Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

Home /  Archives / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar

Correspondence With C-J’s Environmental Reporter Concerning Global Warming

Mr. Bruggers –

I am very interested in the environment and even took several environmental engineering courses back in the 1970’s when I was in college.  It is clear that you have bought into the idea that our release of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is causing the earth to heat up and will cause dire results, and that reducing carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels would have a substantial effect on reducing global warming and should be encouraged or required.  You seem to be depending upon the United Nations report as the basis for your position. 

It seems to me that any real scientist would be very skeptical of anyone who claims to understand something as complex as the earth’s climate and would be very cautious about taking any steps that would definitely have a very negative impact on the economy while not certainly having any beneficial impact on the environment.  Also, I would think that anyone who is serious about science would be very skeptical about getting his scientific information from politicians and political groups, who are prone to seek power, not truth. 

There are many serious scientists whose specialty is climate who offer views that are at odds with those of the UN and Al Gore, but you do not seem to be paying any attention to them.  I am old enough to remember the panic about global cooling, which helps make me skeptical about the current global warming panic.  I also remember when we lived in Milwaukee and all the “experts” were afraid we were going to get too much water in Lake Michigan and would have to build a huge pipeline to ship it off to other places, and then, in a short period of time, that disastrous, looming environmental problem suddenly disappeared. 

Too many people today are treating global warming as a religion, ignoring evidence and theories that disagree with Al Gore’s views, and smearing any people who question the dogma.  I would hope that, as a journalist, you would be more objective and skeptical, presenting the views of various scientists in an even-handed way.  Instead, you are ridiculing Kentucky elected officials who don’t worship at the global warming church as if they are a bunch of rubes.  Please remember that truth is not determined by how many people buy into it or some type of majority rule arrangement – the truth is the truth even if nobody believes it!

I am a patent attorney and have no investment in the coal industry, but I know enough about the limits of computer models and about science to be skeptical of people who think they can model the earth’s climate.  They definitely cannot.  They can’t even predict the weather one week in advance!  One of my friends from college is an expert in sunspots and solar activity, and she is very skeptical of Al Gore’s talents as a scientist.  

I would like to encourage you to exercise some of that journalist’s skepticism that you must have been taught, and especially not to accept Al Gore’s and the UN’s version of science without question.    The mixture of science and politics can be very toxic – please don’t allow yourself to swallow it whole.  Just remember that many of the things that “everyone knows” are simply not true.

Sincerely,

Theresa Fritz Camoriano

Ms. Camorianio:

Thank you for taking the time to write to me.

I appreciate your comments.

It's true, I am reporting in stories that most climate scientists believe that our releases of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide is causing the climate to warm. But I want you to know that I am not relying only on the UN-sanctioned Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which represents top climate scientists from governments all over the world.

Virtually every major scientific society now recognizes that the basic science of global warming, and concludes that humans are playing a role in the warming of the Earth. Many warn of potentially serious effects.

In fact, at this point, it's quite hard to find credible climate scientists who have done peer reviewed work in the field who would *deny* that humans are influencing the climate.

At the same time, in many of my stories on the subject, I will note that there's still debate over just how bad it could get, and how quickly -- and what, if anything, we should or can do about it.

You will also find my reporting to focus a lot on the economic implications for Kentucky, which by all accounts, are potentially quite large.

You are right that it's a complex issue. I'm sorry you feel my reporting to be biased. But I am doing my best to navigate the  issue in a way that is fair to all sides, while also reflecting accurately the best science as I'm able to determine it.

//Jim

Mr.  Bruggers –

Have you seen this? http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html  Of course, there are many other scientists who are very skeptical as well.

Resa

Ms. Camorianio:

I have, and am familiar with Prof. Lindzen's work. Believe it or not, I've actually done a fair amount of research, and have tapped into my own academic science background, and more than 25 years of experience as a reporter -- much of that specializing in science and the environment.

I could provide you with links to a large number of reports by very credible scientific bodies that show Prof. Lindzen's views are in the minority.

To give them equal weight with the bulk of science would be misleading, don't you think?

//Jim

 Mr. Bruggers –

As I said before, the truth is not something that is determined by a majority vote.  History has repeatedly shown us that the scientist who is right is often not believed for many years.  In this case, there is a great reliance on computer modeling which is not at all capable of taking into account all the elements that affect climate.  The models have been revised repeatedly, so that now even the most hysterical folks have scaled back the predicted disaster to a large extent.  Even the temperature data that is being used is suspect.  The NASA data was improperly “corrected” to try to prove that temperatures are hotter now than they were during the dust bowl days, and NASA has recently admitted its error.  I have not seen you reporting these changes in positions on the part of the folks who support the man-made global warming theories.

Anyone who swallows this global warming hysteria without a huge dose of skepticism is allowing himself to be taken in by a popular political trend rather than acting as a real scientist.  Real scientists seek the truth, not the popular trend.  They don’t ask how many societies take a position – they ask about the scientific basis for the position, which, in this case, is very shaky.  Of course, I also understand that people know where their bread is buttered, and the research money and power all support the global warming hysteria.  Senators have even threatened anyone who dares to challenge their theory, which is not a healthy way to seek the truth.

When people accept something as shaky as the theory that our burning fossil fuels is going to cause environmental disaster, without a huge dose of skepticism and without demanding much more solid proof, then they are practicing religion, not science.  I appreciate the skepticism of our elected officials in Kentucky and think we would be far better off if more people expressed more skepticism and demanded much more solid proof before enacting laws that cripple the economy and harm many people.

Obviously, you and I have far different views on this issue.  You believe you are right, and you will continue to use your position to write articles ridiculing people who disagree with you rather than explaining the shaky basis for this theory and the fact that scientists are not speaking with one voice on this issue and even the scientists who support the man-made global warming theory are continually changing their predictions and scaling back the extent of the predicted disaster.  You are playing the role of a crusader, not the role of a scientist or an objective reporter, but I accept it as reality.

Resa

Weather (Louisville) / Mapquest /  White Pages / Business Search / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN