Modern David Versus Goliath?

From my remarks on the Tran­script seed­ed today at Newsvine:

So when Lar­ry King has MIT pro­fes­sor Richard Lindzen, not­ed cli­mate change skep­tic, on his show to dis­cuss the top­ic of glob­al warm­ing, what equal­ly famous sci­en­tist does he turn to to get the con­sen­sus per­spec­tive? NASA’s James Hansen? Ohio State’s Lon­nie Thomp­son? Penn State’s Michael Mann? Any­one in cli­mate sci­ence at all?

None of the above. Try TV kid’s show host Bill Nye.

Now, I think the world of Bill Nye, but is this real­ly accu­rate­ly report­ing the con­sen­sus of sci­ence just two days before the IPCC report is expect­ed to 180° dis­agree with essen­tial­ly every­thing Prof. Linz­den has ever said? Is this the “lib­er­al media bias” that some would have you believe is why glob­al warm­ing ever makes the news (as opposed to it being a sin­cere world­wide con­cern)?

It’s a pathet­ic attempt to por­tray the two “sides” of this “argu­ment” as being remote­ly equal, or more like­ly, the skep­tics as hav­ing more weight. It is poor jour­nal­ism (or what­ev­er Lar­ry King pass­es for) on CNN’s part and is entire­ly mis­lead­ing to the view­ing pub­lic. It would be like some sci­ence fic­tion author being a sci­ence con­sul­tant to the Pres­i­dent. Oh, wait, that actu­al­ly hap­pened