Did you just claim that this recent pacific heatwave is not linked to climate change? That puts you in scientific fringe territory as an outlier. Such an event is statistically highly highly unlikely as a singular event. When you tie it into all the other One in a Million events such as extreme flooding in summertime Central Europe and China you start to really have to do a lot of handwaving to pretend that it’s not climate change caused by humans burning hundreds of millions of years of sequestered carbon.

Frankly, such radical statements as you made right here undermine this piece that we should be discussing here. It means that you are one of “those” people (climate change denialism in 2021 is an anachronism not supported by any substantive evidence) and it suggest that perhaps we shouldn’t take this piece here seriously, which is not what I grokked from reading it. You do this piece above an associative disservice if you truly hope it to be taken seriously you should refrain from attaching frivolous false commentary. The recent pacific heatwave would likely not have happened if we didn’t burn petroleum like there is no tomorrow.

This piece above, meanwhile, purports to debunk two studies that are claimed to be methodologically flawed. The author does not claim that neonicotinoids don’t harm insects, but rather targets the work of specific individuals. I only gave a cursory read, nor do I have access to the materials to evaluate, nor the domain knowledge.