Reading only the headline of Mark Slavit’s latest "news" story -- “Luetkemeyer wants to stop climate control funding” -- you would be forgiven for thinking the KRCG Columbia Bureau Chief would go on to detail the Congressman’s opposition to refrigeration techniques or even China’s controversial attempt to prevent rain during the 2008 Olympics. [In fact, “Climate control” strikes me as just the kind of vaguely sinister-sounding but utterly meaningless term the right would seize upon, so keep an eye out for “Stop the Government Takeover of the Climate” signs]
Alas, Slavit was in fact training his uncritical eye on Blaine Luetkemeyer's latest bout of climate change denialism with an incomplete, inaccurate, biased and -- unfortunately for KRCG readers -- fairly typical story. Slavit provides no counterpoint or context to Luetkemeyer’s partisan attacks on Nobel-Prize winning scientists. Nor does he attempt to verify whether the $13 million Luetkemeyer’s amendment purports to save even exists.
Slavit also dutifully relays that “Luetkemeyer believes global warming activists have a political agenda instead of a scientific agenda.” Well then. The Congressman certainly would be the expert, given that he’s been trying to corner the market on politicizing research and science for years now.
This is from the Beacon’s considerably more thorough piece:
After word spread over the weekend about Luetkemeyer's successful amendment, a number of leading scientists decried what they viewed as the politicization of research. A Science magazine blog quoted Jane Lubchenco, an environmental scientist who heads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as saying: "Science should not be partisan. It is highly unfortunate that in many cases it is."