Media bias distorts science of global warming
To the Editor:
As one of 700 individuals who registered to attend the Fourth International Conference on Climate Change from May 16 - 18 hosted by Chicago's Heartland Institute, I was appalled over the absence of both print and TV coverage despite its international flavor.
Appearing at the conference were 73 distinguished scientists, economists, and policy experts from 23 countries who were united in exploring the science and economics of global warming. Perhaps the most distinguished guest of all, and one who appears on American TV from time to time as he travels the world advocating for the truth of sound science, was Lord Christopher Monckton.
Having served as a policy adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and now the chief policy adviser to the Science and Public Policy Institute, Lord Monckton illustrated how bogus facts -- garbage in, garbage out -- can be used to construct computer models to show that the rate of global warming is accelerating and man is the culprit. Such was the "hockey-stick" graph published in the 2001 report of the IPCC, but which was later debunked by scientists Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, both who attended Heartland's conference.
Lord Monckton offered a strong warning how Cap and Trade (the Kerry-Lieberman bill), EPA regulations, and an attempt to push a new treaty at Cancun to replace the failed Copenhagen one, are all doomed to failure because they would have no effect on climate change. According to Lord Monckton, even if all economic activity were shut down for 100 years to curtail global warming, the temperature reduction would only amount to 1 degree Fahrenheit!
Considering the above revelations at the Heartland conference, and there were many more, Illinoisans, regardless of political party, should be concerned about the obvious media bias over climate change.
Having invested so much of its credibility in the promotion of man-made global warming, might the media be concerned that more and more Americans are becoming skeptical of man as the cause of global warming despite the media's push to convince the pubic otherwise (According to a recent poll, only 33 percent of Americans believe global warming is man-made).
Accordingly, the media is not about to inform readers of the thousands of leading scientists around the world who reject global warming.
The public is susceptible to scare tactics. Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, published in 1962, helped to start the environmental movement by misrepresenting the potential dangers of DDT based on biased studies of eggshell thinning of birds, as well as ignoring test results.
But what constitutes truth in science? Lord Christoopher Mockton described truth as the center of every lasting consensus. As such, scientific truth will always remain the truth regardless of how many lies are told.
A Heartland Institute sign prominently displayed said it all: "Global Warming? It is not man made, it's a natural variation, the human impact is very small, computer models are flawed, and there is no 'consensus'." Global warming is also not harmful, past warmings were beneficial, no current warming harms, future warmings will be modest and warming is better.