{ "schema_version": "1.1", "series": "Propaganda Buster", "publisher": "Affect Climate Change", "section": { "title": "Propaganda Buster", "subtitle": "Debunking bogus climate claims in the media with peer-reviewed science and primary sources.", "canonical_path": "/buster/", "methodology_path": "/buster/methodology/", "short_path": "/buster/", "description": "A permanent, source-first ACC fact-checking archive. The website holds the detailed record; social posts are concise invitations to examine it." }, "issue_id": "002", "issue_title": "Summer heat and model spin", "issue_summary": "This edition checks a misquoted UK temperature record, a HAARP weather-control allegation, an aerosol study framed as replacing CO₂, and a false claim that the IPCC admitted its scenarios were wrong.", "cover": { "presentation_mode": "social-slide", "public_asset_included": true, "title": "Summer heat and model spin", "description": "ACC-authored Issue 002 carousel cover using four recreated attributed-text treatments; no platform screenshot or private research capture is reproduced.", "private_review_capture": { "capture_file_name": "propaganda-buster-issue-002-cover.png", "sha256": "64DC3F9581C95BB9350C9F1BB6907E9B1756247A7B0072992E088D17584193A5", "distribution": "private-research-only" }, "rights_note": "The earlier private cover embedded four third-party source specimens. It is retained only by hash and private filename for provenance and is excluded from publication. The current public-facing cover uses ACC-authored attributed-text cards." }, "status": "published", "robots": "index,follow,max-image-preview:large,max-snippet:-1", "planned_publication_on": "2026-08-08", "schedule_note": "The edition remains dated August 7; its local website publication candidate was completed August 8. This one-off timing does not change the recurring Propaganda Buster schedule.", "editorial_rule": "The website record is authoritative. Social assets are concise derivatives that link back to the canonical issue or claim record.", "reviewed_on": "2026-08-08", "updated_on": "2026-08-08", "published_on": "2026-08-08", "corrected_on": null, "issue_path": "/buster/002/", "short_issue_path": "/buster/002", "source_ledger_path": "/assets/data/propaganda-buster/source-ledger-002.csv", "social_cta": "Full evidence: www.affectclimatechange.com/buster/002", "publication_gate": { "source_review": "approved", "image_rights_review": "approved", "calculation_review": "approved", "editorial_approval": "approved", "publish_allowed": true, "approved_on": "2026-08-08", "release_scope": "Public website evidence record plus the approved ACC-authored ten-slide social edition. Claim pages use recreated attributed-text treatments rather than third-party screenshots.", "note": "Owner-authorized public website release after source, quantitative-copy, attribution-boundary, image-rights, and final editorial review. This metadata does not state that an external social post or website deployment has occurred." }, "social_release": { "status": "published", "production_date": "2026-08-07", "claim_ids": [ "PB-002-01", "PB-002-02", "PB-002-03", "PB-002-04" ], "slides": [ { "number": 1, "role": "Cover and issue definition", "file": "slide-01.png", "alt": "Propaganda Buster Issue 002 cover dated August 7, 2026, introducing four climate claims with recreated attributed-text treatments." }, { "number": 2, "role": "Claim 1 specimen", "claim_id": "PB-002-01", "file": "slide-02.png", "alt": "Recreated attributed quote presenting the false claim that one UK heat comparison with 1976 disproves global warming." }, { "number": 3, "role": "Claim 1 evidence", "claim_id": "PB-002-01", "file": "slide-03.png", "alt": "Met Office and IPCC evidence showing a verified 38.0 degree Celsius June record, a higher 2022 all-time record, and the long-term warming trend." }, { "number": 4, "role": "Claim 2 specimen", "claim_id": "PB-002-02", "file": "slide-04.png", "alt": "Recreated attributed excerpt presenting the false allegation that HAARP activity caused the June 2026 UK heat." }, { "number": 5, "role": "Claim 2 evidence", "claim_id": "PB-002-02", "file": "slide-05.png", "alt": "HAARP, NASA, and peer-reviewed evidence showing ionospheric research occurs far above the troposphere where weather develops." }, { "number": 6, "role": "Claim 3 specimen", "claim_id": "PB-002-03", "file": "slide-06.png", "alt": "Recreated attributed quote presenting the misleading claim that cleaner air rather than carbon dioxide is driving rising temperatures." }, { "number": 7, "role": "Claim 3 evidence", "claim_id": "PB-002-03", "file": "slide-07.png", "alt": "Peer-reviewed and IPCC evidence explaining that reduced aerosol