MokshithSai15/ClimeAI huggingface dataset:
Claim: Last December, the respected  journal “Oceanography” published projections (see graphic below) for this rising acidity, measured by falling pH
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Ocean acidification: Limiting global warming to below 2 °C would imply a reduction in surface ocean pH of 0.16 from pre-industrial levels. [SUPPORTS]
- Ocean acidification: It is expected to drop by a further 0.3 to 0.5 pH units (an additional doubling to tripling of today's post-industrial acid concentrations) by 2100 as the oceans absorb more anthropogenic CO 2, the impacts being most severe for coral reefs and the Southern Ocean. [SUPPORTS]
- Ocean acidification: "Dynamic patterns and ecological impacts of declining ocean pH in a high-resolution multi-year dataset". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Ocean acidification: Between 1751 and 1996, surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.25 to 8.14, representing an increase of almost 30% in H+ ion concentration in the world's oceans. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Ocean acidification: "Rising levels of acids in seas may endanger marine life, says study". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Since the hockey stick paper in 1998, there have been a number of proxy studies analysing a variety of different sources including corals, stalagmites, tree rings, boreholes and ice cores.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Hockey stick controversy: For his postdoctoral research, Mann joined Bradley and tree ring specialist Malcolm K. Hughes to develop a new statistical approach to reconstruct underlying spatial patterns of temperature variation combining diverse datasets of proxy information covering different periods across the globe, including a rich resource of tree ring networks for some areas and sparser proxies such as lake sediments, ice cores and corals, as well as some historical records. [SUPPORTS]
- Hockey stick controversy: The Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1998 (MBH98) multiproxy study on "Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries" was submitted to the journal Nature on 9 May 1997, accepted on 27 February 1998 and published on 23 April 1998. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Paleoclimatology: Paleoclimatology uses a variety of proxy methods from the Earth and life sciences to obtain data previously preserved within rocks, sediments, boreholes, ice sheets, tree rings, corals, shells, and microfossils. [SUPPORTS]
- Proxy (climate): Examples of proxies include ice cores, tree rings, sub-fossil pollen, boreholes, corals, lake and ocean sediments, and carbonate speleothems. [SUPPORTS]
- Proxy (climate): Several studies, including and have compiled box and gravity cores in the North Pacific analyzing them for palynological content to determine the distribution of dinocysts and their relationships with sea surface temperature, salinity, productivity and upwelling. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: They all confirm the original hockey stick conclusion: the 20th century is the warmest in the last 1000 years and that warming was most dramatic after 1920.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Effects of global warming: A wide variety of temperature proxies together prove that the 20th century was the hottest recorded in the last 2,000 years. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: Multiple independently produced instrumental datasets confirm that the 2009–2018 decade was 0.93 ± 0.07 °C warmer than the pre-industrial baseline (1850–1900). [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: The period from 1983 to 2012 was likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years in the Northern Hemisphere, where such assessment is possible (medium confidence). [SUPPORTS]
- Hockey stick controversy: They concluded that although the 20th century was almost certainly the warmest of the millennium, the amount of anthropogenic warming remains uncertain." [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: They judge that global mean surface air temperature has increased by 0.3 to 0.6 °C over the last 100 years, broadly consistent with prediction of climate models, but also of the same magnitude as natural climate variability. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: A number of independent investigations from different countries, universities and government bodies have investigated the stolen emails and found no evidence of wrong doing.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the National Science Foundation closed an investigation on 15 August 2011 that exonerated Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University of charges of scientific misconduct. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The OIP findings confirmed the university panel's conclusions which cleared Mann of any wrongdoing, and it stated "Lacking any evidence of research misconduct, as defined under the NSF Research Misconduct Regulation, we are closing the investigation with no further action." [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct. [SUPPORTS]
- Nepal: The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority is an independent investigative agency that investigates and prosecutes cases related to corruption and bribery, in addition to the abuse of authority by government officials and officeholders. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections: By January 2017, a multi-agency investigation, conducted by the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Justice Department, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the DNI, was underway looking into how the Russian government may have secretly financed efforts to help Trump win the election had been conducted over several months by six federal agencies. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Climate change denial: Despite leaked emails during the Climatic Research Unit email controversy, as well as multinational, independent research on the topic, no evidence of such a conspiracy has been presented, and strong consensus exists among scientists from a multitude of political, social, organizational and national backgrounds about the extent and cause of climate change. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climate change denial: The efforts of Al Gore and other environmental campaigns have focused on the effects of global warming and have managed to increase awareness and concern, but despite these efforts, the number of Americans believing humans are the cause of global warming was holding steady at 61% in 2007, and those believing the popular media was understating the issue remained about 35%. [SUPPORTS]
