Roger Pielke Jr, who can in no way be described as skeptical about global warming or man’s role in it, runs an always interesting blog called Prometheus. Dr Pielke’s main area of study is hurricane impacts and he is less than impressed by today’s coverage of hurricane science in the New York Times:
The New York Times makes (and has made) no mention of two other just-published peer-reviewed studies (links here and here) providing somewhat different perspectives on the hurricane-climate issue and its policy significance…
To the extent that the New York Times has a powerful role in shaping how policy options are framed and discussed, it does a disservice to the public and policymakers when it cherrypicks science. I suppose this is because they have decided to pick sides in the political debate over climate change and that political calculus shapes its editorial decisions.
He also has an interesting analysis of “censored” NASA scientist Jim Hansen’s famous 1988 predictions of the future extent of global warming. Gore-like alarmists often assert he got things right. As Dr Pielke points out, if he did, he did so for the wrong reasons.