Newsweek has finally admitted that they were wrong about Global Climate Change—in 1975 when they were predicting Global Cooling. Their thirty-years-late mea culpa is evidently supposed to convince us to trust their judgment about Global Warming in the present day. Their admission of error is somewhat strained—they include, in the first sentence of their article, a non sequitur swipe at American involvement in Vietnam, and refer to their 1975 piece as "a small back-page article" as if they can't understand why everyone paid so much attention to "that little story."
In April, 1975, in an issue mostly taken up with stories about the collapse of the American-backed government of South Vietnam, NEWSWEEK published a small back-page article about a very different kind of disaster. Citing "ominous signs that the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically," the magazine warned of an impending "drastic decline in food production." Political disruptions stemming from food shortages could affect "just about every nation on earth." Scientists urged governments to consider emergency action to head off the terrible threat of . . . well, if you had been following the climate-change debates at the time, you'd have known that the threat was: global cooling.
Referring to a recent speech on the floor of the Senate by Republican Senator James Inhofe, chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, which cited their "little article," and which appears to have stung Newsweek, they attempt to paint a picture of Inhofe as a head-in-the-sand right-winger.
In fact, as Inhofe pointed out, for more than 100 years journalists have quoted scientists predicting the destruction of civilization by, in alternation, either runaway heat or a new Ice Age. The implication he draws is that if you're not worried about being trampled by a stampede of woolly mammoths through downtown Chicago, you don't have to believe what the media is saying about global warming, either.
Newsweek's assertion of Inhofe's implication is utterly false, as can easily be seen from the closing sentences of his speech.
The American people know when their intelligence is being insulted. They know when they are being used and when they are being duped by the hysterical left.
The American people deserve better -- much better -- from our fourth estate. We have a right to expect accuracy and objectivity on climate change coverage. We have a right to expect balance in sourcing and fair analysis from reporters who cover the issue.
Above all, the media must roll back this mantra that there is scientific “consensus” of impending climatic doom as an excuse to ignore recent science. After all, there was a so-called scientific “consensus” that there were nine planets in our solar system until Pluto was recently demoted.
Breaking the cycles of media hysteria will not be easy since hysteria sells -- it’s very profitable. But I want to challenge the news media to reverse course and report on the objective science of climate change, to stop ignoring legitimate voices this scientific debate and to stop acting as a vehicle for unsubstantiated hype.
There's not a woolly mammoth in sight: Inhofe's implication is, clearly, that the left-leaning media does not know what it's talking about, and should shut up until it does.
Inhofe's speech, unlike Newsweeks "admission", is a succinct distillation of the current state of Global Warming hype tactics, read the whole thing.