Green Daily

Lorne: "Antarctic ice (which is about 20 times as voluminous as the Arctic kind) has grown by 1% per decade"

Fact: Factually correct, but a phenomenon which at least as early as 2005 was predicted as a probable outcome of global warming. Warmer temperatures mean more condensation and hence more precipitation in the normally dry Antarctic region. The resulting rain and snow remain on the ground and thicken the ice pack.

Lorne: "NASA satellites have found that Arctic Sea ice coverage this year is more than one million square kilo-metres greater than last year's, greater than the average of the last three years and 10-20 centimetres thicker than in 2007."

Fact: From the June edition of the monthly Sea Ice Outlook, which compiles data from major scientific organizations studying Arctic ice: "Of the 17 responses, all suggest that the extent will remain lower than the historical average (i.e., mean 1979–2000 September values) of 7.0 million square kilometers. Five (5) responses suggested a less dramatic loss than in 2007 (i.e., 4.3 million square kilometers) and closer to the pre-2007 long-term trend of approximately 10% loss per decade. Five (5) anticipate a repeat of the dramatic loss of 2007. Four (4) suggest a loss even greater than that experienced in 2007."

Lorne: "And while global temperatures increased slightly in June, through the end of May, the nine-month decline in temperatures beginning in September was greater (0.8C) than all the warming of the 20th century (0.6C)."

Fact: Here it looks as though a warm month and cold month have been cherry-picked as start and end points for a data series in order to claim global cooling. However, according to the US National Climactic Data Center, the period from January – June 2008 was the 8th warmest since measurement began in 1880. 2007 was the 5th warmest year overall. That hardly suggests a cooling trend.

The problem with this kind of thing is not simply that it's ignorant or dishonest, although it is. It's that there are a surprising number of people who will weigh the opinion of one ill-informed reporter as being equal to that of thousands of scientists who have researched the topic for years, and will gauge their personal and political actions accordingly. And for those of us who propose to keep living on this planet, that's not only sad but dangerous.