- Climate change denial: Most of the few statements that critics claim as evidence of malfeasance seem to have more innocent explanations that make sense in the context of scientists conversing privately and informally." [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climate change denial: Science education is under attack… by climate change deniers, who ignore a mountain of evidence gathered over the last fifty years that the planet is warming and that humans are largely responsible. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: The warming evident in the instrumental temperature record is consistent with a wide range of observations, documented by many independent scientific groups; for example, in most continental regions the frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation has increased. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: “[T]he 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal  involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made  warming theory - a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern  science.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: Writing for Newsweek, journalist Sharon Begley called the controversy a "highly orchestrated, manufactured scandal", noting that the public was unlikely to change their mind. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: He said that it was not a single scandal, but "a sustained and coordinated campaign" aimed at undermining the credibility of the science. [SUPPORTS]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: An editorial in Nature said that many in the media "were led by the nose, by those with a clear agenda, to a sizzling scandal that steadily defused as the true facts and context were made clear". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: In blogs, talk radio and other new media, we are told that the warnings about future global warming issued by the national science academies, scientific societies, and governments of all the leading nations are not only mistaken, but based on a hoax, indeed a conspiracy that must involve thousands of respected researchers. [SUPPORTS]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: In this context, John Tierney of The New York Times wrote: "these researchers, some of the most prominent climate experts in Britain and America, seem so focused on winning the public-relations war that they exaggerate their certitude – and ultimately undermine their own cause". [SUPPORTS]
Claim: It found the scientists' rigour and honesty are not in doubt, and their behaviour did not prejudice the IPCC's conclusions, though they did fail to display the proper degree of openness.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: Scientific integrity demands robust, independent peer review, however, and AAAS therefore emphasised that investigations are appropriate whenever significant questions are raised regarding the transparency and rigour of the scientific method, the peer-review process, or the responsibility of individual scientists. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The committee criticised a "culture of non-disclosure at CRU" and a general lack of transparency in climate science where scientific papers had usually not included all the data and code used in reconstructions. [REFUTES]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The report, issued on 18 February 2011, cleared the researchers and "did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data or failed to adhere to appropriate peer review procedures". [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming conspiracy theory: The Muir Russell report stated that the scientists' "rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt," that the investigators "did not find any evidence of behavior that might undermine the conclusions of the IPCC assessments," but that there had been "a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness." [SUPPORTS]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: This document also states that IPCC will do this work by assessing "on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis" of these topics. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: […] Constant 24-7  media coverage of every significant storm worldwide just makes it seem  that way.”
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- 2003 invasion of Iraq: This attracted considerable media coverage at the time. [SUPPORTS]
- Daniel Bryan: "Radican's ROH Respect Is Earned Report 7/20: ongoing "virtual time" coverage of PPV". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Gulf War: At the same time, the war's coverage was new in its instantaneousness. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Hurricane Sandy: The severe and widespread damage the storm caused in the United States, as well as its unusual merger with a frontal system, resulted in the nicknaming of the hurricane "Superstorm Sandy" by the media, public officials, and several organizations, including U.S. government agencies. [SUPPORTS]
