I do a lot of reading on Twitter by climate scientists and conservation scientists and I usually learn a lot. However, sometimes I run into extreme claims by non-scientist activists that don't seem to be fact-checked by scientists.
Ben See (@ClimateBen) | Twitter
For example, this guy makes some pretty scary claims about polar ice loss and permafrost methane that have been debunked by climate scientists, and he also says the world will warm past 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius by faster dates than the IPCC or most scientists say. He also tends to claim countries will be "partially uninhabitable" past certain dates without defining the term, and he often claims animals are endangered when they aren't by IUCN definitions (for example, hedgehogs and hummingbirds). I've read many of his posts and he seems to embellish the facts beyond what science says. Is he onto something, or is he just scaremongering for political reasons?
On a more professional note, the Audubon Society recently made claims projecting habitat losses for North American bird species due to climate change, projecting that most species will become "at increasing risk of extinction." Does this imply the IUCN statuses of these bird species should be revised to make them more threatened, or are Least Concern birds likely to stay Least Concern even with profound range shifts/declines?
Survival by Degrees: 389 Bird Species on the Brink
Ben See (@ClimateBen) | Twitter
For example, this guy makes some pretty scary claims about polar ice loss and permafrost methane that have been debunked by climate scientists, and he also says the world will warm past 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius by faster dates than the IPCC or most scientists say. He also tends to claim countries will be "partially uninhabitable" past certain dates without defining the term, and he often claims animals are endangered when they aren't by IUCN definitions (for example, hedgehogs and hummingbirds). I've read many of his posts and he seems to embellish the facts beyond what science says. Is he onto something, or is he just scaremongering for political reasons?
On a more professional note, the Audubon Society recently made claims projecting habitat losses for North American bird species due to climate change, projecting that most species will become "at increasing risk of extinction." Does this imply the IUCN statuses of these bird species should be revised to make them more threatened, or are Least Concern birds likely to stay Least Concern even with profound range shifts/declines?
Survival by Degrees: 389 Bird Species on the Brink