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

Propaganda Buster · Issue 007

Cause and effect: four climate claims checked against the evidence

This issue checks whether CO₂'s greenhouse effect has been measured, whether climate attribution is a legitimate scientific method, whether warming produces uniformly fewer and weaker storms, and whether El Niño plus a rising greenhouse-gas baseline reverses cause and effect.

Propaganda Buster Issue 007, dated August 28, 2026. A navy, orange, cyan, lime and cream science-magazine design introduces four checks: CO₂ evidence, attribution tests, storm physics, and El Niño plus the temperature baseline. The cover says the series debunks misleading climate media with peer-reviewed science and authoritative source records.
Issues available
Issue 007
Claims checked
4
Scientific sources linked
16
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 007 · 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
16 linked sources
Status
Published
Propaganda Buster Issue 007, dated August 28, 2026. A navy, orange, cyan, lime and cream science-magazine design introduces four checks: CO₂ evidence, attribution tests, storm physics, and El Niño plus the temperature baseline. The cover says the series debunks misleading climate media with peer-reviewed science and authoritative source records.Slide 01 · Meet Propaganda Buster and the four claims examined in this issueNative NoTricksZone article capture with outlet name, headline and August 25, 2026 date visible. Large text presents the claim that there is no experimental evidence for the CO₂ greenhouse effect. A verbatim excerpt repeats that proposition. A side panel asks whether CO₂'s heat-trapping effect has been measured in the atmosphere or only assumed by models. An arrow directs readers to slide 3.Slide 02 · Claim: There exists no unequivocal experimental evidence for the CO₂ greenhouse…Headline: The greenhouse effect has been measured directly. Three linked cards explain that laboratory spectroscopy identifies CO₂ absorption wavelengths, satellites detect changes in outgoing energy at those wavelengths, and surface instruments measure added downward infrared energy as CO₂ rises. Bottom line: direct measurements show CO₂ changing Earth's infrared energy flow. Verdict: false, high confidence. Visible sources include HITRAN2020 laboratory spectroscopy, Harries and colleagues in Nature, 2001, and Feldman and colleagues in Nature, 2015.Slide 03 · What the evidence shows: Laboratory spectroscopy, satellite spectra, and surface instruments independently…Official X embed capture of Chris Martz's August 26, 2026 post, with account identity and opening text visible. The large headline and verbatim excerpt present the claim that attribution science is pseudoscience. A side panel asks whether attribution assumes a human cause or tests observed patterns against competing explanations. An arrow directs readers to slide 5.Slide 04 · Claim: Because ‘attribution science’ is pseudoscience to the core.Headline: Attribution tests competing causes. Three comparison cards show an observed pattern, a climate with natural drivers, and a climate with natural plus human drivers. A method strip reads: hypothesis, predicted fingerprint, observed record, uncertainty check. Bottom line: attribution is comparative testing, not a declaration that every result is certain. Verdict: false for the post's factual description of the method, high confidence. Visible sources are the National Academies 2026 report and a peer-reviewed 2020 attribution protocol.Slide 05 · What the evidence shows: Attribution uses testable observation, model-evaluation, counterfactual…Native CFACT article capture with headline, author Joe Bastardi and August 27, 2026 date visible. Large text presents the claim that warming aloft and at the poles means fewer, weaker storms. A verbatim excerpt says the straightforward result is fewer and weaker storms where most people live. A side panel asks whether one temperature contrast can determine every storm type, place and metric. An arrow directs readers to slide 7.Slide 06 · Claim: Where most people live, the straightforward dynamical result is fewer and…Headline: Storm risk is not controlled by one dial. Four large cards identify ocean heat, air moisture, wind shear and temperature gradient as different controls. The slide preserves the true point that a smaller north-to-south temperature difference can weaken some midlatitude weather systems, while explaining that warmer oceans and air can still increase heavy rain and the intensity of the strongest storms. Bottom line: one process can weaken while another strengthens; results depend on storm type, place and metric. Verdict: misleading, high confidence. Visible sources include IPCC Chapters 10 and 11 and Knutson and colleagues, 2020.Slide 07 · What the evidence shows: Storm outcomes depend on moisture, instability, ocean heat, wind shear…Native ClimateRealism article capture with headline, Anthony Watts byline and August 25, 2026 date visible. Large text presents the claim that combining climate change with El Niño reverses cause and effect. The verbatim excerpt preserves the exact two sentences being checked. A side panel asks whether a temporary ocean cycle explains the rising temperature baseline beneath it. An arrow directs readers to slide 9.Slide 08 · Claim: Saying climate change is ‘teaming up’ with El Niño to produce record warmth…Headline: El Niño moves heat; greenhouse gases raise the baseline. A conceptual, not-to-scale diagram shows a cyan short-term cycle moving up and down above a lime baseline that rises over time; orange circles mark warm peaks. Three cards explain that El Niño temporarily moves heat, greenhouse gases reduce heat escaping to space, and both influences can add during the same year while remaining different causes. Bottom line: a higher greenhouse-gas baseline and a temporary El Niño boost can contribute to the same record year. Verdict: false because two influences can add together without one causing the other, high confidence. Visible sources are the IPCC and NOAA Climate.gov.Slide 09 · What the evidence shows: Greenhouse gases raise the long-term baseline while El Niño temporarily…Headline: Follow the cause. Check the evidence. Four numbered steps describe the Propaganda Buster method: preserve the original post and date, test the exact claim, check competing causes, and document sources, limitations and corrections. A large panel directs readers to www.affectclimatechange.com/buster. The slide also asks readers to follow Affect Climate Change on Facebook and Instagram for new issues between climate news updates.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 False

Has the CO₂ greenhouse effect been measured?

Laboratory spectroscopy, satellite spectra, and surface instruments independently measure the radiative behavior expected as atmospheric CO₂ increases. The categorical no-evidence claim is false.
Case
PB-007-01
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
5 directly linked
 02 False For The Categorical Description Of The Field

Is climate attribution ‘pseudoscience’?

Attribution uses testable observation, model-evaluation, counterfactual, multi-method, and uncertainty procedures. The categorical description of the field as pseudoscience is false; individual studies can still warrant specific criticism.
Case
PB-007-02
Source specimen
X
Science sources
4 directly linked
 03 Misleading

Does warming mean fewer and weaker storms?

Storm outcomes depend on moisture, instability, ocean heat, wind shear, circulation, place, and storm type. Some counts may fall while heavy rain or high-end intensity rises, so the one-dial conclusion is misleading.
Case
PB-007-03
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
4 directly linked
 04 False For The Cause-And-Effect Reversal Claim

Do El Niño and greenhouse warming reverse cause and effect?

Greenhouse gases raise the long-term baseline while El Niño temporarily redistributes heat. Both can contribute to one warm year without either process causing the other, so the claimed cause-and-effect reversal is false.
Case
PB-007-04
Source specimen
Public article
Science sources
3 directly linked