climate science, the spread of this content now also carries a significant risk of real-world violence.
Resolver analysts reviewed online discourse after recent US weather disasters, including Hurricanes Helene and Milton and the Los Angeles wildfires. Conspiracy theories spread across mainstream and alt-tech platforms and quickly moved from climate denialism to targeted harassment, hate speech and incitement to violence against public officials, relief workers and migrant communities. This in turn creates cascading public health risks that extend far beyond the physical damage caused by these ecological disasters.
With an unparalleled bird’s-eye view of the risk landscape, Resolver analysts also tracked how climate mis- and disinformation narratives evolved after these events. Many of them soon overlapped with other risk areas, including hate speech, racism, harmful or dangerous activities and, ultimately, incitement to violence.
Extreme weather trends and the rise of climate mis- and disinformation
According to data collected by the World Meteorological Organization, disasters caused by extreme weather have increased fivefold over the past 50 years, driven by climate change, more severe weather and improved reporting.
The US alone faced 27 separate weather and climate disasters, including severe storms, tropical cyclones, winter storms, flooding, droughts and heat waves. Each caused at least $1 billion in damage. The National Centers for Environmental Information estimated that fatalities from these events made 2024 the eighth-highest year for weather-related deaths in the past 45 years.
Climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of many extreme weather events. As the planet warms, melting ice caps contribute to rising sea levels, which can lead to severe coastal flooding. Warmer ocean temperatures also provide more energy for hurricanes to develop and intensify into destructive storms that have the capacity to kill hundreds.
Alongside a worsening weather landscape, mis- and disinformation about these events is also increasing. Governments often face two simultaneous crises: the natural disaster itself and the spread of false or inflammatory narratives that undermine relief efforts.
As seen most clearly in the COVID-19 pandemic, unchecked mis- and disinformation can severely hinder public health campaigns. In the context of extreme weather, false narratives about agencies responsible for delivering aid can discourage victims from seeking help and create confusion and panic during a time of crisis.
Conspiracy theories and hate speech target relief workers after hurricanes
Following the devastating impacts of Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton — which left more than 250 people dead and thousands injured or displaced — climate scientists reviewed the conditions that made these storms possible. In both cases, research indicated that climate change made the disasters more likely and more severe.
Following the devastation caused by recent Hurricanes Helené and Milton, social platforms saw a surge in climate mis-and disinformation and conspiracy theories blaming the disaster on government weather-controlling projects.
Despite the scientific consensus, conspiracy narratives spread across both fringe and mainstream platforms within hours. Many focused on the High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), a government-funded research facility often misrepresented in online communities. These narratives claimed the hurricanes were engineered as a weapon for various alleged purposes, including preventing political groups from voting, exerting government control, acquiring land for development or exploiting natural resources.
This conspiracy theory alleges that the hurricanes were created to be used as a weapon for a multitude of reasons including: to disable and prevent political groups from voting, as a form of governmental control, in order to take control of the land for property development or to make use of its natural resources.
The supposed “perpetrator” behind these theories was rarely consistent. Some posts blamed the US government, while others pointed to unnamed “shadowy groups” portrayed as holding hidden influence. Much of this content circulated through right-wing influencers and activists across mainstream and alt-tech platforms. Popular posts often reshared clips from news reports or podcasts, which were then spliced into memes, text overlays, hashtags and short videos before recirculating within conspiracy and anti-establishment communities.
A parallel wave of false narratives emerged after US Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas warned in October that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) might not have sufficient funds to last the full hurricane season. As uncertainty grew, online users sought someone to blame.
False claims circulated — largely originating from right-wing media outlets — alleging that FEMA had spent $59 million assisting migrants while victims of the hurricanes would receive only $750 in aid. Despite an official FEMA statement clarifying that funds were available and that the $750 represented an initial payment, sentiment grew increasingly hostile toward migrants and the agency.
Shortly afterward, racist and anti-migrant hate speech spiked across mainstream and alt-tech platforms. Posts featured ethnic slurs, allegations that migrants entering the US were criminals, white supremacist narratives and calls for violence. Antisemitic hate speech also targeted officials, including Mayorkas. Users highlighted the Jewish or Jewish-sounding surnames of FEMA agents — such as Jeremy L. Greenberg and Michael A. Coen Jr. — as part of broader conspiratorial narratives.
In North Carolina, one of the hardest-hit states, additional misinformation circulated claiming that relief workers were withholding aid, taking hotel rooms from victims and “antagonizing and intimidating” storm survivors.
This pressure cooker of mis- and disinformation culminated when a man was arrested outside a storm relief site, armed with a handgun and rifle, after posting threats toward FEMA employees online.
