# data[].attributes.headline
The dramatic effects of climate change from coast to coast

# data[].attributes.subject
The dramatic effects of climate change from coast to coast

# data[].attributes.body
CBS News senior environmental correspondent Ben Tracy shows how the increasing impacts of climate change — such as wildfires, floods, droughts and record heat waves — are hitting the country. This video report employs climate scientists to explain the evidence behind the concerns about the dangers of climate change. The report uses imagery and graphics to explain how the current trajectory of global warming will continue to negatively impact our weather patterns. They also make the point that global warming is at least in part due to human activity and that we can make changes to slow the impact.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The dramatic effects of climate change from coast to coast | ClimateWatch

# data[].attributes.body
This video takes a neutral stance on climate change by looking at data and claims from both sides of the debate. The stated purpose of the speaker is to present arguments from both sides so the viewer can make their own independent decision based on how they interpret each of the points. The presenter, an author, entrepreneur and business consultant, does not come down on either side of the debate.

# data[].attributes.body
This report is from Sky News, a UK media outlet, and details a claim by the Australian Prime Minister about how much it will cost to prepare for the potential impacts of climate change over the next 30 years. In this case, it's the reporters who call global warming a "fairytale" and fear-mongering by liberals. They cast doubt on the efficacy of global warming by saying it's part of a larger agenda to undermine the economy.

# data[].attributes.body
This tweet uses a bible verse and quotes from an astrophysicist to claim global warming was created to make money. The claim uses concepts people connect to strongly (religion and science) to portray the media as untrustworthy.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
once  again
global warming---clinate  change---in  a  HOAX

https://t.co/dihFdJwvqi

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].title
Astrophysicist says climate change has “nothing to do with man,” just a “gravy train” to make money

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
The climate brigade is whining and complaining about how human activity is responsible for Europe’s record-breaking hot summer, to which physicist and meteorologist Piers Corbyn says [...]

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
once  again
global warming---clinate  change---in  a  HOAX

https://t.co/dihFdJwvqi https://t.co/JHSFBHOgTm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
once again
global warming---clinate change---in a HOAXhttps://t.co/dihFdJwvqi pic.twitter.com/JHSFBHOgTm
— steve dixon (@ripper1fl) September 21, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
once  again
global warming---clinate  change---in  a  HOAX

https://t.co/dihFdJwvqi https://t.co/JHSFBHOgTm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].title
Astrophysicist says climate change has “nothing to do with man,” just a “gravy train” to make money

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
The climate brigade is whining and complaining about how human activity is responsible for Europe’s record-breaking hot summer, to which physicist and meteorologist Piers Corbyn says [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
once  again
global warming---clinate  change---in  a  HOAX

https://t.co/dihFdJwvqi https://t.co/JHSFBHOgTm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
once  again
global warming---clinate  change---in  a  HOAX

https://t.co/dihFdJwvqi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].title
Astrophysicist says climate change has “nothing to do with man,” just a “gravy train” to make money

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
The climate brigade is whining and complaining about how human activity is responsible for Europe’s record-breaking hot summer, to which physicist and meteorologist Piers Corbyn says [...]

# data[].attributes.body
This tweet asks a question but does not lean towards supporting or denying global warming. Even in the article, the phrase "climate change" is used sparingly, choosing to rely more on stating factual statistics without adding much commentary.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Is 2022 the driest year on record? https://t.co/wr1mj7TIkI

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].title
China, Europe, US drought: Is 2022 the driest year recorded?

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Heatwaves hit China, Europe and the US, causing lakes and rivers to dry up. Is this year the driest ever?

