copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: When the exact same group of 'experts' who claimed it was global cooling in 1977 now claim it's global warming you can easily see why I am skeptical (Anonymous, 2019-12-16)
Evidence (2017-04-04): Despite the many climate "skeptics" in key positions of power today, 97 percent of working climate scientists agree that the warming of Earth’s climate over the last 100 years is mainly due to human activity that has increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Why are they so sure? [...] Global temperatures have risen an average of 1.4˚ F since 1880. Sea ice in the Arctic has thinned and decreased in the last few decades; the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are decreasing in mass. The North and South Poles are warming faster than anywhere else on Earth. Glaciers are retreating on mountains all over the world. Spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the last 50 years. [...] Evidence from ocean sediments, ice cores, tree rings, sedimentary rocks and coral reefs show that the current warming is occurring 10 times faster than it did in the past when Earth emerged from the ice ages, at a rate unprecedented in the last 1,300 years.
Claim: When the exact same group of 'experts' who claimed it was global cooling in 1977 now claim it's global warming you can easily see why I am skeptical (Anonymous, 2019-12-16)
Evidence (2017-01-17): I had also submitted an abstract with Stephen Lewandowsky and James Risbey called "Bets reveal people’s opinions on climate change and illustrate the statistics of climate change," and a companion poster entitled "Forty years of expert opinion on global warming: 1977-2017" in which we proposed to survey the conference attendees: Forecasts of anthropogenic global warming in the 1970s (e.g. Broecker, 1975, Charney et al., 1979) were taken seriously by policy makers. At that time, climate change was already broadly recognized within the US defense and intelligence establishments as a threat to national and global security, particularly due to climate’s effect on food production. There was uncertainty about the degree of global warming, and media-hyped speculation about global cooling confused the public. Because science-informed policy decisions needed to be made in the face of this uncertainty, the US Department of Defense funded a study in 1977 by National Defense University (NDU) called "Climate Change to the Year 2000" in which a panel of experts was surveyed. Contrary to the recent mythology of a global cooling scare in the 1970s, the NDU report (published in 1978) concluded that, "Collectively, the respondents tended to anticipate a slight global warming rather than a cooling". Despite the rapid global warming since 1977, this subject remains politically contentious. We propose to use our poster presentation to survey the attendees of the Fourth Santa Fe Conference on Global and Regional Climate Change and to determine how expert opinion has changed in the last 40 years.
Claim: When the exact same group of 'experts' who claimed it was global cooling in 1977 now claim it's global warming you can easily see why I am skeptical (Anonymous, 2019-12-16)
Evidence (2019-12-14): It is more difficult to tune out similar statements from responsible individuals representing the United Nations. In his opening remarks for the UN Climate Change Conference this week in Madrid (COP25), UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said that "the point of no-return is no longer over the horizon." Hoesung Lee, the Chair for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said "if we stay on our current path, [we] threaten our existence on this planet." [...] Alarming press releases are issued about each new climate model projection that predicts future catastrophes from famine, mass migrations, catastrophic fires, etc. However these alarming scenarios of the 21st century climate change require that, like the White Queen in Alice and Wonderland, we believe ‘six impossible things before breakfast’. [...] As noted in a recent paper co-authored by Dr. Tim Palmer of Oxford University, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2019/11/26/1906691116.full.pdf, there is "deep dissatisfaction with the ability of our models to inform society about the pace of warming, how this warming plays out regionally, and what it implies for the likelihood of surprises." "Unfortunately, [climate scientists] circling the wagons leads to false impressions about the source of our confidence and about our ability to meet the scientific challenges posed by a world that we know is warming globally."
