Despite having been proved, again and again, to be out of step with the science, the Wall Street Journal is still promoting a phony "balanced" view on global warming - still trying to argue that there is a legitimate argument about climate change.

In a short feature today, the WSJ juxtaposes three decades of warnings, from sources of integrity and obvious expertise (eg., the U.S. Department of Energy), with 30 years of denial, from paid apologists for industry (eg., former tobacco and energy industry shill Dr. Fred Seitz).

The effect is to elevate the status of the deniers and to suggest that debate endures.

It's a sham that should be embarrassing to any journalist of conscience.

Dr. Frederick Seitz, who died yesterday at the age of 96, was a great scientist, a President-Emeritus at Rockefeller University and a past president of the U.S. National Academy of Science.

Which makes it a greater scandal that people like Dr. S. Fred Singer took such advantage of the man in his declining years.

Ah, a breath of fresh air on Capitol Hill today. Was it the spring air? Nope, it was a Congressional Subcommittee hearing today questioning industry efforts within science agencies, like NASA, NOAA and the EPA, to control federal scientists and confuse the public around the science of global warming.

Check here for the RealPlayer webcast and hit read more for some quotes DSBlog has pulled from the proceedings, as well as some research on one particular Republican Senator's outrageous "scientific sources" on global warming.

words that are developed and tested through public opinion research - through polling and focus groups.

For example, Republican pollster Frank Luntz has made a career of massaging language to his clients advantage. In Luntz's now infamous enviro-speak memo (pdf) to the republican party, he advises the following:

There are few parties in the public realm that are more credible than a "grassroots organization" - a group of citizens who rise up with no agenda other than to speak frankly about a public issue. Politicians are inevitably suspect and businesses are clearly self-interested, so reporters are always searching for the "common man" - the "person on the street" - or from impartial experts. No news source wraps up those characteristics more efficiently than the true grass roots organization.