Here's what the media (including us, natch) didn't tell you: The report that was just released with much fanfare wasn't the report at all. The 21-page "Summary for Policymakers" was. This isn't the 1,500 page report that will be released in May, it's a document written mostly by UN bureaucrats, not scientists, and meant to shape public opinion and bolster support for the point-of-view that the UN wants to push--namely that the sky is falling and it's all GEORGE BUSH'S FAULT!
Anyway, it seems that the summary has been taken for gospel by the media.
NBC head newsman Brian Williams: "Climate change is increasingly a political issue. But today's report is all about science." (I think we just proved that's not true)
ABC's Sam Champion: The IPCC report would conclude with 99 percent certainty that global warming is caused by mankind's fossil fuel pollution. (Except it didn't. The summary only said 90% certainty)
Matt Lauer: Global warming "could be the end of the world as we know it."
Is the climate changing? Surely.
Is it unanimously believed among all the world's scientists and climatologists? Not a chance. Jeff Jacoby finishes his column off with "Climate-change hyperbole makes for dramatic headlines, but the real story is both more complex and more interesting. Chicken Little may claim the sky is falling. A journalist's job is to check it out."
Yes, it is Jeff. I wonder how many reporters read the 21-page summary (PDF), never mind how many will read the full report--you know, that doesn't come out until May--when it's available?
Read more: "Media Fired Up About UN Global Warming Report" Business & Media Institute
"The IPCC Should Leave Science to Scientists" American Thinker
But wait, there's more: Scientific American says "THE DEBATE IS OVER"
I don't know what to say.