Slate Editor Weisberg Second-Guesses the Potential of Climate Change Catastrophe

Slate Editor Weisberg Second-Guesses the Potential of Climate Change Catastrophe

By Jeff Poor (Bio | Archive)
April 6, 2009 - 22:01 ET

Remember when the alarmists were taking the premise that anthropogenic global warming was more of a threat to the planet than just polar bears and penguins, but also sea levels and catastrophic weather patterns?

Jacob Weisberg, the editor in chief of the Slate Group and author of "The Bush Tragedy," presents seven things taken for granted that might not be completely correct in a column for the April 13 issue of Newsweek.

"A lot of premises have turned out to be wrong lately," Weisberg wrote. "I'm not talking about evanescent bits of conventional wisdom, but about overarching assumptions that were widely shared across the political spectrum."

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Weisberg points to errors in judgment about the failure of the Soviet Union, terrorism, Iraq and the U.S. financial system.

"So at a moment when everything we once assumed is suddenly up for discussion, it's worth asking: what other big stuff could we be wrong about?" Weisberg wrote. "I'm looking for issues where the received wisdom may be entirely correct-but merits a stronger dose of skepticism than it usually gets."

Weisberg brought up several topics, but one that was most striking was the possibility that climate change might not create the end of the world scenarios as some have purported:

Climate change will be catastrophic.
We all know civilization is doomed if we don't reduce carbon emissions, right? The physicist Freeman Dyson disagrees. Dyson doesn't dispute that human activity is causing warming. But he challenges the consensus that warming will be catastrophic. In a New York Review of Books essay, Dyson wrote that warming "is mostly making cold places warmer rather than making hot places hotter." Carbon emissions could make the earth more fertile and prevent harm from global cooling, which isn't caused by humans. And if it really turns out that there is a serious problem, genetically engineered carbon-eating trees might fix it. (Might.)

Although it's not an outright dismissal of the anthropogenic global warming theory, it is a refreshing change from the usual gang of alarmist rhetoric coming from the likes of former Vice President Al Gore and NASA scientist James Hansen.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Hey...

April 6, 2009 - 22:14 ET by jcheney

...with all the cold weather and all, I've noticed we haven't heard much from Al Bore lately.

You can thank a few of the brave scientists who dismissed Global Warming from the beginning. It's becoming more common to hear others coming out and calling it what it is....a fraud.

The biggest problem is the guy with America's checkbook believes in it. He won't listen no matter what evidence shows it to be junk science. It's going to come down to the cost for the average person in the end verses those who will make money from it. Those who can't afford carbon credits, then can't afford to heat or air condition their homes, and it's unintended consequences.

In the meantime, enjoy bigger gardens. Plants just love CO 2.

When is a tax not a tax?

April 7, 2009 - 00:11 ET by IamTinman

When the government calls it a carbon credit! This, the most insidious kind of tax will have an impact that will be felt by everyone but will weigh most heavily on the poor.

Don't think this is an unintended consequence! Like the banks and auto companies, this president intends to control if not own the major utilities in this country.

When is a tax not a tax? Welll....

April 7, 2009 - 00:18 ET by Delia

...if enough convoluted pretty ribbons are wrapped around enough red tape ad infinitum behind the stranglehold on "e pluribus unum" we can all have a collective head-ache and a shrinking wallet whilst the man behind the green curtain pulls the puppet strings.

In 'udda voids'... I'm not a happy camper.

Our country is better than this. Our soldiers who put their lives on the line are better than this. Our PEOPLE are better than this.

That was one of my points....

April 7, 2009 - 18:40 ET by jcheney

..."unintended consequences" are people who can't afford to turn on their heat or their air conditioner and either freeze to death or die of heat stroke.

I think we agree, but doubt those crazed by the Global Warming fever have considered that.

Refreshing

April 6, 2009 - 22:24 ET by bigtimer

Refreshing indeed!

A Cold wind is a blowin' algore's way...

