Climate change and the Republicans

The moment when presidential candidate Mitt Romney provided millions of  US Republicans with a belly laugh at climate science — Aug 30, 2012 — is destined for a place in the history books.

“President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans,” said candidate Mitt Romney, pausing as the audience of Republicans howled with laughter at the absurdity of the promise. Romney continued: “… and to heal the planet. My promise — is to help you and your family.”

It’s one of those remarkable moments that speaks to the spirit of an age — in this case, an age of denial, of superstition, and of reckless, deliberate ignorance in the face of  facts.   It is a 1938 Munich moment, a stroll on Titanic’s ice-strewn deck in 1912. To use environmental history analogies, it’s like the Donora smog of 1948 or  the Cuyahoga river fire of 1969 in that it could be a wake-up call.  Continue reading

“Are chemicals killing us?”

Well? Are chemicals killing us? That’s the title of study concerning news media coverage of chemical risks, and it concludes that the media over-reacts to chemical risks.

According to the press release:  “Majorities of toxicologists rate most government agencies as accurately portraying chemical risks, but they rate leading environmental activist groups as overstating risks, according to the survey by George Mason University researchers.”

The study also says that industry gets it right most of the time. And, the study says that Wikipedia is more accurate than the New York Times on issues of risk analysis and communication.

The study was performed by the Center for Health and Risk Communication at George Mason University.

So how was this study done, and why did it reach such negative conclusions about the media? Continue reading