George Will vs. The New York Times

Syndicated conservative columnist George Will rarely mentions The New York Times in his writing without some expression of contempt. Will's track record of disdain for the publication continues in his February 15th Washington Post column, in which he voices his skepticism toward global warming. In addition to citing statistics from the University of Illinois' Artic Climate Research Center, he recalls that in the 1970s, the Times, along with pretty much every other major scientific publication, alarmed the American public with its predictions of certain, impending global cooling. By 1980, hysteria about a new ice age had faded, and Will expects a similar trend in regards to the current theories of climate catastrophe.

Andrew Revkin of the Times (which was, I imagine, irked at such an unflattering potrayal) published a news analysis in which he asserted that experts had called out Will on writing a column ridden with inaccuracies and exaggerations. According to Revkin, experts maintain that Al Gore is also guilty of sensationalsim and exaggeration in his affirmation of man-made global warming- he even had to pull a slide from his well-known powerpoint presentation. Revkin's conclusion, based, of course, on "the experts," is that both men are culpable of putting political agenda before indisputable scientific fact and are, thus, deceiving the public. But Will is not one to go down without a fight. Today he published a rebuttal column in the Post.

Note: In January 2005, the late Dr. Michael Crichton echoed an equally skeptical (and rather convincing) view on global warming in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Though he might try, Revkin would be hard-pressed to find anything resembling political bias in the analysis. Recall that Crichton was about as apolitical as it gets.