- Hurricane Sandy: As coverage continued, several media outlets began eschewing this term in favor of "superstorm". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: It is unclear whether global warming is increasing hurricane frequency but there is increasing evidence that warming increases hurricane intensity.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Effects of global warming: more intense droughts and tropical cyclones) are more uncertain. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Extreme weather: In recent years, growing evidence suggests that human-induced global warming is increasing the periodicity and intensity of some extreme weather events. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: The maximum rainfall and wind speed from hurricanes and typhoons are likely increasing. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: The warming evident in the instrumental temperature record is consistent with a wide range of observations, documented by many independent scientific groups; for example, in most continental regions the frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation has increased. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: The effects of global warming include rising sea levels, regional changes in precipitation, more frequent extreme weather events such as heat waves, and expansion of deserts. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Al Gore's film was "broadly accurate" according to an expert witness called when an attempt was made through the courts to prevent the film being shown in schools.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Al Gore: In a 2007 court case, a British judge said that while he had "no doubt ...the film was broadly accurate" and its "four main scientific hypotheses ...are supported by a vast quantity of research", he upheld nine of a "long schedule" of alleged errors presented to the court. [SUPPORTS]
- Al Gore: He ruled that the film could be shown to schoolchildren in the UK if guidance notes given to teachers were amended to balance out the film's one-sided political views. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- An Inconvenient Truth: The plaintiffs sought an injunction preventing the screening of the film in English schools, arguing that by law schools are forbidden to promote partisan political views and, when dealing with political issues, are required to provide a balanced presentation of opposing views. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- An Inconvenient Truth: The judge ruled that An Inconvenient Truth contained nine scientific errors and thus must be accompanied by an explanation of those errors before being shown to school children. [REFUTES]
- An Inconvenient Truth: Gore climate documentary to be shown in schools. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: While there are minor errors in An Inconvenient Truth, the main truths presented - evidence to show mankind is causing global warming and its various impacts is consistent with peer reviewed science.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- An Inconvenient Truth: The survey, published as an editorial in the journal Science, found that every article either supported the human-caused global warming consensus or did not comment on it. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- An Inconvenient Truth: All 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie or had read the homonymous book said that Gore accurately conveyed the science, with few errors. [SUPPORTS]
- An Inconvenient Truth: Gore's presentation was the most powerful and clear explanation of global warming I had ever seen. [SUPPORTS]
- An Inconvenient Truth: "Judge attacks nine errors in Al Gore's 'alarmist' climate change film". [REFUTES]
- Global warming: In the scientific literature, there is an overwhelming consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: While there are isolated cases of growing glaciers, the overwhelming trend in glaciers worldwide is retreat.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Glacier: Following the Little Ice Age's end around 1850, glaciers around the Earth have retreated substantially. [SUPPORTS]
- Glacier: A slight cooling led to the advance of many alpine glaciers between 1950 and 1985, but since 1985 glacier retreat and mass loss has become larger and increasingly ubiquitous. [SUPPORTS]
- Himalayas: In recent years, scientists have monitored a notable increase in the rate of glacier retreat across the region as a result of climate change. [SUPPORTS]
- Holocene glacial retreat: The Holocene glacial retreat is a geographical phenomenon that involved the global deglaciation of glaciers that previously had advanced during the Last Glacial Maximum. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Subantarctic: Glaciers are currently retreating at significant rates throughout the southern hemisphere. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: In fact, the global melt rate has been accelerating since the mid-1970s.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Global warming: This effect results in the increased absorption of radiation that accelerates melting." [SUPPORTS]
- Sea level rise: This acceleration is due mostly to human-caused global warming, which is driving thermal expansion of seawater and the melting of land-based ice sheets and glaciers. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: "Antarctica ice melt has accelerated by 280% in the last 4 decades". [SUPPORTS]
- Sea level rise: However scientists have found that ice is being lost, and at an accelerating rate. [SUPPORTS]
- Sea level rise: A 2018 systematic review study estimated that ice loss across the entire continent was 43 gigatons (Gt) per year on average during the period from 1992 to 2002, but has accelerated to an average of 220 Gt per year during the five years from 2012 to 2017. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: Cosmic ray counts have increased over the past 50 years, so if they do influence global temperatures, they are having a cooling effect.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Eocene: Oxygen isotope analysis showed a large negative change in the proportion of heavier oxygen isotopes to lighter oxygen isotopes, which indicates an increase in global temperatures. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: The main balancing feedback to global temperature change is radiative cooling to space as infrared radiation, which increases strongly with increasing temperature. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: Currently, surface temperatures are rising by about 0.2 °C per decade. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: IPCC AR5 SYR Glossary 2014, p. 124: Global warming refers to the gradual increase, observed or projected, in global surface temperature, as one of the consequences of radiative forcing caused by anthropogenic emissions. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: Globally, these effects are estimated to have led to a slight cooling, dominated by an increase in surface albedo. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: By regulating the Earth’s cloud cover, the Sun  can turn the temperature up and down. ...