cooling can reveal warming while greenhouse gases remain the dominant driver." }, { "number": 8, "role": "Claim 4 specimen", "claim_id": "PB-002-04", "file": "slide-08.png", "alt": "Recreated attributed quote presenting the misleading claim that the IPCC admitted the RCP8.5 scenario and climate models were wrong." }, { "number": 9, "role": "Claim 4 evidence", "claim_id": "PB-002-04", "file": "slide-09.png", "alt": "IPCC, WCRP, and peer-reviewed evidence explaining that scenarios are conditional pathways and updating them is not a model failure." }, { "number": 10, "role": "Sources and website invitation", "file": "slide-10.png", "alt": "Closing Issue 002 slide directing readers to AffectClimateChange.com/Buster/002 for the complete evidence, provenance, and corrections record." } ] }, "publication_blockers": [], "methodology": { "verdicts": [ "False", "Misleading", "Unsupported", "Missing context", "Unverifiable" ], "minimum_evidence": "At least two directly relevant reputable sources, normally including a primary dataset, government scientific assessment, or peer-reviewed research.", "attribution_boundary": "ACC evaluates the claim. It does not infer intent, coordination, funding, or representativeness without direct evidence specific to that attribution.", "corrections_policy": "Material corrections are dated, explained, and retained in the revision history." }, "claims": [ { "claim_id": "PB-002-01", "slug": "uk-heat-1976", "canonical_path": "/buster/002/uk-heat-1976/", "short_path": "/buster/002/uk-heat-1976", "claim_as_circulated": "June 26, 2026 was the UK's hottest day since 1976, therefore global warming is a lie.", "full_post_context": "Today is the hottest day in the UK since 1976. That means 50 years ago it was still just as hot as it is today. Global Warming is a lie.", "scope_note": "This verdict evaluates the temperature-record statement and the inference drawn from one day. It does not evaluate or infer the poster's motive.", "verdict": "FALSE — RECORD MISSTATED", "verdict_summary": "The UK's all-time record is 40.3°C from July 2022. The Met Office verified 38.0°C at Lingwood on June 26, 2026 as a new June record, and one day cannot overturn the long-term warming trend.", "topics": [ "UK heat", "Weather versus climate", "Temperature records", "Cherry-picking" ], "why_wrong": "The post mislabels a new June record as the hottest UK day since 1976 even though the country reached 40.3°C in July 2022. It then treats one comparison with a historic heatwave as evidence against a trend measured across many decades, regions, seasons, and independent datasets.", "what_is_true": "The UK did experience exceptional heat in June 2026, and June 1976 was also historically hot. The Met Office has verified 38.0°C at Lingwood as the UK's highest June temperature on record, exceeding the previous June record of 35.6°C set in Southampton in 1976.", "how_scientists_know": "National meteorological services quality-control observations from standardized weather stations and maintain records by date, month, season, and location. Climate scientists then combine long records and multiple indicators to distinguish short-lived weather variability from sustained changes in the probability and intensity of extremes.", "evidence_points": [ "The Met Office verified 38.0°C at Lingwood on June 26 as the UK's highest June temperature on record, superseding the earlier provisional 37.7°C report.", "The Met Office's official climate-extremes record lists 40.3°C at Coningsby on July 19, 2022 as the UK's highest recorded temperature.", "The IPCC concludes that human influence has unequivocally warmed the climate system and has made hot extremes more frequent and more intense across most land regions." ], "source_specimen": { "specimen_mode": "attributed-quote", "attributed_quote": "Today is the hottest day in the UK since 1976. That means 50 years ago it was still just as hot as it is today. Global Warming is a lie.", "platform": "X", "account": "Alex Barnicoat (@AlexBarnicoat_)", "published": "2026-06-26", "original_url": "https://x.com/AlexBarnicoat_/status/2070466138593517912", "circulation_note": "Original X post captured for research on August 3, 2026. Changing engagement counts are intentionally excluded from the assessed claim.", "public_asset_included": false, "presentation_description": "Attributed text treatment preserving the account, date, exact wording, and source URL without reproducing the source screenshot.", "rights_status": "approved", "reuse_status": "Publication review approved for the ACC-authored attributed quote treatment. The private X screenshot is not