Environmental Myths

Environmental Myths

April 3, 2006

Yesterday, George Will used prime space in the Washington Post and other major papers to suggest — not only is global warming not the result of human activity — global warming may not exist at all. In a one-two punch, this morning columnist Robert Novak used his regular space in the Washington Post to suggest that global warming — if it even exists — would only impact us so far in the future that our technological advances should be able to handle it. Neither of these columns is based in scientific fact — their only purpose seems to be to bolster the position of the administration.

• George Will’s suggestion that global warming may not exist is not backed up by fact. George Will says that global temperatures have risen about one degree over the last 100 years and that “might be the margin of error when measuring the planet’s temperature.” The only support Will provides for this statement is a crude analogy — there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support Will’s position that the earth might not be warming. The American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have also “issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling.”
  
  
• Will’s argument, while full of holes, is a winning one for the White House. The Bush administration can’t deny the facts — the United States contributes to global pollution. And as the world moves forward to address climate change, the U.S. “which is home to less than 5% of Earth’s population but produces 25% of CO2 emissions, remains intransigent.” Bush abandoned the Kyoto protocols and didn’t keep his campaign pledge to control carbon output. And there is no time to wait. In 2005, the National Academy of Sciences signed a joint statement with 10 other national academies which said, “The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action.” (PDF)
  
  
• George Will goes as far as to say that global warming might not be a bad thing. In his column, Will asks: “Are we sure the consequences of climate change — remember, a thick sheet of ice once covered the Midwest — must be bad?” It’s hard to believe that a credible journalist would make such an argument — and Will doesn’t list any of the supposed benefits of global warming. Scientists think differently — they believe that global warming can cause severe hurricanes, flooding of coastal population centers and the spread of serious disease. That doesn’t sound too appealing.