{"id":349343,"date":"2024-10-28T18:26:51","date_gmt":"2024-10-28T17:26:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=349343"},"modified":"2024-10-28T18:26:54","modified_gmt":"2024-10-28T17:26:54","slug":"emotionally-unstable-climate-scientists-dont-like-being-criticized-run-to-daddy-nature","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=349343","title":{"rendered":"Emotionally Unstable \u201cClimate Scientists\u201d Don\u2019t Like Being Criticized, Run to Daddy (Nature)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

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

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Charles Rotter<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Guardian<\/em> article titled \u2018We have emotions too\u2019: Climate scientists respond to attacks on objectivity<\/em><\/a> is a remarkable exercise in self-pity, featuring climate scientists venting about the supposedly unjust criticism they face\u200b. This is in reaction to the pushback received after publication of an idiotic survey by the Guardian last May<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

These self-appointed climate saviors insist that their projections should be accepted without question, and when they aren\u2019t, they moan about how harsh and unfair the world has been to them. This isn\u2019t science under attack\u2014it\u2019s fragile egos crying foul when the rest of us refuse to buy into their doomsday narrative.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
\n

The researchers said they had been subject to ridicule by some scientists after taking part in a large Guardian survey of experts<\/a> in May, during which they and many others expressed their feelings of extreme fear about future temperature rises and the world\u2019s failure to take sufficient action. They said they had been told they were not qualified to take part in this broad discussion of the climate crisis, were spreading doom and were not impartial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the researchers said that embracing their emotions was necessary to do good science and was a spur to working towards better ways of tackling the climate crisis and the rapidly increasing damage being done to the world. They also said that those dismissing their fears as doom-laden and alarmist were speaking frequently from a position of privilege in western countries, with little direct experience of the effects of the climate crisis.

https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/environment\/2024\/oct\/25\/we-have-emotions-too-climate-scientists-respond-to-attacks-on-objectivity<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Real \u201cCrisis\u201d: Hurt Feelings<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The Guardian<\/em> piece is full of climate scientists\u2019 complaints about being criticized, a situation that apparently causes them great distress. They whimper about public skepticism as though it were some kind of assault on their personal well-being. In one particularly melodramatic section, a scientist whines about being called a \u201cliar\u201d on social media\u200b. Well, welcome to the world of public debate, where people will scrutinize, question, and yes, sometimes rudely dismiss claims that seem dubious. But the Guardian<\/em> seems determined to present these professionals not as robust researchers capable of handling criticism, but as delicate flowers wilting under the harsh glare of public doubt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead of addressing substantive criticisms\u2014like the failed climate models, inconsistent predictions, or the fact that climate policies often do more harm than good\u2014these scientists turn to emotional appeals. They argue that the public\u2019s harsh words are as much of a threat as climate change itself. They even suggest that \u201cclimate anxiety\u201d is exacerbated by \u201conline abuse\u201d from skeptics\u200b\u200b. So, let\u2019s get this straight: the models can handle the complex calculations of global warming trends, but the scientists can\u2019t handle mean tweets?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The \u201cToxicity\u201d of Skepticism<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

One theme that dominates The Guardian<\/em> article is the scientists\u2019 characterization of public scrutiny as \u201ctoxic\u201d\u200b. It\u2019s a clever rhetorical strategy, designed to make criticism seem not only misguided but morally wrong. By framing dissenters as aggressors who \u201charm\u201d scientists, the article tries to flip the script: suddenly, it\u2019s not about whether the climate models hold up under scrutiny; it\u2019s about whether the critics are hurting the scientists\u2019 feelings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If anything, this rhetoric exposes the scientists\u2019 shaky confidence in their own predictions. People who are confident in their data don\u2019t crumble under questioning. They engage, clarify, and persuade. But here, instead of rolling out hard evidence to silence their critics, climate scientists want sympathy. It\u2019s a deeply unserious approach to a field that supposedly determines the fate of our planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ben Pile\u2019s critique in the Daily Sceptic<\/em><\/a> nailed it when he observed that the current trend among climate scientists is to brand skeptics as not just wrong, but dangerous\u200b. By shifting the focus to the alleged \u201ctoxicity\u201d of criticism, the scientists evade the actual issues\u2014like why their models frequently overshoot reality, or why predictions of imminent catastrophe keep getting delayed like a badly managed train schedule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

