-1.5Very low
Wall Street Journal op-ed on economic consequences of climate change found naive by scientists
“This is a very simplistic, almost naive op-ed on climate change impacts. Some assertions such as the one about CO2 being good for plants demonstrates that the authors do not know or understand how increasing CO2 is good or bad for plants, they are just repeating something they heard.”
-1.3Low
Analysis of "An Overheated Climate Alarm"
“Lomborg is using scientific ‘language’ to suggest that climate change will have insignificant health impacts; this goes against a vast body of evidence. The notion that benefits from warmer winters could be more important than risks from hotter summer in terms of human health is plain wrong.”
-2Very low
Analysis of “Top 10 Global Warming Lies That May Shock You”
“This article wins the Olympic gold for cherry-picking data, misleading claims, and a long list of scientifically unsupported assertions.”