MokshithSai15/ClimeAI huggingface dataset:
Claim: If every nation agrees to limit CO2 emissions, we can achieve significant cuts on a global scale.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference: To cut carbon emissions by 25% below 2000 levels by 2020 if the world agrees to an ambitious global deal to stabilise levels of CO2e to 450 ppm or lower. [SUPPORTS]
- 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference: To reduce emissions between 10% to 20% below 1990 levels by 2020 if a global agreement is secured that limits carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) to 450 ppm and temperature increases to 2 °C, effective rules on forestry, and New Zealand having access to international carbon markets. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climate change mitigation: Cost-effective 2 °C scenarios project annual global greenhouse gas emissions to peak before the year 2020, with deep cuts in emissions thereafter, leading to a reduction in 2050 of 41% compared to 1990 levels. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climate change mitigation: "Cut Global Emissions by 7.6 Percent Every Year for Next Decade to Meet 1.5°C Paris Target - UN Report". [SUPPORTS]
- Paris Agreement: To limit global temperature rise to 1.5 °C, the global annual emission reduction needed is 7.6% emissions reduction every year between 2020 and 2030. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: The actual data show high northern latitudes are warmer today than in 1940.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Effects of global warming: It is, however, expected that future warming will follow a similar geographical pattern to that seen already, with greatest warming over land and high northern latitudes, and least over the Southern Ocean and parts of the North Atlantic Ocean. [SUPPORTS]
- Eocene: The polar stratospheric clouds had a warming effect on the poles, increasing temperatures by up to 20 °C in the winter months. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- 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). [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- 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). [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Physical impacts of climate change: Changes in regional climate are expected to include greater warming over land, with most warming at high northern latitudes, and least warming over the Southern Ocean and parts of the North Atlantic Ocean. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: When you account for all of the costs associated with burning coal and other fossil fuels, like air pollution and health effects, in reality they are significantly more expensive than most renewable energy sources.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Air pollution: Even in the areas with relatively low levels of air pollution, public health effects can be significant and costly, since a large number of people breathe in such pollutants. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Fossil fuel: Fossil fuel prices generally are below their actual costs, or their "efficient prices," when economic externalities, such as the costs of air pollution and global climate destruction, are taken into account. [SUPPORTS]
- Fossil fuel: Artificial gasolines and other renewable energy sources currently require more expensive production and processing technologies than conventional petroleum reserves, but may become economically viable in the near future. [REFUTES]
- Nuclear power: Today's primary sources of energy are mainly non-renewable: natural gas, oil, coal, peat, and conventional nuclear power. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Renewable energy: It would also reduce environmental pollution such as air pollution caused by burning of fossil fuels and improve public health, reduce premature mortalities due to pollution and save associated health costs that amount to several hundred billion dollars annually only in the United States. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Global sea level data shows that sea level rise has been increasing since 1880 while future sea level rise predictions are based on physics, not statistics.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Sea level rise: Using different satellites from 1992 to 2017 shows melt is increasing significantly over this period. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: For instance, Mercer published a study in 1978 predicting that anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming and its potential effects on climate in the 21st century could cause a sea level rise of around 5 metres (16 ft) from melting of the West Antarctic ice-sheet alone. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: This network was used, in combination with satellite altimeter data, to establish that global mean sea-level rose 19.5 cm (7.7 in) between 1870 and 2004 at an average rate of about 1.44 mm/yr (1.7 mm/yr during the 20th century). [SUPPORTS]
- Sea level rise: This is an important confirmation of climate change simulations which predicted that sea level rise would accelerate in response to global warming. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: As climate research into past and present sea levels leads to improved computer models, projections have consistently increased. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Humans are small but powerful, and human CO2 emissions are causing global warming.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Carbon dioxide: Since the Industrial Revolution anthropogenic emissions – primarily from use of fossil fuels and deforestation – have rapidly increased its concentration in the atmosphere, leading to global warming. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: CO2 emissions are continuing to rise due to the burning of fossil fuels and land-use change. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: Human activity since the Industrial Revolution has increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, leading to increased radiative forcing from CO2, methane, tropospheric ozone, CFCs, and nitrous oxide. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: The largest human influence has been the emission of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. [SUPPORTS]
- Greenhouse gas: Cumulative anthropogenic (i.e., human-emitted) emissions of CO 2 from fossil fuel use are a major cause of global warming, and give some indication of which countries have contributed most to human-induced climate change. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: Lindzen and Choi’s paper is viewed as unacceptably flawed by other climate scientists.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Global warming controversy: Judith Curry has said "This is a completely unconvincing analysis", whereas Naomi Oreskes said that the paper shows "the vast majority of working [climate] research scientists are in agreement [on climate change]... Those who don't agree, are, unfortunately—and this is hard to say without sounding elitist—mostly either not actually climate researchers or not very productive researchers." [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Richard Lindzen: It received considerable media coverage; 22 then- current or retired MIT professors promptly issued an open letter addressed to Trump saying that Lindzen’s petition doesn’t represent their views or those of the vast majority of other climate scientists. [SUPPORTS]
- Richard Lindzen: This claim was criticized by climatologist Gavin Schmidt, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who notes the more generally-accepted understanding of the effects of the Iris effect and cites empirical cases where large and relatively rapid changes in the climate such as El Niño events, the Ultra-Plinian eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, and recent trends in global temperature and water vapor levels to show that, as predicted in the generally-accepted view, water vapor increases as the temperature increases, and decreases as temperatures decrease. [SUPPORTS]
- Richard Lindzen: Lindzen and Choi revised their paper and submitted it to PNAS. [SUPPORTS]
- Richard Lindzen: Andrew Dessler published a paper which found errors in Lindzen and Choi 2011, and concluded that the observations it had presented "are not in fundamental disagreement with mainstream climate models, nor do they provide evidence that clouds are causing climate change. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: The iris hypothesis has not withstood the test of time - subsequent research
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Confirmation bias: Wason accepted falsificationism, according to which a scientific test of a hypothesis is a serious attempt to falsify it. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event: Current research cannot ascertain whether the extinctions occurred prior to, or during, the boundary interval. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming controversy: "A scientific hypothesis is tested to absolute destruction, but medicine can't wait. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Type I and type II errors: Mathematics portal Binary classification Detection theory Egon Pearson Ethics in mathematics False positive paradox Family-wise error rate Information retrieval performance measures Neyman–Pearson lemma Null hypothesis Probability of a hypothesis for Bayesian inference Precision and recall Prosecutor's fallacy Prozone phenomenon Receiver operating characteristic Sensitivity and specificity Statisticians' and engineers' cross-reference of statistical terms Testing hypotheses suggested by the data Type III error "Explorable - Think Outside The Box - Research, Experiments, Psychology, Self-Help". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Type I and type II errors: The results of such testing determine whether a particular set of results agrees reasonably (or does not agree) with the speculated hypothesis. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: A large amount of warming is delayed, and if we don’t act now we could pass tipping points.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Climate engineering: Climate change may cross tipping points where elements of the climate system may 'tip' from one stable state to another stable state, much like a glass tipping over. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: A concern is that self-reinforcing feedbacks will lead to a tipping point, where global temperatures transition to a hothouse climate state even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced or eliminated. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: Both the Greenland ice sheet and Antarctica have tipping points for warming levels that could be reached before the end of the 21st century. [SUPPORTS]
- Sea level rise: Quantifying the exact temperature change for which this tipping point is crossed remains controversial. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: "A tipping point in refreezing accelerates mass loss of Greenland's glaciers and ice caps". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Jim Hansen had several possible scenarios; his mid-level scenario B was right.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- James Hansen: They described the intermediate scenario as the most likely, and that real-world greenhouse gas forcing had been closest to this scenario. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: In 2000 Hansen authored a paper called "Global warming in the twenty-first century: an alternative scenario" in which he presented a more optimistic way of dealing with global warming, focusing on non-CO2 gases and black carbon in the short run, giving more time to make reductions in fossil fuel emissions. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: They described a business-as-usual scenario, which has greenhouse gases growing at approximately 2% per year; and an alternate scenario, in which greenhouse gases concentrations decline. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: An alternate scenario would keep the warming to below this if climate sensitivity were below 3 °C for doubled CO 2. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Scenario planning: How do we know if we have the right scenarios? [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Volcanoes have had no warming effect in recent global warming - if anything, a cooling effect.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Greenhouse effect: The greenhouse effect is the process by which radiation from a planet's atmosphere warms the planet's surface to a temperature above what it would be without this atmosphere. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Ice age: The reflection of energy into space resulted in a global cooling, triggering the Pleistocene Ice Age. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Michael E. Mann: This cooling had contributed towards the recent Global warming hiatus in surface temperatures, and would change to enhanced surface warming in the next phase of the oscillation. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Nuclear winter: Impact winter Laki, 1783 eruption of an Icelandic volcano which produced continentally localized cooling for 1–2 years. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Volcano: The 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora created global climate anomalies that became known as the "Year Without a Summer" because of the effect on North American and European weather. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Arctic sea ice has shrunk by an area equal to Western Australia, and summer or multi-year sea ice might be all gone within a decade.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Arctic Ocean: Research shows that the Arctic may become ice-free in the summer for the first time in human history by 2040. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Arctic Ocean: The summer shrinking of the ice has been quoted at 50%. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Arctic sea ice decline: Sometime during the 21st century, sea ice may effectively cease to exist during the summer. [SUPPORTS]
