Another Biased Story Favoring Global Whining (Warming) Proponents

Today's display of liberal bias by the Dead Fish Wrapper has to do with that favorite liberal topic of Global Warming. The tool for displaying it is an article about a debate on global warming.

Tonight at OMSI, George Taylor and Philip Mote will debate global warming and its causes. Taylor is the head of the Oregon Climate Service, and Mote is the state climatologist in Washington state.

Tha article actually starts out pretty evenhanded.

The climate gurus of Oregon and Washington could hardly be further apart on the greatest climate and environment issue of our time: global warming.

Philip Mote, the state climatologist in Washington, is part of a University of Washington research group that is trying to prepare the region for the hard realities of human-caused global warming: shrinking mountain snow that leaves rivers short of precious summer flow, for example.

George Taylor, who heads the Oregon Climate Service, has a different view: It's not clear humans are causing warming. The world has been warmer before, he says. Natural ups and downs have a bigger hand in temperatures than people do.

"Can we really control climate?" he asks. "I don't think we can."

The future of the planet hangs on the answer.

Taylor and Mote will meet in a kind of climate face-off at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry at 7 p.m. Tuesday where they will critique each other's work -- and search for some common ground.

But from there, it becomes fairly obvious what the reporter's opinion is.

"George Taylor's position is, global warming is not real, and Phil Mote is the other way," said Kyle Dittmer, president of the Oregon Chapter of the American Meteorological Society, which is sponsoring the event with OMSI. "They're essentially looking at the same data through two very different glasses."

Mr. Milstein needs to read his own copy. Taylor did not say glbal warming isn't real; he said it's not clear humans are causing it. Big difference.

Next, Milstein shows who he favors in the way he describes the two.

It comes days before an international scientific panel is scheduled to release its most definitive assessment yet of the global changes driven by human-caused warming. Mote is a lead author of that report.

While Mote is in step with the great majority of scientists, Taylor is far from it. His distance from the scientific mainstream and the public has widened as evidence of global warming has mounted in the form of rising temperatures, shrinking glaciers and accelerating snowmelt.

I'm still trying to figure out this "great majority" of scientists. How is it quantified? Was a survey taken, and something like 75% agreed that global warming is caused by humans? No, it's just a liberal way of twisting words to suit their agenda.

"The public is just moving past him," said Mark Abbott, dean of the College of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at Oregon State University. "The science certainly has."

Taylor's background is in meteorology, and other scientists say much of his work on climate change has not gone through the full scrutiny of peer review by independent researchers. He has written on the subject for Web sites financed in part by the oil industry.

Taylor is listed as a scientific adviser for a group that receives money from ExxonMobil and says on its Web site that escalating greenhouse gases are good for the Earth, promoting plant life and bringing "growth and prosperity to man and nature alike."

Meanwhile, Taylor is supposedly just a backwoods fope who has no idea what he's talking about (translation - he doesn't agree with us).

Later, Milstein again lets his bias show.

Taylor is not among the leading Oregon scientists, including Abbott, whom Gov. Ted Kulongoski asked to help develop a state strategy on climate change. The governor last week questioned whether Taylor can legitimately call himself state climatologist since the position is not officially authorized in state law.

"He's not the state climatologist," the governor said. "I never appointed him. I think I would know.

"He's not my weatherman."

The position of state climatologist was dissolved by the Legislature in 1989, Abbott said. Taylor runs the OSU-based Oregon Climate Service, which performs many of the same duties that the state climatologist once did, and OSU gave him the same title.

I see it as a good thing that he isn't associated with Kulongoski, but that's a different issue...

Other scientists say Taylor overlooks convincing evidence that human burning of fossil fuels is driving the climate to unprecedented extremes. Sophisticated climate models and observations of ocean temperatures and other factors show that only escalating greenhouse gases can explain current climate trends, Mote said.

The open questions surround what effects warming will have, he said.

"There are wrinkles that are still being debated," he said. "But basically the debate about whether there's a human influence is over."

Taylor says on the Oregon Climate Service Web site, and in a new report on forests and climate change, that the 1930s were the warmest decade on record in the Northwest.

"That's absolutely not true," Mote said, adding that the 1990s were the warmest.

Jane Lubchenco, a well-known OSU professor and marine ecologist who led one of the governor's task forces, said Taylor "muddies the water" by leading the public to believe there is still a debate about whether global warming is real.

So once again, the Fish Wrapper finds it impossible to do a straight news story; it has to let it be know where its biases lie.

It's actually getting scary out there when it comes to free speech and global warming. Not only are people advocating trials for those who dare to disbelieve global warming, but one Weather Channel nut case has suggested that any American Meterological Society meteorologist that dares to express skepticism about global warming should have their certification yanked.

A great response to this was provided by James Spann, a weatherman in Alabama.

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them.

Then, he idientifies the real fuel for global warming proponents.

Here are the basic facts you need to know:

*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.

The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.

If you don’t like to listen to me, find another meteorologist with no tie to grant money for research on the subject. I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue.

Good points, James. His point is well made about listening to journalists, and Michael Milstein illustrates the point very well, wouldn't you say?

Update: I found a pretty thorough coverage of the debate (unlike what appeared in the Fish Wrapper) at SOS Forests. You can also see video of the event on the OMSI web site.

Thanks for the blog plug.

Thanks for the blog plug.

The Ogre-onian has really slid leftwards in recent years. I'm not sure it is even good for wrapping fish anymore.

The real news may be found only on the Internet these days. Dead tree inkings are no longer timely or useful, let alone valid.

User login


Syndicate content