Global warming skeptics have reached a milestone of sorts. They are seldom referred to as "deniers" these days. That label was used by global warming zealots in an attempt to isolate and ridicule skeptics and brand them as extremists, much like the phrase "holocaust denier" was used against people who tried to claim the holocaust didn't happen. However, the global warming zealots were the ones who came across as extremists.
Monday evening on the PBS News Hour there was a segment on global warming and in particular about an individual named Richard Muller of U.C. Berkley who recently converted very publicly from a skeptic to a believer of man made global warming. In the interview he even went so far as to say, "In our world, we attribute the warming from 1753 to the present essentially exclusively to humans — not mostly, but exclusively."
The interview seemed to slant toward the warmist side, and note that the only use of the word "deny" in application to skeptics came from the PBS reporter, Spencer Michels.
However, Anthony Watts was given time ample air time to explain the reasons to be skeptical, and a transcript of the program can be found at his website, Wattsupwiththat.com. Watts believes that the climate models are based on flawed data as the temperature information came from measuring stations located in urban areas which are consistently hotter than rural areas.
And there's this observation:
ANTHONY WATTS: Some of the issues have been oversold. And they have been oversold because they allow for more regulation to take place. And so the people that like more regulation use global warming as a tool as a means to an end. And so, as a result, we might be getting more regulation and more taxes that really aren’t rooted in science, but more in politics.
He nailed it. But the good news is that the general population is becoming more skeptical of the warmists' claims, and that might slow the movement for more regulation of our lives on the doubtful premise that we are saving the planet.
" ... The interview seemed to slant toward the warmist side ..."
Oh, just a teensy bit. I mentioned that problem back in July, "PBS NewsHour global warming coverage: IPCC/NOAA Scientists - 18; Skeptic Scientists - 0" http://junkscience.com/2012/07/13/pbs-newshour-global-warming-coverage-ipccnoaa-scientists-18-skeptic-scientists-0/ and then expanded on the problem when I described a survey the NewsHour was conduction about their climate change reporting: http://junkscience.com/2012/08/17/pbs-newshour-please-fill-out-a-survey-about-our-science-and-climate-change-coverage/
Posted by: QuestionAGW | September 25, 2012 at 01:16 AM