The Western Star and Global Warming

Certain topics will be addressed again and again, and global warming is one of them. When I read something that is absolutely in error, in fact, that makes the writer look foolish, I will comment.

So when I read in The Western Star on Wednesday the Dale Jones editorial slamming Al Gore and the Nobel Peace Prize process I felt obligated. Here is what he writes: "There is absolutely, positively no scientific evidence to support global warming."

I could argue against that statement, but I don't need to. Read on.

Here are some quotes from Dale's article:

"While ground-level temperature measurements suggest the earth has warmed between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1850, global satellite data, the most reliable of climate measurements, show no evidence of warming during the past 18 years".

"A Gallup poll found that only 17 percent of the members of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society think that the warming of the 20th century has been a result of greenhouse gas emissions - principally CO2 from burning fossil fuels".

"While atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 28 percent over the past 150 years, human-generated carbon dioxide could have played only a small part in any warming, since most of the warming occurred prior to 1940 - before most human-caused carbon dioxide emissions".

Now...here are some quotes from a brief analysis from the National Center for Policy analysis written by H. Sterling Burnett:

"While ground-level temperature measurements suggest the earth has warmed between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1850, global satellite data, the most reliable of climate measurements, show no evidence of warming during the past 18 years".

"A Gallup poll found that only 17 percent of the members of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society think that the warming of the 20th century has been a result of greenhouse gas emissions - principally CO2 from burning fossil fuels".

"While atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 28 percent over the past 150 years, human-generated carbon dioxide could have played only a small part in any warming, since most of the warming occurred prior to 1940 - before most human-caused carbon dioxide emissions".

First, Dale, this information that you are basing your argument on is 10 years old. This was written in 1997. Ten year old data!!! Scientists and others...even Newt Gingrich (his new book A Contract with the Earth) are currently overwhelmingly supportive of climate change and man's role in it, along with mankind's responsibility for doing something against it. (I admit I have not read Gingrich's book, and wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him, so I don't how supportive he is, but that is beside the point).

Second, Dale, and more importantly, this is plagiarism. You are writing for a newspaper, and should know better than to copy someone elses work without giving them credit. If I were to do this in school, I would be severely disciplined...we are warned about it all the time. You should know better Dale. People from newspapers more prestigious than yours have lost their jobs for plagiarism. You should lose yours too, if you can't even put the outdated material you report as fact in your own words. Have you taken any journalism courses Dale? What did they teach you?

Dale, you also plagiarized from this site , and probably others. Why should we believe anything written in your newspaper, when you take credit for the work of others as if it were your own?

Don't write about that which you do not know about, and when you do, give credit where credit is due. If you are allowed to keep your job.