48 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2022
    1. Greenland’s Melting Ice Is No Cause for Climate-Change Panic

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low' according to the scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in Climate Feedback's analysis

    1. Deepti Gurdasani. (2022, January 29). Going to say this again because it’s important. Case-control studies to determine prevalence of long COVID are completely flawed science, but are often presented as being scientifically robust. This is not how we can define clinical syndromes or their prevalence! A thread. [Tweet]. @dgurdasani1. https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1487366920508694529

    1. Deepti Gurdasani. (2022, January 30). Have tried to now visually illustrate an earlier thread I wrote about why prevalence estimates based on comparisons of “any symptom” between infected cases, and matched controls will yield underestimates for long COVID. I’ve done a toy example below here, to show this 🧵 [Tweet]. @dgurdasani1. https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1487578265187405828

  2. Aug 2021
  3. May 2021
    1. There is no climate emergency

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low' according to the scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in Climate Feedback's analysis

  4. Apr 2021
    1. Are We Doomed?

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low' according to the scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in Climate Feedback's analysis

  5. Jan 2021
  6. Jun 2020
  7. Mar 2020
  8. Nov 2019
  9. Oct 2019
  10. Aug 2019
  11. Jun 2019
  12. May 2019
  13. Apr 2019
  14. Feb 2019
  15. Dec 2018
  16. Sep 2018
    1. Hurricane Florence is not climate change or global warming. It's just the weather.

      Overall scientific credibility: 'low' to 'very low', according to scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  17. Aug 2018
  18. May 2018
    1. The Sea Is Rising, but Not Because of Climate Change

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low', according to scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  19. Apr 2018
    1. A Startling New Discovery Could Destroy All Those Global Warming Doomsday Forecasts

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low', according to scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  20. Dec 2017
  21. Nov 2017
    1. Climate change might be worse than thought after scientists find major mistake in water temperature readings

      Overall scientific credibility: 'low', according to scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  22. Oct 2017
  23. Jun 2017
  24. May 2017
  25. Mar 2017
    1. Earth heading for 'mini ice age' within 15 years

      Overall scientific credibility: 'low' to 'very low', according to the 6 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the reply+annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  26. Feb 2017
    1. Scientists: Here's What Really Causes Climate Change (And It Has Nothing To Do With Human Beings)

      Overall scientific credibility: 'low' to 'very low', according to 4 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

    1. The Alarming Thing About Climate Alarmism

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low' to 'low', according to 7 climate scientists who evaluated this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and on ClimateFeedback.org

      This evaluation features contributions by MIT Prof. Kerry Emanuel (see annotations below) and by Wesleyan University Prof. Gary Yohe (see his comments on the article)

      karmour:

      The article contains numerous scientific errors, does not provide references for some of its key claims, and ignores much of the published literature on the subjects discussed. It appears that many details have been cherry-picked or misconstrued in service of making a political point.

      anonymous reviewer:

      The author tries to rebut the narrative "that the world’s climate is changing from bad to worse". In doing so, he erects a straw-man, cherry-picks studies and misrepresents current climate science. Furthermore, the logic that since things are not 'worst-than-we-thought', we shouldn't take action and do the things we would do if things were simply 'bad', is lost on me…

      emvincent:

      The article is imprecise, for instance, about who the “doomsayers” and the “alarmists” are: since the core of the argumentation is about them, a definition of who they are and what they argue exactly cannot be avoided. It is also vague in its conclusion: “we need balance”, here again what exactly is meant by balance should be made clearer.

      jgdwyer:

      Tries and fails to make a convincing case for why humans need to worry about climate change less than they currently do.

      bmv:

      Although this author appears to have read parts of the IPCC report and carefully selected the facts which support his narrative, he presents information in a very misleading way, and some of his statements (e.g. "despite endless successions of climate summits, carbon emissions continue to rise") do not support his thesis that action on climate change is alarmist and unnecessary. His conclusion that "climate change is not worse than we thought. Some indicators are worse, but some are better" suggests a false equivalency between the indicators that are "worse" and those that are "better".

      drchavas:

      The author on multiple occasions presents blatantly inaccurate information and otherwise uses selective information to argue his point, which is highly misleading.

  27. Dec 2016
    1. Stunning new data indicates El Nino drove record highs in global temperatures suggesting rise may not be down to man-made emissions

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low', according to 7 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  28. Nov 2016
    1. The Phony War Against CO2

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low', according to 6 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

    1. About Those Non-Disappearing Pacific Islands

      Overall scientific credibility: 'low', according to 12 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  29. Oct 2016
    1. James Lovelock: ‘Before the end of this century, robots will have taken over’

      Overall scientific credibility: 'low' to 'very low', according to 5 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  30. Jul 2016
  31. Jan 2016
    1. The Climate Snow Job

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low' to 'low', according to 10 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the reply+annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  32. Dec 2015
    1. Your Complete Guide to the Climate Debate

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low' to 'low', according to 12 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the reply+annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  33. Nov 2015
  34. Oct 2015
    1. The vested interests at play mean the evidence we see from the research community isn’t always objective. So instead of allowing “experts” to determine the best course of action, why not ask the public? We could demand independent, objective evidence

      Underplays the vast independent scientific research literature that is already out there.

  35. Sep 2015
    1. Wake up, Obama, climate change has been happening forever

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low', according to 9 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the reply+annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis

  36. Aug 2015
    1. How Arctic ice has made fools of all those poor warmists

      Overall scientific credibility: 'very low', according to the 8 scientists who analyzed this article.

      evaluation card

      Find more details in the reply+annotations below and in Climate Feedback's analysis