In­hofe slams press warn­ings on global warm­ing as ‘un­founded’ hype

The Washington Times Weekly - - National - By Christina Bellantoni

Sen.JamesM.In­hofe,in­one­ofhis fi­nal ac­tions as chair­man of the En­vi­ron­ment and Pub­lic Works Com­mit­tee,onDec.6hel­da­hear­ing­toin­ves­ti­gate whether press ac­counts have “over-hyped” pre­dic­tions of global warm­ing.

“The me­dia of­ten fails to dis­tin­guish be­tween pre­dic­tions and what is ac­tu­ally be­ing ob­served on the Earth­to­day,”theOk­la­homaRepub­li­can said. “Rather than fo­cus on the hard science of global warm­ing, the me­di­a­hasin­stead­be­comead­vo­cates for hyp­ing sci­en­tif­i­cally un­founded cli­mate alarmism.”

Mr. In­hofe will lose con­trol of the en­vi­ron­men­tal panel next month when Democrats as­sume the Se­nate ma­jor­ity, and Sen. Bar­bara Boxer of Cal­i­for­nia will as­sume the gavel. She promis­e­sex­ten­sive­hear­ing­songlobal warm­ing,and­chas­tisedMr.In­hofe­for scru­ti­niz­ing global-warm­ing cov­er­age. “In a free so­ci­ety, in what is the great­est­democ­ra­cyinthe­world,Ido not­be­lieveitisprop­er­top­ut­pres­sure on the me­dia to please a par­tic­u­lar Se­nate com­mit­tee view, one way or the other,” she said.

The two are po­lar op­po­sites when it comes to cli­mate change — Mr. In­hofe has called global warm­ing “the great­est hoax per­pe­trated on the Amer­i­can peo­ple,” while Mrs. Boxer has ad­vo­cated ef­forts to sig­nif­i­cantly re­duce green­house gases.

Mr. In­hofe, vil­i­fied by en­vi­ron­men­tal­groups­forhis­po­si­tion,saidhe fears “poorly con­ceived pol­icy de­ci­sions may re­sult from the me­dia’s over-hyped re­port­ing.”

The­hear­ing­wasanop­por­tu­ni­ty­for Mr. In­hofe to strike back at his crit­ics, cit­ing “over­whelm­ingly onesided”re­port­sonCBS,ABCandCNN and by Time, the As­so­ci­ated Press and Reuters.

He ac­cused re­porters, in­clud­ing for­mer NBC an­chor Tom Brokaw, of fail­ing to in­ter­view cli­mat­e­change skep­tics, and of omit­ting sci­en­tific data that con­tra­dicts global-warm­ing the­o­ries. He also said re­porters are mo­ti­vated by money, quot­ing a French geo­physi­cist who says alarmism “has be­come a very lu­cra­tive busi­ness.”

Dan Gainor, di­rec­tor of the Busi­ness and Me­dia In­sti­tute, tes­ti­fied that 30 years ago re­porters tried to con­vince the pub­lic “we would all freeze to death” in a pre­dicted new ice age.

“In­morethan100years,the­ma­jor me­di­a­have­warne­du­so­fatleast­four sep­a­rate­cli­mate­cat­a­clysms,”he­said, adding there is a “me­dia ob­ses­sion” with­formerVicePres­i­den­tAlGore’s doc­u­men­tary “An In­con­ve­nient Truth.”

Aus­tralian cli­mate-change re­searcher Robert M. Carter said the pressem­ploys“Fris­bee­science”that is “in­vari­ably alarmist in na­ture.”

Naomi Oreskes, a pro­fes­sor of science stud­ies at the Univer­sity of Cal- ifor­nia at San Diego, told the panel that while sci­en­tists still ar­gue over thede­tails,“thereisacon­sen­sus”the cli­mate is chang­ing.

David Dem­ing, a ge­ol­o­gist at the Univer­sity of Oklahoma, dis­agreed.

“There is no sound sci­en­tific ba­sis for pre­dict­ing fu­ture cli­mate change with any de­gree of cer­tainty,” he said. “It would be fool­ish to es­tab­lish na­tional en­ergy pol­icy on the ba­sis of mis­in­for­ma­tion and ir­ra­tional hys­te­ria.”

Mrs.Box­ercit­ed­com­ments­from oil and bank ex­ec­u­tives who say glob­al­warmingis­are­aloc­cur­rence, and promised Congress can “do what it takes to change course and pro­tect the fu­ture for our chil­dren and grand­chil­dren.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.