Updated: You Can’t Make This Stuff Up… Um, on second thought, I guess you can

Filed in National by on February 16, 2009

What do Republicans have against science?  Is this really just a way to package corporate profits to God-Fearing Christians?  First, we have Fred Barnes making up crap, now George Will.

Over the weekend, the Washington Post‘s George Will, got in on the act. And it took us about ten minutes — longer, it appears, than the Post‘s editors spent — to figure out that Will, like Barnes, was essentially making stuff up.

Both of Will’s major “data points” fall apart after a moment’s scrutiny.

Here’s the first:
According to the University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979. 

But within hours of Will’s column appearing, the ACRC had posted the following statement on its website:
We do not know where George Will is getting his information, but our data shows that on February 15, 1979, global sea ice area was 16.79 million sq. km and on February 15, 2009, global sea ice area was 15.45 million sq. km. Therefore, global sea ice levels are 1.34 million sq. km less in February 2009 than in February 1979. This decrease in sea ice area is roughly equal to the area of Texas, California, and Oklahoma combined. 

It is disturbing that the Washington Post would publish such information without first checking the facts.
So, nevermind then.

As for Will’s second claim, he writes:

[A]ccording to the World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade. 

This one is a little more complicated. But only a little.


Will’s claim appears to come from a BBC News article from last week, whose first version reported:

Global temperatures will drop slightly this year as a result of the cooling effect of the La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said. 

The World Meteorological Organization’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.

This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.

 It’s true that temperatures haven’t risen since 1998, because that year was a particularly hot one. But as anyone with a high-school level grasp of statistics understands, you need to look at data over a broad period to get a realistic assessment of what’s going on. In fact, the WMO itself makes that very point in an “information note” that confirms that the organization believes global warming is continuing, and points out that the last decade has been the warmest on record.

h/t TPM for breaking this down.

For a nation that worries so much over education, we sure don’t seem to place much value on facts.  The Washington Post has egg on its face.  At this rate I’m expecting to see a piece entitled  I’m having an alien’s baby pop up on their opinion page.

The science is in, folks.  The debate over whether or not Global Warming exists is over.  All that’s left is what we’re going – or can – do about it.

Another h/t to Cassandra for directing me to these charts from 538!

Now let’s look at reality.

GO SCIENCE!  Amazing what happens when you don’t cherry-pick data.

Tags:

About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (5)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Unstable Isotope says:

    They have to make up facts because reality doesn’t conform with their ideology.

  2. pandora says:

    WaPo should be ashamed. Don’t they set the bar? All this lying – yes, lying – only prolongs action being taken against the problem. If only scientists were awarded the same face time as Global Warming deniers.

  3. Von Cracker says:

    Will and Barnes are not only intellectually lazy but they are stark-naked opportunists too. They write that tripe just to be contrarian. Due to the moronic theocratic masses, who consistently bash science, there’s a market for these lies, therefore ca$h to be made and a chance to stay in the public eye.

    Look at it this way; if Will and Barnes lived in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Syria, I am certain they would write articles casting doubt on the Holocaust and defending Nazis against the Jews.

    They don’t care; it’s about staying relevant.

  4. Unstable Isotope says:

    I think VC is right that Will and Barnes are more opportunistic the ideologic, but their pay masters are quite ideologic.

  5. cassandra_m says:

    The thing that is tough to suss out about Will is just how far he’ll put on the ideology of the day — clearly he is willing to draw the line when embracing it will make his look really stupid to alot of people.

    But look! Nate has lovely graphs showing just how stupid Will’s claim is.