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Is 2022 the driest year on record? https://t.co/wr1mj7TIkI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Is 2022 the driest year on record? https://t.co/wr1mj7TIkI
— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) September 17, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Is 2022 the driest year on record? https://t.co/wr1mj7TIkI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].title
China, Europe, US drought: Is 2022 the driest year recorded?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
Heatwaves hit China, Europe and the US, causing lakes and rivers to dry up. Is this year the driest ever?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Is 2022 the driest year on record? https://t.co/wr1mj7TIkI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Is 2022 the driest year on record? https://t.co/wr1mj7TIkI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].title
China, Europe, US drought: Is 2022 the driest year recorded?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Heatwaves hit China, Europe and the US, causing lakes and rivers to dry up. Is this year the driest ever?

# data[].attributes.body
This post by NASA shows average global temperatures increasing over a timespan of ~140 years. As a respected scientific agency, without saying much, the graph infers that humans have caused a dramatic change to global climate since at least the onset of mass industrialization.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Monthly global temperature anomalies, 1880-2021

Source: NASA https://t.co/pKTmdR0ABc

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
The visualization presents monthly global temperature anomalies between the years 1880-2021. These temperatures are based on the GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4), an estimate of global surface temperature change. Anomalies are defined relative to a base period of 1951-1980. The data file used to create this visualization can be accessed here. The Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) is a NASA laboratory managed by the Earth Sciences Division of the agency’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The laboratory is affiliated with Columbia University’s Earth Institute and School of Engineering and Applied Science in New York. The 'climate spiral' is a visualization designed by climate scientist Ed Hawkins from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading. Climate spiral visualizations have been widely distributed, a version was even part of the opening ceremony of the Rio de Janeiro Olympics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Monthly global temperature anomalies, 1880-2021

Source: NASA https://t.co/pKTmdR0ABc pic.twitter.com/OY6DvmzKnl
— Steve Stewart-Williams (@SteveStuWill) September 18, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
The visualization presents monthly global temperature anomalies between the years 1880-2021. These temperatures are based on the GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4), an estimate of global surface temperature change. Anomalies are defined relative to a base period of 1951-1980. The data file used to create this visualization can be accessed here. The Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) is a NASA laboratory managed by the Earth Sciences Division of the agency’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The laboratory is affiliated with Columbia University’s Earth Institute and School of Engineering and Applied Science in New York. The 'climate spiral' is a visualization designed by climate scientist Ed Hawkins from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading. Climate spiral visualizations have been widely distributed, a version was even part of the opening ceremony of the Rio de Janeiro Olympics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Monthly global temperature anomalies, 1880-2021

Source: NASA https://t.co/pKTmdR0ABc

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
The visualization presents monthly global temperature anomalies between the years 1880-2021. These temperatures are based on the GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4), an estimate of global surface temperature change. Anomalies are defined relative to a base period of 1951-1980. The data file used to create this visualization can be accessed here. The Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) is a NASA laboratory managed by the Earth Sciences Division of the agency’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The laboratory is affiliated with Columbia University’s Earth Institute and School of Engineering and Applied Science in New York. The 'climate spiral' is a visualization designed by climate scientist Ed Hawkins from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading. Climate spiral visualizations have been widely distributed, a version was even part of the opening ceremony of the Rio de Janeiro Olympics.

# data[].attributes.headline
Internet article debunking the science behind climate change

# data[].attributes.subject
Internet article debunking the science behind climate change

# data[].attributes.body
German Professor Hermann Harde claims that scientists have hyped the potential dangers of climate change to compete for media attention. His position is that humans have caused less than 15% of the global carbon dioxide increases, implying that the majority comes from natural events and would have occurred with or without human intervention. This article is believable as it's published on a site called "The Daily Sceptic." Even with the pun/play on words (sceptic vs skeptic), the title of the site implies a reader would get an unbiased treatment of the subject.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With Germany scouring the world for supplies of oil and gas and firing up dormant coal power stations, one of its most distinguished atmospheric scientists, Professor Hermann Harde, has castigated politicians for reacting to increasingly shrill climate horror stories and "believing they can save the world". Many of the research studies and "horror scenarios" are not based on a secure physical foundation, he says, "but rather represent computer games that reflect what was fed in". The idea that humans can control the climate with their CO 2 emissions is said to be an "absolute delusion".

