Debra Saunders: Still Scientifically Illiterate After All These Years

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing...and a very little knowledge is damn near lethal. See, for example, Debra Saunders, whose general impression that global warming is a crock makes her vulnerable to all sorts of misinformation.

As usual, she finds a scientist to validate her ignorance. Unfortunately for her, the scientist is Fred Singer. Singer, a professional global warming denier, is founder and president of the SEPP--which, in the past, has also argued against links between CFCs and ozone depletion, and secondhand smoke and lung cancer. You won't be shocked to read which industries fund them.

She triumphantly cites a couple of articles about the UN IPCC report that came out earlier this month. One is a Telegraph piece reporting that the IPCC has downgraded its estimate of the potential rise in sea level. Happily, Tim Lambert disposes of this neatly:

The reporter has confused climate sensitivity (how much warming you eventually get from doubling CO2), with predicted warming in 2100. In the third assessment report the top end of the range for sensitivity was 4.5, while the top end for warming by 2100 was 5.8. These numbers haven't changed in the new report, all that has happened is that the reporter has mistaken the 4.5 number for sensitivity as a new estimate for warming and reported it as a reduction from 5.8.

The other reports that methane from livestock is a greater contributor to global warming than automobiles. Saunders, of course, trivializes this as 'cow farts', and appears to think it's a 'trees cause pollution' sort of thing (hey, it's animals releasing those greenhouse gases!). If you read the UN press release, though, you see it's still all about human causes: increasing methane emissions are just another part of the heavy environmental price we pay for the fact that more people are eating meat. (Industrial agriculture appears to contribute in other ways, if I read the piece correctly; what livestock are fed, for example, appears to be a factor in methane emissions.)

But what does that matter when she has someone like Singer to reinforce her ignorance:

If there's one thing that irritates Singer, it is Gore's belief that there is a scientific "consensus" about human-induced global warming, even as Gore incessantly complains about scientists who deny global warming.

"Well, which is it?" Singer asked. If there is a consensus, there should be no deniers.

I don't know if Singer is being stupid or dishonest here; I'm inclined to guess the latter, as surely anyone with his background should understand the distinction between consensus and unanimity. Debra Saunders, though--I'm pretty sure she doesn't. And that's just one reason why science should get a restraining order to keep her from coming any closer than a thousand yards of it.

[That's all, folks]