Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Wall Street Journal: ‘More Droughts, Floods, Extreme Weather Expected With Warming Climate’

By Joe Romm  

"Wall Street Journal: ‘More Droughts, Floods, Extreme Weather Expected With Warming Climate’"

Share:

google plus icon

On going through my old draft posts, I came across this unexpectedly accurate story in the Wall Street Journal from January:

More Droughts, Floods, Extreme Weather Expected With Warming Climate

Rising temperatures in the U.S. already have brought more frequent heat waves, droughts, floods and other extreme weather and scientists expect more of the same as a result of climate change, according to a government study released Friday.

Average U.S. temperatures have risen by about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1895, with most of the increase occurring in the past 30 years, according to a draft of the National Climate Assessment.

Climate Progress covered the story at the time with this headline “End Climate Silence Now: Draft Climate Assessment Warns Of Devastating 9°-15°F Warming Over Most Of U.S.”

If you are wondering how Rupert Murdoch’s WSJ, home of the worst opinion page on climate in the country, could  get the story right, well, it was a wire story from Dow Jones.

And, purely coincidentally, the author’s name was Cassandra Sweet, which all too well suggests how Journal editors view all such prescient warnings:

‹ Paul Gilding’s Optimistic Question: Is Victory At Hand For The Climate Movement?

Why We Must Put Nature Back To Work, Part 1 ›

5 Responses to Wall Street Journal: ‘More Droughts, Floods, Extreme Weather Expected With Warming Climate’

  1. prokaryotes says:

    Probably just a mistake and the guy responsible fired?

    • Calamity Jean says:

      Well, the author’s first name is Cassandra, so maybe TPTB figured that nobody would believe her.

  2. Paul Papanek says:

    Although it may be amusing to note when the WSJ slips up and actually prints the truth, I think the better path is to trivialize that despicable rag. For years, the WSJ has been printing lies for profit. I discourage my friends, students, and colleagues from buying it, reading it, or even referring to it.

    I look forward to the day when citing the WSJ as an information source will be viewed with the same bemused condescension as citing, say, the National Enquirer.

  3. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    Another vile Murdoch rag, ‘The Australian’, runs almost entirely denialist propaganda in its opinion pages, is running a truly vicious campaign against environmentalists (and has been for years) and a nasty scaremongering campaign against wind power. Yet, with exquisite hypocrisy, it still occasionally proffers the opinion, in its editorials, that it accepts climate science. Of course the two positions are radically opposed, indicating, in my opinion, either end stage schizoid dissociation, or truly cynical hypocrisy-or both.

  4. Jan Freed says:

    Hats off to WSJ for accurate reporting. I tend to forget their transgressions when such quality appears. This will definitely improve their track record!