Ongoing debates about the ontology and epistemology of trust – both generally and in the context of epistemic trust in science – often conceptualize trust as reliance supplemented by an additional factor, such as the trustee’s willingness (Hawley, 2014). In the context of science, epistemic trust depends on three conditions: (1) reliance on the trustee’s competence, (2) reliance on their willingness, and (3) acceptance of the trustor’s vulnerability. These conditions highlight the epistemic and normative dimensions of trust, both of which are undermined when scientific findings supporting policy decisions are challenged or denied.

This paper examines key agnotological strategies used to deny scientific findings that underpin political regulations, particularly in epidemiology and climate research. I argue that these strategies not only foster distrust but actively redirect trust toward alternative structures constructed to signal trustworthiness. Rather than viewing science denialism as merely an effort to discredit science (Hansson, 2017), this frames it as a strategic attempt to redirect existing trust in science.

Furthermore, I propose that those influenced by doubt-mongering are not excessive skeptics but individuals placing trust in unreliable sources. Addressing this requires strengthening the socio-epistemic infrastructure to enhance the devision of epistemic labor, alongside measures like inoculation against misinformation.