MotherJones.com | MoJo Blog - Social Issues and Political Commentary: Global Warming Debate Suppressed

« Banning Junk Food from Schools | Blog Index | Divesting from Sudan »


Advertisement
recent entries Condi Busted on Her Own Personal State of Denial Which Is Worse: The U.S. Torturing British Residents or Britain Not Taking Them Back? Salacious Exchanges With Underage Male Pages Foley Now In Deeper Trouble Environmental Damage: Another Reason Why a Border Fence is a Bad Idea Supreme Court Declines to Take Up Sex Toys Texas to DC: Don't Fence Me In Update--PERA Has Passed In the House of Representatives Woodward, Kissinger, Vietnam--Let's Do The Time Warp Again They've known about Foley for almost a YEAR?

Global Warming Debate Suppressed

The Bush Administration is making it increasingly difficult for scientists to disseminate their research on global warming. According to the Washington Post:

[Over the last year,] administration officials have chastised [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] for speaking on policy questions; removed references to global warming from their reports, news releases and conference Web sites; investigated news leaks; and sometimes urged them to stop speaking to the media altogether. Their accounts indicate that the ideological battle over climate-change research, which first came to light at NASA, is being fought in other federal science agencies as well.

As of summer 2004, all NOAA media releases had to have prior authorization from those higher up in the administration, a caveat that intimidates some researchers to modify what they publish. According to Christopher Milly, a hydrologist at the U.S. Geological Survey, his team "purged key words from the releases, including 'global warming,' 'warming climate' and 'climate change,' " in order to get a news release issued. James Hansen, head of NASA's top institute studying the climate, said:

In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public. Should we be simply doing our science and reporting it rigorously, or to what degree the administration in power has the right to assume that you should be a spokesman for the administration? … I've tried to be a straight scientist doing the science and reporting it as best I can.

Meanwhile, global warming is not only becoming taboo for scientists. TV weather reporters are increasingly urged to report only on the day’s weather, with no mention of its relationship to overall climate change or human influence. According to a recent Salon feature, networks, driven by ratings, want weather programming devoid of social responsibility and often program lengthier climate reports on weekend evenings, a timeslot known to have the lowest ratings. "The last thing any station wants is an activist weatherman," says Matthew Felling, media director for the Center for Media and Public Affairs, a Washington research group.

Ross Gelbspan reported something similar in Mother Jones last year, asking why discussion of climate change is absent from the media. The world is being inundated by extreme weather—mudslides, higher-than-average rainfall, tsunamis, hurricanes, and floods, yet the media never tries to look at the larger picture. For example, Gelbspan writes, "when one storm dumped five feet of water on southern Haiti in 48 hours last spring, no coverage mentioned that an early manifestation of a warming atmosphere is a significant rise in severe downpours."

Newsrooms deserve a portion of the blame for providing soft reports about the global climate, but the fault isn't solely the media's. The more pressing problem is the fact that scientists are unable to disclose their findings and research, preventing both the media—and consequently, the public—from fully understanding the ramifications of global warming.

Posted by on 04/07/06 at 9:45 AM | E-mail | Print

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://161.58.185.225/mb/mb-backtracks.cgi/596

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Global Warming Debate Suppressed:

» MoJo Blog: Global Warming Debate Suppressed from ThisCanadian
Bergman had interviewed the other INC defector, Sabah Khodada, but he was unable to go to Beirut, so he and Chalabi briefed Hedges at Brownâ€™s Hotel in London before sending him on to meet Ghurairy.Chalabi had been a source for Bergman since 1991, whe... [Read More]

Tracked on April 16, 2006 12:08 AM

Comments

i completely agree with what is written in the post and i feel that open debate is a good step in the right direction. however we must be sure to make a clear distinction between meteorology and geology. tsunamis are not atmospheric, are not directly linked to any sort of weather patterns or occurences and cannot be caused by human actions. thanks

Posted by: David Krause on 04/07/06 at 12:40 PM

everyone should be warned to prevent further loss of life.
property can allways be replaced but life can not.
lets make this a safer world.

Posted by: Dr.Q on 04/07/06 at 12:40 PM

Sadly, as with many other natural (and man made) catastrophies, it is not 'something to be concerned about' until you see it happening in your backyard.

Posted by: Ken Winterberger on 04/07/06 at 12:42 PM

What???, you don't want to believe that George W. truly deserved the honor of being named Time's Man of the Year, along with other such notables as Adolf Hitler (1938) and Joseph Stalin (1939)?

Whomever knowing concels a felony (federal)is guilty of Misprision of Felony, and wouldn't we be better off if this concept was extended to cover the media and its "criminal" bias toward the establishment...?

Posted by: Michael L. Wagner on 04/07/06 at 1:00 PM

Thanks David. I appreciate you identifying the distinction between meteorology (weather) and geology (tsunamis). It's easy with such a preponderance of extreme events in both areas to blend the two. You are absolutely correct in pointing out the clear-cut difference.