I believe that is the implication of Carrington\u2019s series of Guardian<\/em> articles and his survey. It shows that people with no scientific expertise to speak of are nonetheless routinely presented as \u2018scientists\u2019 and experts. It shows that even those with scientific expertise will happily and radically depart from both the consensus position and the objective data on both meteorological events and their societal impacts. And it shows they have no reluctance to use their own emotional distress as leverage to coerce others. Carrington thinks that showing us scientists\u2019 emotional troubles will convince us to share their anxiety. But all it shows is that it would be deeply foolish to defer to the authority of climate science. It\u2019s an unstable mess. Science must be cool, calm, rational, detached and disinterested, or it is just a silly soap opera.

https:\/\/dailysceptic.org\/2024\/05\/13\/many-of-the-climate-experts-surveyed-by-the-guardian-in-recent-propaganda-blitz-turn-out-to-be-emotionally-unstable-hysterics\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Victimhood as a Shield<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A whole tantrum<\/em> (see murder of crows, pod of whales), of climate whiners scurried off to their ideological shelter, Nature Climate Change<\/em>, <\/a>to cry for help. You see, when public skepticism became too much for their fragile nerves to handle, this tantrum ran straight to \u201cdaddy,\u201d hoping for a pat on the back and a warm bottle of validation. And what better place than Nature<\/em>, a publication that will bend over backwards to prop up their emotional narratives? These scientists clearly needed a safe space where their feelings could be stroked, rather than questioned. Forget rigorous defense of their models and theories\u2014no, no, this time it was about defending their delicate psyches<\/em> from the big, bad skeptics on Twitter.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The Nature<\/em> article<\/a> isn\u2019t just a plea for public sympathy; it\u2019s a full-on temper tantrum disguised as scholarly commentary. The authors aren\u2019t interested in hard science or debate\u2014they want therapy. With a straight face, they argue that public criticism is akin to abuse, reducing scientific discourse to a matter of emotional resilience. So rather than refining their models, this tantrum of whiners wants the rest of us to accept that hurt feelings are a legitimate basis for climate policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Nature<\/em> article doubles down on this victimhood narrative, describing scientists as burdened not only by the existential threat of climate change but by the hostility of the public\u200b. The authors make a point of equating climate research with front-line war reporting, as if posting dire projections on X were the same as dodging bullets. This is a transparent attempt to invoke sympathy and sidestep criticism. If the scientists can present themselves as victims of a cruel public, then their arguments become untouchable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Guardian<\/em> piece further amplifies this theme, portraying scientists as misunderstood martyrs who bear the emotional weight of foreseeing a bleak future\u200b. It\u2019s as if being skeptical of poorly substantiated projections makes one a tormentor of noble truth-seekers. The narrative is clear: \u201cDon\u2019t question us, or you\u2019re part of the problem.\u201d But when scientific discourse devolves into moral posturing, it loses its credibility and begins to resemble a political campaign\u2014one driven by emotional manipulation rather than evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Social Media Tears<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Of course, no article about scientists\u2019 suffering would be complete without a good dose of social media victimhood. The Guardian<\/em> article features complaints about online \u201cabuse,\u201d as scientists recount harrowing experiences of being criticized on platforms like X\u200b. According to these supposedly hard-nosed researchers, the online world is a mean place where people say unkind things about their predictions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is almost comical. After all, social media is a battleground for ideas, not a safe space for pampered experts. If scientists can\u2019t handle criticism on X, how can they expect to withstand the scrutiny of peer review or public debate? Ben Pile rightly points out that climate scientists\u2019 complaints about social media \u201cabuse\u201d often serve as an excuse to shut down dissent altogether\u200b. Rather than engaging with criticism, these scientists prefer to play the victim, using their emotional wounds as a shield against legitimate questions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cScience\u201d as a Moral Crusade<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The Guardian<\/em> article\u2019s melodramatic tone is matched by its moralistic language. It tries to turn science into a crusade, with climate scientists cast as righteous warriors battling the forces of ignorance and denial. This framing isn\u2019t just patronizing; it\u2019s manipulative. By presenting climate scientists as virtuous crusaders, the article implies that their opponents are not just mistaken, but immoral.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The scientists even manage to make their emotions seem like a badge of honor, arguing that their despair over climate change somehow legitimizes their work\u200b\u200b. But in reality, emotional outbursts and moral grandstanding are signs of weakness, not strength. Scientists are supposed to be objective and dispassionate\u2014traits that make their conclusions reliable, not subject to personal bias or emotional manipulation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The irony here is palpable: the same scientists who claim to be guided by evidence resort to emotional appeals when that evidence fails to convince. It\u2019s a strategy designed to stifle debate rather than foster it. By making criticism a form of aggression, these scientists are effectively saying, \u201cAgree with us, or you\u2019re contributing to our emotional suffering.\u201d This isn\u2019t science; it\u2019s emotional blackmail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Public Scrutiny is a Good Thing<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Contrary to the complaints in The Guardian<\/em>, public scrutiny is not an attack on science; it\u2019s a vital part of it. The scientific method thrives on skepticism, criticism, and revision. When climate models fail to predict reality accurately, the appropriate response is not to coddle the scientists\u2019 feelings but to demand better models. If the scientists featured in The Guardian<\/em> can\u2019t handle that, they\u2019re in the wrong field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This thin-skinned response to criticism is particularly troubling given the sweeping policy changes that are based on climate projections. The rush to Net Zero, for example, has profound implications for energy costs, employment, and global inequality. Public skepticism is not only justified; it\u2019s essential. If climate scientists expect to be taken seriously, they should welcome hard questions, not recoil from them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion: Buck Up or Bow Out<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The Guardian<\/em> article offers a window into the current state of climate science\u2014a field increasingly driven by emotional manipulation rather than empirical rigor. The scientists\u2019 complaints about being criticized reveal more about their own insecurities than they do about the validity of their claims. If these researchers want to be seen as credible, they need to toughen up. Real science doesn\u2019t hide behind emotions; it faces scrutiny head-on and welcomes challenges as a means to improve its findings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, to the climate scientists who complain about \u201cabuse\u201d on X: toughen up. If you can\u2019t defend your models and predictions against public criticism, maybe you\u2019re not as confident in your conclusions as you claim to be. And to The Guardian<\/em>, which seems intent on shielding these delicate \u201cwarriors\u201d from criticism: stop trying to turn skepticism into a sin. The future of the planet deserves better than a bunch of whining scientists seeking sympathy rather than solutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Guardian article titled \u2018We have emotions too\u2019: Climate scientists respond to attacks on objectivity is a remarkable exercise in self-pity, featuring climate scientists venting about the supposedly unjust criticism they face\u200b. This is in reaction to the pushback received after publication of an idiotic survey by the Guardian last May<\/p>\n

These self-appointed climate saviors insist that their projections should be accepted without question, and when they aren\u2019t, they moan about how harsh and unfair the world has been to them. This isn\u2019t science under attack\u2014it\u2019s fragile egos crying foul when the rest of us refuse to buy into their doomsday narrative.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":349353,"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":[691818102,691818153,691819659,691831161,691831160,691818262],"class_list":{"0":"post-349343","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-crisis","9":"tag-climate-models","10":"tag-climate-scientists","11":"tag-emotional-manipulation","12":"tag-moral-crusade","13":"tag-the-guardian","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/0what-is-distress.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1sSz","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":352910,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=352910","url_meta":{"origin":349343,"position":0},"title":"The Oppressed Scientist: When Emotions Replace Objectivity in Climate Research","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/12\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"It\u2019s time we asked an important question: who needs cold, unfeeling objectivity when you\u2019re saving the world from a climate apocalypse? Apparently not climate scientists, according to the recently published article in\u00a0Nature Climate Change\u00a0by Schipper, Maharaj, and Pecl.\u00a0This manifesto\u2014masquerading as a scientific commentary\u2014argues that emotions, anxieties, and grievances belong in\u2026","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\/12\/0-Scientists-have-emotional-responses-to-climate-change-too.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Scientists-have-emotional-responses-to-climate-change-too.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Scientists-have-emotional-responses-to-climate-change-too.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Scientists-have-emotional-responses-to-climate-change-too.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0-Scientists-have-emotional-responses-to-climate-change-too.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":328934,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=328934","url_meta":{"origin":349343,"position":1},"title":"Many of the \u2018Climate Experts\u2019 Surveyed by the Guardian in Recent Propaganda Blitz Turn Out to be Emotionally-Unstable Hysterics","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"14\/05\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The\u00a0Guardian\u00a0last week published its survey of \u2018climate experts\u2019. The results are a predictable mush of fire-and-brimstone predictions and emotional incontinence. This stunt may have convinced those already aligned to the newspaper\u2019s ideological agenda to redouble their characteristically shrill rhetoric, but encouraging scientists to speculate and emote about the future of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"1.5\u00baC target\"","block_context":{"text":"1.5\u00baC target","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=1-5oc-target"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/08SR.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/08SR.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/08SR.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/08SR.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/08SR.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":367322,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367322","url_meta":{"origin":349343,"position":2},"title":"Are Climate Scientists Lying About Their Work to Secure US Research Grants?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"23\/02\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Did an anonymous climate scientist just admit to conspiring to defraud the US Government into providing funds for a climate paper, by turning the very title of their paper into a lie?","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\/2025\/02\/0.86527900_1572704314_9.jpg?fit=1024%2C673&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0.86527900_1572704314_9.jpg?fit=1024%2C673&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0.86527900_1572704314_9.jpg?fit=1024%2C673&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0.86527900_1572704314_9.jpg?fit=1024%2C673&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":268845,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=268845","url_meta":{"origin":349343,"position":3},"title":"Scientists Say More Marine Life Is Greening The Oceans, So Media Freak Out\u00a0","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"22\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Knee-jerk alarm goes up yet another notch in the climate-obsessed media. Look what *you\u2019ve done*, they try to insinuate.","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\/0shutterstock-1134335816.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0shutterstock-1134335816.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0shutterstock-1134335816.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0shutterstock-1134335816.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0shutterstock-1134335816.webp?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":257989,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=257989","url_meta":{"origin":349343,"position":4},"title":"Scientists Pushing Net Zero Complain of Hurty Feelings on Twitter","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"18\/05\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"There has been another sighting of the regular complaint that climate scientists are being subject to hurty comments on Twitter. The\u00a0Guardian\u00a0reports a \u201chuge\u201d rise\u00a0in abuse since Elon Musk took over the platform last year.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate deniers\"","block_context":{"text":"climate deniers","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-deniers"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00tweetrvlsoft.jpg?fit=1200%2C417&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00tweetrvlsoft.jpg?fit=1200%2C417&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00tweetrvlsoft.jpg?fit=1200%2C417&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00tweetrvlsoft.jpg?fit=1200%2C417&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00tweetrvlsoft.jpg?fit=1200%2C417&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":267458,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=267458","url_meta":{"origin":349343,"position":5},"title":"Scientists: \u2018More Ocean Life Making Seas Look Greener\u2019, Media: \u2018Climate Crisis!\u2019","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"14\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Climate change is benefiting life in the oceans so much that ocean color is becoming noticeably greener as a result, scientists reported this week. Bodies of water with little life tend to be bluer, the scientists observed, while bodies of water rich in life tend to be greener.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate crisis\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate crisis","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-crisis"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/00Ocean-life-wallpapers-marine-life-on-the-seabed-like-fish-plants-animals-hd-wallpaper-13.jpg?fit=1200%2C750&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/00Ocean-life-wallpapers-marine-life-on-the-seabed-like-fish-plants-animals-hd-wallpaper-13.jpg?fit=1200%2C750&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/00Ocean-life-wallpapers-marine-life-on-the-seabed-like-fish-plants-animals-hd-wallpaper-13.jpg?fit=1200%2C750&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/00Ocean-life-wallpapers-marine-life-on-the-seabed-like-fish-plants-animals-hd-wallpaper-13.jpg?fit=1200%2C750&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/00Ocean-life-wallpapers-marine-life-on-the-seabed-like-fish-plants-animals-hd-wallpaper-13.jpg?fit=1200%2C750&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349343","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=349343"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349343\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":349356,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349343\/revisions\/349356"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/349353"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=349343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=349343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=349343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}