Friday Cat Blogging

There's nothing better than a mid-afternoon nap on the sofa.

More Bamboozling from Pittenger on Global Warming

I first wrote about Republican State Senator Robert Pittenger back in February, in response to his claim that human activity wasn't a significant cause global warming. Well, he's back, and as intellectually dishonest as ever.

This time around, Pittenger tries to argue that North Carolina shouldn't mandate reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Such reductions wouldn't affect global carbon dioxide levels significantly and would be very expensive to implement, he says. But as before, the "evidence" that he puts forward in support of these claims show him to be a grade-A science abuser.

To dispute the scientific consensus that human activity causes global warming, Pittenger relies on a few right-wing, industry-funded contrarian cranks like Robert Balling and Pat Michaels. To calculate the costs of reducing emissions, he throws together some numbers from New Jersey and an 8-year-old report from WEFA, a consulting company that brings "together leaders from the utilities, automotive, metals, and other key industries" to produce its climate briefings. And the punchline, that any regulations would be "all cost and no benefit", comes from Dr. Ed Erickson, an ally of Pittenger's and an anti-environmentalist who has also cast his lot with the cranks.

If Pittenger wants to side with big business and oppose new regulations… well, he's a Republican, of course he will do that. But he still has an obligation to make his case on the merits, and his preference for bamboozlement over science means he is just not to be trusted. Perhaps the editors at the Observer should take that into account before giving his distortions any more space in their paper. And perhaps the fact that Pittenger can't come up with any good arguments in favor of his position means there aren't any good arguments to come up with here.