Net
Zero Is Asinine. Over the past few decades, the UN, the mainstream media, academia,
Hollywood, and governments all over the world have peddled similar talking points regarding the
existential threat of climate change. But the facts tell a very different story. In
truth, the world is not on the verge of an environmental collapse. Weather events like
tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, etc. are not becoming more frequent nor deadlier. Sea rise
is not a dangerous threat and all the glaciers have not melted. Wildfires are not increasing
in intensity and neither are heatwaves. The UN does not want you to be aware of these facts
because they directly undercut the core of their alarmist message and therefore undermine the
supposed urgency for net zero. Moreover, the UN is adamantly opposed to developing nations
utilizing fossil fuels so that they can become economically competitive while drastically reducing
the abject poverty that still exists in far too many countries. If the continued use of
fossil fuels poses no imminent threat to humanity, why is the UN so gung-ho about net zero?
Perhaps the answer is money. The sheer cost of transitioning the world from fossil fuels to
renewable energy and achieving net zero is estimated to cost about $75 trillion, according to
Goldman Sachs.
Vox
Gets Almost Everything Wrong in Its Report on Measuring Cow 'Emissions'. The rhetoric
coming from climate scolds in the media just seems to get more outlandish by the day. We've
reported in the past how emissions of methane from cows are apparently a desperate issue if you
believe these folks. But then, everything seems to be a desperate issue with climate scolds
these days — except, perhaps, for Leonardo DiCaprio's mega-yacht, the Obamas' oceanfront mansion,
or John Kerry's private jet. Intellectual consistency isn't a really high priority for these
people. But then, that seems to be a hallmark of the left these days. This brings us to
the leftist outlet Vox, who has been reporting some evaluation of cow "emissions," and doing a
little panic-mongering into the bargain. The problem? They predictably get almost
everything wrong. On the "Climate Realism" website, the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate
and Environmental Policy's Linnea Lueken has the receipts. [...] Part of what Vox doesn't understand
(and that's a lengthy list) involves the nature of methane and its half-life in the atmosphere —
which, one would think, would be something that should be added to the evaluation.
Globalist
Misinformation: No, the Earth is Not Warming. One man's disinformation is
another man's speaking truth to power. Who is the referee? We, the people, or the
administrative state? This is a multifaceted war, including all things COVID, vaccinations,
election integrity, crime statistics, illegal immigration, and the Earth's climate. I want to
focus on climate change, once known as global warming. Climate warriors insist the planet's
climate is changing. No one will argue that. We have had ice ages burying the upper
Midwest under a mile-thick sheet of ice, with the planet cooling enough to create these massive
glaciers, followed by subsequent warming and melting. [...] The Denver Post breathlessly exclaims,
"Mile High City ties the 132-year-old high-temperature record." Big deal. [...] Does the Denver
Post know if there was a warmer late September day in Denver in the 1700s? Or the 700s?
Or 2700 BC? [...] The data goes back to 1872. What if 1772, 772, or 772 BC were hotter?
More
Solar Silliness In The New York Times. Hyping solar energy is one of America's most
renewable resources. For instance, in 1978, Ralph Nader declared that "everything will be
solar in 30 years." In 1979, President Jimmy Carter declared the US needed to capture
more energy from the sun because of "inevitable shortages of fossil fuels." In 2011, in the
New York Times, Paul Krugman claimed we are "on the cusp of an energy transformation driven
by the rapidly falling cost of solar power." In 2015, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
pledged that if elected president, she would oversee the installation of 500 million solar
panels. In 2021, the Department of Energy released a study that claimed solar "has the
potential to power 40% of the nation's electricity by 2035." That's a mighty big claim.
Last year, solar accounted for about 5% of US electricity production. Furthermore, solar only
provided about 2.2 exajoules of primary energy to the US economy out of 94.2 EJ used. The DOE
also claimed solar could reach 45% of US electricity production by 2050. (That same year,
President Joe Biden declared that climate change poses "an existential threat to our lives.")
The solar hype continued last month in the pages of the New York Times with an article by
David Wallace-Wells headlined, "What Will We Do With Our Free Power?"
MSM
tells only part of the story, highlights 'record number of deaths' from 'climate
change'. The Hill recently ran an article by Zack Budryk, which highlighted the
"record number of Americans killed by heat" last year; here's what he had to say:
["]Extreme heat killed more Americans in 2023 than any other year over nearly a quarter
century of records, according to research published Monday in the Journal of the American Medical
Association. At least 2,325 people died from the heat last year, according to the study,
which included deaths with heat as both an underlying and contributing factor.["] If
you didn't already figure it out, this piece was on "climate change," and its purpose, like most
pieces on climate change, is to get people to capitulate to the radical green agenda. Why
don't journalists ever report on the number of people killed each year by extreme cold, which is
much higher than heat deaths? The answer is that facts don't matter when the media and other
Democrats are trying to force people to surrender to their agenda.
Twisted
Truth: Lies, Extreme Lies, and Climate Statistics. [C]laims of the hottest
surface temperatures ever on record are made regularly for various locations across the US. But, as
noted in meteorologist Brian Sussman's new book Climate Cult, 20 states registered record
maximum temperatures of at least 109 degrees Fahrenheit, all occurring in the 1930s, a decade
that also contained the infamous Dust-Bowl years. Yet a June New York Times article on the
"not normal" summer heat conveniently displayed a graph with temperature trends beginning in the
1940s. Fortunately for much of main-stream media that pushes a climate-disaster agenda, the
public can be easily duped when temperatures are extra hot and knowledge of the climate record is
extra low. Standard statistical ploys using incomplete datasets or cherry-picked values are
circulated on not just temperature levels, but also severe weather frequency and intensity, sea
level fluctuations, and ice cap extents.
When
you have junk science, you end up with mad scientists. If journalists were curious,
instead of talking puppets pushing the Democrat agenda, they could ask a simple question like I
did, and use a search engine to find the answer: "What are the warmest summers on record?"
The following information populated: The warmest summer on record was in 1936 during the Dust
Bowl, which was before we had central air... so it was colder for more than eight decades, while
the population was rising rapidly, and while our use of the natural resources (which supposedly
causes warming) was exploding. (It should be noted that there was essentially no air
conditioning of any type in 1936.) Some of the other warm summers were 1934, 1901, 1911, and
1913. They were clearly not caused by gas-powered cars, so getting rid of them can't possibly
change the temperature.
Don't
Buy the Media Lies About Crop Production. One of the mainstream media's favorite
pastimes in recent years has been trying to scare the pants off everyone by suggesting that climate
change is decimating crop production around the world. They are either lying intentionally,
or mistaken. However, in either case, there is some journalistic malpractice going on, as
well as a notable failure of logic. We have all seen the stories, the favorites of the media
usually have to do with foods that are popular semi-luxury items, depending on where you live, like
cocoa beans, coffee, and wine. For instance, Forbes put out an article claiming that cocoa, olive
oil, rice, and soybeans are all "particularly vulnerable" to the effects of "climate-induced stressors."
Media
sounds the alarm on a handful of 'possibly heat-related' deaths. After several weeks
of heat, because it is obviously summer, we get a headline about seven people dying, and the cause
of death might be heat-related; [...] One was a motorcyclist who died in Death Valley... and should
be attributed to stupidity. Death Valley has been extremely hot much longer than we have been
using natural resources to greatly improve our quality and length of life. Putting the deaths
into perspective: Over three million people die in the U.S. each year, which equates to
around 8,000 per day, and in a few weeks of heat this summer, we get a big story on seven deaths as
"possibly being heat-related," as it serves as fuel to the fire to continue the push to destroy
industries that greatly improve our quality and length of life. (Of course, we don't ever learn
if the people had underlying conditions.)
No,
CBS News, New York City Isn't Going to Be Flooded by Sea Level Rise. An recent CBS
News article claims that climate change induced sea level rise could result in large parts of New
York City being underwater by the year 2100. This is false. The best and most relevant data
measuring sea level rise in the New York Battery Park area shows a slow but steady rate of rise
since 1850 that would fall very far short of submerging any locations in New York City by 2100.
In the article, CBS News cites the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) saying:
"NOAA predicts sea levels in Battery Park City and on the East Side of Manhattan will rise between
2.5 feet and 6.5 feet by the year 2100." CBS interviewed a resident nearby who said:
"That's crazy to even picture," said Nef Garcia, who lives in Battery Park City. He's right, it is
crazy and here is why. NOAA's prediction is heavily predicated on computer climate models that
assume a huge acceleration in sea level rate of rise over the next 75 years. In particular,
NOAA's Sea Level Rise Viewer, upon which the prediction is based, relies on estimates and models used
in 2007.
The Editor says...
[#1] Perhaps someone could explain how sea levels around New York City will go up 6½ feet
in the next 75 years (i.e., one inch per year) without going up by the same amount along the coastlines
of every other country. Also please explain how you know this with any certainty. [#2] Do you
expect to be alive in 2100 A.D.? If not, isn't this someone else's problem? [#3] If the mean
sea leverl goes up one inch per year, doesn't that leave you plenty of opportunity to move inland?
[#4] Global average sea level has risen 8 to 9 inches (21 to 24 centimeters)
since 1880.
Over the course of the 20th century, global mean sea level rose at about 1.5 millimeters per year. By the early 1990s,
it was about 2.5 mm per year.
An increase of one inch per year (for the next 75 years) would require sudden acceleration, starting now.
It is
not happening.
World's
sleep being chipped away by hotter nights, global warming, Climate Central study says.
Climate change is not only harming the planet[,] it's also ruining our sleep. A new report from
Climate Central says rising nighttime temperatures are chipping away at human sleep across the globe.
Scientists found global mean temperatures have risen by more 34 degrees Fahrenheit since 1850,
setting a new record in 2023.
Reaction and rebuttal: World's
Sleep Being Disrupted By Global Boiling. It's amazing what a 1.7F increase (or 2.2F,
depending on which climahysteric outlet you listen to) over 170+ years can do, eh? All while
the Warmists are trying to take air conditioning away from Other People, and stop those people in
places like Africa from getting it[.] [...] ["]Scientists found global mean temperatures
have risen by more 34 degrees Fahrenheit since 1850, setting a new record in 2023.["]
[...] According to NASA the mean global temperature is 59F. Are we seriously supposed to
believe that it was 25F in 1850?
More
garbage science about wildfires and global warming from Nature. The once highly
respected science journal Nature continues its descent into propaganda and bad science, all
because it bows unskeptically before the altar of global warming and leftist science
fantasies. Today's example is an article this week entitled "You're not imagining it: extreme
wildfires are now more common," describing a new Nature paper that attempted to use
satellite data to prove that the intensity of wildfires has increased in the past two decades.
Heat
Wave Sets Off New Round Of 'Climate Crisis' Lies. There's a summer heat wave going
on, which gives journalists the opportunity to fill up their stories with climate change
boilerplate. It no longer matters whether any of it is true. Just the opposite, in
fact. If you point out the truth, you're accused of being a denier. Sure, the data
doesn't show an increase in the number of heat waves, or hurricanes, or tornadoes, or
wildfires. Yet every time one or the other strikes, the press robotically connects that event
to "climate change." And so, true to form, every story about the current heat wave says that
climate change is to blame.
Wrong,
Mainstream Media, Tree Rings Aren't Reliable Indicators of Past Temperatures. Dozens
of media outlets such as ABC News, The BBC, The New York Times, and many more, hyped a study
that claims summer temperatures in 2023 were unprecedented over the past 2000 years.
This claim, in fact, can't be verified by tree ring data, which isn't that precise.
Researchers are falsely assuming tree rings are reliable temperature indicators when in fact tree
rings can indicate a multitude of different conditions, not just temperature.
How
the Met Office and BBC Try to Fool Us All. As we all shiver in the autumnal weather
during what is meant to be summer and some of us have even turned our central heating back on or
continued using our winter duvets, there is one certainty — in a few weeks time, the
good folk at Met Office and the BBC will tell us that we've just had the "warmest June on record".
After all, the Met Office and the BBC made the same claim about appalling April and miserable
May. In fact, the weather has been so wet that there is a risk of a potato shortage later
this year. So, what will be intriguing will be the mathematical contortions the Met Office
and BBC will use to justify their preposterous nonsense.
The Editor says...
The article above was published on June 20, so it was a bit premature to say, "we've just had the 'warmest June on record.'"
BBC
Pushes U.S. Heatwave Story But Buries 'Junuary' Winter Storm Story. The BBC has a
story today about the heatwave in May and early June the southwestern U.S. and Mexico.
Apparently, a report by the World Weather Attribution (WWA) group has claimed that climate change
made the heatwave 35 times more likely, though exactly what that means goes unexplained. [...]
The interesting thing about that BBC story is the complete lack of any mention of the spectacular
plunge in temperatures across the northwestern United States as a major winter storm crossed over
the Rockies into Montana and Idaho.
The
Mirror goes mega-viral for saying UK will be "blasted" by 78°F "heatwave".
[Scroll down past several advertisements and tweets] It's headed to 93°F today in
Michigan, where I have the inexhaustible pleasure of writing this article. We have
moose that reside in our state. They don't seem to mind the occasional hot day.
[Advertisement] Meanwhile, Brits apparently melt if the mercury rises above room-temperature.
Climate
BS from the Wall Street Journal. My publisher contacted me this week, drawing
attention to a Wall Street Journal article claiming climate change is producing shortages of "the
finer things in life," like wine, coffee, cocoa, and olive oil. The implication was clear:
your carbon footprint is causing the price of these commodities to sharply rise. [...]
Specifically, the story speaks of the recent drought in West Africa, which has resulted in a cocoa
shortage; dry spells in Vietnam, which have reduced coffee harvests; and parched Italian olive
groves and grape vineyards recently destroyed by wildfires. None of these meteorological
events has anything to do with the use of fossil fuels and the subsequent release of carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere. The truth is that these regions of the world are historically well known
for witnessing wild swings in otherwise natural weather patterns.
With
Summer Heat Wave Expected, Be Prepared for What the Climate Change Nuts Will Do.
Despite the fact that summer, and the heat associated with that season, comes around reliably every
year, the climate activists behave as if such a thing has never happened before. Ever since
"global warming" and "climate change" (formerly known as "weather") became the environmental
bogeymen, any slight increase in temperature over the summer has been spun as the first sign of the
climate apocalypse. And, this summer's impending heat wave is no different. According
to The Washington Post, the U.S. will be assaulted by abnormally high temperatures thanks to a
"heat dome" forming over the mainland United States. Apparently, temperatures in most of the
continental U.S., especially in the Southeast and the Midwest, are projected to reach the high 90's
and potentially stay that hot at least through June. The National Weather Service likewise
predicted that, with the humidity, the overall heat index for states from Texas to Washington,
D.C., could reach as high as 100 to 110 degrees.
The Editor says...
Lots of things could happend this summer, but probably won't. Yes, summer is the time
for hot weather. That has been the case since Noah got off the Ark, about 2347 B.C.
Hot weather is not a crisis. Hot weather is not a reason to stop burning hydrocarbons. Hot
weather is not a reason to vote for socialists. [#2] How does the Washington Post or the
National Weather Service know, with any certainty at all, what the weather will be like a month
from now? There is so much chaos in the atmosphere, and so many competing forces at work, that
nobody can predict the path of a hurricane more than two or three days in advance, and nobody can
predict the local weather two weeks from now. Chance are it'll be hot, but there is still plenty
of wiggle room.
June
temperatures [are] at half the level of this time last year. Temperatures in June 2024
are at half the level of 2023, the Met Office has said, although warmer weather is predicted
towards the end of the month. While London was experiencing 32C (89.6F) a year ago,
temperatures were around 16C (60.8F) in the capital on Tuesday. Similarly Cambridge had
temperatures of 30.3C (86.5F) on June 11 2023, and 15C (59F) on the same day in 2024.
Temperatures are around 2C (35.6F) below average for the time of year, with scattered showers this
week that could turn into heavy rain by Thursday, while some areas could see ground frosts.
The Editor says...
Somehow I would like to rebut the article above without including a cliché like cherry-picking.
Oops, too late. It's easy to find examples of a high (or low) temperature on some date that
was "half" (or "double") the temperature on the same day in the previous year. This is made
easier by the use of the Celcius temperature scale, in which the day-to-day ambient temperatures
are recorded with smaller numbers than in areas that use the Fahrenheit scale. But a decrease
from 32°C. to 16°C. does not mean it's only half as warm outside. On the absolute
(Kelvin) scale, that's a change from 305°K. to 289°K. Hardly any difference. This
is another example of the news media attempting to make problems sound worse than they really are,
and hoping you don't know why they are in error. These are the same people who sound the
alarm about a one-half degree average temperature increase by the end of this century. On the
absolute scale, it's almost no change at all. It's background noise, especially compared to
the temperature differences between day and night and between summer and winter.
Green
Billionaire Funding of 'Climate Emergency' Reporting in Mainstream Media. A massive
global grooming programme aimed at mostly mainstream media involving climate catastrophism and Net
Zero promotion is detailed in a recently published report from the green billionaire-funded
Internews's Earth Journalism Network (EJN). The work is a shocking insight into the corruption of
independent, investigative journalism. At one point the report observes "a concerning trend
among journalists in some countries still seeking to 'balance' their climate change reporting". The
report shows clearly that the green billionaires are calling most of the shots in promoting stories
of Net Zero-inspired climate collapse. It is noted that they may fund journalists "to cover
stories in a particular subject area, determined by funder interests and goals". Over the
last 20 years the tax-efficient billionaire foundations have stepped into the funding gaps
left by declining circulation and advertising sales across mainstream media. It is noted by
the EJN that journalists "overwhelmingly agreed" that support from external funding organisations
was "essential" to enabling their climate and environmental reporting.
Green
college degrees and phony climate calamities. Last week an Associated Press headline
declared, "Graduating seniors seek degrees in climate change and more US universities deliver."
Keep in mind the AP, which feeds stories to news publications around the world, was given an
$8 million grant in 2022 to promote the theory of human-caused climate change in its daily
coverage. The media giant's funding came from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Quadrivium, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Walton Family
Foundation. In announcing the gift, the AP said it would be hiring twenty environmental
reporters to "enhance the global understanding of climate change and its impact across the world."
The AP's climate desk isn't staffed by journalists. These are activists
bent on shaping opinions that are short on science and long on instilling fear.
Stop
Making Plane Turbulence About Climate Change. Passengers "smashed" into the ceiling,
blood stained the carpet in the aisles, luggage flew through the cabin, and there was "awful
screaming": Is what happened on a Singapore Airlines jet on Monday evening going to become a
regular occurrence? The plane, which was flying from London to Singapore, reportedly
encountered "severe turbulence" about 10 hours into the flight, while 37,000 feet above
southern Myanmar. Multiple passengers were injured — 20 were still in intensive
care this morning — and one man died: a 73-year-old British citizen who appears to
have gone into cardiac arrest. Within hours of reporting the incident, major news organizations
were wondering: Will this be the new normal, in the age of global warming? "Is climate
change making turbulence worse?" asked the BBC.
'Consumer
Reports' Jettisons Objectivity on Climate Change. Consumer Reports. You probably
have heard of it, as it has been around since 1936. Since then, it has offered valuable information
to assess the safety and performance of many products and services, and has come to be widely trusted.
So, you can understand why we were intrigued when it issued a blurb in one of its latest newsletters
about... climate change. Wait... what? [...] We applaud Consumer Reports for its work in
maintaining integrity within the marketplace of goods and services. Which brings us to its latest
emailed newsletter (which does not appear to be online). It doesn't focus on a comparison of
gas-powered clothes dryers or the best electric vehicle you should buy based on safety, features, ease
of refueling, combustion potential of the lithium battery, or any other consumer-oriented criterion.
No, its topic is climate change.
Smoke,
mirrors and CO2 emissions, Part 2. The climate change charade makes headway by
obfuscation, mixing vastly different units to hide reality as for example when warning of the
threat posed by CO2 emissions, they count them in millions of tons (mt), but when crying over the
effects of these emissions on global warming, they speak of parts per million (ppm) of atmospheric
CO2. How is the man in the street to make sense of these two quantities? I explained
[elsew]here how its effect is to present a very 'black' picture, rather than a rather white
one. Other examples of obfuscating terminology can be found in the changes in language usage
over time, from 'global warming' during most of the last century, a term which has units of
temperature that can be measured, to 'climate change' during much of this century, with no
measurable units, and now 'global boiling', which only occurs in the mind of the UN Secretary
General. To 'prove' that CO2 is a pollutant, the populace is regularly presented with
pictures of cooling towers in a way that suggests the white stuff exiting from the top is CO2, when
in reality it is just condensing water vapour/steam!
No,
Sun Sentinel, Florida Isn't Under Future "Climate Threats". A recent article in the
South Florida Sun Sentinel (SFSS) newspaper, titled "Florida in 50 years: Study says
land conservation can buffer destructive force of climate change," makes some catastrophic claims
about what Florida's climate will be like in 50 years. The article relies heavily on
climate model projections, that are undermined by real world evidence and by the fact that the
climate models in question have been shown to create "implausibly hot forecasts of future warming."
As outlined in Climate at A Glance: Climate Model Fallibility peer reviewed science has
shown that climate forecasts like the one cited by the SFSS have no basis in reality because
comparisons of actual measured atmospheric temperature data to model forecasts show up to a 200%
discrepancy between model temperature outputs and observed temperatures. Because the
temperature forecasts are wildly implausible, the claimed disastrous impacts that are forecast to
result from those unbelievably high temperatures also lack credibility.
BBC
weather map row heats up over confusing colours. The BBC has been criticised for the
colour scale it uses to represent temperatures, with lows of 11C shown as yellow while 41C is
depicted as dark red. The broadcaster has triggered confusion among some viewers with its
temperature contour map, which switches to orange when temperatures hit 13C. The colour scheme
was introduced in 2017, with the BBC at the time saying it was intended to help those with colour
blindness. Toby Young, the founder of website The Daily Sceptic, suggested that the BBC was
"going a bit far". "How is it going to represent temperatures above 20C? Fireballs?" he
said. A weather forecast on Tuesday night showed most of the country yellow and orange for
Wednesday when temperatures were predicted to hit as high as 20C. One viewer wrote on social
media that the system was "utterly farcical". "I'm not a massive conspiracy theorist but I
have to agree with those who castigate the utterly ludicrous use of bright yellow and orange/red on
the weather maps to indicate temperatures of 18/19 degrees!" the viewer wrote.
The Editor says...
When television was received on black-and-white receivers, 50 years ago, no consideration was given
to "color blind" viewers. We were all color blind. At the same time, much less
emphasis was placed on sensational (and highly speculative) forecasting beyond the next 24 hours,
hardly any TV stations had their own weather radar, nobody had any delusions about the government
being able to alter the weather, and absolutely nobody considered carbon dioxide to be a threat.
The
BBC's 1970s climate alarm — a new Ice Age. Climate scientists at the time
were unanimous — by the 1970s it was crystal clear that the planet had been cooling for
three decades. This fact led to various ice age scares in the media, but on a more serious
level the authorities were very concerned about a return to the Little Ice Age conditions which had
persisted until the late 19th century. In particular they were extremely worried about the
world's ability to feed itself following the abundance of food which the warmer early 20th century
had brought. Since then, of course, the climate establishment has done everything to cover up
those concerns, and eliminate the 30 years of cooling by tampering with the temperature
record. But they can't get rid of the wealth of literature written at the time by climate scientists
such as H H Lamb, who must be turning in his grave at the antics of his successors. Nor can
they hide TV documentaries, such as the BBC's The Weather Machine, broadcast in 1974.
Unfortunately there is only this short clip available now: [Video clip]
Guyana
President Lights Up BBC Host Who Tries to Climate Shame Him Over Extracting Oil. I'd
like to introduce you to Mohamed Irfaan Ali, President of Guyana. What he did in the face of
climate activism being thrown at him has now gone viral (almost 3 million views on the video
below) and it isn't hard to see why. BBC host Stephen Sackur essentially asked him during an
interview isn't it a bad thing for you guys to extract $150 billion of oil and gas off your
coast because of the carbon emissions that would ultimately be released into the atmosphere?
Ali's response is just pure gold. He stops Sackur cold and then just rips him a new
one. [Tweet with video clip]
The Editor says...
In the interview, Stephen Sackur from the BBC made a series of unfounded statements masquerading as
questions, implying that Guyana is not entitled to be an oil producer, that carbon dioxide (which he calls
"carbon") is a pollutant, and that Guyana should get back in its place. The BBC is probably replete
with pompous twits like this guy, who assume that nobody will challenge their assertions because the BBC
is always right. Hats off to President Mohamed Irfaan Ali, who wasn't having it.
BBC
Meteorologist Falsely Claims South Sudan is Experiencing "Extreme Heat" for March.
South Sudan is experiencing "extreme heatwaves" and is shutting schools and cutting power, reports
BBC meteorologist Matt Taylor. "It is exceptionally early for South Sudan to experience such
heat — temperatures often exceed 43°C but only in the summer months, according to
the World Bank's Climate Change portal," he states. Hot days in the capital Juba —
five degrees north of the equator — are for some a big 'climate change' story, but it is
difficult to read into the World Bank data the interpretation that Taylor wants to publicise.
In fact it is impossible, since the data clearly show that average South Sudan temperatures peak in
March and then fall away through the wet monsoon 'summer' months.
USA
Today can't stop promoting the global warming fallacies. [Scroll down]
Every one of these articles starts with the intentional lie that people who disagree with the
radical green agenda are climate change deniers. I have never seen anyone deny that the
climate changes. We tell the truth that the climate has always changed cyclically and
naturally. What we deny is that humans and our use of natural resources cause global warming
and that warming causes the ice to melt in the Arctic and that melting will cause a massive rise in
sea levels. They also tell us that the warming causes more severe and deadly storms. We
also don't believe that politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, or anyone else can establish policies
that control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever. We also don't believe the
computer model predictions because previous dire predictions have not come true.
Met
Office Says it Cannot Back Up its Senior Meteorologist's Claim on BBC Radio That Storms in the U.K.
are "More Intense" Due to Climate Change. The Met Office has been unable to back up a
claim that storms in the U.K. are "more intense" due to the effects of climate change. The
claim was made by senior Met Office meteorologist Claire Nasir on January 22nd on BBC 5 Live
Breakfast in the aftermath of Storm Isha, and led to a freedom of information request for an
explanation by investigative journalist Paul Homewood. The Met Office has replied that it is
unable to answer the request due to the fact that the information "is not held".
Associated
Press Takes More Money to Promote Climate Alarm. The Associated Press (AP) recently
accepted a grant of approximately $300,000 from the KR Foundation, a Danish organization founded to
"address the climate crisis by pushing for a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels at a global level."
This follows a $8 million grant to the AP by five U.S.-based foundations — the
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Quadrivium, the
Rockefeller Foundation, and the Walton Family Foundation — in February 2022.
Those foundation devote significant funds to motivating carbon restricting policies at the federal,
state, and local levels of government. That grant directed the AP to hire more than two dozen
journalists to report on climate issues, primarily from Africa, Brazil, India, and the United
States. Now, the Danish group is giving the AP additional money to continue and expand its
efforts to stoke climate alarm through its "global scholars network."
2023
Was Not the "Hottest Year on Record" for Over 70% of the World's Population, Data Show.
Further doubt has been cast on the widely-broadcast alarmist temperature claim that last year was the
hottest since records began. A deep dive into figures published by the U.S. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reveals that the 'hottest ever' claims did not apply to large areas
of the world including Asia, Europe, North America, Oceania, East N. Pacific, Hawaiian region,
Arctic and Antarctic. Investigative science writer Larry Hamlin notes in the science blog
Watts Up With That that at least 58% of the Earth's
land surface where 73% of the world's population lives did not experience the hyped 'highest ever
recorded' average temperature anomaly.
US
in deep freeze while much of the world is extra toasty? Yet again, it's climate
change. [Scroll down] Wind chills in parts of North Dakota reached minus
70 degrees (minus 56 degrees Celsius), while the heat index in Miami was more than
160 degrees warmer at 92 (33 degrees Celsius). The fourth-coldest NFL football game
took place in Kansas City, while across the globe the thermometer hit a blistering 92 degrees,
12 degrees (6.8 degrees Celsius) warmer than average on Friday during tennis' Australian
Open in Melbourne.
The Editor says...
The article above is replete with half-truths and false comparisons. The wind chill and the heat
index are relatively recent inventions to estimate what the winter wind and the summer humidity make the
weather feel like. Comparing the wind chill at one place to the heat index in another
(on the same day) is absurd and immaterial. It proves nothing. Also it is nothing but
sensationalism to compare the temperature in Kansas City to the temperature in Melbourne, Australia,
because in January, one city is in the middle of winter and the other is in the middle of summer.
The Associated Press hopes you won't notice.
2023
"Earth's Hottest Year on Record" Claims Fail. The year-end 2023 global average
temperature anomaly measurement data outcomes have climate alarmist media falsely claiming these
results established that "2023 Was the Hottest Year on Record" since records began in the
mid-1800s. These "hottest year on record" claims are based on misrepresenting the
year 2023 obscure "global average temperature anomaly" outcome that is not applicable to any
specific location or region on earth. [...] NOAA's global regional temperature anomaly data
establishes that the assertion of year 2023 being the "highest ever measured average
temperature anomaly" claim did not occur across the globally dominant regional land areas that
include Asia, Europe, U.S., Oceania, Hawaiian Region, Arctic and the Antarctic.
Taking
a look at my hometown data I discover the very opposite of the 'global warming' narrative is
true. The following are actual pieces of scientific data related to Springfield,
Illinois, where I live: The warmest day recorded in January is 73 degrees Fahrenheit on
January 23, 1909, so every day in January, for the last 115 years, has been colder; the
warmest day ever in February is February 24, 1930, when temperatures hit 78 degrees; the
warmest day in March was March 21, 1907, when the temperature hit 91 degrees. The
average high temperature in Springfield today is around 36 degrees, and this weekend we are
supposed to have highs around 30 degrees below normal, with wind chills around 20 below
zero. So, after 160 years of exponential growth of all the things the green pushers say
cause warming, we are thirty degrees below normal. Temperatures have always fluctuated
cyclically and naturally. Humans have no control over them, and there is no correlation
between CO2 content, crude oil use, number of vehicles, and temperatures. Yet, here is an
article from two days ago, full of worthless information and repeated talking points, all to push
the radical green agenda to scare people into capitulation: ["]Earth shattered global
heat record in '23 and it's flirting with warming limit, European agency says["]
Separating
fact from fiction on 'climate change'. Why is it easier to find lies in the media
about "climate change" than truthful information? Why is honest reporting on the environment
an outlier instead of a rule? Media parrots have said for decades that humans, and our use of
natural resources are killing the planet, and that oceans, species, and forests are dying.
They report on future predictions, but rarely on scientific facts — so I thought I would
fill the vacuum. We have been told that we are responsible for irredeemable destruction in
the Great Barrier Reef, but that is not true. The reef is making a "comeback," yet we don't
see that story because it doesn't push the radical green agenda; [...] It was thinning cyclically
and naturally, and it has come back cyclically and naturally. Humans didn't cause the
thinning, and government policies didn't cause the comeback — or we would see the green
pushers claiming victory.
BBC
'Disinformation' Reporter Plans Six-Month Sabbatical to go on Climate Course Funded by Green
Billionaires. Marco Silva is taking time out from his role as a senior reporter for
BBC Verify specialising in 'climate disinformation' to enrol on a six-month course at the Oxford
Climate Journalism Network (OCJN), a green activist operation funded by billionaire foundations
promoting the collectivist Net Zero project. [...] The OCJN runs what is described as an intensive
programme for about 100 journalists/activists around the world. Participants can expect to be
immersed in the correct political narrative surrounding climate collapse, the so-called 'settled
science' and the need for extreme Net Zero measures, whatever the economic and societal cost. [...]
Marco Silva should enjoy his time confirming his climate science priors. He has a keen nose
for what he calls 'disinformation', basing his work on what he deems to be the authority of 99.9%
of scientists who say humans are primarily responsible for the current warming of the
climate. This is provided as a reason for not hearing from the "other side". The ongoing
scientific process, alas, seems to play little part in the BBC's Net Zero agitprop.
Not
the Babylon Bee. What exactly a "climate disease" is is a mystery until you realize
this term was invented to make a snappy headline. In non-headline speak, these are diseases
that are spread by more frequent interactions between people and wild animals driven out of their
natural environment due to climate change. Or they are diseases we are to believe are made
more common due to climate change. Color me skeptical. Malaria, Dengue fever, and other
diseases have been with us for millennia, and new diseases have been springing up throughout human history.
Climate
Advocacy: Incompetence Or Intentional Fraud? From euronews.green we have a
piece from November 12 with the headline "Powered by wind and water: The Canary Island
proving it is possible to run on renewables." The byline is Lauren Crosby Mendicott.
Ms. Mendicott announces the exciting news that one of Spain's Canary Islands, El Hierro, has
recently reported that it ran its electricity system entirely on wind and water power for 28
consecutive days. [...] And yet, despite having such a rare near-perfect site for a large pumped
hydro storage facility, the El Hierro system does not have nearly the energy storage needed to
provide full-time electricity from the wind/storage system. It would need to multiply its
storage capacity by at least an order of magnitude to come close to 100% electricity from this
system. Meanwhile, most of its electricity comes from a backup diesel generator —
a fact nowhere mentioned in Ms. Mendicott's piece. So, is the piece mere incompetence,
or intentional fraud? Several factors would seem to give strong support to the inference of
intentional fraud — failure to mention the diesel backup at all; failure to mention the
number of hours in each recent year where the diesel backup had to be called into activity to keep
the lights on, and whether that number of hours was trending up or down; [...]
More
media drumbeating on the global warming nonsense from USA Today. We are told that the
science is settled, that the last 160 years of our using natural resources have led to record
high temperatures on Earth and that the ocean is rising to unsustainable levels. [A recent]
article from USA Today says the Earth used to be much hotter, so why do they tell us constantly
that the Earth has reached record high temperatures and that we don't have much time to save the
planet[?] [...] Of course, they never explain how the Earth cooled from 1940 [to] 1975 when they
say all these things cause warming. Facts haven't mattered to green pushers for a long
time. And of course, the solution is big government and taking away our freedom of choice of
what we drive and how we power our houses and appliances. We are supposed to capitulate to
radical green pushers which makes us poorer and them much richer.
The Editor says...
How could the ocean be "rising to unsustainable levels?" What's easier to sustain than sea level?
Climate
Change Is Not Threatening Human Health. The mainstream media has increasingly used
words like "catastrophe" and "uninhabitable" to describe the condition of the planet. This is
despite the fact that data show weather is not getting worse. Creating climate anxiety is
explicitly the goal of media climate reporting. Bombarding their audiences with scare
stories, facts to the contrary be damned, is aimed at motivating people into "taking action" and
supporting severe restrictions on fossil-fuel use. Survivors of a natural disaster may also
struggle with PTSD or similar ailments, but it doesn't mean that climate change is the cause.
VOA reporting that climate anxiety is a result of climate change itself is frankly disgusting.
In the end, objective scientific data does not show that human health is being negatively impacted
by climate change, and it is certainly not the biggest health threat facing humanity.
US
moves to protect wolverines as climate change melts their mountain refuges, threatens
extinction. The North American wolverine will receive long-delayed threatened species
protections under a Biden administration proposal released Wednesday in response to scientists'
warnings that climate change will likely melt away the rare species' snowy mountain refuges and
push them toward extinction. [...] Wolverines join a growing number of animals, plants and
insects — from polar bears in Alaska to crocodiles in southern Florida — that
officials say are at growing risk as increasing temperatures bake the planet, altering snowfall
patterns and raising sea levels.
The Editor says...
The Associated Press is getting more brazen in its reporting of the dire effects of global warming,
even though there has been approximately zero global warming in the last 25 years.
Certainly not enough of a change for a wolverine to sense. In particular, the Associated Press
casually presents idle conjecture as proven fact. The AP doesn't hesitate to report changes
"snowfall patterns and raising sea levels" as if those are well-established facts on which we all agree.
CNBC
Eliminates Climate Desk, No More Dedicated Staff Covering Climate Change. CNBC has
reportedly shut down its climate desk and will no longer have dedicated journalists covering
climate change. The Comcast-owned business news cable network hasn't publicly commented on
the decision, which was first reported by Bloomberg Green journalist Akshat Rathi. [Tweet]
Rathi cited a LinkedIn post by recently laid-off CNBC "climate innovation and technology" reporter
Catherine Clifford, who recounted a conversation she had with her "editor's boss." "As part
of wider newsroom headcount reductions, there would no longer be any staff at CNBC dedicated to
covering climate, this boss said," Clifford wrote. "The climate desk was being dismantled and my
position covering climate tech and innovation was being eliminated, this boss told me."
CNBC
has "dismantled its climate desk" amid layoffs and will no longer have a dedicated team to cover
our impending doom. CNBC is going through budget cuts (I wonder why!), meaning they
have to decide which news divisions are the most important and which they can cut. The
24-hour news network has decided that its going to be "dismantling" its "climate desk," which was
the company's full-time team for covering climate doom. I guess either climate change was
solved or they decided it's not actually the most important crisis of our lifetime anymore.
Woke
Lancet Warns: 'Highest Global Temperatures in over 100,000 Years'. The once
prestigious Lancet medical journal has made the astounding claim the year 2023 saw "the
highest global temperatures in over 100,000 years," even though temperature data collection only
began in the 19th century. According to NASA, three of the world's most complete temperature
tracking records, maintained by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center, and the U.K. Meteorological
Office's Hadley Centre, began in 1880.
Lies and
Polling Questions. Looking back over three decades plus of climate hysteria one can
identify several phases in the narrative. Phase one was simple, the message being: the
climate is changing. The response from many (including this scientist) was: yes it is, and
it always has, and it always will. We then moved into phase two: the climate is changing,
and human activity bears some responsibility for the phenomenon. The question was always:
"if true, how much?" But once we started down that road, civilized discourse pretty much came to an
end. That's because the media professionals got involved, and they don't care about highly
technical. They're only interested in attracting eyeballs. [...] Media types, like the
propagandists they are, deplore complexity and nuance. They want messages that are simple and
powerful. Once those of us they've labeled "deniers" started to delve into the intricacies
involved in evaluating and responding to "climate change," the PR professionals put a stop to
discourse. They essentially said that this "crisis" was too important to dither about the
details. "Climate change is happening and mankind is responsible" — full stop.
Any further discussion was not desired.
The
Weather Channel's Absurd 'Hot' Propaganda. The Weather Channel is absolutely
ridiculous. The channel's "Weather Across the Country" map on their homepage for September 19
had red colors EVERYWHERE! Because it's HOT HOT HOT! No area of the country is experiencing normal
weather for mid September, apparently. Chicago, for instance, was displayed as red to deep orange.
Warm, right? I can tell you from personal experience: It was "freezing" on Tuesday, September 19
in Northern Illinois for a day that is still technically summer. It rained all day and barely got over 60
all afternoon. I regretted not wearing a jacket to the office. On this map, Seattle is in
"yellow/green" denoting cooler weather, but I can assure you that today in Chicago felt like Seattle ...
and it probably felt a lot warmer in Seattle where The Weather Channel said, and showed with color,
that it was significantly "cooler." [...] Minot, North Dakota was allegedly 86 degrees today and is
in "cool" yellow. Jacksonville, Florida is one degree higher at 87 and is in "deep red hot."
Tens
of thousands march to kick off climate summit, demanding end to warming-causing fossil fuels.
Yelling that the future and their lives depend on ending fossil fuels, tens of thousands of protesters
on Sunday kicked off a week where leaders will try once again to curb climate change primarily caused
by coal, oil and natural gas. But protesters say it's not going to be enough. And they aimed
their wrath directly at U.S. President Joe Biden, urging him to stop approving new oil and gas projects,
phase out current ones and declare a climate emergency with larger executive powers.
The Editor says...
Climate change is not "primarily caused by coal, oil and natural gas." That assertion was thrown in
by the Associated Press writer as if it were an undisputed fact. The climate was constantly changing long
before the industrial revolution created a demand for hydrocarbon fuels, among other things. The
output power of the Sun is not constant. The eruption of one volcano can alter the weather for months.
China and India have no qualms about the emission of carbon dioxide, so any attempt to reduce our own CO2
byproducts will only hurt US.
Ignoring
History Means Choosing Windmills Over Whales. What we do know is that the media will
hysterically opine about climate change records. Except that they'll be wrong (as always).
There's nothing exceptional about the current heat we're experiencing:
• Death Valley, California, holds the world-record temperature high:
A whopping 134 F measured on July 10, 1913.
• North Dakota hit its historic high of 121 F in 1936.
