I joined a radio program last week during the early stages of the tour to discuss the implications of the Supreme Court decision handed down last week validating that EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. Don’t worry though. There is no discussion of legal theory and implications in the following paragraphs whatsoever. I mention the program because I was joined by two others, one an environmental attorney and the other, well, it was a guy named Sterling Burnett of the National Council for Policy Research.
For those of you who aren't quite as familiar with Sterling as I am, he is what you would call a global warming denier. According to Sterling, he finds the science behind global warming unconvincing. And why shouldn’t he be allowed to question the scientists on this one? He does have a PhD in philosophy after all. While we're at it, let's get him up on a panel with fellow experts Dr J, Dr. Phil and Dr. Dre.
Last summer, following the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Sterling could be found attacking Al Gore’s message comparing Gore's message to Nazi propaganda. Classy move. Now I’m not really one for conspiracy theories, but I have to admit that the nearly $400,000 NCPA has received from Exxon since 1998 may just provide a window into motivations. Draw your own conclusions though.
I could spend time going into the variety of ridiculous statements he made in a futile attempt to undercut the scientific consensus on this issue, but it is truly a waste of my time. Bottom line is, we all need to ask ourselves: who are we going to trust on global warming? I mean, on the one hand we have the opinion of over 2000 scientists from 130 countries analyzing the best science available, not to mention the consensus of every major scientific body in the world including the US National Academy of Sciences, and then on the other hand we have some dude with a degree in philosophy from an Exxon funded think tank who seems to oppose all government subsidies other than those that benefit his corporate sponsors. Hmmmmm…. that’s a tough one.
I warn all who read this to beware the global warming denier who refers to all sorts of 'competing claims' for global warming without mentioning a single scientific study backing them up, much less a peer-reviewed, published scientific study. The bad news is that the Sterling’s of the world still get play in the media. For example, the very same day I was on with Sterling Burnett, Laurie and Sheryl got ambushed by Joe Kernen on CNBC, who decided to cite a ridiculously flawed documentary from Britain as his evidence. Joe felt compelled to bring up volcanoes, the temperature on Jupiter and a number of other ‘theories’ that have no backing in peer-reviewed scientific literature. See Laurie’s response. Where does the backing come from you ask? Mostly think tanks and other groups that put out their own reports and simply quote each other. I like to call it the “Exxon echo chamber”.
The bottom line is that global warming is here, it is real, and the naysayers (cite) are finding themselves increasingly isolated because there is no room for a "Flat Earth Society" on a round planet. The media needs to wake up and quit giving guys like Sterling a stage simply because he disagrees.