redistributed.", "private_capture": { "capture_file_name": "claim-01-x-post.png", "captured_on": "2026-08-03", "sha256": "8CE4174054FA322C0D11512C84FEEB7A338FD5C54A53CB87FC581DAC2FEA07AB", "distribution": "private-research-only" } }, "science_sources": [ { "type": "government meteorological record", "title": "New June daily temperature records heading into the record books", "publisher": "Met Office", "url": "https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/weather-and-climate-news/2026/new-june-daily-temperature-records-heading-into-the-record-books", "finding": "The Met Office verified 38.0°C at Lingwood on June 26 as the UK's highest June daily maximum temperature on record, superseding the earlier provisional 37.7°C figure.", "accessed": "2026-08-08" }, { "type": "government meteorological record", "title": "UK climate extremes", "publisher": "Met Office", "url": "https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-extremes", "finding": "The official record lists 40.3°C at Coningsby on July 19, 2022 as the highest UK temperature.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "international scientific assessment", "title": "AR6 Working Group I headline statements", "publisher": "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change", "url": "https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/resources/spm-headline-statements/", "finding": "The assessment concludes that human influence has unequivocally warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land and has intensified hot extremes across most land regions.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" } ] }, { "claim_id": "PB-002-02", "slug": "haarp-uk-heat", "canonical_path": "/buster/002/haarp-uk-heat/", "short_path": "/buster/002/haarp-uk-heat", "claim_as_circulated": "RAF and US Air Force HAARP activity caused the June 2026 UK heat.", "full_post_context": "The Royal Air Force and the US Air Force have recently messed around with the pressure around our islands with the HAARP Weather Weapon — and that's what's made it crazy hot.", "scope_note": "This is a faithful excerpt of an archived post that also contains other allegations. This case evaluates only the stated link between HAARP activity and the UK heat.", "verdict": "FALSE", "verdict_summary": "HAARP transmits radio waves into the ionosphere far above the troposphere where weather develops. Neither the facility's physics nor controlled experiments provide a mechanism or evidence for creating a surface heatwave.", "topics": [ "HAARP", "Weather control", "Atmospheric layers", "UK heat" ], "why_wrong": "The allegation places a surface weather event in the wrong atmospheric system. HAARP's high-frequency radio transmissions interact with charged particles in the ionosphere, while the pressure patterns and heat involved in ordinary weather form much lower in the troposphere. No cited measurement connects HAARP operations to the UK heat.", "what_is_true": "HAARP is a real research facility that can deliberately perturb a small region of the ionosphere for controlled experiments. Those localized ionospheric effects can support studies of radio propagation and space physics, but they are not evidence that the system can engineer pressure systems or surface temperatures.", "how_scientists_know": "Researchers directly measure the altitude, frequency, power, and spatial extent of HAARP experiments with radar, optical instruments, and radio diagnostics. Atmospheric observations independently locate clouds, convection, pressure systems, and most weather in the troposphere, allowing the claimed mechanism to be tested against established physics and measurements.", "evidence_points": [ "The HAARP program's FAQ states that its radio waves are not absorbed in the troposphere or stratosphere, the atmospheric regions that produce Earth's weather.", "NASA explains that nearly all weather occurs in the troposphere, which extends from the surface to an average height of roughly 12 kilometers.", "A peer-reviewed HAARP experiment produced a localized artificial aurora in an approximately 20-kilometer spot around 120 kilometers altitude, documenting an ionospheric effect rather than weather control." ], "source_specimen": { "specimen_mode": "attributed-quote", "attributed_quote": "The Royal Air Force and the US Air Force have recently messed around with the pressure around our islands with the HAARP Weather Weapon — and that's what's made it crazy hot.", "platform": "Facebook, preserved by MediaVault", "account": "Napoleon Blownaparte's Orgonite", "published": "2026-06-25", "original_url": "https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0SBpa6TjXforhF6eUuTj5AwZ624wHbX2MtHwFHx6ztFqx5W9EmX8hSAsLA3dpGPbKl&id=61565864835431", "archive_url": "https://mvau.lt/media/9c56be51-9318-4a4f-9ca4-0436db69986d", "archive_date": "2026-07-10", "circulation_note": "One