• Montana experienced its highest temperature of 117F in 1937.
• Despite being the USA's warmest state, Florida's record high is only
108 F, and that occurred in 1931.
Uh-oh:
German and Austrian news outlets vow to report in lockstep their climate change coverage.
Reports indicate that Austrian and German mainstream news outlets have agreed to cover the alleged "climate
crisis" in lock-step and uniformity, disallowing deviation from the their narrative. To this end,
many major Austrian news outlets have agreed to sign a "climate codex," thereby committing themselves to
cover the "climate crisis" by portraying it as the "most urgent crisis in this century." The
"Network of Climate Journalism" responsible for the codex developed a "Climate Charta" on how to cover
the issue "together with our colleagues from the Network of Climate Journalism Germany." Austria
and Germany united again in promulgating an extremist agenda? In pushing a dangerous lie?
Are these media outlets going to blame the "climate crisis" on the Jews?
What
the media are failing to report about our current heat wave. The current heat wave is
being relentlessly blamed on increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but there is a
much more plausible explanation, one that is virtually endorsed by two of the world's leading
scientific organizations. It turns out that levels of water vapor in the atmosphere have
dramatically increased over the last year-and-a-half, and water vapor is well recognized as a
greenhouse gas, whose heightened presence leads to higher temperatures, a mechanism that dwarfs any
effect CO2 may have. So, why has atmospheric water vapor increased so dramatically?
Because of a historic, gigantic volcanic eruption last year that I — probably along with
you — had never heard of. The mass media ignored it because it took place 490 feet
underwater in the South Pacific.
Overheated.
The short version is an underwater Pacific Ocean volcano named Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai, 490 feet
under the waves, massively erupted, bigger than any other modern eruption, even bigger than Mount
Pinatubo. You never heard about it since it was underwater and nobody died. But
the erupting lava instantly vaporized fantastic, unimaginable amounts of sea water, which billowed
into the atmosphere, changing the water composition of Earth's atmosphere and heating it up for
years. [...] But I bet you never heard anything about Hunga Tonga, did you? Thanks,
media. [...] For the first time since tracking began, the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere
is pegged out at the maximum, across the board. Here's why corporate media is ignoring the
most dramatic climate even in modern history: because you can't legislate underwater
volcanoes. You can try, but they won't listen. So what's the fun in that?
Corporate media only exists to further political ends. Since volcanoes aren't subject to
politics, why bother?
'A
Hoax': Steve Milloy Exposes Climate Fearmongering About Hot Weather. After 50+ years
of failed eco-apocalypse predictions, it's no surprise to find that climate alarmists are
cherry-picking or manipulating some data and ignoring inconvenient evidence to prop up their
climate narrative. Media and politicians are ignoring the areas of America that are cooler
than previous summers — but they're also ignoring data upending their claims of record
heat. Data shows that the world has not in fact experienced global warming for the last eight
years. Also, a recent study found that CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are too low to cause
global warming. Not only that but no fewer than 36 climate models were also recently found to
have overestimated warming in the U.S. corn belt. These are the stories you won't hear from
climate alarmist media.
Washington
is gaslighting on "climate change". Baby, it's hot outside. Right on cue, a New
York Times headline links this surge in temperatures to "climate change." [...] We had multiple ice
ages and heat waves long before we had coal mines, gas-guzzling automobiles and air
conditioning. Or human-made CO2 emissions. Or human-made anything. The biggest
source of greenhouse gas emissions has been Mother Nature. Forest fires and volcano eruptions
have been some of the leading causes of greenhouse gases being released into the atmosphere.
The forest fires in California last year and Canada this summer have undone almost all the
"progress" in reducing carbon emissions from the green energy fad. Instead of outlawing cars,
how about better forest management? You've probably heard some of the preposterous
scaremongering from politicians and the media. CNN declared in big, bold letters that "global
temperatures are likely highest in at least 100,000 years." According to whom? "One
scientist told CNN."
Warming-obsessed
media wrong again. There is not much new about media hyperbole in weather reporting,
but July's climate alarmism may be more breathless than usual. Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn
and other social media were inundated with posts containing flaming red maps of Southern Europe and
Northern Africa. [Several tweets] "July 2023 will probably be the world's hottest month in
hundreds, if not thousands, of years," said top NASA climatologist Gavin Schmidt. One Twitter
user (with 22,000 followers) claimed, "After the hottest day and week, we are now experiencing the
hottest month ever (in about 120,000 years, based on paleoclimatology). As we keep warming the
planet, we will soon experience global temperatures not seen in the past million years!" When
questioned about the justification for his claims, the tweeter responded that scientists had "discovered
there was a glacial period, which many people know about from a movie called Ice Age."
Imagine substantiating scientific claims by referencing a Hollywood movie! Such is the
sorry state of critical thought.
LA
Times energy writer: What if we accepted occasional blackouts to solve climate change?
Sammy Roth is an energy & environment reporter for the LA Times. Last week he asked a serious
question on Twitter: Would it really be so bad if we had occasional blackouts as the cost of transitioning
away from fossil fuels sooner? [Tweet] I'm not an energy writer for a major newspaper but
this immediately strikes me as a terrible idea. Yesterday he wrote an entire column about this
starting with this rephrased version of his question: ["]What's more important: Keeping
the lights on 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, or solving the climate crisis?["]
The Editor says...
[#1] There is no climate crisis, so the answer to that last question is "keeping the lights on."
[#2] Switching over to windmills and solar panel will only help America's enemies. They want
us to have unreliable power. [#3] China and India don't have intentional outages, and neither
country cares about carbon dioxide emissions. [#4] Cuba has blackouts all the
time,*
and it has made no difference to the climate, locally or globally. [#5] If power outages
are planned, what's the best time of the week to pull the plug? Solar panels don't work at night,
so it will have to be done in daylight. Sunday morning? What about the churches and
weekend sports in the big government-funded stadium? Saturday morning? What about the gas
stations, hospitals, broadcasters, and nursing homes that need continuous power? Obviously
each of them will need to run a big diesel-powered generator to stay in business (and keep patients
alive). Wouldn't that defeat the whole purpose of the switch to windmill power?
How many TV stations are in California?
Approximately 106 full-power
stations, and 205 low-power stations, not counting the sub-channels. Most of them have a local studio
and all of them have a transmitter. Even if the transmitters for different stations are in the same
building, they don't share the cost of any resources, especially generator power, because they are in ruthless
competition with each other. TV stations make a bunch of money every minute they're on the air,
and I can assure you that none of them will bite the bullet and sit in the dark while the power is
intentionally turned off. Also consider the amount of energy being consumed by marijuana farming.
That crop is grown under artificial light 24 hours a day. Is anyone in that business going
to sacrifice their competitive edge by sitting through a blackout every week? Certainly not.
The same is true of the motion picture industry, and any other competitive enterprise. Time is money.
Are the airport terminals and control towers exempt from this lunacy? Do you want to be in a hospital
when the power goes off? What about the county jail, the police station, or the penitentiary? All of
the places listed above have backup generators already. Some of them are as big and as loud as locomotives.
And you can safely presume that the wealthy liberal elite have generators
for their 10,000 square foot houses. A scheduled weekly (or daily!) blackout would just make people angry.
It wouldn't do much to win Democrat votes. And it wouldn't do any good to have blackouts in California if no other
state follows suit, and especially if no other industrialized country cooperates. All this avoidable inconvenience
will accomplish NOTHING. You may have to live through The Great Energy Transition to Renewable Power,
but a few years later, I predict you will see an uprising called Put Everything Back the Way it Was.
NBC
just repeats climate predictions by the UN, no matter how many previous dire projections have been
100% wrong. It seems that every day the media will repeat a doomsday prediction about
the climate from the UN or elsewhere to scare the public. They never ask questions even
though previous dire predictions have been 100% wrong. The purpose is clearly to mislead the
public that predictions are equivalent to facts, and they must capitulate to radical leftist
policies to save the planet. The prediction below is that people in the southern U.S won't be
able to survive unless they give up gas cars, gas furnaces, and other conveniences. [...] What will
make the South more uninhabitable is if they succed in destroying the power grid and we have less
air conditioning.
Climate
Fact Check: June 2023 Edition. Ten more false climate claims from June have already
gone bust and are presented below. [#1] Canadian forest fires caused by climate change?
Smoky American skies caused by Canadian wildfires are not new. The historical record shows
Canadian wildfires have darkened U.S. skies repeatedly since 1706. [...] [#4] Florida strawberries
suffering from climate change? As shown in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) chart
[not seen here], Florida's strawberry harvests increased nearly 50 percent between 2001 and 2019.
[#5] Summers getting hotter? The New York Times reported in "Tracking Dangerous Heat in the
U.S." that: "Summer temperatures have become hotter and more extreme in recent decades." Fact
Check. The New York Times uses the 1951-1980 global cooling period as the baseline temperature
and ignores hot summers before 1940.
As
usual, the media's knee-jerk take on the Canadian wildfires was all wrong. There was
nothing new about springtime wildfires in Canada until the wind shifted unexpectedly last
week. That shift blew smoky air all over the northern and eastern US, producing memorably
apocalyptic-like orange air in New York City. Not wanting to waste a crisis, the lamestream
media jumped right in with both feet. They blamed the wildfires on the much-dreaded "climate
change," scared the daylights out of everyone about the air quality and then warned that more like
it was on the way unless we changed our fossil fuel-burning ways. Not unexpectedly, the
media's knee-jerk take was all wrong. Wildfires and smoky air have always occurred wherever
there are forests. At least eighteen of these dark or "yellow days" occurred in the US and
Canada from 1706 to 1910. George Washington even noted in his diary the one that occurred on
May 19, 1780 that reached as far south as Morristown, New Jersey.
It
is humorous to watch so-called 'experts' explain to us why each weather event has happened.
Whenever there are fires, floods, droughts, and storms, the media trots out "experts" to almost always
blame humans and our use of natural resources for the problem as they seek to destroy our great countries
with radical leftist policies. The following article in the New York Times seeks to get an explanation
for why it is supposedly significantly cloudier and colder than normal in California this year.
["]Why Has California Been So Cloudy Lately?["] I expect another deep thinking
article soon from NYT asking experts how winds dissipated Canadian smoke. Hint to journalists:
The climate (weather) has always been cyclical and always will be, no matter how much journalists, politicians,
bureaucrats, educators, and others pretend they can change and control it. The "May Gray" and "June Gloom"
seen this year are to many no different than any other year in California, and no, the Marine layer phenomenon
never brings rain.
'115
Degrees Fahrenheit' screams the New York Times headline. But in point of fact,
instead of seeking to scare people with high temperatures, most of the reporting lately talks about
the heat index. The purpose is to make people think it is warmer than it is. [...] If you
Google the question: What is the highest heat index ever recorded, you actually get the highest
actual temperature ever recorded which was 134 F. which occurred in Death Valley California in
1913. A lot of other heat records occurred during the 1930's, so why do they keep
telling the public that these are the hottest years on record and then claim that humans, cars,
CO2, Coal, methane etc. have caused the high temperatures?
Media
peddles new gas-stove study, neglects to mention one thing. Media outlets covering a
recently-published study claiming to show the harmful effects of gas stoves this past week failed
to note that the study was primarily funded by a China-linked climate group. The study found
that the burning of methane in gas stoves raised household levels of benzene — a
carcinogenic chemical — to those comparable with secondhand smoke, after setting one
burner to high or an oven to 350 degrees Fahrenheit for 45 minutes. Outlets such as
The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and NPR covered the study in the past seven days, but did not
mention that the study was conducted with "primary support" from the High Tide Foundation, a climate
activist non-profit committed to reducing methane that was co-founded by Richard Lawrence, an
investment banker with significant economic ties to China.
Democrats
are seeking to destroy the greatest country that ever existed. Why doesn't the media
report things about the climate that don't correspond with the dire predictions we have heard for
decades? The answer is obvious. Facts don't make any difference to the media and other
Democrats when they are pushing an agenda to control the people. They want to intentionally
mislead students. They do not want students to ask any questions or do any research.
After all, the media refuses to ask questions and do research themselves. That is why
Democrats oppose letting poor and minority kids go to better schools. [A recent] article
shows that the capital of India has been experiencing record cold periods since 2017. As far
as I can tell, India's population is still growing, they are still driving, they continue to use
coal and oil, CO2 is still rising, Methane is rising, and yet they are setting record cold
temperatures that have stood in place for a long time.
The
Leftist Green Agenda Is Buying Its Way Into The News. One recent analysis found AP
stories mentioned the phrases "climate change," "global warming," and "Climate disaster" hundreds
of times since receiving grants totaling $8 million in early 2022. The stated purpose of the
money is to fund the AP's "Climate Journalism Initiative," which would employ 20 new reporters to
"transform how the AP covers the climate story." Perhaps it also funded the story that gave us
Biden's hard-hat environmentalism? In another example from the story, former top Clinton
adviser John Podesta is heavily quoted in his role as overseer of the $369 billion for green
energy from Biden's so-called Inflation Reduction Act. The story fails to mention Podesta's
political operative past, including his unofficial title of "White House clean-up chief" during the
Clinton years. Also quoted are the extreme eco-groups the Natural Resources Defense Council
and Center for Biological Diversity. They are all given a lot of space in a story with a lot
of reach. As a wire service, the hard-hat rebranding from the AP will appear in thousands of
newspapers across the world as news. We don't know if the millions the AP received for climate
coverage played a role in helping Biden rebrand his energy policy, and that's precisely the point.
Explosion
of AP climate change stories following $8 million environmental grant. In the year
following a grant of more than $8 million to the Associated Press from key climate change
advocates, the news service has poured out at least 64 stories warning of environmental calamity,
according to a new media study. Media Research Center Business charted the stories and
language used following the multimillion-dollar grant and found that AP also used over 500
environmental extremism buzzwords in the stories. The media giant, which feeds news outlets
worldwide, received grants totaling $8 million from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Quadrivium, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Walton Family
Foundation in February 2022.
Government
Fiat Will Not Make Electric Cars Viable. The unelected bureaucrats in the Biden
administration's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have announced a plan to wave their magic
regulatory wand. These obviously "woke" EPA global-warming ideologues aim to mandate new
tailgate emission standards that require two-thirds of all new passenger vehicles sold in the United
States by 2032 to be electric. On April 8, 2023, the New York Times, in a story
that appeared to be an obvious trial balloon, published the news that the EPA was planning to
implement "the most stringent auto pollution limits in the world, designed to ensure that
all-electric cars make up as much as 67 percent of the passenger vehicles sold in the country by
2032." The source for the story was the typical unnamed "according to two people familiar with the
matter." Clearly, the Biden administration and the newspaper expected push-back, given that the
New York Times article announcing the news also cited industry statistics indicating
electric vehicle (EV) sales still languish under 6 percent of total passenger vehicles sold
in the United States.
The
media is clearly confused about the difference between made-up predictions and factual news. A
significant percentage of news stories are made-up predictions, not factual reporting. [...] Here is a small sample:
Prediction: In 1922, an article appeared in the Washington Post warning that because of warming, the icecaps are melting fast.
Fact: the icecaps are still there because the predictions were made up.
Prediction: In 1970, around the first Earth Day, after thirty years of global cooling,
we were told that an existential threat of a coming ice age would kill billions of people because of starvation.
Fact: The predictions were 100% wrong because they were made up to scare the people. [...]
Prediction: In 2000 we heard predictions that there would be snowless winters.
Fact: The predictions were 100% wrong.
Prediction: In 2005, after hurricane Katrina hit, we were told that global warming would cause more frequent and more severe hurricanes.
Fact: The predictions were 100% wrong because they were just made up. We actually had a very mild ten-year hurricane period after Katrina.
Prediction: In 2008, ABC predicted great disasters by 2015 because of global warming
Fact: The predictions were 100% wrong.
More
Climate Fiction From the BBC. Countless mainstream media programmes now incorporate
extremist green climate propaganda into their output, seemingly without any desire to question the
most outlandish and improbable statements. Last Monday's Start the Week on BBC Radio 4
provides a case study in how fiction is mixed with cherry-picked fact, doused in error-ridden
political Net Zero propaganda and presented as a learned contribution to our understanding of how
the climate is breaking down. Not to put too fine a point on it, the whole affair was a
one-sided, misinformed muddle.
A fridge too far?
The Associated Press is continuing its tradition of celebrating people who are making a difference in an effort to "save
the planet" through noble acts of sacrifice. One such person is Josh Spodek of Manhattan. After taking
recycling and composting to the extreme, Spodek determined that he still wasn't doing enough. So now he has
permanently unplugged his refrigerator, which was apparently using too much electricity and contributing to the climate
crisis. He started out by unplugging it for three months during the winter, but now he has shifted his shopping
and eating habits to allow him to live entirely without refrigeration. [...] It's hard for me to ignore the likelihood
that there is more going on here than just another liberal who is trying to eliminate his carbon footprint. This
is someone who has fully bought into the idea that humans don't "deserve" the benefits of technology and that we all
need to live in pods and eat bugs.
PBS:
'Why Are So Many Americans and [GOP] Lawmakers Still Enthralled With Gas?'. The Thursday evening edition
of the PBS NewsHour devoted 11 minutes to the apparent foolishness... of cooking with gas. Science
correspondent Miles O'Brien condescendingly mocked anyone who would dare not throw out their gas stoves and purchase
more expensive induction stoves, given the obvious health hazards of natural gas (a danger the liberal press learned
about a few days go and won't stop shrieking over).
You
Must Assume That All Information Put Out By Our Government Is Corrupt. Long-time readers here are
undoubtedly familiar with my series, now of some 30 parts, on what I call the Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All
Time. The headline refers to the alteration by U.S. bureaucrats of historical climate records to make it appear
that temperatures have closely tracked the ongoing increase in CO2 in the atmosphere, when in fact the actual
temperature readings show the opposite. The U.S. climate bureaucracies NASA and NOAA regularly put out excited
press releases about the most recent month or year being the "hottest on record," or something like that. But
anybody can go to past information releases to find that those statements only hold if one accepts alteration of prior
information to support the narrative. My October 20, 2020 post contained the ultimate smoking gun: two
NASA charts of U.S. temperatures, one from 1999 and the other from 2019, clearly showing the alteration of early-year
temperatures to support the claim that the most recent years are the warmest. [Charts] In NASA's data in
1999, 1934 was the warmest year in the U.S. temperature record, about 0.6 deg C (1 deg F) warmer
than 1998; 1921, 1931 and 1953 were also warmer than 1998. By 2019, 1998 had somehow become the warmest year,
through the magical cooling of the earlier years. And thus do we get a claim that there is some kind of dangerous
warming going on that requires a full transformation of the U.S. and world energy system, all under the direction of the
all-knowing bureaucrats.
Extreme
Weather Events [are] Declining. Some years ago, environmental alarmists decided to hedge their bets by
talking about "climate change" rather than "global warming." These days, any inconvenient weather event is chalked
up to "climate change." If a tornado hits Florida, it's climate change. If rain spoils your picnic, it's
climate change. But are severe weather events actually increasing? No, they are not: [...] Most of our
reporters — ignorant, mendacious, or both — routinely recite as fact that the number of extreme
weather events is rising, due to climate change. It simply isn't true.
Liberal
media made slew of dubious claims about climate change, year-end report finds. The Associated Press took
$8 million in donations to fund climate coverage in 2022, with the news cooperative and several other major media
publications engaged in dubious claims about climate change, according to a new, exclusive year-end report. The
"Climate Fact Check 2022" report, presented by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), the Heartland Institute, the
Energy & Environmental Legal Institute, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), and the International Climate
Science Coalition (ICSC), stated that "climate alarmists" and members of the media engaged in claims about the
relationship between manmade emissions and natural disasters, claims that clashed with "reality and science." In
February, the Associated Press admitted that they would assign more than 24 journalists across the globe to cover
"climate issues" after receiving more than $8 million over three years from various organizations.
Keystone
Pipeline Allowed to Reopen, Media Continues Lying about Spill. The Keystone Pipeline runs from Alberta to
Houston, almost in a straight line south down "Tornado Alley" in America's midwest, running from North Dakota to
Texas. The overall pipeline is 2,687 miles long, is owned by TC Energy, and carries 860,000 barrels of
oil per day through its 30 inch diameter tubes. The current price of oil per barrel is roughly $80. So
the pipeline is moving roughly $68.8 million worth of oil through its pipeline every day, or $25.1 billion per
year. The pipeline shut down on December 7th after a spill of 14,000 barrels of oil in rural North
Kansas. The Calgary, Canada-based company received permission from the Biden administration on Friday to reopen
the pipeline, though it did not give a definitive date when it would restart.
Biden
admin is funding foreign reporters to write climate stories, emails show. The Biden administration funded
a foreign "reporting tour" last year, sponsoring several overseas journalists who cover climate change, internal State
Department emails showed. In March 2021, high-ranking State Department officials discussed a proposal to sponsor
foreign journalists to "have experiences that educate them on reporting on climate change," according to the emails
obtained by Protect the Public's Trust (PPT) and shared with Fox News Digital. In the email exchange, officials
from Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC) John Kerry's office and the Office of Global Change (EGC) praised the
program as a "fantastic" and "great" idea.
"Some
of the Worst" News Media. About 15 years ago I co-authored a book about air pollution and the Clean Air
Act. I know — you'll just have to contain your excitement. One of the things we found was an
example of what might be called the reverse Lake Wobegone Effect, i.e., according to local media every local area had
"some of the worst" air pollution in the whole country! Every metro area was below average! Of course, if every
place has "some of the worst" of anything, then no place really does (as the government's air quality data bear out*).
[...] Actual EPA data shreds these claims, but environmental advocacy groups (especially the American Lung Association's
annual "state of the air" report) produce cookie-cutter press releases claiming that each local area suffers "some of
the worst" pollution in America, and the media dutifully repeats these claims. This is why most environmental
"reporters" are really just stenographers for environmentalists. This ought to be embarrassing for any serious
editor or publisher, but there aren't many serious editors or publishers any more.
Vicious dogma.
The COVID pandemic is just a flash in the pan when compared to the dogmatic hysteria surrounding most aspects of weather
and climate. When CBS News periodically covered the enormous blanket of snow that recently fell on Buffalo, NY and
environs, they would then immediately jump to coverage of the world climate conference (COP 27) at the Egyptian resort
of Sharm el-Sheikh. The abrupt juxtaposition caused me to burst out laughing. Never once was it mentioned
that the historically significant northeast blizzard happened a month before the beginning of winter, i.e., the
middle of autumn. Just about every news story regarding floods, wildland fires, drops in lake and river levels,
high tides, etc. winds up including "climate change" as a significant component. In this year's political season,
even candidates for city council included climate activism in their proposed agendas. Imagine, local political
hacks saving their constituents from the weather.
UPI
hiding the decline in order to promote climate change agenda. Last week, I ran across a UPI story that
left me scratching my head. Titled "In a surprise, global greenhouse gas emissions seem to be on the decline" by
Daniel J. Graeber, it's purportedly evidence that there's good news on the climate change front. The Joe Biden
Inflation Reduction Act has caused a bunch of people to buy electric cars, and that, along with wind farms and increased
solar capacity, shows we may have turned the corner on climate change, according to data. Except here's the
problem. The data suggests no such thing.
Hurricane
Hysteria, Hype, and Histrionics. Hurricane season is upon Southeastern America and that means hair-on-fire
hysteria from the media and the political left. After Hurricane Ian ravaged southwest coastal Florida, we have
heard nothing but hype from the corporate media, eager to connect every hurricane to catastrophic global warming,
climate change, or whatever excuse they are currently using to usher in the Green New Deal and tyrannical top-down
control of all aspects of our lives. Hurricanes are not new and are a staple of southern coastal regions since
long [ago]. Yet judging from media histrionics, severe hurricanes are only a recent phenomenon, ignoring hundreds
or thousands of years ago when Florida was nothing but a swamp. Hurricane harpies in the media, practicing one of
the Democrats' favorite strategies of never letting a crisis go to waste, were quick to pounce on tragedy for political
gain. Look at some of the headlines, all singing in perfect harmony. [...]
It
would be nice if progressives concentrated on fixing the man-made disasters they caused instead of theoretical ones they
make up. The media and others continually said Ian was the deadliest hurricane in Florida in over 90 years,
as if that is a meaningful statistic. They say that Ian was caused by manmade climate change. Of
course, they gave zero scientific evidence to support that statement, because there is none, but the indoctrination
continues. Only one of the deadliest 24 hurricanes in the U.S has occurred after 1970. Eight of the deadliest
occurred before 1900. There has never been a correlation between temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity and
the use of energy related natural resources. When there is no correlation, there can't be causation. The
radical leftists want to control us, not the climate.
Media
Falsely Links Hurricanes to Climate Change. Here Are the Facts. As Florida deals with the cleanup
from Hurricane Ian — which ravaged the state, killed hundreds, and displaced thousands more —
media outlets have peddled the idea that this tragedy is the result of climate change. Some even suggested that
Florida shouldn't get aid because some of its elected officials oppose federal legislation that would pump billions of
dollars into various green initiatives. The New York Times ran a piece headlined "Florida Leaders Rejected Major
Climate Laws. Now They're Seeking Storm Aid." The subheadline read, "Senior Republican politicians in the state
have opposed federal action against global warming, which is making storms like Hurricane Ian more destructive." The
Times report said that while Republicans in the state are requesting aid, they "don't want to discuss the underlying
problem that is making hurricanes more powerful and destructive." What was the cause, according to the Times?
"The burning of fossil fuels." Of course.
Do Republicans Cause Hurricanes?
With the grim inevitability of Greek tragedy, three things always happen when a hurricane makes landfall in the United
States. First, the storm will be touted by the corporate media as evidence that anthropogenic climate change
presents an existential threat to humanity and the planet. Second, anyone who dares question the accuracy of this
claim will be either ignored or denounced as a dangerous anti-science "denier." Third, if the hurricane happens to
hit a state with a GOP governor, he will be blamed for causing any resultant death and destruction. In the case of
Hurricane Ian, all three commenced more than 24 hours before the storm actually arrived in Florida.
US
media do Somalians a disservice by blaming climate change for famine. Ishaan Tharoor, a foreign affairs
columnist at the Washington Post, didn't mince words about a looming famine in Somalia. "Ordinary Somalis ...
have contributed little to the emissions that are warming the planet. But they are on the front lines of the
catastrophic climatic events scientists believe will only grow more common in the years to come." On cue, National
Public Radio picked up the story, allowing the author to expound unchallenged on "the connection between the hunger
crisis, the war in Ukraine and climate change." If the media really want to "follow the science," however, they got
cause and effect wrong. Certainly, the Horn of Africa does face drought and famine in Somalia. It may be a
bit of an exaggeration to blame climate change, though, given the cyclical nature of drought in the Horn. When
scientists voice hypotheses, they seek to prove them by isolating variables to rule out any other explanation.
Here is the problem: Suggesting emissions cause climate change, which in turn explains famine, may conform with
journalists' politics — but not with science.
Is
Extreme Weather Causing the World's Rivers to Dry Up? A recent CNN article entitled
"The World's Rivers are Drying Up from Extreme Weather. See How 6 Look from Space" purports
to argue that rivers such as the Colorado, Yangtze, Rhine, Po, Loire, and Danube are dwindling due
to "a painful lack of rain and relentless heat waves." [...] Let's start close to home. The
Colorado River is cited as the first example, and, although CNN attributes its drying to the
"historic drought in the US West," they do not suggest that this drought is human induced.
They do mention, however, that "around 40 million people in seven states and Mexico rely on the
river's water for drinking, agriculture and electricity." But an evaluation of the current
conditions from the USGS National Water Dashboard indicates, as shown below, that many stream gauge
stations in western Colorado and Utah are near normal, and in New Mexico and Arizona, they are
above and much above normal.
The
vast majority of pharmacology, psychiatry, vaccine science and published research is a complete fraud. [Scroll
down] As a hilarious example of the junk science lunacy of the climate cult, look no further than the corporate-controlled
media which now claims that every country in the world is heating up faster than every other country in the world. Such a
claim is mathematically impossible, yet it has become the default lunatic claim of the climate cult media, regardless of its
incomprehensible nature.
CNN'S
'Climate Correspondent' Predicts All Life on Earth Is About to End. Nearly all media cooperate in disseminating
climate change fear-porn. When hot months come because the northern hemisphere is closer to the sun, temperatures go
up. Changes in temperatures are reported in media with alarm and always denoted on graphics in blood red. A few
days ago, I saw this graphic of July temperatures in Europe. The split screen shows different colors, although the
temperatures are just about the same. The replies were swift to point out that other stations reported hot weather
temperatures as a red graphic in 2017. In any event, the effect of coloring land in red is to cause people to feel the
emotional burn. Feel the fear. [Tweet]
NBC
Panics Over Climate Change, Blames Manchin for Blocking Biden. On Monday's NBC Nightly News, after
spending the first five minutes of the broadcast panicking over a heat wave in the middle of July, anchor Lester Holt and
correspondent Anne Thompson chalked the warm weather up to "climate change" and sought to blame Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV)
for blocking the Biden administration's radical climate change agenda which would drive inflation up further by pumping more
money into the economy. "This severe weather certainly underscoring the increasing role of climate change and the
challenges America faces in trying to combat it," Holt whined before turning to Thompson to give her report.
Seven
Ways The Texas Tribune Is All-In On Climate Fearmongering. A recent piece in The Texas Tribune lists
seven alleged ways climate change is already impacting the state of Texas and its residents. When not outright false,
the listed claims are extremely misleading. Real-world data indicates the state of Texas faces no severe imminent
threat from climate change. Two writers, María Méndez and Erin Douglas contributed to the article, "Seven
ways climate change is already hitting Texans," which runs the gamut of common alarmist lines. This isn't the first
time Erin Douglas and The Texas Tribune have published false information about the impacts of climate change on Texas.
Another
day, another fearmonger article on climate change. The bureaucrats at the United Nations desertification agency
are blaming us for droughts, as the Associated Press reports: [...] I wonder how the experts at the U.N., in the media, in
academia, and in government think 33% of the Earth already is covered by desert. It certainly wasn't caused by humans
and fossil fuels. There were obviously long droughts. [...] The Sahara desert is the largest desert in the world and it
has been in a 13,000-year drought, clearly not caused by humans and fossil fuels and clearly longer than any current or
projected droughts.
CNN claims
Normal Weather Is A Climate Crisis. "Temperatures in parts of India and Pakistan have reached record levels,
putting the lives of millions at risk as the effects of the climate crisis are felt across the subcontinent. The
heatwave has also been felt by India's neighbor Pakistan, where the cities of Jacobabad and Sibi in the country's
southeastern Sindh province recorded highs of 47 degrees Celsius (116.6 Fahrenheit) on Friday" [This is
followed by numerous newspaper reports from decades ago, showing that brutally hot weather is normal in India.]
Why
don't the media ever ask why previous IPCC predictions have been so wrong? Once again, the UN intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change is warning that we are doomed by climate change. The media, Biden administration, and the IPCC
like to scare people. [...] If fossil fuel consumption causes temperature to rise substantially, why has the temperature over
the last 150 years only gone up one to two degrees while crude oil consumption went from around zero to 100 million barrels a day?
• How did the globe cool from 1940 to 1975 when the IPCC says that fossil fuels, CO2, methane, cars, humans, industrialization all cause warming?
• Isn't the temperature on the globe today similar to what it was during the medieval warming period when fossil fuels and humans weren't causing warming?
• Wouldn't a one-to-two-degree temperature rise be normal after a 550 year ice age ended in the mid 1800's?
• Why is the media willing to push a radical leftist agenda that will destroy America and decimate the poor, middle class, and small businesses without asking questions?
Boulder
Wildfires and Media Gaslighting Over Global Warming. The recent Marshall fire in Boulder, Colorado and
neighboring communities was the most destructive fire in Colorado history, moving quickly and relentlessly, destroying more
than 1,000 homes, leaving an apocalyptic level of destruction in its wake. [...] The fire was quickly and predictably blamed
on global warming, now called climate change, although a changing climate, including moisture and drought, are nothing new to
Colorado and have been occurring long before gas-guzzling SUVs and air conditioners were a staple of American life.
Don't tell the corporate media, however. This is how they reported on the Boulder wildfires. From NBC, "How
climate change primed Colorado for a rare December wildfire." The Washington Post agreed, "How extreme climate conditions
fueled unprecedented Colorado fire." An echo from Colorado Public Radio, "Why a fire scientist sees climate fingerprints on
the suburban Boulder County fires." And from Axios, "Climate changes linked to Colorado's fire disaster."
A
Danish newspaper decided to finally ask questions. Sadly, most American journalists won't. Sadly, most people
pretending to be journalists, won't ask any questions. They are too busy campaigning for Democrats and pushing their leftist
agenda to remake and destroy America. I keep wishing some enterprising reporter would do a simple amount of investigative
reporting on climate change. There needs to be just one question: Can you show us some piece of scientific data that
shows a direct relationship between temperatures and fossil fuel use over the last 150 years? Give the simple project to
a 7th grader with two variables, temperature and crude oil use, and ask for a line graph. The temperature line, would be
horizontal, with periods where the temperature goes up and down and with a minor rise over the total period. The crude oil
line would be almost vertical with an exponential rise from around zero to around 100 million barrels per day. Why would
anyone advocate destroying an industry, that has greatly improved the quality and length of everyone that uses it, when there is
zero correlation?
Pandemic
Response Will Be Used As Model for "Climate Crisis" Response. [Scroll down] We can see media hustlers
ginning up climate fear in real time. Instead of allowing the investigation into whether downed power lines combined
with poor urban planning resulted in Colorado's winter wildfires to be completed, many in the press immediately interject
"climate crisis" into reports. [Tweet] Laughing off the delusions of climate activists can no longer be the only
course of action. Cambridge University Press has just published a paper that argues "authoritarian environmentalism" in
the mode of the pandemic is appropriate to address the alleged climate "emergency". [...] The failures of the pandemic
response model should make us seriously question all our climate models and the projections being made from them.
Our World Gone (Climate)
Mad. Each day the media are filled with "news" stories blaming various events and conditions on "climate
change," which are of course code words for "humans are overheating their planet." Never do these reports offer evidence
that mankind's carbon dioxide emissions are to blame. That the press feels there's no reason to back its claims with
facts indicates that a large segment of the West has bought fully and uncritically into the narrative. Some days it
seems as if it's useless to continue to fight the fight against global warming. Politicians, "journalists," activists,
activist scientists, celebrities, and a substantial portion of the public tell us that human activity is causing Earth to
warm and there's no more to the story than that. Skepticism is equated with denial. Questions are verboten.
Aligning with the alarmists' account is the only acceptable response.
EPA
moves to regulate methane emissions from oil and gas. The Biden administration on Tuesday [11/2/2021] announced
a proposal to regulate methane from oil and gas sources, touting the rules as having the potential to produce immediate
emissions cuts and hoping the proposal will bolster U.S. clout at the ongoing U.N. climate conference. Methane, the
main component of natural gas, is less known than carbon, the biggest contributor to climate change. But emissions from
methane are driving more than 25% of global warming, mostly caused purposely or accidentally by leaks during production and
transportation of natural gas. Those methane leaks could offset the carbon reduction benefits of the switch in recent
years from coal to natural gas and renewables for generating electricity in the United States.
The Editor says...
The article above, judging by the first few sentences, appears to have been written by a Democrat Party activist. So-called renewable
energy isn't going to solve any problem that anybody has. Natural gas is clean and abundant, and should be utilized to its fullest
potential. Any "global warming" that you prevent by eliminating the use of natural gas will be negated the next time Mount Pinatubo
erupts, as it did in 1991. Aside from that, consider the statement that methane "is less known than carbon, the biggest contributor
to climate change." There are several things wrong with this deceptive assertion; for example: [#1] Carbon dioxide is not
carbon. [#2] Carbon dioxide doesn't cause climate change. The climate constantly changes with or without slight changes in
the CO2 content of the atmosphere. [#3] Lots of things contribute to climate change, especially the variable output power of the
Sun. In the sentence prior to that, there was a statement that "emissions from methane are driving more than 25% of global warming."
Presumably the writer means, "emissions of methane," but even so, methane does not cause "more than 25% of global warming." For
one thing, there is not enough global warming to be of any concern at the moment. But more importantly, water vapor has a far
greater influence in the greenhouse effect than methane. Water vapor comes from the lakes and oceans and can never be stopped.
Media
peddling a new 'climate change' lie. The lead story on ABC news on Monday November 1st was a blatant,
intentional lie spreading propaganda on climate change to mislead the public. It is tremendously sad and dangerous that
so much of what is purported to be news today is Democrat talking points used to pass their radical leftist agenda to destroy
America. [...] Most of the media and other Democrats have lied for decades about the existential threat of climate change
supposedly caused by humans and fossil fuels. Not once do we see scientific data, or facts showing a direct causal
relationship because facts don't matter, only the agenda and power. I hope enough American people wake up and do not
submit to the draconian measures being proposed which will cause the U.S. to commit economic suicide.
A Flood Of Superficial
Climate Reports. This past week, the Biden administration doubled down in its campaign against climate change
with the release of a suite of four reports, on national defense, financial risk, homeland security, and migration.
These reports all start with the common premise that the climate crisis is now upon us in full fury. Moreover, they
also all insist that the issues at hand are nonpolitical, and that the objective at all times is "to be guided by the best
available science and data." To say the least, however, the claim looks hollow, given that none of these reports offers
any data whatsoever to support its major contentions. [...] Sadly, instead of asking any hard questions, these reports just
take the worst-case scenario for granted and move on.
The crafty
language of climate alarmism. When really bad, damaging weather hits it is normal to declare a federal
disaster. This which allows Federal agencies to take certain actions, including loans and tax relief. This is
done at the county scale. So [The Washington Post] looked at all of the disaster declarations in the last three months
and determined the cumulative fraction of the US population that lived in those counties. [...] The stretching begins when
they report their study. First we get the headline, which is all that most people will read. Here is the main
headline: "Nearly 1 in 3 Americans experienced a weather disaster this summer" This assumes that somehow every
person living in every county "experienced" the local disaster. The number of people that physically experienced these
disasters is actually quite small. In some cases, like flash floods, most of the county never knew it had happened
until they heard the news. In the hurricane cases a lot of people were not there, while others simply watched it rain
really hard. Losing electricity, while unpleasant, is hardly experiencing a disaster.
U.N.
Climate Summit: A Meaningless Meeting Of Useless People. Despite the incessant screeching demands that we
must save our planet by severely cutting our greenhouse gas emissions, it's obvious that man's impact on the climate is not
creating an existential crisis. Every harsh weather event is blamed by activists, politicians, reporters, editors, and
celebrities as evidence that anthropogenic global warming is going to destroy Earth. Of course these are often the same
people who tell us we cannot take a single weather event, such as a cold snap or an unusually heavy snow, and extrapolate
from that there is no man-made warming. They want man's greenhouse gas emissions to be an existential crisis.
Al
Roker Swoons Over Unhinged Climate Radical Greta Thunberg. On NBC's 3rd Hour Today on Tuesday
[10/12/2021], co-host and weatherman Al Roker conducted a gushing interview with radical climate crusader Greta Thunberg,
hailing her as "the face of the climate movement." He even fondly recalled Thunberg's melodramatic meltdown in front of
the United Nations in 2019 as "one of the most memorable speeches in U.N. history." "Climate activist Greta Thunberg is
back. After holding rallies virtually for more than a year, she's taking to the streets once again, challenging world
leaders," Roker excitedly announced as the segment began.
Here is an example of a biased report: Phoenix, other
cities keep growing as climate danger rises. A risk index map by the Federal Emergency Management Agency found
that the nation's five fastest-growing cities — Phoenix, Las Vegas, Houston, Fort Worth and Seattle —
are in counties at relatively high to very high risk of natural disaster. The risks include hurricanes, flooding,
wildfires and heat waves — all phenomena associated with climate change. The people at greatest risk are
often in poor and racially diverse communities where many households lack the means to cope with disasters, including heat
waves that are more frequent, widespread and severe.
The Editor says...
There is no "climate danger." There is no need for "emergency management." "[H]urricanes, flooding, wildfires and
heat waves [are] associated with climate change" by the same people who blame climate change for everything. "[P]oor and
racially diverse communities" live in the same weather as anybody else, and are in no greater danger than the rest of us.
