NY Times mag sends a sports and music writer to do a science writer's job

[NNN0LHI]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903260033?f=h_top

Summary: The New York Times Magazine is slated to publish a story on March 29 -- promoting the controversial global warming views of physicist Freeman Dyson -- that was written, not by a scientist or science writer, but by Nicholas Dawidoff, whose previous work for the Times has focused largely on sports and music.

[snot]

1. Why? and

do we know anything about the article as written?

[ColbertWatcher]

2. And, why this specific writer?

If you're going too send a non-science writer, why this guy?

[cali]

8. Why not read it?

[ColbertWatcher]

14. Last night when I posted it wasn't yet up. Is it up yet? n/t

[JI7]

3. i don't feel bad about them losing subscribers

[sarge43]

4. Sounds like the Gray Lady might step in it again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Goddard

(scroll down to Criticism section)

[Bill McBlueState]

5. here's the article

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html

[cali]

6. It's a terrific article. Just finished reading it.

It is not a science article. It is largely a portrait of a man who is a scientist, and it's an interesting and insightful piece. Media Matters wrongly characterizes it as the NYT pushing Dyson's controversial views on global warming. It is no such thing.

Thumbs down to MM on this one.

[cali]

7. kick

because it's really worth reading.

[baldguy]

9. Why are Freeman Dyson's views on climate change considered "controversial"?

He seems to be in line with the general scientific consensus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson#Global_warming

[cali]

11. not really.

However, he has argued that existing simulation models of climate fail to account for some important factors, and hence the results will contain too much error to reliably predict future trends.

“ The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world we live in...<20> ”
“ As a scientist I do not have much faith in predictions. Science is organised unpredictability. The best scientists like to arrange things in an experiment to be as unpredictable as possible, and then they do the experiment to see what will happen. You might say that if something is predictable then it is not science. When I make predictions, I am not speaking as a scientist. I am speaking as a story-teller, and my predictions are science-fiction rather than science.<20> ”

He is among signatories of a letter to the UN criticizing the IPCC <1>. The letter includes the statements "The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years" and "there has been no net global warming since 1998". Both statements have been criticised as inconsistent with the data.<21><22>

He has also argued against the ostracisation of scientists whose views depart from the acknowledged mainstream of scientific opinion on climate change, stating that heretics have historically been an important force in driving scientific progress.

[NashVegas]

10. Professional Jealousy?

Are the MM guys angry because they didn't get the paying gig?

It's a profile of a scientist, it's not a defense of his data analysis.

Dyson may be an Obama-loving, Bush-loathing liberal who has spent his life opposing American wars and fighting for the protection of natural resources, but he brooks no ideology and has a withering aversion to scientific consensus.

Reading the article, he strikes me as a futurist who thinks science will solve everything. I disagree, but getting into a screaming match about it is a diversion from more useful discussions.

If the polar bears don't make it, we'll know he's full of shit, okay? In the meantime, just because RW knuckle-draggers love him doesn't make him the enemy.

[cali]

12. MM is not right wing. They're just full of shit on this one

Good, provocative article about a fascinating man.

[NashVegas]

13. No, I Know That