[LATE UPDATE: I have added a correction in the “Craven” section.]
The correct answer of course is, “Yes.”
Stupid: Reminiscent of my complaints back in a recent Lomborg post, one of the most infuriating things about the denialists is that they don’t bother putting even minimal effort into their attacks on mainstream climate science, and often make worse arguments than someone passing familiar with the subject could make. Case in point, Will claims, “Reducing carbon emissions supposedly will reverse warming”. This is not just obviously, boneheadedly wrong- if Will bothered to get it right, it would actually have been a more forceful complaint! Reducing the amount we continue to raise atmospheric concentrations of GHGs isn’t going to cool the planet, Georgie boy. Continuing to increase their concentrations, even at a somewhat lower rate, will continue to increase the amount of radiative forcing in the system. In fact, even if we were to reduce emissions to zero today, there would still be warming, due to the immense thermal inertia of the oceans. Rhetorically (although not factually), making this point would actually serve Will better than the idiocy he wrote in trying to portray CFLs as a bad idea.
Lying: Will hedges the wording of his ridiculous claim that there has been no warming since 1998 to give the same impression while not explicitly saying so, but the end message is the same- according to the WMO, warming stopped in 1998. Something that the WMO debunked in the Washington Post’s own pages! Carl Zimmer:
Does the Post read its own letters? Does it remember them? Do they think if you add the phrase “stastistics” you can continue to mislead on the exact same point emphasized by Jarraud? Perhaps Will’s editors think if they put a link in Will’s misleading statement, it somehow makes it right
Craven: Hiatt and Will make no acknowledgment of the withering refutations of Will’s previous nonsense by countless critics, including scathing rebuttals from the WMO and the [Correction, see here for more] Arctic Climate Research Center University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Polar Research Group- two of the very organizations Will himself claimed as sources for his mendacious articles. Why don’t Hiatt and Will have the integrity to acknowledge their falsehoods and the ensuing refutations? Chris Mooney challenges:
So here’s an idea, Mr. Will: Why don’t you openly acknowledge your critics, and debate them, and explain to us all why it is that you think there’s a relationship between the 1998 record–which is only a record according to the WMO, not NASA–and the idea that global warming isn’t happening due to human causes?