{"id":426787,"date":"2026-02-17T14:33:26","date_gmt":"2026-02-17T13:33:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426787"},"modified":"2026-02-17T14:33:28","modified_gmt":"2026-02-17T13:33:28","slug":"judge-rejects-climate-dogma-begins-to-restore-integrity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426787","title":{"rendered":"Judge Rejects Climate Dogma, Begins to Restore Integrity"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

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

From The CO2 Coalition<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

by Vijay Jayaraj<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a bold stroke against the pseudoscience of climate alarmism, U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg has removed a deeply flawed discussion on climate change from the fourth edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Supposedly the gold standard in science education for the federal judiciary, the reference manual<\/a> is a joint product of the Federal Judicial Center \u2013 overseen by Judge Rosenberg \u2013 and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Its stated<\/a> purpose is to assist judges in managing cases involving complex scientific evidence and distinguish between sound science and speculation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet the fourth edition\u2019s chapter on climate change was closer to lead than gold, drawing objections from state attorneys general and others. It was a manifesto of bias, drafted by a panel of alarmists who treated computer models as gospel and disregarded empirical reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The model-reality divergence<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The core problem with the now-deleted chapter \u2013 and indeed with the scientific approach of the climate lobby \u2013 is a reliance on the flawed assumptions of models over empirical observation of reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Data analyzed<\/a> by Dr. Roy Spencer, covering the period from 1979 through early 2025, exposes an epic failure of these models. Satellite readings measuring the actual temperature of the troposphere differ sharply from the outputs of computer simulations, the latter predicting runaway warming and the former a modest rise of temperature. The gap is not a margin of error, but a chasm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For decades, computer models of the climate have been used to justify draconian regulations, most notably an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finding that carbon dioxide (CO2<\/sub>) is a pollutant. This underpins claims of climate alarmists that CO2<\/sub> emissions of fossil fuels threaten to overheat the planet and cause all manner of deadly weather events.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, no trends of increasing weather severity are in the historical data and the risk of dying from a climate-related catastrophe \u2013 floods, droughts, storms, wildfires, extreme temperatures \u2013 has plummeted<\/a> by 98% since the 1920s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the early 20th century, millions perished worldwide from climate disasters. Today, despite a global population that has quadrupled, the number of victims is a tiny fraction<\/a> of the past. Fossil fuels have provided the cheap energy necessary to build sturdy infrastructure, heat and cool homes, mechanize agriculture and develop early warning systems. Coal, oil and natural gas have helped humankind manage the environment, not destroy it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judicial line of defense<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nowhere is this understanding more critical than in the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts. The federal judiciary has become a focal point of the legal war between those promoting alarmism and those defending realism and modern lifestyles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Activists know they are losing the public debate. Ordinary families, struggling with inflation and energy costs, are not interested in sacrificing standards of living for a theoretical crisis. So, activists have turned to \u201clawfare.\u201d They sue oil companies, car manufacturers and utilities, hoping to bypass the legislative process and impose \u201cgreen\u201d policies through judicial fiat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These lawsuits rely entirely on the premise that there is an \u201cexistential\u201d crisis. If the judge\u2019s own handbook says the crisis is scientifically proven, the defense stands no chance. By purging the biased chapter, the Federal Judicial Center has acted to level the playing field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

America leads, the world follows<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The implications of this decision extend far beyond American borders. The United States is not just another country in the global environmental debate; it is the trendsetter. Policies and legal standards established in the U.S. ripple outward, influencing legislation and court rulings in Europe, Asia and the Global South.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The U.S. light-duty vehicle emission programs are among the main sets of standards globally. The Federal Test Procedure is used to certify cars for the North American market, effectively globalizing the EPA\u2019s methodology. In the realm of ambient air quality, the U.S. National Ambient Air Quality Standards serve as a model framework for nations developing their own environmental laws.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the U.S. judiciary and the EPA were to fully embrace the alarmist narrative \u2013 legally codifying the absurd notion that CO2<\/sub> and other greenhouse gases threaten life \u2013 this stance would be exported worldwide. Conversely, the U.S. sends a powerful signal when it taps the brakes on lunacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By removing this horribly flawed climate section, the judiciary has signaled that it will not be a rubber stamp for political activism masquerading as science<\/a>. Science is a process of constant inquiry, skepticism and testing. The attempt to codify an ideologically driven and scientifically unsupported viewpoint into a manual for judges was an affront to the hundreds-year-old scientific method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are not facing a climatic apocalypse. We are confronted with a crisis of competence and integrity in our elite institutions. The removal of this chapter is an initial step in restoring these much-needed qualities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the <\/em>CO2 Coalition<\/em><\/a>, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor\u2019s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Originally published in Townhall <\/em><\/a>on February 14, 2026.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vijay Jayaraj<\/a> is a Science and Research Associate at the <\/em>CO2 Coalition<\/em><\/a>, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor\u2019s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

