Climate Realism – Bias and Credibility

---

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

• Overall, we rate Climate Realism as Right Biased due to its consistent promotion of climate denial narratives and attacks on scientific consensus. We rate it Low for factual reporting and questionable based on its reliance on misleading arguments, omission of the full scientific record, and ideological funding connections to fossil fuel interests. Climate Realism functions primarily as a propaganda outlet for the Heartland Institute’s anti-regulatory, pro-fossil fuel agenda rather than as a source of scientifically credible information.

---

History

Climate Realism is a project of the Heartland Institute, a U.S.-based conservative think tank founded in 1984. According to the About page, the site’s mission is to rebut “false, misleading, and one-sided” climate change information presented by mainstream media and environmental organizations. Climate Realism officially launched in 2019 as a daily publication platform for Heartland’s climate content. The Heartland Institute itself is widely known for promoting climate change denial and disinformation, particularly during the 2000s and 2010s, including opposition to the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change. They are based in Illinois.

Read our profile on the United States media and government.

Funded by / Ownership

Climate Realism is operated and funded through the Heartland Institute. As outlined by public records and nonprofit watchdogs, Heartland has received funding from fossil fuel interests, including over $700,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005, as well as significant contributions from the Mercer Family Foundation. Historically, Heartland has also accepted money from tobacco companies and pharmaceutical interests. There is no clear independent funding model for Climate Realism apart from Heartland’s broader donor network, which leans heavily toward conservative, anti-regulatory, and fossil fuel-related funding sources.

Analysis / Bias

Climate Realism exhibits a strong right-wing editorial bias and promotes climate change skepticism and denial. Articles frequently dismiss or minimize the scientific consensus on climate change and frame mainstream reporting as “alarmist.” For example, in this article, the site claims that global warming has significant benefits, contradicting overwhelming scientific evidence of its harms. In another piece, “No, Euronews, Europe Is Not Suffering Serious Impacts from Climate Change”, Climate Realism rejects mounting scientific and empirical data regarding extreme weather events in Europe.

The site uses emotionally charged language, labeling mainstream climate science as the “Climate Delusion,” and claims a conspiracy exists between scientists, politicians, and the media. Rather than providing balanced reporting, Climate Realism selectively highlights isolated studies or anecdotes that appear to downplay climate risks, while ignoring the broader body of peer-reviewed research. This editorial approach is consistent with the Heartland Institute’s long-standing strategy of undermining climate science for political and economic interests.

Failed Fact Checks

• New Data Absolutely Destroys Media Claims of ‘Climate Change is Causing More Wildfire. – False
• Polar bears are declining due to climate change. Nothing could be further from the truth. Data show polar bear numbers have grown significantly during the recent modest warming. – Misleading
• Climate change is a hoax. – False

Overall, we rate Climate Realism as Right Biased due to its consistent promotion of climate denial narratives and attacks on scientific consensus. We rate it Low for factual reporting and questionable based on its reliance on misleading arguments, omission of the full scientific record, and ideological funding connections to fossil fuel interests. Climate Realism functions primarily as a propaganda outlet for the Heartland Institute’s anti-regulatory, pro-fossil fuel agenda rather than as a source of scientifically credible information. (D. Van Zandt 04/28/2025)

Source: https://climaterealism.com/

Last Updated on April 28, 2025 by Media Bias Fact Check

---

Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.

MBFC Ad-Free 

or

MBFC Donation

---

---

---

Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources