Lia (@liaandtheworld) debunks a viral climate chart that compared 73 climate model runs with satellite and radiosonde observations. She explains that satellites measure microwave radiation (not temperature), need careful calibration, and suffer orbital-drift biases—corrections that substantially increase the observed warming trend. A 2017 Journal of Climate study found that after such corrections, five of six satellite datasets showed clear warming. Lia also criticized selective comparisons by the chart’s authors and warned that fossil-fuel interests often amplify misleading claims.
Expert Debunks Viral Climate Graph: Outdated Satellite Data and Misleading Comparisons
Photo Credit: TikTok
Former U.S. youth climate negotiator and TikTok creator Lia (@liaandtheworld) has publicly dismantled a viral chart shared by Lucy Biggers and The Free Press that purports to show climate models wildly overstating warming.
The disputed graphic, produced by John Christy and Roy Spencer, overlays 73 climate model runs—most projecting rising global temperatures—against observational records from satellites and radiosondes. On the chart, the observations appear relatively flat, implying that models have exaggerated future warming. Lia explains why that conclusion is misleading.
Why The Chart Is Misleading
Satellites Don’t Measure Temperature Directly. Satellites detect microwave radiation emitted by the atmosphere; scientists convert those signals into temperature estimates. That conversion requires careful calibration and methodological choices that affect long-term trends.
Orbital Drift And Instrument Changes Matter. Satellites slowly change orbit and instruments age, which introduces biases. When independent teams corrected for those drifts and instrument issues, the satellite warming trend increased substantially—Lia cites analyses showing the trend roughly tripled in some cases.
A peer-reviewed 2017 study in the American Meteorological Society’s Journal of Climate supports this point: after correction, five out of six satellite-based datasets showed significant planetary warming.
Questionable Comparison Choices
Lia also criticized the methodology used by Christy and Spencer. They rely on a single atmospheric layer (which is difficult to measure consistently) and, according to Lia, compare the warmest model runs to the coldest portions of the observational series—an approach that exaggerates differences between models and observations.
"The truth is that climate models are actually extremely accurate, to a fraction of a degree," Lia noted, calling the viral graph "a fossil fuel talking point pretending to be science."
Context And Influence
Lia emphasized that fossil-fuel interests have long funded tactics to downplay human-caused warming, including sowing doubt about scientific findings. Whether or not individuals like Lucy Biggers sincerely believe the content they share, Lia warned, sophisticated disinformation campaigns can widely amplify misleading material.
Zooming out from the clip, Lia underscored the scientific consensus: the vast majority of modern climate research attributes recent global warming to human activities. She added that it is difficult to argue extracting and burning billions of tons of ancient carbon would have no measurable effect on climate or air quality.
Viewers responded positively to Lia’s explanation. Comments included, "Thank you for fighting misinformation," and "I love your videos! So informative!"
Note: This piece summarizes Lia’s critique and related scientific literature; readers interested in the technical details should consult the original Journal of Climate study and subsequent satellite dataset analyses for full methodology and data.
Help us improve.
