Sunday, November 29, 2009

What has become astonishing in the past few days since the Climategate scandal broke is the struggle for damage control by the science pundits for the “establishment” view that humans cause global warming. Whether it is Andrew C. Revkin of the New York Times, George Monbiot of the Guardian or Tom Yulsman of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado, each is incapable of grasping the possibility that there might actually be a question about climate science here.

Their minds are closed to the possibility that man-made CO2 might not be causing climate change. They assume automatically that the “global warming deniers” are wicked types bought off by big pollution, and so they write pieces calling for greater openness. They say they want to refute their opponents’ claims by using scientific data because they firmly believe that, of course, they will be proved right.

In fact, they already have announced most confidently that the entire scandal will blow over before long. That’s wonderful damage control.

They do not comprehend that the climate skeptics have been saying for years, “Look at the data! Never mind the computer models. Data trumps theory.” What the climate skeptics want is to have the observational data out in the open and for journals to publish opposing views freely. That is the real scientific method, which needs to be restored. When that day comes (and hopefully the Climategate scandal will hasten it) the zealous advocates of a “sure thing” will be stunned.


Deer Park, Md.

Copyright © 2022 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide