|

WSJ rejects global warming article from 255 scientists, accepts denialism piece from 16 crackpots

Right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch strikes again!

For years now, all of Murdoch’s far-flung properties, including Fox News, have made every effort to deny mainstream scientific theories regarding global warming. Never mind that not even one reputable scientific organization in the world disagrees with those mainstream theories. Murdoch knows what his readers and viewers want.

Accordingly, under the headline “No Need to Panic About Global Warming,” Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal published an eminently assailable opinion piece the other day signed by 16 scientists, several of whom are notorious cranks.

This was after the Journal had turned down an article from 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences explaining the urgency of the climate-change issue.

There’s a detailed article about all of this HERE. And there are other rebuttals to the WSJ’s denialism piece HERE and HERE.

 

Share:

13 Comments

  1. It’s not nice to fool mother nature.

  2. Pat, keep it up! The more you freaky libs whine about the climate the more gullible you all look. Six billion years old and a few decades of industry and we’re screwing it all up! lol. God, how do you people tie your own shoes.

  3. This is funny: Eddie says people like me are gullible if we lend credence to the global-warming theories of the overwhelming majority of climate scientists, and yet he seems to subscribe to the denialist theories advanced by such eminent thinkers as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and a few TV weathermen.

    Funny, indeed.

  4. Funny, indeed… how Pat Cunningham here attempts to push the idea that ‘denialist theories’ were somehow invented by Limbaugh, Beck & a few weatherforcasters, when those folks are merely repeating science assessments from eminently knowledgeable skeptic scientists. What a strange and paper-thin premise to resort to.

    Meanwhile, if we are playing a numbers game, we can always throw in the 700+ skeptic scientists who signed a Senate report compiled at Oklahoma Senator Inhofe’s EPW office back in 2009, along with the 300+ additional scientist signers collected at Marc Morano’s Climate Depot. Fear not, though, Pat will advise readers to ignore the collection because Inhofe & Morano are Republican denialists. Yawn.

    Then there is the 31,000 skeptic scientist-signed Oregon Petition Project, which Pat will no doubt claim was debunked by citing a few articles which point to a solitary fake name planted there by the enviro-activist group Ozone Action back in 1998. Try looking for any of the other ‘fake’ names that the articles say are there, any you can’t find ‘em, even in ancient archive web pages of the petition.

    One is left to wonder how many of the members of National Academy of Sciences chose not sign the article. It has over 2,100 members, after all. You’d think they could do a bit better than 12% of their membership in this era of instant electronic communication, if an overwhelming consensus is supposed to be present within their organization.

  5. I looked up a few, not all, of the 255 scientists. There are a few geneticists a couple of neurologists but no one I could find in any field relating to climate studies. They tend to be older, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. Every person I checked seemed to have impeccable credentials in their field, they just didn’t have much in the way of climate knowledge.

  6. Did everyone enjoy Junuary?

  7. Steverino says:

    “Did everyone enjoy Junuary?”

    I don’t think it was June in Alaska, northern Canada, Europe, Japan or central Asia, Stevie old boy.

  8. And since it only took a 1 degree F average world-wide reduction in temperature in the 1200’s to bring about the Little Ice Age (possibly caused by volcanic eruptions, from several new studies), I would be careful what I wished for. A little global warming, or a period of unusually active volcanism (which is totally unpredictable) and a new Little (or worse, major) Ice Age.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0130/Volcanic-eruptions-emerge-as-lead-cause-for-Little-Ice-Age

  9. Terry the climate expert who lived during the first ice age doesn’t acknowlege scientific research of late. Alaska’s temperatures over the past 30 years have changed more than anywhere else followed by Europe, in fact Alaska’s winter temperatures have increased between 4 to 5 degrees which is rather significant. These changes in temperature are a direct result of green house gases not Mt. Vesuvius.

  10. I hate to tell you this, Steve, but Alaska is not a closed system. The entire Earth is. Why don’t you check out how much colder it has been getting in the continent of Antarctica? And how much thicker the East Antarctic Ice Sheet is getting? Or how sea level has only risen one foot in the last 100 years, and is only predicted to rise another foot in the next 100 years. Just because it’s getting hotter in heat islands on surface temperature gauges in large cities does not make the whole earth a scorching hot mass.

    And your ignorance of volcanic activity is no excuse, either.

  11. There are two seperate and different phenomena occuring in Antarctica, land ice and sea ice. Land ice is melting at an unprecedented rate while sea ice has increased from among other things a reduction in the ozone layer which increases wind and humidity. Now, how’s the moon doing?

  12. Steverino says:

    “Land ice is melting at an unprecedented rate”…

    Why don’t you stick to one-liner snarky comments on Pat’s political opinion pieces that can’t be proven. You are out of your league here.

    Widespread Persistent Thickening of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet by Freezing from the Base

    An International Polar Year aerogeophysical investigation of the high interior of East Antarctica reveals widespread freeze-on that drives significant mass redistribution at the bottom of the ice sheet. While surface accumulation of snow remains the primary mechanism for ice sheet growth, beneath Dome A 24% of the base by area is frozen-on ice. In some places, up to half the ice thickness has been added from below. These ice packages result from conductive cooling of water ponded near the Gamburtsev Subglacial Mountain ridges and supercooling of water forced up steep valley walls. Persistent freeze-on thickens the ice column, alters basal ice rheology and fabric and upwarps the overlying ice sheet, including the oldest atmospheric climate archive, and drives flow behavior not captured in present models.

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2011/03/02/science.1200109

    Snowfall-Driven Growth in East
    Antarctic Ice Sheet Mitigates
    Recent Sea-Level Rise
    Curt H. Davis,1* Yonghong Li,1 Joseph R. McConnell,2
    Markus M. Frey,3 Edward Hanna4
    Satellite radar altimetry measurements indicate that the East Antarctic icesheet
    interior north of 81.6-S increased in mass by 45 T 7 billion metric tons
    per year from 1992 to 2003. Comparisons with contemporaneous meteorological
    model snowfall estimates suggest that the gain in mass was associated
    with increased precipitation. A gain of this magnitude is enough to slow sealevel
    rise by 0.12 T 0.02 millimeters per year.

    http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/121648main_ais2.pdf

    East Antarctica is four times the size of west Antarctica and parts of it are cooling. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research report prepared for last week’s meeting of Antarctic Treaty nations in Washington noted the South Pole had shown “significant cooling in recent decades”.
    Australian Antarctic Division glaciology program head Ian Allison said sea ice losses in west Antarctica over the past 30 years had been more than offset by increases in the Ross Sea region, just one sector of east Antarctica.

    http://www.news.com.au/antarctic-ice-is-growing-not-melting-away/story-0-1225700043191

  13. Terry and Steverino: I highly recommend to both of you this Web site on matters relating to global warming: http://www.skepticalscience.com/.

    It’s very detailed and precise in its rebuttals to AGW skeptics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>