ACC globe logo Affect Climate Change Inc.Education. Evidence. Practical action.
Sustainability CompanionCompanion Donate

Propaganda Buster · Issue 006

Signal / Noise: four climate and energy claims checked

This issue checks claims about cool regions on a monthly map, wind and solar's share of energy, hurricane trends, and falling disaster deaths against temperature records, energy forecasts, tropical-cyclone assessments, and loss data.

Propaganda Buster Issue 006 cover dated August 25, 2026. A dramatic climate-science illustration shows a data-ringed globe, hurricane, wind turbines, grid arcs and an early-warning tower. Text explains that Propaganda Buster debunks misleading climate-related media using peer-reviewed science and authoritative sources. Four checks are previewed: cool patches versus the global trend, “just 3%” energy spin, hurricane signals, and disaster deaths versus total risk.
Issues available
Issue 006
Claims checked
4
Scientific sources linked
10
Publication status
Published
How this visual issue works

Every claim is followed by the evidence that checks it.

The opening slide introduces the series and this issue. Slides 2, 4, 6, and 8 show the four claims with source provenance; slides 3, 5, 7, and 9 summarize what scientific evidence shows. Slide 10 directs readers to the complete record.

Issue 006 · August 28, 2026

Read the claim, then swipe once for the evidence.

The slides give the short version of each fact check. Select any preview to open the full-size slide, then choose the matching case page below for the complete explanation, scientific sources, limitations, and revision history.

Format
10 square slides
Structure
4 claim-and-evidence pairs
Scientific record
10 linked sources
Status
Published
Propaganda Buster Issue 006 cover dated August 25, 2026. A dramatic climate-science illustration shows a data-ringed globe, hurricane, wind turbines, grid arcs and an early-warning tower. Text explains that Propaganda Buster debunks misleading climate-related media using peer-reviewed science and authoritative sources. Four checks are previewed: cool patches versus the global trend, “just 3%” energy spin, hurricane signals, and disaster deaths versus total risk.Slide 01 · Meet Propaganda Buster and the four claims examined in this issueThe Claim, Case 1. A preserved Watts Up With That source page and excerpt dated August 22–23, 2026 are shown. The excerpt says areas around Britain and France were below normal in July and concludes, “Does not look like global warming to me.” A large panel asks whether cooler regions on one monthly map can overturn the global average and long-term warming trend. A bright button points readers to the facts on slide 3.Slide 02 · Claim: Cold regions in July? Does not look like global warming.The Facts answering slide 2. Headline: “A cool patch is not the global average.” Some regions were cooler than their July average. Copernicus nevertheless measured July 2026 at 16.90 degrees Celsius globally, 0.67 degrees above the 1991–2020 July average, tying July 2024 as the second-warmest July on record. NASA says the ten most recent years are the warmest on record. Verdict: misleading, high confidence.Slide 03 · What the evidence shows: Regional cold anomalies can occur during a very warm global month; they do not…The Claim, Case 2. A preserved Watts Up With That page and excerpt dated August 22, 2026 are shown. The claim says wind and solar are “just 3%” and will never be more than bit players. A panel asks whether one primary-energy percentage can prove wind and solar can never become major power sources. A bright button points to the facts on slide 5.Slide 04 · Claim: Wind and solar are just 3%—they will never be more than bit players.The Facts answering slide 4. Headline: “3% is a denominator—not a destiny.” The cited share uses the Energy Institute's broad Total Energy Supply (TES) frame; the source post calls it primary energy. Electricity is a different denominator. IEA reports wind and solar at about 17% of global generation and projects 27% by 2030; renewables are projected to rise from 32% in 2024 to 43% in 2030. Verdict: misleading, high confidence.Slide 05 · What the evidence shows: The 3% figure uses a broad primary-energy denominator; electricity is different…The Claim, Case 3. A preserved Watts Up With That page and excerpt dated August 22, 2026 are shown. The claim says long-term observations do not show stronger hurricanes overall. A panel asks whether one “overall” label can combine hurricane frequency, intensity, rapid intensification and rainfall into a single no-change verdict. A bright button points to the facts on slide 7.Slide 06 · Claim: Long-term observations do not show climate change causing stronger…The Facts answering slide 6. Headline: “Hurricane risk is not one trend line.” One hurricane cannot prove a climate trend, and scientists do not find a clear global increase in total tropical-cyclone numbers. Other metrics differ: IPCC finds a likely rise in the global proportion of Category 3–5 storms and rapid-intensification events, while Tom Knutson's scientist-maintained NOAA/GFDL-hosted synthesis projects higher average intensity and rainfall with warming and is not an official agency position. Verdict: misleading, high confidence.Slide 07 · What the evidence shows: Total storm counts, intensity, Category 3–5 share, rapid intensification, and…The Claim, Case 4. A preserved Watts Up With That page and excerpt dated August 24–25, 2026 are shown. The excerpt says deaths from extreme weather declined by 90% or more. The claim uses that decline to describe human-caused warming as only a modest problem. A panel asks whether declining mortality proves the hazard is modest or shows that protection and forecasting save lives. Slide 9 provides the evidence.Slide 08 · Claim: Disaster deaths fell 90%—so warming is only a modest problem.The Facts answering slide 8. Headline: “Fewer deaths show protection works—not that risk vanished.” WMO credits early warnings and coordinated disaster management for falling mortality rates. WMO also records nearly 12,000 disasters and 4.3 trillion dollars in raw reported losses from 1970–2021, with losses rising and 90% of reported deaths in developing countries. IPCC documents widespread climate losses and damages. Verdict: misleading, high confidence.Slide 09 · What the evidence shows: Falling mortality shows that protection works; it does not measure total hazard…Website call to action. Headline: “Follow the signal. Check the record.” The slide explains that the Affect Climate Change website holds the complete evidence behind every Propaganda Buster issue: original post and date, plain-language explanation, direct science sources, and limitations and corrections. Large text directs readers to www.affectclimatechange.com/buster and invites them to follow Affect Climate Change on Facebook and Instagram.Slide 10 · Sources, methodology, and where to read the complete fact checks
Follow new investigations

Catch the claim. See the facts. Follow the next issue.

We publish new Propaganda Buster visual issues on Instagram and Facebook several times a week—usually every two or three days, between ACC's climate news updates. Each one checks four circulating claims and points back to the complete evidence here.

Follow on Instagram@affectclimatechange Follow on FacebookAffect Climate Change Inc.
Selected cases

Read the complete fact checks.

Each permanent page preserves the original claim and explains the verdict at greater depth than a social slide can carry.

01 Misleading

Can cool regions on one monthly map overturn the global warming trend?

Regional cold anomalies can occur during a very warm global month; they do not overturn the measured global average or long-term trend.
Case
PB-006-01
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
2 directly linked
 02 Misleading

Does a 3% energy share prove wind and solar will always be minor?

The 3% figure uses a broad primary-energy denominator; electricity is different, and a current share cannot prove what will never happen.
Case
PB-006-02
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
3 directly linked
 03 Misleading

Can hurricane risk be reduced to one no-change trend?

Total storm counts, intensity, Category 3–5 share, rapid intensification, and rainfall are different metrics with different assessed trends.
Case
PB-006-03
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
3 directly linked
 04 Misleading

Do falling disaster deaths prove total climate risk is modest?

Falling mortality shows that protection works; it does not measure total hazard, exposure, economic loss, displacement, ecosystem damage, or unequal vulnerability.
Case
PB-006-04
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
2 directly linked