The
New Yorker provides a platform for ecoterrorism. David Remnick, of The New Yorker, put up a podcast over
the weekend. He opened by saying that, while the Biden administration and the UN are working hard on climate change,
it's too late. As the California wildfires show, catastrophic climate change is here. (Never mind that California has
had cyclical droughts and fires for centuries.) That's why Remnick respectfully gave The New Yorkers' bully pulpit podcast to
Andreas Malm, a lecturer at Lund University in Sweden, who thinks it's time to blow things up. [...] Well, as Remnick
explains, Malm's recent book is entitled "How to Blow up a Pipeline." And while "it's a bit more nuanced than the title
suggests," even Remnick agrees that, "at its core, he really does want environmental activists to rethink their commitment to
non-violence and embrace tactics of sabotage." Then, Remnick has a polite and respectful interview with Malm, as the
latter details his rage and the need to destroy property.
No,
CBS News, Global Warming Did Not Create Taliban Victory. CBS News published an article today claiming global warming
was a major factor in the Taliban overrunning Afghanistan and creating murderous chaos throughout the country, rather than political
ineptitude. CBS News argues that global warming created horrible weather conditions that decimated crop production during the
past 30 years in the country, and the Taliban fed off the misery experienced by Afghan farmers. The objective truth is
entirely the opposite. [...] CBS News claims that climate change in Afghanistan during "the last three decades ... have destroyed
crops and left people hungry." As you can see, however, Afghanistan has fully doubled its crop yields during the past
three decades.
Asia's
fossil fuel plans [are] oblivious to UN's climate scare. Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the
author. Asian demand for fossil fuels is unlikely to be deterred by the United Nations' Aug. 9 fearmongering climate
report. Asian countries like India and China are increasing their production and consumption of fossil fuels.
India — one of the largest energy consumers — is not only a big importer of fossil fuel but is also a
key investor in oil exploration projects in other countries. This aggressive development of oil, gas, and coal stands
in stark contrast to the mainstream media's narrative of a so-called green revolution.
National Public
Radio's Misinformation on Wildfires and Climate: Part 1. Each day I attempt to synthesize curiously divergent views in the news. In the
morning I listen to National Public Radio (NPR) and in the evening I watch Fox News. However, I'm increasingly disturbed by NPR's unbalanced reporting
on wildfires. With every wildfire report, NPR now adds climate crisis comment but ignores wildfire science. I learned more about heat transfer and
wildfires as a boy scout. I also expanded my wildfire science as an ecologist researching California's Sierra Nevada ecosystems for 30 years
and I must say an honest NPR would focus on the 3 major issues needed to minimize wildfire devastation.
[#1] Minimize human ignitions.
[#2] Improve ground fuel management.
[#3] Remove introduced annual grasses.
Politicians and media journalists that claim reducing CO2 will save us from bigger wildfires are only exacerbating public fears and promoting ineffective policies.
Physicist
to Tucker Carlson: Climate Change Is 'Fiction of the Media,' Not an 'Existential Threat'. Democrats and
their media lapdogs are rabidly hyping the bogus narrative that climate change is an imminent "existential threat" to mankind
as part of a cynical move to promote left-wing agendas. That's the takeaway from a Fox News interview with physicist
Steven Koonin, who offered scientific support to those who believe grifting climate alarmists are flippantly weaponizing this
sham talking point to enrich and empower themselves. "It's a fiction of the media and the politicians who like to
promote that notion," Koonin said on Fox Nation's "Tucker Carlson Today." Lest anyone dismiss Koonin as "right-wing,"
it bears pointing that he was undersecretary for science in former President Barack Obama's Department of Energy. The
theoretical physicist and engineering professor is currently the director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New
York University.
Playing Fast and Loose
with Numbers. Far from being settled, climate science is tricky: we don't know well what happens to global
temperatures when atmospheric CO2 doubles ("climate sensitivity"); we can't properly model clouds and cloud formation, crucial
for how much of the sun's incoming heat will be reflected away; the range for best-guesses as to what the global temperature
rise over the coming century will be is vast (maybe 1° Celsius — maybe 5° Celsius) — so vast,
in fact, that it hardly warrants a quantification. Yet, the science is "settled," we hear, and we must "listen to
the scientists." But the worst crime are the subtle throwaway lines that journalists tuck onto their coverage of
impending doom that give a completely mistaken impression about the future of the world.
Earth's Axis
Has Been Shifted by Climate Change, Study Says. Climate change has contributed to the shifting of Earth's axis
of rotation, according to new research. Earth's geographic north and south poles — where the planet's axis
of rotation intersects with its surface — are not fixed. Changes in where the Earth's mass is distributed
can cause the axis, and the poles, to move. Melting glaciers caused a significant amount of water to shift, which
scientists have now said helped the locations of the poles accelerate eastward. It is estimated that since 1980, the
poles' positions have moved about 4 meters (13 feet).
The Editor says...
[#1] The poles migrate constantly.
Use your favorite non-Google search engine to find "Chandler wobble." The same thing is happening
to Mars, where there are no
coal-fired power plants or internal-combustion engines. [#2] If the "poles accelerate eastward," what does that mean? If
the North Pole moves east, the South Pole moves west. The net result is zero. [#3] The article above lacks specifics.
In my opinion, it was intentionally written to be vague. "Melting glaciers caused a significant amount of water to shift," it
says. What is that significant amount? Is that the only place in the world where ice melts?
On CNN, "Town Hall" means "one-sided Democrat infomercial." CNN
plans climate change town hall after staffer reveals plan to sell climate 'fear' in leaked recording. CNN is
set to host a live town hall with senior Biden administration officials this weekend on the topic of climate change, weeks
after a network employee told an undercover journalist the network planned to push "fear" about the issue. The town
hall, moderated by CNN anchor Dana Bash, will focus on "The Climate Crisis" and will air on Friday night to mark this year's
celebration of Earth Day, the network announced. The participants include Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John
Kerry, White House National Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan and
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, all of whom will be asked about Biden's campaign promise to remake American climate policy.
A
classic example of agenda-driven weather reporting. Weather, like climate, should always be the end, not the
means to an end. If you love something, that should be your goal. That is where your treasure is and you aim
what you do at it. Our field is simply being used by many that report on it as a means to an end, not the end[.]
This is a classic example. And if you ever wonder why I am still bringing up this whole climate situation its because
in what I do, I can not avoid watching the nonsense that I see.
Coordinated propaganda: Major
News Outlets Pledge to Begin Calling 'Climate Change' a 'Climate Emergency'. A number of major news
organizations worldwide, ranging from Scientific American and The Columbia Journalism Review to The
Guardian and Al Jazeera, have signed a pledge to begin referring to "climate change" as a "climate emergency" in
their reporting. "Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using the term 'climate
emergency' in its coverage of climate change," the publication announced Monday in a tweet to its 3.9 million followers
touting "the impact we hope it can have throughout the media landscape." "We Are Living in a Climate Emergency, and
We're Going to Say So," the headline of a Scientific American commentary published Monday declares. Claiming
that that climate change is "the biggest environmental emergency to beset the earth in millennia," the piece announces the
name change: "Given the circumstances, Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using
the term 'climate emergency' in its coverage of climate change."
The Death
of Science, and of Scientific American. The great legacy publication, Scientific American, is
dead. It's still in print, but it is no longer either scientific or American. In an article described by a friend
as, "a hailstorm of impenetrable academic verbiage, dictated by a Ph.D. trying to outpreen the race and climate-change virtue
signalers," the publication has stepped through the woke looking-glass and emerged as self-parody. How else can one
explain "Climate Anxiety Is an Overwhelmingly White Phenomenon"? The nonsensical article's apparent points are that
"climate anxiety [is] just code for white people wishing to hold onto their way of life or get 'back to normal,' to the
comforts of their privilege", and "Climate anxiety can operate like white fragility, sucking up all the oxygen in the room
and devoting resources toward appeasing the dominant group."
The Editor says...
Chuck Todd made this statement as part of a "question" for Dr. Anthony Fauci, who then failed to take the bait,
and didn't mention climate change in his answer. Chuck Todd attempted to inject global warming into a
discussion where it has no place. That's fake news.
This article is a pack of lies mixed with baseless fearmongering: To save the
planet from climate change, gas guzzlers have to die. The numbers paint a daunting picture. In 2019, consumers
worldwide bought 64 million new personal cars and 27 million new commercial motor vehicles, a paltry 2.1 million
of which were electric-powered. Climate scientists tell us that we have less than a decade to make meaningful reductions
in carbon emissions — including those from internal combustion engines — if we have any hope of staving
off the worst effects of global warming. Yet manufacturers are still making, and consumers are still buying,
overwhelming numbers of vehicles that will, on average, continue to spew carbon into the atmosphere for a dozen years after
they first leave the lot. That means new cars bought this year will still be on the road well into the
2030s — long after the point when we should have slashed emissions.
The Editor says...
[#1] If China and India are not reducing CO2 emissions, it doesn't matter if the U.S. does. [#2] The small percentage of electric
vehicles sold is due to low demand. Nobody wants them! Electric cars are not without their problems, and the electricity required
to charge them comes from conventional power plants. There is no reduction in "emissions" because some people drive electric cars.
[#3] "Climate scientists tell us that we have less than a decade ..." But there have been numerous such predictions over the
last fifty years and none of them have come to pass. [#4] There is no extraordinary global warming. Any global warming
currently underway is happening so gradually that it's not only negligible, it's almost impossible to measure. [#5] Cars do not
"spew carbon into the atmosphere," because carbon dioxide is not carbon.
Why
The Texas Blackout Has The Greens So Scared: Deflecting blame to a more exciting apocalypse. Within days,
most of the country was seeing "with our own eyes" and feeling "in our bones" a cold wave so severe that five million people
lost electricity and, in a special irony, nearly half of the ballyhooed wind turbines in Texas, which had risen to supply 23%
of her energy, were left frozen (and inoperable). This constituted a double whammy to the huge global warming
establishment. First was the cold, when the "science" had confidently predicted a steadily warming Texas. Second
was the failure of renewables, vastly exacerbating the problems for the energy grid. Within hours the mainstream media
had risen to the challenge. Journalists employed their familiar word games, quickly substituting "climate change" for
global warming. Readers might be a tad confused if they read "The brutal cold striking Texas is emblematic of a world
facing more unpredictable weather due to the rising impact of global warming" but substitute "climate change" for the last
two words and presto, the sentence works. To be sure, that's only because "climate change" is a meaningless term.
Bill Gates's Climate
Hysteria. This past Sunday, Bill Gates (net worth, $133 billion) and Anderson Cooper ($110 million) got
together on 60 Minutes to discuss the numerous sacrifices Americans will be expected to make to avert an imminent climate
catastrophe. First, we should refrain from referring to these sorts of conversations as "journalism," since Cooper never
challenges any of Gates's wild predictions nor displays even a hint of professional skepticism regarding the subject matter.
Cooper simply cues up the next talking point like a host of an in-house corporate video.
Expect Overheated
Climate Reports Advancing Radical Energy Agendas. Don't be either surprised or alarmed to see lots of
authoritative-sounding "hottest time ever" media reports in advance of President Biden's pledge to recommit America to the
2015 Paris Climate Agreement and support for his all-out war on fossil energy aimed at eliminating carbon emissions from
electricity by 2035, and achieving "net-zero carbon emissions" by 2050. An example appeared in a January 26 Wall
Street Journal editorial "World's Ice is Melting Faster than Ever" citing "a new satellite study" which concluded that global
melting had dangerously accelerated 65% between 1994 and 2017. The research was conducted by a team of legitimate
scientists from the U.K.'s University of Leeds Centre for Polar Observation and Modeling, the University of Edinburgh,
University College London and an Edinburgh-based climate data company called Earth Wave Ltd. Where the study
conclusions go feverishly wrong concerns altogether unsupportable speculations that the melting was "driven by rising
atmospheric and ocean temperatures resulting from greenhouse gas emissions."
Are
Record Temperatures Occurring More Often in the Conterminous United States? There has been a storm brewing in
the US about a collection of short brochures published by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy on climate
change. Naturally attempts have been made by the warmist media and climate establishment to have them taken down, as
they embarrassingly undermine the official dogma about climate emergencies.
Over
400 Media Outlets Join Project to Prioritize Global Warming Over Coronavirus Coverage. The Columbia Journalism
Review is asking more than 400 media outlets to join in on a project that seeks to prioritize coverage of alleged "global
warming" instead of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, as reported by the Daily Caller. The project is referred to
as "Covering Climate Now," and among its extensive network of outlets are Reuters, Bloomberg, and the Daily Beast.
Although originally founded in 2019, one of the project's founders, Mark Hertsgard, recently released a statement declaring
that the project and "global warming" should receive more coverage than the pandemic that has killed over 100,000 people
worldwide, and brought the global economy and international travel to a complete standstill.
The
Left Is an Existential Threat. The March 2020 issue of Fortune magazine focused on the "existential threat" to
the Earth posed by global warming, despite the fact that no significant global warming seems to be taking place. With
its appealing cover art — an image of the Earth tied up in a plastic trash bag — this issue is just
what I'd expect from a liberal outfit. It's typical of climate alarmists to begin by assuming their premise: warming
is an existential threat because, well, it is. And anyone who questions that premise is a criminal. Just what
is meant by "existential threat" is a bit vague.
Latest
Climate Report Feeds into Alarmist Fearmongering. The latest National Climate Assessment, released just last
week, aims to plant yet another seed of climate catastrophism into the mind of the public. Predictably, its worst-case
scenarios got huge play in the media. After all, disaster sells. But the doomsday scenarios that animated talking
heads throughout the weekend aren't just highly unlikely; they're close to impossible.
"Hottest"
January? More Globaloney Bloviating from NOAA and the Media. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration on February 13 issued a press release claiming "January 2020 was Earth's hottest January on record."
Predictably, mainstream media trumpeted the news. ABC's treatment was typical. [...] So what we're seeing is more of
the typical journalistic fearmongering, driven by politicized science in government agencies like NOAA.
Fake News
Is Fracking Endemic In Environmentalism. Fake news is everywhere today; enabled, magnified and spread by social
media. It's particularly prevalent in environmental talk and the fracking debate.
CNN
Pushes Global Warming While Reporting Park Had to Remove Signs Predicting Glaciers Would be Gone in 2020. On
Wednesday [1/8/2020], CNN published a report claiming that global warming, or "climate change," is still a bigger problem
than ever before, even though the report referenced a particular national park that had just seen a similar claim be
debunked, according to Fox News. The CNN report referenced Glacier National Park in Montana, where so-called experts
had predicted that the park's glaciers would be gone by 2020 due to climate change. The park had even placed signs near
the glaciers making this claim, and thus were forced to take them down after the claim was debunked due to the glaciers still
standing.
The
disastrous fires in Australia are man-caused, but they're not climate change. ABC made a laughingstock out of
itself with a map superimposing Australia across the United States, implying that an area equal to 25% of America was on
fire, even as ABC acknowledged that the fire was, in fact, only as big as Maryland. Unsurprisingly, Hollywood and the
media are wrong. Nothing unusual is happening with Australia's climate. The only unusual thing is that
environmentalists have prevented remediation and arsonists have had fun.
Debunking
CNN's false climate scare reporting. A CNN article, "Shouting into the apocalypse: The Decade in climate
change," recently reached the top of Google News searches for "climate change." The article falsely asserted climate
change is to blame for recent extreme weather events, even though extreme weather events began occurring long before the
invention of coal-fired power plants and SUVs. The silver lining is the CNN article provides the opportunity for a
concise rebuttal for the most common alarmist climate misinformation.
Shouldn't
the media report how bad previous climate change predictions have been instead of participating in the indoctrination?
For the last 100 years, we have seen climate prediction labels go from global warming, global cooling, global warming, climate change,
climate catastrophe, climate emergency and climate collapse. The goal has been to scare the public and especially the children to
give up their freedom and money to the powerful government. Instead of journalists investigating and saying how wrong previous
predictions have been, they go along with the indoctrination to try to force the radical leftist agenda and policies on the public.
CBS
News Touts 'Peak Meat' by 2030 to Avoid Climate Crisis. It looks like livestock production is contributing to
climate change, and we need to hit "peak meat" by 2030 to avoid an "ecological disaster." At least, that's the idea CBS
News is touting from "scientists." In a bizarre Dec. 12 article headlined "World must hit 'peak meat' by 2030 to avoid
climate crisis, scientists say," CBS News reported that "In a letter published in the Lancet Planetary Health, more than 50
scientists recommend setting 2030 as the peak year for meat consumption, after which it needs to drop dramatically."
Stranger still, CBS summarized the letter's claims in the beginning paragraph, suggesting, "With livestock production
contributing to climate change, people need to drastically reduce how much meat they eat to help stave off ecological
disaster, a group of scientists warn."
The Editor says...
Follow-up questions: In what science(s) are you 50 scientists currently working? Is political science really scientific?
How much do you think the climate is changing? What percentage of that change is the result of livestock production?
Do you understand the concept of trade-offs? If the whole world got one degree warmer overnight, would you be able to tell
the difference?
The
Fate of Secular Saint Greta Thunberg. One suspects that in a very short time, St. Greta will invite
St. Joan's fate. No, she won't suffer a literal execution, but she will be "executed" nonetheless; and by the
same crowd that currently is elevating her to sainthood. For now, she is proving to be very useful in promoting the
religion of climate change. She would not be the first nor would she be the last of saints who have been exploited and
then deserted in favor of another.
Greta, Teenager of the Year.
Time casting Miss Thunberg as a person of enormous significance represents, in microcosm, the corruption that shifts
journalistic purpose from reporting to influencing. [...] Greta's adult well-wishers do not see her as a god or even a human
being but instead as an especially useful use object. Cowardly puppeteers put their words into the mouth of child not
to spark a debate but to end one; rebut a pigtailed Swedish saint at the risk of cries of "child abuse!" Like all use
objects, Greta someday outlives her usefulness, and comes the great big discard. They adore her then ignore her.
Who are the real child abusers?
Greta
Thunberg scores with 'Time,' as activism replaces achievement. Greta Thunberg, pronounced "Toon-berg," has just
been named Time magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2019 because — well, because, she has a cadre of left-leaners
who saw in her the necessary theater skills to publicly shame an entire world of fossil fuel users while keeping a straight
face. That's not how "Time" put it. But that's the truth. What's so remarkable about Thunberg is she has
absolutely no accomplishments to her name. She's being recognized for being a tool of the environmentalists.
Greta
Thunberg Is the Perfect Hero for an Unserious Time. Who better than a finger-wagging teen bereft of
accomplishment, or any comprehension of basic economics or history, to be Time magazine's Person of the Year in 2019?
Greta Thunberg's canonization is a perfect expression of media activism in a deeply unserious time. Has there ever been a
less consequential person picked to be Person of the Year? I doubt it. [...] These days we celebrate vacuous fire and
brimstone. "Greta Thunberg" — the idea, not the girl — is concoction of activists who have
increasingly taken to using children as a shield from critical analysis or debate. She's the vessel of the
environmentalist's fraudulent apocalypticism-as-argument. Her style is emotion and indignation, histrionics
and fantasy.
CNN Hopes Americans
Fret Over Climate 'Catastrophe' This Thanksgiving. CNN Newsroom co-host Jim Sciutto and "climate
correspondent" Bill Weir spent time Wednesday [11/27/2019] warning it may be "too late" to stop the upcoming environmental
global catastrophe. While most Americans are going to be enjoying their families and remembering what they are thankful
for this holiday, the CNN duo claimed families would be sitting around worrying about how the world is going to become
uninhabitable in the next decade. Sciutto opened the segment hyping a new United Nations report that warned humanity
was running out of time to stop the impending catastrophe. "Folks, this is important. A new United Nations report
warns that countries are running out of time to limit — just limit, the climate crisis and it could soon be too
late to prevent temperatures around the world from rising to near catastrophic levels. This is real!" Sciutto fretted,
really laying on the dramatics.
The Editor says...
There is no climate crisis. There is no extraordinary world-wide temperature increase: Certainly nothing you'd ever
notice, and definitely nothing that can or should be fixed by shutting down all industrial activity.
Fossil
fuel production on track for double the safe climate limit. The world's nations are on track to produce more
than twice as much coal, oil and gas as can be burned in 2030 while restricting rise in the global temperature to 1.5C,
analysis shows. The report is the first to compare countries' stated plans for fossil fuel extraction with the goals of
the Paris climate agreement, which is to keep global heating well below 2C above pre-industrial levels, and to aim for 1.5C.
It exposes a huge gap, with fossil fuel production in 2030 heading for 50% more than is consistent with 2C, and 120% more
than that for 1.5C. Scientists have warned that even the difference between 1.5C and 2C of heating will expose hundreds
of millions of people to significantly higher risks of extreme heatwaves, drought, floods and poverty.
The Editor says...
[#1] One-half degree of temperature change is literally imperceptible. If the temperature changes one-half degree in the next
60 seconds, right where you are sitting now, you won't notice it. One-half degree is not enough to "expose hundreds
of millions of people" to anything at all, let alone the laundry list of drought, floods (concurrent with the drought?),
poverty, famine, pestilence, stratospheric ozone depletion, or anything else. [#2] The mining, sale, and combustion
of coal is not the only factor at work in the climate. There are many other natural sources of heat and carbon dioxide.
[#3] The self-important pencil pushers in Paris do not have the magic formula for a Goldilocks temperature that must
never be exceeded. [#4] Any news outlet that prints "1.5C" when they mean "1.5°C." or "1½ degrees
Celsius," is a news outlet with lazy writers. In the age of electronic publishing, punctuation costs nothing, and it is
omitted or misused only by incompetent journalists.
'Climate
emergency' declaration takes heat for fictional 'world scientists'. There was something goofy about the
petition signed by 11,258 "world scientists" from 153 countries declaring a "climate emergency." One "scientist" was
named "Mouse, Micky" from the "Micky Mouse Institute for the Blind, Nambia." Another was Albus Dumbledore, headmaster of
Hogwarts. And then there was "Araminta Aardvark" from the fictional University of Neasden. Among the "Alliance of
World Scientists" members who were apparently real people, many identified themselves as teachers, students, administrators,
statisticians, economists, technicians, therapists, doctors, psychologists — not climate scientists. [...] "More
than 11,000 scientists from around the world declare a 'climate emergency,'" said the headline in the Washington Post.
Said the CNN article: "11,000 scientists warn of 'untold suffering' caused by climate change." "Climate crisis:
11,000 scientists warn of 'untold suffering,'" said the [U.K.] Guardian, while ABC News reported, "11,000 scientists sign
declaration of global climate emergency."
Everything
You Hear About Billion-Dollar Disasters Is Wrong. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) counts the number of disasters in the United States that result in losses of greater than $1 billion, starting in
1980. Over the past three decades that count has shown a sharp increase, from five or less such disasters each year in the
decade of the 1980s to ten or more in each of the past 4 years. That increase must be due to climate change, right?
Actually, no. The billion-dollar disaster tally is easy to understand, simple to communicate, but —
regrettably — incredibly misleading and just plain bad economics.
11,000
Scientists? Just Kidding. Earlier this week, the world's news media reported breathlessly that 11,000
scientists had issued a report contending that the Earth faces a "climate emergency." NBC News, to cite just one
example, described a "study" produced by an "international consortium of more than 11,000 scientists." [...] Actually, there
was no study, there was just a press release. And it wasn't 11,000 scientists, it was 11,000 random people who put
their names on a web page. But today's reporters are so biased and so incompetent that when it comes to "climate
change," they will swallow anything.
Attenborough
Tacitly Admits Netflix on 'Walrusgate' Tragedy Porn. It was one of the most heart-rending animal tragedy
episodes ever shown on TV: hundreds of walruses shown plunging over a cliff to their deaths out of "desperation" caused
by climate change. Or so the story originally went when Sir David Attenborough first told it last year on his
Netflix documentary Our Planet, causing much upset to impressionable viewers.
Flood
of Oil Is Coming, Complicating Efforts to Fight Global Warming. A surge of oil production is coming, whether
the world needs it or not. The flood of crude will arrive even as concerns about climate change are growing and
worldwide oil demand is slowing. And it is not coming from the usual producers, but from Brazil, Canada, Norway and
Guyana — countries that are either not known for oil or whose production has been lackluster in recent years.
The Editor says...
The article above, apparently from the New York Times and quoted by MSN, reeks with bias. Oil is not produced and has
never been produced "whether the world needs it or not." Oil production is always a response to steady demand. The
combustion of hydrocarbons (resulting in carbon dioxide as a byproduct) does not cause climate change. The climate is
not changing. Most of the global warming in the 20th century occurred before 1940, when internal combustion engines
were still relatively rare. An abundant supply of cheap oil is a good thing. The writers at the New York Times
apparently hate America, and can't stand to see capitalism succeed.
California
Is Acting Like The Federal Government Again, Promptly Gets Sued By Trump Admin. The Trump administration and
California under Governor Gavin Newsom are locked in a power battle, with the Golden State increasingly exercising their
independence in ways that test the purview of the federal government. The newest theater of war is a cap and trade
agreement California has entered into with the Canadian province of Quebec, a system that, according to the Los Angeles
Times, seeks to lower emissions by making it more economical for countries to reduce carbon emissions than pay the government
for the right to pollute.
The Editor says...
One cannot buy "the right to pollute," because that's not a right.
The Editor continues:
The photograph accompanying the article above is apparently supposed to depict air pollution coming from a factory. Please notice that as the gas comes from the larger
of the two stacks, it is transparent. That's water vapor, not smoke, not carbon, not carbon dioxide, not pollution. The picture is cropped at the top so you can't
see that the water vapor quickly disappears (see close-up) as it is absorbed into the atmosphere, as is the case with the smaller of the two stacks. The picture was
apparently taken at dawn or twilight, to make the cloud appear darker than it really was. The close-up version (left) was brightened to show details. The
deceptive use of photography is becoming a common component of environmental "journalism." More examples like this can be found further down this page.
Polar
bears fired as mascot of climate socialists. The Guardian reported, "Guardian picture editor Fiona Shields
explains why we are going to be using fewer polar bears and more people to illustrate our coverage of the climate emergency."
That is because there are too many polar bears. An estimated 25,000 to 40,000 polar bears live in the Arctic —
up from just 5,000 a half-century ago. The Guardian was too dishonest to admit it.
Another
Newsweek Conspiracy: 'Greta Thunberg Snubbed for Nobel Peace Prize' By Big Oil. Newsweek reporter Rosie
McCall offered a conspiracy theory as to how a 16-year-old environmental activist somehow failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize
this year: [...] This new theory comes courtesy of a magazine fresh off breaking the news that opening tanning salons in
urban neighborhoods were a plot to give gay men skin cancer, or something. [...] Such speculation amounts to an insult of the
actual Nobel Prize winner, Abiy Ahmed, the prime minister of Ethiopia, who restarted peace talks with neighboring Eritrea and
beginning restoring freedoms in Ethiopia. He helped stop a war, but was barely mentioned by McCall. A European
teenager who performed some angry End Times-style rants was more deserving, in the eyes of the journalists at Newsweek.
When Pictures
Lie: Faking Climate Change. Recently, a picture of arctic dogs running across what appears to be a sea of
melted snow in Greenland circulated in the news. It was taken as absolute proof of how humans are changing the climate
and melting the glaciers. There is only one problem with this story: It was fake news. Only a few days
later, another picture from the same site surfaced, showing nearly the same scenery and the same melted sea of water, except
that the image was from 1984. It turns out that this type of snow melting occurs every summer in Greenland. It is not a
sign of global warming, and it tells us nothing about human influences on the climate. But visual persuasion is often
far more powerful than arguments.
One Climate Chart
to Rule Them All. You would think that 50 years of failed climate predictions might have eroded their
haughtiness somewhat. But you'd be wrong.
Our World In Fake Data.
It took me about thirty seconds to research the accuracy of the graph. The Red Cross described 1927 as the worst year
in history, reporting 111 disasters — including 29 tornadoes, 24 floods, 9 hurricanes and 23 fires.
The worst floods in US history occurred that year. [...] Obviously the person who generated the graph didn't do any research, and is
simply making numbers up. Another graph from the same website shows death rates from natural disasters down 95% since the 1920s.
American
Heroes Troll NBC's 'Climate Confessions' Site. The far-left NBC News launched a Climate Confession site, where
eco-hypocrites can go to confess their carbon sins. Thankfully, there are still enough Americans left in America to
treat this nonsense with the contempt it deserves.
NBC News Asks Americans
To Confess Their Climate Change Sins. NBC News is asking Americans to confess their climate change sins, though
at least some people have taken the opportunity to troll the news company. "Even those who care deeply about the
planet's future can slip up now and then. Tell us: Where do you fall short in preventing climate change?" reads
the introduction to NBC's "Climate Confessions" project. Many of the responses appear to take the project
seriously. One person confessed taking flights to see their son across the country.
Climate
Crazies: CNN Pushes for Global Eugenics, Trillions in Spending, No Beef. [Scroll down] Arguably the
most disturbing point during the climate hysteria came roughly halfway through the town hall with Vermont Senator Bernie
Sanders (I). After a commercial break, AC360 host Anderson Cooper went to an audience question from Martha Readyoff,
who's "a teacher from New Milford, Connecticut." [...] Sanders got in touch with his inner communist and declared "the answer
is yes." He went on to decry the Mexico City agreement as "totally absurd" because it "denies American aid to those
organizations around the world that allow women to have abortions or even get involved in birth control..." It's worth
noting that all the audience questions were pre-screened by CNN, so they knew that radical question was going to be part of
their program and the narrative they were crafting.
Trump
Tweets Eight Things CNN Will Bury During Their Global Warming Event. CNN is having a seven-hour town
hall event on so-called global warming. This circus is going to last seven whole hours. The 2020 Democratic field
is going to have their day talking about one of the Left's favorite subjects. Julian Castro got the ball rolling talking
about "environmental racism." He was later asked whether it was "fair" for younger generations to procreate. Yeah,
this clown show is going to last seven hours, did I already mention that? The noted anti-Trump network has its rating
buoyed by the fact that airports only show CNN, though I think even folks waiting to board their flights will find this to be
nauseating. No one cares. It's another theatrical production from people of the elite class, from urban America,
trying to tell the rest of us how to live our lives. It's one massive ad buy for the Green New Scam, which, like most
far-left environmental action items paves way for backdoor socialism under the guise of trying to save Mother Earth.
Media's
embrace of 'climate crisis' raises alarm about journalistic objectivity. With its town hall Wednesday [9/4/2019] on
climate change, CNN joined nearly 200 media outlets vowing to increase their coverage of the "climate crisis," raising concerns
that the real crisis may be less about rising temperatures than the erosion of journalistic objectivity. The network aired
an "unprecedented prime-time event on the climate crisis," a seven-hour marathon featuring 10 of the 2020 Democratic presidential
primary candidates, who took questions early on from activists and climate-woke audience members, with nary a skeptic in
sight. "We have 11 years to avoid the catastrophic consequences of this crisis. Food shortages. Rising
sea levels. More extreme weather events like Hurricane Dorian," said CNN host Wolf Blitzer at the town hall.
The Editor says...
Eleven years from now, when the world is carrying on exactly as it is today, CNN (if they are still in business) will
still be peddling alarmist misinformation for profit.
CNN's
7-Hour Climate Town Hall Extravaganza Cheered by Activists. Organizations that advocate for the health of the
climate and the urgency of global warming are praising CNN after the network announced that its climate-focused town halls
next week will run for seven hours. On Sept. 4, the network will broadcast 10 back-to-back town halls with Democratic
presidential candidates focused on climate change, running from 5 p.m. ET to midnight.
The Editor says...
That's not programming, that's brainwashing.
CNN
falsely pushes claims that [the] 'climate crisis is making hurricanes more dangerous'. CNN's fall from a
purveyor of news to pure propaganda organ of the Left was vividly displayed yesterday. An anchor named Ana Cabrera
accused an expert of "sidestepping" the purported issue of global warming making hurricanes more dangerous. She didn't
interview the guest herself, but rather commented on a previous interview done by her colleague in which the other CNN anchor
tried to bait guest Peter Gaynor, acting FEMA director, into blaming global warming: ["]Researchers say that we're
going to see even more very intense hurricanes due to the climate crisis. Do you agree with that?["] Gaynor
refused to agree.
The Editor says...
Name the "researchers" (plural) who say hurricanes will intensify because of the "climate crisis." Sounds like propaganda
to me. More specifically, it sounds like she's an activist (not a journalist) who is quoting someone who doesn't even exist.
Media
Ignores Climate Alarmist's Court Loss — It Doesn't Fit The Warmist Agenda. Last week, a Canadian
court tossed out a lawsuit in which Michael Mann, the researcher who published the idolized hockey stick temperature chart,
had sued another researcher for libel. Did the mainstream media run with this story? Of course not. That
would ruin the narrative.
How
The Media Enables Destructive Climate Change Hysteria. At a 2005 London conference of "concerned climate
scientists and politicians" that helped launch contemporary climate rhetoric, attendees warned that the world had as little
as 10 years before the Earth reached "the point of no return on global warming." Humans, they claimed, would soon be
grappling with "widespread agricultural failure," "major droughts," "increased disease," "the death of forests," and the
"switching-off of the North Atlantic Gulf Stream," among many other calamities. Since then, the Earth has gotten
greener. This year, for the first time since we began logging data in 2000, there were no "extreme" or "exceptional"
droughts across the contiguous United States — although we've come close to zero on numerous occasions over the
past decade. Every time there's a drought anywhere in the world, climate change will be blamed. But world crop
yields continue to ensure that fewer people are hungry than ever.
False
Reports of Amazon Fires Mislead, Undermine Trust. The latest climate-change disaster du jour was the lead story
in many newsfeeds and headlines around the globe. The report that the Amazon was burning at unprecedented rates due to
man-made global warming was tailor-made for the climate-catastrophe crowd to promote fear of impending planet-wide doom.
[...] However, a closer look reveals some real problems with the data. First, the satellite fire data referenced only
began in 2013, so six years of data is hardly long enough to make statements about "record breaking" in any context.
Secondly, the satellite data collected wasn't intended to be used as a counting tool for number of fires, but rather as a
readiness alert system to identify fires before they rage out of control. It turns out that the same fire might be
counted more than once to ensure that none are missed.
NASA
map shows Africa has more fires burning than Brazil. The dust up with France's Macron and the President of
Brazil's Jair Bolsonaro regarding the fires burning in the Amazon left out one small detail. Africa is on fire as
well. NASA maps show that there are more fires in the African region than in the Amazon. The on again off again
acceptance of money to fight the Amazon fire lost sight that we have fires everywhere. The G-7 Summit raised $20 Million
to assist in putting out the fires in Brazil. No doubt more proof that humans are just too destructive to the "lungs"
of earth. Another detail never mentioned is that long before planes and humans, fires raged across the planet. It
was nature's way of regeneration. Old growth was removed and new growth lead to food sources for animals and birds.
Why
Everything They Say About The Amazon, Including That It's The 'Lungs Of The World,' Is Wrong. [Scroll down]
Singers and actors including Madonna and Jaden Smith shared photos on social media that were seen by tens of millions of
people. "The lungs of the Earth are in flames," said actor Leonardo DiCaprio. "The Amazon Rainforest produces
more than 20% of the world's oxygen," tweeted soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo. "The Amazon rain forest — the
lungs which produce 20% of our planet's oxygen — is on fire," tweeted French President Emanuel Macron. And
yet the photos weren't actually of the fires and many weren't even of the Amazon. The photo Ronaldo shared was taken
in southern Brazil, far from the Amazon, in 2013. The photo that DiCaprio and Macron shared is over 20 years
old. The photo Madonna and Smith shared is over 30. Some celebrities shared photos from Montana, India,
and Sweden.
The Editor says...
The internet is a two-edged sword, and the celebrities just got hit with the other edge: Not only does the
internet never forget, there are ways of finding out where a photograph was taken, and when, and by whom.
A
Short List Of Facts Global Warming Alarmists Don't Want To Face. Man's carbon dioxide emissions are not burning
down the Amazon. Empty-headed celebrities and activists have had quite a virtue-signaling feast tweeting photos from
fires three decades ago, fires in Europe, and fires in the U.S. Yes, we've seen the claims that there are 80% more fires this
year than last in South America, but we've also seen this from the New York Times: "The majority of these fires were
set by farmers preparing Amazon-adjacent farmland for next year's crops and pasture." Of course that's a disposable
detail because it doesn't fit the narrative.
Lies, Damn Lies, And Rainforest Fear-Mongering.
The MSM and other liberals are going nuts about the Amazon wildfires, but instead of being honest, they are rainforest
fear-mongering. The fires are bad but not as bad as we are being told, many of the pictures being used to show the fire
are from older Amazon wildfires or are showing wildfires that arent from the Amazon, but totally different parts of the
world. [...] This time of year, farmers and ranchers in tropical areas burn their fields to control pests and weeds and to
encourage new growth in pastures.
[One]
Day After Stating [there is] No Link, [The] NY Times Blames Amazon Fires on Global Warming. In Sunday's
[8/25/2019] [New York] Times, Johannesburg bureau chief Norimitsu Onishi falsely conflated the Amazon rain forest
fires in Brazil with global warming in "Europe Tries to Fill Void On Climate Left by U.S.," a two-for-one story that blamed
both President Trump and Brazil's "far right" president Jair Bolsonaro for failing to act on "climate change." A photo
showing burning forest had a caption that underlined the purported connection: "Europe 'has to be a green superpower,'
a member of Parliament said, as the Amazon burned." Onishi either fell victim to a lazy leftist assumption that the wildfires
in the Amazonian rain forest were somehow connected to global warming, or else did his best to force the connection himself[.]
New
York Times: Lawns Are Symbols of Racism and Bad for Global Warming. While most Americans are spending
time this summer enjoying the sun in the comfort of their houses' yards, the New York Times is out with a new
exposé on how lawn care is problematic, once viewed through the lens of social justice. Lawns are contributing
to pollution and climate change, asserts narrator David Botti, and their origins are far from woke, in a seven-minute video
on the history of American lawns.
Delingpole:
Every Story You Read About the Environment Is #FakeNews. [Scroll down] In the face of such overwhelming
'evidence', what possible reason could any casual reader have not to believe that world is indeed in the midst of an
unprecedented environmental crisis wherein critically endangered species are being wiped out by callous, out-of-control,
unregulated hunters, where extreme weather is endangering homes and lives, where not even the formal gardens in Britain's
world-renowned stately homes are safe? This, my friends, is why we are in such trouble. Every one of those
stories is a lie. Almost every word of every one of those stories is a lie. But how many of the people who read
those stories would be aware of this?
Europeans
More Concerned About Immigration Than Climate Change, Despite Massive Media Attention. Immigration has possibly
caused more fractious discord at the heart of the European Union than any other topic apart from Brexit, and it is a
preoccupation shared by the citizens of Europe who say it is the most important issue facing the EU in 2019. The
European Commission's Eurobarometer survey, a twice-annually inquiry into the opinions of over 27,000 Europeans asked people
in 33 countries what their main concerns were for the European Union, and found worries over immigration to be the clear
winner. Some 34 percent of Europeans said immigration was one of their top concerns in 2019, putting the issue
comfortably ahead of the competition for another year.
CNN to host climate
crisis town hall with 2020 Democratic candidates. CNN will host a Democratic presidential town hall in
September focused on the climate crisis. [...] President Donald Trump has pledged to leave the Paris climate accord and has
said he does not believe government reports that cast grave warnings about the effects of climate change. The most
prominent proposal put forth by Democrats and backed by multiple presidential candidates has been the Green New Deal, the
renewable-energy infrastructure investment plan proposed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
The Editor says...
[#1] There is no climate crisis. [#2] I don't believe those "government reports" either. [#3] AOC is a
poorly-educated simpleton who doesn't realize that implementing even a fraction of the Green New Deal would wreck the U.S. economy.
Journalism's
Contribution to the Rise of Climate Alarm. Journalism, until recently revered as the "fourth estate," is
supposed to promote objectivity and facts, with its practitioners serving as watchdogs against government corruption and
malfeasance and big moneyed interests who collude with bureaucrats and politicians against the average Joe. Yet on the
issue of climate change, the mainstream media long ago abandoned objectivity and their role as watchdog in favor being
cheerleaders and promoters of conspiracy theories and ever more powerful, intrusive government. Mainstream media
outlets uncritically parrot and hype the most alarming claims and extreme scenarios, however unlikely, made in every report
governments issue saying human-caused "climate extremes" are an "existential threat to humanity." They report the claims
as if they were revealed truths, given to them from on high.
The
New York Times Enlists in the War on 'Sexist' Air Conditioning. The Internet Isn't Having It. Shortly
before the Fourth of July, The New York Times published an op-ed attacking air conditioning as unnecessary,
contributing to global warming, and oppressive. Taylor Lorenz, a staff writer at The Atlantic took up the call,
calling air conditioning itself "unhealthy, bad, miserable, and sexist." She called for a ban on air conditioning in general,
and the internet rushed to defend the technology. "Air-conditioning is unhealthy, bad, miserable, and sexist. I
can't explain how many times I've gotten sick over the summer b/c of overzealous AC in offices," Lorenz tweeted, adding "ban A/C."
