Michael Coren’s October 10th column in the Edmonton Sun titled ‘Global warming hooey‘ kinda jerked my chain a little. Not so much because he stands opposed to the idea of man-made global warming, but because his opinion doesn’t even try to come to any sort of common ground with those he opposes. It’s harsh. It’s sensationalized. He’s flat out right and they’re all wrong …simple as that. The idea that there may be ambiguous facts or untestable circumstances among both sides doesn’t hold him back from claiming victory. Aside from this he compares his opposing journalists to ‘hacks’, degenerates his opponents by calling them whiney, he belittles them, and finally places his scientific faith in a renowned scholar who “…has defeated so many environmental activists — he calls them “bedwetters” — that few of them will now debate him.“
Gee, I wonder why.
In Coren’s defense though, he does rightfully side with his renowned scholar on the grounds that he is ‘peer-reviewed’. That’s important. Not being a peer-reviewed scientist is akin to one of those ‘Doctors’ who happens to be a Doctor in title only. Or perhaps a Police Officer who has been behind the desk for his whole career …you wouldn’t necessarily want him to protect you in an armed robbery – or someone with a doctorate degree in Music deliver your next baby. Ditto goes for a climate scientist who may actually be a lowly weather reporter. Scientists need their research and ideas looked over by experts in the same field of study …and having your work peer-reviewed means being recognized by those in your community. You can attest to handling the job and you know what you’re talking about.
According to Coren’s renowned scholar “…there are more than 700 major scientists who steadfastly refute the notion that the climate is changing to any worrying degree, that global warming is a reality and that the planet is in danger.“ I wonder if these major scientists are the same (or of the same stock) as those listed in the United States Senate Minority Report on Global Warming? In the Sept./Oct. 2009 issue of Skeptical Inquirer, (Volume 33, No 5, pg. 16) Stuart Jordan reports that of the near 700 (taken in Jan./09) scientists listed in the Minority Report (these are government favored climate scientists who dissent over man-made global warming) only “…15% exhibited a significant publication record in subjects at least related to climate science.“ They also found that “…80% had [no] peer-reviewed publications bearing on climate science. At least 55 had no science credentials at all, and many others identified as meteorologists proved to be weather reporters.“ I’m assuming of course that the IPCC-2007 group (who agree with climate change as being man-made and who boast 2000 government favored climate scientists) are all peer-reviewed!? Fair is fair of course.
And that’s what it’s all about really …being fair. Coren calls people names while Jordan openly admits “…there are still a few dark corners in the realm of cloud theory that need to be explained in more detail…“ Coren stands tall in his correctness while Jordan states “…some as-yet undiscovered natural process may be playing a larger than anticipated role in global warming.“ What ticks me off is that a professional, influential and often read journalist with his own talk-show can be so uncompromising and utterly convinced that one has to be either winning or losing. That things have to be white or black. Good or bad.
Having an opinion is one thing …presenting it fairly though, seems to be an ever dwindling tact.





