In a February 10 column, Rocky Mountain News media critic and Independence Institute research director Dave Kopel criticized the Colorado media for their “excessively credulous” coverage of the recently released Fourth Assessment Report by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In his column Kopel suggested that readers “looking for a broader view” could turn to the Fraser Institute, which he described as “an independent Canadian research organization.” However, Kopel failed to mention that petroleum giant Exxon Mobil Corp. has donated $120,000 to the Fraser Institute since 2003 specifically to address the issue of “climate change.”

Kopel wrote, "Denver Post columnist Diane Carman is usually scrupulous about her facts, but not so in last Sunday's column about global warming." He further stated, “Carman also touted the [IPCC] document as a 'consensus interpretation' by 'hundreds of scientists from all over the world.' True enough, but, as noted by The Wall Street Journal on Monday, one reason the government-picked IPCC scientists had such an easy time agreeing with each other was the exclusion of scientists who might disagree, such as Paul Reiter, head of the Insects and Infectious Diseases unit of the Pasteur Institute.” Kopel concluded by saying:

Like Carman, most of the other Denver journalists who covered the IPCC were excessively credulous. Readers looking for a broader view could start with the Fraser Institute's new analysis of the IPCC's work, which provides extensive evidence that the IPCC has vastly overstated the degree of certainty about climate change and its consequences. The Fraser Institute is an independent Canadian research organization whose self-described mission is to analyze the “impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals.”

But in touting the Fraser Institute, Kopel failed to note either its conservative positions on public policy, including global-warming skepticism, or the fact that it has received funding from Exxon Mobil Corp. In 2003, Exxon Mobil reported donating $60,000 to the institute as part of the company's “Public Information and Policy Research” giving, specifically for the area of “Climate Change.” In 2004, Exxon Mobil donated another $60,000 to the institute for the same purpose.

Furthermore, the Board of Trustees listed in the Fraser Institute's most recent annual report, for 2005, included Jim W. Davidson, managing director and CEO of the Calgary-based energy investment firm FirstEnergy Capital Corp.; Gwyn Morgan, then-CEO of EnCana Corp., North America's largest independent producer of oil and gas; and R.J. Pirie of the Canadian petroleum producer Sabre Energy Ltd.

From Dave Kopel's February 10 column in the Rocky Mountain News, “Climate report too quickly embraced by journalists”:

Denver Post columnist Diane Carman is usually scrupulous about her facts, but not so in last Sunday's column about global warming. According to Carman, the recent, highly-publicized report from the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “is not a political document.”

Yet the very name of the group tells you that it is produced by governments. As the IPCC's Web site details, IPCC scientists are picked by governments (or by organizations which have been approved by governments), and IPCC drafts must go through two stages of “peer review” by government bureaucrats.

Many government leaders, such as France's Jacques Chirac, have gained political advantage in hyping global warming, and subordinate bureaucrats would be foolish to risk their careers by challenging the official orthodoxy.

Carman also touted the document as a “consensus interpretation” by “hundreds of scientists from all over the world.” True enough, but, as noted by The Wall Street Journal on Monday, one reason the government-picked IPCC scientists had such an easy time agreeing with each other was the exclusion of scientists who might disagree, such as Paul Reiter, head of the Insects and Infectious Diseases unit of the Pasteur Institute. Reiter writes that policy advocates have fabricated a connection between malaria and global warming.

Like Carman, most of the other Denver journalists who covered the IPCC were excessively credulous. Readers looking for a broader view could start with the Fraser Institute's new analysis of the IPCC's work, which provides extensive evidence that the IPCC has vastly overstated the degree of certainty about climate change and its consequences. The Fraser Institute is an independent Canadian research organization whose self-described mission is to analyze the “impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals” (www.fraserinstitute.ca).