Arsenic
found in bottled water sold at Whole Foods, Walmart, Target. When you pay premium prices, you expect a premium
product — but that's not necessarily the case with bottled water. California nonprofit Center for
Environmental Health has revealed that water bottle brands Peñafiel, owned by Keurig Dr. Pepper, and Starkey, owned
by Whole Foods, contain levels of highly toxic arsenic that are above the legal limit. [...] Other symptoms of arsenic
poisoning include stomach pain and nausea, vomiting and diarrhea, numbness, even paralysis or blindness.
The Editor says...
This is nothing but alarmism, brought to you by an environmental activist group and gladly passed along by the New York Post.
There's not enough arsenic in bottled water to give anyone arsenic poisoning. The "legal limit" for arsenic content
in bottled water is probably so low that it's easy to exceed that limit.
ABC's
'08 Prediction: NYC Under Water from Climate Change By June 2015. New York City underwater? Gas
over $9 a gallon? A carton of milk costs almost $13? Remember when that happened on June 12, 2015? No? This
was the wildly-inaccurate world of 2015 predicted by ABC News 11 years ago this week. Appearing on Good Morning
America in 2008, Bob Woodruff hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic
2015. The segment included supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, "It's June 8th, 2015. One
carton of milk is $12.99." (On the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip
featured this prediction for 2015 "Gas reached over $9 a gallon." (In reality, gas cost an average of $2.75 four years ago.)
Paper
to staff: Use 'climate crisis' ... 'change' is 'too gentle'. Staff at the Guardian newspaper of
London, England, has been directed to address "global warming" more aggressively and use "climate crisis" or "climate
emergency" instead of "climate change," which it considers "too passive and gentle."
Contra
New York Times Scare Story, Trump is Trying to Improve Climate Forecasts. The Trump administration has made,
and is still making, adjustments in the way the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other agencies approach climate
change and make the predictions that drive climate policies. Not everyone is pleased, to put it mildly. New York
Times reporters Coral Davenport and Mark Landler, in a piece that sounds more like a screed than a news story, can barely
contain themselves. "Now, after two years spent unraveling the [environmental] policies of his predecessors," they
write, "Mr. Trump and his political appointees are launching a new assault."
EPA
Admin Rips Journalist For Misleading Tweet: 'Most Reporters Are Lazy'. Environmental Protection Agency
Administrator Andrew Wheeler ripped into a Yahoo News reporter in a Friday interview over a tweet he believed took remarks he
made out of context. Yahoo national correspondent Alexander Nazaryan tweeted Monday [6/3/2019] that Wheeler had said
during a National Press Club event that "'The media does a disservice to the American public' by reporting on global
warming." [...] But in the full quote in the article, Wheeler didn't actually say the press did a disservice by "reporting on
global warming," full stop, but for not also reporting on the strides the country had made. "The media does a
disservice to the American public, and sound policymaking, by not informing the public of the progress this nation has made,"
he said.
Climate
change scare stories reach the point of psychological terrorism. The corporate media cartels have become hubs
of hatred and "journo-terrorism" that targets the psyche of the masses. The quack science hoax of so-called "climate
change" is used to terrorize the public into believing that their planet will somehow be destroyed by carbon dioxide —
the very molecule that has been rapidly re-greening the Earth over the past four decades, according to NASA. Now, a new
round of "science" has been studying the mental stress of the victims of this psychological terrorism pushed by the dishonest
media, and they've reached an even more bizarre conclusion. Scientists now claim that climate change is causing "mental
anguish" among humans. Seriously. Of course, the real source of the mental anguish is the lies and panic propaganda
of the corporate media and the pathetic scientific establishment which has figured out that if you want more government grant
money, you have to conduct "research" that identifies some new crisis to be blamed on climate change. In fact, the very
phrase "climate change" isn't scary enough yet to achieve the desired goal of mass mental terrorism, so media outlets around
the world are now ordering their obedient writers to start using the phrase "climate crisis."
Debunked:
Media claim rare tornado outbreak is 'new normal'. Tornadoes, and especially F3 or stronger tornadoes, are
becoming increasingly rare as the Earth continues its modest warming, but the media are claiming a rare outbreak of recent
tornadoes in Kansas is "the new normal." The misleading nature of the media's reporting may be frustrating, but it affords
climate realists an opportunity to show everyday people why they should be skeptical of alarmist global warming claims. [...]
Most readers will take the [Kansas City] Star's assertion at face value and believe global warming is making tornadoes
more frequent and severe. The objective data, however, tell the opposite story.
Climate hysteria. The UK Guardian
Newspaper decided that you're not sufficiently alarmed about climate doom. Climate change is no longer the term of
choice with the Guardian and other news outlets. Get ready to hear the newly invented terms, "climate emergency,"
"climate crisis," "climate breakdown," and "global heating." By the way, when did it become the job of a news organization
to hype public concern over an issue instead of just reporting the facts?
The
hoax and due diligence. Nothing illustrates the decline of serious journalism more than the fact that many of
the major media, particularly CNN and MSNBC, have participated (and to some extent continue to participate) in massive hoaxes
which would have been easily disproved with basic due diligence. [...] The alarmists told us decades ago that the Arctic ice
cap would be gone by now (it is still there). According to recent counts, there are more polar bears than ever. The
glaciers have not melted. The ocean continues to rise at roughly the same rate it has for the last 10,000 years.
The California and Western drought has not gotten worse, and the drought has all but disappeared. Few in the news media
cover the failed predictions of the climate alarmists. It only takes modest due diligence to uncover the real
facts. News people would feel better about themselves if they reported things accurately rather than blowing smoke.
Will
the Media Ever Pay a Price For Its Irresponsibility? [Scroll down] The second current media narrative
concerns the Swedish schoolgirl who has become the face of climate change panic: Greta Thunberg. Thunberg, in
case you live a sensible existence ignoring the media, is the 16-year-old who has "gone on strike" from school to protest for
climate change action. It is fitting that a movement that increasingly displays the traits of a pre-teen temper tantrum
would turn to an adolescent, and I admit it is a step up from listening to Al Gore. The World Economic Forum spotlighted
Thunberg in its most recent gathering in Davos. She's even given a TED Talk! So she must be right about climate
change. I have mostly ignored this story, but then I made the mistake of picking up a copy of this week's Time
magazine, and Thunberg is prominently featured, in a four-page spread with custom photography, as the lead example of "next
generation leaders."
UN
hysteria linking climate change and species extinction mindlessly parroted by media. Why [...] would anyone
with a brain take U.N. reports as factual when so many have been spectacularly wrong by direction and amount? Why would
politicians base any policies on these crackpot reports, especially since we know that scientists have manipulated the
numbers when their previous predictions have been wrong? Should the public just be willing to hand over trillions to
government bureaucrats to control our lives? Does anyone believe that politicians and bureaucrats can control
temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity if we hand over trillions to them? If they do, they are a few bricks short
of a load. The big question is, why would journalists, who are supposed to fact-check and investigate what they publish
or report, just repeat all these things as if they are factual?
Children
Have to Listen to Fake News, Too, and It's Not Good for Them. [Scroll down] Kids are being propagandized about the ticking climate
clock in school, on TV, and everywhere on social media. It just doesn't help when the parents are scared, too. A 40-year-old
Salt Lake City mother said the release of the U.N.'s latest climate report caused her three teenage daughters a severe emotional crisis.
"There was a lot of crying. They told me, 'We know what's coming, and it's going to be really rough.'" Because mom believes
it, too, there's not much help she can offer. "I want to have hope," she said, "but the reports are showing that this isn't going to
stop, so all we can do is cope." I don't believe that these children are really studying climate reports; it's the media's hysterical
coverage that's upsetting them.
Why
This NY Times Maple Syrup Story Tastes Odd. Climate change is at it again, ruining everything good. This
time around it's maple syrup that is at risk, according to the New York Times, which on Saturday had the alarming headline,
"Warming Climate May Slow the Flow of Maple." Or at least it would be alarming if it weren't for the tell-tale word "may."
If a warming climate were actually slowing the flow of the sap that makes for syrup, you can be sure the Times would declare it
clearly. To say it "may" slow the flow suggests that it isn't actually happening, at least not yet.
Gore's
activist group demands broadcasters push 'climate crisis' in their coverage. The Climate Reality Project, an
activist group founded by Al Gore in 2006, is now demanding that major broadcast news organizations refer to climate change
as a "crisis" — and have launched a public petition to entreat ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News and MSNBC to change their
ways. [...] They claim that "less than 4% of news segments" categorize climate matters as a crisis or emergency. The
group wants the networks to categorize such factors as weather events and temperature as an "urgent, existential threat,"
among other things. "The words your reporters and anchors use matter. What they call something shapes how
millions see it — and how entire nations act," the new petition states.
The Editor says...
There are many who confuse journalism with activism. News reports are not supposed to be laden with editorial
opinion. Weather reports are supposed to include factual observations and educated guesses about the conditions
we can expect in the next few days. There is no point in screaming about a climate "crisis" when there is none.
If the national news media are not calling global warming an "emergency," it's because global warming isn't an emergency
if it exists at all. The weather changes seasonally, and there is nothing to be done about it,
but to prepare and adapt.
Greenland's
glacier grows alarming climate hysterics. Have you happened to notice that some news most of us would normally
regard as very cheering is often treated by the mainstream media as tragic, or goes unreported altogether? [...] A case in
point is a screaming lack of enthusiastic media coverage regarding recent evidence that Jakobshavn, the previously fastest-flowing,
fastest-thinning glacier on Greenland's west coast, has now gone rogue. Jakobshavn has represented the largest source of
periodic ice mass loss over the last 20 years, and has produced about 10 percent of the country's icebergs.
David
Attenborough, dead bats and how radical Green propaganda relies on tragedy por. "Tragedy porn" is now a
standard green propaganda technique. You've probably been on the receiving end of it, and will recognise it once I
describe it. First of all you need a victim. Animals — preferably fluffy ones, and preferably with
large eyes — are ideal, but people will do at a pinch. Then you have to film them in the process of dying or
otherwise suffering. A presenter or scientist needs to be on hand to describe the events, preferably choking away their
tears. Then you blame global warming. It is often an effective technique, but care is required. Last week,
tragedy porn proved to be the undoing of Sir David Attenborough, when on Netflix a carefully contrived story that global
warming was driving walruses over cliff tops unravelled over the course of a week, as a series of flaws were discovered in
the narrative and in the tales spun by the production team as they attempted to cover up what they had done. Once it
emerged that the production team may well have played a role in causing the tragedy, it all started to look a bit problematic.
Another
Warning Of 'Imminent' Climate Catastrophe. The Washington Post, apparently written and edited by the
descendants of Henny Penny, is advising us to "start planning for the fact that climate change is" going to cause natural
disasters to become more destructive. "The Environmental Protection Agency published a 150-page document this past week
with a straightforward message for coping with the fallout from natural disasters across the country," the Post reported over
the weekend. "The language, included in guidance on how to address the debris left in the wake of floods, hurricanes
and wildfires." Apparently we are to be not only supposed to be frightened by the report, we should also exasperated
because it "is at odds with the rhetoric of the EPA's own leader, Andrew Wheeler." But then being "at odds" with
previous predictions of human-caused weather catastrophes means being in accord with reality.
BBC
and Attenborough Accused of Fake News Misinformation on 'Climate Change: The Facts'. The Global Warming
Policy Foundation (GWPF) has made a formal complaint to the BBC about the series of gross inaccuracies in its recent
documentary Climate Change: The Facts. As wags have quipped, the programme presented by Sir David
Attenborough was so riddled with errors it really should have been called Climate: Change The Facts.
Now the GWPF has written to the BBC Complaints department listing just a few of them.
Netflix
series challenged on claim that climate change causes cliff-diving walruses. A new Netflix documentary series
that features disturbing footage of walruses plunging off a cliff to their deaths — a phenomenon attributed by the
filmmakers to climate change — has sparked a fact-check backlash by critics questioning whether the animals were
actually fleeing polar bears or drones. Leading the pushback is Canadian zoologist Susan Crockford, who said Netflix's
"Our Planet" is misleading the public about the massive gathering of walruses on the rocky beach, known as a haulout, and the
footage showing walruses falling from a steep ledge. She blasted claims by series narrator David Attenborough during
the episode as "contrived nonsense" and "Attenborough's tragedy porn."
Attenborough's
climate facts fell off a cliff with the Walruses. [Scroll down] The facts turn out to be half-truths that
fit the pattern of exploiting primal fears to create deep psychological spin. He says "we don't know" but then shows
the opposite — associating every kind of bad weather, fire, and storm with man-made emissions even though data
shows that these were worse in the past or are caused by other factors. In probably his lowest career point, rumours
are spreading that not only did thriving polar bears cause the falling walrus episode rather than coal power stations, but
his crew may have killed walruses unwittingly by being there.
How
Climate Change Is Fuelling the U.S. Border Crisis. [Scroll down] "It was about six years ago that things
started to change," he said. Climentoro had always been poor. Residents depended on the few crops that could
survive at an elevation of more than nine thousand feet, harvesting maize to feed their families and selling potatoes for a
small profit. But, [Feliciano] Pérez said, the changing climate was wiping out the region's crops. "In the
higher part of town, there have been more frosts than there used to be, and they kill an entire harvest in one fell swoop,"
he said. "In the lower part of Climentoro, there's been much less rain and new sorts of pests." He added, "Farmers
have been abandoning their land."
The Editor says...
What percentage of the world's population attempts to live at elevations above 9,000 feet?
At that height, one would be far more susceptible to changes in the weather.
This article in the liberal New Yorker has an odor
of ventriloquist
journalism about it. This farmer probably has good years and bad years, and doesn't care that much, but then a reporter
shows up to tell him about Global Warming, and suddenly he's a fountain of tabloid sound bites.
CBS
& NBC Cheer Student Climate Strike, Warn 'Future Might Not Exist'. On Thursday [3/14/2019] and Friday, CBS
This Morning and NBC's Today show celebrated left-wing student activists around the world preparing to walk out of
their classrooms to "demand action on climate change." The CBS report took a particularly dark turn as correspondent
Tony Dokoupil warned of "a future that might not even exist" for the young protesters. "Groups of students across
America say they will skip class tomorrow for the first national school strike over climate change," co-host Gayle King
proudly announced on Thursday's CBS This Morning. "Tomorrow's protests are planned in more than 130 U.S. cities and
about 90 countries worldwide," she added.
Study:
White People Responsible for Blacks' and Latinos' Higher Exposure to Pollution. A study in the Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences claims that white people contribute more to pollution than black and Latino people,
but the latter suffer from it more than the white polluters. "The air that Americans breathe isn't equal," USA
Today says in its report on the study. "Blacks and Hispanics disproportionately breathe air that's been polluted by
non-Hispanic whites, according to a study," USA Today says. "This new research quantifies for the first time the
racial gap between who causes air pollution — and who breathes it."
Rebuttal: Who
Declared this to Be Crazy Week? There are so many things stupidly wrong with this whole story that I don't even
know where to begin. First, this study, and many others like it, anchor their alarm on the supposed fact that particulate
pollution causes about 42,000 premature deaths in the U.S. every year. Though the EPA relies on this figure, the
epidemiology behind it is very weak. But without this scary statistic, a lot of regulations would fail even the most
generous cost-benefit test. Second, particulate levels have been falling fast for the last 25 years, and will
continue to fall in the future. Most studies such as this one are relying on obsolete data. What this means is
that most black and Hispanic Americans, even in the places that still have the highest air pollution levels like the Los
Angeles basin, are breathing air today that is lower in ambient pollution than white people inhaled 20 years ago.
Don't expect NPR or anyone else to put it in perspective this way. They've got an agenda and a narrative that needs
to be kept up.
The
Climate Scare: Ever More Shrill, Ever Less Serious. The Democrats have taken control of the House of
Representatives! And, for their first act, how about some scary "climate" hearings? The New York Times, of
course, takes the occasion to run a big front-page story with the headline (in the print edition — online is
different) "2018 Continues Warming Trend, As 4th Hottest Year Since 1880." Let's apply a little critical analysis.
The Times adorns their article with a huge temperature graph, covering the period 1880 to 2018, that goes across two-thirds
of the top of the front page. The overall trend looks up at first glance. But on not-very-much-closer inspection,
it is obvious that 2017 was down from 2016, and 2018 was down from 2017. How exactly does that constitute 2018 "continu[ing
the] warming trend"? I would have said that the last two years in a row down is the opposite of "continuing the warming
trend," but what do I know?
American
Air Is Clean And Getting Cleaner. [A]ir quality is very good pretty much everywhere in the United States.
This fact stands in stark contrast to utterly absurd claims in the media, such as blaming air pollution for killing 155,000
Americans. Why is there such a disconnect between reality and what the media say? Because bad news is
intrinsically more interesting than good news. It's the same reason that murder and violence grab top headlines, even
though both are near historic lows. [...] Air pollution is not a problem in the United States. It is a problem in
Europe, and it is a monumental problem in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.
Mass
Immigration and Climate Change Doublethink. When recipients of tens of millions of dollars in federal climate
research grants ask the Department of Justice to arrest, prosecute, and imprison those who question their data quality,
analysis, and conclusions, it's a fair bet they're up to something, but whatever it is, it's not science. The peer
review process has been a disaster for a long time. It would not be improved by deep state prosecutors going after
scientific peers who are more interested in homing in on the truth than in advancing a political agenda. Climate change
skepticism should also be informed by headlines proclaiming that a particular year was the Hottest in Recorded History.
That headline piqued my interest, but my willingness to believe was affected when I later learned that the "hottest year
ever" part was based on a statistical analysis that was less robust than a coin toss.
An example of news media sensationalism: It Could
Take Joshua Tree 300 Years to Recover From the Government Shutdown. Though the government shutdown may have
ended last Friday [1/25/2019], Joshua Tree National Park will be feeling the ruinous effects of it for hundreds of
years. Throughout the duration of the shutdown, which lasted a record-long 35 days, national parks greatly suffered:
human waste piled up, lands were littered with trash, and some campgrounds and other public areas even closed to visitors, as
the parks weren't adequately staffed to stay open. It wasn't until after Joshua Tree closed on January 2, though, that
humans became excessively reckless, during which they off-roaded, graffittied rocks, started campfires in illegal areas, and
cut down protected trees.
The Editor says...
Sounds like a wee bit of an exaggeration. Human waste does not stick around for 300 years. Neither does
litter. Neither do tire tracks. But aside from that, the obvious solution is to privatize the park. (By the way,
graffiti is not a verb. Neither is off-road.) But this whole story seems very far-fetched. Were
a bunch of anarchist maniacs taking advantage the government shutdown, during which they could enter the unattended national parks
and spread garbage and feces everywhere? Sounds like a false flag to me: Somebody went into the park and trashed it,
in order to make the "government shutdown" as ghastly as possible — something that must be avoided at all cost —
when in reality very few people outside of a 200-mile radius from Washington DC even noticed the five-week shutdown.
It's the communist catch-all: Obesity,
climate change and hunger must be fought as one, health experts declare. Maybe, when it comes to finding a way
out of a global crisis of obesity, we're just thinking too small. Maybe the steps needed to reverse a pandemic of
unhealthy weight gain are the same as those needed to solve two other crises of human health: malnutrition and climate
change. So instead of trying to tackle each of these problems individually, public health experts recommend that we
lash the three together.
The Editor says...
A pandemic is usually a communicable disease that is prevalent over a whole country or the world, spreading unchecked, out of control, affecting
everybody. That does not describe obesity. Nor is obesity a crisis. Gluttony is not a crisis. The solution to "unhealthy
weight gain" is the opposite of the solution to malnutrition. Also, climate change is not a health crisis, because the climate has always
changed, and any long-term changes are barely large enough to be measurable, and only became newsworthy in the last few decades. By and
large, the "public health experts" have no names, yet the news media rely on them without questioning their motives. Other than all that,
the article above is right on target.
It's
Climate Alarmists Who Remain in Denial. Chuck Todd opened last year's final Meet the Press show, which focused its
entire hour on climate change, with a pompous, long-winded speech blaming human activity for a disastrously overheating Planet Earth.
The NBC News host made news himself by declaring that "climate deniers" aren't welcome to the discussion because "the science is settled."
It was an awful show, even by NBC standards -- a Sunday news and discussion program that not only deliberately invited only one point of
view to the table, but proudly proclaimed as much in its opening statement. As promised, what followed was as one-sided and
alarmist-biased a presentation on the subject as you're likely to see anywhere.
Global
Warming Crop Apocalypse Is Just Media Fear-Mongering. Global warming alarmists and their media allies launched
a new scare last week, claiming that global warming is causing crop failures and food shortages around the globe. In
one of their biggest whoppers ever, the media are claiming that global warming has displaced "millions" of farmers in India
and is causing — or will soon cause — similar devastation to farmers and crops in Bangladesh, Syria,
and Honduras. Objective evidence, however, decimates the assertion and shows that crop yields continue to set annual
records as growing seasons lengthen, frost events become less frequent, soil moisture improves, and more atmospheric carbon
dioxide fertilizes crops and plant life.
Don't Join The
Media Freak Out Over Recent Jump In CO2 Emissions — It Won't Last. For the first time in years, U.S.
carbon dioxide output rose last year, a new report says. The jump has set off alarms in all the predictable media
quarters. Relax. It's a great sign for the economy, and will mean nothing long term for the environment.
Chuck
Todd Bans 'Climate Deniers' From Meet The Press. On Sunday [12/30/2018] Chuck Todd, host of NBC's Meet The
Press, used his bully pulpit to deny any opportunity for opponents of climate change activists to appear while he devoted his
entire show to climate change, saying, "We're not going to give time to climate deniers." Beginning by announcing his
show would be devoted to the "climate crisis," Todd played snippets from various people, some of whom have suffered from
natural disasters and some who simply opined that there was indeed a crisis, then pontificated: "The evidence is
everywhere." "The science is settled." "But the politics is not."
NBC
News host says no air time for climate 'deniers' on "Meet the Press': 'Science is settled'. NBC News has
decided that climate change is no longer an issue that has two sides. Sunday's [12/30/2018] episode of "Meet the Press"
with Chuck Todd featured an hourlong panel with lawmakers and scientists about the consequences of climate change. But
at the start, Mr. Todd said his show is "not going to give time to climate deniers" and went on to inaccurately
characterize the nature of the climate debate. "Just as important as what we are going to do is what we're not going to
do," he said. "We're not going to debate climate change, the existence of it. The earth is getting hotter, and
human activity is a major cause. Period."
The Editor says...
Not so fast, Mr. Todd. [#1] The earth is warming at the rate of perhaps one degree per century. In your
lifetime, chances are the average global temperature will increase one degree or less. That is an imperceptible change.
[#2] Human activity is a very minor cause of global warming. Most of the warming in the 20th century occurred before
1940. The widespread use of internal combustion engines didn't begin until after 1940. The output power of the sun
varies, and that causes the earth to warm or cool. [#3] No legislation will stop climate change. [#4] Nobody
really knows from one decade to another if warming will continue, or if global cooling will take over. [#5] The global
warming hoax is all about expanding the government and collecting taxes.
NYT's
Editorial Board Claims That 'Trump Imperils The Planet'. The New York Times editorial board says that President
Donald Trump is literally endangering the entire planet with his rolling back of the Obama administration's climate agenda.
The Times' editorial, titled "Trump Imperils the Planet," comes as the print edition published a 12-page special section on the
"far-reaching and potentially devastating" consequences of Trump's environmental policies.
The
real tragedy of human-caused climate change theories is not environmental. MSNBC anchor Katy Tur read an
article in the New Yorker about the devastating effect California's wildfires have had due to climate change and proclaimed,
["]I read that New Yorker article today, and I thought, 'Gosh, how pointless is my life and how pointless are the
decisions that I'm making on a day-to-day basis, when we are not focused on climate change every day, when it's not leading
every one of our newscasts?'["] That's not funny and not to be ridiculed. It's sad. It's sad because
it appears she has been trained to say that ridiculous thing through deceit and pressure.
How
NPR Is Carrying The Dirty Water Of The U. S. Climate Assessment, Ignoring Complex Systems. On November 26th,
2018, NPR released a dire headline: New U. S. Climate Assessment Forecasts Dire Effects On Economy, Health. The
co-author of the assessment, Katherine Hayhoe, a long-time Union of Concerned Scientists activist, clarifies the assessment's
conclusion in her interview with NPR's Weekend Edition Saturday by saying: "Climate change is happening here and now."
It must be a new thing. And it must be true, because the Climate Assessment is daunting, according to NPR it is, "the
culmination of years of research by the country's top climate scientists. It's well over 1000 pages touching on a
daunting range of topics." Conveniently, the NPR article makes no mention of the years that were studied, the methods used to
accumulate and analyze the data, or the reliability of the forecasting models. But there are two things we know for sure.
First, that the Assessment cost untold millions of taxpayer dollars, thanks to the lobbying efforts of John Podesta, Tom Steyer and
George Soros' Center for American Progress (their senior fellow Andrew Light served as a review editor). And second, blame for
the economic damage the Assessment predicts will fall squarely on, drum roll please, greenhouse gas emissions.
Weather
Channel Defends Reporter Mocked for 'So Dramatic' Hurricane Florence Coverage. The Weather Channel is defending
one of their own after a video of Hurricane Florence coverage went viral. The video, uploaded to Twitter, shows Weather
Channel meteorologist and reporter Mike Seidel bracing in the wind during a live shot in Wilmington, NC. As he is
struggling to keep his footing, two people walk behind him showing no signs of struggle. Twitter was not impressed.
Hilarious
video shows journalist 'bravely' reporting on Hurricane Florence — until two men in shorts casually stroll past.
A Weather Channel reporter looked to have played up the drama and severity of Hurricane Florence in a hilarious video that
has been circulating on Twitter. Weather Channel reporter Mike Seidel was shooting a live segment in Wilmington, North
Carolina, on Friday [9/14/2018] as winds barreled around him. In the clip, Seidel appears to brace his feet deeper into
the grass so that he won't go with the wind.
What's
really behind the rise in political violence. [Scroll down] Take, for example, The Washington Post, which
suggested in an editorial this week that President Trump is "complicit" about Hurricane Florence because he doesn't support
the Post's preferred climate-change policy. Now, whatever your feelings about Trump's climate-change policy —
or lack thereof — he's not responsible for a hurricane any more than former President Barack Obama was responsible
for Hurricane Sandy. At best, Trump's policy may be contributing to future global warming. But that's not the Post's
suggestion. Instead, the Post editors suggest that Trump is himself a King Triton, stirring the seas into hurricane-friendly
territory.
Hurricanes, Death
Tolls, and Trump. It's Hurricane Katrina all over again. Since the election of climate denier Donald
Trump, the politicization of major hurricanes — along with a torrent of hysterical news coverage and
blame-laying — is back en vogue. During last year's unusually active hurricane season, the media,
Democratic politicians and scientific activists claimed the devastating storms were Trump's fault even though he had been
president for less than a year; some suggested voters in the red states that helped elect Trump deserved to have their
property destroyed or even to be killed. (The Washington Post editorial board already this week has blamed Trump
for Hurricane Florence, [...])
Hurricane
Florence is not climate change or global warming. It's just the weather. Even before Hurricane Florence
made landfall somewhere near the border of North and South Carolina, predicted damage from potentially catastrophic flooding
from the storm was already being blamed on global warming. Writing for NBC News, Kristina Dahl contended, "With each
new storm, we are forced to question whether this is our new, climate change-fueled reality, and to ask ourselves what we can
do to minimize the toll from supercharged storms." The theory is that tropical cyclones have slowed down in their speed
by about 10 percent over the past 70 years due to a retreat of the jet stream farther north, depriving storms of steering
currents and making them stall and keep raining in one location. This is what happened with Hurricane Harvey in Houston
last year.
The Editor says...
What is a "supercharged storm?" Has Donald Trump sent someone out into the Atlantic to supercharge storms?
Or are the storms supercharged because I still drive a gas-engine Hyundai instead of a Prius?
The NY Times' "Three Surprising Energy
Trends" Editorial: Surprising Because They Aren't True. Let's start with electricity prices. The
editorial acknowledges that "electricity prices vary a lot from state to state, for many reasons. For example, prices
in California, which has made reducing emissions a priority, have gone up in recent years. But they have fallen in New
York, which has set similarly ambitious climate targets." What the Times fails to mention is that the states with the
most ambitious renewable generation and climate mandates, including New York, California, and many New England states, have
the highest electricity prices in the continental US. In 2017, for example, the average residential price in New York was
over 18 cents per kilowatt-hour, 40 percent higher than the national average, and just slightly below the California
average. And with Governor Cuomo's mandate to develop 2,400 megawatts of offshore wind generation, residential customers
in New York can expect to see much higher prices, thanks to lavish subsidies for wind developers.
BBC
tells journalists that IPCC is God, can not be wrong — "No debate allowed". Let[']s all bow to the
IPCC — a modern God that shalt not be questioned. The Holy Sacred Climate Cow! The IPCC is an
unaudited and unaccountable foreign committee. Not only are no scientists paid to check its findings, now the publicly
mandated BBC is making sure none of their journalists will check its findings either. [...] In April, the UK regulator,
Ofcom, found the BBC was guilty of not sufficiently challenging Lord Lawson, a skeptic. So in response the BBC now
promises they will never sufficiently challenge the IPCC. That's "false balance" for you.
One-sided environmental alarmism in USA Today: Hothouse
Earth: Runaway global warming threatens 'habitability of the planet for humans'. Runaway global warming on our
planet remains a distinct possibility in the decades and centuries ahead, scientists reported Monday [8/6/2018] in a new study,
warning that a "hothouse Earth" threatens the very "habitability of the planet for human beings." Such a hothouse Earth
climate would see global average temperatures some 6 to 8 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are now, with sea levels
30 to 200 feet higher than today, the paper said. In addition, even if the carbon emission reductions called
for in the Paris Agreement are met — meaning a rise of no more than 3.6 degrees above preindustrial
levels — that still may not be enough.
Climate Change: What's
So Alarming? Are droughts, hurricanes, floods and other natural disasters getting stronger and more
frequent? Are carbon dioxide emissions, global temperatures and sea levels putting us on a path for climate
catastrophe? Bjorn Lomborg, Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, breaks down the facts about the environment
and shows why the reality of climate change may be very different from what you hear in the media.
A
New Low in the Media's War on Fracking. Rolling Stone just dropped a bombshell — or so it
claims in its article, "'The Harms of Fracking': New Report Details Increased Risks of Asthma, Birth Defects and Cancer."
Highlighting what it deems an "authoritative study," Rolling Stone concludes that fracking is "contaminating the air
and water — and imperiling the health of millions of Americans." Dig into the details, though, and it becomes
clear that the study is not scientific. There remains no proof that fracking is dangerous to the general population.
The
Study You Won't Be Hearing About: No Impact On Groundwater From Fracking. Protests by environmentalists against
hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) have been going on for years now, along with the Hollywood efforts of serial fabulists such as
Josh Fox. One of the biggest concerns surrounding the process is the possibility of contamination of groundwater. While
a previous study in Pennsylvania by the state Department of Environmental Protection revealed zero instances of this happening
(except for surface spills during transport of hydraulic fluids), critics discounted the study and the protests continued.
Now a different study conducted in Ohio on the Utica shale play has been completed and published. They were looking for
evidence of natural gas methane (CH4) in the drinking water near fracking sites which might be traced back to the drilling process.
Leftist
Propaganda Thwarts Unity. The Americans who listen to the Washington Post, the New York Times, and all the networks
are being systematically lied to. [...] There is an incessant drumbeat of stories about how man is causing the Earth to warm so
much that catastrophe will result. The fact that all the computer models are wrong and disagree with the data and that
even those scientists — who are not 99.7% of all scientists — generally don't believe that the warming we see will result in
disasters is never reported. The media don't really cover the fact that the infamous Paris Accords allowed China and India
to massively increase their CO2 emissions. If global warming is an existential crisis, why can we allow those countries to
massively increase their contribution to our impending doom?
Here's
One Global Warming Study Nobody Wants You To See. A new study published in a peer-reviewed journal finds that
climate models exaggerate the global warming from CO2 emissions by as much as 45%. If these findings hold true, it's huge
news. No wonder the mainstream press is ignoring it. In the study, authors Nic Lewis and Judith Curry looked at
actual temperature records and compared them with climate change computer models. What they found is that the planet
has shown itself to be far less sensitive to increases in CO2 than the climate models say. As a result, they say, the
planet will warm less than the models predict, even if we continue pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.
U.S.
Cuts 'Global Warming' Gases Faster Than Anyone Else, But Media Ignore It. The latest report from the Environmental
Protection Agency shows that the emission of so-called greenhouse gases declined by 2% in 2016 from 2015 and 11% from 2005.
No major industrial economy on Earth has made as much progress as the U.S. And no, we're not claiming this as a victory for
Donald Trump or anyone else in government. It's due to fracking and the replacement of high-CO2 fuels like coal with
far-cleaner natural gas. That trend can bee seen in another data series, which shows that emissions in the electric
power sector plunged 25% since 2005, an unprecedented amount.
American Journalists Are Hysterical
Knuckleheads. [Scroll down] Or take the reporting on the EPA's expected rollback of Obama's fuel-economy mandate. The mandate
required automakers to hit targets of 54.5 miles per gallon — an absurd number based on zero science (the decimal point was a snarky joke)
which automakers could duck by jumping through a bunch of largely cosmetic "green" hoops that cost them money but made the administration look
good. It was scientific, political and environmental hogwash that hurt American business. Here's how CBS reported it. "The Trump
administration is set to roll back one of President Barack Obama's signature policies on the environment." "It's expected to ignite a
firestorm of criticism." And then, despicably, they picked up a series of likely coordinated and unfounded attacks on EPA Chief Scott
Pruitt's ethics — travel expenses that are in keeping with those of previous directors, an apartment he rented from an energy guy who had
no business in front of the EPA, and so on — clearly designed to take the man down.
EPA poised
to scrap fuel economy targets that are key to curbing global warming. The Trump administration is poised to
abandon America's pioneering fuel economy targets for cars and SUVs, a move that would undermine one of the world's most
aggressive programs to confront climate change and invite another major confrontation with California. The Environmental
Protection Agency is expected to announce in the coming days that it will scrap mileage targets the Obama administration
drafted in tandem with California that aim to boost average fuel economy for passenger cars and SUVs to 55 miles per
gallon by 2025, according to people familiar with the plans. The agency plans to replace those targets with a weaker
standard that will be unveiled soon, according to the people, who did not want to be identified discussing the plan before
it was announced.
Bias alert!
If all the internal combustion engines in the world stopped tomorrow, global warming or cooling would continue uninterrupted,
except by each other(!), because warming and cooling result from the variable output power of the sun, and the effects of naturally-occurring
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Fuel economy is not the key to "curbing global warming," as falsely stated in the headline above.
15 Times
Major Media Outlets Used a Statistic about Plastic Straws Based on Research by a 9-Year-Old. Yesterday
[1/25/2018], I reported that the oft-cited, debate-driving statistic that Americans use 500 million plastic straws a day was
the product of a 9-year-old's guesstimations. Despite those shaky factual foundations, the 500 million figure has
quickly spread, virus-like, across the media landscape and even into our shops and schools. [...] Meanwhile, impressionable
children at the Mount Vernon Community School in nearby Alexandria, Virginia, are coming home with "Straw Wars" handouts
citing the same dubious figure. It's easy to understand how the school could have been led astray, given how ubiquitous
this claim is in the media. Please see below for a list of just a few of the news outlets that have cited this
"fact" — or otherwise quoted people saying it without any critical pushback — in their reporting: [...]
The
liberal media have all the facts! Except when they don't. There was an article in my Illinois paper this
week that said in Illinois, 2017 was the sixth warmest on record. That's another worthless piece of information unless
we see the top five. My guess is that some are in the 1930s, which means that eighty years ago, Illinois was warmer
than today, and the theory falls apart. When Al Gore, Michael Mann, and the mayor of Boston say the current record cold
is caused by warming, journalists should know that this is pure garbage. These people are trying to cover up their bad
predictions, but most journalists just repeat what they are told as if that were factual — because, after all,
there is an agenda to push.
NY
Times: It's So Cold Because You Drove A Fossil Fueled Vehicle. That, and your use of a hair dryer, ice
maker in the fridge, the fridge itself, air conditioning and heating, washing and drying your clothes with machines, wearing
clothes that you didn't make yourself or buy from local manufacture, eating meat, not growing your own veggies, owning a gun,
and so much more.
MSM:
Slash CO2 Emissions or the Reindeer Get It. Despite these stories, this year's effort to weave Santa into the
Global Warming myth seems somehow more subdued than previous years. Perhaps heavy snowfall in the North is making it
more difficult to believe in the climate ice melt fairy.
Electric Car Putsch? It's not just
the government that's pushing electric cars. The media is equally complicit. Both are engaged in what has to be
described as nothing less than a concerted propaganda onslaught to convince the public that the naked emperor is indeed
wearing a suit of the finest materials available. But the question — why? — remains
mysterious. What is so important — to them — about electric cars? Why the urgency to
create the impression of inevitability? The media, in particular, seems to be obsessed with this — even to
the point of exaggerating the confected enthusiasm for electric cars displayed by major car manufacturers, who must at least
pretend that electric cars are The Future — in order to not offend politically correct orthodoxy.
Trump
EPA to propose repealing Obama's climate regulation: document. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will propose repealing the
Clean Power Plan — the Obama administration's centerpiece regulation to fight climate change — and plans to solicit input
on a rule to replace it, according to an EPA document seen by Reuters.
The Editor says...
This article is accompanied by a photograph (left) which appears to be a photo of an industrial plant of some sort, with the dishonest
caption, "Smoke is released into the sky at a refinery in Wilmington, California March 24, 2012." The "smoke" being released is
obviously water vapor, since it appears to be absorbed into the surrounding atmosphere within a few seconds of its release. The
contrast on the photo appears to have been enhanced to make the emission appear to be black as it leaves the vent, but smoke doesn't
turn white and then disappear within a few seconds. This appears to me to be a shamelessly dishonest attempt by Reuters to make
harmless water vapor look like smoke.
EPA
Set To Repeal Obama's Clean Power Plan On Coal Regulations. The Trump administration continues to rollback
failed Obama-era policies with a measure to remove coal regulations. On Monday [10/9/2017], EPA Chief Scott Pruitt
announced the president will scrap the Clean Power Plan. The plan, which Pruitt called "unfair," would have imposed
stringent emissions standards on coal-fired power plants. Critics claimed it would kill thousands of jobs, but it was
put on hold by the Supreme Court over a year ago and has never taken effect.
The Editor says...
Same as above, but this time it's the Associated Press. The article above includes the photo (left) with the caption, "In this Sept. 4, 2011 file
photo, smoke rises from the stacks of the main plant facility at the Navajo Generating Station, as seen from Lake Powell in Page, Ariz." But
this is an obvious canard. Smoke does not emanate from a power plant and then disappear into the atmosphere in a few seconds. That is the
behavior of water vapor, especially in the dry Arizona air.
Now
it's a War on Pipelines. The prestigious journal Nature Geoscience recently published a careful study that found
there has been far less planetary warming since 1998 than alarmist scientists and computer models had predicted. The models are
based on the assumption that carbon dioxide drives climate change, and they "run too hot," resulting in predictions that deviate from
actual temperature measurements more and more every year. But instead of admitting they were wrong, the usual strident suspects
in the climate crisis industry doubled down and attacked the study and any news outlet that called attention to it. Even Britain's
BBC denounced the inconvenient study and displayed not a whit of apology over its climate chaos claims.
NYT
Pesticide Exposé Only Exposes Foolish Reporting. Earlier this year, the Environmental Protection Agency
rejected a petition from two environmental activist groups to ban the longtime, widely-used pesticide chlorpyrifos.
Last week, the New York Times published an ostensible exposé on that decision by reporter Eric Lipton, but
despite a lot of dark hints, the story exposes nothing new or noteworthy about the Trump Administration's decision. The
Environmental Protection Agency decision, announced by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt last March, was wise, as I detail
[elsewhere]. Nonetheless, Lipton maintains that emails the Times obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request
show that the Trump EPA consulted with "the farm industry" in making this decision, as if that's a shocking revelation.
Did
Climate Change Cause Hurricane Irma To Fizzle? When Irma shifted to the west as it approached, it was described
as the "worst-case scenario" for the state. However, when Irma made landfall in the U.S., it's strength quickly
diminished and the actual damages to Florida in dollar terms will likely be 75% lower than predicted. While those dire
forecasts were being made, environmentalists and politicians were busy pinning the blame on global warming. It was the
same after Hurricane Harvey caused massive flooding in Houston. It's the case whenever there is an adverse weather
event. If there's a drought, it's because of "climate change." If there's flooding, climate change. Wild
fires, climate change. Blizzards? Climate change. So will environmentalists credit climate change for Irma's
unexpected turn for the better?
