Did You See The News Reports On Yesterday’s Climate Change Hearing???

By July 20, 2006Global Warming

No, and you won’t, either. Don’t bother to go looking for them. There ain’t much there.

As we mentioned earlier in the week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing yesterday featuring Dr. Edward Wegman, the Chairman of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, no rube. He had looked at the statistics and statistical methods used by Michael Mann in developing his famed “hockey stick” graph, ostensibly proving the theory of global warming.

Since everybody else who doubts global warming is accused of being on the oil companies’ payroll (they are not), Dr. Wegman actually worked pro bono, i.e., for free. He concluded that the statistical methods — and thus, presumably, the conclusions — of Mann’s famed study were flawed. People who were at the hearing told us he was “bullied” by the minority (i.e., Democrat) members of the Committee. Lovely. That’s what dissenting views get you.

In any event, wouldn’t you think that with all the media hype over global warming and Al Gore’s movie that a dissonant view might be newsworthy? If you thought so, you’d be wrong. The WaPo, which has covered this story almost more than it has covered the Nationals (that’s our baseball team…), had nary a word about it. The Grey Lady? Bupkiss. Look, we understand that these folks supported Al Gore, trust him, trust his version of the facts. But in some fundamental respects he’s just wrong. And the opposing view deserves equal time, doesn’t it? How about a shred of time?

And so, in the interest of trying to be the de facto ombudsman for the mainstream media who will ignore the good work of Dr. Wegman, we just wanted to remind you of yesterday’s hearing and link once again to his paper so you can read it for yourself and — God forbid — draw your own conclusions.

Join the discussion 9 Comments

  • Herbert Glass says:

    From “The Joys of Yiddish” by Leo Rosten.
    bubkes
    1 Something trivial, worthless, insultingly disproportionate to expectations. “I worked on it three hours-and what did he give me? Bubkes”
    2 Something absurd, foolish, nonsensical. “I’ll sum up his idea in one word: bubkes”
    Bubkes must be uttered with either scorn, sarcasm, indignation, or comtempt
    The man who exclaims “Bubkes!” is a man who understands the place of pride in the protocol of humiliation.
    Only the proud say “Bubkes!”

  • hugh says:

    Quote ” He concluded that the statistical methods — and thus, presumably, the conclusions — of Mann’s famed study were flawed.”

    presumbably, but not at all – his findings have an almost insifnificant effect on the results

    have a look at the link if you are interested in the details

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/the-missing-piece-at-the-wegman-hearing/#more-328

  • Pat Cleary says:

    Steve:

    What’s NPR….?

    Seriously, though, a Lexis search turned up only the NPR report, nothing else. Pretty slim pickin’s.

  • Pat Cleary says:

    Herb and Ron:

    I’m a total wannabe. I love language and some Yiddish words are just so descriptive, musical and great. “Verklempt”, “schpilkis, “meshugga” (and “meshuggener”), “fekakte”, I’ve used them all here at one time or another. “Bupkiss” is another. It just fits, just works. And to Ron’s point, on this and on a few others I’ll not even name, they are used in polite company even though their true meanings ought not be.

    Thanks for writing.

  • Steve says:

    I guess you don’t listen to NPR. They had a story about this on Morning Edition.

  • I saw reports of Wegman?s testimony, and it is clear that he recognizes that global warming is a real and present danger. Asked if all the international scientific academies that have concluded that global warming is real and caused by human-created pollution should reconsider their findings in light of his analysis, Wegman answered: “Of course not.”

  • obvious says:

    This is not a partisan issue. Global warming is real and its time for us to get serious about it.

  • Ron Reisman says:

    Pat’s use of word “bupkiss” and Herbert Glass’ comment about it revives an old argument about using Yiddish words casually. There are many coarse words in Yiddish which one would never think to use in translation…bupkiss being one of them. I was reminded of another yesterday when the Seattle Mariners brought in a pitcher with the name “Putz” on the back of his uniform. Still, I applaud Pat’s salute to the language.

  • Herbert Glass says:

    Pat Cleary uses the word “bupkiss”. It has been many years since I heard the word used. Where did you learn it?