False balance: Fox News demands a recount on US’ warmest year

[DainBramaged]

"Is that just math you do as a skeptic to make yourself feel better?"


Back in 2010, a memo leaked from Fox News in which its managing editor informed his staff that they couldn't even report on basic temperature measurements without noting they were subject to controversy in some quarters, even if those quarters are out past the fringes of the scientific community. That directive is apparently still in force. Just days after NOAA released its reading of last year's US temperatures, Fox responded with a report in which it questions whether NOAA is producing accurate temperature readings.

The report is a classic example of what's been termed "false balance." It presents experts with relevant experience and the official word from NOAA, but it simultaneously surrounds them with quotes from several people who aren't scientists—as well as one scientist who is a notable contrarian about other fields of science. In many ways, the self-labelled skeptics contradict each other in their haste to condemn NOAA. But the Fox article doesn't point any of this out, and it actually ends with a veiled hint that we might consider throwing NOAA scientists in jail for their "manipulations of data."

At issue are the historic US temperature records. These are generated from stations maintained by the US government. Over the course of 100-plus years, many of these stations have been moved to new locations or had their equipment replaced. These events create a break in the record. To generate its historical analysis, NOAA has to identify the breaks and perform an analysis that matches up the two end-points, creating a single, continuous record.

Apparently it does a good job. When the Berkeley Earth project examined temperature records, they used a statistical method that didn't repair the breaks. Instead, they treated the two sides of the break as independent temperature records. Yet that team came up with a temperature reconstruction that was nearly identical to ones made using NOAA's data. Since that time, NOAA has gone back and updated their records further, identifying additional breaks that had gone undetected and updating its algorithms to take advantage of advances in computing power. If anything, its current data is even more reliable.


http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/01/false-balance-fox-news-demands-a-recount-on-us-warmest-year/

http://arstechnica.com/science/2010/12/fox-news-on-climate-skip-the-science-report-the-controversy/

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/01/10/hottest-year-ever-skeptics-question-revisions-to-climate-data/#ixzz2HbjuLWQj

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/15/goddard_arctic_ice_mystery/


FAUX News, if it's fucked in the head, they're first with the story.

[catbyte]

1. Our local NWS office is reporting that 2012 was the warmest year in history

here in Grand Rapids, MI. We've had hardly any snow this year, in fact it's raining right now. It's scary. Congrats, Republicans. You're not only poisoning US politics, you're murdering the planet.

[malaise]

2. So help me out here

The same Fox 'news' that delivered all those bogus statistics about who would win the November elections iscautious about stats re climate change.

[DainBramaged]

5. My first reaction was, HOLY SHIZNITZ, they are from another dimension

[mwb970]

3. I don't understand how conservatives "think".

Why is it so vitally important for them to deny the obvious reality of this issue? And how do they fool themselves into believing it? Don't they read the newspapers? Don't they know about the huge changes in climate we have seen in the last several years?

And of course the universal question......

WHAT IN HOLY HELL IS WRONG WITH RIGHT-WINGERS???

[aandegoons]

4. It is their overwhelming wish to be wrong on everything.

It has been going on for years. It is one of the things that frightens me the most about the shift of the Democratic party.

Remember the whole thing on DDT? Or lead?