Here is how Robert Siegel introduced the piece:
"A White House document has reignited the debate over whether the government should regulate greenhouse gases... The document that's come to light raises questions about the EPA's findings."And here is Elizabeth Shogren's summary:
"Some industry representatives say the White House document shows that the EPA might be stretching the science to increase its regulatory might."No.
These are basically the talking points from the oil industry and the Senate Republicans who promoted this story, but it is not quite true.
David Roberts at Grist explains that Republican senators are promoting a memo that had been submitted in response to the EPA’s call for comments on the recent “endangerment finding” on greenhouse gases. The memo is extremely critical of the EPA’s greenhouse gas decision. But rather than the official position of the Obama White House, the OMB memo is a compilation of comments and opinions from staff in various federal agencies, including Bush administration officials. The comments were compiled over the first couple months of the Obama administration, when Bush officials were still in place and before the Obama administration had appointed new agency leads.
As Grist's Roberts puts it: "The OMB is not challenging the EPA. All these memos show is that there are people somewhere in the vast federal bureaucracy, either now or from the Bush era, who don’t like the idea of the EPA regulating greenhouse gases."
Far be it from me to defend the Obama administration, but it seems quite a stretch for NPR to portray this as the official position of Obama or the OMB. So why are Siegel and Shogren parroting propaganda from the global warming deniers? I don't know. But to cap it off, Shogren ends the story with,
"Some environmentalists...say there is no doubt that greenhouse gases endanger public health."Again, no. It is not just those pesky environmentalists who say that greenhouse gases and global warming are a problem. It is the EPA who says so.
10 comments:
Some canaries that die in coal mines are said to have perished from natural causes, others as a result of hypoxia due to their tiny, poorly maintained oxygen tanks. Some environmentalists insist on breathing air they cannot see, a problem for anyone who has had to go hunting for new air resources.NPR, where the corporate tentacle dances the tarantella!
++++
A really good piece, Brian. Thanks.
Someone should send this to the ATC editors and the NPR Ombotsman for correction.
It is not just those pesky environmentalists who say that greenhouse gases and global warming are a problem. It is the EPA who says so...to say nothing of the gist of thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies (published in scientific journals) which were the basis of the conclusions and reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
I't's no secret why NPR continues to play this as a "he said she said issue".
It's the "tried and untrue" pattern that they follow.
They think "balance" is what journalism is about.
While the approach might work for some things, it fails miserably on scientific issues where there actually IS a right answer (and lots of wrong ones).
As someone who was educated as a scientist, this "balanced science" crap really gets under my skin.
"Someone should send this to the ATC editors and the NPR Ombotsman for correction."
Don't bother.
It's far more likely that Dick Cheney will be prosecuted for war crimes or learn how to shoot a hunting rifle (or, more precisely, how NOT to shoot it at his hunting partners) than that the ombot will actually do its job.
This am we have Richard Harris looking at a new report that says the west Antarctic ice sheet's predicted collapse will only raise sea level by 11 feet, not 20 feet as previously conjectured. So we are to take this as a things are only half as bad as those scientists say, since someone has finally updated the research. Or better, things are twice as good?
No discussion of causes and/or remedies, mind you. Never mind that coal lobby behind the curtain.
Brian:
If you would just "sit down and shut up" you would have a bright future ahead of you at WHYY!
Gopol:
If James Hansen says 23 feet I would take that to the bank. He is another of the dedicated people trying to prevent catastrophy and putting his entire life's work on the line because he sees the future much better than harris.
He is not "balanced" which is NPR code for bought and paid for!
edk
Richard Harris looking at a new report that says the west Antarctic ice sheet's predicted collapse will only raise sea level by 11 feet, not 20 feet as previously conjectured.If that is what he said, it's not accurate.
Read this to see why.
The 11 feet is average sea level rise worldwide which should be compared to 16 feet (not 20) average rise worldwide estimated previously.
But the rise will not be uniform. Some areas will experience sea level rise greater than the average and some less. That's where the 20 comes from.
With the new study, the east and west coasts of north America will see about 13 feet rise.
Nothing to scoff at. Actually even 11 feet is nothing to call "only". Even that would put most of Manhattan Island (NY city) under water.
And that says nothing about Greenland (which by itself would add an average rise of 6.5 meter) and the effects are cumulative, of course.
This "It's only going to rise 11 feet, so why worry" stuff is just absolute nonsense.
It is precisely this kind of crap (coming from NPR and other media outlets) that has delayed any action on climate change for the past decade.
The science will never be 100% certain. The next study may actually predict a higher value for melting of West Antarctic Ice sheet (perhaps this one left out a key factor, who knows).
but what will not chnageis the reality of climate change and the likely consequences. The sooner we start dealing with this reality, the better.
That's not just my opinion. It is the opinion of people who actually study climate (eg, NASA scientist james Hansen) and actually know something about this stuff (more than some NPR reporter, at any rate)
Nice counter, Brian.
Suuuure, Juan - and we all know what talkin' back at the all-knowing NPR-acle will get ya: A blandly pleasant form letter, dubious in all its perfunctory candor ... and if yer realllll persistent, eternal banishment from their ivory radio tower.
I'd like to trust Obama, but if I have learned anything over his first 100 days, it is "Don't simply trust. Verify."
Don't trust what he says. Look at what he does:
"Obama Nominates Superfund Polluter Lawyer To Run DOJ Environment Division"
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/15/ignacia-moreno-superfund/
Post a Comment