Here’s quite a good Denver Post piece that tries to find the journalistic middle ground, with three scientists (Bill Gray, Roger Pielke and Chris Landsea) arguing against the climate change consensus and four (Kevin Trenberth, James Hansen, Christopher Essex and Chris Folland) arguing that it is.
The reporter did a good job canvassing some of the complications of climate change science and gave the last word to the consensus:
“The American government might not agree,” Folland said. “Most American scientists do.”
But the article still leaves an impression that scientists are lined up pretty evenly on both sides – which is a fiction. Regardless of the good work, and the likely good intentions, this ends up being just another victory for those who hope to delay a sensible social or policy response to climate change.
As long as the North American public continues to believe there are significant scientific issues unresolved – as long as President G.W. Bush can get away with saying “I think there is a debate about whether it’s caused by mankind or whether it’s caused naturally” – the risks of climate change will continue to get worse.