Climate Change

Wrong Again: The National Post on Climate Change, Part 2

By Adrian Duyzer
Published July 11, 2007

In March I wrote Anti-Science: The National Post on Climate Change, in which I criticized the National Post for "shoddily researched agenda-pushing in the guise of journalism" on the climate change issue.

I singled out two people in particular for criticism: Lorne Gunter and Lawrence Solomon.

Both columnists have contributed articles to a National Post series called Climate Change: The Deniers, a series on "scientists who buck the conventional wisdom on climate science".

Gunter and Solomon believe that climate change is occurring because the sun is getting warmer (see Gunter's Bright sun, warm Earth. Coincidence? and Solomon's The sun moves climate change).

No Sun Link

According to a new report, both of them are wrong. The BBC reports today that there is 'No Sun link' to climate change:

A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen. [Emphasis added]

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

Writing in the Royal Society's journal Proceedings A, the researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

"This should settle the debate," said Mike Lockwood, from the UK's Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland.

At the end of Gunter's Bright sun, warm Earth. Coincidence? article, he looks ahead:

Here's a prediction: The sun's current active phase is expected to wane in 20 to 40 years, at which time the planet will begin cooling. Since that is when most of the greenhouse emission reductions proposed by the UN and others are slated to come into full effect, the "greens" will see that cooling and claim, "See, we warned you and made you take action, and look, we saved the planet."

Now that researchers have found that the sun's output has actually been waning since 1985, Gunter's prediction has been proven wrong far sooner than he ever expected.

Which leads me to make a prediction of my own: the next article in the National Post's The Deniers series will not be a retraction by Lorne Gunter, or an apology for leading the Post's readers astray on this vitally important subject.

I hope I'm wrong.

Adrian Duyzer is an entrepreneur, business owner, and Associate Editor of Raise the Hammer. He lives in downtown Hamilton with his family. On Twitter: adriandz

3 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By adrian (registered) | Posted July 13, 2007 at 16:59:58

Perhaps this is not the case in their print edition, but the Post didn't even bother to report this story, according to a Google search.

http://news.google.com/news?as_q=climate...

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Ted Mitchell (registered) | Posted July 14, 2007 at 09:21:14

Adrian, you will not be wrong with that prediction. It is part of ideological blindness that "unfavourable" evidence cannot even be evaluated. They always find some way to change the subject, the shifty buggers attack somewhere else for diversion.

I saw this on CNN a couple of days ago when they tore apart Michael Moore (undefended of course)for inaccuracies / fabrications. Sure, some of it is staged or even made up for effect (something I wouldn't do!) but the majority of his stuff is mostly factual. CNN gave not a single word to concede he had a point.

Neocons cannot stand grey areas, everything has to be right or wrong. THis of course is incompatible with rational analysis.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By fearmonger - not (anonymous) | Posted August 17, 2007 at 14:38:43

so, let me get this straight; several publications point to a potential link between solar activity and warming, and this is just conjecture. a single article argues there is no link, and this is supposed to settle the issue? typical of your side...the science is unsettled unless it supports the'cause'

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds