The thing with ZeroHedge is that you will see an article like this alongside another one like this: https://www.zerohedge.com/health/temperatures-pacific-ocean-

The thing with ZeroHedge is that you will see an article like this alongside another one like this: https://www.zerohedge.com/health/temperatures-pacific-ocean-have-shot-dangerous-levels-and-scientists-are-blaming-strange https://www.zerohedge.com/health/temperatures-pacific-ocean-... It is in aggregate an extreme blog with narratives that are non-consensus. So, yes, climate denial fits in that box, but it will also have articles on climate apocalypse. In aggregate I find it to be fairly eye-opening and bring to light ideas that are forgotten by mainstream media. It also has a healthy disregard for any form of consensus reality or authority. Furthermore, in the very article you linked there is a link to a NATURE commentary: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2938.epdf https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2938.epdf Of course, we should leave it to experts to interpret a scientific paper such as this one, but my perception is that reporters do not always get it right. In all of the NYTimes you just hear the consensus from organizations such as the UN, I have yet to see an interview with an author of a paper such as the one mentioned above.