- Arctic sea ice decline: "Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years," Gore said. [SUPPORTS]
- Arctic: About half of the analyzed models show near-complete to complete sea ice loss in September by the year 2100. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: The claim sea level isn’t rising is based on blatantly doctored graphs contradicted by observations.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: The mid-points of the sea level rise estimates are within ±10% of those from the TAR; but the range has narrowed. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Past sea level: The current rise in sea level observed from tide gauges, of about 1.8 mm/yr, is within the estimate range from the combination of factors above, but active research continues in this field. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: Semi-empirical sea level models rely on statistical techniques, using relationships between observed (contributions to) global mean sea level and global mean temperature. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Sea level rise: For instance, Mercer published a study in 1978 predicting that anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming and its potential effects on climate in the 21st century could cause a sea level rise of around 5 metres (16 ft) from melting of the West Antarctic ice-sheet alone. [SUPPORTS]
- Sea-level curve: Their sea-level curve was based on seismic and biostratigraphic data accumulated during petroleum exploration. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: The IPCC simply updated their temperature history graphs to show the best data available at the time.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Hockey stick controversy: This decadal summer temperature reconstruction, together with a separate curve plotting instrumental thermometer data from the 1850s onwards, was featured as Figure 3.20 in the IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR) of 1996. [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]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: This graph extended the similar graph in Figure 3.20 from the IPCC Second Assessment Report of 1995, and differed from a schematic in the first assessment report that lacked temperature units, but appeared to depict larger global temperature variations over the past 1000 years, and higher temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period than the mid 20th century. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: These studies were widely presented as demonstrating that the current warming period is exceptional in comparison to temperatures between 1000 and 1900, and the MBH99 based graph featured in publicity. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Temperature record of the past 1000 years: This was the basis of a "schematic diagram" featured in the IPCC First Assessment Report beside cautions that the medieval warming might not have been global. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: An independent inquiry found CRU is a small research unit with limited resources and their rigour and honesty are not in doubt.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The Science and Technology Select Committee inquiry reported on 31 March 2010 that it had found that "the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact". [SUPPORTS]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: Describing its report as "hugely positive", he stated that "it is especially important that, despite a deluge of allegations and smears against the CRU, this independent group of utterly reputable scientists have concluded that there was no evidence of any scientific malpractice." [SUPPORTS]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The "rigour and honesty" of the scientists at the Climatic Research Unit were found not to be in doubt. [SUPPORTS]
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy: The panel did not seek to evaluate the science itself, but rather whether "the conclusions [reached by the CRU] represented an honest and scientifically justified interpretation of the data". [SUPPORTS]
- Rigour: Intellectual rigour is a subset of intellectual honesty—a practice of thought in which ones convictions are kept in proportion to valid evidence. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Benny Peiser, the Oreskes critic, retracted his criticism.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Benny Peiser: One of his main points of criticism is that the vast majority of the abstracts referred to in the study do not mention anthropogenic climate change, and only 13 of the 928 abstracts explicitly endorse what Oreskes called the "consensus view". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Benny Peiser: Peiser later admitted that it was a mistake to include one of the papers in his survey and said that his main criticism of Oreskes' essay its "claim of a unanimous consensus on anthropogenic global warming (APG) (as opposed to a majority consensus) is tenuous" and that it still was valid. [SUPPORTS]
- Benny Peiser: In a 2006, letter to Australia's Media Watch, Peiser explained that he had retracted 97% of his original critique and elaborated on some of his comments: "I do not think anyone is questioning that we are in a period of global warming. [SUPPORTS]
- Benny Peiser: Well when we first contacted him two weeks ago he told us..." "Only [a] few abstracts explicitly reject or doubt the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) consensus which is why I have publicly withdrawn this point of my critique." [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Naomi Oreskes: Oreskes' 2004 "Beyond the Ivory Tower" essay was challenged by British social anthropologist Benny Peiser, who eventually retracted his challenge, admitting he had only found one paper rejecting anthropogenic climate change, published by American Association of Petroleum Geologists (see also Benny Peiser § Objections to Oreskes essay). [SUPPORTS]
Claim: Trenberth is talking about the details of energy flow, not whether global warming is happening.
