This is an actual Guardian article. 🤡 pic.twitter.com/KRMyk2mRlH

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) February 28, 2025

I confirmed that this is a real article.

Please raise your hand if you believe the Guardian about this.

The Plants are trying to tell us something here, and you, HawaiiBear, are simply not listening, and missing the spiritual element.

You must listen to the goddess Gaia, and pay Her tribute (in the form of carbon taxes).

There's no link to the article in your post and no link in the tweet. I'm not willing to go hunt the story down, but the comments in the tweet certainly support it being poorly written. Frankly, I don't generally look to newspapers and tabloids for science reporting. On the very occasional times I've talked to a reporter, my statements and meaning often get garbled. I suspect that is what happened here.

HawaiiBear33 said:

---

This is an actual Guardian article. 🤡 pic.twitter.com/KRMyk2mRlH

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) February 28, 2025

I confirmed that this is a real article.

Please raise your hand if you believe the Guardian about this.

---

OK, I found the Guardian article and the paper from Weather that the Guardian is referring to. I can't believe you're getting bent out of shape about a 3 paragraph article trying to summarize a 7or 8 page journal article. Not everything can be boiled down to fit in a tweet.

I don't know enough about the CO2 cycle chemistry to judge the journal article's merits, but it's not as hand wavey as the Guardian article. It's referencing current scientific thought and has data, graphs, equations and other fun stuff like that.

The Guardian is allegedly a serious paper, their article title and conclusion are embarrassingly naive.