Claim: When the exact same group of 'experts' who claimed it was global cooling in 1977 now claim it's global warming you can easily see why I am skeptical (Anonymous, 2019-12-16)
Evidence (2010-03-19): Skeptical Science housekeeping: Contradictions, URLs and getting hacked [...] Lastly, to prove once and for all that I'm a tragic data junkie (as if the resources taxonomy page wasn't enough evidence), I've added a new page called Global Warming Skeptic Contradictions. The idea for this page originated when I was discussing with a few other bloggers the notion that many global warming skeptic arguments flatly contradict each other. Someone pointed out a few webpages that already list arguments that contradict each other. For example, Climate WTF, Frank O'Dwyer and Mind of Dan have all posted on the subject. [...] Of course, I know what some are going to say in objection to the whole concept of a contradiction page. Not all skeptics think exactly the same - they're not all one homogenous, identically thinking block. This is a fair comment and the fact that some skeptic arguments contradict each other doesn't necessarily invalidate global warming skepticism (there's plenty of empirical evidence to do that). That's not the ultimate point of the contradictions page. The ultimate point is coming later - I have a few other bells and whistles to add to this page once the list of contradiction pairs gets long enough. So please do add some contradiction pairs (browse those other blogs listed above for ideas). The more others contribute, the more it frees me up for other work such as a "Preview Comment" feature that many have been hankering for.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2023-11-09): COVID-19 vaccines are effective against severe disease. The American Academy of Pediatricians recommends that children and adolescents aged six months and above receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Some research suggests that COVID-19 vaccination may temporarily change how the immune system reacts to infection from pathogens other than the virus SARS-CoV-2. However, the study didn’t show that vaccinated children have weaker immunity.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2022-02-01): Understanding COVID-19 in children: immune determinants and post-infection conditions [...] Nevertheless, collectively, these studies show that the immune response of children and adults to mild SARS-CoV-2 infection are similar, but diverge after the development of severe disease (Fig. 3). Adults with severe COVID-19 might have loss of immune synchrony: T cell lymphopenia, reduced circulating follicular helper T cells, and impaired IFN-mediated signaling juxtaposed with high frequencies of activated SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells, robust humoral responses, and myeloid cell activation. By contrast, children with MIS-C exhibit multilineage immune cell activation beyond that which occurs in pediatric or adult COVID-19, evidenced by greater IFN and inflammasome signaling, widespread T cell activation, and activation of a broad humoral response reactive to common viruses as well as SARS-CoV-2. The association of severe COVID-19 in children and adults with pre-existing medical conditions underscores the contributions of these comorbidities to disease severity. Although studies have started to identify genetic risk factors for MIS-C, the constellation of factors that lead to MIS-C are mostly undefined. The spread of viral variants among unvaccinated pediatric populations may also change the spectrum of disease in children. The solutions to these questions will emerge as investigators continue to develop multicenter studies with larger cohorts alongside new tools for studying SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis. [...] Consiglio, C. R. et al. The immunology of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children with COVID-19. Cell183, 968–981.e7 (2020).
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2020-12-10): How kids’ immune systems can evade COVID Childrens’ untrained immune response seems to be key to eliminating SARS-CoV-2. [...] Young children account for only a small percentage of COVID-19 infections1 — a trend that has puzzled scientists. Now, a growing body of evidence suggests why: kids’ immune systems seem better equipped to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 than are adults’.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2021-08-24): Covid-19: 40% of patients with weakened immune system mount lower response to vaccines [...] The Octave (Observational Cohort Trial T cells Antibodies and Vaccine Efficacy in SARS-CoV-2) trial is one of the largest in the world to have looked at the response to covid-19 vaccination in patients who are immunocompromised. It compared 600 patients, who had a weakened immune system because of their disease process or treatment, with the antibody response of healthy people from the Pitch (Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare workers) study. [...] The findings have been shared with the UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, which is poised to decide on provision of booster vaccines in early September. Some countries that are already administering booster doses have prioritised people with chronic diseases or who are taking immunosuppressive therapies.2
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2024-01-30): SARS-CoV-2-targeting mRNA vaccines have become available for individuals six months of age and older5,6,7,8,9,10,11. These vaccines have provided substantial protection against hospitalizations and severe disease in children ages 5–17 years5,7,10,12. Moreover, detailed humoral profiling of children and adolescents reveals that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines elicit robust, highly functional humoral immune responses in children in a dose-dependent manner13, with strong cross-reactivity against variants of concerns (VOC)13,14. In children under 5 years of age, mRNA vaccination results in neutralizing immunoglobulin titers comparable to vaccinated adults and vaccination protects against symptomatic infection11. However, detailed humoral profiling in this age group has not yet been investigated. As an individual’s humoral immune response evolves with age15, age-related differences in mRNA vaccine responses must be fully characterized to fully understand the impact of mRNA vaccination in infants and toddlers. [...] Bartsch, Y. C. et al. SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination elicits robust antibody responses in children. Sci. Transl. Med., eabn9237 (2022). [...] Jalkanen, P. et al. COVID-19 mRNA vaccine induced antibody responses against three SARS-CoV-2 variants. Nat. Commun.12, 3991 (2021).
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2022-04-14): Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Data Demonstrating High Immune Response Following a Booster Dose of their COVID-19 Vaccine in Children 5 Through 11 Years of Age - Data from a subanalysis of 30 sera from a Phase 2/3 clinical trial of children 5 through 11 years of age show a 36-fold increase in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron neutralizing titers following a booster (third) dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine - In the Phase 2/3 clinical trial with 140 children a booster (third) dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine increased neutralizing antibodies by 6-fold against the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type strain in this age group - Companies plan to submit these data to U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the coming days with additional submissions to other regulatory agencies worldwide to follow [...] - chest pain - shortness of breath - feelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering, or pounding heart - Fainting can happen after getting injectable vaccines, including Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA). Sometimes people who faint can fall and hurt themselves. For this reason, your vaccination provider may ask you to sit or lie down for 15 minutes after receiving the vaccine - Some people with weakened immune systems may have reduced immune responses to Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2023-06-05): Owing to these advantages, two COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (Moderna mRNA-1273 and Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2) were authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for emergency use in under a year. Therefore, these early licensed mRNA vaccines were given priority in many countries. Around the same time or later, various COVID-19 vaccines, including inactivated and viral vector vaccines, were approved, and globally administered. Furthermore, the FDA has recently approved a traditional protein subunit type vaccine, Novavax, for emergency use8. Because of the availability of these vaccines, people worldwide have inadvertently received a heterologous prime-boost vaccination schedule, i.e., the administration of different types of vaccines to achieve immunization against a single virus. It has been reported that heterologous prime-boost strategies induce more robust T-cell responses and higher neutralizing antibody titers9. Increasing clinical results indicate that heterologous vaccination strategies such as priming with viral vectored vaccines followed by boosting with mRNA vaccines or priming with inactivated vaccines followed by boosting with mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 provided enhanced immune responses compared to homologous vaccination strategies10. However, the immunogenicity and efficacy of heterologous priming-boosting using mRNA and protein vaccines have not yet been reported.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2023-03-06): Understanding COVID-19 in children: immune determinants and post-infection conditions [...] Ouldali, N. et al. Hyper inflammatory syndrome following COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in children: a national post-authorization pharmacovigilance study. Lancet Reg. Health Eur.17, 100393 (2022). [...] Zambrano, L. D. Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccination against multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children among persons aged 12–18 years — United States, July–December 2021. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.71, 52–58 (2022).
