Did you read this headline and get upset? You probably did, and you should because what it implies it horrifying. Except, what does this climate study actually say vs what this headline implies? How does the study define “population control”? Let’s examine https://twitter.com/business/status/1200078223037673472

Bloomberg quotes the study as saying: “population must be stabilized—and, ideally, gradually reduced—within a framework that ensures social integrity” but the full quote includes specific mention of gender equity, reproductive freedom and increased education for women.

Bloomberg also omits what I think is a much more interesting interesting quote, and one that is more central to the study’s argument: that the climate crisis is linked to overconsumption by affluent nations and the wealthy class.

Why would Bloomberg bury that lead? They don’t even mention it at all & instead focus entirely on a small quote taken out of context with the intent to cause maximum controversy. They’re deliberating misrepresenting the climate study to imply the scientists support eugenics.

Interesting to note that the article’s author @eroston’s latest posts are RTs of other people making the same points I just did: that the Bloomberg piece is irresponsible in its portrayal of the study and makes climate scientists out to be fascists.

Thought more about this and recalled the journalists don't write the headlines or the tweets. So that helps explain things, but the article omitting the line in the study about excess consumption by the wealthy as a primary driver for climate change is still irresponsible.