Sunday, February 5, 2012

Regarding the Wall Street Journal's letter "No Need to Panic About Global Warming"

This latest tiff regarding Wall Street Journal’s shameful distortion of science centers around a lead letter printed January 27, 2012 and signed by a collection of sixteen engineers and scientists titled:   “No Need to Panic About Global Warming.” 

It repeated the “free-market think-tank” claims that there's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.

In doing research on the signees I’ve come across an assortment of rebuttals to the various misleading and outright false claims made in the letter from a variety of sources. This post is a collection of those varied rebuttals.

Although to set the stage I recommend an interesting (August 1, 2011) “Point of Inquiry” interview by Chris Mooney with David Frum former speech writer for George W. Bush and author of Comeback: “Conservatism that Can Win Again” and Kenneth Silber science writer and contributor to “Research Magazine, Scientific American” that occurred August 1, 2011.

My favor it quote happens about twenty minutes into the discussion when Mooney asks about “Right-Wing Think-Tanks” and their attitude that it’s their job “to refute what liberal intellectuals say.”
David Frum replies:

“You can’t. . .  you have no business going into the intellectual market to try and convince others unless you are willing to be convinced yourself.  And if you begin from the point of view I’m just not going to yield no matter what the evidence is I will just continue to say blah, blah, blah and repeat talking points, then you’re selling.  You’re not engaged in the market place of ideas.  And that has become a worse problem...”
Tragically it seems to me that attitude can be seen repeated ad nauseam in the writings and utterances of The WSJ sixteen.

It’s worth beginning this list with a letter signed by over 250 National Academy of Sciences members (in response an earlier denialist missive) which the Wall Street Journal editors refused to print.  However the letter was printed in the May 14, 2010 issue of “Science” magazine titled:

“Climate Change and the Integrity of Science.”

It must be noted that the Wall Street Journal’s editors must have felt the heat this time.  Printing a reply letter signed by 38 Climatologists, Oceanographers and Earth Scientists February 1, 2012: “Check With Climate Scientists for Views on Climate”


The Journal Hires Dentists To Do Heart Surgery

Media Matters ~ January 30, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Remarkable Editorial Bias on Climate Science at the Wall Street Journal

Peter Gleick, ~ 1/27/2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In Which Climate “Skeptics” Drop the Lysenko Bomb. No, I’m Not Kidding….
Chris Mooney  ~  January 30, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Panic Attack: Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal Finds 16 Scientists to Push Pollutocrat Agenda With Long-Debunked Climate Lies
Joe Romm ~ Jan 29, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Latest Denialist Plea for Climate Change Inaction
Dana1981 ~ 31 January 31, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A case study of the tactics of climate change denial, in which I am the target
Phil Plait ~ February 2, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Scientists Challenging Climate Science Appear to Flunk Climate Economics

Andrew C. Revkin ~ January 30, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

{This series of exchanges is a exceptional example of how a noted specialist can sink 
to base demagoguery, when faced with issue focused questions he can’t answer.
Brian Angliss questions Burt Rutan’s claims - engineer to engineer}

Climate Science Discussion Between Burt Rutan and Brian Angliss
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Wall Street 16 – Hapless Happer Leads Clueless Geriatrics in WSJ Fiasco
Climate Denial Crock of the Week with Peter Sinclair ~ January 31, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

If you want to investigate the background of the small group of scientists 
who advocate willfully ignoring what climate science has taught us 
the following is a good place to start.

An extensive database of individuals involved in the global warming denial industry.
“DeSmogBlog thoroughly investigates the academic and industry backgrounds of those involved in the PR spin campaigns that are confusing the public and stalling action on global warming. If there's anyone or any organization, ( i.e. scientist, self-professed "expert," think tank, industry association, company) that you would like to see researched and reported on DeSmogBlog”

1 comment:

Peter said...

It's a shame the Wall Street Journal can't look beyond their pocket books and the next round of earning reports. Their blindness will come back to haunt all of us.

Here are some fresh informative articles regarding The Wall Street Journal's Attack On Science:

WSJ's Climate "Dynamite" Is A Dud
December 20, 2012 ››› MAX GREENBERG

Followup on the WSJ climate denial OpEd
By Phil Plait | October 7, 2011