Chris Mooney is on a roll lately. I finally got around to his piece in the latest issue of Mother Jones, and it’s an absolute must-read. Lots of people have the vague impression that there’s a sort of climate-skeptic cottage industry out there, funded largely by a few large financial interests, particularly ExxonMobil. Well, they’re right — check out this chart.
There’s nothing wrong, of course, with industries trying to advance their views on economic and policy issues, but this is a coordinated attempt to "do science," or rather, create the illusion of scientific controversy around an issue on which there is in fact overwhelming scientific consensus.
Also check out Mooney’s latest column in the American Prospect, which highlights some of the more obvious absurdities in James Inhofe’s recent speeches on "Four Pillars of Climate Alarmism." In particular, Inhofe is cherry-picking from a report that draws heavily on another report he hated so much he tried to sue to block its release.
Inhofe faces this predicament because of his, and the right’s, cavalier treatment of serious scientific documents. If climate-science reports are deemed too "alarmist," as the "National Assessment" was, they are viciously denounced. If the reports are subtle and contain plenty of language about scientific uncertainty that can be quoted out of context, they are misrepresented as throwing the scientific consensus into question.
Clown town.
Update [2005-4-19 12:41:23 by Dave Roberts]: If you get tired of seeing the same old oft-debunked climate-skeptic arguments used again and again, stay entertained with Deltoid’s Global Warming Skeptic Bingo! Fun for the whole family.
