Climate Uncensored: Climate realism

Climate Uncensored is an organisation founded by two climate scientists, Prof Kevin Anderson and Dr Dan Calverley.

A document that appears typical of their messaging is assessed here by a checklist for climate realism or denial of climate implications.

The messaging was found to be in line with what the IPCC says needs to be done.

It could act as a "gold standard" for other groups.

Summary table Assessment against a checklist for climate realism or denial of climate implications
Climate action an overriding priority Temperature limit e.g. 1.5°CKeeping to the IPCC CO2 budgetIncluding global equityDouble digit percentage annual emission cutsCredibly compliant policiesAvoiding false solutionsNumber of fails
Climate UncensoredtickticktickticktickN/Atick 0
N/A: not applicable

The organisation

Climate Uncensored ( is an organisation founded by two climate scientists, Kevin Anderson (professor of energy and climate change at the Universities of Manchester, Uppsala and Bergen ) and Dr Dan Calverley.

According to the website [1], "Climate Uncensored provides robust, unflinching commentary and assessment of the scale of the climate challenge and our responses to it."

Document assessed

The document assessed was a blog How alive is 1.5? Part one - a small budget, shrinking fast, dated 28 Nov 2022 [2]. It seems to be typical of the messaging from the organisation.

It was assessed using a checklist for climate realism or denial of climate implictions - see document 138. There are concerns that there is widespread denial of the implications of the facts of climate change, which is termed implicatory denial [3].


A summary of the assessment is given at the top of this page. It can be compared with the assessments for other groups via the summary table in document 154. Details of the checklist elements are given here.

1. Is climate action an overriding priority, on the basis of e.g. the gross injustice?
YES - the text states
Clearly, to many high-emitters, 1.5, or even 2°C, is little more than an abstract academic construct... But for those at the sharp end of the impacts caused by our emissions, encroaching on these thresholds means real and deadly harms: another crop failure, a typhoon-devastated landscape, a drowned mother or a destitute child. As the IPCC makes clear, this is how it is already playing out today. Tomorrow it will spread to poorer families within our communities, shortly followed by our own children.

2. Is a limit to global warming specified, generally 1.5°C?
YES - a limit of 1.5°C is the subject of the blog.

3. Is there adherence to the IPCC CO2 budget? Is the mechanism for limiting global warming clearly stated to be limiting further total global CO2 emissions to the CO2 budget specified by the IPCC?
YES - CO2 budgets are discussed in detail.

4. Is global equity incorporated? Are the implications of the international commitments to global equity properly taken into account, i.e. that developed nations cut emissions faster than the global average?
YES - the implications of equity are discussed:
Once the equity criteria embedded in every international climate agreement since 1992 are taken into account, the rate of reductions for wealthier industrialised nations increases substantially.

5. Is the size of appropriate annual emission cuts specified e.g. double digit percentage cuts in developed countries?
YES - figures of over 10% are discussed.

6. Are any policies discussed consistent with this timescale?
Not applicable - no detailed policies are discussed.

7. Are false solutions avoided?


In summary, the Climate Uncensored blog has no failures on the checklist, and could act as a "gold standard" for others.


[1] (accessed 14.2.23)
[2]How alive is 1.5? Part one - a small budget, shrinking fast (28 Nov 2022) (accessed 13.2.23.

[3]Iain Walker and Zoe Leviston (2019) There are three types of climate change denier - and most of us are at least one The Conversation

First published: 14 Feb 2023
Last updated: 26 Feb 2023