Fair Means Unbalanced
According to this article in the San Diego Union-Tribune
It's standard operating procedure for journalists covering a controversial issue to offer contrasting opinions in the interest of balance.
But for years there's been consensus on this topic among scientists, with just a few skeptics on the fringe. Sometimes the facts are so overwhelming on one side that it's unfair and inaccurate to give equal weight to both sides. This is one of those times.
Journalists have gradually accepted that, and people who follow climate change closely have noticed. When I asked a couple of scientists and a senior research fellow at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change why they thought this has happened, they answered along the lines of the Pew Center's Jay Gulledge, who said, “The science became all the more compelling in the last year.”
Ah, yes, that compelling science. But how compelling is it?
For staff writer Craig Rose, it was “a watershed moment” when the international report on climate change concluded that the chances are at least 90 percent that global warming is caused by human activity.
Well, if it's 90% certain, then it's 100% certain, I suppose. Errr.
Labels: Global Warming