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2022-05-23): Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Demonstrates Strong Immune Response, High Efficacy and Favorable Safety in Children 6 Months to Under 5 Years of Age Following Third Dose - Based on topline data, three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine met all immunobridging criteria required for Emergency Use Authorization - The third 3-µg dose was well tolerated among 1,678 children under 5 years of age with a safety profile similar to placebo - Vaccine efficacy of 80.3% was observed in descriptive analysis of three doses during a time when Omicron was the predominant variant - The 3-µg dose level, which is one-tenth the dose for adults, was selected for children under 5 years of age based on safety, tolerability and immunogenicity [...] - chest pain - shortness of breath - feelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering, or pounding heart - Fainting can happen after getting injectable vaccines, including Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA). Sometimes people who faint can fall and hurt themselves. For this reason, your vaccination provider may ask you to sit or lie down for 15 minutes after receiving the vaccine - Some people with weakened immune systems may have reduced immune responses to Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2021-11-02): What parents need to know about Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for kids ages 5 to 11 [...] In a clinical trial, Pfizer assessed the immune response and the safety of their mRNA vaccine in kids 5 to 11. The trial included about 2,250 children, with two-thirds getting the shot and the other third receiving a placebo. [...] Pfizer assessed kids’ immune response to the vaccine by looking at antibody levels. The company compared the response in a group of 5- to 11-year-olds one month after the second shot with antibody levels seen in a group of 16- to 25-year-olds, who were part of the earlier and much larger clinical trial that studied the vaccine’s efficacy in tens of thousands of adults (SN: 10/4/20). There was no difference in the immune responses between the different groups, even though the younger children received a smaller dose, the FDA reported in their review of Pfizer’s trial data. Since the immune response was similar between the two groups, the protection against COVID-19 offered by the vaccine for each group should also be similar.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2021-09-20): Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Positive Topline Results From Pivotal Trial of COVID-19 Vaccine in Children 5 to 11 Years - Results are the first from a pivotal trial of any COVID-19 vaccine in children under 12 years of age - In participants 5 to 11 years of age, the vaccine was safe, well tolerated and showed robust neutralizing antibody responses - Companies plan to submit these data to the FDA, EMA and other regulatory agencies around the world as soon as possible - Results in children under 5 years of age are expected as soon as later this year [...] COMIRNATY® (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) is an FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine made by Pfizer for BioNTech. [...] Individuals should not get the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine if they:
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2024-08-08): - Malden DE, Gee J, Glenn S, Li Z, Mercado C, Ogun OA, Kim S, Lewin BJ, Ackerson BK, Jazwa A, Weintraub ES, McNeil MM, Tartof S. Reactions following Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and related healthcare encounters among 7,077 children aged 5-11 years within an integrated healthcare system. Vaccine. 2023 Jan 9; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.10.079. Online ahead of print.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2024-09-13): For children ages 5 through 11, the FDA reviewed a vaccine study of more than 4,600 children in this age range. Of this group, about 3,100 were given the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. The other children were given an inactive (placebo) shot. Children who were given the vaccine were monitored for side effects for at least two months after the second dose. Side effects were generally mild to moderate. [...] For children ages 12 through 15, the FDA reviewed a vaccine study of more than 2,200 U.S. children in this age range. Of this group, about half were given the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. The other children were given a placebo shot. A week after the second dose was given, there were no cases of COVID-19 in the 1,005 children given the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. [...] The Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID-19 vaccines use messenger RNA, also called mRNA. Researchers have been studying mRNA vaccines for decades.
Claim: A study showed a “weakened immune response in kids injected with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot”; “The mRNA Covid jabs damage immune responses to other viruses in children” (Alex Berenson, Jonas Vesterberg, 2023-11-09)
Evidence (2024-09-26): The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are a type known as an mRNA vaccine. (Read more about COVID-19 vaccine types.) For people ages 12 and older who are unable to get an updated mRNA vaccine, or choose not to, another type of vaccine, made by the biotech company Novavax, is available. The Novavax product is a protein subunit vaccine. Two doses are recommended three weeks apart if you haven’t been vaccinated for COVID-19 before. [...] The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are a type called a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine. Novavax’s is a protein-based (or protein-subunit) vaccine. All these vaccines teach the body how to fight the virus that causes COVID-19 without you actually having to get the illness. None of the vaccines causes the illness — there is no live virus in any of the vaccines. [...] Your health care team can guide you on whether you have a weakened immune system and should receive additional COVID-19 vaccinations. (The CDC has specific guidance, listed by age group, for vaccination in people with compromised immune systems.) Also, continue other COVID-19 precautions according to your health care team’s advice, including masking, distancing and frequent handwashing, and be sure people close to you are vaccinated whenever possible.