Conspiracy theories and hate speech in LA wildfire aftermath
A similar pattern of mis- and disinformation appeared after the devastating LA wildfires of January 2025. The fires, which tore through Los Angeles and San Diego, killed 29 people and destroyed more than 18,000 homes and structures.
Researchers later concluded that the conditions that made the fires possible were 35% more likely and 6% more intense because of climate change. Despite this scientific consensus, many of the conspiracy theories seen after the hurricanes quickly resurfaced.
Similarly, following the LA wildfires, racist and anti-migrant hate speech surged on social platforms, including harassment campaigns targeting politicians and FEMA officials.
Popular conspiracy narratives included allegations that the fires were purposely started by the government using “weather weapons” to control the population, and claims that migrants were receiving more aid than wildfire victims. Many of these narratives mirrored those spread after the hurricanes. For conspiracy communities, each new event — weather-related or otherwise — was framed as further evidence of a hidden government plot. These communities and their spokespeople routinely hijack high-impact events when they appear to support existing conspiratorial beliefs.
Diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives were also blamed for the Los Angeles Fire Department’s alleged poor preparedness. Users targeted nonwhite or female officials, including LAFD Fire Chief Kristin Crowley and LA Mayor Karen Bass, with online harassment as well as misogynistic, homophobic and racist abuse. False claims circulated that Crowley had reallocated $57.6 million from the department’s “equipment and infrastructure fund” to promote DEI-related programs such as “gay choirs, trans cafes and social justice art.” These claims were copied and pasted across multiple platforms.
Regulating climate mis- and disinformation under the DSA and OSA
Platform teams responsible for limiting the spread of harmful narratives online are now expected to comply with legislation such as the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and the UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA).
While many current platform guidelines flag only explicit climate-denial content as violative, the Code of Practice on Disinformation — part of the DSA’s broader framework — takes a wider view. It considers additional forms of misleading content, including information that downplays the severity of climate change, false claims about the effectiveness of climate-related policies and efforts to create doubt about scientific consensus. The OSA, which aims to protect children and adults online, is less specific than the DSA but requires platforms to take action against false information when it poses a risk to public safety or undermines evidence-based understanding.
Although the application of these laws may take time, pressure is increasing on platforms to better manage and mitigate climate mis- and disinformation across their services. Resolver’s Trust and Safety teams monitor a wide range of risk areas, including child safety, harassment, hate speech and violent extremism. This holistic approach allows analysts to track narratives as they evolve across categories. By helping customers monitor the trajectory of mis- and disinformation narratives on their platforms, early interventions can limit the spread and impact of misleading claims.
Jodie Molyneux recently conducted a webinar in partnership with EU DisinfoLab on how platforms can address emerging climate mis- and disinformation threats. Watch the full session here.
Looking ahead, recent legislation in the UK and Europe will play a role in addressing this issue. Both the OSA and DSA include media literacy requirements: the OSA mandates that Ofcom develop a national media literacy strategy, while the DSA requires platforms to give users tools to better understand online risks. Both laws also call for stronger platform action on harmful content, with clear standards for transparency and accountability.
As implementation progresses, these measures offer hope for strengthening public resilience to mis- and disinformation. In an era where climate change and related false narratives can amplify one another, sustained collaboration between regulators, platforms and civil society will be essential to safeguarding users and maintaining a safer digital environment.
The broader impact of climate mis- and disinformation
The spike in hate speech, incitement to violence and conspiracy theories in online discourse after recent hurricanes and wildfires has underscored the profound impact of climate change mis- and disinformation. These narratives undermine disaster relief efforts, exacerbate societal divisions and, in some cases, put lives at risk.
The spread of false information about climate change can erode trust in scientific consensus, hindering collective efforts to address the crisis. False narratives about immigration further polarize vulnerable communities — particularly migrants and disaster victims — making it harder to build public cooperation around environmental initiatives.
This confusion and mistrust in authorities can delay critical responses to severe weather events, endangering more people. As the consequences of climate change become increasingly visible, the need to address mis- and disinformation will become even more urgent.
For the past 20 years, Resolver has partnered with many of the world’s largest social media platforms and technology service providers. Our human-led Trust and Safety Intelligence approach is tailored to meet each client’s needs. With a team of more than 180 analysts and subject matter experts, we use advanced Trust and Safety detection and analytical tools to provide precise, timely and deeply informed intelligence and guidance.
We support platforms at the intersection of freedom of expression and policy enforcement, helping teams understand risks and identify issues before they escalate. If your organization is preparing for stricter climate-related enforcement under the DSA or OSA — or needs deeper visibility into how narrative threats evolve across your platform — our analysts can help. Reach out to learn how Resolver supports platforms in managing emerging risks with confidence.
