Global Warming, is it Real?

To the Editor:

For the past six years or so the public has been exposed to a cacophony of voices that have attempted to cast doubt on the reality of global warming. If public opinion polls and the publication of articles skeptical of the global warming hypothesis are any indication, they may have succeeded. This, despite the fact that the overwhelming consensus of the international scientific community is that global climate change is occurring. In 1995, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), comprised of over 2,500 scientists from more than 60 countries, concluded that the balance of the evidence points to a discernable increase in global temperatures brought on by human activity (largely attributable to CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels). While one might imagine that a report like the one released by the IPCC would bring closure to the debate and spur the search for solutions, a concerted effort to "manufacture doubt" as to the reality of warming has instead kept the controversy alive. The rhetorics and arguments of warming skeptics are largely distortions of the scientific and political realities surrounding global climate change and are part of well-funded and systematic campaigns to create the appearance of doubt over the reality of warming, and to delay action.

The public communication campaigns of the fossil fuel, resource extraction, and petro-chemical industries, along with public relations firms, so-called "astroturf" organizations (industry front groups) and think tanks, have been amplified by a handful of "dissident" scientists (most notably Fred Singer), environmental opposition groups (Wise Use), and conservative radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh. The news media, out of concern with "balanced" coverage, have been all too quick to give voice to warming skeptics and have aired and printed hundreds of stories, articles and Op-Ed pieces, all of which have created the perception that global warming may not be real. The corporate funding, rhetorical slights-of-hand, faulty reasoning, and poor science characteristic of these campaigns has been well documented by biologists Anne and Paul Ehrlich (The Betrayal of Science and Reason), journalist Edward Flattau (Tracking the Charlatans), scholar/media watchdog Susan Beder (Global Spin: The Corporate Assault on Environmentalism) and others. The existence of a legitimate scientific consensus, the mounting atmospheric and ecological evidence, along with the questionable character of the arguments of climate skeptics, however, is enough to suggest that we take seriously the reality of global warming and begin the difficult task of devising solutions. While legitimate questions regarding how to reduce CO2 emissions and slow global warming remain, there should be little doubt about the need to do so.