Global Warming

Peter has a critical look at some of the media confusion about global warming

Dear Ray,

Last month you kindly published a piece I penned complaining of the media's treatment of Global Warming. Having read through something I put together with just the minimalist research, I thought I had better dig a bit deeper into the subject I had jumped on a soapbox to champion. The result was interesting to say the least. This story is taken almost word for word from a report from The National Centre for Public Policy Research. (TNCFPPR)

In 2004 Associated Press ran a global warming story (Charles J. Hanley...CO2 Build-up accelerating in Atmosphere.) In it makes the following statements:-

QUOTE1 'Carbon dioxide, the gas largely blamed for global warming, has reached record-high levels in the atmosphere after growing at an accelerated pace in the last year....'

QUOTE2 'Carbon dioxide, mostly from burning of coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels traps heat that would otherwise radiate into space.'

QUOTE3 'Global temperatures increased by about 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6degrees Celsius) during the 20th century, and international panels of scientists, sponsored by world governments have concluded that most of the warming was due to greenhouse gases.'

Corrections trotted out by TNCFPPR are as follows.

QUOTE1

The sun, not a gas is primarily to 'blame' for global warming. Carbon Dioxide accounts of less than 10% of the greenhouse gas effect as its ability to absorb heat is quite limited.

Only 0.03% of the earth's atmosphere is Carbon Dioxide anyway.

QUOTE2

Only 14% of that 0.03% comes from burning fossil fuels.

QUOTE3

Most of the 20th century global warming occurred in the first few decades of that century.

The world does not have world governments.

All of the TNCFPPR stuff is backed by quotes and dates of published research documents.

I repeat my earlier question... how is any layman supposed to make any sense of what the media put out if the so called 'experts' don't agree and if the media seem totally incapable of reporting scientific facts accurately?

Peter Bodle