documented Facebook example, archived July 10 and captured for research August 3, 2026. It is not evidence of coordination, intent, reach, or representativeness.", "public_asset_included": false, "presentation_description": "Attributed text treatment preserving the archived wording and provenance without redistributing the MediaVault capture.", "rights_status": "approved", "reuse_status": "Publication review approved for the ACC-authored attributed quote treatment. The MediaVault capture remains private and is not redistributed.", "private_capture": { "capture_file_name": "claim-02-haarp-archive.png", "captured_on": "2026-08-03", "sha256": "8457031684CF4926CA9B0F4774817F8C1CDFBAD800E0F400AFDF6A3AD6A1A186", "distribution": "private-research-only" } }, "science_sources": [ { "type": "government research facility FAQ", "title": "Frequently asked questions", "publisher": "HAARP, University of Alaska Fairbanks", "url": "https://haarp.gi.alaska.edu/faq", "finding": "The facility explains that HAARP frequencies are not absorbed in the troposphere or stratosphere and therefore cannot control weather.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "government science explainer", "title": "Earth's atmosphere: a multi-layered cake", "publisher": "NASA", "url": "https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-atmosphere/earths-atmosphere-a-multi-layered-cake/", "finding": "NASA identifies the troposphere as the lowest atmospheric layer and the region where nearly all weather occurs.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "peer-reviewed experimental research", "title": "Artificial Aurora Produced by HAARP", "publisher": "Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics", "doi": "10.1029/2019JA026607", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JA026607", "finding": "The controlled experiment observed a localized artificial aurora around 120 kilometers altitude, demonstrating a bounded ionospheric response.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" } ] }, { "claim_id": "PB-002-03", "slug": "clean-air-not-co2", "canonical_path": "/buster/002/clean-air-not-co2/", "short_path": "/buster/002/clean-air-not-co2", "claim_as_circulated": "Cleaner air, not CO₂, is driving Europe's heat, and net-zero policy is making temperatures rise.", "full_post_context": "Net Stupid Zero is contributing to rising temperatures not helping… Cleaner air = higher temps, not CO2.", "scope_note": "This verdict separates the supported aerosol-cooling effect from the unsupported claims that it replaces greenhouse-gas forcing or ties recent heat to net-zero policy.", "verdict": "MISLEADING — REAL AEROSOL EFFECT, FALSE REPLACEMENT", "verdict_summary": "Reducing sulfate pollution removes some regional cooling and can add to European summer warming. The cited research does not show that CO₂ stopped driving warming or that net-zero policy caused the heat.", "topics": [ "Aerosols", "Air pollution", "Carbon dioxide", "Net zero", "European heat" ], "why_wrong": "The post turns a real secondary climate effect into a replacement for the primary driver. The cited study examines how declining sulfate aerosols can alter regional circulation and add European summer warming; it does not attribute recent heatwaves to net-zero policy, nor does it overturn the measured warming effect of accumulated greenhouse gases.", "what_is_true": "Sulfate aerosols reflect sunlight and affect clouds, producing a net cooling influence. Cleaning up air pollution can therefore reveal some warming that aerosols had masked and can change regional circulation. That effect can operate alongside greenhouse-gas warming and does not make pollution a safe climate strategy.", "how_scientists_know": "Scientists compare observed temperature and circulation patterns with climate-model experiments that vary individual forcings such as greenhouse gases and aerosols. Multiple lines of evidence, including radiative physics, atmospheric composition measurements, detection-and-attribution studies, and assessed model ensembles, separate each contribution and its uncertainty.", "evidence_points": [ "Roldán-Gómez and colleagues associate sulfate-aerosol reductions since about 1980 with circulation changes and additional European summer warming; the paper does not identify net-zero policy as the cause of recent heat.", "IPCC Working Group I assesses anthropogenic aerosols as a net cooling influence that has offset part of the warming caused by greenhouse gases.", "The IPCC identifies greenhouse-gas forcing as the dominant