Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2023-06-05 13:05:10 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING

This paper was published in 2022 in Health Physics, and attracted several comments calling out major flaws. https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2022/07000/Comment_on__World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C.3.aspx https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2022/06000/Comment_on__World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C.13.aspx https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2022/06000/Comments_on__World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C.11.aspx Primarily the criticism revolves around incorrect accounting for various carbon sinks such as the ocean, and lack of review by atmospheric scientists.

Written by 2D02A41E8126937FF2B2DE9D2F3C25752E9162679D483AE3E7F5C89106472EA9
Participant Details

Original Tweet

Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1665371292546072579

Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.

All Information

  • ID - 1665706328008929280
  • noteId - 1665706328008929280
  • participantId -
  • noteAuthorParticipantId - 2D02A41E8126937FF2B2DE9D2F3C25752E9162679D483AE3E7F5C89106472EA9 Participant Details
  • createdAtMillis - 1685970310581
  • tweetId - 1665371292546072579
  • classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
  • believable -
  • harmful -
  • validationDifficulty -
  • misleadingOther - 0
  • misleadingFactualError - 1
  • misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
  • misleadingOutdatedInformation - 1
  • misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
  • misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
  • misleadingSatire - 0
  • notMisleadingOther - 0
  • notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
  • notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
  • notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
  • notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
  • trustworthySources - 1
  • summary
    • This paper was published in 2022 in Health Physics, and attracted several comments calling out major flaws. https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2022/07000/Comment_on__World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C.3.aspx https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2022/06000/Comment_on__World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C.13.aspx https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2022/06000/Comments_on__World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C.11.aspx Primarily the criticism revolves around incorrect accounting for various carbon sinks such as the ocean, and lack of review by atmospheric scientists.

Note Status History

createdAt timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus firstNonNMRStatus timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus currentStatus timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus mostRecentNonNMRStatus participantId
2023-06-05 13:05:10 UTC
(1685970310581)
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
(-1)
2023-06-06 02:41:43 UTC
(1686019303396)
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
(-1)

Note Ratings

rated at rated by
2023-06-05 19:31:25 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 16:36:12 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 16:35:14 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 16:01:11 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 14:46:22 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 14:23:57 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 10:08:57 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 09:55:49 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 09:50:15 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 08:59:06 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 08:55:47 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 08:45:15 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 08:34:42 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 08:16:01 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-06 07:02:51 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-06 02:31:37 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 23:28:50 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-05 20:22:54 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-07 01:14:37 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-08 14:01:38 -0500 Rating Details
2023-06-12 04:51:00 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-17 03:18:17 -0500 Rating Details
2023-08-20 05:43:41 -0500 Rating Details
2024-02-02 10:01:15 -0600 Rating Details
2024-02-02 08:14:15 -0600 Rating Details