{"id":262923,"date":"2023-06-20T09:57:30","date_gmt":"2023-06-20T07:57:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=262923"},"modified":"2023-06-20T09:57:33","modified_gmt":"2023-06-20T07:57:33","slug":"in-climate-debate-exaggeration-is-a-pitfall-nyt-article-revisited-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=262923","title":{"rendered":"\u201cIn Climate Debate, Exaggeration Is a Pitfall\u201d (NYT article revisited)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From \u00a0Master Resource<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Robert Bradley Jr.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ed Note<\/strong>: This week is the 35th anniversary of the exaggerated climate alarm, which began with James Hansen\u2019s June 1988 testimony before the Senate. Meanwhile, far-too-many scientists remain quiet about the climate model problem and psuedo-scientific attribution studies, while the campaigners link all extreme weather events to mankind\u2019s consumption and energy habits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIn a paper<\/a> being published in the March-April [2009] edition of the journal Environment<\/em>, Matthew C. Nisbet \u2026 said Mr. Gore\u2019s approach, focusing on language of crisis and catastrophe, could actually be serving the other side in the fight \u2026 \u2018as global-warming alarmism\u2026.\u2019\u201d \u2013 Andrew Revkin, NYT (2009<\/a>).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThere has to be a lot of shrillness taken out of our language. In the environmental community, we have to be more humble. We can\u2019t take the attitude that we have all the answers.\u201d \u2013 Fred Krupp, Environmental Defense Fund (2011<\/a>).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Alarm becomes its own energy when the data does not back it up. Repeated exaggerations cause a backlash as credibility shrinks. And it is well documented, as in Michael Shellenberger\u2019s Apocalypse Never<\/a>, building on his argument presented in a Forbes column, Why Climate Alarmism Hurts Us All<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bjorn Lomborg\u2019s best-seller False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet<\/a><\/em>,\u201d also demoted the climate scare at the time the climate elite wanted us to panic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The alarmists, meanwhile, declare themselves to not be alarmist! Wiki blocked an entry on Climate Alarmism,<\/a> bowing to the offended alarmists. My climate opponent Andrew Dessler<\/a> cut off email communication with me because \u2026 I called him an alarmist in print!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not an alarmist? Consider this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

If \u2018some humans survive\u2019 is the only thing we care about, then climate change is a non-issue. I think it\u2019s certain that \u2018some\u2019 humans will survive almost any climate change. They may be living short, hard lives of poverty, but they\u2019ll be alive. (November 20, 2018<\/a>)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Here is the email exchange between us (February 16, 2020) where Dessler labels me a \u201cdenier\u201d but rejects the alarmist label:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

I don\u2019t feel like talking to someone who insults me on their widely read blog. When you publicly apologize for calling me an \u201calarmist\u201d, then I\u2019ll consider answering\u2026.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

I answered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

I did not understand your offense with being called an alarmist. What would you describe yourself as in the sense of seeing a dire future of climate and the need for short-term forced energy transformation? Can one buy into \u201cthe existential threat\u201d and not be labeled an alarmist?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I assume you would call me a \u201cdenier\u201d (those who view the future of climate optimistically under BAU).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

He ended the exchange with this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

You\u2019re absolutely a denier, Rob.  The difference between us is that I don\u2019t call you out about it.  If you want a civil discussion with someone, don\u2019t begin it with an insult.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Dessler knows that Malthusian gloom is a short-run strategy at best. Does he realize that his scare today is straightlined from Paul Ehrlich\u2019s 1968 The Population Bomb<\/em>, which began<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Mass starvation \u2026 Mineral resource famines \u2026 global cooling \u2026 global warming. Doomsday has had many different colors but a common flaw: no theory of entrepreneurship, or human ingenuity to tame the bad (anticipate, adapt!) and capitalize on the good (more atmospheric CO2!) in wealthy free societies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The climate debate, after all, is all about high-energy society powered by mineral energies increasing human betterment in a variety of climates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Revkin: 2009<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This gets me to a 14-year-old piece by the then New York Times<\/em> climate scribe Andrew Revkin, In Climate Debate, Exaggeration Is a Pitfall<\/a>. This article is timely for the debate today where the alarmists tip-toe between dire predictions and losing the general public on the issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Revkin compares Al Gore\u2019s message of impending catastrophe with eco-complaints against George Will (see yesterday\u2019s defense of Will\u2019s article<\/a> in reference to the points below).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the effort to shape the public\u2019s views on global climate change, hyperbole<\/a> is an ever-present temptation on all sides of the debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earlier this month, former Vice President Al Gore and the Washington Post columnist George Will made strong public statements about global warning \u0097 from starkly divergent viewpoints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mr. Gore, addressing a hall filled with scientists<\/a> in Chicago, showed a slide that illustrated a sharp spike in fires, floods and other calamities around the world and warned the audience that global warming \u201cis creating weather-related disasters that are completely unprecedented.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mr. Will, in a column<\/a> attacking what he said were exaggerated claims about global warming\u2019s risks, chided climate scientists for predicting an ice age three decades ago and asserted that a pause in warming in recent years and the recent expansion of polar sea ice undermined visions of calamity ahead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Both men, experts said afterward, were guilty of inaccuracies and overstatements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mr. Gore removed the slide from his presentation<\/a> after the Belgian research group that assembled the disaster data said he had misrepresented what was driving the upward trend. The group said a host of factors contributed to the trend, with climate change possibly being one of them. A spokeswoman for Mr. Gore said he planned to switch to using data on disasters compiled by insurance companies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mr. Will, peppered with complaints from scientists<\/a> and environmental groups who claimed the column was riddled with errors, has yet to respond. The Post\u2019s ombudsman said Mr. Will\u2019s column had been carefully fact-checked. But the scientists whose research on ice formed the basis for Mr. Will\u2019s statements said their data showed the area of the ice shrinking, not expanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The events illustrate the fine line that advocates on all sides walk \u0097 and sometimes cross \u0097 in using science to bolster their arguments over what should or should not be done about global warming, the buildup of emissions of heat-trapping gases that scientists have linked to rising temperatures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