Inconvenient
energy fact: It takes 79 solar workers to produce same amount of electric power as one coal worker. In an
April 25 New York Times article ("Today's Energy Jobs Are in Solar, Not Coal") reporter Nadja Popovich wrote that
"Last year, the solar industry employed many more Americans [373,807] than coal [160,119], while wind power topped 100,000
jobs." Those energy employment figures are based on a Department of Energy report released earlier this year that
provides the most complete analysis available of employment in the energy economy. But simply reporting rather
enthusiastically (see the NYT headline again) that the solar industry employs lots of Americans, more than twice as many as
the number of coal miners and utility workers at electric power plants using coal, is only telling a small part of the story.
NY
Times Knocks Down Hurricane Irma Is Climate Change Stories. An early shot from the NY Times, which somehow made
it through Climate Justice Warrior editorial review. Of course, we'll be sure to see many stories from the NY Times
in future days blaming 'climate change' for Irma, because that's what they do[.]
Scientific American
Sokalized. A few years ago, I learned of an article by Mark Z. Jacobson and Mark A. Delucchi in the
November 2009 issue of Scientific American called "A Path to Sustainable Energy." My first impression was, "These guys must be
joking." My second impression was, "Yes, they are joking, and the joke is on Scientific American."
CNN,
MSNBC: Climate Change Caused Hurricane Harvey. CNN and MSNBC have been working double time to turn the Hurricane Harvey
disaster into a conversation about climate change. "12 years ago was Katrina. We've now had three storms in
12 years that were as bad as this," The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza said on CNN. "A lot of Democrats will be saying, you
know, climate change is actually... this is the kind of flooding you would predict based on the climate change models." CNN
host John Berman pressured a Republican congressman to blame the disaster on climate change, asking if hurricanes are "really
just a part of life."
Scientists
Debunk New York Times Story on Trump Climate Report. Scientists are pushing back on the The New York Times for
a story claiming the Trump Administration could suppress a climate change report. The report, titled "Scientists fear
Trump will dismiss blunt climate report," said the draft of the National Climate Assessment, a project of the U.S. Global
Change Research Program, "has not yet been made public" but "a copy of it was obtained by The New York Times." Except,
scientists who worked on the report say the version that was obtained and posted in full by the New York Times has actually
been online and available to the public for months.
The scoop that wasn't.
In this case, reporter Lisa Friedman buys into the Sky-Us-Falling scenario despite more than four decades of predictions of gloom and
doom proving false. Billions of people have not died of famine due to overpopulation or global cooling or global warming.
The world population has more than doubled over the last 50 years (now topping 7.5 billion) and people are healthier, more
prosperous, and freer than ever before. Predictions also proved wrong that we would be overwhelmed by actual pollution (not this
fairy tale about carbon dioxide, which is a nutrient for plants). The air is so clear in Poca, West Virginia, that you hardly
notice the large coal-fired power plant across the river.
Worst
media moments of the week: NY Mag climate screed wins! [Scroll down] "There are now, trapped in Arctic ice, diseases that have not circulated in the
air for millions of years," goes one of the milder passages. It was so bad that climate alarmist and hockey stick creator Michael Mann teamed up
with two others to write a response, arguing, "Doomsday scenarios are as harmful as climate change denial." Mann and his compatriots criticized the New
York Mag piece as painting, "an overly bleak picture, arguing that climate change could render the Earth uninhabitable by the end of this century."
They also called it out for errors. Mann made an interesting comment that seems to go right over the head of eco-journalists, explaining, "fear does
not motivate, and appealing to it is often counter-productive." Yet fear is about 99.99 percent of all media climate catastrophe coverage.
Listen
To Trump's Energy Secretary Slap Down New York Times Reporter On Coal. Energy Secretary Rick Perry slapped down
a question from a New York Times reporter on clean coal technology while touring an advanced coal-fired power plant Thursday
[7/6/2017]. New York Times reporter Carol Davenport asked Perry a question about exporting U.S. clean coal technology.
Boston
Globe Is Super Excited For You To Give Up Your Air Conditioning. Nowhere within this long article does Leon
Neyfakh express that he's given up his own use, nor that the Boston Globe has turned off their AC units at the corporate
building and in the fossil fueled vehicles they use to deliver newspapers.
From
Fake News to Fake Polls. The media blob is making much of a Washington Post/ABC News poll that finds the public
by a 2 to 1 margin opposes President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris Accord: [...] You need to click through to
the actual poll questions to see what [an incompetent] poll it is. The poll only asked five questions. [...]
Conspicuously missing are any questions about whether people support appropriations for wealth transfers from the U.S to
developing nations that the Paris Accord included (and into which Obama tossed $1 billion)? No questions, also,
about whether people are willing to pay higher energy costs for an agreement that will make no difference to the planet's
temperature 80 years from now, according to the EPA's own models.
NPR
Bungles Sea Level Rise Story (supposed threats to coastal military installations ignore science). National
Public Radio's March 31 "Morning Edition" program carried a "news" story claiming that rising seas threaten a number of U.S.
coastal military bases. The commentary was so laden with factual errors that listeners might have thought it was an
early April fool's joke. Unfortunately, it was not. NPR remains so wedded to its belief that humans and carbon
dioxide emissions are causing a fossil fuels-driven global warming catastrophe that its reporting has been compromised, and
it is unable to think critically or report honestly without resorting to activist claims and fake news events. Real
journalism would have at least included passing references to alternative views and sources. But they were absent in
this story, which in truth is a splendid example of ignorance or deception — reader's choice.
The
Misuse of Asthma as a Justifaction for EPA Rules. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt was one of the featured guests
on Fox News Sunday yesterday. Chris Wallace grilled him about President Trump's decision to scrap Obama's Clean Power
Plan (CPP). The interview mostly consisted of Wallace reading Obama Maladministration talking points about the CPP and
demanding that Pruitt explain how they were going to "prevent those terrible things" without the CPP.
When
climate change warriors can't keep their stories straight. In 2015, CNN ran a story with the headline, "Did
climate change cause California drought?" Less than two years later, CNN ran this headline, "California's drought is
almost over." Is the irony of these two headlines lost on the journalistic mavens of CNN? Probably. But the
internet remembers, happy to take CNN to task over their contradictions.
Doctors
join forces, warn climate change is harming our health. "It's not only hurting polar bears, it's hurting us,"
said Dr. Mona Sarfaty, the director of the new consortium and a professor at George Mason University in Fairfax,
Virginia. [...] Carbon dioxide levels in the air are increasing and air and ocean temperatures are warming, contributing to more
frequent and extreme droughts, wildfires, and flooding, Sarfaty explained. In turn, she said doctors are seeing an uptick
in heat-related illnesses; worsening chronic conditions such as asthma; injuries and deaths from extreme weather like floods;
infectious diseases spread by increasing populations of mosquitoes and ticks (including those that spread Lyme disease); illnesses
stemming from contaminated food and water; and mental health problems like aggression and anxiety.
The Editor says...
The article immediately above reeks with left-wing bias.
First of all, mosquitoes and ticks are thriving because the leftists got DDT banned decades ago.
Second, the rate of global warming is currently zero, and even if it resumes its earlier pace of about
one degree per century, it's unlikely the numerous environmental problems listed above can be caused
or prevented by temperature changes of one degree. And in any event, mosquitoes and ticks are not
bothered by one-degree differences in temperature, obviously, since the ambient temperature often changes
25 or 30 degrees from day to night.
Iceberg
Story, Slim. In the post-November 8 universe, one man's fake news is another man's vitally important
scoop. The third-most emailed article in today's [2/7/2017] New York Times is surely both things depending on
who's reading it. [...] Here's the gist of it: A crack is growing in the Larson C Ice Shelf, "in an area already
vulnerable to warming temperatures" and may soon create a very large iceberg. [...] This is literally a story about an
iceberg that could form — and then do no appreciable damage. And lest you think there's any new
information here, the Times reports that scientists have been monitoring the thing since 2014.
Opinion
Activism On News Page: GOP Hurries To Slash Oil And Gas Rules. [Here is another reason] that the
Credentialed Media has lost trust, as the NY Times publishes what is essentially an activist opinion piece by Eric Lipton on
page A1 of the Sunday NY edition. This might as well have been written by the office of Nancy Pelosi[.] [...] If that
was a press release from the Democratic National Committee, would you know the difference? Interestingly, Lipton never
actually names the group till literally the next to last paragraph.
Why NYT Hid
The Numbers For The 'Hottest Year On Record'. [W]hen you read an article proclaiming that, for the third year
in a row, last year was the hottest year on record, you might expect that right up front you will get numbers, measurements,
and a statistical margin of error. [...] I just got done combing through a New York Times report titled, "Earth Sets a
Temperature Record for the Third Straight Year." The number of relevant numbers in this article is: zero. We
are not told what the average global temperature was, how much higher this is than last year's record or any previous records,
or what the margin of error is supposed to be on those measurements. Instead, we get stuff like this. [...]
Putin's
Other American Propaganda Effort: Anti-Fracking News. Energy politics makes strange bedfellows, none
stranger than Robin Hood and Russian President Vladimir Putin. RT, a media organization that the U.S. intelligence
community calls "the Kremlin's principal international propaganda outlet," published an article on Jan. 2 under the unlikely
headline: "Robin Hood's Sherwood Forest hideout under threat from frackers." The article, which carries no byline
and cites the work of environmental activists, laments plans of a unit of Ineos Group, a Switzerland-based chemical company,
to conduct seismic testing for natural gas near Major Oak, the millennium-old tree that served in legend as headquarters to
Robin Hood and his merry fellows.
NYT:
Global Warming Is Turning Polar Bears Into 'Climate Refugees'. The New York Times actually agrees that
Arctic-dwelling polar bears are "climate refugees," fleeing for their lives from melting sea ice, which of course according
to all the radical politicians, activists and media outlets, is caused by humans... these basket cases are really looking for
anything to call a 'refugee'.
The
Weather Channel Publicly Calls Out Breitbart For Claiming Global Warming Isn't Real. The Weather Channel just
pulled a Taylor Swift and asked to be excluded from a narrative, one that they have never asked to be a part of. You
see, Breitbart published an article last week that used some Weather Channel information to claim that global warming isn't
real. The Weather Channel is not happy about it. They are not happy at all. [Video clip]
Brexit2
Signals the End of the Green Age. Donald J. Trump comes into office with a plan to toss out most of what
President Obama achieved on energy and the environment. While vowing to "cancel" the international Paris climate accord
Obama championed, Trump would also rearrange domestic energy and environmental priorities. He wants to open up federal
lands to oil and gas drilling and coal mining. He wants to eliminate regulations he calls needless. He would
scrap proposed regulations for tighter methane controls on domestic drillers. And he wants to shrink the role of the
Environmental Protection Agency to a mostly advisory one and pull back the Clean Power Plan, Obama's proposed plan to push
utilities toward lower carbon emissions.
The Editor says...
The Washington Post apparently sees this as bad news. I certainly don't. And I wish they would quit saying
"carbon emissions" when they mean carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
Fish don't live in the sky.
Drew Creighton at the Sydney Morning Herald gets excited: Climate Change affects all levels of life. [...] It must be a
pretty hot fisheries model to separate the the multifactorial uncontrolled nightmare of predator-prey changes and temperature
shifts too-small-to-measure, spread over decades in an ocean where hot and cold water swirls in eddies right next to each
other. The story mentions "one degree of warming since the industrial revolution." But that's air temperature,
and fish don't fly much.
MSNBC
reporter under fire for claiming Obama's Paris climate change agreement is designed to STOP storms like Matthew. An MSNBC reporter
was bashed online on Wednesday, when he claimed on air that the new Paris climate change agreement would stop storms like Hurricane Matthew.
Ron Allen was reporting from the White House, where President Obama spoke to the media about the agreement being ratified by the required number of
nations. When President Obama wrapped up his speech, Allen started speaking and tied the agreement to the current hurricane barreling
towards Florida.
Murdoch's
NatGeo Plans DiCaprio Climate-Panic Documentary. When the Murdochs bought the National Geographic Society and
its media properties, the eco-leftists had a fit that the right-wing climate deniers had invaded and "Foxification" would
follow. But the latest news from the Television Critics Association tour suggests their panic was premature. It's
actually the climate skeptics who should feel panicky. Variety reports NatGeo announced plans to acquire and promote a
global-warming documentary hosted by that "scientist" Leonardo diCaprio and put it in theaters and on television before the
November elections. It sounds like the same old drill of doom and gloom and calls for leftist action.
Wikipedia and the Climate Non-Debate.
Wikipedia, known as the "people's encyclopedia," has proven to be anything but a reliable source in regards to the debate concerning the causes and possible
consequences of climate change. Wikipedia is written and edited "by the people who read it," and it receives more than 400 million unique visitors
every month worldwide, according to GuideStar. The massive website has about 80,000 volunteers, a substantial number of whom are devoted enough to earn
the unpaid rank of "editor." Editors are provided with a fat book of rules to follow and a code of civility to honor. Wikipedia has emerged as an
influential tool used by climate alarmists against climate change realists, who are unwilling to accept political proclamations that humans are causing
catastrophic climate change. Dogmatic climate doomsters ignore Wikipedia's rules and spend days plowing through reams of Wikipedia pages to track
down and purge or alter any entry daring to challenge the view humans are responsible for global warming.
U.S.,
Canada, Mexico pledge to generate 50 percent of energy from clean sources. The United States, Canada and Mexico
have agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas industry by increasing clean energy generation to 50 percent
by 2025. The North American Climate, Clean Energy and Environment Partnership will impose new restrictions on some
industries to reduce emissions following last year's United Nations climate change agreement in Paris that sought a global
reduction in emissions.
The Editor says...
The article immediately above reflects an interesting increment in the media's handling of the Global Warming Hoax. Energy sources that produce carbon
dioxide when they are consumed — which would include coal, petroleum, biofuel, and natural gas — are not considered clean any more.
But there is nothing dirty about carbon dioxide.
FEAR-Mongering
Newspaper Warns PART of Antarctic Is Losing Ice (But Total Ice Is Up). Sometimes the media relies on
half-truths and sensationalized headlines to advance the climate change hypothesis and Thursday's Daily Mail is a great
example of how they try and fool the public. Trying to frighten the public into a global warming fear-frenzy they
published an article warning that West Antarctica has lost 386 square miles of ice since 1975, what they didn't
mention until a sidebar near the bottom of the article is that total Antarctic ice has been growing.
Media Denial of Climate Change
Thuggery. Powerful government officials collude with proponents of one side of a vastly complex national debate. They
target the opposition. They use their broad investigatory powers to intimidate, financially punish and ultimately silence them.
The legacy media respond to this egregious misuse of the public powers of office by collectively yawning and looking away. We expect
the media to inform the public, to safeguard free expression and to promote robust debate. Yet time and again, the legacy media fail
to deliver. They avoid colorful stories that cast doubt on the Obama administration's climate change agenda. They ignore the abuse
of power perpetrated by four state attorneys general, at present count, on organizations that deviate from the party line on climate change.
Climate
and Environmental Propaganda. Have you ever wondered how the LA Times, Associated Press, Weather Channel
and your local media always seem to present similar one-sided stories on climate change, fossil fuels, renewable energy and
other environmental issues? How their assertions become "common knowledge," like the following? Global
temperatures are the hottest ever recorded. Melting ice caps are raising seas to dangerous levels. Hurricanes,
tornadoes, floods and droughts have never been more frequent or destructive. Planet Earth is at a tipping point because
of carbon dioxide emissions. Fracking is poisoning our air, water and climate. 97 percent of scientists agree.
A clean renewable energy future is just around the corner. It's as if a chain of command, carefully coordinated process or
alliance of ideological compatriots was operating behind the scenes to propagate these fables. This time, conspiracy
theorists have gotten it right.
Alarmism
Cranked Up to Absurd Level. The Reuters article Record surge in 2016 temperatures adds urgency to climate deal,
say scientists features some notable quotes and a photo of a dead cow in South Africa — yes, a dead cow, a solitary
dead cow, without explanation — as if to say, Oh look, a dead cow. It must be due to global warming.
Also, I believe on-the-dole activists in the title and text would be more appropriate than scientists.
The
non-disaster of 150,000 missing penguins? They just went somewhere else. Much fuss was made of 150,000 missing
penguins in Antarctica as if climate change had killed them. A monster iceberg had washed in, stopping the cute swimming
tuxedos from getting to dinner and the colony of 160,000 suddenly shrank to 10,000. Where did all those penguins go? In
previous tough times, when they could be tracked they just split up and went to different colonies. Given that the penguins
have survived repeated ice ages and warming for millions of years who would have thought that they would have a strategy for
dealing with the odd big iceberg?
Cure
for 'Islamophobia'? Fox Orders Pilot of Muslim Family Sitcom. Here it is at last: the long-desired Muslim family situation comedy that is going
to cure "Islamophobia" by showing racist, ignorant, xenophobic Americans that, hey, Muslims are just like us. [...] This show has been a long time coming.
Katie Couric called for it during the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, saying that America needed a Muslim Cosby Show. Now that Bill Cosby is so
resoundingly discredited, Reza Aslan, with his typical clumsiness, called for a Muslim All in the Family, apparently not realizing that the central
character of that show was held up as a bigoted object of ridicule. But clearly both calls meant the same thing: if Americans could just
see Muslims outside of the context of jihad terrorism, they would love them, and "Islamophobia" would evanesce.
Audubon Goes over the Edge. The
cover of the January-February 2016 issue of Audubon Magazine proclaims: Arctic on the Edge: As global warming opens our most critical bird habitat,
the world is closing in. In reality, it is the magazine's writers and editors who have gone over the edge with their misleading reports on the
Arctic. This magazine is so awash in misstatements of fact and plain ignorance of history, science, and culture, that they must not go
unchallenged — especially since they epitomize the false and misleading claims that have characterized far too much of the U.S. and
worldwide "news coverage" of "dangerous manmade climate change."
Three
Global Warming Stories The Media Don't Want You To See. Let's start with a new paper from NASA — a
distinctly American organization — that was covered by the British Express. The newspaper tells us that our
space program has "found the Earth has cooled in areas of heavy industrialization where more trees have been lost and more
fossil fuel burning takes place." This is, of course, the opposite of what we've been told for decades.
Christmas
Eve 1955 Was Much Warmer. Last winter, the East Coast had record cold. That was ignored because it was "less
than 1% of the Earth." But this week, the Eastern US defines the global climate.
Did
Media Misquote NC Anti-Solar Residents To Make Them Look Stupid? Numerous left-wing media outlets have repeatedly misquoted citizens
of Woodland, N.C., after the city government voted to reject a proposed solar farm. An article in the Huffington Post claimed local resident
Bobby Mann said the proposed solar farm would "stop plants from growing and suck up all the energy from the sun," during his testimony to the
Woodland Town Council, citing an article in the Roanoke-Chowan Herald-News. However, the Herald-News only directly quotes Bobby Mann as saying
"You're killing your town, [a]ll the young people are going to move out." Other media outlets repeated the misquote.
Paris
climate summit: If liberal journos get their wish it may be lights out for billions. The UN climate change
conference (COP 21) is bringing thousands of environmental activists to still-shaken Paris to discuss what liberals consider
a bigger threat than terrorism — climate change. Heads of state are attempting, yet again, to reach a legally
binding agreement for carbon dioxide emissions, even though satellite temperature records still show a pause in the warming
trend. That pause began more than 18 years ago in 1997. The conference has no bigger supporters than the liberal media.
Journalists have worked together with environmentalists to attack nearly every energy source we use. News outlets have targeted
energy that provides more than 90 percent of U.S. power — oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear and even hydroelectric.
The
Walrus and the New York Times. The Times is peddling ignorance here. Actually, the congregation of walruses on
land is an age-old phenomenon known as "hauling out." It has nothing to do with the volume of sea ice at any given time. In
fact, the Times is not just peddling ignorance, it is recycling it. Today's Times piece is paraphrased from a much-derided column
by Gail Collins that ran in October 2014.
Scorched
Earth: Networks Evening Shows Spend 15 Minutes Hyping Climate Change Agenda, Summit. Seeking to boost President
Barack Obama and backers of the Paris climate change summit, the "big three" networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC devoted on Monday
night [11/30/2015] over 15 minutes of airtime across six segments touting the summit, a Discovery Channel documentary on
climate change, a hashtag campaign, and climate scientists in the Arctic Circle to name a few examples. Leading the way
toward the 15-minute-and-14-second total (without teases) was the CBS Evening News, which started with the topic on its Monday
broadcast and included anchor Scott Pelley cheering "the unprecedented global summit meeting" and a friendly poll of their own
to back the climate change advocates.
The Climate Change Inquisition Begins.
According to The New York Times, its sources "said the inquiry would include a period of at least a decade during which Exxon Mobil
funded outside groups that sought to undermine climate science." See what they did there? To have a different view of climate
science is to "undermine" it because there is no scientific study of the climate except that which they agree with.
AP
Stylebook boots term 'climate change deniers'. The Associated Press (AP) today announced a change to its famous
stylebook, discouraging the use of the terms "climate change deniers" and "climate change skeptics" in favor of an
alternative: "climate change doubters." The switch in terminology, noted the wire service in an online posting,
solves a number of problems encountered by journalists writing on this divisive topic. "Scientists who consider themselves
real skeptics — who debunk mysticism, ESP and other pseudoscience, such as those who are part of the Center for
Skeptical Inquiry — complain that non-scientists who reject mainstream climate science have usurped the phrase
skeptic," notes the AP posting under the byline of Vice President and Director of Media Relations Paul Colford. And
that's only the beginning of the clash that motivated this AP change.
UN
and Oxfam caught bribing media to write crusading climate stories. News journalists are being bribed by the
United Nations and the Oxfam charity to write scare stories about climate change ahead of the global climate treaty
negotiations in Paris later this year. Details of the bribes — which take the form of ego-boosting "awards",
global travel in CO2 generating airliners and financial payments — are contained in a news release just published
by the UNDP today, an organisation headed by former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark. Journalists' codes of ethics
prohibit being induced to give favourable coverage, but those rules have increasingly been ignored in recent years by the use
of backdoor mechanisms like funding journalism "awards" as a means of generating content and rewarding propaganda-writers.
Ignoring Science, 97% of Stories Hype BPA
as Health Threat. Fear of chemicals and "toxins" is rampant among the so-called "environmental" left. Unfortunately, that
phobia infects national media coverage as well. For more than a decade, the left has been on the attack against BPA, a chemical that is
commonly found in plastics and other products. Anti-chemical groups such as the Breast Cancer Fund and some scientists have crusaded
against BPA (known formally as bisphenol A), connecting it to cancer and reproductive problems and claiming that it is "a threat to human
health," despite government agencies that have declared it "harmless" even in baby bottles. Much of the national media have bought in
spreading fear of the chemical in ordinary canned goods, on cash register receipts, in dental sealants and more. In just the past two
years, the three broadcast networks and top five national newspapers have continued to report on the "hidden danger" of BPA, labeling it
"carcinogenic" and "toxic" often with small or flawed reports from activists.
Big
Media Ignores Nobel Physicist, Promotes Hollywood Climate Activists. So, a world-famous scientist,
winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, delivers a scathing speech at an annual gathering of Nobel Laureates,
during which he skewers President Obama (whom he previously endorsed and advised) for the president's "ridiculous"
claims that global warming is an existential threat. Did Dr. Ivar Giaever's speech rate even a blip on the
radar screen of the corporate Big Media? Of course not. The "mainstream" media were completely occupied,
falsely reporting for the umpteen time, for instance, on the supposed demise of polar bears — due,
allegedly, to human-caused global warming. Or warning how anthropogenic global warming (AGW) may be causing
sex changes in Australian lizards. Or broadcasting the never-ending cascade of environmental tirades from
the pampered Hollywood jet set scolding us middleclass folks for our "wasteful" lifestyles that, they say, are
killing the planet.
The
Station That Was Formerly Known As The Weather Channel. Want the weather report without a sermon?
Just need to know if it's going to rain tomorrow and hope to find out without being hectored? Looking for a
forecast, not a lecture? Then the Weather Channel is probably the place to avoid.
ABC's
'08 Prediction: NYC Under Water from Climate Change By June 2015. New York City underwater? Gas over $9 a
gallon? A carton of milk costs almost $13? Welcome to June 12, 2015. Or at least that was the wildly-inaccurate
version of 2015 predicted by ABC News exactly seven years ago. Appearing on Good Morning America in 2008, Bob Woodruff
hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic 2015. The segment included
supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, "It's June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99." (On
the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip featured this prediction for the
current year: "Gas reached over $9 a gallon." (In reality, gas costs an average of $2.75.)
Who
were those "science advisors" behind the NY fracking ban? Last week we talked about
the bombshell EPA report which said that fracking didn't have any demonstrated, systemic effect on
ground water quality. (Well, it was a "bombshell" unless you work at the NY Times, which didn't find
that it merited much of a mention.)
NY
Teacher Exam Thrown Out For Being Discriminatory. At first glance, the city's second
Liberal Arts and Science Test (LAST-2) seems fairly innocuous. Unlike the unfair literacy tests
of Jim Crow, LAST-2 was given to every teaching candidate in New York, and it was simply a test to
make sure that teachers had a basic high school-level understanding of both the liberal arts and the
sciences. [...] Nevertheless, this apparently neutral subject matter contained an insidious kernel
of racism, because Hispanic and black applicants had a passage rate only 54 to 75 percent
of the passage rate for whites.
New
York Teachers Test Ruled Discriminatory — Minority Educators Failed.
Disparate Impact is the social justice legalese term when an innocuous process or qualification
standard disqualifies minority applicants at a higher rate than non-minorities. [...] Any
qualification standard that adversely impacts minorities more than non-minorities is considered
racist; the same applies to testing candidates.
The Age Of Disinformation.
No doubt national news media outlets are out of control when it comes to weather coverage, and their
idiotic claims find their way to us on a daily basis. The Houston flooding is a great example.
We are being told this is "unprecedented"... Houston is "under water"... and it is due to manmade global
warming. Yes, the flooding in Houston yesterday was severe, and a serious threat to life and
property. A genuine weather disaster that has brought on suffering. But, no, this was not
"unprecedented". Flooding from Tropical Storm Allison in 2001 was more widespread, and flood
waters were deeper.
Reporters
Ignore Climate Change Skeptics. The views of researchers skeptical of the theory
humans are causing potentially catastrophic climate change have become scarce in news stories
covering the topic. A recent study by George Mason University researchers published in the trade
magazine Journalism found contrarian views on the subject are no longer welcome in many of the nation's
newspapers. The authors of "Covering Global Warming in Dubious Times: Environmental Reporters in
the New Media Ecosystem," interviewed nearly a dozen journalists who regularly report on climate change,
formerly known as global warming.
Warming
seas may spell end to Britain's fish and chips. Warming seas may spell the end to traditional British
food favourites such as haddock and chips, researchers said on Monday [4/13/2015]. Haddock, plaice and lemon
sole are to decline in numbers as the North Sea warms by a predicted 1.8 degrees Celsius (35.24 degrees [sic]
Fahrenheit) over 50 years, according to research by University of Exeter scientists.
The Editor says...
The writer of the article above can't convert °C. to °F., so the rest of his or her assertions can be
proportionally discounted as well. This is another vague prediction of what might happen in the worst case
over the next 50 to 100 years. In all likelihood, no shortages of fish will ever result from climate
change, largely because fish are able to swim up or down to find warmer or cooler water — even if
the dreaded 1.8 degree estimates turn out to be accurate, which (in my opinion) they won't.
Obama's
Strategy on Climate Change, Part of Global Deal, Is Revealed. The White House on Tuesday [3/31/2015]
introduced President Obama's blueprint for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by nearly a third
over the next decade. [...] The United States and China are the world's two largest greenhouse gas polluters.
The Editor says...
The article immediately above appears in the New York Times, and it reeks with left-wing bias.
First of all, the reduction of CO2 emissions by "nearly a third" in this country would require us to return to the
18th century. Second, CO2 is plant food. It is not a pollutant. We should inject CO2 into the
atmosphere at every opportunity, because it makes the crops and the rain forests grow better.
Al
Roker: Extreme Weather This Winter Made Possible By Climate Change. Larry King Live: "In an in-depth
interview with Larry in New York, America's most trusted weatherman says he thinks the extreme Winter weather in
the northeast this season has been fueled by climate change." [Video clip]
Political,
Scientific Chicanery Underlies Global Warming Alarmism. In her December 28 CNN
article, "How Germany Banishes Climate Myths," German environment minister Barbara Hendricks argues
that the climate policies enabled by her country and the EU as a whole have been an economic
success. This is nothing more than East German-style disinformation. The reality is that
Germany's so-called "Solar Valley" has become a mothballed industrial rust belt. Nearly all solar
energy manufacturers have closed their doors. [...] Hendricks' CNN article is just another example
of the use of fraudulent PR spin to promote a desired political message while ignoring the realities
of science and economics.
Bill
Nye Pleads With MSNBC: More Climate Hysteria, Please! Climate change enthusiast Bill
Nye appeared on MSNBC, Monday [2/16/2015], to lobby the network for more global warming cheerleading and the
importance of linking all weather events to the phenomena. Talking to Joy Reid about the cold and
snow hitting much of the country, he implored, "...Just say the word climate change. Just, like, 'It
could be climate change. It's a possible connection to climate change. Is this evidence of climate
change?'" Nye demanded, "Could you just toss that in now and then?" A compliant Reid agreed:
"Absolutely. I would like to toss that in every single time."
The Climate Change
"Consensus" Isn't What the Washington Post Thinks. A recent Washington Post article by
Stephen Stromberg epitomizes the smug ignorance of the policy wonks pushing for aggressive
government intervention in the name of fighting climate change. Stromberg refers to the recent
publicity stunt of having senators vote on various propositions regarding climate change, and then
is grateful that at least some members of "the stupid party" (i.e. the GOP) are willing to listen to
the findings of modern science. He then invites them to adopt the policies that Stromberg supports,
such as a carbon tax. Yet as I'll show in this post, Stromberg was far from proving his case, so he
should check his disdain at the door.
Study:
Reporters told to stop covering 'irrelevant' climate change critics. A new study of
how environmental reporters cover global warming and climate change reveals that they see the issue
as one America has endorsed and, as a result, no longer include critics in their reports because
they are "generally irrelevant." And the orders are coming from editors. What's more, the
study from George Mason University found that climate change reporters are weaving their coverage into
stories on broader issues to get around editors who don't want a lot of reports on global warming.
Adventures
in Obama's Imaginary World. It is tempting to get distracted by the cartoonishly
biased framing of [a recent] Washington Post story on the Obama administration's new
executive action on environmental regulation in Alaska. But that media bias is only one of three
important takeaways in the story — and in fact is the least important of the three.
The Washington Post says... The
U.S. has caused more global warming than any other country. You may have heard that
China has recently surpassed the United States in annual greenhouse gas emissions —
becoming the largest emitter. That's true, but it's a relatively recent occurrence (within the last
decade). Looking back over time, the United States is far and away the number one emitter. This
analysis from the World Resources Institute shows that from 1850 to the year 2011, the United States, a
single country, produced 27 percent of the total carbon dioxide emissions of the world.
The Editor says...
The United States contributed a lot more to the world in those 161 years than just carbon dioxide.
Therefore, even if CO2 causes global warming, which it does not, the United States has nothing to be
ashamed of. People (like the writers at the Washington Post) who want us to feel guilty about producing CO2
are unwilling to believe that CO2 is beneficial plant food,
not a pollutant, and CO2 levels in the atmosphere are
a response
to global warming, not the cause of it.
Climate
Reporting's Hot Mess. News reporting of the latest climate alarm was not uniformly
bad. Among hundreds of publications in the Factiva database, exactly one — the Mail on
Sunday, one of those derided London tabloids — injected the phrase "statistically significant"
into consideration of whether 2014 was in any meaningful sense the "hottest year on record." A
nonjournalistic source and not exactly an outfit of climate-change deniers, Berkeley Earth, also
noted that, when it comes to 2014 and the other "hottest year" candidates, 2005 and 2010, the observed
temperature difference was smaller than the margin of error by a factor of five, adding:
"Therefore it is impossible to conclude from our analysis which of 2014, 2010, or 2005 was actually the
warmest year."
No
Scientific Consensus on '2014 Hottest Year on record'. The temperature at any given
location is surging up and down by many degrees each day and even more wildly across a year. It can
be done, across a timescale of decades, but trying to say that one year is hotter or colder than the
next is to push the limits of statistics and the available data. This sort of thing is why the
battle over global temperatures tends to be so hotly debated.
2014
Was NOT the Warmest Year on Record. Figure 1 shows the mean of the monthly anomalies
on the two datasets since the beginning of the record in January 1979. It is immediately apparent
from the graph that 2014 was not "the warmest year on record." Several previous years had been
warmer, including the El Niño years 1998 and 2010. In fact, some 70% of the years since
the last Ice Age were warmer than today. Figure 1 also shows the rate of global warming
since 1979 is the equivalent of just 1.3° Celsius per century — hardly anything to
worry about.
The climate is
ruined? An article at CNN now professes that "the climate is ruined. So can civilization
even survive?" Well, if CNN's current quality is any indication, civilization may have already died.
Climategate,
the sequel: How we are STILL being tricked with flawed data on global warming.
Although it has been emerging for seven years or more, one of the most extraordinary scandals of our
time has never hit the headlines. Yet another little example of it lately caught my eye when, in the
wake of those excited claims that 2014 was "the hottest year on record", I saw the headline on a climate
blog: "Massive tampering with temperatures in South America". [...] Puzzled by those "2014 hottest
ever" claims, which were led by the most quoted of all the five official global temperature records —
Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) — Homewood examined a place in the world where
Giss was showing temperatures to have risen faster than almost anywhere else: a large chunk of South
America stretching from Brazil to Paraguay.
Was
2014 Really the Warmest Year Ever? The New York Times features one of the most
misleading headlines ever: "2014 Was the Warmest Year Ever Recorded on Earth." The first paragraph
drives the hysteria home: [...] It would be hard to pack more misinformation into a single sentence.
First, the Times headline, and countless others like it, convey the impression that 2014 was the hottest
year ever! But note the paper's reference to "recorded history." If you keep reading, you see
that "recorded history" goes back only to 1880. But in 1880, the Little Ice Age had just ended,
and the Earth was beginning to warm after several hundred years in the deep freeze. So, yes,
temperatures are a little warmer now than they were then — happily. Indeed, the Earth
may still be recovering to more average temperature levels after the Little Ice Age.
The
Most Dishonest Year on Record. Last week, according to our crackerjack mainstream
media, NASA announced that 2014 was the hottest year, like, ever. No, really. The New York
Times began its report with: "Last year was the hottest in earth's recorded history." Well,
not really. As we're about to see, this is a claim that dissolves on contact with actual science.
But that didn't stop the press from running with it.
Substandard
MSM Reporting on Climate Change in Alaska. Over the last few days, three major
newspapers have reported on Alaska's climate. Unsurprisingly, there are problems in each article.
At the Washington Post, Philip Bump discusses how "Anchorage, Alaska never saw a day below zero in
2014" and then states that "Complete annual records from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
begin on Jan. 1, 1954." That's odd, since complete annual records from the NOAA National Weather
Service online database for Anchorage appear to begin in 1917, not 1954. The L.A. Times has a
piece on Anchorage's climate, and it shows [a graph] of the lowest temperature each year for the city, going
back to 1953. How does the L.A. Times show annual data for 1953, if the annual data doesn't begin
until 1954? And what data is NOAA-NWS providing for Anchorage that starts in 1917?
Media
Go Into Panic On How To Spin Record Cold. The liberal media are going into panic mode
attempting to salvage their precious global warming crisis as yet another record cold winter takes
shape across the country. Desperately hoping to purge the public's memory of failed predictions of
warm, snowless winters, the media are now going into overdrive trying to claim global warming theory
predicted colder and snowier winters all along.
'Natural
Cycles' Blamed for California Drought Instead of Climate Change. Climate science is "settled" according
to the news media, that is, unless scientists conclude climate change is not connected to a specific climate occurrence.
That was precisely the conclusion of a team of federal scientists came to when they studied California's three-year drought.
They determined "natural cycles" and "sea surface temperatures" were "main drivers" of that ongoing dry spell. NBC's website
responded by saying the science wasn't settled about the cause of the drought. The New York Times buried the news far back
in its A section and none of the broadcast networks news programs mentioned the findings on Dec. 8 or Dec. 9.
EPA
chief denies McConnell's 'war on coal'. The Obama administration's top environmental
official on Monday [11/17/2014] defended the new climate agreement with China as a significant achievement and
insisted that, contrary to Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell's charges, the coal industry is not being targeted.
But Gina McCarthy, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, defended her agency's work. "I feel very
confident that the American people understand the value of the EPA," she told reporters at a breakfast hosted by
The Christian Science Monitor.
Bias alert:
Senator McConnell is not declaring a war on coal: It is Obama's EPA that is effectively strangling the coal industry.
What
the mainstream media won't tell you about global warming. Between the recent "deal"
with China, reports of Obama taking climate action via executive fiat, and the debate over keystone,
global warming has been over the mainstream media recently. But instead of debating whether or not
the global warming hypotheses is a valid threat to the Earth, the media starts with the premise that
the theory is real and anybody who contests global warming is the equivalent of people who don't
believe the holocaust actually happened, they are called deniers. The "LA Times" refuses to print
letters that disagree with global warming, CNN openly mocks them on air, the NY Times ran a cartoon
suggesting climate change skeptics should be stabbed to death, and MSNBC and CBS only interview
climate change believers on their programs.
Weather
Channel Comes Out for Junk Science, Scaremongering and 'Global Warming'. "There is no
significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no
reason to fear any in the future," declared John Coleman, veteran meteorologist and founder of the
Weather Channel, last week. Every word of this statement is accurate, defensible and supported by
all the current available science. But that hasn't stopped Coleman's old home the Weather Channel
issuing a bizarre "position statement" in response.
New
York Magazine: How to Psychologically Fool Conservatives Into Accepting Global Warming. New York
magazine poses the problem of how to fool conservatives into buying the global warming beliefs. The answer
provided by writer Jesse Singal is to psychologically manipulate them via long term "framing interventions."
If you think the tone of the article is dripping with condescension toward the "conservative yahoos" you would be
right. One failed attempt at such obvious manipulation is to call it "climate change" instead of global warming
since there has been no global warming for about the past 14 years. Of course, Singal himself has proved
that he is not up to psychological manipulation speed since lately they have been calling it "climate disruption"
since it was pointed out that climate always changes.
Of
Course: Newsweek Clowns Link Ebola and So-Called 'Climate Change'. This may well be the dumbest thing
we've seen so far today, but it's still early. [...] Despite all evidence to the contrary they still claim
temperatures are rising, when they obviously are not. Yet the media just keeps repeating the lies.
Cold
Summer: 1,025 Record Lows in First Three Weeks of August. The NOAA Daily Weather
Records for today, August 25, report that in the last 30 days there have been 331 U.S. "High
Max" records set. However, there were 2,104 (more than six times as many) "Low Max" records set.
The same NOAA page reports in its "Year to Date" section that 2014 has seen 7,053 High Max records set, but
nearly three times that number (19,178) of Low Max records were set during the same period. [...] Of course,
we continue to see blazing headlines and breathless broadcasts from the establishment news media regarding
every new high temperature record, but a near total blackout of the news of low temperature records.
The News Media Now Reports All Weather
as "Extreme". In a desperate effort to keep the global warming hoax alive even though
it is now called "climate change", the meteorologically challenged print and broadcast media is now
declaring all weather "extreme" these days. The Media Research Institute recently analyzed
broadcast network transcripts between July 1, 2004 and July 1, 2005, along with those
between July 1, 2013 and July 1, 2014. What it discovered was the network coverage
of "extreme weather" had increased nearly one thousand percent!
Media
Twists Specialized Meaning of Science Words. A hot-topic in the media these days has
to do with the West Antarctic Ice Shelf (WAIS), a region comprising about 8 percent of the ice
covering Antarctica. Within that region, there are two glaciers that are sliding down to the sea at
a steady pace, as glaciers always do. They constitute about 10 percent of the WAIS, less than
1 percent of the total of Antarctic ice. This descent has been in progress for several
thousand years, and is neither new nor, of course, man-caused. It will go on for a few thousand
more years, after which the two glaciers will be gone. In the parlance of geology, those two
glaciers are collapsing. If that doesn't sound to you like the usual meaning of the word
"collapse," you're absolutely right. It's a specialized geological term.
