>So the correct conclusion is not necessarily that most climate change skeptics are bots, but rather that climate change skeptics are likely to be characterized

>So the correct conclusion is not necessarily that most climate change skeptics are bots, but rather that climate change skeptics are likely to be characterized by the software as bots. Yes, that is as much as we can deduce from the data presented in the paper, given that they apparently just took the 'Botometer' verdicts at face value without taking the extra steps to see if they were indeed accurate. It may, of course, be absolutely true that the 'denier' accounts are just scripts, but further investigation is necessary to establish this. > I wonder what else makes you more likely to be characterized as a bot? That would best be established by examining the bot-detector's algorithm. Another commenter on this thread noted that he received a high rating based on the fact that he rarely logged into his account.