President Obama has not been immune from the lure of hype. As president-elect, Mr. Obama, making a video appearance at a California climate conference, began by saying that the science pointing to human-caused warming was beyond dispute \u0097 a statement backed by a strong consensus among scientists. But he went on to push the point, taking the same step as Mr. Gore onto shakier ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe\u2019ve seen record drought, spreading famine and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season,\u201d Mr. Obama said, linking this to global warming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While climate scientists foresee more intense droughts and storms, there is still uncertainty, and significant disagreement, over whether recent patterns can be attributed to global warming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Social scientists who study the interface of climate science and public policy say that campaigners and officials who seek to curb emissions of heat-trapping gases face an uphill battle in changing people\u2019s minds about the issue. Even with the success of \u201cAn Inconvenient Truth,\u201d the Oscar-winning 2006 documentary featuring Mr. Gore, and widely publicized images of melting Arctic ice, surveys show that most Americans are either confused about climate change, mildly concerned about it or completely disengaged from the issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A variety of surveys show that roughly 20 percent of Americans are in Mr. Gore\u2019s camp and another 20 percent in Mr. Will\u2019s, rejecting the idea that humans could dangerously alter global climate. That division is unlikely to change any time soon, said David Ropeik<\/a>, a consultant on risk communication who teaches at Harvard University.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once science moves from the laboratory or ice caps into fights over policy and the economy, Mr. Ropeik said, the issues are mainly framed by polarizing figures who tailor their message to people who already strongly support their views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cGore and Will will rally their supporters and entrench their opponents, and we will be no closer to progress,\u201d Mr. Ropeik said. \u201cThey are merely two leaders of their tribes waving the tribal flag.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a paper<\/a> being published in the March-April edition of the journal Environment, Matthew C. Nisbet, a professor of communications at American University, said Mr. Gore\u2019s approach, focusing on language of crisis and catastrophe, could actually be serving the other side in the fight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThere is little evidence to suggest that it is effective at building broad-based support for policy action,\u201d Dr. Nisbet said. \u201cPerhaps worse, his message is very easily countered by people such as Will as global-warming alarmism, shifting the focus back to their preferred emphasis on scientific uncertainty and dueling expert views.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But Dr. Nisbet said that for Mr. Will, there was little downside in stretching the bounds of science to sow doubt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Criticism of Mr. Will\u2019s columns, Dr. Nisbet said, \u201conly serves to draw attention to his claims while reinforcing a larger false narrative that liberals and the mainstream press are seeking to censor rival scientific evidence and views.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s summertime 2023. Expect every heat record and drought anomaly to be highlighted and publicized as \u201cglobal warming.\u201d Never mind that air conditioning has tamed the heat for almost all<\/a>, and the world\u2019s warming is well below <\/a>(alarmist) model-predicted. Expect, too, that hurricanes this season (it began June 1) will be hyped as \u201cclimate change.\u201d The exaggeration continues with fundraising and political power as the prize.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This week is the 35th anniversary of the exaggerated climate alarm, which began with James Hansen\u2019s June 1988 testimony before the Senate. Meanwhile, far-too-many scientists remain quiet about the climate model problem and psuedo-scientific attribution studies, while the campaigners link all extreme weather events to mankind\u2019s consumption and energy habits.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":262925,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691819079,691819282,691818056,691818090,691820347,691820348],"class_list":{"0":"post-262923","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-al-gore","9":"tag-climate-alarm","10":"tag-climate-change","11":"tag-climate-warning","12":"tag-exaggeration","13":"tag-psuedo-scientific","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0-psuedo-scientific.jpg?fit=1200%2C1134&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-16oH","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":266959,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=266959","url_meta":{"origin":262923,"position":0},"title":"Climate Fact-Check June 2023 Edition","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"12\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"We\u2019ll close out by returning to James Hansen\u2019s June 1988 testimony. As it turns out, June 2023 was 1.53\u00b0F\u00a0cooler\u00a0in the U.S. than June 1988.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-350.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-350.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-350.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-350.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263622,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=263622","url_meta":{"origin":262923,"position":1},"title":"In Search of the \u201cGreenhouse Signal\u201d in the 1990s (and when did they know?)