We are the 99%

July 8, 2012

Watch Them Misread. Again.

Take a look at this from our good friends on the Tribune-Review editorial board:
Even The Associated Press, long-serving cardinals in the Church of Global Warming, had to admit in a news story last week that “it’s far too early to say (global warming) is the cause” of the current spate of hot and stormy weather. But that didn’t stop it from giving ample space to those who do blame “climate change.” And the AP waited until the 20th paragraph of its 21-paragraph story to quote anyone with a counterargument. Fair and balanced? Try bogus and biased. [bold in original]
Now take a look at the AP story they found so bogus and biased.  We'll start with the quotation.  Here it is in its original form:
If you want a glimpse of some of the worst of global warming, scientists suggest taking a look at U.S. weather in recent weeks.

Horrendous wildfires. Oppressive heat waves. Devastating droughts. Flooding from giant deluges. And a powerful freak wind storm called a derecho.

These are the kinds of extremes climate scientists have predicted will come with climate change, although it's far too early to say that is the cause. Nor will they say global warming is the reason 3,215 daily high temperature records were set in the month of June.

Scientifically linking individual weather events to climate change takes intensive study, complicated mathematics, computer models and lots of time. Sometimes it isn't caused by global warming. Weather is always variable; freak things happen. [emphasis added.]
Take a look at that last sentence. Now here's the skeptic quoted:
While at least 15 climate scientists told The Associated Press that this long hot U.S. summer is consistent with what is to be expected in global warming, history is full of such extremes, said John Christy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He's a global warming skeptic who says, "The guilty party in my view is Mother Nature."
See that?  That's more or less exactly how the AP ends the fourth paragraph.  So the AP doesn't wait until the end of the 19 (not 21) paragraph piece to float some skeptical caveats, does it?

But the piece, however, isn't about establishing the credibility of "global warming" as much as it's about how:
[S]ince at least 1988, climate scientists have warned that climate change would bring, in general, increased heat waves, more droughts, more sudden downpours, more widespread wildfires and worsening storms. In the United States, those extremes are happening here and now.
All of which is true - no "counterbalance" is possible.  The piece is about how our current weather closely matches the warnings climate scientists have been making for decades - all without going all post hoc ergo propter hoc on us.

And yet Scaife's braintrust says it's bogus.  Who's bogus?  As the braintrust bellowed only a few days ago:
A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.

1 comment:

EdHeath said...

It is impressive how wrong the Trib OpEd people get the intent of the AP article. Scientists apparently wanted to make statements about how current weather *looks* like the kind caused by climate change. Maybe climate change will turn out to be like how economics determines when recessions start and finish - months later. Maybe in a year climate scientists will tell us they have proof that this summer was made more severe by the carbon in the atmosphere, or maybe they want.

But I guess the Trib is telling us that scientists should not speak publicly except through James Inhofe.

Actually the later item about brisk sales of large pickup trucks gives me an idea. Instead of taxing gasoline, we should tax all vehicles which get mileage under 30 mpg a few hundred per mpg under, and maybe subsidies for vehicles which get over 45 mpg combined at a few hundred per mpg over. Exceptions for the taxes could be granted to people who file schedule C's as primarily farmers (over 80% income from a farm) or plumbers or other small business trade occupations.

And tax gas later.