NewsHour Global Warming Bias Tally, Updated 3/27/17: 39 to 0

This page originally was published in July 2012 at Steve Milloy’s site as “PBS NewsHour global warming coverage: IPCC/NOAA Scientists – 18; Skeptic Scientists – 0”, but notice the two asterisks in the title where the post appears now. What I did after I put the piece online was update the tally at the bottom of the post as new IPCC/NOAA guests appeared, expanding the list to include NASA scientists when Gavin Schmidt was a guest.

However, I don’t have access to Steve’s site anymore, and Steve is busy with his own work, so now the tally will be adjusted in the title here at GelbspanFiles and new updates will appear here at the bottom of this page. I’ve also laboriously fixed the broken transcript links, as the NewsHour altered its web address system recently, causing all links prior to 2014 to stop working. I also corrected the date of Tom Karl’s appearance on the program.


[**3/27/17 Author update: The bias ratio now stands at 39 to zero. See end of post for new tally entry in the NOAA group.]

Tom Karl appeared on the NewsHour 7/10 on behalf of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to describe how “climate change, including human factors, has increased the odds of extreme weather”. But what are the odds that his appearance there was among 300 500 approaching 600 over 620 other instances where the idea of man-caused global warming was met with not one word of rebuttal from any scientist holding a skeptical viewpoint?

Tuesday July 10th was Tom Karl’s first broadcast appearance on the NewsHour, but he has been quoted previously in a 6/16/09 NewsHour online page saying, “What we would want to have people take away is that climate change is happening now, and it’s actually beginning to affect our lives.  … It’s not just happening in the Arctic regions, but it’s beginning to show up in our own backyards.

Meanwhile Kevin Trenberth appeared on the NewsHour for the third time just a week earlier, his prior appearances happened on February 2, 2007 right alongside his fellow Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientist Michael Oppenheimer, and on December 4, 1997. Trenberth was additionally quoted prominently in a January 22, 2009 online page where the NewsHour inexplicably left out a key sentence (at the end of the 8th paragraph there) from his quote in an Associated Press article where he concluded, “It is hard to make data where none exist.” (10th paragraph). Certainly, the context of his statement would have been significantly more damaging for NewsHour readers to see if that sentence wasn’t missing.

How many times has Michael Oppenheimer appeared? When I compiled the figures in a laborious search through the NewsHour’s online broadcast archives and web pages relating to specific broadcast discussions about global warming for my July 29, 2010 American Thinker article “The Left and Its Talking Points“, I tallied up eight where he was either in an on-air broadcast segment or prominently mentioned in an online page, including one on-air appearance alongside another fellow IPCC scientist Joel Smith. The late Stephen Schneider? Three times, or four if you include a sort of taped ‘pseudo-debate’ with skeptic scientist Pat Michaels over the ClimateGate email scandal, where Schneider seemed to be allowed to promote science bits for his IPCC side of global warming, while Michaels essentially got no skeptic science points in.

But if you check out the NewsHour’s archives, not one skeptic scientist ever appeared to debate with any IPCC, NOAA or other scientists who take the side of man-caused global warming, and none have been allowed to be interviewed in singular fashion like Oppenheimer, Trenberth, Karl and others were, when it comes to giving climate assessments. Not one. EVER.

Sure, Pat Michaels was on to say a few words about the ClimateGate situation…. four months after it happened. And, George Taylor was on in June 2007, but that was more to explain the politics of his dismissal as Oregon’s state climatologist. The only lengthy mention of skeptic science viewpoints I can find in the NewsHour’s online archives going back to 1996 was when Margaret Warner interviewed Western Fuels Association CEO Fred Palmer in Dec 1997. And her final question was, “… why should the American people think you all are right about the future versus them?

My ongoing count of NewsHour broadcasts/web pages where the idea of global warming is significantly conveyed (not simply two-word mentions of it) as a worrisome unprecedented phenomenon is now over 300 500 approaching 600 with just the Fred Palmer segment and two others, CEI’s Chris Horner and Texas Representative Joe Barton, counted as ones where viewers at least got a usable impression of what a few skeptic science points are. And the Barton one is a bit of a stretch at just three sentences in length.

It’s rather long odds that the NewsHour is clueless to the existence of a wide variety of fully qualified skeptic scientists who are available to speak as rebuttal guests.

Or perhaps what we should ask is, what are the odds the NewsHour can plausibly explain that this long-term exclusion of skeptic scientists is not deliberate?——————————————————————————————————
[ **11/2/16 Author update: As seen in the original JunkScience version of this page, I had a growing list of addendums. The addendum list was continuing to grow here, to an ungainly level of text as late as 10/6/16. However, in my attempt to corroborate a claim seen in the latest Wikileaks PodestaEmails, made by the League of Conservation Voters about NewsHour “climate scientist” interviews during 2012 (which turns out to be literally unsupportable), I found that I’d overlooked two other NOAA / NASA scientists in the ongoing file I have concerning the NewsHour’s biased global warming reporting. So, rather than tack those two onto the end of a bulky set of addendums, I’ve swapped all of that out for the following simplified list, which has full context links to the broadcast segments of in-studio interviews / significant taped interview segments, which will be updated and noted as such as needed. When a climate scientist who is skeptical about human-induced CO2 being the primary driver of global warming is finally allowed to express detailed viewpoints on that position, I will update the 0 figure to 1. ]

IPCC scientist appearances = 27, NASA = 6, NOAA = 6.  39 total. Skeptic scientists = 0

Michael Oppenheimer – 13: November 10, 1997;  #1 February 2, 2007, #2 April 6, 2007; #3 October 12, 2007; #4 November 19, 2007; #5 December 15, 2008; #6 November 25, 2009; #7 December 9, 2010 #8 Dec. 10, 2010; #9 Sept. 27, 2013; #10 March 31, 2014; #11 November 12, 2014; #12 January 14, 2015; #13 December 2, 2015;
Stephen Schneider – 3: #1 March 28, 2001; #2 April 6, 2007 (in brief lead-in quote); #3 March 26, 2008
Kevin Trenberth – 4: #1 December 4, 1997; #2 February 2, 2007; #3 July 2, 2012; #4 November 12, 2013
Joel Smith – 1: April 6, 2007
Steve Running – 1: October 31, 2008
Richard Alley – 1: December 2, 2015
Scott Barrett – 1: December 2, 2015 (who was additionally offered the opportunity to write an online column for the Newshour)
Patricia Romero Lankao – 1: March 31, 2014
Robert Stavins – 1: April 15, 2014
Kristie Ebi / Jonathan Patz – 1: December 24, 2009 Both are identified as IPCC scientists, albeit offering brief comments much like Dr Schneider’s #2 appearance above, thus I combine them into one entry.

James Hansen NASA – 1: August 6, 2012
Gavin Schmidt NASA – 2: #1 January 16, 2015; #2 October 6, 2016
Bill Patzert NASA – 1: April 6, 2016
Thomas Wagner NASA – 2: July 25, 2012; #2 May 12, 2014

Tom Karl NOAA – 1: July 10, 2012
Randy Dole NOAA – 1: April 6, 2016
Thomas Peterson NOAA – 1: October 9, 2012
Stephanie Moore NOAA – 1: October 23, 2013
Bill Causey NOAA – 1: February 3, 2015
C. Mark Eakin NOAA – 1: March 22, 2017