Friday, August 04, 2006

Climate change on Lehrer Newshour

I've heard that the Newshour with Jim Lehrer (forever known to me as the McNeil/Lehrer Newshour) is likely(*) going to have a discussion tonight about climate change. This is probably motivated by the present heatwave. I've also heard that they're trying to get someone from the NAS Hockey Stick Panel to appear. I'll be tuning in.

[Addendum: They did not end up having any scientist on. Also, you can find a transcript and realaudio of the segment here.]

(*) Likely denotes confidence level of 75%


Anonymous said...

Well, obviously that was predictable, liberal magazine writer who sells her books about AGW catastrophies, liberal think tank technocrat that makes money selling reports to governments and companies on the impending AGW regulations and problems/opportunities, and PBS, who like NPR, is left leaning as well, then we get a very one sided conversation indeed. At least Mr. Bailey, a recent AGW believer convert, had some rational thoughts, though "technical difficulties" (how convenient)took him out for most of the time. Same old same old political blather, nothing new and no one discussing the science, just saying it's been settled for over 5 years, so trust us and do something. At least they said the current heat wave doesn't prove AGW, and of course said unusually cold weather doesn't disprove it, so they can be right about AGW no matter what the weather, that's very convenient too.

Anonymous said...

Well Dr. J, not all the pro-AGW folks agree the current heat wave is not due to AGW, this quote from Pew is quite firm: "Jay Gulledge, senior research fellow for science and impacts at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, told NBC News on Wednesday that "this heat wave and other extreme events we've seen in recent years are completely consistent with what we expect to become more common as a result of global warming, even though we can't be definitive on any single event."

Many are truly trying to make political hay on this one, although as usual with the left leaning think tanks like Pew, this character is not a scientist, he just plays one in the media.

Andrew Dessler said...

I was disappointed that they didn't have any scientists on. I know the producers were calling around today to find a scientist, so I'm not sure what happened.

That said, I thought the piece was pretty reasonable. I couldn't quibble with any scientific statement they made.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't either Dr. Desser, but then again I didn't hear many scientific statements other than 5 years ago reasonable scientists could question AGW, but today none can, that makes me wonder what I am and where I have been the last 5 years.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Dr. Dressler, I suspect the intense interest shown of late by the liberal media in this topic is being driven by the upcoming election.

The latest media frenzy was kicked off a few weeks ago by the Algore film.

Brokaw had a very biased and one-sided 2 hour "special" on the History or Discovery channel just last week as well.

Anonymous said...

PS, while I welcome public discussion, I certainly wish the old, liberal dinosaur media would be objective and present a genuine informational and scientific report, but they won't do it.

I'm keeping up with developments via the internet as a great portal into the scientific research world for objective information on this topic.

Anonymous said...

Very well said ttyler, the mainstream media is the last place to look for any objective and scientific data or discussion or analysis of this topic. You will get the pablum mainsteam position from them, hardly scientific and hardly unbiased.

Anonymous said...

Yes, George, and it's a real shame. They seem to have no idea that there is a vast audience for authentic science reporting and that intelligent people would respond to it.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Dressler, having read through the posts and comments, followed up the links and having added a few comments of my own here at your new blog, I am very much looking forward to reading your next installment and the ensuing commentary and links. I hope to learn much more here and have added your URL to my daily reading list.

While I am decidedly skeptical -- (firstly, because I suspect misjudgements have occured in the scientific interpretation of critical data regarding global warming; and secondly because of the incredible extent to which national and global political, bureaucratic and media interests I wholeheartedly distrust and oppose have attempted to impose their ideological stamp on as well as exploit the discussion) -- I am however seriously investigating the science involved and I am looking to authentic science and to objective scientists for accurate answers and well-grounded judgements in these matters.

It occurs to me as well that, while I am a skeptic, I am a skeptic who is interested in encouraging free market-oriented as well as public health-oriented solutions to the more traditional array of air and water pollution problems, and so there is a huge area in which successful efforts to significantly reduce pollution in these problem areas may also contribute to a significant reduction in manmade greenhouse gas emissions. This is a political area where those of us who don't buy the global warming scenarios can certainly discuss with and agree on anti-pollution policies and approaches with those who do.

Anyway, looking forward to more at this blog! :^D


Anonymous said...

Also, please accept my apologies for mispelling your name in my earlier comments, it's from bad eyesight!