The first day of spring proved perfect timing for the CBSs Jim
Acosta to resurrect global warming as the villain behind last years
hurricane season, downplaying how hotly debated the matter is in the
scientific community.
Last November, Acosta grossly exaggerated
the hurricane seasons
death toll.
On the March 20 Evening News, he played up an upcoming article
for the journal Science in which climate researcher Judith Curry
argues over the last 35 years greenhouse gases raised ocean
temperatures by one degree while doubling high-intensity tropical
cyclones around the world.
The CBS correspondent then set up a clip of National Hurricane
Center director Max Mayfields September testimony denying global
warming as the cause of a strong hurricane season, as well as an
excerpt from the NOAA Web site arguing the same for Curry to dismiss
out of hand as misleading.
But rather than flesh out the complicated scientific issues in
debate, Acosta then tossed in a third party perspective from Joe
Bastardi of private weather forecaster
AccuWeather.com to warn
these storms are coming back whether there is global warming or
not.
That didnt really explain where he stands on the issue. In fact,
Bastardi is himself a skeptic of global warming, albeit a
self-professed environmentalist. Writing in the May 15, 2005
Durham Herald-Sun, Bastardi warned against populist Fern Gully environmentalism
divorced from sound science. I am disturbed that they often base
their conclusions on data that, in the context of time, are only a
grain of sand on the beach, Bastardi said of global warming
proponents. They cite temperature changes from the last 10, 50, or
100 years, ignoring the fact that climate history and cycles didnt
start 10 years or even 10 centuries ago.
As a scientist, I find it discomforting to see people trying to
shut down debate on this matter by ignoring research that doesnt
fit preconceived conclusions, AccuWeathers Bastardi lamented in
his May 2005 commentary
While CBS papered over Bastardis views on global warming, other
media outlets consulted experts outside of NOAA for dissenting
opinions. The Los Angeles Timess
Robert Lee Hotz
found such a meteorological expert who pointed to incomplete data as
the foundation for what he considered a hyped estimate. "I think the
[warming] signal is there but the data problems are leading us to
exaggerate it. No matter how you do the statistics, we really don't
know, cautioned Hugh Willoughby of Florida International University
in Hotzs March 17 article.
In a similar article the next day, Hotz cited University of
Virginias Dr. Pat Michaels who panned the study. Careful scrutiny
of all of the available data shows the connection to global warming
is less than tenuous, said Michaels in the
March 18
article.
The
Business & Media Institute has previously
documented how the media shut out scientific dissent while
presenting
global warming
as incontrovertible science.
CBS Whips Up Worry about Hurricane Season
suggested reading