(CANDIDATE 45) - Scientists estimate that this presidential candidate’s understanding of climate change is “very low”. more about the credibility rating
A majority of reviewers tagged the article as: .
Emmanuel Vincent: The candidate does not appear to have any commitment to accuracy.
Scott Mandia: Confuses short-term weather with long-term climate change and impugns the entire scientific community by claiming climate change is a hoax.
David Battisti: Embarrassing.
Victor Venema: Embarrassing nonsense.
William Anderegg: Wouldn’t pass a fifth-grade science class.
Michael Mann: Everything he/she says about climate change is erroneous and/or nonsensical.
Ryan Sriver: The candidate lacks basic understanding about the differences between local weather and global climate.
Twila Moon: Does not appear to understand the basic difference between weather and climate and provides misleading statements.
Rasmus Benestad: The candidate mixes up media statements (e.g. NBC News and alike, which are usually not scientific, not always correct) and scientific knowledge. His/her statements seem to be confused, and even though weather and climate are related, they are not the same.
Note on the statistical significance of the rating:
The average of the scientists’ ratings is 1 with a 99% confidence interval level of 0-3* ‘Very low’. We estimate that this rating is extremely robust given that all scientists independently converged on a ‘Very low’ estimation.
* The confidence interval level is based on a bootstrap technique randomly drawing from the set of ratings.