Unfotuately...I fear he and his agenda will win for the most part with O and his Cabinet/congress (along with some RINOs) before the next mid-term elections...that will cost this country dearly...goes without saying hitting us in the pocket-books every-way but sideways...and that is iffy in-itself.

Agenda Matters.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

GOD I HATE THESE A-HOLES!!!!!!!!!

April 6, 2009 - 22:44 ET by red_dragon311

so global warming WE KNOW is causew by man ..hell we have a concensus

this ass bag has the stones to out this "...Carbon emissions could make the earth more fertile and prevent harm from global cooling, which isn't caused by humans..."

this makes me want to bang my head on a brick wall... so cooling is bad and can cause harm but is not caused by man..but ..warming can cause harm and is caused by man and can't in anyway shape or form can it be natural

and the worst part is that if they really belive this GW garbage they are morons, and if they dont' and just are trying to push some stupid anti-everything agenda

i hate them with every fiber of my being

FINALY A REAL CANDIATE FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!

http://zod2008.com/index.htm

Dyson

April 6, 2009 - 22:53 ET by slickwillie2001

The Freeman Dyson case is interesting. He is highly respected, even revered in the liberal techie set, and his AGW-blasphemy is generating some controversy. There's a chance he will be thrown under the bus, marginalized as over-the-hill or even senile. Yet he's not rejecting AGW outright, just questioning the cost of proposed solutions and the extent of the problem.

There's very little tolerance in the liberal community over AGW, and any concept of scientific process of discovery and peer-review is long gone.

BTW, this is his list of his things that might be wrong:

Nuclear proliferation is bad
Climate change will be catastrophic
China is stable
Home ownership is better for us
Stocks outperform bonds in the long run
Detroit can't compete

The first one is idiotic, but some good points overall. Read the whole thing.

My solution for anthropogenic global warming worried citizenry..

April 6, 2009 - 22:55 ET by CT

Hold your breath.

Global warming has yet to keep my buns warm...

April 6, 2009 - 23:17 ET by Delia

I'm waitinggggggggggggg, Al Gore. In fact, please aim some global warming at my lil' part of the world because I'm frizzerin' my bootay off!

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...my heating bill is rising and AL BORE still has a HUGE carbon footprint.

Elephant in the room much?

Hmmmmmmm.

Sunspot Watch

April 7, 2009 - 00:14 ET by Parker1227

Our silent sun is starting to raise eyebrows. Though no one knows how long the 2 years of low sunspot activity will last, nor what the long term effects will be if it continoues.

Current pic:

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/synoptic/sunspots_earth/mdi_sunspots_1024.jpg

And while still high compared to 20th century averages, global temps have flatlined for the last 10 years - while C02 has increased by 4%.

Hmmmm...

Jeff: Thx, good article!

April 7, 2009 - 00:28 ET by sbourg

This guy Weisberg sounds like a pompous fool. And he manifestly typifies the idiocy of "Newsweak"......as if we needed one more reason among thousands, to never buy Newsweak! Weisberg's writing style isn't so great. Strunk and White's "Elements of Style" railed on pompous words like "evanescent" when a simpler word would suffice (or be known to the readers). And I chuckled at Weisberg's sentence "We all know civilization's doomed if we don't reduce carbon emissions, right"? Well, NO Jacob.....maybe just all the people YOU know. Way to start the nonsense though, with a non-sequitur! I love the strategically-placed lack of courageous writing, where he says he's looking for topics that might be completely correct, but warrant more skepticism. WOW, Jeezus Jacob, why don't you look for topics that may be utterly wrong and damaging? What a blowhard this guy is. Can't even go out on a limb, without a huge fallback for his liberal friends. Can hear him now explaining to his friends that he was not at all implying that AGW is not true. Just trying to get some "skepticism"! Well, Jacob, LOOK OUTSIDE, opening day for the White Sox and the wind-chill's about 10 degrees, and you can't even invoke some courage to take a stand on AGW!