[Silence]
\n[Instrumental Intro: electric piano, dark psychedelic acoustic guitar, pulsing bass, distant feedback]<\/p>\n
[Verse 1]
\nFirst they say
\n(It isn’t real)
\nNothing here
\n(That you can feel)<\/p>\n
Just a cycle
\n(Just the weather)
\nNothing’s changing
\n(Not together)<\/p>\n
[Refrain]
\nDenial and delay
\n(Can’t last another day)
\nThe cost too high to pay
\n(Denial and delay)<\/p>\n
… just go away<\/p>\n
[Verse 2]
\nThen the story
\n(Starts to change)
\nNow that warming
\n(Isn’t strange)<\/p>\n
[Refrain]
\nDenial and delay
\n(Can’t last another day)
\nThe cost too high to pay
\n(Denial and delay)<\/p>\n
… just go away<\/p>\n
[Instrumental, Acoustic Guitar and Electric Piano Jam]<\/p>\n
[Bridge]
\nIs it denial?
\n(Is it delay?)
\nIs it doubt?
\n(Or a way?)<\/p>\n
What uncertainty
\n(Do we stress?)
\nWhat consequences
\n(Do we suppress?)<\/p>\n
[Refrain]
\nDenial and delay
\n(Can’t last another day)
\nThe cost too high to pay
\n(Denial and delay)<\/p>\n
… just go away<\/p>\n
[Break]
\nGo away
\n(You can’t sway)
\nDenial
\n(Go away)
\n… you can’t stay<\/p>\n
[Outro]
\nDenial and delay
\n(Can’t last another day)
\nThe cost too high to pay
\n(Denial and delay)<\/p>\n
You can look away
\n(But it won’t go away)
\nYou can say
\n(Just go away)<\/p>\n
But the world won’t
\n(Go away)<\/p>\n
[Outro]
\nDenial and delay
\n(Can’t last another day)
\nThe cost too high to pay
\n(Denial and delay)<\/p>\n
… just go away<\/p>\n
[Instrumental Outro: distorted guitar, pulsing bass, feedback fading into silence]<\/p>\n
[Fade out]
\n[Silence]
\n[End]<\/p>\n
About the Song
\nClimate Denial and Climate Delay<\/p>\n
The most familiar form of climate misinformation is outright denial: rejecting the existence, severity, or human cause of climate change.<\/p>\n
Political rhetoric has also attacked renewable energy through claims that wind turbines, solar power, or other clean-energy technologies are inherently dangerous or economically destructive. Some of these claims have been challenged by scientific evidence, while others involve legitimate questions about environmental impacts that require quantitative comparison rather than political rhetoric.<\/p>\n
As public acceptance of climate change has increased, however, the political emphasis has increasingly shifted from denying the problem to opposing proposed solutions. Researchers commonly describe this strategy as climate delay.<\/p>\n
The basic argument changes from:<\/p>\n
\u201cClimate change isn\u2019t happening.\u201d<\/p>\n
to:<\/p>\n
\u201cClimate change may be happening, but addressing it will cause even greater economic or social damage.\u201d<\/p>\n
This framing can emphasize immediate costs\u2014higher energy prices, job losses, grid reliability, restrictions on vehicles or industrial activity\u2014while giving less attention to the long-term economic costs of continued warming.
\nGovernment-sponsored challenges to climate science<\/p>\n
A prominent recent example was the U.S. Department of Energy\u2019s July 2025 publication of A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate. The report was produced by five scientists assembled by Energy Secretary Chris Wright and argued, among other things, that the economic damages from CO\u2082-induced warming may be smaller than commonly believed and that aggressive mitigation policies could be more harmful than beneficial.<\/p>\n
Carbon Brief subsequently conducted a detailed fact-check with climate scientists and reported more than 100 statements it characterized as false or misleading, including claims involving the economic consequences of climate change, extreme weather, and the interpretation of scientific literature.<\/p>\n
The significance of such disputes is not simply whether individual claims are correct. It is also about which scientific evidence is selected, which uncertainties are emphasized, and how those choices are translated into public policy.<\/p>\n