driver of observed increases in hot extremes, with aerosol forcing providing a partial offset rather than an alternative explanation." ], "source_specimen": { "specimen_mode": "attributed-quote", "attributed_quote": "Net Stupid Zero is contributing to rising temperatures not helping… Cleaner air = higher temps, not CO2.", "platform": "X", "account": "Richard Tice (@TiceRichard)", "published": "2026-07-23", "original_url": "https://x.com/TiceRichard/status/2080198978239434803", "circulation_note": "Original X post captured for research on August 3, 2026. The capture also contains an embedded Telegraph card, so both screenshot and nested-content reuse require review.", "public_asset_included": false, "presentation_description": "Attributed text treatment preserving the account, date, wording, and original URL without reproducing the X capture or embedded Telegraph card.", "rights_status": "approved", "reuse_status": "Publication review approved for the ACC-authored attributed quote treatment. The X screenshot and embedded Telegraph card are not redistributed.", "private_capture": { "capture_file_name": "claim-03-clean-air-x-post.png", "captured_on": "2026-08-03", "sha256": "CC96B3BE9307059E931F02850E5432AF72862B24BCABEF64CEAE2A7889D7A26F", "distribution": "private-research-only" } }, "science_sources": [ { "type": "peer-reviewed attribution research", "title": "Accelerated European Summer Warming Driven by Atmospheric Circulation Changes in Response to Aerosol Forcing", "publisher": "Geophysical Research Letters", "doi": "10.1029/2026GL122424", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1029/2026GL122424", "finding": "The study links sulfate-aerosol reductions since 1980 to circulation changes and additional European summer warming, not to a replacement of greenhouse-gas forcing.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "international scientific assessment", "title": "AR6 Working Group I, Chapter 6: Short-lived climate forcers", "publisher": "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change", "url": "https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-6/", "finding": "The assessment finds that anthropogenic aerosols exerted a net cooling influence and masked a portion of greenhouse-gas warming.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "international scientific assessment", "title": "AR6 Working Group I, Chapter 11: Weather and climate extreme events in a changing climate", "publisher": "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change", "url": "https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-11/", "finding": "The assessment identifies greenhouse-gas forcing as the main driver of intensified hot extremes, partly offset by aerosol cooling.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" } ] }, { "claim_id": "PB-002-04", "slug": "ipcc-rcp85-wrong", "canonical_path": "/buster/002/ipcc-rcp85-wrong/", "short_path": "/buster/002/ipcc-rcp85-wrong", "claim_as_circulated": "The IPCC admitted that its RCP8.5 climate projections were wrong.", "full_post_context": "The United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!", "scope_note": "This verdict evaluates the asserted IPCC authorship, admission, and model-failure inference while preserving the genuine update to the plausibility of very-high-emissions scenarios.", "verdict": "MISLEADING — SCENARIO UPDATE MISREPRESENTED", "verdict_summary": "The IPCC said the cited ScenarioMIP study was WCRP research, not an IPCC admission. Emissions scenarios are conditional inputs, and revising their plausibility does not show that climate models failed.", "topics": [ "IPCC", "Climate scenarios", "Climate models", "RCP8.5", "SSP5-8.5" ], "why_wrong": "The statement attributes a WCRP ScenarioMIP paper and its scenarios to the IPCC, then turns an update to scenario plausibility into an admission that projections were wrong. The IPCC does not own the scenarios or run the climate models, and a conditional pathway is not a prediction that must occur for model physics to be valid.", "what_is_true": "Very-high-emissions pathways are considered less plausible today than when earlier scenario sets were designed, and ScenarioMIP-CMIP7 narrowed the range used for new model experiments. The newer SSP5-8.5 pathway is the CMIP6 successor to RCP8.5, but the labels and model-intercomparison generations should not be treated as identical.", "how_scientists_know": "Scenario designers specify alternative future emissions and socioeconomic assumptions, climate models calculate the resulting physical response, and assessment bodies evaluate the published literature. Model skill can also be tested retrospectively by comparing