Posted by: Juliana Bunim on 04/07/06 at 1:09 PM

America waking up to Enron ethics in the White House
Enron tried to get away with financial accounting fraud, but congress has been letting the Bush administration get away with global scientific accounting fraud. When your congressional representative asks for your vote ask them why they have been letting the Bush administration get away with lying about the petroleum, coal and auto corporations profiting from destabilising our planets climate.

Criminal corporate governance is at the heart of the issue.
Tobacco got away with profiting by lying for decades about the lethal cancerous effects of their product. The fast fat and sugar industry has been permitted to profit from lying about food unfit for human consumption by politicians and inflected diabetes and obesity on uneducated consumers. Coke is not the real thing and happy meals don’t make you happy.

On the issue of global scientific accounting fraud, how many will die from the destabilisation of our planets climate.
If failing to act to prevent the destabilising our planets climate is not a crime against humanity what does George Bush, congress and corporate leaders thing it is? Pinochet of Chile is being pursued in court, two Africans are now being tried by the International criminal court.

Bush has broken his oath of office by failing to act to protect Americans from radical fundamentalist capitalists hell bent on profiting from destabilising our planets climate. If that is not enough to impeach this president what values are your congressional members using?

Being Canadian is no consolation since the Chretian Liberals permitted Canada climate destabilising emissions to increase 24% since 1990 levels from development of the tarsands to supply the US. Prime Minister Harper will also be asked what scientific accounting standards his newly elected party will use.

Posted by: Gord Chamberlain on 04/07/06 at 1:55 PM

Our little ball in space has been changing and will continue to change. Emotional responses on global warming pandered to by the left and right in order to maintain their plush government positions does not solve the problem.Scientist on the government payroll will give any administration any amount of scientic data supporitn any position desired. The honest scientist has no more of a chance to express his/her view than the rest of us poor chumps outside the political inner circles. You can bet the bank mother nature could care less about the Republican or Democratic Party, neither should any of us.In the final analysis those able to adapt will be here with the roaches and rats after political man eradicates himself.

Posted by: Chuck Kidd on 04/07/06 at 2:15 PM

Human health and environmental health are suffering severely due to chemical pollution causing chemically induced illnesses, diseases & injury, chemical sensitivity,MCS - globally we must drastically reduce our reliance on such a massive range of toxic, neurotoxic and carcinogenic chemicals and heavily promote organic food production, chemical free means of pest control, change all of our habits of using such a massive range of chemical personal care products and opt for chemical free ones - there are safer alternatives - we must do this to stop this global damage to human health and environmental health - we should also be deeply concerned at global warming.

Thank you, Sincerely,
Diana Buckland

MCS-GLOBAL Website www.mcs-global.org
Global Campaign for Recognition of MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY/CHEMICAL INJURY and other Chemically Induced Illnesses & Diseases
affecting both civilians & military personnel

Chemicals - Effects on Human Health & Environmental Health
Founder: DIANA BUCKLAND
Kallangur Queensland Australia
Emails: diana@mcs-global.org or ducklan@bigpond.net.au

Posted by: Diana Buckland MCS-Global www.mcs-global.org on 04/07/06 at 6:08 PM

Garry Walsh; Do you think it helps to post such outbursts? We Americans know for the most part, what we are dealing with. And it might surprise you to learn that there really aren't that many of us who are waiting for that - Scottish, wasn't it?.. fable created by someone from the McDonald family - known as the 'rapture'. And as far as a TV set goes - we refuse to even own one. Perhaps there is something alittle more positive and productive that you can do to help the situation, rather than bashing Americans.

Posted by: Rivyn on 04/10/06 at 10:59 AM

Debate? This is science. Let's debate gravity or heat or the laws of thermodynamics or whether Pat Robertson is clinically insane instead. Meanwhile, people in Tennessee better start digging tornado shelters. Rubes.

Posted by: osisbs on 04/10/06 at 12:28 PM

I'm not a scientist. This is why I get my scientific information from actual scientists and not from the white house. Of course, the folks currently living in the white house probably don’t believe in gravity either. I suspect George believes that there is a person living in the center of the earth operating a giant four-pronged vacuum that gives the appearance of gravity. Call it intelligent vacuuming. In any event, by suppressing science and promoting ignorance, it’s easier for fear mongers to control people.

Posted by: Josh Boelter on 04/12/06 at 6:23 AM

I can not believe that U.S. citizens are told what to report and OBEY so lambly ... Embarrasing ; and what an example to the rest of us that tought You where the Best ... I guess we will have to rely on Europe from now on , to bad they ( Europe ) do nothing for Africa and Latin America , their former colonies ... The solution is to Elect Public Officials who have Graduated and with the best Grades from whatever Universities ... At least their represion would be Civilized ... Later

Posted by: Jerry Martin Davis on 04/12/06 at 9:55 AM

You guys are the 64745 best, thanks so much for the help.

Posted by: Caty Tota on 08/03/06 at 7:30 PM