I believe in the concepts of democracy, free speech, and the free exchange of ideas, but although I believe that everyone is entitled to his own opinion, I don’t believe folks are entitled to their own facts. Nonetheless, the media propagates confusion in the debate of climate change by giving too much credibility to the claims of climate change skeptics.

Supposedly, we’re an advanced civilization, but we fail to understand the issues and illustrate the issues clearly (although we often fail to understand the issues willfully). Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and carbon dioxide is a factor in why the Earth doesn’t freeze. Furthermore, it’s ridiculous to believe that there are no consequences of burning fossil fuels, pumping pollution into the atmosphere, or pumping so much additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. There are environmental and corresponding health impacts when we pollute aquatic environments, and burning coal is directly connected to (1) mercury deposition, which causes, inter alia, mercury in seafood; (2) nitrogen deposition, which causes, inter alia, eutrophication; and (3) sulfur deposition, which causes, inter alia, acid rain. Consequently, why are global warming and climate change so controversial? More from the Boulder Daily Camera:

Maxwell Boykoff, an assistant professor of environmental studies, was one of four CU researchers who presented their work over the weekend at an annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Diego.

Boykoff — who has tracked climate-change coverage by 50 newspapers in 20 countries since 2004 — cites several concerns in the media coverage, including a tendency to give too much ink to skeptics who have extreme views but little evidence to support their arguments.

Reporters often lump all skeptics together in their coverage, he said, instead of testing the veracity of individual claims and putting those arguments in context.

“This has been detrimental both in terms of dismissing legitimate critiques of climate science or policy, as well as amplifying extreme and tenuous claims,” he said.

Playing up the skeptical viewpoint also creates conflict and drama, attributes that may make news stories more interesting but which ultimately impede public understanding of the science behind climate change, according to Boykoff.

—
Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse my work or me and their image is protected under an attribution license.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::