(CANDIDATE 29) - Scientists estimate that this presidential candidate’s understanding of climate change is “Very high”. more about the credibility rating
See the candidate’s statements annotated by scientists
David Battisti: The candidate clearly accepts the science conclusions (warming has happened and will continue to happen due to human activity) and has clearly determined it is a problem that must be dealt with.
Victor Venema: The claim that the Earth will not be habitable is too strong. Climate change is a stressor, only in combination with other stressors and human stupidity would it become this bad. Otherwise no complaints on the science.
Twila Moon: This candidate correctly acknowledges that climate change is real and human-caused, but overstates the scientific conclusions.
Ryan Sriver: Candidate seems to at least acknowledge the evidence, but there is not much scientific viewpoints.
Emmanuel Vincent: Overall the candidate seems to understand the reality and importance of climate change.
Michael Mann: Hits the nail on the head with the statement “Climate change is real. It is caused by human activity. It is already causing devastating problems around the world”.
William Anderegg: Generally good understanding of the science.
See the analysis for other candidates
Note on the statistical significance of the rating:
The average of the scientists’ ratings is 88 with a 99% confidence interval level of 79-94* ‘Very high’. We estimate that this rating is robust given that all scientists independently converged on a ‘High’ or ‘Very high’ estimation.