Prominent climate change denier and lap dog for the Koch brothers, Richard Muller, completely reverses course in his op-ed for the New York Times.
Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course
The verdict is in: Global warming is occurring and emissions of greenhouse gases caused by human activity are the main cause.
This, according to Richard A. Muller, professor of physics at UC Berkeley, MacArthur Fellow and co-founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project. Never mind that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and hundreds of other climatologists around the world came to such conclusions years ago. The difference now is the source: Muller is a long-standing, colorful critic of prevailing climate science, and the Berkeley project was heavily funded by the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, which, along with its libertarian petrochemical billionaire founder Charles G. Koch, has a considerable history of backing groups that deny climate change.
Oh, but wait. Why bother listening to all those scientists who study this kind of thing for a living when you can get the highly informed opinion of someone who actually knows the truth?
Muller’s conclusions, however, failed to sway the most ardent climate contrarians, like Marc Morano, a former top producer for Rush Limbaugh and communications director for the Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee who now runs the website climatedepot.com. “Muller will be remembered as a befuddled professor who has yet to figure out how to separate climate science from his media antics. His latest claims provide no new insight into the climate science debate,” Morano said in an email.
This is what drives me nuts about today's media. Oh yeah, sure the liberal
New York Times would publish an op-ed from some deranged scientist who agrees with every other scientist in the world, but unless we include the opinion of Mark Morano someone might accuse us of being biased. Does the LA Times figure that they're doing us some sort of favor by diluting the facts with some baseless opinions of someone who's paid to have baseless opinions? How is that news?