Major Corporate Media-Pushed ‘Climate Change’ Study Caught Using Fake Data

A major study amplified by the corporate media to push the globalist narrative on “climate change” has been found to have relied on fake data.

The 2024 study projected that “climate change” would cause global damages of up to $38 trillion by 2050.

It also claimed that “climate change” could cause global GDP to plummet by 62% by 2100.

However, the study has now come under scrutiny, with a new report revealing that the study’s data relied on inaccurate figures from Uzbekistan.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the inclusion of Uzbekistan’s faulty GDP data had a significant impact on the study’s conclusions.

The report casts significant doubt on the study’s findings and the alarmist narrative about the economic impact of “global warming.”

The study was heavily promoted by the corporate media, which used it to amplify warnings about the impending economic crisis due to “climate change.”

Numerous major media outlets seized on the study as proof of the urgent threat that the so-called “climate crisis” poses to the global economy.

The study was the second-most cited paper across media in 2024, according to the UK-based climate outlet Carbon Brief.

However, a closer analysis of the data and interviews with experts highlighted in the Post’s report revealed that Uzbekistan’s flawed GDP figures were skewing the results, leading to inflated projections of GDP losses.

Once the data from Uzbekistan was removed from the study, the projected GDP losses dropped dramatically.

The revised estimates show a 23% loss by 2100, down from the original 62%, and a 6% loss by 2050, down from the initial 19%.

However, the credibility of the entire study has now been called into question over the use of fake data.

This shift occurred when researchers, including co-authors Solomon Hsiang, Tom Bearpark, and Dylan Hogan, examined the data by removing countries one by one.

They noticed that Uzbekistan’s data anomalies were having a disproportionate effect on the study’s conclusions.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration had even cited the study, with the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) referencing it in a December 2024 report to demonstrate the economic risks supposedly associated with “climate change.”

However, the study’s flawed data has raised questions about the credibility of such findings and the push for “climate change” policies based on alarmist predictions.

James Taylor, president of the Heartland Institute, was quick to dismiss the study’s conclusions, calling the findings “fraudulent” and “self-promoting.”

He pointed to common sense and peer-reviewed studies that show that warmer temperatures actually save lives, with nearly 20 times more people dying from cold than heat.

He also noted that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is benefiting plant life, stimulating record crop production and longer growing seasons.

Taylor argued that these facts make the exaggerated claims of catastrophic GDP losses look highly suspect.

The errors in the Uzbekistan data were flagged during the peer-review process, and Nature editor Karl Ziemelis confirmed to the Post that the publication was reviewing the study.

The authors of the original paper, however, maintained that the main conclusions of the study still stand, even with the correction, arguing that only minor adjustments were needed to the estimates.

Despite these claims, the study has already sparked significant concern about the accuracy of data used in climate change studies and the political motives behind such alarmist projections.

As Taylor put it, “the only GDP set to plummet is that of fraudulent self-promoting climate activists, who will finally see their funding cut under the Trump administration’s more rational policies.”

This revelation adds fuel to the ongoing debate about the integrity of “climate change” studies and the motivations behind the push for sweeping regulations and policies.

As the scientific process continues to uncover flaws in these studies, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the data driving the “global warming” narrative may be finally melting, unlike the polar ice caps.

READ MORE – Greta Thunberg Insider Blows Whistle: ‘Climate Change’ Is a ‘Scam’