Sometimes I just want to slap Deborah Saunders. Especially when she writes drivel like this column.
It starts out like this:
THERE IS A CONCEIT among the American Left that the American Right cleaves to bad science out of deference to religion, while the left is all-science all-the-time. Former Veep Al Gore's new movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," however, shows how unscientific -- and downright faith-based -- the left has become.
Um... I don't remember anyone making that claim. Certainly I've heard my fair share of pseudoscience from the far Left. What does that have to do with anything? Well, it lets her go on the attack, I suppose.
There are a number of well-known scientists who don't believe that global warming is human-induced, or who believe that if it is, it is not catastrophic. Hurricane expert William Gray of Colorado State University believes the Earth will start to cool within 10 years. Neil Frank, former director of the National Hurricane Center, told the Washington Post that global warming is "a hoax." Climate scientist Robert Lindzen of MIT believes that clouds and water vapor will counteract greenhouse-gas emissions.So you have to ask yourself: Why does Gore pretend that apostates do not exist?
And I have to ask myself: why doesn't Ms. Saunders acknowledge that the apostates, upon closer examination, appear to be loonbuckets? Or that bad ideas don't necessarily deserve equal time?
She seems to love the phrase "faith-based." Odd.
Because this is a crusade -- and not about science -- Gore is drawn, not to the most reasoned scenarios, but the most apocalyptic.Consider this exchange with ABC's George Stephanopoulos -- formerly of the Clinton/Gore administration -- who questioned Gore's prediction that global-warming could cause sea levels to rise 20 feet. "But the consensus is several inches over the next century. Right?" asked Stephanopoulos on June 4. "Not 20 feet?"
"Not at all," Gore replied. He added that the scientists he talks to -- his disciples, if you will -- see it his way. He ignores the less catastrophic theories, which predict a rise of an inch per decade, or three feet over the next century. To Gore, the worst-case scenario is the only scenario.
"Disciples"?!?!? Anyway, did we watch the same movie or not? Because in the movie I saw, Gore makes it pretty clear that he IS talking about the worst-case scenario. IF we don't do anything, IF current trends keep up, and IF Antarctica or Greenland dump all their ice into the ocean, THEN we're talking 20 feet.
It's rather rich seeing Ms. Saunders suddenly taking issue with somebody using the worst-case scenario to try to goad the public into action... considering which party, which administration, which president, and which war she's been very publicly supporting for years. ("Smoking mushroom cloud" anyone?)
Then we have this masterpiece of reasoning:
Battling scientistsEditor -- True believers in human-caused global warming quickly attacked recent Debra J. Saunders' columns suggesting their beliefs might be more political and faith-based than scientific (Letters, "Murky science,'' June 13). One described her heretical view as being supported by "a lone scientist, or two.'' However, a more accurate count can be found by searching "The Petition Project,'' which lists more than 10,000 scientists questioning whether global warming is driven by human activity or natural climatic variation.
Prophets of Al Gore might have been unsettled by the June 1 Chronicle story concerning the Arctic Coring Expedition, whose samples indicate the Arctic Ocean's average temperature 55 million years ago was 74 degrees. Unfortunately for them, the report made no mention of the core samples containing fossilized remains of SUVs, factory smokestacks or Weber grills.
Now there's an inconvenient truth.
Yes, and human activity had nothing to do with how hot the planet was 4 billion years ago, either. Come to think of it, since carbon dioxide existed before people came along, there's really no problem with the stuff at all!
And if you really want to talk about the Petition Project, here you go...
Fact: In the spring of 1998, mailboxes of US scientists flooded with packet from the "Global Warming Petition Project," including a reprint of a Wall Street Journal op-ed "Science has spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth," a copy of a faux scientific article claiming that "increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide have no deleterious effects upon global climate," a short letter signed by past-president National Academy of Sciences, Frederick Seitz, and a short petition calling for the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol on the grounds that a reduction in carbon dioxide "would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."The sponsor, little-known Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, tried to beguile unsuspecting scientists into believing that this packet had originated from the National Academy of the Sciences, both by referencing Seitz's past involvement with the NAS and with an article formatted to look as if it was a published article in the Academy's Proceedings, which it was not. The NAS quickly distanced itself from the petition project, issuing a statement saying, "the petition does not reflect the conclusions of expert reports of the Academy."
The petition project was a deliberate attempt to mislead scientists and to rally them in an attempt to undermine support for the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was not based on a review of the science of global climate change, nor were its signers experts in the field of climate science. In fact, the only criterion for signing the petition was a bachelor's degree in science. The petition resurfaced in early 2001 in an renewed attempt to undermine international climate treaty negotiations.
Believe me, I WISH Al Gore and the saner scientific community was wrong about global warming/global climate changed being caused by people. I wish that things didn't sound so dire. But if they are that bad, and there's something we can do about it, why would I want to stick my head in the sand? It's just pathetic.
In any case, the attack playbook is clear. Just keep saying 1) the warnings are too extreme! 2) the person making the warnings is too arrogant and "faith-based." Lather, rinse, repeat... oh, and avoid actually citing any real science. That helps.
