Ana Bastos
Breitbart article makes numerous false claims about the impacts of climate change, based on Global Warming Policy Foundation post
“The article’s scientific credibility is very low. The author cherry-picks data, makes broad generalizations and characterizations based on incomplete or flimsy reasoning, and repeatedly misinterprets technological and economic progress in justifying false claims and misinformation minimizing global warming impacts.”
Guardian story conveys statement by scientists stressing role of deforestation in climate change
“The article correctly links estimates of current carbon dioxide emissions from land use and land cover change with fairly conservative estimates for potential carbon sequestration embedded in “natural climate solutions” as part of the climate mitigation strategy to avoid 1.5°C warming.
Land-use and land-cover change is responsible for roughly 10-15% of total global carbon dioxide emissions. Forest management, reforestation, and afforestation where appropriate, is part of the climate mitigation portfolio assessed by Integrated Assessment Models used in the IPCC process.”
EPA’s Scott Pruitt incorrectly suggests climate change might not be “a bad thing”
Claim:
We know that humans have most flourished during times of, what, warming trends. I think there are assumptions made that because the climate is warming, that that is necessarily a bad thing.
Atlantic story on the climate implications of reduced beef consumption could provide clearer context
“The article explains the issue (meat production diverts crops from humans to cattle) on a simple level. More explanation and more context could have been provided, I think, regarding individual-level and sectoral sources of greenhouse emissions.”
Commentary in The Australian ignores evidence and misrepresents research while falsely claiming humans are not responsible for climate change
“Yet another in the exhausting heap of opinions choosing not to engage with evidence, while still expecting readers to believe inaccurate and baseless claims. It is baffling why publications such as The Australian wish to promote opinions that are both not well-argued and demonstrably not based on fact.”
New York Times’ “straightforward answers” to common climate questions are accurate, too
This article in The New York Times serves as a primer by briefly answering seventeen basic questions about the cause and consequences of—and possible solutions to—climate change. Ten scientists reviewed the article, and generally found the answers to be highly accurate distillations of the research on that topic.
Daily Wire article misunderstands study on carbon budget (along with Fox News, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail, Breitbart…)
“The article selectively quotes from interviews and scientific papers to create the false perception that climate models significantly overestimate the rate of warming. The article also falsely implies that the cited paper is about the so called “hiatus” while the paper is actually about the carbon budget for the 1.5 ºC target.”