Original sentence: Heartland Institute denies the scientific opinion on climate change, arguing that the most reliable temperature data show no warming trend and, further, that warming might be beneficial if it did occur.In 2013 the Institute falsely portrayed a translation of one of its documents on global warming by the Chinese Academy of Sciences as a major shift towards skepticism by China's leaders.This was despite a preface in the translation saying it was to help them understand the public debate and was not an endorsement of the position contained in the document
Edited sentence: A preface in the translation stated that it was to help them understand the public debate and was not an endorsement of the position contained in the document.Heartland Institute questions scientific opinion on climate change, arguing that the most reliable temperature data show no warming trend and, further, that warming might be beneficial if it did occur.Heartland subsequently issued an apology, stating that it hadn't meant to imply that the CAS endorsed the views contained in CCR.In 2013, Heartland interpreted a translation of Climate Change Reconsidered (CCR) by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) as both "a landmark event that puts enormous scientific heft behind" climate skepticism and a reason why the Chinese government refused to sign a 2012 climate treaty that took place in Doha.The CAS and numerous reporters and bloggers reported that in doing so Heartland was implying that the CAS supported the views represented in CCR