I think it would be better for the writer to provide specific evidence for the specific pretext. You don't need to convince me that climate change is real, but climate change is a general term. I'd rather see some evidence backing up the sea level increase in Miami claim.
Which claim exactly are you taking issue with? If you're going to be pedantic, you need to also be specific, otherwise you're basically asking for some kind of blanket trigger warning about climate change.
The article itself did not focus on making predictions on global warming. The title, while a bit sensationalised, is not wholly inaccurate and was probably picked by the editor not the writer. The other two claims that I could find were about the potential damage of a six-foot sea level rise, which was probably accurate even if it didn't list out the likelihood of such a rise, and the article by the Union of Concerned Scientists which made a claim about the likelihood of increased flooding that seemed reasonable to me.
