Climate Change: Fueling the "Debate"

Newsweek Now Decides Climate Change is Real

The title of Newsweek's current article, "The Global Warming Hoax", makes one wonder if Newsweek is still playing to appease all audiences. Its provocative title and cover photo with a giant burning sun seems to fuel the fire for debate. Inside, Sharon Begley coolly focuses on the deception of climate change deniers, who she says are still running amok:

"....outside Hollywood, Manhattan and other habitats of the chattering classes, the denial machine is running at full throttle -- and continuing to shape both government policy and public opinion."

In the clear 4000+ word article, Begley profiles the cabal of naysayers', who say, alternatively, that global warming is false, unproven or unimportant. Featured are the usual suspects, ExxonMobil, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, James Inhofe, Fred Singer, and Richard S. Lindzen. The article is well worth reading if you haven't heard the news, want to read about it again, or if you went out and bought a Hummer after reading Richard S. Lindzen's own 1000 word opinion in Newsweek last April: "Learning to Live With Global Warming, Why So Gloomy?":

"There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe. What most commentators -- and many scientists -- seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes...Many of the most alarming studies rely on long-range predictions using inherently untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately forecast the weather a week from now..."

Earlier this year, to be fair, Newsweek also published an article on the Union of Concerned Scientist's report on ExxonMobil's lobbying campaign.

The 50% Solution

It's not clear whether Newsweek's "balanced" coverage is in deference to its readers or its advertisers or both. This newest article comes at a time when ExxonMobil itself acknowledges climate change. "With its change of heart, ExxonMobil is more likely to win a place at the negotiating table as Congress debates climate legislation"

To Begley's point, the deniers thrive and now have been invited to the negotiating table, and those media outlets that broadcast them also apparently thrive. The Financial Times featured an editorial last week, "The Steamrollers of Climate Science", by Clive Crook arguing that the IPCC and its reports were tainted by "pervasive bias"..

He acknowledged that it was written by numerous scientists, but wrote as if the IPCC was actually just Ian, Paul, Chuck and Cliff. He recommended that "if governments are to get the best advice, they need information and analysis from an open and disinterested source". Who did he have in mind? He quoted the opinions of David Henderson, affiliated with the Marshall Institute, Fraser Institute, and Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) (all funded by ExxonMobil). Today, the Financial Times published two letters to the editor, one in complete agreement with, one disagreeing with his editorial. The rote, 50% solution.

Oil in The Melting (Shhhh!) Arctic

However the libertarians ought to be experiencing enough cognitive dissonance to compete with the "wind-induced"mechanical resonance that brought down the Tacoma-Narrows bridge in 1940. Russia planted a flag in the Arctic last week, staking out future Gazprom profits, accessible with the melting waterway and the capital of foreign oil companies.

The Financial Times reported on various companies and countries chances of competing for oil , in the short article: "Arctic Ice":

"in a dreadful circularity, global warming, helped along by the burning of fossil fuels, is causing the Arctic's ice sheet to recede -- making any oil and gas there easier to access.

"How much truth is there to the dire warnings of melting polar ice caps"?, asks the German newspaper Spiegel, in the beginning of it's report about The French Oil Company Total, which is sponsoring an explorer to the artic. The explorers' stated purpose is to "measure the arctic melt" (and perhaps to send back pristine images for public relations efforts). Total is also working with Gazprom on Russian gas reserves in the arctic. Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the United States currently claim parts of the North Pole.

The Heritage Foundation noted that "a quarter of the world's oil", may be under the caps, and "if the ice caps melt and shrink", the newly available resources will fuel foreign "tension".

Is global warming real? No it's not, say deniers, but whoever gets to the Arctic and oil as the ice melts wins. If you're crazy-dizzy snapping your head around to follow first the one side, than the other, simply follow the money for the truth. Or do we know the truth and just want to drive around in our SUV's a while longer?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Acronym Required previously posted about climate change with:
"Cars, Buying Cognitive Dissonance"
"Green Spirit"
Communicating Climate Change
"Sea Change or Littoral Disaster"