projected temperatures with observations while accounting for the forcing that actually occurred.", "evidence_points": [ "The IPCC's May 20 clarification says the ScenarioMIP-CMIP7 paper was incorrectly attributed to the IPCC and explains that the IPCC does not conduct research, run models, or own climate scenarios.", "The ScenarioMIP-CMIP7 design paper presents seven conditional pathways for model experiments and judges the very-high SSP5-8.5 pathway less plausible under current knowledge.", "A peer-reviewed retrospective evaluation found historical climate models generally projected observed warming successfully, especially after accounting for differences between projected and realized radiative forcing." ], "source_specimen": { "specimen_mode": "attributed-quote", "attributed_quote": "The United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!", "platform": "Truth Social", "account": "Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)", "published": "2026-05-16", "original_url": "https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/116586488927495029", "circulation_note": "Truth Social post captured for research on August 3, 2026. The authoritative source timezone was not preserved, so the archive records the displayed publication date only.", "public_asset_included": false, "presentation_description": "Attributed text treatment preserving the author, displayed date, exact wording, and original URL without reproducing the source screenshot.", "rights_status": "approved", "reuse_status": "Publication review approved for the ACC-authored attributed quote treatment. The private Truth Social screenshot is not redistributed.", "private_capture": { "capture_file_name": "claim-04-truth-social-live.png", "captured_on": "2026-08-03", "sha256": "335FAA9428CF8772094D0B82A25008A06E1C1DB81386FEB56818824EB3CCFA35", "distribution": "private-research-only" } }, "science_sources": [ { "type": "international scientific organization clarification", "title": "IPCC news comment on scenarios", "publisher": "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change", "url": "https://www.ipcc.ch/2026/05/20/ipcc-news-comment-scenarios/", "finding": "The IPCC states that the ScenarioMIP paper was incorrectly attributed to it and that the IPCC neither owns scenarios nor runs climate models.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "scientific program explainer", "title": "Scenarios for CMIP7", "publisher": "World Climate Research Programme CMIP", "url": "https://wcrp-cmip.org/explainer-scenarios-for-cmip7/", "finding": "The explainer describes scenarios as conditional pathways used to explore possible futures rather than forecasts of what will happen.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "peer-reviewed scenario methods paper", "title": "The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP7 (ScenarioMIP-CMIP7)", "publisher": "Geoscientific Model Development", "doi": "10.5194/gmd-19-2627-2026", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-2627-2026", "finding": "The paper defines seven scenarios for CMIP7 experiments and updates their design and plausibility without treating them as predictions.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" }, { "type": "peer-reviewed model evaluation", "title": "Evaluating the Performance of Past Climate Model Projections", "publisher": "Geophysical Research Letters", "doi": "10.1029/2019GL085378", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085378", "finding": "The evaluation found most historical projections consistent with observations, particularly after accounting for differences in projected and realized forcing.", "accessed": "2026-08-03" } ] } ], "revision_history": [ { "version": "0.1", "date": "2026-08-03", "change": "Issue 002 ingested into the cumulative private archive with four evidence-reviewed case records, provenance, source roles, and publication blockers." }, { "version": "0.2", "date": "2026-08-05", "change": "Adapted the research draft to canonical /buster routes and attributed-quote specimens; public screenshot references and social slides remain excluded." }, { "version": "0.3", "date": "2026-08-08", "change": "Updated the UK heat case to the Met Office's verified 38.0°C June record, integrated the complete ten-slide social edition, replaced cover screenshots with attributed-text cards, and advanced the issue to a locally reviewed publication candidate." }, { "version": "1.0", "date": "2026-08-08", "change": "Recorded final owner editorial approval for the public website record and approved ACC-authored social edition; retained the corrected outlined Issue 002 cover and all source-provenance safeguards." } ] }