Encouraged by the results of my survey, I am embarking on another press complaint.  I know I said that press complaints appear to be very difficult to be upheld.  I also said I wouldn’t draw wild conclusions from the small, biased sample that my survey represents.  Hey ho.

The survey indicated that once you are over your denial of climate science, the amount of change you are willing to make to reduce your impact is correlated with how bad you think the outcomes will be.  Phew, that is a wild conclusion given the survey was unscientific, small and biased.  But it makes logical sense, so I’m running with it.

So, less contrary and inaccurate bilge in the press, less for people to hang their denial hats on, more chance of progress.  I’m not sure the logic follows either.

But, we’re going for it anyway, for the last time maybe.

The experiment this time is whether a clearly inaccurate statement gets retracted.

Thank you to Graham, who has both pointed out the article and done the research.  The target is an article in the Express in the UK by Leo KcKinstry, with the headline “Global warming is about hotter, drier weather … not flooding“.

There is an awful lot that is wrong about the article, but we decided to go for the two most obviously inaccurate statements.  The following is the first email to the Express: