Throttling Dissent from Global-Warming Orthodoxy
Hoar, William P., The New American
Item: I he website for the WWF--the World Wide Fund for Nature, formerly called the World Wildlife Fund--calls climate change (or global warming, terms it uses interchangeably) one of uthe biggest threats to humanity and nature" It is, avers WWF,
nearly impossible to overstate the threat of climate change. Greenhouse gas emissions are rising more rapidly than predicted and the world is warming more quickly in response. Global warming will have catastrophic effects such as accelerating sea level rise, droughts, floods, storms and heat waves. These will impact some of the world's poorest and most vulnerable people, disrupting food production, and threatening vitally important species, habitats and ecosystems.
Item: USA Today for January 16, 2012, in a piece entitled "Science educators take on climate naysayers" reports: "The National Center for Science Education [NCSEJ, based in Oakland, California, is best known for leading charges against creationist efforts to remove evolution from public schools nationwide. But now, the three-decade-old group will also fight efforts to slip incorrect climate science information into school lessons." Item: In an article called "Climate change skepticism seeps into science classroom" the Los Angeles Times reports on January 16 that there has been "mounting resistance to the study of man-made climate change in middle and high schools." The Times went on to say: "Although scientific evidence increasingly shows that fossil fuel consumption has caused the climate to change rapidly, the issue has grown so politicized that skepticism of the broad scientific consensus has seeped into classrooms."
The NCSE, a "watchdog group that supports the teaching of evolution through advocacy and educational materials," is beginning an "initiative to monitor the teaching of climate science and evaluate the sources of resistance to it."
Correction: You might think that someone who purported to be pro-science would want to hear all relevant evidence--not just assertions pushed by lobbyists seeking to use force to shut up one's opponents in the public arena. But when one is in the propaganda business, it does matter what is planted in the mind of youngsters, and it also helps if evidence to the contrary can be excluded.
When it comes to the crusade involving climate change--the current euphemism of choice, since "global warming" seems to have lost its allure--there is a pincer movement. On the one hand, the object is to create panic: A fright campaign is used to justify extreme government action lest there be a worldwide disaster. On the other hand, there is an attempt to control what is taught, with the curricula in schools being used as a straitjacket to control the issue.
Anyone who really believes that a left-wing advocacy outfit such as NCSE doesn't support big-government "solutions" in the war against certain types of energy production is terminally naive.
Slanted press coverage also helps to color claims. Last year, there was a lot of hype by the warming crowd over the release of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) study, which reported that the temperature of the Earth has risen 1 degree Celsius since 1950. But even the project manager (who supports the theory of global warming) acknowledged the limitations of the study. Berkeley Professor Richard Muller was begrudgingiy honest enoueh to admit that the land-based "tern-perature station quality is largely awful."
The project director also pointed out: "A careful survey of these stations by a team led by meteorologist Anthony Watts showed that 70% of these stations have such poor siting that, by the U.S. government's own measure, they result in temperature uncertainties of between two and five degrees Celsius or more. We do not know how much worse are the stations in the developing world." Muller went on to note: "The margin of error for the stations is at least three times larger than the estimated warming. …