Newsweek's
Antarctic Global Warming Scares Cancelled. Despite Newsweek's fantasies to the
contrary, Antarctic sea ice has been consistently increasing since satellites first began measuring
the sea ice in 1979. The sea ice expansion has been particularly dramatic in recent years as
Antarctic sea ice extent has set dozens of new records. As is the case with so many other asserted
global warming catastrophes — hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, crop production, forest
fires, etc. — objective evidence shows global warming is having the exact opposite
effect claimed by global warming alarmists.
Are CBS, ABC, and
NBC Dishonest? Can the major networks be trusted to report news honestly? In
June 2006, all three of them reported on a global warming study by a 12-member committee of the National
Academy of Sciences. [...] New[s] anchors at CBS, ABC and NBC emphatically proclaimed that the new
study definitively settled the issue, that there was no longer any basis for skepticism about
global warming, and that human activities were largely responsible. Absolutely no doubt
about it, said the networks' news. But the Wall Street Journal reported on the same
study — under a headline titled: "Panel Study Fails to Settle Debate on Past Climates."
The Editor says...
This Washington Post article is unmitigated propaganda. They'll presume to dispense "every number you need,"
apparently to discourage independent investigation. The chart they use as an illustration tears their argument
into little shreds, if you read carefully. WaPo says "Over a quarter of all carbon dioxide
emissions are from coal burning," but the graph they use as proof shows U.S. energy-related
CO2 emissions, and the CO2 from the combustion of coal is already way down from 2005 levels.
The Hard Sell on Climate
Change. More and more people in the middle of America — both geographically and culturally —
have come to believe either that global warming is manageable or that extraordinary efforts to slow the economy to combat it
aren't worth the cost. But that "doesn't faze the bicoastal urban media elite," says Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise
Institute. These elites, he adds, "have become more hysterical in their treatment of the issue, blaming everything from drought
to wildfires to hurricanes on climate change."
Global
Warming Alarmists Are Getting Desperate. California Gov. Jerry Brown's absurd contention that LAX Airport
is going to be turned into a bathtub because of climate change is the latest example of how know-nothings in the media,
entertainment and politics are reaching for ever more questionable arguments as they continue to fail to stoke fears in
an American public that, contrary to their hateful claims, largely believes in global warming but isn't particularly
worried about it. Brown said that due to changes in glacier mass (breathlessly hyped as "collapse" by the media), in
200 years "the Los Angeles airport's going to be underwater." No, it isn't. A projected four-foot rise
in sea levels won't much affect the airport, which sits 120 feet above sea level.
Politico
Notices TV Meteorologists 'More Skeptical' of Climate Change Than Other Scientists. Politico's Darren Goode
surprisingly highlighted the skepticism of many on-air meteorologists in a Monday item about President Obama's interviews
with "some of television's most popular celebrities — weather forecasters — to ratchet up the volume
on the administration's latest scientific assessment of climate change." Goode pointed out that "not all broadcast
meteorologists have been conducive to the climate science message." The writer cited Weather Channel founder John
Coleman, who labeled global warming "the greatest scam in history" back in 2007.
Obama to Al
Roker: Climate change is a problem affecting Americans 'right now'. "We've been
sounding this urgency for the last five years," the president told [Al] Roker, when asked why it had
taken so long for the White House to stress the need to address climate change. "You've seen some
resistance from Congress. Part of the reason for putting forward this assessment — which
involved hundreds of people, experts, businesses, not-for-profits and local communities sharing their
experience — is we want to emphasize to the public, this is not some distant problem of the future."
The Editor says...
Global warming stopped, all by itself, in 1998.
If Americans have problems, the problems weren't caused by global warming because there is no
global warming.
Obama
to talk climate with meteorologists. President Obama will speak about climate change on Tuesday [5/6/2014]
with a number of national and local TV meteorologists across the country, according to an administration official.
The 2014 National Climate Assessment will be released Tuesday and will be the focus of Obama's interviews.
"Today" show weather forecaster Al Roker will be among those interviewing Obama on this year's report, which is
expected to look at the number of extreme weather events and their connection to climate change, among other data.
The Editor says...
Obama's handlers make sure he is never interviewed by anyone who might ask difficult questions.
This event was obviously a "satellite media tour" to promote government propaganda. The participating
"news" organizations are probably doing so only either because they are loyal and obedient to Obama or
because of Obama's tabloid appeal.
Five Alarmist Celebs and Their Double Standards.
Showtime's new climate change series, "Years of Living Dangerously," premiered April 13, 2014, slightly
more than a week before Earth Day 2014. It relies on several wealthy, Hollywood celebrities to spread fear
about climate change. While these actors and directors talk a lot about reducing carbon footprints
and saving the world, they haven't given up their own enormous mansions and private jets. Director
James Cameron, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and actors Harrison Ford, Matt Damon and Ian Somerhalder
who are worth a collective $1.2 billion, according to Celebrity Net Worth, were just some of the Hollywood
types involved in Showtime's nine-part series.
Climate
Change Gets Big-Budget Treatment on Showtime. Climate change is one of the issues at the top of President
Barack Obama's agenda, and now it's getting big budget treatment in Hollywood, at least by documentary standards.
A nine-part series called "Years of Living Dangerously" will debut this Sunday evening on Showtime —
emphasizing stories "from the front lines" of climate change impact.
They call it "extreme weather" to avoid calling it
extremely COLD weather. Beef prices hit
all-time high in U.S.. Extreme weather has thinned the nation's beef cattle herds to levels last
seen in 1951, when there were about half as many mouths to feed in America. "We've seen strong prices
before but nothing this extreme," said Dennis Smith, a commodities broker for Archer Financial Services in
Chicago. "This is really new territory."
Global warming
makes for stormy politics. No one who lives in the Northeast doubts that it's been a rough winter.
Snow totals have been near record highs and temperatures have been near record lows. As a result, "extreme weather"
has become a feature of meteorology. In fact, the word "weather" hardly ever appears in the press without the word
"extreme" before it. I attribute that mostly to the hyperbolic efforts of media outlets to attract ever-bigger
audiences. Plain "weather" is boring compared with "extreme weather." Boring doesn't improve ratings.
There's more to it than that, though. Every time it snows a lot, or rains in buckets, or the wind blows hard and long,
someone, in fact a lot of people, say that's proof that the globe is warming because of pollution.
Wikipedia on Global Warming.
[Scroll down] These two articles are the only Wikipedia entries (excluding the Simple English Wikipedia piece) on global warming.
They're entitled 'Global warming' (2002 to 2014) and 'Global warming controversy' (2003 to 2014). The thing is: they're both
written by the same person. The positions advanced in them are almost indistinguishable and even the wording is often quite
literally identical. However, it is indeed the case that Wiki articles receive many "edits". Nonetheless, that doesn't
change the fact that they are written by a single person (or a specific group of people). The editors can only edit what's
already there. The main point is that these articles are two of the most biased and one-sided I've ever read on the subject
of the AGWT.
CNN Declares No Two Sides to Climate
Change Debate. Have you ever seen a four year old kid who is completely closed to any type of reasoning? Typically his hands will
cover his ears and he will scream loudly to block out any arguments others might give to the contrary. Well, CNN has become that unreasoning four
year old kid. And what type of reasoning is CNN attempting to block out? Anything that might contradict their blind faith in global warming
or climate change as they now call it. Yes, CNN has declared that there are no two sides to the climate change debate.
CNN's
Van Jones: 'Delusional' to Not Act on Climate Change to Prevent 'A Billion Climate Refugees'. Left-wing activist turned CNN host Van
Jones ran to John Kerry's defense on Wednesday's [2/19/2014] Crossfire, after co-host Newt Gingrich slammed Kerry as "delusional" for recently
hyping climate change as "the world's most fearsome weapon of mass destruction." Jones retorted, "It's not delusional to focus on climate
disruption. It's delusional not to." Moments earlier, the former Obama green jobs czar himself made a doom-and-gloom prediction about
the hypothetical effects of what he labeled "climate disruption."
Dems Want
Networks To Manipulate Climate Coverage Like BBC. The mainstream media, long a house organ for Democrats, are about to
come under pressure by Senate Democrats led by Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, who are gathering signatures
from colleagues on a letter to the networks telling them they're ignoring global warming, according to a report in the National
Journal. They are seeking to impose sort of a climate change "fairness doctrine" designed to ignore inconvenient truths about
climate researchers getting stuck in Antarctic ice that was supposed to have melted in favor of the gospel according to Al Gore.
Democrats
Plan to Pressure TV Networks Into Covering Climate Change. Senate Democrats pledging to get more aggressive on climate
change will soon pressure the major TV networks to give the topic far greater attention on the Sunday talking-head shows. Sens.
Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, are gathering colleagues' signatures on a letter to the networks asserting that
they're ignoring global warming.
If
You Ever Had Any Doubt the Media is Biased on Climate, This Should End Your Doubt. The indefatigable David Rose of Britain's Daily
Mail, working with British climate blogger Tony Newberry, has today exposed bias in news reporting of climate change of a scale heretofore unknown,
even for that never-accurately-covered subject. He reveals that, in a move orchestrated by the BBC itself and a left-wing lobby group,
the British government under the Labor Party paid for BBC personnel to be taught the left-wing, pro-alarmist spin on climate issues for the
specific purpose of using the "news" as propaganda.
Climate
Alarmists Sink to Comedic Low Explaining Historic Cold. Confronted with the embarrassment of historic cold gripping the nation
just as the Obama administration launches a new offensive on the mythical global warming crisis, global warming activists and their media
allies just invented their most knee-slapping assertion yet; that global warming causes winter cold outbreaks. Global warming
activists, after giving us about 48 hours of silence after the cold temperatures hit while they scrambled to come up with an
explanation, now say they have always predicted that global warming would cause more frequent and severe winter cold spells.
Logic Gets Sucked into the Polar
Vortex. North America is presently experiencing the kind of abnormally cold temperatures that can wreak havoc on computer
climate models. The mainstream media is overflowing with headlines about coldness raging unexpectedly across Canada in January,
Jack Frost nipping at people's noses, and other signs of the Apocalypse. Naturally, then, it was only a matter of time before
these media outlets — aka the global Ministry of Propaganda — let the other shoe drop, and explained how all
this routine winter weather is the result of man-made global warming, and therefore can only be halted by international totalitarianism.
Time Magazine Swings Both Ways. [T]he warnings for
what industrialized man should do to fight global cooling are virtually identical to the warnings would-be "climate" "scientists" have given to fight
global warming as well.
MSM
Glosses Over Irony of Global Warming Scientists Trapped in Antarctic Ice. Somewhere far, far to the south where it is summer, a
group of global warming scientists are trapped in the Antarctic ice. If you missed the irony of that situation, it is because much of
the mainstream media has glossed over that rather inconvenient bit of hilarity.
Global
Warming Researchers Ice-Bound; 96 Percent of Network Stories Censor Why Ship Is There. Antarctic ice trapped a ship full of scientists
on a climate change expedition. Yet, 96 percent of network news reports about the stranded researchers ignored climate change entirely.
The ship has been stuck since Christmas morning. The broadcast networks mostly ignored the reason the Russian ship, Akademic Shokalskiy,
was on its way to Antarctica. Twenty-five out of 26 stories (96 percent) on the network morning and evening news shows since
Dec. 25 failed to mention climate change had anything to do with the expedition.
Networks
Miss 'Climate Change' Irony of Ship Stuck in 10 Feet of Antarctic Ice. A Russian research vessel has been stuck in thick ice in
the Antarctic since Christmas morning, and predictably the big three networks are enjoying the novelty of such an event. However, despite
the obvious news story, ABC, CBS and NBC have all missed one great irony in their reporting. On Monday December 30, all three networks
covered the story, but only CBS even used the words "climate change" when discussing the trapped ship. All three failed to point out the
irony that this event is an embarrassment for those pushing the liberal "climate change" narrative.
Al Gore
Forecasted "Ice-Free" Arctic by 2013; Ice Cover Expands 50%. Self-styled "global-warming" guru Al Gore and a gaggle of supposed "climate
scientists" have egg all over their faces — big time. In 2007, 2008 and 2009, Gore publicly and very hysterically warned that the North Pole
would be "ice-free" by around 2013 because of alleged "man-made global warming." Citing "climate" experts, the government-funded BBC hyped
the mass hysteria, running a now-embarrassing article under the headline: "Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'." Other establishment
media outlets did the same.
The Press Endures Obama's Unrequited Love.
A recent, glaring example of how some of today's journalists have debased their profession was the decision by Paul Thornton, editor of The Los Angeles
Times letter's section, to openly refuse to publish any letters from skeptics about the global warming hoax that blames "climate change" on human
activity, not the Sun, oceans, and other natural factors.
Networks Embrace 'Catastrophic' Warnings of Latest IPCC
Report. The UN's climate panel (IPCC) released its latest warning about "catastrophic" climate change on Sept. 27, garnering the frantic
attention of all three broadcast networks that night. CBS even aired a claim about temperatures rising "more than 200 degrees." Predictably,
the evening news shows on ABC, CBS and NBC Sept. 27 repeated the IPCC's dire warnings without including any skeptics and without mentioning past failures
such as their inability to accurately predict warming or sea level rise.
LA Times: We Don't
Publish Letters to Editor Claiming Man Isn't Causing Climate Change. It's one thing for a news outlet to advance the as yet unproven theory of
anthropogenic global warming; it's quite another to admit that you won't publish views that oppose it. As amazing as it may same, that's exactly what the
Los Angeles Times did Saturday [10/5/2013] in an article by editorial writer Jon Healey.
Networks Embrace IPCC
Report's Fraudulent Warnings. Temperatures have flat-lined for 15 years, the Arctic and Antarctic are gaining record amounts of ice, most
computer models have been wrong, yet the networks are buying into the alarmists' narrative.
It's a Cooked Book. The AP itself
uses the term "climate skeptics," which is less pointed than "denialists" but is still problematic. The purported opposition between
"skeptics" and adherents to "the scientific consensus" is nonsensical, for skepticism is at the very heart of the scientific method.
When the data call a theory into question, a scientist revisits the theory. Instead, the panel is employing the antiscientific method:
It "is expected to affirm" the theory "with greater certainty than ever." And look how the AP sums up that theory: "that humans are
cooking the planet by burning fossil fuels and cutting down CO2-absorbing forests." That's science fiction, not science.
Obama White House Rolls Out Tough New
Climate-Change Rules. In his January State of the Union address, President Obama urged Congress to take action to stop global warming.
But he warned, "If Congress won't act soon to protect future generations, I will." He's following through on that pledge. Friday morning, the
Environmental Protection Agency will release a draft regulation to limit carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants, the nation's chief source of global
warming emissions. The draft regulation is the first of four major regulatory steps the EPA will take to create a significant body of action on climate
change before Obama leaves office.
The Editor says...
The article immediately above, as you can plainly see, calls coal-fired power plants "the nation's chief source of global warming emissions."
Really? The emissions from all the coal-fired power plants in the world (to which China is adding monthly) haven't resulted in any global
warming since 1998. The emissions from coal-fired power plants are not as influential as other factors, like the variable output power of the sun.
President Obama is pretending to take bold action to "stop global warming," which stopped, all by itself, in 1998. The Democrats hope
(and the news media assume) you don't know any of this.
Beating the IPCC with Their Own Numbers.
Many parts of the MSM are monolithic in their endorsement of any and every scheme to 'combat climate change' and our pseudo-intellectual elite would
make Pavlov proud as they battle to be the most vocal to decry those who "deny" the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. But what we don't see
much of are cold hard numbers. Oh we see lots of numbers of the rubbery or nebulous variety, the plucked almost from thin air variety, but very
little in the way of actual hard sensible numbers that were arrived at in an actually sensible way.
Breaking News! Seventh First Climate
Refugees Discovered! BBC, your climate reporting is pathetic. Doesn't anyone there think to check up on some dewy-eyed reporter
gushing on about the tragic fate of the latest batch of pseudo-refugees? Missing the facts in this story would have been understandable a decade
ago, but in 2013, you guys are a running joke.
Art Horn Letter to
Connecticut State Department of Agriculture. Hurricane Sandy was not a "Super Storm". This label was assigned by the news media.
Those who called Sandy a Super Storm did so because they liked the sound of "Super Storm." Having worked in television news rooms for 25 years
I am well acquainted with these exaggerations. The term "Super Storm Sandy" sounds much more dramatic than "Sandy is a category one Hurricane
on a scale of one to five" which is what it was.
Note to Broadcast
Meteorologists pressured by News Directors or Forecast the Facts. We have heard tales of broadcasters who dare express some degree of
skepticism in the blogs or twitter or sometimes on air, being scolded at by News Directors or outside advocacy groups like Forecast the Facts (funded
by the Center for American Progress, a George Soros advocacy group) claiming to be a grassroots organization, whichs conduct letter writing campaigns
to attack them with station management. Their launch coincided with the AMS Annual meeting in 2012 where they disrupted the council meeting to
lobby the society to make a stronger statement and exert pressure on broadcasters. [...] [T]hey want broadcasters to tie virtually every weather (and
other) extreme, to our use of fossil fuel and not attempt to explain these events with natural factors or cycles.
The
New York Times' Global Warming Hysteria Ignores 17 Years Of Flat Global Temperatures. The New York Times feverishly reported on August 10
that the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is about to issue another scary climate report. Dismissing the recent 17 years
or so of flat global temperatures, the IPCC will assert that: "It is extremely likely that human influence on climate caused more than half of
the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010."
New York Times environmental
journalist Justin Gillis is wrong. Justin Gillis tells NPR how much sea levels will rise: "experts believe sea levels will rise at
least 3 feet in the next century, and that number could be as much as 6 feet." [...] So, Gillis tells us the one end of the spectrum is 3 feet
and the highest 6 feet, while the the UN says 1 foot to 2.7 feet. His *lowest* estimate is higher than the *highest* of the UN Climate
Panel's new, higher estimate. Yet, he justifies his numbers with "experts." Justin Gillis seems to listen to an extremely skewed set of experts.
Time for the BBC to ban the 'D' word?.
Personally I don't believe in banning words — but I do believe in intellectual and moral consistency. You'd never hear an organisation as
eggshell-treadingly right-on as the BBC use pejorative terms for Jews or black people or homosexuals or sufferers of cerebral palsy. So why, pray, does it
feel it can persist in using the deliberately offensive term "denier" to write off anyone who is sceptical about Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming?
Associated Press retracts 'global warming' North Pole
photo. The news organization is catching some heat after publishing a photo supposedly showing a large lake forming at the North Pole due to global warming.
But the AP issued a formal retraction of the photo, admitting that the "lake" was a naturally formed small melt-pond that isn't even at the North Pole.
Climate change is making poison ivy grow
bigger and badder. Climate change is making poison ivy grow faster, bigger and meaner. Rising atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide and higher
temperatures are to poison ivy what garbage is for rats, dormant water is for mosquitoes and road kill is to buzzards.
The Editor says...
Right away you can tell the article above is bogus, since the writer blames "higher temperatures" for the poison ivy heyday, when in reality there are no higher
temperatures. The writer apparently believes conditions will improve (or they already have) for poison ivy, without a beneficial effect on corn, soybeans, wheat,
hay, carrots, other crops.
Reuters editor attacked by media
for 'climate skepticism'. A managing editor at Reuters has been accused of being a global warming skeptic and not running
articles on the topic. Global warming coverage fell 50 percent after Reuters hired Paul Ingrassia as deputy editor, Media
Matters reports. The issue came to light after former Reuters climate correspondent David Fogarty wrote about it on an insider blog.
Fogarty said Ingrassia told him personally he was "skeptical" of global warming, and that after he became deputy editor, "getting any climate
change-themed story published got harder."
The Age of Hyperbole: How Normal Weather Became 'Extreme'.
The distortion and outright lying in the media's coverage of weather and climate change have increased dramatically in the past year.
This is because the global warming narrative has been exposed as false, making it harder to sell without resorting to hyperbole and
cherry-picking data that supports the alarmist agenda. So, publications such as the New York Times are not reporting
news any more when it comes to weather and climate. Instead, they are spinning a false narrative to create their version of
the news, much like the state-controlled media of communist China.
'Gasland' scandal ignited at EPA.
HBO viewers thought they saw Steve Lipsky, a Parker County, Texas, home-owner, holding his garden hose belching fire from his methane-contaminated
water well. The flaming water was terrifying and "Gasland Part II" blamed it on fracking done by Range Resources, a Fort Worth-based
shale gas driller. What viewers actually witnessed was Lipsky holding a hose secretly connected to a gas vent, not a water line.
This fraud came out in a lawsuit filed by Steven and Shyla Lipsky against Range for $6.5 million in the 43rd State District Court of Texas.
The
BBC long ago became a mouthpiece for green lunatics. Why does it pretend otherwise? [Scroll down] Now if programmes like Shared
Planet were merely shamelessly and nakedly biased, that would be one thing. But what really makes them so insidious and dangerous is this pretence
they maintain throughout — in classic BBC style, just like with that travesty of a documentary on shale gas the other day — that
they are carefully weighing up the pros and cons of a complex argument and reaching a measured conclusion. So what the unwary listener hears is
Monty doing his nurturing, caring, gently contemplative voice as he appears to consult experts on both sides of the debate in order to help make up his
mind. And what the unwary listener doesn't realise he's getting, in fact, is yet another party political broadcast on behalf of the Green party.
Trains full of
fracked N. Dakota oil are heading our way. Each week, more and more mile-and-a-half long tanker trains filled with oil travel into the Pacific
Northwest. The sweet crude — sucked from deep under North Dakota — brings opportunity for business and jobs in the Lower Columbia
region and stirs fears the river will become a fossil fuel highway.
Bias alert!
It stirs fears? I guess the earth-worshiping hippies of the Pacific northwest are afraid of massive shipments of oil coming their way, if
this article is to be believed, and that's a big if. If the people of Washington state are so afraid of oil, let them pay $5 a gallon for gas, and send
the oil south instead!
Obama Readying Emissions Limits on Power
Plants. President Obama is preparing regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, senior officials said Wednesday
[6/19/2013]. The move would be the most consequential climate policy step he could take and one likely to provoke legal challenges from Republicans and
some industries. Electric power plants are the largest single source of global warming pollution in the country, responsible for nearly 40 percent
of greenhouse gas emissions.
Bias alert!
Beware of the phrase, "global warming pollution." There is no such thing.
States,
green groups delay lawsuit amid Obama climate rumors. New York is one of a dozen states and cities that on April 17
threatened to sue the Environmental Protection Agency in as few as 60 days. The litigation would be aimed at forcing completion
of delayed rules, floated in draft form more than a year ago, that would set emissions standards for new power plants. The cities and
states also want the EPA to carry through on its commitment in a 2010 legal settlement to require carbon standards for existing power plants.
The Editor says...
Once again, a reporter says carbon when he obviously means carbon dioxide. And once again, carbon dioxide is
harmless at the current 400 ppm levels. CO2 is not a pollutant, it's plant food. Simply stated, CO2 restrictions are motivated by
anti-capitalism.
Media Display
Ignorance and Bias in Warming Debate. Suzanne Goldberg displayed the establishment media's inexcusable ignorance and/or
willful distortion of the global warming debate in a Thursday 'news' article in the prominent UK newspaper The Guardian.
Writing about an effort by the Obama administration to politicize the global warming debate and direct public ridicule at Republicans
who are skeptical of alarmist global warming claims, Goldberg describes that effort as one that will "shame members of Congress who deny
the science behind climate change."
Global Warming? Oops! Never Mind!
Almost every place on Earth today has a different temperature from that of any other location. So, is our planet's temperature
rising? Do we even know? However, it is officially admitted: Global warming stopped 15-20 years ago. The
mainstream media is struggling very hard to explain this away. They admit that the Earth stopped warming 15 to 20 years
ago. But just you wait — disaster is coming unless we vote liberals into office. They cannot explain the pause.
Yet they "know" global warming will kill us all unless we vote Democrat.
Goodbye to a Very Green Business
Week. In the February 18-24 edition of Business Week, an editorial, "The Right Way Forward on Climate Change",
contained this gem: "Still, the U.S. accounts for about 19 percent of all emissions — emissions that are causing
global temperature increases, rising seas, and destructive droughts, floods, and hurricanes, according to a government advisory panel
report released last month." When a magazine publishes such drivel, you should not read it. There are no rising temperatures
worldwide.
No,
David Attenborough: Africa hasn't warmed by 3.5 degrees C in two decades. 3.5 degrees C in two decades? That would indeed be a
remarkable temperature rise in anybody's money. (Remember, since 1850 global mean temperatures have risen by about 0.8 degrees C — and we're
supposed to find that worrying and significant). Which is why, you might have thought, the BBC would have spotted so obvious an error and removed it
before the programme went out. To his credit, this troubled Leo Hickman, too.
Climate assessment
delivers a grim overview. The Obama administration has implemented several regulations to curtail emissions of carbon
dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists say have stoked global warming. But the president seldom speaks of climate
change. The White House declined to comment on the National Climate Assessment report, saying it had not had a chance to
review it.
The Editor says...
The article above appears in the LA Times, and it reeks with bias. The writer publicizes false White House statements
without challenging them: The White House (ignoring the personification) has all day and all night to review every report
published by anybody, especially when it pertains to big-government policy like so-called global warming.
Misguided PBS
Program Gets the Facts Wrong on Acid Ocean Alarm. On December 5 the PBS NewsHour showed a segment titled "Endangered Coral
Reefs Die as Ocean Temperatures Rise and Water Turns Acidic," with Hari Sreenivasan reporting. The story discussed the recent loss of
Florida coral reefs and the possible impact on recreation and tourism if reef degradation continues. But PBS wrongly told viewers reef
degradation was due to warmer ocean temperatures and "ocean acidification," both allegedly caused by human carbon dioxide emissions.
What
is this strange white stuff falling from the sky? On days like this it seems positively churlish not to remind the
Independent of its most famous comedy headline ever: Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past Problem is, I don't
think they meant it as a comedy headline. Nor, I fear, did the "expert" from (where else?) the Climatic Research Unit at the
University of East Anglia intend it as some manner of obscure climatological joke.
Now even Pravda
admits the 'global warming' jig is up. If you didn't know better, you'd almost get the impression that AGW theory has been so
crushingly falsified that hard-headed newspaper executives, even ones at papers as painfully right-on as the New York Times, just aren't prepared
to fund its promulgation any more. What this means for similarly overstaffed environment desks at other left-wing newspapers one can
scarcely begin to imagine.
New Report: Man-made Global Warming Is a
Farce. Extreme Weather Report 2012 was presented at the latest UN Climate Conference in Doha, Qatar, but the only press this landmark study
received was when British politician and author Lord Christopher Monckton was kicked out of the conference for presenting it.
U.S. Main stream
media duped on global warming polls. In the past two weeks many U.S. media gave supportive coverage to two public opinion
polls about global warming. However, reporters were duped. The surveys released on October 9th and 18th by the
Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication were hopelessly
biased. They therefore cannot be meaningful measures of American public opinion.
Obama's Next Move: the Global Warming
Tax. And carrying the water in support of this global scheme are the media, selecting their talking points from a recent
World Bank report claiming global temperatures are likely to increase by more than 6 degrees, leading to "extreme heat waves,
declining global food stocks, loss of ecosystems and biodiversity, and life-threatening sea level rise." Given that since 1850
the earth's temperature has only warmed 1.2 degrees (with 88 percent of that warming occurring before 1940), and that
the global average temperature has not risen since 1998, a six-degree hike flies in the face scientific sanity.
Chris
Matthews Claims GOP Ignorant of Science While Claiming Plants Absorb Carbon Monoxide. Note to Chris Matthews:
when seeking to slam Republicans for their supposed ignorance of science, try not to expose your own. On Tuesday's [11/13/2012]
Hardball, Matthews — mocking the Republican congressmen vying for the chairmanship of the House Science
Committee — committed this whopper: "As we all learned in grammar school — young people
watching — trees absorb carbon monoxide."
Uncritically, Media Accepts Misleading Global Warming Poll.
Conducting surveys that measure real public opinion about global warming is difficult. Because the hypothesis that humanity is causing dangerous warming is now
loudly supported by most opinion leaders — media, educators, and government — and alternative viewpoints are condemned, most citizens are reluctant
to express skepticism about the issue despite what they actually think. The public will often give answers contrary to their opinions so as to conform to what they
believe is socially acceptable concerning issues on which the politically correct position is clear.
Climate of Doubt about PBS's Objectivity.
This is just one more reason to defund PBS. If a "journalistic" organization cannot even provide some level of objectivity, why should the
taxpayer be forced to support it?
Heartland comments on Frontline 'Climate of Doubt'.
It appears host John Hockenberry spent enough time with global warming "skeptics" to know we are sincere, honest, and effective, but not enough time to learn we are right
on the science. Rather than examining the scientific debate directly [...] he decided to rely uncritically on the claims of a few alarmists pretending to
speak for "climate science." That choice ultimately makes "Climate of Doubt" a biased and unreliable guide to the scientific debate.
Europe's
Media Ignores Record High Antarctic Sea Ice. When the Arctic set a record sea ice minimum back in August, the European mainstream
media and government funded climate institutes howled in a deafening, days-long chorus of "global" climate Armageddon. Now fast forward
one month to late September 2012 with the sea ice peaking at the opposite end of the planet, i.e. Antarctica. Knowing that the media has
grown particularly sensitive to weather extremes, you'd think this current weather extreme around Antarctica would have set off a similar
reaction. Any extreme, we are told, is proof of global warming.
Now, alarmists are
making the public believe in the extreme weather boogeyman. A new survey has been released by Yale in cooperation with George Mason
University. In it, 74% surveyed say "global warming is affecting weather in the United States". Personally, I blame Seth Borenstein, Kevin
Trenberth, Bill McKibben, Joe Romm and Brad Johnson for elevating and continually propagating this lie. As readers may recall, the
journal Nature came out with a strong editorial against this sort of thinking, saying it is unsupportable by the current science.
Actual AP
Headline: 'Experts: Global Warming Means More Antarctic Ice'. For many years, climate realists have pointed to expanding ice in
Antarctica as a counter to the claim that decreasing ice in the Arctic is necessarily proof of anthropogenic global warming. The folks at the
Associated Press on Wednesday [10/10/2012] came up with an unbelievable answer to that in an article unbelievably titled "Experts: Global Warming
Means More Antarctic ice". [...] Author Seth Borenstein then predictably cited scientists supporting this truly amazing concept that anthropogenic
global warming can melt ice in one hemisphere while creating it in another.
Here are two reasons most
Americans don't trust the mainstream media. The first story concerns electric vehicles, or EVs, which are assumed to be the wave of the
green future. EVs cannot now and aren't likely any time soon to offer more comfort or convenience at less cost to consumers than conventional
internal-combustion cars and trucks. Even so, the federal government has spent billions of dollars in the past two decades on research, loans
and tax credits to encourage automakers to sell more EVs and consumers to buy them. But consumers avoid EVs like the plague.
The president
decides to stick with climatism. The president's use of the term "carbon pollution" is disappointing.
Environmentalists inaccurately use this phrase to conjure up images of billowing smoke stacks, and the president has picked this
up. The theory of manmade global warming claims that carbon dioxide, not carbon, causes climate change. Carbon dioxide is an
invisible gas, while carbon is a black solid. Referring to carbon dioxide as "carbon" is as foolish as calling water "hydrogen"
or salt "chlorine." Compounds have totally different properties than their composing elements. Neither is carbon dioxide
pollution. It's an odorless, harmless gas that green plants need for photosynthesis. Carbon dioxide is a foundation for
life on Earth along with oxygen and water.
Bottled Water Going the Way of the 20-ounce Soda.
The latest law to encourage use of refillable containers comes out of San Francisco. Their ultimate goal is to ban bottled water. San Francisco is a
hardcore environmentalist city and they do not like plastic water bottles. The first step they are taking is to require new buildings with water fountains
to install special bottle-filling taps. That would be the same water that comes out of your kitchen sink which is what bottled water drinkers don't want
to drink. They also don't want anything to do with public fountains where so many have been before.
CBS Turns Blind
Eye To Climate Change Hype Truth. While CBS touts a "groundbreaking" government report linking extreme weather
and climate change, German researchers find 2,000 years of cooling and warmer temps in medieval times and the Roman era.
Should Scientific
Skepticism Be Kept Out of Public Schools? PBS NewsHour and National Public Radio aired a segment last night [5/2/2012] on how
public school teachers are becoming frustrated about students being skeptical of alarmist global warming claims. The segment showed how
government-funded programs are providing teachers with tools to fight scientific skepticism.
Global Warming's Killer: Critical Thinking.
The media has been implying that extreme weather is more frequent, yet blaring headlines from long ago are easily found on weather appearing to be
just as extreme, if not worse. We're told that the dry warm winter in the U.S. this time around indicates global warming, yet horrible cold
temperatures in Europe this same winter aren't called a similar indicator.
Media Claims Antarctic Ice Crisis, Yet Ice
Continues to Grow. Reuters and other media outlets are publishing claims this morning that global warming is threatening Antarctic ice shelves. The
rash of media stories perfectly illustrates the strengths and weaknesses of each side in the global warming debate. Computer models, programmed by global warming
alarmists to assume that carbon dioxide causes substantial global warming, keep predicting rapidly warming Antarctic temperatures and melting ice sheets. In the
real world, however, Antarctica is not warming at all and the Antarctic ice sheet is in a long-term expansion.
WashPost
Disguises 'About 40 People' Hung Out at DC's Earth Day Rally! Monday's Washington Post gave the badly-attended Earth Day
rally on Sunday [4/22/2012] a whitewash on the front page of the Metro section. "Earth Day stands up to the rain," was the headline,
as reporter Tara Bahrampour said rain "didn't stop the die-hards." Online, the headline was funnier: "Rains don't water
down Earth Day enthusiasm." The Post offered no attempts at a numerical estimate.
Abrupt climate-change reversal.
News reports often recite conventional wisdom that such catastrophes are becoming more frequent and severe because of industry-emitted
carbon dioxide — the same gas that makes all animal and plant life possible. The same substance is vilified as a
"greenhouse gas" that purportedly traps heat, warms the planet and provokes killer tempests. However, climatologists who
stick to facts say otherwise.
This is an example of biased reporting: Is
the fight against global warming hopeless? It can seem so. The long-term threat to the
climate comes from carbon dioxide, which lingers in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, locking in higher
temperatures for generations.
The Editor says...
(1) The "fight against global warming" is not much of a struggle, since global warming stopped in
about 1998.* (2) Carbon dioxide
is neither a long-term threat nor a short-term threat, since all plant life depends
on it.* (3) Fossil fuel derived
CO2 is almost totally absorbed locally in the year it is
emitted.* That's
just a rebuttal of the first major sentence. When I complain about media bias, this is exactly the kind
of article I'm talking about.
EPA emission standards may
rule out new coal power plants. Taking aim at the gases that the vast majority of scientists say are the main contributor to
climate change, the Obama administration proposed rules limiting carbon dioxide emissions from new power plants, a move that could
essentially bar new coal-fired electric generation facilities.
Bias alert:
The excerpt above is only the first sentence of the heavily slanted article, but it includes several clear indications of the
writer's bias. "Taking aim at the gases"? There is only one gas mentioned in the remainder of the article, and that
gas is carbon dioxide. "[T]he vast majority of scientists say..." is an attempt to substitute consensus for scientific
proof. "[T]he main contributor to climate change" is the sun, not industrial activity. The rest of the article is
similarly one-sided.
EPA
to impose first greenhouse gas limits on power plants. Industry officials and environmentalists said in interviews
that the rule, which comes on the heels of tough new requirements that the Obama administration imposed on mercury emissions and
cross-state pollution from utilities within the past year, dooms any proposal to build a coal-fired plant that does not have costly
carbon controls. "This standard effectively bans new coal plants," said Joseph Stanko, who heads government relations at the
law firm Hunton and Williams and represents several utility companies. "So I don't see how that is an 'all of the above' energy
policy."
The Editor says...
The photograph above accompanied the article next to it, and is another example of journalistic bias on the part of the Washington
Post. The photographer took a picture of the water vapor being released from some factory or power plant on a cold and
cloudy day, and the picture was then used to falsely depict carbon dioxide coming from a smokestack. Carbon dioxide
is a colorless gas. The emissions in this picture appear to be gray and black because of the angle and the
lighting. Under other lighting conditions, these plumes would be as white as clouds, because they are made from
the same material -- water vapor. And on a hot summer day, you probably would notice these vapors at all.
There could very well be carbon dioxide mixed in with the plumes in this picture; but if you'll notice, the emissions
are invisible as they leave the stacks, and then they become clouds as they encounter the cold and evidently saturated
outside air. Water vapor is the predominant "greenhouse gas", so this is a picture of a "greenhouse gas emission",
strictly speaking, but not in the way the Washington Post writer likely intended.
Update:
Another very similar photo, presented for the same deceptive purposes, is
in this article, again in the Washington Post.
Another update:
Apparently the same photo is still in use at the Washington Post, as seen in this article: WaPo commits photo fraud for global
warming column. First, those billowing emissions from the smokestacks are water vapor — not carbon dioxide, which
is invisible. Next, the photo was taken either at dawn or dusk, thereby darkening the billowing vapor to make it look ominous.
The WaPo has been smacked about this before, but apparently its editors simply don't care.
The Heartland Institute
Flap. The NY Times weighed in the following day [Feb 16] with this misleading headline:
["]Leak Offers Glimpse of Campaign Against Climate Science["] It calls the event a "leak" rather than
evident fraud, clearly indicating bias. It also refers to a "campaign against climate science."
This too is wrong; there are honest scientific disputes, which the NYT ignores.
'Agenders' and Right Wing Conspirators.
A recent article in the Atlantic Monthly, "Is the UN Using Bike Paths to Achieve World Domination?" by Andrew
Cohen, drew my intense attention. ... Cohen does not mention the numerous bankrupted renewable energy companies
such as Solyndra, Evergreen Energy Inc., Beacon, Ener1, Amonix Inc. that squandered billions of taxpayer dollars
while failing to deliver any affordable renewable energy to American households.
"Global temperature in 2011 was lower than in 1998." A
really inconvenient truth is Earth not melting after all. Even as climate scientists — and an
ever-gullible media — are forced by new data to admit that the Earth is not warming, they take pains to assure
us that the Earth is still warming. The Associated Press was typical in its contortions, as in this Jan. 20
statement: "The world last year wasn't quite as warm as it has been for most of the past decade, government scientists
said Thursday, but it continues a general trend of rising temperatures." Not as warm, but still a "general trend" of
rising temperatures.
Weather Channel peddles party line blaming 'climate change' for
severe storms. Asked whether global warming causes weather extremes, [Jim] Cantore responded:
"We are seeing a warming world. I know there are going to be more extreme weather events." He then
segued into a few gut-instinct observations: "And being a guy who stands out in the rain all the time ...
it's raining harder out there. And that's really weird. It's not scientific, but when I'm out there
in it, it just seems to be raining a lot harder. More water vapor means more rainfall," he said. Well,
OK, Cantore got the "It's not scientific" part right.
Lies & Enviro-Fraud.
Millions around the world admired the supreme photography of the BBC's natural history flagship series Frozen
Planet. Until, that is, a British newspaper exposé revealed how the BBC faked key sequences
including the intimate filming of a polar bear and its cubs in the Arctic. Duped viewers could hardly
believe it when they were told the sequence was actually shot in a Dutch zoo — and using fake snow.
Writer and broadcaster David Attenborough was unrepentant, pointing out that, in fact, the BBC fakes it all the
time. When other sequences from Frozen Planet were also revealed to have been staged, BBC bosses were
forced to admit that staging shots was in fact "standard practice".
AP
Report on Heating Costs Forgets Global Warming. In what is a perennial MSM complaint story this
time of year, the AP reports: "Mary Power is 92 and worried about surviving another frigid New England
winter because deep cuts in federal home heating assistance benefits mean she probably can't afford enough heating
oil to stay warm." But wait a minute. Shouldn't "global warming" be mitigating such suffering?
Aren't we expecting increasingly mild winters? How could we be getting a story of "another frigid winter"
in 2011 when Al Gore has been telling us literally for 30 years to fear global warming?
Weather's
Too Nice For Global Warming Alarmists. Sunday will be the 2,232nd consecutive day that the U.S. has gone
without being hit by a major hurricane. This is a big enough deal to be covered by the mainstream media.
But of course it won't be.
Greenhouse
Gases Soar; No Signs Warming Is Slowed. New figures from the U.N. weather agency Monday [11/21/2011]
showed that the three biggest greenhouse gases not only reached record levels last year but were increasing at
an ever-faster rate, despite efforts by many countries to reduce emissions.
The Editor says...
The article above is a pack of lies and half-truths, beginning with the headline. Global warming stopped
about 12 years ago. The article goes on to say that the three most influential greenhouse gases are
carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. They completely ignore water vapor, which is by far the
predominant greenhouse gas, and is completely beyond anyone's control.
The
BBC's hidden 'warmist' agenda is rapidly unravelling. Since 2006, the BBC has relentlessly promoted
the global warming orthodoxy as a pressure group in its own right. The story of the BBC's bias on global
warming gets ever murkier. Last week there was quite a stir over a new report for the BBC Trust which
criticised several programmes for having been improperly funded or sponsored by outside bodies.
Objectivity
Lost: Journalist Covering Shale Gas Sues Same Industry. I don't read the New York Times or
the Chicago Tribune. For that matter, I don't read the closest newspaper to my home, the Charlotte
Observer. I don't read these rags for a simple reason: I find that the objectivity that is claimed
within their pages is a sham. There are plenty of polls and countless bits of anecdotal evidence and
investigations that have shown a liberal bias that overwhelmingly represents the modern newspaper.
Come on in, the Earth Is Fine.
Last week the United Nations Population Fund released a report heralding the birth of the world's 7 billionth
person. The milestone is important, the United Nations explains, because their calculations now project
that global population is likely to hit 9.3 billion by 2050 and could go as high as 15.8 billion by
the end of the century. As you might imagine, these dire warnings were greeted with eager and solicitous
concern by the alarmist media.
Paul Krugman's
Solar Eclipse. Paul Krugman may be a Nobel Prize-winning economist, but his most recent column in
the New York Times, which condemns hydraulic fracturing and praises solar energy, displays an astounding disinterest
in numbers and woeful ignorance of the facts. Without providing any sources, Krugman writes, "We know
that [fracturing] produces toxic (and radioactive) wastewater that contaminates drinking water; there is reason
to suspect, despite industry denials, that it also contaminates groundwater." Huh?
Time magazine says your refrigerator's icemaker causes global warming. Ice, Arrogant
Ignorance, and Global Warmism. The latest global warming derangement? In order to stop
"imperiling the planet," turn off your refrigerator's icemaker. To appreciate the depth of madness to
which warmists are now routinely sinking, let's identify the fallacies contained in a sentence lifted from a
recent Time magazine post. ["]Climate modelers have long known that households are far bigger contributors
to global warming than most laypeople realize.["] There are at least three fallacies: that "modelers"
deal in proven facts, that "households" cause any global warming at all, and that "most laypeople" generally
swallow the second fallacy.
Solyndra
solar plant closes; $535 million vanishes. This ought to be the top story on every news outlet
nationwide, and ought to be the death knell for the "Stimulus" concept and for the "green jobs" fallacy.
But I get the feeling the MSM will bury it.
Liberal
Media Won't Let a Good Crisis Go to Waste. In the days leading up to Hurricane Irene's march through
the Northeast, journalists repeatedly suggested that the storm was yet more evidence of climate change.
NPR
Anchor: Rick Perry Goes 'Against All Evidence' on Warming. Notice how NPR just rolls up everything
they disagree with and loads it into one question for the "conservative" panelist. ... NPR likes to parade
around as the intellectually serious network But they don't really want to engage those issues.
ProPublica
is the left's biggest muckraker you never heard of. Dave Kopel, research director at
Colorado's Independence Institute, ... checked out ProPublica's assertions about natural gas hydraulic
fracturing, or fracking, "suspected of causing hundreds of cases of water contamination." Colorado
and New Mexico officials supposedly "documented more than 1,000 cases where water was contaminated by
drilling activities." Kopel called the officials. New Mexico had no fracking cases.
Colorado didn't compile fracking numbers. Kopel concluded that ProPublica cited data about contamination
from every drilling-related activity in a story only about fracking.
Almost
No Temperature Records Broken in Last Week's 'Record-Breaking Heat'. All last week, global
warming-obsessed media were rife with reports about record-breaking heat. Problem is, according to the
National Climatic Data Center, and marvelously reported by the Hockey Schtick Sunday, almost no temperature
records were actually broken.
Maher
Proves Limbaugh's Point About Hyped Heat Wave Reports. Conservative talk show host Rush
Limbaugh on Wednesday mocked news outlets hyping the heat wave gripping much of the nation by reporting the
heat index rather than the actual temperatures. On Friday's [7/22/2011] "Real Time," host Bill Maher
proved Limbaugh's point by falsely telling his audience, "It was 123 in Minnesota".
'BBC's
biased climate science reporting isn't biased enough' claims report. As Biased BBC notes, it
has been five years since the BBC officially abandoned all pretence that it was adopting a neutral position
on "Climate Change". In a 2007 BBC Trust policy report, it wrote: ["]The BBC has held a high
level seminar with some of the best scientific experts (on whose and what measurement) and has come to the
view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of consensus.["]
This anti-heretic policy it has been pursuing with Torquemada-like fervour ever since.
Lots
of Hot Air After Activists Lose Climate Suit. This week, climate change activists suffered a
major loss at the Supreme Court, which unanimously threw out their highly publicized lawsuit against power
companies. Although — or perhaps because — the Court's opinion was clear and direct,
the losing activists have sought desperately to spin a loss into a win. And the press's lackluster
coverage of the decision only has helped obfuscate the Court's decision.
Inhibiting an Oil
and Gas Boom. The fossil fuel shale extraction industry, where technological advancements
and discoveries of huge reserves of oil and natural gas hold great promise for the nation's future energy
needs, is under attack. In June the New York Times ran a dubiously sourced series of stories
that sought to show the bullishness on natural gas is overblown.
Here's an example of environmental alarmism in the news media: Atop TV Sets, a Power Drain That Runs Nonstop.
Those little boxes that usher cable signals and digital recording capacity into televisions have become the
single largest electricity drain in many American homes, with some typical home entertainment configurations
eating more power than a new refrigerator and even some central air-conditioning systems. ... One
high-definition DVR and one high-definition cable box use an average of 446 kilowatt hours a year...
The Editor's rebuttal:
Do the math. 446 kWh a year, consumed by an appliance that runs 24 hours a day, is an
average power consumption of only 50 watts. Is that more power than your "central
air-conditioning system" uses? Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to get a high-def DVR
and a cable box. If that's how you want to spend your money, that's your business.
Obama
Backs EPA War on Coal, While Networks Ignore Harm to Industry. It is no longer a secret that
President Obama's administration is willing to allow electricity prices to "necessarily skyrocket," in
order to accomplish his green energy agenda. Although he has so far been unsuccessful at instituting
cap-and-trade, Obama's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is hard at work running coal companies and
consumers into the ground. Not that you'd know it from ABC, NBC and CBS news coverage.
Will
MSM Look into the Global Warming Abyss and Find Their Character? Considering how incredibly
rare it is to find balanced global warming reporting in the mainstream media, Noel Sheppard's 4/24 NewsBusters
headline was worthy of a double-take: "Retired Anchorman Apologizes for Presenting Both Sides of Global
Warming Debate." Having written an American Thinker article last year where I quantified the
outright bias at the PBS NewsHour to be a ratio of 3 "skeptic" to 200+ "pro-Al Gore/IPCC" going back
to 1996, I was puzzled. Who could it be?
Climate
Change Improving World Water Supply. The Obama Interior Department has issued a paper
claiming global warming will harm water supplies in the western United States. The Obama
administration claiming global warming is or will be a bad thing is no more newsworthy than Obama
administration claiming higher taxes and more federal spending is a good thing. Nevertheless, the
news media is running amok with the administration's paper, citing it as more "proof" that global
warming is a horrible crisis.
It's ReVolting. In our fast
paced, ever-changing lives, we can take occasional comfort in the fact that some things never change.
We can rely on death, taxes, McDonald's, the fecklessness and narcissism of Barack Obama, and above all the
obsequious New York Times. Yes, the NYT has, once again, lived down to expectations. Thus comes
Lawrence Ulrich, on the Times website, with a review of the much-ballyhooed Chevy Volt, a review that could
not be more fawning if it was named "Bambi." In fact, "Volt" could easily be replaced with "Obama" in
much of the review and it would yield yet another Obama puff piece for which the NYT has become justly infamous.
Hold
the accolades on China's 'green leap forward'. As the world's factory floor, China is not an
obvious environmental leader. It is beleaguered by severe pollution and generates more carbon emissions
than any other nation. Yet many have trumpeted it as an emerging "green giant" for its non-carbon-based
energy production and its aggressive promises to cut carbon emissions. New York Times columnist Thomas
Friedman described China's "green leap forward" as "the most important thing to happen" at the end of the
first decade of the 21st century. But the facts do not support this "green" success story.
Time:
Your Icemaker Is Killing the Earth. This just in, courtesy of Time Magazine: Mother
Gaia is dying and your ice maker is the perp. Continue churning out ice with your automated
cube-maker, and you'll be contributing to the plight of the 50 million refugees the United Nations
insists anthropogenic global warming has caused will cause by 2020.
NYT
columnist on lightbulb law: Lobbyists like it, so it must be fine. Gail Collins has a
light-hearted column in the New York Times gently condescending to those who don't like the federal government
prohibiting them from buying the kind of light bulbs they want to buy. She dismisses this "Hysteria
over the government taking away our right to buy inefficient light bulbs" as being "just for political show."
Surely nobody is actually upset about a law that has no constitutional justification, and that takes away
an affordable option from consumers, and that contributed to hundreds of people in Ohio, Kentucky, and
Virginia losing their jobs.
Japan's Nuclear Lesson: U.S. Needs
Yucca Mountain Project. An old, decrepit nuclear power plant in Japan, battered by
earthquake and tsunami, burned and melted down, spewing radioactivity around the plant and panic
across the world. Yet not one person died from radiation poisoning. Not one person
anywhere. Thanks to the design and construction of the plant and the brave workers who battled
to save it. Undeterred by this fact, American media went into Chicken Little mode.
The Nuke Scare. The
rhetoric [the Greens and the media are] using is designed to make the disaster seem much worse than it is, to
find someone to pin things on, and to shift public opinion in the direction of shutting down all nuclear plants
no matter what the circumstances. Anybody who was around for Three Mile Island back in 1979 or Chernobyl
in 1986 will recognize the cycle: first hysteria, then accusations, then more hysteria, then demands to
return to the pre-modern era.
Exploiting the Japanese.
For the left, no crisis is too terrible to go unused. So it is with the horrific suffering that has
taken place in Japan. ... In [an] appearance on the NBC Nightly News, Edward Lyman of UCS stressed
the ominous situation in Japan while at the same time stressing that "it can happen here." The
"safety bar is set too low," Lyman insisted. We need more restrictions — presumably
the sort that would slow down further nuclear power development or shut it down entirely. Suddenly,
the media was full of the "worse than Three Mile Island" scenario — the worst nuclear
catastrophe since Chernobyl. Come to think of it, has there been a nuclear "catastrophe" since
Chernobyl? Is the situation in Japan, however serious it may be, a Chernobyl-scale accident?
Not likely, but the media seems to be licking its lips, hoping it will come close.
Fear the Media Meltdown,
Not the Nuclear One. Relax: this is not another Chernobyl or Three Mile Island, and I'll
tell you exactly why. The only thing to fear is the sensationalist reporting that has the world panicked.
Time to stop
nuke hysteria. It's not bad enough that thousands of people may be dead from Japan's earthquake
and devastating tsunami. No, the media is instead obsessing over a nuclear reactor that has killed no one
and probably never will.
Anti-Nuclear
Press Puts Japanese Lives at Risk. Japan currently faces a real emergency. As a result of the
earthquake and the ensuing tsunami, thousands of people are dead, and tens of thousands more are missing and may
be trapped under rubble, severely injured, and in danger of death by thirst or suffocation. There are over
500,000 people without shelter, with a blizzard on the way, and even the as-yet unscathed could soon face death from
epidemics caused by thousands of unburied corpses. At such a time, nothing could be more scandalous than the
current campaign by much of the international press to spread panic over trivial emissions of radiological material
from several disabled nuclear power stations.
Japan:
whatever happened to the nuclear meltdown? Amazing, isn't it, what a little light military intervention
can do to a nuclear crisis? One minute, the world is facing nuclear meltdown armageddon to rank with —
ooh, Three Mile Island at the very least, and quite possibly Chernobyl. A few (shockingly expensive) missile
strikes over Benghazi and Tripoli later, though, and the Japanese nuclear crisis has all but vanished from the
face of the earth. Maybe we should start small wars more often. Or maybe — even better —
the MSM could learn to start reporting on nuclear incidents like journalists instead of activists from Greenpeace
and Friends of the Earth.
Rand Paul's Toilet Tirade.
[Scroll down] His unwitting victim was Kathleen Hogan, the deputy assistant secretary for energy efficiency at the
Department of Energy. "You're really anti-choice on every other consumer item that you've listed here,
including light bulbs, refrigerators, toilets — you name it, you can't go around your house without
being told what to buy.
Bias alert:
Rand Paul is right. The writer of the article above makes it sound as if Rand Paul's
objections were irrational and unfounded.
WaPo
Slips Coal Critique into the Entertainment Section. Have you seen Spike TV's new show on coal
mining in West Virginia? I haven't, but I've read the Washington Post's review, and while it didn't
tell me anything about the show, it did provide an interesting insight into jaded lens through which the
mainstream media views the coal industry.
CBS
'Early Show' Touts Government Banning Incandescent Light Bulbs. At the top of the 7:30AM ET
half hour on Monday's CBS Early Show, co-host Chris Wragge happily proclaimed: "After 130 years,
[Thomas] Edison's invention is basically being phased out.... The government is replacing the incandescent
bulb with a much more energy efficient light." Wragge portrayed the government ban as a new "choice"
for consumers: "Consumers will now have a choice of two different kinds of bulbs, the CFL and LED and
we're going to tell you the difference and which one is better for you, which one's going to be a little more
cost effective."
ABC News
Star Reporter Busted for Eco-Activist Journalism. Big Journalism has learned that [Bob]
Woodruff has for years lent his name and his network news affiliation to an annual charity event that raises
money for the hard-left advocacy group Waterkeeper Alliance headed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. To
make matters worse, Mr. Woodruff profiled the group's efforts in fighting Exxon in a story about the Hudson
River and objectively featured Mr. Kennedy and his personal efforts on behalf of the organization.
Food chain not stretched to limit —
yet. The cable network MSNBC is warning that the world food chain "has been stretched to the
limit" by rising world demand and a series of crop failures in several countries. The TV network's
warning is premature. The U.S., in fact, could ease the current global food price spike with one
administrative action — limiting the amount of U.S. corn that gets turned into corn ethanol.
Crazy Green Media. The other
day I noted a "facially stupid" headline, "CHINA: Nation drops energy use by 20 percent." China is
in truth spectacularly increasing its energy consumption but, if you're not the U.S. you get the
benefit of regularly twisted rhetoric to spin things like a reduction in energy intensity (energy used
per unit of GDP), which every maturing economy experiences and at levels not unlike China's. Internally
I wondered to colleagues, purely rhetorically of course, "why don't we ever get headlines like this?" The
obvious answer is that the aim of most journalists who write on the relevant topics is to paint the U.S.
and/or politically disfavored industry as inferior, lagging, reckless, uniquely wasteful, and otherwise
deserving of further interventions by those who know what's best for us all.
Media Excuse Obama's Power Grab.
Juliet Eilperin of the Washington Post reported on Friday [12/31/2010] that "the Obama administration is
prepared to push its environmental agenda through regulation where it has failed on Capitol Hill..."
There was no hint that this approach is illegal or unconstitutional. The account simply assumes that the
Obama Administration can do what it wants, no matter what Congress or the law says. This kind of
matter-of-fact reporting about lawlessness by the federal government is typical of the decline, if not
death, of adversary journalism in the nation's capital.
A Blizzard of Lies in
The New York Times. It's Orwellian when cold is declared warmth. It's deceitful and
insulting when it occurs in the midst of a huge blizzard shutting down much of the northeast. I would
not even trust the date on the front page of The New York Times because the newspaper long ago lost touch
with reality, with sanity, and, one can only assume, readers fleeing to other sources for the news.
Top Ten
Examples of Media Bias in 2010. [#4] Global warmists' admissions: First, there was
Professor Phil Jones's February concession that there has been no global warming since 1995. Then
there was IPCC economist Ottmar Edenhofer's frank November assertion that climate policy "is redistributing
the world's wealth." Apparently only English newspapers and editorial writers at Investor's Business
Daily care about these things. Meanwhile, journalists moaned about how people were no longer buying
into the supposedly "settled science."
The 10 Biggest 'Non-Story'
Stories of 2010. [#8] Global warming sham further exposed — This is a holdover and certainly the
number two story ignored in 2009. The trouble continued for the whole Al Gore climate change crowd
throughout 2010. Though exposed in late 2009, the East Anglia e-mail scandal unfolded into 2010. By
the end of the year, the climate conference in Cancun, Mexico seemed much ado about nothing and U.S Physicist
Hal Lewis resigned from his post of 38 years at UC-Santa Barbara, calling the scientific community corrupted
and global warming a scam.
Skeptics
Have Their Say at COP16, Press Refuses to Report. Amidst prayers to ancient Mayan goddesses,
dire predictions of climate catastrophe, and alarmist proposals to ban everything from children to kerosene
lamps, a few eminently qualified "skeptics" of the United Nations' global-warming alarmism held a press
conference at the summit in Cancun to share their views. ... Very few reporters, however, bothered to
show up — let alone balance their coverage.
Pop Went the Climate Bubble. The
New York Times' editorial writers have apparently spent the last 11 months in a Rip Van Winkle-like state
of unconsciousness when it comes to climate change. Monday's [10/18/2010] lead editorial, "In Climate
Denial Again," railed about the 19 of 20 or so Republican Senate candidates who do not "accept
the scientific consensus that humans are largely responsible for global warming."
Apocalypse Now! (Or Pretty
Soon, Anyway). November 30 was the last day of the Atlantic hurricane season. Those with
six-month memory spans will recall that back in May, forecasters at NOAA were predicting "an extremely active"
hurricane season, with 14 to 23 named storms and three to seven major hurricanes. The mainstream
media was quick to enlarge NOAA's predictions, speculating that storm damage would exceed that of 2005, the year
of Katrina. The environmental radicals who populate mainstream newsrooms were licking their chops, panting
at the chance to broadcast images of storm victims hanging out on rooftops and to link the devastation to climate
change.
Another Climate Change Scare Is On Thin Ice.
All the scares generated by the false climate science promoted by political agendas disappear from the mainstream
media and are rarely heard of again. There's no follow up in the mainstream media, no apologies for providing
false or inadequate information. Nasty old Mother Nature causes the demise by going about her normal business.
The
Survey Says...(Whatever You Want It to Say). Environmental reporters, to cite a common instance, will
take the Wilderness Society at its word when it releases a report predicting ecological calamity at the hands of
grasping capitalists; when a think tank backed by an oil company puts its own scientists on the case, the reporter
smells a rat.
All The News That Is
Unfit to Print. [Example #7] The Implosion of the Green Movement: Two years ago
Al Gore was considered a Nostradamus. This was to be our moment when the seas were to recede.
But today? The Volt may well become a boondoggle. Cap and trade is doomed. Al Gore is
discredited. Few trust academics to conduct honest climate research. The U.S. is finding huge deposits
of natural gas in a way that seemed unimaginable a few years ago. Even Obama wants to build nuclear power
plants, or so he says. Yet we read almost nothing about the crackup of Green evangelicalism.
How
the Climategate weasels wriggled free. [Scroll down] And why is this so? In part, at least,
it is because of the abject, ongoing failure of our Mainstream Media to report environmental issues with the robust
scepticism that ought to be the natural tack of responsible journalists. Too many environmental reporters are
still regurgitating press releases handed to them by activist organisations like the WWF, Greenpeace and Friends Of The
Earth. In the MSM, as in government, it's like Climategate never happened.
Al
Gore's Climate Exchange Utterly Fails — Media Ignores It All. One would think that if
such an effort from the right had failed so miserably to succeed the Old Media would be pushing this news by
leading every news cast, every TV report, and filling up the front page of every news paper with the tale.
Yet this magnificent failure of the leftest of left-wing causes leaves the Old Media utterly silent.
Climate Alarmism
at the New York Times. The New York Times editorial page has been persistent in publishing
alarmist editorials on climate change. The latest one appearing shortly before the November elections
accused politicians of being in "denial" about climate change. What nonsense! Climate is changing
all the time; it has been doing it for millions of years — without any human intervention.
And politicians are simply trying to stay in step with the public. There is no credible evidence at all
that human activities have had any appreciable influence on global climate changes during the last century.
USA
Today Global Warming Propaganda. Parroting the claims of a new "study" released by the Yale Project
on Climate Change Communication, an alarmist propaganda group whose claims counter those of some of Yale's own
scholars, this morning's USA Today article, "Survey: Public knowledge on climate lacking," is seven
parts alarmist propaganda, three parts condescension, and zero parts sound, objective science reporting.
According to the USA Today article, survey respondents who believe there is "a lot of disagreement
among scientists" regarding global warming have answered the question "incorrectly." ... People who answered
that the sun is one of the five most significant causes of global warming answered the question "incorrectly."
There's
Nothing Mainstream About Old Media. If nearly 1,000 people gather at a hotel in downtown Chicago to
hear 72 speakers from 23 countries explain why global warming is not a crisis, and not a single mainstream
print outlet or network news station reports it, was the meeting any less important or successful? Nope.
But it does speak volumes about what's wrong with the old media.
When
journalists become Big Green's spinmeisters. Many Gloucester, Mass., residents depend on commercial
fishing, so it's not surprise they have little patience with the almost uniformly negative media coverage in
recent years suggesting the entire marine ecosystem is about to collapse due to the industry. Nancy
Gaines, a Gloucester Times reporter who recently analyzed that coverage, made some shocking discoveries about
a cozy little Iron Triangle among well-known reporters, Big Green environmental scientists whose findings they
regularly report, and funding by foundations that share the movement's ideological agenda. "The journalists
are wined and dined by the advocates and hired to train the scientists to use the media to advance their message,"
Gaines reported. "The journalists, in turn, call on those same scientists as sources when writing about
the advocates and their agenda."
This article is loaded with political bias and outright lies: GOP Victory May Be Defeat For
Climate Change Policy. The more carbon that gets released into the atmosphere, the higher the
average temperature rises. That's a scientific fact. Human activities, such as driving, flying,
building and even turning on the lights, are the biggest contributor to the release of carbon. That too,
is a fact. And yet the majority of Republicans running for House and Senate seats this year disagree.
The Editor says...
If you are looking for factual information about carbon dioxide, please
see this page.
But if you don't have all day to explore the subject, allow me to offer this synopsis:
About 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is due to water vapor from the lakes and oceans.
Manmade carbon dioxide emissions are roughly five percent of the total atmospheric CO2. The
rest comes from natural sources such as volcanos, termites and cows. Some scientists
believe there is no greenhouse effect.*
But even if there is, all the industrial activity in the world makes a tiny contribution to it,
and the only way to eliminate man-made CO2 production is to stop all industrial activity and return
to a 17th century way of life. If that sounds feasible to you, then by all means,
keep listening to NPR. The rest
of us have figured out that man-made global warming
is a hoax.
IPCC Distortion Of Weather And Climate Is Reinforced
By Media Hyperbole. It's pathetic to watch the US mainstream media yearn for a hurricane, especially
one that will threaten people. They anxiously scan the weather maps off the coast of West Africa for any
low-pressure system that might develop into a news making, life threatening, normal event. It is another
measure of how the media is not about news but editorializing, speculation and sensationalism. Sadly,
they are joined in this or at least not dissuaded or counteracted by government agencies.
Why
We Blink In Face Of Eco-Terror. An environmental activist inspired by Al Gore's "An Inconvenient
Truth" takes hostages at the Discovery Channel headquarters. This isn't the latest example of eco-terrorism,
just the latest to be ignored.
NYT
Article Admits DDT Ban as a Cause of Bedbug Outbreak. Unfortunately for residents of many urban
areas such as New York and Philadelphia, the bedbugs are not only biting but spreading at an alarming rate.
Despite this outbreak, the mainstream media has until recently kept insisting that bedbugs developed a
resistance to DDT so any emergency lifting of the EPA ban on that pesticide is unnecessary.
Slippery
Oil, Slipshod Coverage. So who's responsible for the Great Oil Spill Panic of 2010? Surprise,
surprise: Scientists are starting to complain about the media's alarmist interpretation of their preliminary
public assessments.
Huffington Post's Dirty
Disinformation. As a rule of thumb, one should always approach a mainstream or left-wing media
story involving the environment with a healthy sense of skepticism. A seemingly innocuous slide show
entitled "9 of the Most Polluted Places in the World" that appeared at the Huffington Post on Tuesday [8/31/2010]
provides a lesson in how environmental disinformation is disseminated and thus becomes part of the liberal
narrative.
Andrea
Mitchell: I Thought Al Gore Settled the Global Warming Issue. One may think that someone as
well connected as long-time Washington correspondent and MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell might also connect the dots.
After an unseasonably rough DC winter occurring right in the midst of the ClimateGate scandal, she would be
aware of doubt being cast over the idea of manmade global warming. But if you want evidence her mind
is made up regardless of any of this...
Heartland Conference
Establishes Post-Climategate Consensus. [Scroll down] Had the mainstream media acted
responsibly, then every word spoken at the first major post-Climategate climate colloquium would have indeed
built public awareness of the implausibility of manmade global warming and, consequently, any job-killing
legislation, treaties or regulations designed to "control" it. But ours is an agenda-driven MSM —
brazenly toting water for a president and Hill Democrats shamelessly rolling out the Gulf-coast disaster
crash-cart to reanimate their flat-lined "climate" bill.
A Phone Call from
the Associated Press. [Scroll down] What the AP did yesterday [7/14/2010] is yet another
example of how low journalism has sunk in the United States. The AP journalist seems to be dialing around to
engineering experts hoping to get the answer they want to support a political position determined to stop
fossil fuel use in the United States.
The Left and Its
Talking Points. The Journolist story demonstrates active, covert collaboration among leftists
to plant political themes in the media. Long-time listeners of conservative talk radio are aware of
audio montages where old-line media talking heads repeat verbatim a set of words that can't be anything
other than shared talking points. A perfect example was the 2000-era Dick Cheney "gravitas" showcased
by Rush Limbaugh. It's one thing to ask how proper reporting of Obama might have changed the outcome
of the election. I'll ask a bigger question: Did old-line media journalists share talking
points to prop up the global warming issue?
When Good Trees Go Bad.
In its attempt to put the best possible spin on the latest whitewash of the global warming con artists, the
New York Times inadvertently provides readers with this gem: ["]... The C.R.U. researchers, leaders in
that type of work, were trying in 1999 to produce a long-term temperature chart that could be used in a United
Nations publication. But they were dogged by a problem: Since around 1960, for mysterious reasons,
trees have stopped responding to temperature increases in the same way they apparently did in previous
centuries.["]
Politicizing the climate science debate has
boosted alarmism. [Scroll down] Those of us who do not support the idea that human
greenhouse gas emissions are dangerously warming the planet are usually condemned by main stream media
as being ultra-conservative, ill-informed, anti-environmentalists, when the press acknowledges us at
all. As a consequence, many in the public still regard the climate debate as a left vs. right wing
struggle, with supposedly greedy industrialists on the right trying to sway governments against the
concerns of supposedly caring environmentalists on the left.
Governments still promote climate fears
despite contradictory advice. [Scroll down] A few years ago, an editorial pages
editor of a major eastern Canadian newspaper told me candidly that he didn't cover both sides of the
climate debate because "our advertisers wouldn't like it". At first I thought he just meant that
crisis sells media and advertisers were more likely to pay for expensive ads if the periodical had high
circulation numbers. But a look at the paper told me more — major international
corporations have identified reducing 'greenhouse gas emissions' as an important marketing tool
and so often incorporate it into their advertising so as to appear virtuous...
An
Excellent Example of Media Morass on Climate. Here are headlines from two stories about the
same peer-reviewed study.
Reuters: "Melting mountains put millions at risk in Asia: study"
Nature: "Global warming's impact on Asia's rivers overblown"
I'll go with Nature on this one.
Gagging on Green Garbage. The
"East Anglia Event Horizon" occurred on Nov 19, 2009 and that day will live in infamy in the honest
history of science. Yet in the nine months since the 'Climate-Gate' disclosure there has NOT BEEN ONE
MENTION of this event or any conflicting viewpoints to the AGW orthodoxy presented in Popular Science
or Popular Mechanics. Not a single letter to the editor in opposition, not a single mention
of ANY other possible climate forcing factors. This is not science, this is despicable political
advocacy.
Are Climate
Alarmists losing the Mainstream Media? In the past week, two mainstream media giants have
apparently recognized that the debate over manmade global warming is far from over. On Monday
[5/24/2010], the NY Times broke with years of blatant warmist bias in reporting that Climate
Fears Turn to Doubts Among Britons. ... Now Newsweek has joined the newly aware, but with
a dash more honesty.
Political, Media, and Bureaucratic Distortions
of Weather and Climate. Mainstream television has extreme or severe weather reports when they are
actually reporting natural events. Hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards are all natural events and warnings
for potential loss of life are commendable, but the focus creates a false impression. It reinforces the
false IPCC claims of more severe weather with global warming.
Climate
Depot's Marc Morano Takes on ABC News' Dan Harris. We've all sort of known the media have been in
the tank for the global warming alarmist movement. For evidence, look no further than a March 2008
segment that aired on ABC "World News" attacking leading climate skeptic, University of Virginia environmental
scientist Professor Emeritus Fred Singer.
The Problems with Al Gore:
[Scroll down slowly] Al Gore may not know what he's talking about, but he's not alone. The
world is full of ignorant people. As a college professor, I interact constantly with students, many of
whom are very concerned with global warming. But in my interactions I have invariably found that the
more science a student knows, the more skeptical they are of the standard global warming alarmist scenario.
Students majoring in engineering or physics have some appreciation for the scientific method and the uncertainties
involved in understanding and predicting climate change. ... Students who buy into global warming alarmism
are almost always from non-technical majors such as journalism. They can't think quantitatively,
critically, or analytically. They have beliefs, but no interest in or appreciation for facts.
Hit
Job: ABC News Attempts to Align Climate Change Skeptics with White Supremacists. At
first, Michael Mann, a Penn State professor and a central figure in the Climategate scandal, but best known
for his discredited "hockey stick graph" didn't like being mocked in a YouTube video. Now Mann is
alleging he's a victim of hate groups.
Leadership. [The mainstream
media] report the ideas and expert evidence created by those seeking or holding power. They also produce
their own expert evidence to support their stories. There is no other way to explain the mainstream media
failure to report on the Climategate fiasco — indeed, as the emails revealed, reporters at major newspapers
and media outlets were actively involved.
American Fossil Fuels:
The New Alternative Energy Source. [Scroll down] While Americans obsess about the latest spill
in the gulf, Nigeria announces casually the 14,000 tons of oil lost in its ecosystems this past year due to
accidents and sabotage. That number has increased dramatically in the last few years, and there is little
indication that any sort of public outcry will reduce or even modify energy extraction in a major producer
such as the country of Nigeria.
Gullible Media Panicking Over Climate. Media service to
weather or climatic panics goes back more than a century. One particularly amusing anecdote is the Los
Angeles Times, which was among many outlets seizing on the fear of frozen stuff on the heels of the Titanic's
sinking at the hands of an iceberg, digging up an academic to say that the expanding ice would soon consume
us all.
When
White House Correspondents Go Green, Follow the Money. In the Politico today [4/30/2010], there's
a story about how the Natural Resources Defense Council is advising the White House Correspondents' Association
on how to "go green" with their annual dinner. They seem to be taking this very seriously.
Global warming follies.
I use Yahoo as the home page for my internet browser. This exposes me to the daily global warming propaganda
Yahoo publishes, with correspondingly outrageous, inflammatory headlines. These types of articles are
specifically selected to frighten us into acceding to the pro-warming political forces' demands, including
surrendering our freedoms and our prosperity.
Networks Hide the Decline in Credibility of Climate Change Science.
[Scroll down] It took ABC, CBS and NBC 14 days to even mention the ClimateGate e-mail controversy. When
they couldn't get away with it any longer they downplayed its threat to the credibility of the global warming movement.
CBS's Wyatt Andrews defended alarmists against accusations of "fraud" and "deception" saying "if that's true, it's a fraud
adopted by most of the world's leading scientists..." ... The networks aired more than six times as many global warming
alarmism reports than they did stories mentioning any of the problems with climate science research (86 to 13).
ABC and NBC both aired stories about Arctic photographers that indicated their pictures were proof of global warming, even
though they were not part of any scientific analysis.
Matthews
Urges James Cameron To Trash 'Dangerous' Global Warming Deniers in 'Right Wing Media'. Chris
Matthews spent an entire segment of Monday's Hardball sucking up to director James Cameron as the MSNBC host
prodded the "Avatar" director to trash those in the "right wing media" who deny global warming, like Glenn
Beck, as "very dangerous to this country." Cameron, who was on to plug the DVD version (coming soon to a
landfill near you) of his pro-greenie fantasy flick, warned the Earth was being imperiled by not only the
United States but also a rising middle class in places like India and China, and urged viewers to combat the
"professional deniers" like Beck who are thwarting his fight against the "clear and present danger" of
climate change.
Why can't we find
a Climategate summary like this in US Media. The level of coverage in America regarding
questions raised by the Climategate scandal and other related revelations is a scandal. The Euro-media
has been on the story from the beginning and surprisingly, is telling the story in a mostly objective manner.
Spiegel Online has an exhaustive, 8-page review of events and discoveries since the Climategate emails were
revealed. It shows a climate science community in near chaos and dispirited over the fact that so much
data was fabricated or deliberately ignored.
Climategate: Failure of a Blind and
Biased Mainstream Media. It's beyond belief that the mainstream media can't see the devastating
importance of the emails leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) known as Climategate. The blindness
cancels the claim they're society's watchdog. ... The mainstream media willfully ignore the massive deception
just as they have the political exploitation of climate science. In fact, most led or joined attacks on
scientists who dared to point out the problems.
Mainstream Media Ignores Climategate.
[Scroll down] What I have also noticed since the revelations in November 2009 that the UN Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change data had been deliberately falsified to justify claims of "global warming" is the return in
the media of the usual idiotic claims that "global warming" is causing this and that. The Economist, an
otherwise respected news magazine, had a recent issue in which it essentially said it didn't care how much
evidence there was that no global warming was or is occurring.
New Global Warming Alarmism from
LA Times. We have now reached the apex of "heads I win, tails you lose" global warming-alarmism.
In his April 18 op-ed for the LA Times, author Eli Kintisch warned that "the world is running short on air
pollution, and if we continue to cut back on smoke pouring forth from industrial smokestacks," global warming
consequences could be "profound." Having painted themselves into an environmental conundrum, Kintisch and
climate scientists are left debating how they are going to proceed with sulfate aerosols — a natural
and anthropogenic air pollutant believed to have cooling properties on the earth's atmosphere.
Newsweek
Helps Energy Secretary Chu Push Cap-and-Trade. At Newsweek, the global warming crusade remains
an important mission. The magazine's latest push came in an interview by CNN contributor Fareed Zakharia
of Energy Secretary Steven Chu. Zakaria threw softballs to Chu throughout the article, as Newsweek
showed it was simply a matter of when — not if — the administration should continue to
pursue a drastic environmental agenda.
EEEEK!,
Reports Newsweek. Just in time for Earth Day at your local supermarket newsstand,
Newsweek has published "100 Places to Remember Before They Disappear," a shrill, apocalyptic,
scaremongering photo album of favorite hot spots the world over that are threatened with destruction by
global warming.
Media Failure: Global
Warming Edition. American newspapers and television news bureaus are staffed with people for
whom skepticism of the U.N. and politicized climate scientists is tantamount to heresy.
Finally
BBC asks: Are we maybe a bit biased on 'climate change'? [Scroll down] For example,
there's this from a recent edition of the children's news programme Newsround, explaining — just
in case kids got any funny ideas to the contrary — that the current snow showers are nothing to
celebrate but are in fact yet another sure sign of man's evil.
American Enviro-Media
Still MIA. A sampling of stories, since the Climategate story broke in November, that discredit
"consensus" global warming science and the UN IPCC — many from British media.
Global warming
science implodes overseas: American media silent. The revelations have been nothing short
of jaw dropping. Dozens — yes dozens — of claims made in the IPCC 2007 report on
climate change that was supposed to represent the "consensus" of 2500 of the world's climate scientists have
been shown to be bogus, or faulty, or not properly vetted, or simply pulled out of thin air. We know
this because newspapers in Great Britain are doing their job...
The Great Unraveling.
Compounding the headaches for warm-mongers is a probe being launched by the British Parliament into the
Climate Research Unit e-mail scandal. ... This isn't terribly fresh news, having been announced on Jan. 22
by Parliament. But news that casts doubt on global warming tends to move slowly, if at all, in the U.S.
media. If not for the foreign press, the inquiry would be virtually unknown in this country.
MSNBC's
Ratigan Blames 'Snowpocalypse' on Global Warming. With Washington, D.C. buried beneath at least
20 inches of snow, and with more in the forecast, common sense would suggest global warming alarmists look
elsewhere to make the argument to raise awareness for their concerns. But no, Dylan Ratigan thinks it's
ridiculous to suggest all the snowfall totals could cast doubt on the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
Bill
Nye 'The Science Guy': Denying Climate Change 'Unpatriotic,' 'Inappropriate'. Challenging
someone's patriotism is a pretty hefty charge to level in the political arena, based on the response when
Barack Obama's patriotism was challenged during the 2008 election cycle. However, there seems to be a
different set of rules when it comes to questioning the authenticity of the manmade global warming argument
in the wake of record-setting snowfall in the Mid-Atlantic.
House of
Peers: "Climate change" is not only a scientific scandal but also a massive journalistic failure.
Public Media Bias and Climate Change.
CBC science is almost the exclusive playground of the leftist environmentalist David Suzuki. Biases,
distortions, and false information are in evidence throughout his series, "The Nature of Things". ... McDonald
has no post-high school education. He has honorary degrees but they're condemnation of the granting
universities. ... Lack of credentials is only an issue when you disagree with anthropogenic global warming.
Global warming and
the 'settled science' baloney. While not faulting journalists and politicians for their
stupendous ignorance when discussing most scientific subjects, I do condemn their utter lack of coherence
concerning basic scientific definitions, processes, and principles. Specifically, the chattering
classes have no appreciation of the following truisms: settled science comes only in the form of
physical laws while the causes behind specific phenomena are sometimes never definitively settled.
And the more complex the system being observed, the longer it takes to reach a consensus about the
causal mechanisms.
The Global Ostrich Press. [Scroll
down] Like all emotional appeals without reason, the editorial started with an ominous warning: "Unless we
combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security."
Ignoring evidence to the contrary, the editors looked down from the world's ivory towers and proclaimed to the peasants
that "science is complex but the facts are clear."
Watchdog smacks Times for bogus climate
claim. An advertising campaign touting the depth and quality of the Times newspaper's environment
coverage has been slapped by an industry watchdog for inaccuracy. The paper has agreed to modify the
advertisements, which are based on a false climate change claim.
Global cooling documented in last
decade. The mainstream media is reporting the World Meteorological Organization's assessment
of global average temperatures asserting this decade is "the warmest on record," without mentioning the WMO
data actually documents the United States and Canada experienced cooler-than-average conditions since
2000. The reports circulating from the U.N.'s climate summit in Copenhagen also don't mention
scientific climate data that suggest the globe has cooled in the last 10 years.
Move Over Polar Bear, the Arctic Fox is the New Furry Face of Global
Warming. On Wednesday's [12/16/2009] Today show, the co-hosts of the 10am hour, Kathie Lee
Gifford and Hoda Kotb, invited on David Mizejewski of the Wildlife Federation to participate in that talk-show
time honored tradition of the animal segment but viewers couldn't enjoy the cuddly creatures without getting
a dose of global warming alarmism.
The shocking
lesson from the climate scandal. With the outrageous news of deceit, fraud and suppression
of opposing evidence by top climate change "scientists," many conservatives had expected to see the story
unfold a little differently (with actual reporting and investigating). Global warming, aka, climate
change has been heralded as the preeminent story of our time. As such, the exposing of scientific
fraud in the ultimate "science" movement would have made screaming headline news in a sane world.