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"24\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"When did the \u201cgreenhouse signal\u201d become recognized and \u201csettled science\u201d? Despite the 35th anniversary of James Hansen\u2019s June 1988 testimony to a Senate subcommittee, the historical record should be clear that detection was not in 1988. Or 1991. Or 1995. Or 1998.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0dontpanic3.webp?fit=1200%2C848&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0dontpanic3.webp?fit=1200%2C848&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0dontpanic3.webp?fit=1200%2C848&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0dontpanic3.webp?fit=1200%2C848&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0dontpanic3.webp?fit=1200%2C848&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263587,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=263587","url_meta":{"origin":262923,"position":2},"title":"Wrong Again: James Hansen 1988 Senate Testimony Edition","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"23\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"NASA scientist James Hansen launched climate idiocy on June 23, 1988 with his famous Senate testimony. This review of it 35 years later indicates that Hansen\u2019s testimony was largely just hot air, which no doubt contributed to the legendary stuffiness of the Senate hearing room that day.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0014014819_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C630&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0014014819_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C630&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0014014819_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C630&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0014014819_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C630&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0014014819_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C630&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":348355,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=348355","url_meta":{"origin":262923,"position":3},"title":"Naturally Hot, Exaggeration Not","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"22\/10\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWhat has come to be known as \u2018weather attribution,\u2019 research assigning causation to observed weather events, is fraught with methodological problems. Veteran climate scientist Roger A. Pielke Jr. in his Substack publication The Honest Broker calls it \u2018weather attribution alchemy\u2019.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/428cb5e678da63e8f316391bc0d6116d.jpg?fit=1200%2C695&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":354286,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=354286","url_meta":{"origin":262923,"position":4},"title":"Andrew Dessler\u2019s Strange Optimism (post-election groping)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"13\/12\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The recent election should have thrown climate scientist\/alarmist\/activist Andrew Dessler into a funk, even toward self-doubt and need to check his anti-CO2 premises. His all-out exaggeration about a climate emergency was resoundingly rejected by the winning party and\u00a0abandoned as an important talking point by the losing party.","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Andrew-Dessler.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Andrew-Dessler.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Andrew-Dessler.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Andrew-Dessler.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Andrew-Dessler.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":400895,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=400895","url_meta":{"origin":262923,"position":5},"title":"New York Times on Climate: Now (2025) and Then (1988)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/09\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The\u00a0New York Times\u00a0is the newspaper of record on climate alarm. The latest, \u201cScientists Denounce Trump Administration\u2019s Climate Report\u201d (September 3, 2025), brings to mind this paper\u2019s first climate alarm article of note, \u201c\u2018Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate Today\u00a0(June 24, 1988).","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN4n5Rlcqe77zG5PxfvMWt6IZgynJuU7y0aPJDfs3L7Q8OfeNpgP9qNIiD0J3k_P7Pf5Y6lWGLFk8al_ACqu7Jp1M0jwY5Fhsy_h3eyPXFfLDfP3Wmjv0N_WvuG3_YreQfmYd5N1zu9AbaJlqFL76Fpq3hrZw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN4n5Rlcqe77zG5PxfvMWt6IZgynJuU7y0aPJDfs3L7Q8OfeNpgP9qNIiD0J3k_P7Pf5Y6lWGLFk8al_ACqu7Jp1M0jwY5Fhsy_h3eyPXFfLDfP3Wmjv0N_WvuG3_YreQfmYd5N1zu9AbaJlqFL76Fpq3hrZw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN4n5Rlcqe77zG5PxfvMWt6IZgynJuU7y0aPJDfs3L7Q8OfeNpgP9qNIiD0J3k_P7Pf5Y6lWGLFk8al_ACqu7Jp1M0jwY5Fhsy_h3eyPXFfLDfP3Wmjv0N_WvuG3_YreQfmYd5N1zu9AbaJlqFL76Fpq3hrZw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN4n5Rlcqe77zG5PxfvMWt6IZgynJuU7y0aPJDfs3L7Q8OfeNpgP9qNIiD0J3k_P7Pf5Y6lWGLFk8al_ACqu7Jp1M0jwY5Fhsy_h3eyPXFfLDfP3Wmjv0N_WvuG3_YreQfmYd5N1zu9AbaJlqFL76Fpq3hrZw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN4n5Rlcqe77zG5PxfvMWt6IZgynJuU7y0aPJDfs3L7Q8OfeNpgP9qNIiD0J3k_P7Pf5Y6lWGLFk8al_ACqu7Jp1M0jwY5Fhsy_h3eyPXFfLDfP3Wmjv0N_WvuG3_YreQfmYd5N1zu9AbaJlqFL76Fpq3hrZw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262923","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=262923"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262923\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":262926,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262923\/revisions\/262926"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/262925"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=262923"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=262923"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=262923"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}