Two key reports from the Trump administration aimed at revoking the longstanding finding that climate change is dangerous were filled with errors, bias and distortions, according to dozens of scientists surveyed by The Associated Press.

One of the reports argues that sea ice decline in the Arctic has been small but uses data from the Antarctic to make the point. It uses a French-focused study on climate-related crop losses for a claim about the U.S. – a generalization the author said didn’t work because of significant differences in climate and agriculture. And after saying decades-old wildfire statistics aren’t reliable, it reproduces them in a graphic anyway that makes it appear they were worse a century ago than more recently.

Scientists noted those basic errors, but the most common critique from the vast majority of the 64 who answered AP’s questions was that the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy ignored, twisted or cherry-picked information to manufacture doubt about the severity and threat of climate change.

The Trump administration in July proposed revoking a 2009 government finding that climate change is a threat to public health and welfare, a concept known as the “endangerment" finding that is backed by mainstream science. Overturning it could pave the way for cutting a range of rules that limit pollution from cars, power plants and other sources.

One of the Trump administration reports, by the Department of Energy, suggests climate models used by scientists to predict warming have overreached, that long-term trends for disasters generally don’t show much change and that climate has little impact on the economy. The DOE document also said there are advantages to a world with more carbon, like increased plant growth.

AP reached out to some 350 scientists by email — nearly all the lead authors of research cited in the Trump administration, plus another 139 climate experts in science, health and economics who are prominent in the field. Fifty-three of the 64 scientists who responded — including outside researchers not mentioned by the reports — gave the EPA and DOE documents a negative review. Seven praised them. The remaining four took no clear position.

In 15 cases, scientists whose work was cited said it was misused, misinterpreted or taken out of context.

When EPA was asked to respond to the scientists' critiques, the agency said it had considered a variety of sources and information in assessing whether the predictions and assumptions baked into the 2009 finding that climate change is a public threat are “accurate and consistent.” The Energy Department said it was committed to “a more thoughtful and science-based conversation.”

White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said the Trump administration “is producing Gold Standard Science research driven by verifiable data” and said the endangerment finding had long been misused to justify expensive regulations “that have jeopardized our economic and national security.”

The public has until Sept. 2 to comment on the Energy Department report and Sept. 22 for the EPA’s proposal to revoke the endangerment finding. Then the Trump administration must consider that feedback before a final decision.

Overturning the finding could undermine environmental standards such as a rule reducing emissions from some coal-fired power plants by 90%, or one limiting methane releases into the atmosphere from the heaviest polluting oil and gas wells, or a requirement that new car emissions be cut roughly in half by the 2032 model year.

Environmental groups are already challenging the proposed revocation in court.

AP Video shot by Nathan Ellgren

Produced by Julián Trejo Bax

___

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.