Fact Checking Candidates Scientific Claims
A fact check of some false statements made by the presidential candidates leading up to the election.
Reading Time: 5 minutes
Misleading Or Incorrect Scientific Statements By Trump
Statement
“There is a cooling and there is a heating, I mean look, it used to not be climate change it used to be global warming. Right… That wasn’t working too well because it was getting too cold all over the place.” Interview conducted by ITV’s Piers Morgan on January 28, 2018.
This is technically true, though in the worst way possible. While there is a cooling effect to the particulate matter from greenhouse gas emissions, the planet is on average warming substantially more than it is cooling. Furthermore, this cooling effect is also bad for the environment because it’s the result of the proliferation of potentially harmful particulates, usually sulfur. In other words, while what he said is technically true, it implies that climate change isn’t real, which is blatantly false. Trump also seems to not fully comprehend the fact that climate change and global warming are part of the same problem, which leads to him declaring victory over global warming any time he finds any cooling effect worldwide.
Statement
“The ice caps were going to melt, they were going to be gone by now, but now they’re setting records, so OK, they’re at a record level.” Interview conducted by ITV’s Piers Morgan on January 28, 2018.
There are two ice sheets that play the largest role in sea level rise, neither of which are at record highs. The Antarctic ice sheet and the Greenland ice sheet are both melting far faster than previous models predicted.
Statement
“And coal is okay, they actually have methods now where coal becomes clean coal.” Said during Shawn Ryan Show Podcast #127 on August 26, 2024.
There is one method by which coal can be made to produce less carbon dioxide and it requires carbon capture. As of 2023, none of the nation's 3400 coal and gas fired power plants were utilizing the technology in a significant way, meaning clean coal is essentially nonexistent at this point in time.
Statement
“So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous—whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light—and I think you said that that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you’re going to test that, too. It sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning.” Said during a White House Speech addressing the media on April 24, 2020.
Injecting bleach or disinfectant does not cure coronavirus. This is for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being if you injected disinfectant everywhere necessary to destroy the virus in the bloodstream, you would also kill the human. After he said that, poison control calls induced by bleach famously spiked significantly, displaying that people did try his solution, despite its blatant lack of scientific foundations. Also, UV radiation in intensities high enough to harm the virus would be dangerous and damage DNA. Exposing an infected person to it would definitely mutate the virus, probably do the same to their internal bacteria, and potentially cause them cancer.
Statement
“We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.” Said during a conversation with CNBC’s Joe Kernen on January 22, 2020.
This statement discusses the—at the time—novel coronavirus, which we did not have under control. At that time, a tiny number of Americans had even contracted the new disease and currently over one million have perished from it.
Statement
“Kamala and Joe tried to take credit for $35 insulin. You know that? You know who did that? I did that. I did that. I did the insulin.” Said during a speech on August 14, 2024.
While Trump did create a program that allowed for the possibility of $35 insulin, it was completely voluntary for prescription drug companies to enter. His program did end up lowering the cost of insulin for some 800,000 people on Medicare, but Biden’s provision of the Inflation Reduction Act, which directly capped out-of-pocket insulin costs at $35 per month for all people covered by said insurance, likely impacted many times more people.
Statement
“They stole the FEMA money, just like they stole it from a bank, so they could give it to their illegal immigrants that they want to have vote for them this season.” Said during a rally on October 3, 2024.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the Biden administration is running a mass campaign to get undocumented migrants to vote in the 2024 election (as voting as a noncitizen is a felony). Furthermore, there is zero basis for claiming that FEMA money was stolen whatsoever. FEMA did receive $650 million from Customs and Border Protection this year to help house migrants, but that pot of money is entirely distinct from the $35 billion they received in congressional appropriations for disaster relief.
Misleading Or Incorrect Statements By Harris
Fortunately, Harris hasn’t made any scientifically false claims that I can find, so I’m going to cover false statements she’s made in general.
Statement
“Donald Trump left us with the worst unemployment since the Great Depression.” Said during the September 10, 2024 presidential debate.
This is untrue. While Trump did leave us with a fairly bad unemployment rate of 6.4%, it was not as bad as the peak unemployment rate immediately after the Great Recession of 2008-2009 (10%).
Statement
“And as of today, there is not one member of the United States military who is on active duty in a combat zone, in any war zone around the world, the first time this century.”
This is somewhat true, but highly misleading. The U.S. maintains nearly 1000 troops in Syria and nearly 2500 in Iraq. These areas still have some fighting and disregarding them as combat zones is to make a somewhat meaningless technical distinction, based entirely on designations by the Secretary of State or the president that mostly impact troop pay and taxes. There are therefore plenty of US troops in locations your average person might consider a combat zone.