Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2023-11-16 20:29:17 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING

Majority of scientists on climate change “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel and requires immediate action. We do not agree.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1112950/

Written by A7E7E9E596BCD92920A6BB80A674FDDC0669AB3A94D9553B9B3E97519D56260C
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/1725217979217088582

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 - 1725249702109626686
  • noteId - 1725249702109626686
  • participantId -
  • noteAuthorParticipantId - A7E7E9E596BCD92920A6BB80A674FDDC0669AB3A94D9553B9B3E97519D56260C Participant Details
  • createdAtMillis - 1700166557234
  • tweetId - 1725217979217088582
  • classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
  • believable -
  • harmful -
  • validationDifficulty -
  • misleadingOther - 0
  • misleadingFactualError - 1
  • misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
  • misleadingOutdatedInformation - 1
  • misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
  • misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
  • misleadingSatire - 0
  • notMisleadingOther - 0
  • notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
  • notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
  • notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
  • notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
  • trustworthySources - 1
  • summary
    • Majority of scientists on climate change “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel and requires immediate action. We do not agree.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1112950/

Note Status History

createdAt timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus firstNonNMRStatus timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus currentStatus timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus mostRecentNonNMRStatus participantId
2023-11-16 20:29:17 UTC
(1700166557234)
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
(-1)
2023-11-17 03:07:47 UTC
(1700190467464)
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
(-1)

Note Ratings

rated at rated by
2023-11-16 17:27:56 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 15:39:13 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 15:15:35 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 14:43:29 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 14:39:21 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 14:38:01 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 14:33:19 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-17 00:30:42 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-17 00:04:20 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-17 00:03:08 -0600 Rating Details
2023-11-16 22:31:17 -0600 Rating Details
2024-03-07 12:59:46 -0600 Rating Details
2024-03-07 19:26:01 -0600 Rating Details
2024-03-21 19:19:20 -0500 Rating Details
2024-03-21 16:44:27 -0500 Rating Details
2024-03-26 17:18:51 -0500 Rating Details
2024-03-29 22:05:35 -0500 Rating Details
2024-04-02 14:51:31 -0500 Rating Details
2024-04-22 20:27:48 -0500 Rating Details
2024-04-22 21:35:35 -0500 Rating Details
2024-04-22 10:21:48 -0500 Rating Details
2024-04-23 09:28:19 -0500 Rating Details
2024-05-30 09:04:46 -0500 Rating Details
2024-06-05 12:12:27 -0500 Rating Details
2024-06-27 23:13:39 -0500 Rating Details
2024-08-20 12:07:57 -0500 Rating Details
2024-08-02 19:06:42 -0500 Rating Details
2024-09-30 08:48:56 -0500 Rating Details
2024-09-29 16:25:10 -0500 Rating Details
2024-09-09 12:42:02 -0500 Rating Details
2024-09-08 15:37:32 -0500 Rating Details
2024-08-29 13:26:09 -0500 Rating Details
2024-10-03 10:13:50 -0500 Rating Details