Scientists aren't impressed with New York Times' new story on climate change

[turbinetree]

Experts label 30,000 word piece "historically inaccurate" and "based on logical non sequiturs."
JOE ROMM
AUG 1, 2018, 1:31 PM

The New York Times Magazine is hyping a massive new story claiming that the period from 1979 to 1989 was “The decade we almost stopped climate change.”

But the just-released, roughly 30,000 word article by Nathaniel Rich is already being widely criticized by leading scientists, historians, and climate experts. As physicist Ben Franta, who studies the history of climate politics, put it, “Rich’s exoneration of fossil fuel producers as well as the Republican party seem based on logical non sequiturs.”

Bob Brulle, a Drexel University sociologist and author of numerous studies on climate politics and lobbying, said in a media statement, “This article strikes me as a highly selective historical account that omits key facts that run counter to its overall narrative.”

In particular, “its treatment of industry actors is limited to their official statements, and neglect their political actions,” Brulle said. Those political actions have always been to oppose action on climate change and spread disinformation.

https://thinkprogress.org/scientists-slam-new-york-times-climate-story-for-whitewashing-role-of-big-oil-and-gop-63fbc3a85b09/

-snip-

That fatalistic view conveniently lets key actors off the hook. The fact is that during the times the United States was seriously contemplating action to address climate change, those efforts were thwarted again and again by by the fossil fuel industry and its multi-decade disinformation campaign, as well as key Republicans dating back to the Reagan administration.

After all, somehow, the world came together in Paris in 2015 to agree to a deal that proved society capable of “sacrificing present convenience to forestall a penalty imposed on future generations.” But today the United States stands alone in opposition, and it’s not because of humans are incapable of acting together for the future benefit of all.



I hate when a major publisher like the New York Times "gaslights".......................our kids, our grand kinds, our planets trees and animals are endanger because of this bull shit..................

[spanone]

1. K&R...

[Polly Hennessey]

2. Sometimes you wonder

what are the real motives of the New York Times. Walking down the middle of the highway with a few detours left and right will probably not work in today’s world. Looks like the “Gray Lady” is becoming a little too Twentieth Century as she ages.

[grantcart]

3. My lord, that's Frank Rich's son.

[GeorgeGist]

4. The old Grey Lady...

died in 2003.

[Cha]

5. Oh the NYFT has a long history of GASLIGHTING..

this is one of the latest..


Mahalo, turbinetree

[suffragette]

6. That would be the Reagan admin, the same one that removed the solar panels Carter had installed.

Yeah, they were actively working to avert climate change.