Daniel Swain
PragerU video on climate change repeats a range of misleading claims by Steven Koonin
“The author of this video, Dr. Steven Koonin, says he is following the scientific reports published by the UN and US government, but by subtly changing wording and choosing not to mention important context this video is very likely to mislead readers.
This style of selective wording and lack of context, an approach called “cherry picking”, applies to every one of Dr. Koonin’s scientific comments.”
Wall Street Journal article repeats multiple incorrect and misleading claims made in Steven Koonin’s new book ’Unsettled’
Scientists who reviewed the article found that it builds on a collection of misleading and false claims. For instance, Koonin states that “Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was eighty years ago”. Contrary to the claim, scientific studies using airborne and satellite altimetry observations show considerable thinning has occurred along the margin of the Greenland ice sheet since 2003.
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.”
Climate change, forest management and several other causes contribute to wildfire severity and total area burned in the western United States
Claim:
“Forest fires are caused by poor management. Not by climate change.”
Article by Michael Shellenberger mixes accurate and inaccurate claims in support of a misleading and overly simplistic argumentation about climate change
“Shellenberger’s article promoting his new book “Apocalypse Never” includes a mix of accurate, misleading, and patently false statements. While it is useful to push back against claims that climate change will lead to the end of the world or human extinction, to do so by inaccurately downplaying real climate risks is deeply problematic and counterproductive.”
Claim that human civilization could end in 30 years is speculative, not supported with evidence
“The report this article is based on describes a scenario which is unlikely, but several aspects of what is included in the report are likely to worsen in coming decades, such as the occurrence of deadly heatwaves. The conclusion of a high likelihood that human civilisation will end is false, although there is a great deal of evidence that there will be many damaging consequences to continued global warming over the coming decades.”
In popular video, Dan Peña falsely claims humans aren't causing climate change
Claim:
Fifty-five thousand years ago the whole world was 2°C warmer than it is today[...] It's all cyclical; [human-caused greenhouse gas emissions are] not a fart in the wind. Sea level rise is not going to happen.
President Trump's claim that water supply policy has worsened California wildfires is baseless
Claim:
California wildfires are being magnified & made so much worse by the bad environmental laws which aren’t allowing massive amounts of readily available water to be properly utilized. It is being diverted into the Pacific Ocean.
Washington Post story puts recent weather extremes in accurate climate change context
“This article accurately describes the broader climate context of recent heat extremes throughout the Northern Hemisphere. There are a couple spots where specific claims are somewhat stronger than justified by the existing scientific evidence, but in general the piece gives an accurate impression regarding the role of climate change and recent advances in extreme event attribution science.”
Daily Mail correctly reports that climate change leads to more severe heatwaves, but explanation of recent weather is off the mark
“Mostly this article is accurate in its reporting of the recent heat over North America and Eurasia. However, there are a few misleading statements, including the headline, that exaggerate both the scale of the event and the likely role of climate change.”
Breitbart article on California fires misleads by omitting explanation of climate’s influence
“The Breitbart article provides a poorly reasoned and misleading view of how climate change has contributed to recent fires in California and the rest of the western USA. The most informative part of the article is the link that it provides to a piece by Southern California Public Radio, which, unlike the Breitbart article, provides an informative and unbiased look at factors contributing to these recent fires.”
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.
Some extreme weather events are clearly becoming more common, in contrast to Lord Lawson's claim
Claim:
The IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which is sort of the voice of the consensus, concedes that there has been no increase in extreme weather events.
Scientists explain what New York Magazine article on “The Uninhabitable Earth” gets wrong
“While it is clear that ongoing warming of the global climate would eventually have very severe consequences, the concept of the Earth becoming uninhabitable within anywhere near the timescales suggested in the article is pure hyperbole. The author has clearly done very extensive research and addresses a number of climate threats that are indeed major issues, but generally the narrative ramps up the threat to go beyond the level that is supported by science.”
Global warming has not “ceased”, as Heartland Institute report falsely claims
Claim:
global warming ceased around the end of the twentieth century and was followed (since 1997) by 19 years of stable temperature
The Daily Wire makes wild claims about climate change based on no evidence
“The article contains little to no rational treatment of observational data, but relies on heavily biased secondhand interpretation… Even the title is based on a lie. There is no ‘study’ that finds static temperatures for 19-years. This article is based on a newspaper article that makes this false statement based in turn on a blog post…”
The Telegraph publishes false information about Arctic climate
“This article suffers from a common error in reasoning. The author focuses on individual “snapshots” of the state of the climate while ignoring the long-term trends. Those trends occur over many decades and must be observed/considered over those time scales.”
Global sea level rise is accelerating, despite Heartland Institute report’s claims otherwise
Claim:
Best available data show sea-level rise is not accelerating. Local and regional sea levels continue to exhibit typical natural variability—in some places rising and in others falling.
Analysis of "From extreme drought to record rain: Why California's drought-to-deluge cycle is getting worse"
“The article is accurate and highlights the challenges that California’s water resource managers are facing due to climate change. There are some issues with differentiating natural climate variability and forced climate change but the main points are correct.”
Analysis of "One of the most troubling ideas about climate change just found new evidence in its favor"
“Overall, this piece accurately describes the findings of a new research paper by Mann et al on linkages between rapid Arctic warming and extreme weather at Earth’s more temperate latitudes. While there are a couple of statements that are overly confident given available evidence in the peer-reviewed literature, the author generally does an excellent job placing this new work into the broader context of related studies over the past decade.”
Analysis of "Record-breaking climate change pushes world into ‘uncharted territory’"
“The article clearly and concisely documents some of 2016’s climate extremes and puts them in the context of the warming trend.”
Analysis of "U.S. scientists officially declare 2016 the hottest year on record. That makes three in a row."
“The article accurately conveys the US agencies’ declaration of 2016 as the hottest year on record. It provides some good background material on why the agencies’ numbers differ slightly (treatment of the Arctic) and the contributing roles of El Niño and man-made global warming.”
Analysis of "Arctic ice melt 'already affecting weather patterns where you live right now'"
“The article nicely introduces some of the emerging science linking Arctic climate change to extreme weather at lower latitudes. There are no major inaccuracies and the author has sought expert comment form several prominent scientists. However, the article fails to fully capture the large uncertainty about how Arctic warming may influence weather in places further south and how big this effect might be.”
Claim that Arctic warming is already influencing mid-latitude weather correct but still under investigation
Claim:
The jet stream meanders more, with big loops bringing warm air to the frozen north and cold air into warmer southern climes.