Who needs a public relations department when you have a willing accomplice like the Associated Press?
A July 28 story written by AP Science Writer Randolph E. Schmid took a very uncritical look at the recently released "State of the Climate" report. According to Schmid, this report, which has a fair share of critics, makes a definitive call about climate change. (h/t Marc Morano of ClimateDepot.com)
"Compiled by more than 300 scientists from 48 countries, the report said its analysis of 10 indicators that are ‘clearly and directly related to surface temperatures, all tell the same story: Global warming is undeniable,'" Schmid wrote. "Concern about rising temperatures has been growing in recent years as atmospheric scientists report rising temperatures associated with greenhouse gases released into the air by industrial and other human processes. At the same time, some skeptics have questioned the conclusions."
Schmid continued on to cite Tom Karl, who was described as "the transitional director of the planned NOAA Climate Service." But there's one problem - a 2008 story by the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Chris Horner for National Review Online reported Karl had misidentified himself as "Dr." Tom Karl, but in fact had not earned the credential:
"The evidence in this report would say unequivocally yes, there is no doubt," that the Earth is warming, said Tom Karl, the transitional director of the planned NOAA Climate Service.
Schmid also cited the questionable claim from Michael Oppenheimer in a paper published in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America) that warming would force mass immigration to the United States from Mexico.
"And a study by Princeton University researchers released Monday suggested that continued warming could cause as many as 6.7 million more Mexicans to move to the United States because of drought affecting crops in their country," Schmid wrote.
However in a story for the Examiner published on July 29, Thomas Fuller debunked this "scare" that Schmid accepted without evaluation. Fuller explained that such a migration wouldn't happen because the world is globalized now, that Mexico should be wealthier by the year 2050, and that based on what the alarmists are saying, rainfall is set to increase and won't cause so-called crop failures. He blasted the PNAS paper, which has been widely cited elsewhere beyond just Schmid's piece.
"Oppenheimer et al are using this paper as political propaganda, just based on the countries they use as examples," Fuller wrote. "How many headlines would a paper get if it examined immigration patterns between Bangladesh and India, or North Africa and Spain? We know that PNAS is moving towards being the propaganda arm of climate hysterics - witness their shameful acceptance of the late Stephen Schneider's bogus paper attempting to prove the superior expertise of his ‘side' of the argument, and establishing a blacklist of opponents for current and future abuse."