In "An Inconvenient Truth," science is taught to assure us that global warming is happening and we are contributing to it -- accelerating it. But one particularly startling bit of the presentation is how the media has been handling the information.
- Of the 962 peer-reviewed articles showing all the various aspects of the global warming process that are occurring, zero percent have had scientific criticisms. 962 at 0%!
- But of the 546 news reports of those scientific findings, the reporters have presented the information with 53% of those reports being critical of the information.
How can this disparity happen? And, by the way, it's happening again as reviews and editorials about the movie report on the "facts" of the movie.
It's possible that it's happened this way: a reporter is assigned a story about global warming and he reads the stories of scientific reports. He picks out a few and wades through the details. He then calls the White House Press Office (or the Press Office for the National Institute of Science) to get the Administration's spin on the reports and the issue. There he is told that it's a non-issue and the reports are incorrect or incomplete or predicated on useless and unmeasurable data. The result, in the reporters point of view, at least, is a balanced story about the report(s) and the issue.
Another possibility is that global warming is not happening. Naaaaah!
Al Gore said in documentary that it's the people that will ultimately rise up and make things happen -- by insisting that their representatives in Congress hear their concern, by changing their representatives if they don't, by altering their consumption habits, and by encouraging others to do the same.
I encourage you to see the movie. Soon.
