Global Warming

Global Warming: Let’s Not Worsen it With Photoshop Illusions

“Hook me up with a great photographer, a clever stylist and an expert retoucher, and together we create a beautiful illusion”. Photoshop is useful in many ways but must never be used for the altering of photographs. Now day’s illusions are created in very intelligent way, but how could this be implemented on global warming [...]

“Hook me up with a great photographer, a clever stylist and an expert retoucher, and together we create a beautiful illusion”. Photoshop is useful in many ways but must never be used for the altering of photographs. Now day’s illusions are created in very intelligent way, but how could this be implemented on global warming and blunder is when scientist makes use of these photoshop illusions to provide evidence of their own study.

Another petition presuming to speak scientifically on the dangers of man-made global warming was published last week in the respected journal Science.

It’s much like a recent petition by the left-wing environmentalist group, Union of Concerned Scientists. It’s got the usual scare language and attacks on global warming skeptics. And it’s got hundreds of names of scientists, only a minority of whom are actually climate scientists. After all, such global warming petition drives look for quantity, not quality, because that’s all the media focuses on.

But this one had a difference. Along with an accompanying editorial in Science, it sported a photo of a forlorn polar bear apparently stranded on an ice floe.

The photo was a Photoshopped creation of a stock art agency.

Petition leader and National Academy of Sciences member Peter Gleick shrugged off the phony photo (which was the responsibility of Science and not him) and blamed “climate deniers” (big clue in that phrasing he’s not acting as an impartial scientist) for drawing attention from the facts. But his fellow global warming alarmists repeatedly use doctored photos, art and charts to make their case. The (in) famous “hide the decline” chart, that selectively removed data from a tree-ring temperature proxy because it was going down, is the most famous.

Other instances include:

The cover of a recent book by that eminent scientist, Al Gore, included Photoshopped hurricanes. One of the hurricanes was rotating backward.

The Obama Administration included a Photoshopped flood picture in a report claiming global warming would increase flood damage.

Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth” used video footage from the TV movie “The Day After Tomorrow” to show Antarctic ice shelves collapsing.

Gleick and other global warming activists would do better to clean up their own act and drop the hysterical denunciations of “climate deniers.” If your facts are so nailed down, why use doctored charts and photos?

Friendly advice for the global warming activists: Next time you gin up a climate change petition, have it led by a scientist who isn’t a left-wing ideologue — if you’re really concerned about science over politics, that is.

And avoid PhotoShop for such a serious issues like Global Warming.