Guest Essay by Kip Hansen
If the year were 1965 AND this were the Soviet Union AND he was writing in Pravda AND CAGW was required Party Line THEN I would understand Justin Gillis’ latest piece in the New York Times.
Justin Gillis, New York Times’ Environmental journalist, has been at it again attempting to shore up the Great Global Warming cause in his latest “opinion column” somehow erroneously placed in the Science News section of the International New York Times online at:
I’d like to really lay into Mr. Gillis for this bit of party-line propaganda, but he says so little that it would be difficult to do so.
He correctly points out that one cold winter does not mean that the world has not warmed up since the Little Ice Age — which is mostly what all those graphs that the NY Times used to put in Mr. Gillis’ articles about Global Warming would show, rising temperatures since 1850 or so. Neither Mr. Gillis nor the NY Times’ editors ever seemed inclined to mark the graphs showing the period from about 1975-2000 as being the part in which the IPCC believes the AGW signal began to be seen.
All readers here know why Justin Gillis no longer includes global temperature graphs in his articles. They tell a different story than his words — the world is a little warmer than it was during the Little Ice Age – thank God or your Lucky Stars — opinions vary – but not quite as warm as the Medieval Warm Period.
He points out as well that Alaska, which most people think of as the cold part of America, has been warmer lately, and that California – the state of my birth and childhood — has been having yet another drought — those in my lifetime alone being 1958-59, 1961, 1977, 1986-91, 2001-02, 2006-07.
Here’s Mr. Gillis’ winning hard-science punch line:
“Though the case is as yet unproven, a handful of scientists think the 50-degree temperatures in London and the frigid weather in Minneapolis might be a consequence of climate change.”
Wait for it now…it gets better:
“Fortunately, we are not stuck with human perception alone. Nowadays we have sophisticated thermometers scattered all over the place. On land, aboard boats, attached to satellites, floating in the ocean — wherever we put them, they are telling us a pretty consistent story.
No matter how cold it got in Wisconsin last week, the world really is warming up.”
I’m sorry, but I’ve just got to wonder who he thinks pops out and reads the thermometers “attached to satellites” and what temperature readings they get out there in space. Maybe Josh could do a cartoon of Gillis checking one for us.
The link on “warming up” goes to the three-year out-of-date — up to 2011– BEST Results paper (published in the very first issue of the journal GIGS: An Overview). You have to be pretty sharp to see it, with the way the material is presented, but, of course, the paper confirms the then-so-far 14-year hiatus in Global Warming.
The main point is: Why is Justin Gillis writing such an article in the NY Times? There is no news in it. His concluding sentence is blatantly incorrect. It contains little journalistic effort, other than finding some scientist that will say something warmish without mentioning the hiatus or the pause. He couldn’t mention the IPCC because they have admitted the pause and can’t explain it, yet he presses on in spite of them. The NY Times editors have been fairly calm on the CAGW issue lately, so it is unlikely they are pressuring him to write such tripe, in fact, they recently closed the Environmental Desk altogether. The NY Times is one of the world’s “newspapers of record” and should be above this sort of sloppiness.
[If there are any secret sympathizers on staff at the Times, weigh in in the comments. The moderators here at WUWT know how to reach me privately, I am intensely curious as to why and how such a piece could be published.]
MODERATION NOTE: I will reply to appropriate comments on journalism, the NY Times, propaganda and its uses in modern society, and the sloppy weather we are having in Florida this week.