My critique of malaria paper, media coverage holds up

The main subjects of my recent analysis — The non-hype about climate change (and malaria) — have chosen either to support my key conclusions or not refute them.

NYT opinion blogger Andy Revkin, whose challenge to cover the original Nature paper led to my first post, opens his follow up:

The climate blogger Joe Romm and I agree (breaking news): Scientific research and assessments examining the link between human-driven climate change and malaria exposure have, for the most part, accurately...