In Professor Harde's view, there exists considerable doubt about a "scientifically untenable thesis" of purely human-caused climate change, "and it is completely wrong to assume that 97% of climate scientists, or even more, would assume only anthropogenic warming". In his view, climate and energy policy can only gain popular acceptance when they are based on reliable knowledge, "and not on speculations or belief". Harde retired a few years ago from Helmut Schmidt University in Hamburg as Professor of Experimental Physics after a long career in science academia.

For many years, Germany's politicians have been able to make virtuous green noises by closing nuclear power stations and banning exploration for fossil fuel. At the same time, the country started importing large quantities oil and gas from an unstable Russia. The war in Ukraine has suddenly brought home to Germany, and the EU, the sheer stupidity of this dangerous policy.

In Harde's view, the move to impose 'climate emergency' policies was led by competition between different research groups to outdo each other predicting horror scenarios. Alarming predictions attracted media attention, "and our decision-makers felt obliged to quickly react". But, noted Harde, it is absolutely clear that without a reliable and sufficient energy supply, "Germany and many other countries that take such a path will end in anarchy".

Professor Harde's research leads him to state that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change overestimates by five times the thermal effect of doubling carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. He points to the "highly overlapping and saturated absorption bands" of CO 2 and water vapour, and the significant reduced effect of greenhouses gases under cloud cover. He goes on to state that the recent increase in CO ₂ has caused warming of less than 0.3°C over the last century.

He continues:

Since only about 15% of the global CO ₂ increase is of anthropogenic origin, just 15% of 0.3°C, i.e., less than 0.05°C remains, which can be attributed to humans in the overall balance. In view of this vanishingly small contribution, of which the Germans are only involved with 2.1% [of emissions], it is absurd to assume that an exit from fossil fuels could even remotely have an impact on our climate. Changes of our climate can be traced back to natural interaction processes that exceed our human influence by orders of magnitude.

In Professor Hande's opinion, modern climate science has developed more as an ideology and world view, rather than a serious science. Scientists who question or point to serious inconsistencies about human-caused or anthropogenic global warming, are "publicly discredited" and excluded from research funds. In addition, research contributions in journals are supressed, and in a reference to the recent Professor Peter Ridd case in Australia, placed on leave or dismissed from their university. After all, he notes, this is "settled climate science", and doubts about the harmful effect of CO ₂ on the environment and the climate are not allowed, "because it is about nothing less than saving the planet".

What we call truths, continues Harde, depends to a large extent on our state of knowledge. He suggests that climate science requires a fundamental review of the hypotheses and a shift away from the widely established climate industry. Science must not be misled by commerce, politics or ideology, he says. It is the genuine task of universities and state-funded research institutions "to investigate contradictory issues and to ensure independent, free research that gives us honest answers, even when these answers are often complex and do not fit into a desired political context".

Harde concludes by warning politicians that it would be an irresponsible environmental and energy policy to continue to ignore serious peer-reviewed scientific publications that show a much smaller human impact on the climate than previously thought. It is also irresponsible to shut down a reliable, adequate and affordable energy supply, to be replaced by millions of wind turbines, "that destroy our nature and shred trillions of birds and insects".

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic 's Environment Editor.

Postscript: It has been pointed out that a 2018 report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found that "human activities are estimated to have caused approximately 1.0°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels". This view is supported by findings from such organisations as the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the IPCC, which indicate that human activity is the greatest contributor to global warming, primarily through its emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

In Chris Morrison's defence, the role of human activity in causing global warming is still a matter of dispute among climate scientists and the claim that it is "the greatest contributor to global warming" is not in reality 'settled science'. Most people know what the IPCC thinks, since its views are widely reported. Our article reported an alternative view, one held by a distinguished atmospheric scientist. We believe science progresses by debating hypotheses such as these, not pretending they are 'settled' and dismissing views that challenge them as beyond the pale.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Scientist Says Humans Cause Less Than 0.05°C of Global Warming and Warns of "Anarchy" From "Delusional" Net Zero Policies - The Daily Sceptic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With Germany scouring the world for supplies of oil and gas and firing up dormant coal power stations, one of its most distinguished atmospheric scientists, Professor Hermann Harde, has castigated politicians for reacting to increasingly shrill climate horror stories and "believing they can save the world".

