Global Climate Coalition 1331 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Suite 1500 - North Tower Washington, DC 20004-1703 Tel: 202.637.3158 Fax: 202.638.1043 Alt. Fax: 202.638.1032 March 15, 1994 Dear Journalist: "1993 was the year ofthe backlash about environmental hype and hoax. The quality papersfinally.,had articles that questioned some of the assumptions about environmental disasters andpointed outfor thefirst time that there were other views, that the scientific community was not in agreement on many ofthese issues..." So said Fred Singer, Executive Director of the Science and Environmental Policy Project in Washington, D.C., in an interview for Nightline last month. What made the Nightline story so interesting, in addition to Dr. Singer's comments, was the source of the segment itself. According to Ted Koppel, "A few weeks ago, Vice President Gore called to draw our attention to some of the forces, political and economic, behind what he would regard as the anti-environmental movement." It turns out the Vice President was pitching a story, not about his views on global warming, but on his view of the skeptics who disagreed with him "The Vice President suggested that we might want to look into connections between scientists who scoff at the so-called greenhouse effect, for example, and the coal industry." Association with other special interest groups was also suggested. Mr. Koppel goes on to examine Mr. Gore's accusation (see the enclosed transcript), in addition to the broader and more substantive story - that of the growing level of skepticism by climate scientists concerning the veracity of the computer models that have been used to make dire predictions about future global temperatures. "The important thing that seems to be getting lost these days is the examination of data with an open mind," said Mr. Koppel. On the issue of the Vice President of the United States calling a news anchor to pitch a story impugning the motives of a specific scientist, Mr. Koppel had a very definite opinion in his closing remarks. "...[T]he issues have to be debated and settled on scientific grounds, not politics," he said. "The measure of good science is neither the politics of the scientist nor the people with whom the scientist associates. It is the immersion of hypotheses into the acid of truth." I thought you might find this story interesting and worth pursuing. For the last five or six years environmental special interest groups have tried to convince the public and policy makers that the scientific community is certain of a future threat of a disastrous increase in global temperatures and on the need to take drastic actions now (such as carbon taxes or other restrictions on fossil fuel use). Neither assertion is true, and it is important that as reporters and scientists enter this public debate, they are not vilified for their participation. "There is some irony," said Mr. Koppel, "in the fact that Vice President.Gore, one of the most scientifically literate men to sit in the White House in this century, that he is resorting to political means to achieve what should ultimately be resolved on a purely scientific basis." Bravo Ted Koppel. To assist you further should you decide to write on this topic, I'm also enclosing commentaries authored by some of the persons whom "Nightline" interviewed, including Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels and Fred Singer. All are outspoken skeptics of the view that catastrophic global warming looms in the next century. If you would like a business voice in your story, I hope you will give me a call to schedule an interview with John Shlaes, executive director of the Global Climate Coalition. I can be reached at the GCC Press Office, (202) 628-3622. --- Sincerely Donald L. Rheem II Media Representative enc.