Pinker says his book acknowledges that environmental concern is good and credits the Green movement for highlighting harms from pollution.

The book is presumably 'Enlightenment Now' (2018), most likely its environment chapter. TRUE: the text explicitly acknowledges that concern for the environment is good, and it credits the Green or environmental movement with drawing attention to harms from pollution. MOSTLY TRUE: both points appear, but the credit to the movement is worded more weakly or indirectly. MIXED: only one of the two acknowledgements appears in the book. MOSTLY FALSE: the book mentions these themes only in passing, or in a way that substantially differs from the claim. FALSE: the book contains no such acknowledgement.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 Co-religion Breakthrough Journal (Breakthrough Institute) · 14 February 2018

   “Pinker, like Mann, credits environmental thought and advocacy with calling our attention to the many insults that modernization and human development have imposed upon the natural world, including the risks that new environmental challenges such as global warming create for sustained human well-being.”

2. E2 Enlightenment Now | Critical Reflections, Critical Reviews, & Notes vialogue (WordPress blog) · 22 September 2018

   “Starting in the 1970s, the mainstream environmental movement latched onto a quasi-religious ideology, greenism”

3. E3 Enlightenment Now: A summary Roots of Progress (Jason Crawford) · 11 March 2018

   “However, he believes that some environmental threats are real and serious, in particular global warming.”

E2 says Pinker credits environmental thought and advocacy with drawing attention to harms to the natural world, but the material does not tie that description to the book. E3 and E4 do not show the book's text acknowledging that environmental concern is good or crediting the Green movement for drawing attention to pollution, so the evidence does not settle the claim under the criteria.