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

In a bold stroke against the pseudoscience of climate alarmism, U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg has removed a deeply flawed discussion on climate change from the fourth edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":425585,"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":[691829997,691819134,691818056,691818153,691820545,691841311,691841312,691841473],"class_list":{"0":"post-426787","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-carbon-dioxide-co","9":"tag-climate-alarmism","10":"tag-climate-change","11":"tag-climate-models","12":"tag-dr-roy-spencer","13":"tag-federal-judicial-center-fjc","14":"tag-reference-manual-on-scientific-evidence-fourth-edition","15":"tag-u-s-district-judge-robin-rosenberg","17":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-Federal-Reference-Manual-on-Scientific-Evidence1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1N1F","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":425574,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=425574","url_meta":{"origin":426787,"position":0},"title":"Federal Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Climate Science Chapter – Withdrawn!","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"On January 29, a coalition of state Attorneys General from red states, led by the AG of West Virginia (JB McCuskey), had sent a letter to Judge Robin Rosenberg, the Director of the Center, asking for immediate withdrawal of the offending chapter.","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\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":425456,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=425456","url_meta":{"origin":426787,"position":1},"title":"Process Wins One: Federal Judicial Center Deletes Climate Chapter from Judicial Manual","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The Federal Judicial Center (FJC), the research and education arm of the U.S. federal judiciary, has removed a chapter on climate science from the fourth edition of its Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.","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\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":429638,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=429638","url_meta":{"origin":426787,"position":2},"title":"Muddling the Judiciary\u2019s Understanding of Science","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/03\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"While an educational manual for federal judges was improved when a biased representation of climate change was removed, a remaining chapter on the fundamentals of science would poison the judiciary with quackery.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Alarmists\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Alarmists","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmists"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/02a8bce31-97cb-452a-b3d2-3f3a84bd77ce_1280x853.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/02a8bce31-97cb-452a-b3d2-3f3a84bd77ce_1280x853.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/02a8bce31-97cb-452a-b3d2-3f3a84bd77ce_1280x853.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/02a8bce31-97cb-452a-b3d2-3f3a84bd77ce_1280x853.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/02a8bce31-97cb-452a-b3d2-3f3a84bd77ce_1280x853.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":439470,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=439470","url_meta":{"origin":426787,"position":3},"title":"Happer, Lindzen, Koonin Letter to the Federal Judicial Center","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"14\/04\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The Happer, Lindzen, and Koonin letter (dated April 1, 2026) is an open letter addressed to Chief Justice John G. Roberts in his role as Chair of the Federal Judicial Center (FJC). It critiques aspects of the Fourth Edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, a long-standing resource used\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate lawsuits\"","block_context":{"text":"climate lawsuits","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-lawsuits"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-Happer-Lindzen-Koonin-Letter-to-the-Federal-Judicial-Center-1.jpg?fit=800%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-Happer-Lindzen-Koonin-Letter-to-the-Federal-Judicial-Center-1.jpg?fit=800%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-Happer-Lindzen-Koonin-Letter-to-the-Federal-Judicial-Center-1.jpg?fit=800%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-Happer-Lindzen-Koonin-Letter-to-the-Federal-Judicial-Center-1.jpg?fit=800%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":426035,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426035","url_meta":{"origin":426787,"position":4},"title":"U.S. judges saved from alarmist tome","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"13\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Quick action by a coalition of States has saved the American judicial system from being presented with a huge hunk of climate alarmism in the guise of guidance. Sounds like a lot and it is. The story starts with a massive judicial tome called the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":434217,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=434217","url_meta":{"origin":426787,"position":5},"title":"Climate Science Is Creeping Into Courtrooms","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"26\/03\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The inadequacies of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence (Fourth Edition) extend far beyond the chapter on climate science you discuss in your editorial \u201cA Judicial Climate Science Scandal\u201d (Review & Outlook, March 14). Another chapter, \u201cHow Science Works,\u201d has earned sharp criticism from Jessica Weinkle, an associate professor of\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\/2026\/03\/A-Turning-Point-for-Litigation-Campaig-SCOTUS-Takes-Up-Boulder-Climate-Lawsuit.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/A-Turning-Point-for-Litigation-Campaig-SCOTUS-Takes-Up-Boulder-Climate-Lawsuit.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/A-Turning-Point-for-Litigation-Campaig-SCOTUS-Takes-Up-Boulder-Climate-Lawsuit.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/A-Turning-Point-for-Litigation-Campaig-SCOTUS-Takes-Up-Boulder-Climate-Lawsuit.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/426787","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=426787"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/426787\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":426791,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/426787\/revisions\/426791"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/425585"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=426787"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=426787"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=426787"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}