Verdict: REFUTES
Evidence:
- El Niño–Southern Oscillation: The ENSO is considered to be a potential tipping element in Earth's climate and, under the global warming, can enhance or alternate regional climate extreme events through a strengthened teleconnection. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- El Niño–Southern Oscillation: "Shifts in ENSO coupling processes under global warming". [REFUTES]
- Global warming: There has been no upward trend in the amount of the Sun's energy reaching the Earth, so it cannot be responsible for the current warming. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Kevin E. Trenberth: In an interview, Trenberth said, "The planet is warming", but "the warmth just isn't being manifested at the surface." [REFUTES]
- Kevin E. Trenberth: In a 2009 paper, "An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth's global energy", Trenberth discussed the distribution of heat and how it was affected by climate forcing, including greenhouse gas changes. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Melting ice leads to more sunlight being absorbed by water, thus heating the Arctic.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: The Arctic gradually loses snow and ice, bare rock and water absorb more and more of the sun's energy, making the Arctic even warmer. [SUPPORTS]
- Arctic sea ice decline: Arctic Sea ice melts in the summer, and more of the sun is being absorbed by the ocean. [SUPPORTS]
- Arctic sea ice decline: The fast rate of the sea ice melting is resulting in the oceans absorbing and heating up the Arctic. [SUPPORTS]
- Climate change in the Arctic: The primary cause of this phenomenon is ice-albedo feedback, where by melting ice uncovers darker land or ocean beneath, which then absorbs more sunlight, causing more heating. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: Not only does this increase the absorption of sunlight, it also increases melting and sea level rise. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Temperature errors in the Great Lakes region are not used in any global temperature records.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Lake Superior: [citation needed] This variation in temperature makes the lake seasonally stratigraphic. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Little Ice Age: The Siple Dome (SD) had a climate event with an onset time that is coincident with that of the Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic based on a correlation with the GISP2 record. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Little Ice Age: This trend could be extrapolated to continue into the future, possibly leading to a full ice age, but the twentieth-century instrumental temperature record shows a sudden reversal of this trend, with a rise in global temperatures attributed to greenhouse gas emissions. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Permafrost: This is evident from temperature measurements in boreholes in North America and Europe. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Precipitation: As a result, the modern global record of precipitation largely depends on satellite observations. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Multiple lines of evidence make it very clear that the rise in atmospheric CO2 is due to human emissions.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Global warming: CO2 emissions are continuing to rise due to the burning of fossil fuels and land-use change. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: Global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions in 2010 were equivalent to 49 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (using the most recent global warming potentials over 100 years from the AR5 report). [SUPPORTS]
- Greenhouse gas: The sharp acceleration in CO 2 emissions since 2000 to more than a 3% increase per year (more than 2 ppm per year) from 1.1% per year during the 1990s is attributable to the lapse of formerly declining trends in carbon intensity of both developing and developed nations. [SUPPORTS]
- Scientific consensus on climate change: The spatial and temporal fingerprint of warming can be traced to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, which are a direct result of burning fossil fuels, broad-scale deforestation and other human activity. [SUPPORTS]
- Scientific consensus on climate change: While ‘climate change’ can be due to natural forces or human activity, there is now substantial evidence to indicate that human activity – and specifically increased greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions – is a key factor in the pace and extent of global temperature increases. [SUPPORTS]