(CANDIDATE 45) - Scientists estimate that this presidential candidate’s understanding of climate change is “very low”. more about the credibility rating
See the candidate’s statements annotated by scientists
Guest comments:
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.
Reviewers’ feedback:
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.
See the analysis for other candidates
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.
