Indefatigable Inhofe Takes on Media Hype

By September 27, 2006Global Warming

Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) is absolutely tireless when it comes to rebutting the global warming alarmists, those who abandon a balanced approach toward science — and skepticism — in favor of activism. (Activism in favor of a vastly expanded, intrusive, expensive, and freedom-constraining government, of course.)

On Monday, Inhofe took to the Senate floor for an extended indictment of the media’s central role in the hype and hysteria, a point-by-point examination of their excesses. His discussion about the media’s periodic switch between warning against global warming versus a new ice age is particularly amusing. (Thanks to Drudge for highlighting the speech. Given the little coverage it received, we would have missed it otherwise.)

As if to prove Inhofe’s point, a day later ABC’s Good Morning America hauled out its best hype-steria. Now, we don’t watch the show since Katie Couric left, but Newsbusters keeps track of it for us. Key quote:

…Another 2 degrees doesn’t sound like much, but scientists say that it means over the next four or five decades at least, the world will suffer increasingly frequent heat waves, more wildfires, droughts as even more mountain glaciers and snow pack vanish, no longer sending water to the valleys below. As we approach 2 degrees hotter, it will mean mass extinctions, say many scientists. Animals and plants simply unable to adjust.

Mass extinction? Ayee! But wait, there’s another point of view? Oh yes. Newsbusters notes a useful example, that of the 60 scientists who wrote Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper in April calling for a balanced review of the science of climate change.

“Climate change is real” is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural “noise.” … It was only 30 years ago that many of today’s global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.

Apparently that includes the predetermined political agenda of most of the mainstream media.

We’ve said many times before, we welcome an honest, fair and balanced debate on the science of global warming. Too bad we rarely get one in the media.

Latest posts by John Engler (see all)

Join the discussion 2 Comments

  • Jeff B. says:

    I’ve read around the web, from mainstream media sources, and in general extensively followed the current “Global Warming Fad Coverage.” Senator Inhofe’s address to the Senate is by far and away the best overall summary and discussion of this trend that I have seen. I sure wish he was my Senator. Thanks for linking this, and yes, kudos to Drudge for providing some much needed balance in the coverage.

  • Andy Revkin says:

    Senator Inhofe and I disagree on the tone and content of my new book on the once and future Arctic, but we do agree on a few things — including that the media are having a really hard time covering climate change.

    Go here for a link to my NYTimes story “Yelling Fire on a Hot Planet”>