Well, Hmm, Not Really

On June 4, 2009, Fox Nation posted this brilliant bit of work claiming that a climatologist had directly blamed the recent crash of an Air France Airbus A-330 on global warming.

This one smells bad from the gitgo, don't it? Even though severe thunderstorms are suspected to have been a factor in the crash, no serious climate scientist would ever blame a specific small-scale weather event on global warming. And, of course, none did.

Fox's post links to a story by the Business and Media Institute:

Once again, a widely publicized tragedy is being blamed on man-caused global warming.

Warming alarmists have often bemoaned air travel saying it increases the threat of global warming, but this time they’re blaming the phenomenon for the tragedy surrounding Air France Flight 447. ...

Aleksey Kokorin, a climatologist for the left-wing World Wildlife Fund’s Russia Climate Program, blamed global warming for the crash. He told Russia Today (RT) on June 4 global warming is to blame for making the weather conditions some think is to blame for the crash more severe.

The first thing to note is that there's no original reporting in this "story"; it's based entirely on another article. In that article, which appeared in Russia Today, climatologist Kokorin makes no such claim. Here's the essence of what Kokorin does say:

“A consequence of global warming is that the frequency and severity of such events (severe weather conditions) is higher,” Aleksey Kokorin, head of Russia’s World Wildlife Fund’s Climate Program, told RT. “Unfortunately, the risk for airplanes, especially in tropical areas above water, will be higher. ....”

Kokorin is, quite obviously, speaking generally about one of the effects of climate change: that severe weather events are likely to become more numerous and more severe, and that this could make some flight routes somewhat more dangerous. This in no way blames climate change for this specific storm or, by extension, the Air France crash.

Business and Media Institute

So, who are these guys? What is the "Business and Media Institute"? From the charged language ("warming alarmists" who "bemoan" things, "left wing" institutions, etc.) you've probably already guessed that it's got a horse in the race. And you were right. BMI is a division of the Media Research Center, and if the MRC testimonials from Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Britt Hume, Laura Ingraham, Bob Novak, John Fund, Neil Boortz, Fred Barnes, Newt Gingrich, Jerry Falwell, Phyllis Schlafly, and Robert Bork aren't enough to give you the general flavor, maybe the more than $250,000 that ExxonMobil has contributed to MRC since 1998 is (see here, for example). Oh, and the $1.9 million of Mellon oil and banking money that the DeSmogBlog says MRC has received from the Scaife people.

Question of the Day: Why did Fox link to an article from industry-funded source that is about another readily available article? Why not link to the original article instead? Do you think it might be because the original article didn't make a ridiculous, easily debunked fake claim about global warming? Extra credit: Look up "straw man argument".

Bonus Question: How many FN commenters bothered with the one extra mouse click it would have taken to look at the original article using the link in the BMI article? (Hint: The correct answer is "One." And he was, of course, shouted down for being the gullible libtard moron that he obviously is.)

---

Update [June 8, 2009]

I tracked down climatologist Kokorin and emailed him. As expected, he confirms that it was not his intent to blame climate change for the crash:

To be honest nothing about this particular crash, but about general risk of global climate change for airplanes.

OK, English is not Kokorin's native tongue, but we get the idea.