Writing about the mainstream climatologists’ attempt to restore their credibility on March 2nd, John Broder of The New York Times all but dismisses the flaws in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 report:

No scientific body is under more hostile scrutiny than the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which compiles the climate research of hundreds of scientists around the globe into periodic reports intended to be the definitive statement of the science and a guide for policy makers. Critics, citing several relatively minor errors in its most recent report and charges of conflict of interest

… Continue Reading

In the August 8th edition of The New York Times, columnist John M. Broder, who writes frequently for the paper on global warming issues penned a column titled, “Climate Change Seen as Threat to U.S. Security.” Broder reported on recent studies and exercises conducted by the military that looked at the security implications of global climate change. He then concluded:

a growing number of policy makers say that the world’s rising temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct threat to the national interest. If the United States does not lead the world in reducing fossil-fuel consumption and thus

… Continue Reading

In the August 8th New York Times, John Broder reports:

Arctic melting also presents new problems for the military. The shrinking of the ice cap, which is proceeding faster than anticipated only a few years ago, opens a shipping channel that must be defended and undersea resources that are already the focus of international competition.

Considering that this paragraph comes under an article titled “Climate Change Seen as Threat to U.S. security”, one would hope Broder knew he was on solid ground here. Unfortunately he is not. The Arctic ice cap – which principally, and as referenced in this story, … Continue Reading

John Broder and James Kanter had a story in the July 7th New York Times titled Despite Shift on Climate by U.S., Europe Is Wary. The article accurately reveals that the U.S. stance on a binding if selective international treaty limiting greenhouse gas emissions remains, in practice if not rhetoric, consistent under President Obama as it was under President Bush. With President Clinton having undertaken the gesture of signing, but refusing to seek ratification of, the Kyoto Protocol, this continues a long chain of consistent U.S. policy. One key characterization, however, presents a materially different circumstance than is the … Continue Reading