[arcturus17]

The questions posed by your parent comment are rather high-level inquiries based on statistics and basic scientific reasoning.

They do not require domain expertise to answer, just a decent command of statistics and a curious mind, and I agree with the parent that they are fundamental to knowing the scientific truth.

> you cannot expect a newspaper article to include these.

Why not?

If you're driving a narrative, using hyperbolic language such as "punishing" or coining terms such as "heat dome", the burden-of-proof standards should be equally high on your part.

I'd expect any scientific reporter in a newspaper like The Guardian to have basic scientific inquiry skills, and if the hypothesis is "this is caused by humans" to try hard to refute it, and not to leave questions like that unanswered.

Is that too high of a standard?