Snarling Cyclones; Goofy Journalism

authordefault
on

The Washington Indpendent reports that a new study suggests climate change may generate fewer, but wetter and more devastating hurricanes. The Independent also notes that this contradicts earlier studies suggesting that global warming may generate more hurricanes that would, again, be wetter and more intense.

The author, Suemedha Sood, then arrives at this stunning conclusion:

“The takeaway point is that we shouldn’t be so quick to point fingers at global warming. The science isn’t [all] in yet.”

So, the smartest scientists in the world are arguing about whether there will be more hurricanes or fewer, but they agree that, either way, they’re going to be stronger and more dangerous, and the Washington Independent decides that means we should ignore climate change until “all” the science is in.

For the record, the Independent is a creature of the Centre for Independent Media, which purportedly has a “progressive” bent. So we can’t blame this silliness on oily self-interest or on ideological blindness – which leaves me, frankly, at a loss …

Related Posts

on

In KTM dealerships across the continent, thousands of off-road bikes are stripped of legally-required features that restrict pollution.

In KTM dealerships across the continent, thousands of off-road bikes are stripped of legally-required features that restrict pollution.
on

By backing a right-wing Canadian conference featuring anti-climate speakers, experts warn TikTok has “abandoned” its commitments to combat climate misinformation

By backing a right-wing Canadian conference featuring anti-climate speakers, experts warn TikTok has “abandoned” its commitments to combat climate misinformation
on

DeSmog obtained audio from a summit where industry talked candidly about how Indigenous partnerships ‘de-risk’ projects.

DeSmog obtained audio from a summit where industry talked candidly about how Indigenous partnerships ‘de-risk’ projects.
on

Campaigners say corporate-friendly science has “corrosive effects on public health debates”.

Campaigners say corporate-friendly science has “corrosive effects on public health debates”.