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Climate change (general concept): These variations can affect global average surface temperature by redistributing heat between the deep ocean and the atmosphere and/or by altering the cloud/water vapor/sea ice distribution which can affect the total energy budget of the earth. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Earth: This last phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect: trace molecules within the atmosphere serve to capture thermal energy emitted from the ground, thereby raising the average temperature. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: If cloud cover increases, more sunlight will be reflected back into space, cooling the planet. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: Without the Earth's atmosphere, the Earth's average temperature would be well below the freezing temperature of water. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sun: The temperature of the photosphere is approximately 6,000 K, whereas the temperature of the corona reaches 1,000,000–2,000,000 K. The high temperature of the corona shows that it is heated by something other than direct heat conduction from the photosphere. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: While the link between cosmic rays and cloud cover is yet to be confirmed, more importantly, there has been no correlation between cosmic rays and global temperatures over the last 30 years of global warming.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Attribution of recent climate change: Together with the lack of a proven physical mechanism and the plausibility of other causal factors affecting changes in cloud cover, this makes the association between galactic cosmic ray-induced changes in aerosol and cloud formation controversial Studies by Lockwood and Fröhlich (2007) and Sloan and Wolfendale (2008) found no relation between warming in recent decades and cosmic rays. [SUPPORTS]
- Cosmic ray: Despite Svensmark's assertions, galactic cosmic rays have shown no statistically significant influence on changes in cloud cover, and have been demonstrated in studies to have no causal relationship to changes in global temperature. [SUPPORTS]
- Henrik Svensmark: Sloan and Wolfendale (2013) demonstrated that while temperature models showed a small correlation every 22 years, less than 14 percent of global warming since the 1950s could be attributed to cosmic ray rate. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Henrik Svensmark: Another 2013 study found, contrary to Svensmark's claims, "no statistically significant correlations between cosmic rays and global albedo or globally averaged cloud height." [SUPPORTS]
- Henrik Svensmark: In 2013, a laboratory study by Svensmark, Pepke and Pedersen published in Physics Letters A showed, that there is in fact a correlation between cosmic rays and the formation of aerosols of the type that seed clouds. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: In fact, in recent years when cosmic rays should have been having their largest cooling effect on record, temperatures have been at their highest on record.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Climate change (general concept): On average, such eruptions occur several times per century, and cause cooling (by partially blocking the transmission of solar radiation to the Earth's surface) for a period of several years. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Instrumental temperature record: Even accounting for the presence of internal climate variability, recent years rank among the warmest on record. [SUPPORTS]
- Mercury (planet): Having almost no atmosphere to retain heat, it has surface temperatures that vary diurnally more than on any other planet in the Solar System, ranging from 100 K (−173 °C; −280 °F) at night to 700 K (427 °C; 800 °F) during the day across the equatorial regions. [REFUTES]
- Solar System: It is the hottest planet, with surface temperatures over 400 °C (752 °F), most likely due to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. [SUPPORTS]
- Venus: The actual temperatures are not known, because the size of the hot spots could not be measured, but are likely to have been in the 800–1,100 K (527–827 °C; 980–1,520 °F) range, relative to a normal temperature of 740 K (467 °C; 872 °F). [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Hypothetically, an increasing solar magnetic field could deflect galactic cosmic rays, which hypothetically seed low-level clouds, thus decreasing the Earth's reflectivity and causing global warming.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Attribution of recent climate change: Henrik Svensmark has suggested that the magnetic activity of the sun deflects cosmic rays, and that this may influence the generation of cloud condensation nuclei, and thereby have an effect on the climate. [SUPPORTS]
- Cosmic ray: In addition, the Earth's magnetic field acts to deflect cosmic rays from its surface, giving rise to the observation that the flux is apparently dependent on latitude, longitude, and azimuth angle. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Cosmic ray: Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark has controversially argued that because solar variation modulates the cosmic ray flux on Earth, they would consequently affect the rate of cloud formation and hence be an indirect cause of global warming. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: If cloud cover increases, more sunlight will be reflected back into space, cooling the planet. [REFUTES]
- Global warming: This effect also causes droplets to be of more uniform size, which reduces the growth of raindrops and makes clouds more reflective to incoming sunlight. [SUPPORTS]