# data[].attributes.body
This article captures the United Nation's position on climate change and is used as an educational tool to explain why it's so important to address. The site can be verified as the official site of the United Nations. This specific section uses well-documented resources and links to other verifiable sites that contain assessments using scientific facts distilled from methodical research and studies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

# data[].attributes.headline
Web article exploring both sides of the global warming debate

# data[].attributes.subject
Web article exploring both sides of the global warming debate

# data[].attributes.body
This article stems from the Council on Foreign relations and examines both sides of the climate change argument. The authors do a good job of detailing both mainstream/pro and skeptic views on the topic without biasing the reader's attention to one position or the other. It explores such topics as blaming human activity, how to define climate "harm," differences on how to halt the impacts and policy implications. Each topic is discussed from both perspectives leaving the reader to decide for themselves on which position is more convincing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Debating global warming policy has moved to the top of agendas worldwide, but some skeptics still question whether action is necessary or possible.

# data[].attributes.body
This article was found using Google Scholar and is located here: https://www-f9.ijs.si/~margan/CO2/Refs/GWHoaxBorn.pdf. Being published in a science and technology magazine gives it some credence and I like how it focuses on a woman who "birthed" the global warming conspiracy at a conference in Research Triangle Park, NC in the mid-1970s. The author uses strong research and cites numerous resources to back her case. Doing a little digging, I discovered the author (Marjorie Hecht) was the editor of the magazine and this piece was written as more of an editorial.

# data[].attributes.body
This study (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13278-019-0568-8) on climate change explores the sentiment of how the topic is discussed on Twitter. Without choosing sides, the researchers examine the tone of the conversation surrounding the debate. In analyzing tweets by time and location, the conclusion was made that the debate in this forum is overwhelmingly negative. It seems the one thing both sides have in common is that they love to talk disparagingly about the other side. The tone of the debate was shown to change with the weather. Extreme weather was linked to more intense and negative comments while more pleasant weather (warmer winter days for instance) led to more friendly conversations. The analysis also showed the US as lagging behind other countries in discussing the topic leading to an assessment that the topic is less important here than in other places.

# data[].attributes.body
This study (https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wcc.710) explores how global warming can and will continue to impact cultural and historical assets through deteriorating weather conditions. The authors don't debate the legitimacy of climate change. This is a peer-reviewed article written by researchers from multiple universities and/or science foundations in the UK and Malta lending believability in their methods and conclusions. Additionally, the website where I found this study includes how many times it was cited by other researchers, and currently there are no contrasting or dissenting citations on record.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WIREs Climate Change - 2021 - Sesana - Climate change impacts on cultural heritage  A literature review

# data[].attributes.body
The global warming debate really gained steam in the 1970s as large studies were commissioned by organizations such as the US National Academy of Sciences. The results of these studies were published in the late 70s/early 80s leading to a broader awareness of the issues. This awareness soon drove policy changes in an attempt to be better stewards of the environment and the debate was on! For this padlet, I choose to look at media from four sources: YouTube, Twitter, Google Scholar, and the internet at large. From Google Scholar and the internet, I easily found sources for each of the three positions (real, neutral, myth). Youtube was a little more challenging in that they have done a good job in removing the vast majority of videos citing misinformation on the topic. While all three sides could be found on Twitter as well, the debate on that medium was often quite heated and probably the most negative of the four I researched.