Climategate
in the Classroom? The mainstream media has for too long dominated the information being
disseminated about global warming. Some people have long-term loyalty to television news programs,
newspapers, or magazines. Any opinion that varies from their source is unacceptable. Some
people have been so completely indoctrinated with the climate catastrophe story, they can't stand to
hear anything else. For them my story of global warming will be met with closed doors and
deaf ears.
CBS Slams Exxon for Not Drilling
More. In stunning turn around, CBS laments the fact ExxonMobil is not putting up more oil
rigs in scenic Alaska and the Gulf Coast.
Climategate:
How the MSM reported the greatest scandal in modern science. [Scroll down] But in the
case of "Climate Change", the MSM has been caught with its trousers down. The reason it has been so
ill-equipped to report on this scandal is because almost all of its Environmental Correspondents and
Environmental Editors are parti pris members of the Climate-Fear Promotion lobby. Most of their
contacts (and information sources) work for biased lobby groups like Greenpeace and the WWF, or conspicuously
pro-AGW government departments and Quangos such as the Carbon Trust. How can they bring themselves to
report on skullduggery at Hadley Centre when the scientists involved are the very ones whose work they have
done most to champion and whose pro-AGW views they share?
Media Ignore Climate
Science Scandal. Media bias is one thing. But we have just witnessed one of the
greatest scandals of modern science, and it barely made the front page of the New York Times.
Andrew Revkin Spins
'ClimateGate' Story. Poor Andrew Revkin can't help himself. The New York Times
reporter and Dot Earth blogger is so intellectually invested in the environmental movement that he simply
cannot report bad news about the movement's extremists without spinning it.
Climategate:
how they all squirmed. Among the many great amusements of the Climategate scandal are the
myriad imaginative excuses being offered by the implicated scientists and their friends in the MSM as
to why this isn't a significant story.
Hot air under
radar. It should be known as "climategate" and should be a front-page story in every newspaper worth
the name and the lead item on television and radio news throughout the world. Instead it has generally been
ignored and often deliberately covered up.
What Story?
If you rely on the lavishly remunerated "climate correspondents" of the big newspapers and networks, you'll know nothing
about the Climate Research Unit scandals — just the business-as-usual drivel about Boston being
underwater by 2011.
Comedy Central Scoops Network News on
Climate-Gate Scandal. ABC didn't cover it. CBS didn't either. And NBC apparently
wouldn't go near it. The network news broadcasts have ignored a growing scandal over evidence of a
potential climate cover-up — and now they've even been scooped by the fake news at Comedy Central.
'Science
Is Dying': What Media Are Really Missing About ClimateGate. While most global warming-obsessed
media have either ignored or downplayed the significance of the growing ClimateGate scandal, the Wall Street Journal
has been on top of this story since it first broke two weeks ago. On Thursday [12/3/2009], Journal editorial
page deputy editor Daniel Henninger penned a piece that should be an absolute must-read for all the so-called
journalists in America that have either intentionally boycotted this controversy or have participated in hiding
its seriousness from the public.
NYT's
Friedman on ClimateGate. [Thomas] Friedman has been hoping for some sort of forced action on
global warming for several years now. On ABC's "Good Morning America" on March 9, 2006, he boldly
announced his preference for the future of U.S. energy policy. "Charlie, if they [Iran] cut off oil
and oil went to $100 a barrel — that would make my day, because the sooner we go to $100 a barrel,
the sooner we're going to have everyone in America driving a plug-in hybrid car fueled by corn and ethanol,"
Friedman said.
Climategate
gaining traction — even in New Jersey. The layer of ice that has formed in the
main-stream media over the Climategate story is finally cracking. The largest newspaper in perhaps
the bluest of states, New Jersey, has run on its front page a Politico column titled "Climategate Distracts
at Copenhagen." The very liberal-leaning Newark Star-Ledger had put the deep freeze on Climategate for
three weeks since the scandal broke, not breathing a word on the subject.
Gore
falsifies the record. Could those carefully vetted journalists who are allowed an audience
with the Great Green Guru please — for once — confront him with his
exaggerations, distortions, fake evidence and absurd predictions? I've done this myself over this
issue, and can guarantee you will get a far funnier and more interesting reaction than another of
his sermons.
Gore
is grossly careless or a barefaced liar. Al Gore has studied the Climategate emails with
his typically rigorous eye and dismissed them as mere piffle. No way did these leaked emails discredit
his global warming crusade, he assured Slate magazine. And you'd trust him, wouldn't you? ... The
fact is you have been lied to by many people for a long time, and the media has betrayed you by not holding
the liars to account. Too much is now at stake for us to tolerate the stifling of debate for an instant
longer.
Why Newsweek is the Punch Line.
[Scroll down] For example, the November 9th edition of Newsweek (The Thinking Man's Thinking Man)
calls Al Gore a "prophet" several times, in multiple articles. Newsweek contributor Sharon Begley
writes glowingly of Gore, praising him for everything from his optimism to his spirituality in her article
The Evolution of an Eco-Prophet. She calls him "fact-filled," largely ignoring the growing scientific
dissent with his claims, and essentially admits her unquestioning faith in the "eco-prophet": "One has
absolutely no trouble — none, zero, nil — believing him," she writes.
Newsweek
Admits 74 Percent of Gore Letters Are Critical, But Fails to Publish Any. Newsweek has done it
again: a few weeks after acknowledging half its letters were critical of Joe Biden (but publishing none
of them), they proclaimed their Al Gore cover was unpopular. Forty-six percent of their letter
writers wrote on the subject of Gore, and 74 percent of them were critical. Still, Newsweek ran
only positive letters.
Global cooling was announced in Newsweek April 28, 1978.
"There are ominous signs that the Earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these
changes may portend a drastic decline in food production — with serious political implications for
just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years
from now."
Unscientific American.
This month's cover story, "A Plan for a Sustainable Future: How to get all energy from wind, water and
solar power by 2030," is a prime example. Authors Mark Z. Jacobsen and Mark A. Delucchi are
respectively, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford and a research scientist at
UC Davis — which makes you wonder what's going on in academia these days. The article is
so full of half-truths, absurd omissions and blue-sky fantasy that it is hard to know where to begin.
Newsweek
Editor Calls Al Gore 'An Eco-Prophet'. "Al Gore's views on climate change are advancing as
rapidly as the phenomenon itself." Such was Newsweek science editor Sharon Begley's sub-headline of
her proselytizing piece "The Evolution Of An Eco-Prophet." Fortunately for the Goracle's loyal
followers, Begley didn't ask him how the planet could possibly have cooled the past eleven years
despite his warnings about the plague "carbon dioxide."
Media Cool To Global Warming.
Can it be true? Are the liberal media actually awakening to the climate reality that manmade global warming is a
hoax perpetrated by environmental fear-mongers? Marc Morano of Climate Depot thinks so. He is convinced that
2009 will be remembered as the tipping point in the coverage of global warming, and he provides plenty of evidence to
support that conclusion.
Cheers and Jeers for
the Post. On climate alarmism, the media and academia have sold out in the most wholehearted fashion one can
imagine in a free society, and there should be no gratitude but instead continued exposure of their folly and shame.
Greenhouse Gases at Highest Level Ever.
Greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere reached record highs in 2008, with carbon dioxide levels increasing faster
than previously, the U.N. weather agency said Monday [11/23/2009].
The Editor says...
It is the policy of this web site to quote no more than one sentence from any Associated Press story, which
is just as well because the story above, in my opinion, is a pack of lies. In the second sentence, the
reporter mentions that "detailed records" of greenhouse gas levels have been kept since 1998. That's
not true; measurements of carbon dioxide levels go back almost 200 years. During the previous two
centuries, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been much higher than they are now, with no adverse
effects. Moreover, the writer doesn't even mention water vapor, which accounts for about
95 percent of the greenhouse effect.
Cooling
Down the Cassandras. The [New York] Times reported that "scientists" — all of
them? — say the 11 years of temperature stability has "no bearing," none, on long-term
warming. Some scientists say "cool stretches are inevitable." Others say there may be growth of
Arctic sea ice, but the growth will be "temporary." ... Warnings about cataclysmic warming increase in
stridency as evidence of warming becomes more elusive.
U.S.
Media Ignoring About Face by Leading Global Warming Proponent. Imagine if the Pope suddenly announced that
the Catholic Church had been wrong for centuries about prohibiting priests from marrying. Would that be considered big
news? Of course. And yet something like that has happened in the field of global warming in which a major
scientist has announced that the world, in contrast to his previous belief, is actually cooling.
NY Times targets renewable energy.
Just as congress is set to tax fossil fuels out of the U.S. economy, the New York Times has reasserted its utterly foolish
demand that we tear out existing hydroelectric dams — the dams that provide most of our renewable energy in the
form of water-generated electricity.
Excuse Me, Your Leftism
is Showing. On March 2nd there was a demonstration in Washington D.C. It was billed as the largest
demonstration for green power/global warming awareness/stop dirty coal/let's all go live in a tepee, ever held.
It was attended by — are you ready for the number? — 2,500 people. That was the largest one ever! This
demonstration was covered by every major television and news service. No station or alleged newspaper gave any
coverage to opposing opinions. Ironically there was a blizzard that day another fact which, to the best of my
knowledge, was not noted by any major news outlet.
House's global warming
bill: $8B. It will cost nearly $8 billion over the next decade to pay for the
expanded federal bureaucracy needed to combat global warming under a bill passed by the House of
Representatives, a report by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says.
The Editor says...
Please note that $8 billion is just the cost of the bureaucracy, not including the
additional cost of energy (taxes) that would result from the Cap and Trade law.
Anthropogenic Global Warming? Not So
Fast. Proof that the science is not, in fact, settled, can be seen by looking at the
controversies within the ACS, APS, and AGU. The growing dissent at these organizations is major
news. Yet as far as I can detect there has not been any acknowledgment of this development in the
mainstream media.
Journalists protest Global
Warming spin cycle. Even journalists are beginning to revolt at tactics the government is now using
to spin the Global Warming myth. Controversy erupted this week at the World Conference of Science Journalists
over the National Science Foundation's "underwriting" of media projects. It turns out that the NSF, which is
heavily invested in propagating the Global Warming party line, has been quietly producing content for news outlets,
content which the casual observer might not recognize for the propaganda it is.
Examples of unmitigated bias:
Big Tropical Storms in
Atlantic Hit 1,000-Year High. The people of U.S. Gulf Coast have felt unusually battered by
big storms during the past few years. Now, it turns out their instincts are right. A new report
in the scientific journal Nature indicates that the last decade has seen, on average, more frequent
hurricanes than any time in the last 1,000 years.
The Editor says...
Wow! That's astonishing news, especially since there are no detailed records of such things
before World War II. National Geographic (dot com) says, "Accurate records of hurricane activity date
back 60 years for the Atlantic Ocean and the western Northern Pacific Ocean, but only about 30 years
elsewhere."*
Meat
creates half of all greenhouse gases. Climate change emissions from meat production are far
higher than currently estimated, according to a controversial new study that will fuel the debate on whether
people should eat fewer animal products to help the environment.
The Editor says...
People have been eating meat (and loving it!) for thousands of years, and it has never been
seen as a problem by any rational person.
Gore deserves
honorary degree from UT. Several colleagues and myself in UT's Department of Sociology write in
support of Gore's stance and the university's decision to award him an honorary degree. The scientific
evidence for anthropogenic global climate change may not be unequivocal, but few independent climate scientists
doubt that climate changes are evident and human caused.
Lizards succumb to global warming.
By 2080, global warming could result in one-fifth of the world's lizard species becoming extinct, a global
study has found.
The Editor says...
Without reading beyond the first sentence, I found plenty of bias indicators: (1) The headline announces
an event that hasn't happened, in order to get you to read the article. (2) How many times have you
read, "global warming could result in..." something or other by the end of this century? Any number of
things could happen. (3) Any time a new "study" comes to some shocking conclusion, it's a
safe bet that the "study" was funded by someone with a political axe to grind. (4) Lizards have
been around a long time, and are unlikely to be affected by a temperature change of one degree per century.
(5) The people who are so distressed about animals being wiped out by "climate change" are the same people
who preach "survival of the fittest" in public schools.
The E.P.A. Announces a New Rule on
Polluters. The Environmental Protection Agency unveiled a final rule on Thursday [5/14/2010] for
regulating major emitters of greenhouse gases, like coal-fired power plants, under the Clean Air Act.
The Editor says...
Beginning in the headline, the New York Times declares carbon dioxide to be a pollutant, when in reality
it is not. The article starts out with a mention of "greenhouse gases", but there is only one
"greenhouse gas" component that the new EPA rules (or the news media) address, as far as I know, and
that is carbon dioxide.
World's
fish stocks may vanish in 40 years. More than 20 million people employed in the fishing
industry may need to be retrained for other work over the next 40 years if the final collapse of fish
stocks in the world's oceans is to be avoided, the United Nations has warned.
The Editor says...
There has never been a shortage of fish, nor is there one today, but apparently the UN bureaucrats
want you to believe that it is possible to catch every fish in the ocean, and that when all the fish
are gone, everybody in the fishing industry can find work elsewhere... with the help of the UN.
Is
EU is Going Too Green with Light Bulb Ban? There must have been a twitch in the universe on
Wednesday evening [9/2/2009] as NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams — who has a history of
highlighting concerns of interest to the environmentalist left — actually ran a story highlighting
complaints by some Europeans that the "going green" movement is going too far as the European Union is banning
the use of old-fashioned lightbulbs...
'Nightly News' Brings Alarmism
Back. Anchor Brian Williams introduced an "Our Planet" segment by reminding viewers that the
Obama administration was remaining active on the issue of climate change. ... Then chief environmental affairs
correspondent Anne Thompson went back to the well for an old standby — that polar bears and penguins
were threatened by the thinning ice attributed to no other than climate change. ... Her report
didn't include any voice of dissent, though many exist.
Uncertain climate. A
person needn't be a buffoon or political hack to be skeptical of global warming. That would be news to The
Washington Post's news desk, however. A Post article on May 19 falsely reported that there is a "consensus"
among scientists and a growing portion of the American public that human carbon emissions are causing a dangerous,
long-term increase in worldwide temperatures. The facts, overwhelmingly, show no such consensus.
Embellishing exaggerations.
Before you paddle off for higher ground, remember Mr. Gore, a Democrat whose education and training are in government,
politics and the law, not science, has been known to embellish from time to time and leave out important facts. He
does this to raise the volume of his alarmism to attract "journalists" forever on the lookout for fodder for apocalyptic
reporting. This symbiosis is most closely replicated in nature by farm animals and dung beetles.
Did ABC Fabricate
Projections of an Underwater Southern Florida? Yesterday [6/16/2009], the White House released
an over-the-top climate report, meant to bolster waning public support (through fear-mongering) for the
administration's disastrous carbon taxation scheme. But as overly-alarming as was the document itself,
its portrayal by ABC's crack meteorologist Sam Champion on today's Good Morning America may have redefined
hysterical reporting.
ABC
Global Warming Special Makes Up Future, But It's Not 'Sci-Fi'. The world is about to end, or at least that's
according to ABC's "Good Morning America." The June 2 segment promoted a new special called "Earth 2100."
The program follows Lucy, a girl born in 2009, and her dramatic story about how if we don't take drastic measures
immediately climate change will cause droughts, floods, mass migration, and starvation. This may sound straight
from a science-fiction movie, but "Good Morning America" went to great lengths to assure viewers this wasn't science
fiction and that by airing this series they were changing journalism. Bob Woodruff, host of the special, called
making up what will happen in the future "a different kind of journalism." The segment quoted him saying, "not a
prediction of what will happen, but what might happen."
Climate Conspiracy.
The US Energy Secretary, a member of the President's Cabinet, has seriously suggested the world should paint its roads and
rooftops white to forestall "global warming" and Save The Planet. The media have widely, solemnly, and uncritically
reported this notion. Few have verified whether it makes any sense.
'World News' Airs Catastrophic Global
Warming story for Earth Day. It just wouldn't be Earth Day without a catastrophic global warming segment
from the network news, so ABC correspondent Bill Blakemore delivered just that April 22. Blakemore warned
viewers of "World News with Charles Gibson" that carbon emissions were causing disastrous changes in the air and the
sea and blamed the United States in his one-sided report, even though the U.S. recently dropped to second place in
global carbon output.
Deliberate misrepresentation.
The New York Times guidelines for staff writers on "Journalistic Ethics" begin by stating the principles that all journalists
should respect: impartiality and neutrality; integrity; and avoidance of conflicts of interest. Andrew Revkin's
front-page article on Friday, 24 April, 2009, falsely alleging that a coalition of energy corporations had for many
years acted like tobacco corporations, misrepresenting advice from its own scientists about the supposed threat of "global
warming", offends grievously against all of these principles.
NBC Affiliate
Meteorologist Rips MSNBC for Apocalyptic Global Warming Special. NBC Universal and its networks
have been criticized for the global warming alarmism it parades on a regular basis. However, now the
criticism is coming from its own affiliates. Prior to its April 26 airing on MSNBC, shows on NBC
had been promoting the first part of the climate special "Future Earth" — an MSNBC program that
used computer animation to show the possibilities of a polar icecap melting. That prompted Bill Steffen,
a meteorologist for NBC's Grand Rapids, Mich. affiliate, to call out MSNBC for that special.
It's Alternative
Media That's Cooling Global Warming Hysteria. The latest Rasmussen poll reports that the lowest
number of voters ever polled —one-in-three —believe that global warming is caused by human
activity. That's an astonishing figure, especially considering the all-out green propaganda assault the
mainstream media (MSM) exposes the public to on a daily basis. ... So despite a MSM that spoon feeds its audience
the latest alarmist [nonsense] about how manmade CO2 kills polar bears, threatens coastal cities and islands,
incubates all manner of pestilence and so on and so on, the number of people actually buying into their
still-unsubstantiated carbo-chondria continues to shrink.
They Think You're
Stupid. Yesterday, the BBC ran an article with the headline "Earth warming faster than thought." Yet,
as we increasingly see in this context ... the piece itself offers no evidence of any such thing. It merely reveals
claims of impacts that modelers project would result from a large warming — impacts greater than previously
asserted by others, as is how things work when it comes to global warming.
Media Credibility,
Not Ice Caps, In Meltdown. Eco-warriors and media hype aside, the fact is, as we head into 2009,
that the world's ice mass has been expanding not contracting. Which will surprise evening news junkies
fed a diet of polar bears floating about on ice floes and snow shelves falling into the oceans. But if a
whole series of reports on ice growth in the Arctic, the Antarctic and among glaciers are right, then it is
truth in the mainstream media (MSM) that's in meltdown not the polar ice caps.
Increased
Number Think Global Warming Is "Exaggerated". Although a majority of Americans believe the
seriousness of global warming is either correctly portrayed in the news or underestimated, a record-high
41% now say it is exaggerated. This represents the highest level of public skepticism about mainstream
reporting on global warming seen in more than a decade of Gallup polling on the subject.
Houston
Sees Record Low Ozone. The Houston metropolitan area, often cited as having the nation's most
polluted air, exceeded federal ozone standards for a record-low 16 days in 2008. The official tally
from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality contradicts a recent claim by the Houston Chronicle that
"the region's goal of consistently healthy air remains elusive."
54%
Say Media Hype Global Warming Dangers. Fifty-four percent (54%) of U.S. voters say the news
media make global warming appear worse than it really is. Only 21% say the media present an accurate
picture, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Thirteen percent (13%) think
the media make climate change appear to be better than it truly is. Twelve percent (12%) don't have
an opinion.
When
the Warmest in History Isn't. Here's another reason why people don't trust newspapers. ... When
it comes to global warming, newspapers play up stories that reinforce the prevalent the-sky-is-falling belief
that global warming is human-caused and catastrophic. But if a study or scientist does not portend the
end of the world as we know it, it rarely rates as news.
Pessimistic Reporting, Optimistic
Data. Washington Post correspondant Juliet Eilperin, in her 12-26-08 report entitled "New climate change
estimates more pessimistic," dutifully surveys the latest bleak findings of the climate change community. ... Three years
ago what NASA quantified as an alarming loss of annual ice loss from Greenland was easily demonstrated at that time to be
an insignificant loss, and today NASA's updated data appears to suggest the annual rate of global polar ice loss has
actually decreased since then.
Top TV Networks
Spread False Arctic Sea Ice Scare. High-profile media reports predicting the North Pole would lose its
ice cover failed to materialize in 2008, as less Arctic sea ice melted than in 2007 and open water came nowhere near
the North Pole. On the July 28, 2008 NBC Nightly News, reporter Anne Thompson warned ominously of ice loss
in the Arctic. "This summer, some scientists say that ice could retreat so dramatically that open water covers
the North Pole, so much so that you could sail across it."
Media Elite vs
Informed Readers. A most ill-informed, intemperate editorial on energy policy sadly was
published in the Kansas City Star this weekend, ... but thanks to the market-based, democratizing power of the
internet, so-called elite media opinion can more easily be exposed for the absurdity it can sometimes be.
BBC abandons 'impartiality' on warming. Londoners might
have been startled last Monday [1/26/2009] to see a giant mock-up of a polar bear on an iceberg, floating on
the Thames outside the Palace of Westminster. They might not have been so surprised to learn, first,
that this was a global warming propaganda stunt and, second, that the television company behind it is
part-owned by the BBC.
Sam
Champion Uses Freezing Cold to Tout Global Warming. On Thursday's "Good Morning America,"
weatherman and global warming alarmist Sam Champion slipped some reassuring words about the validity of
climate change into his report on the bone chilling temperatures hitting much of the country. After
admitting that NASA had declared 2008 to be the coldest year since 2000, he added, "But they [NASA] caution
this was caused in part by a cooling La Nina in the pacific and warn global warming is still playing an
important part in our changing climate."
'Today'
Begins Annual Global Warming Scare Week. The full "Today" show cast went to "The Ends of the
Earth," as a part of NBC Universal's "Green Week," all in an effort to, once again, do the bidding of the
likes of Al Gore, to create hysteria about global warming. With live reports from Matt Lauer
worrying about reefs off the coast of Belize, Meredith Vieira fearful about drought conditions in
Australia, Ann Curry watching the snow caps melt on Mt. Kilimanjaro and Al Roker troubled by glacier
extinction in Iceland, the cast pushed the green agenda throughout Monday's "Today" show.
Let's clear up that Mt. Kilimanjaro business before going any further... Global Warming and Mt.
Kilimanjaro. [Scroll down] Climate activists claim the receding ice is evidence of the need for
developed countries to reduce carbon output. Actually, the glaciers on Mount Kilimanjaro have been receding
since 1890, according to research by G. Kaser, et al., published in the International Journal of
Climatology (2004). They note that when Ernest Hemingway published "The Snows of Kilimanjaro" in 1936, the
mountain had already lost more than half its surface ice area in the previous 56 years. This is more
than it has lost in the 70 years since.
Did NBC Risk Employee Lives in a
Green Agenda Stunt? NBC's Ann Curry aborted her quest to find proof of global warming at the peak of
Tanzania's Mt. Kilimanjaro. But at about a half mile shy of her goal, she did find proof that sub-zero degree
temperatures and thin, low oxygen concentration air might do a 52 year old woman and her crew serious harm,
particularly when altitude safety rules take the back seat to ideology.
When 'green' is
shorthand for environmental idiocy: Consider the recent "lights out" campaign … the World
Wildlife Fund (WWF) quickly called it an amazing success. Newspapers around the world dutifully wrote
feel-good stories about how engaged environmentalists celebrated as the lights went out around the world.
Nobody, it seemed, wanted to spoil the party by pointing that the event was immensely futile, that it
highlighted a horrible metaphor, or that it caused much higher overall pollution.
Networks Wrong On Global
Warming Again; Arctic Ice Still There. So much for the media hype about Arctic ice disappearing
this summer. Less than three months ago, NBC's Anne Thompson was warning ominously of ice loss.
"But this summer, some scientists say that ice could retreat so dramatically that open water covers the North
Pole, so much so that you could sail across it." Both are still with us — the ice and the
hype. According to a September 16 National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) report, such
predictions were off by 1.74 million square miles.
12 Facts about Global Climate Change That You
Won't Read in the Popular Press. [1] Temperatures have been cooling since 2002, even as carbon
dioxide has continued to rise. [2] Carbon dioxide is a trace gas and by itself will produce little
warming. Also, as CO2 increases, the incremental warming is less, as the effect is logarithmic so the
more CO2, the less warming it produces. [3] CO2 has been totally uncorrelated with temperature
over the last decade, and significantly negative since 2002. [4] CO2 is not a pollutant, but a
naturally occurring gas. Together with chlorophyll and sunlight, it is an essential ingredient in
photosynthesis and is, accordingly, plant food.
Global
Warming Censored. Global warming crusader Al Gore repeatedly claims the climate change
"debate's over." It isn't, but the news media clearly agree with him. Global warming skeptics
rarely get any say on the networks, and when their opinions are mentioned it is often with barbs like "cynics"
or "deniers" thrown in to undermine them. Consistently viewers are being sent only one message from
ABC, CBS and NBC: global warming is an environmental catastrophe and it's mankind's fault.
"The mean global temperature, at least
as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years
sea level has stopped rising. Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at
a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980."
— David
Deming, PhD. Warmist hysteria
intensifies as temperatures plunge. The willingness of media outlets to offer self-evident
tripe in the face of both the data of the past decade and the immediate experience of people in their daily
lives right now has to be considered a form of hysteria. Both the Associated Press and the newspapers
which collectively own it are in serious economic trouble, with substantial layoffs accomplished and likely
to be repeated, and questions about their survivability evident to everyone. Instead of focusing on
improving performance and survivability, the organs putting forth this claptrap jeopardize their already
shaky reputations. It is suicide by propaganda.
Biased Media's New Bailiwick: Recession
Calls. During an election year, the media's constant use or expectation of "recession" does matter. Sen.
Barack Obama, the Democratic Party's likely nominee, already considers the U.S. economy "in a recession." So are
we — at least as economists commonly define the term? No, not even close.
Gaiag Me With
a Spoon. No subject, not even Barack Obama and the New Camelot, inspires reporters to drop any
pretense of balance and objectivity like the Environment. Green is the only way to go. Global
Warming is likely to wreak havoc on your flowerbeds by the end of next week, it's all the fault of that
parasitic species, Industrial Man, and anybody who disagrees is either a hopeless simpleton or a paid agent
of Big Oil.
What's not to like?
Time magazine's recent piece "10 Things You Can Like About $4 Gas" exposes the twisted thinking of watermelons
(green on the outside, Red on the inside). While acknowledging Americans' only recourse today is to
"adapt just by suffering," the article celebrates the benefits of record gasoline prices.
Taking Us Back To Mud Huts And
Loincloths. Time's Joe Klein probably thought he was being clever when he wrote his late June
essay on the evils of cooling headlined "Kill Your Air Conditioner." Instead, he wrote yet another
chapter in the left's book of environmental silliness. … Predictably, Klein believes Americans should
sacrifice. Sounds noble, but he leaves out the part in which sacrifice slowly mutates into government
rationing.
John Coleman vs Al Gore:
Regular readers of this website are well aware of the Global Warming scam. Poking holes in the AGW theory is becoming
child's play. But we have to keep at it because the general public and major presidential candidates are not so well
informed. A large percentage of the public still get their news from the mainstream media. And of course the
MSM is in the tank with Al Gore and the global warming believers.
Has Big Media Global Warming
Bias Begun to Endanger the Public? Why did the AP and the [Boston] Globe de-emphasize Maine officials' snowpack
warning, especially when doing so endangered the property and safety of the public they are supposed to serve? The
Globe is owned by the New York Times Company. Both the Times and the Associated Press are heavily invested in the myth of
Global Warming….
TV weather coverage intentionally exaggerates warming sympotoms. Global Whining vs. the
Truth: The bank not only referenced the name of the town, but had a thermometer that was several
degrees off, thanks to the heat absorbing black asphalt on the adjacent multi-lane street and the pavement of
the nearby parking lot. The producer knew 105° would easily read 110°. On air, I always
quickly explained the reason for the soaring temperature reading for our audience, but it was not enough.
The misleading visual message was absolutely clear: 110° in Walnut Creek -- another sign of climate
doom!
The Editor says...
I can tell you from personal experience as a broadcast engineer that on at least one occasion I have been
asked by a news reporter to use photographic tricks in order to make summertime haze look like pollution.
Many people who call themselves "journalists" are really environmental or political activists. These
are the people who will tell you that they got into broadcasting so they could "make a difference" and
change the world. But an objective reporter does not "make a difference." If that happens, the
report is probably biased or very selective with the facts.
My Big Fat Green Wedding
and Other Media Nonsense: From carbon footprint calculators to electricity-free weddings, the
media's promotion of anti-global warming hysteria is warming up with the approach of Earth Day on April 22.
ABC's Good Morning America was actually running a Countdown to Earth Day every morning, beginning last
week, as if we were all like kids waiting for Christmas Day. Maybe that's how it is at Al Gore's house.
ABC Wants You to Fight Global
Warming One Cheeseburger at a Time. It's not enough for the media to try to brainwash the public
the Earth is in peril due to global warming. Now they're telling you what to eat. This is something
you might expect to hear at a PETA rally, but instead it was ABC's May 13 "World News with Charles Gibson"
telling you to curb your beef consumption to lower greenhouse gas emissions.
What Americans 'Know' about Air Pollution
Is False. Activists and regulators depend on public fear and outrage over air pollution to
maintain and enhance their power and budgets. As the polls show, their phony gloom and doom stories
have been all too successful in misleading Americans to overestimate the risks we face. The
exaggerations and fabrications have now been repeated so often that they have become "common
knowledge." Journalists should be acting as a check on these distortions, but they are
not. Journalists, like much of the public, consider environmentalists and regulators
to be virtuous guardians of the public good.
The Media's 'Green is Good'
Philosophy Strangles our Energy Policy. [ANWR is] the kind of place that makes Siberia look like
Miami Beach. That hasn't stopped more than a decade of propaganda campaigns portraying something akin to
an Alaskan Eden and warning of threats to wildlife. Such stonewalling works in Washington.
Politicians won't lead when they risk being seen as anti- the media's crusade du jour. Lately, the
media pound us with the "green is good" mantra. Anyone who dares challenge it is called a "denier" or a
tool of oil interests, as opposed to someone who is just worried about our economy and our energy needs.
Facts beat talking points. The
problem with the energy debate is that most of the "facts" we hear on the radio and cable news are really just
talking points from folks who mostly don't know what they are talking about. The Democrats — as if
they all received the same e-mail Wednesday — are arguing that the oil companies have plenty of
places to drill, and isn't it very curious that they aren't?
ABC's Shameful Global Warming Character Assassination.
The nasty tone and gutter tactics of global warming alarmists and their media allies reached a new low on Easter
Sunday [3/30/2008] when ABC aired on its nightly news and published on its Web site a character assassination
of prestigious scientist S. Fred Singer. Singer, one of the most respected and impeccably credentialed
atmospheric scientists in the world, deserves much better than the media mafia hit ABC delivered on him.
Facts Not Fear on Air Pollution:
Air pollution has been declining for decades across the United States, yet most Americans still believe air
pollution is a growing problem and a serious threat to their health. The reason: most information
on air pollution from environmentalists, regulators and journalists — the public's main sources for
information on the environment — is false. Air quality in America's cities is better than ever.
Propaganda as Journalism: One of the
vilest, most venomous pieces of writing masquerading as journalism was the Newsweek cover story on August 13,
2007. With the sun as the backdrop, which in the piece got a minor supporting role for global warming,
compared to man-produced CO2, the magazine screamed "Global Warming is a Hoax" * and the asterisk led to
the clincher as a large enough footnote: "Or so claim well-funded naysayers who still reject the
overwhelming evidence of climate change. Inside the denial machine."
It
may be cold, but CBC reassures us that calamity still looms. Ah, the weather. … How cold is it? It's
so cold the CBC had to rush to assure all of us that global warming is still a big, big problem. With record snow
falls, record cold snaps, the return of sea ice to the north, snow in the Middle East and a deep freeze in China, any
sensible person might begin to wonder and even have doubts about global-warming theory and climate change. A little
skepticism might begin to creep into the public sphere and threaten to undermine public belief in global warming.
The
media snowjob on global warming: [Scroll down] The bias is that whatever the IPCC and its
defenders claim, the Washington Post and most other outlets report without scrutiny. Meanwhile, the
motives and sources of all sceptics are instantly suspected and derided.
In 2008, a 100 Percent Chance of Alarm.
A year ago, British meteorologists made headlines predicting that the buildup of greenhouse gases would help make 2007 the
hottest year on record. At year's end, even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was
not a new record — it was actually lower than any year since 2001 — the BBC confidently proclaimed, "2007 Data Confirms
Warming Trend." When the Arctic sea ice last year hit the lowest level ever recorded by satellites, it was big news
and heralded as a sign that the whole planet was warming. When the Antarctic sea ice last year reached the highest
level ever recorded by satellites, it was pretty much ignored.
The
red, red Koyapigaktoruk comes bob, bob, bobbin' along. Always interested in a good global warming hook, the
press was all over this. … Alas, as with most over-simplified global warming claptrap, more thought goes into coming up
with the alarmist concept than in actually looking into whether or not it is true….
NASA measures global
temperatures. NASA is spending around 20 million dollars a year to deploy and monitor 3000 robot buoys
around the worlds oceans and the data coming in doesn't support their theory on global warming, in fact it turns out the
world has cooled slightly in the last five years. It's surprising the mainstream media hasn't picked up on this, you
would think the fact that the earth is cooling would be front page news.
Time Magazine subsection
Time
magazine replaces flag in famous Iwo Jima photograph with tree for global warming story. Furious
World War II veterans called for a boycott of one of America's most influential and respected magazines today
over a controversial picture on its front cover. Next week's Time magazine cover is based on the famous
shot by war photographer Joe Rosenthal of marines raising the US flag on Iwo Jima during the bloody battle in
the Pacific.
Time Bomb: Time
calls green "the new red, white and blue" and likens global warming to the fight against Nazism and fascism.
As it insults World War II vets, the magazine seeks to impose a tyranny all its own.
Voters
Don't Care About Global Warming, But They Should. Voters must care, but not for Al Gore's
reasons. Plenty of scientists say we don't have to fear a global warming apocalypse. The global
food riots stemming from forced biofuel policy serve as a chilling clue of what we do have to fear.
Instead of global warming causing food shortages, U.S. government policy has done that. Instead of rising
sea levels, we must fear rising tax levels. Instead of ice caps melting away, we must fear our jobs
evaporating. Elevating the earth's temperature to the prominence of our enemies in World War II is
abominable. Ignoring what the next president could do to us is dangerous.
Time Fights
Carbon Emissions; Military Fights Evil. The state of the liberal mind is on display on this week's
cover of Time magazine. The already notorious cover takes the iconic photograph of U.S. Marines planting
the American flag on Iwo Jima and substitutes a tree for the flag. Why Time's editors did this
explains much about contemporary liberalism.
Chickenfeedhawks:
If the tree-raising is Iwo Jima, a one-degree increase isn't exactly Pearl Harbor. But General Stengel wants us to
engage in preemptive war. The editors of Time would be the first to deplore such saber-rattling applied to, say, Iran's
nuclear program, but it has become the habit of progressive opinion to appropriate the language of war for everything but
actual war.
Time
Magazine's Environmental War Whoop: No doubt Time's editors think they will be celebrated in poetry and song
for generations to come for their high-minded cleverness. Still, if the symbolism wasn't clear enough, Time writer
Bryan Walsh spells it out: "Green is the new red, white and blue." There are any number of problems here,
starting with the fact that this is simply a lie. Green is not the new red, white and blue. Concern over climate
change may be the most honorable and vital thing imaginable. But if "the red, white and blue" means anything, it means
patriotism or love of country. Patriotism and environmentalism simply aren't synonymous terms.
Earlier in Time...
Time Shills for Global Warming Alarmist
Site. Time magazine is at it again. This time, it's going beyond unquestioning coverage of global
warming alarmism to act as a public relations agent for a global warming alarmist's campaign. A Time.com article
by Bryan Walsh encouraged readers to go to an environmentalist Web site because it might be their last chance to see
the "polar world."
The Editor says...
Please note: One degree per century is not enough to erase the polar ice caps.
Time Magazine Gives 51 Ways to
Save Planet, Including Taxes and Regulation. The magazine especially doesn't like anyone who
doubts any aspect of the global warming mantra. According to one article, if a parade of disasters
"didn't quiet most of the remaining global-warming doubters, the hurricane-driven destruction of New Orleans
did." The story then went about blaming Hurricane Katrina on global warming.
The Media are Far From Objective on Climate
Change. Journalists pledged to be neutral, long ago gave up their watchdog role to become lapdogs
for one position. The media became alarmist claiming the planet is at a "tipping point" as if at any
moment everything would go over the edge. An April 2006 issue of Time magazine pushed readers over that
edge with 24 pages of advocacy, claiming: "The debate is over. Global warming is upon
us -- with a vengeance." CBS's Scott Pelley, who covers the environment, actually compared climate
change skeptics with Holocaust deniers and claimed: "There becomes a point in journalism where
striving for balance becomes irresponsible."
Media Frenzy Over Global Warming. The
campaign to convince us all of the coming disasters caused by global warming continues at hurricane force.
There have been gloom-and-doom cover stories in Time magazine and Vanity Fair, and one-sided stories on ABC
News and CBS's 60 Minutes. The problem is that the stories start with the premise that global
warming is here, primarily caused by human activity, and that this is the overwhelming consensus of the
scientific community. As a result, rarely do any of the reports give any sort of a fair representation
of the views by the thousands of scientists who disagree….
Time Bemoans 'Doomed' Wildlife
Refuge: The media took little pain to conceal their displeasure that the Bush Administration won
House approval for oil exploitation in Alaska. Time Magazine ignored entirely the possibility of
coexistence between industry and the environment, unfairly skewing the issue.
Not So Hot. If a scientific
paper appeared in a major journal saying that the planet has warmed twice as much as previously thought, that
would be front-page news in every major paper around the planet. But what would happen if a paper was
published demonstrating that the planet may have warmed up only half as much as previously thought?
Nothing.
'Nightly News' Gives One Side
of Antarctica Ice Changes. Defying the tenets of ethical journalism has become the norm for some
media outlets when it the issue is global warming. "NBC Nightly News" was no exception. On
January 14, "Nightly News" aired a biased alarmist report of changes in the ice shelf in Antarctica
during its "Our Planet" segment, blaming "manmade carbon dioxide" for the shift and ignoring any other
possibilities.
Evening Newscasts Not Sure
Energy Bill is Enough. President Bush just signed an epic energy bill that will increase fuel
efficiency standards in automobiles, increase biofuel requirements for gasoline, and phase out incandescent
light bulbs. Two network newscasts couldn't decide if the "massive" changes are enough.
Two Out of Three Networks
Support Banning Incandescent Bulbs. How many networks does it take to change a lightbulb?
Two. "CBS Evening News" and ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" both excluded anti-regulatory
opinions from segments about a coalition that wants to ban incandescent light bulbs in favor of compact
fluorescents. Only NBC "Nightly News" offered a statement from its parent company, General Electric,
supporting consumer choice during the March 14 broadcasts.
Anatomy of a Fake Consensus: Most
scientists (more than 80 percent) believe some global warming has occurred. The best estimate is
that global temperatures have risen about 1 degree Fahrenheit during the past 100 years. A
majority of scientists, but certainly not all, believe the human presence is responsible for some part of
the warming that occurred after 1940. Most scientists, however, don't agree on how much of the modern
warming is the result of natural cycles and how much is due to human activities.
GE's Househugger TV
commercial. The voice-over commentary of GE's "house hugger" commercial says: "Introducing
a new way to build a home, with advanced GE lighting and technology that not only helps to reduce energy use,
but greenhouse gas emissions as well." Does false advertising become truthful just because the falsehood
is communicated in the context of an obvious flight of fancy?
Happy Earth Day. More than 30 years
ago political scientist Anthony Downs discerned what he called the "issue-attention cycle," a five-stage process
by which the public and especially the news media grow alarmed over an issue, agitate for action, generate piles
of scary headlines, and then begin to draw back as we come to recognize that the problem has been exaggerated or
misconceived, and the price tag for action comes in.
MSNBGreen: "We have turned out
the lights in the studio," NBC's Bob Costas told viewers of Sunday's Dallas Cowboys-Philadelphia Eagles game,
"to kick off a week that will include more than 150 hours of programming designed to raise awareness
about environmental issues." … On a typical game day, a large football stadium burns about 65,000 kilowatt
hours of electricity and 35,000 cubic feet of natural gas. The cars driving to the game spew about 200
metric tons of CO2 (and that assumes nobody's driving SUVs or RVs, which is like assuming tailgaters are
eating only sushi). There's also the electricity used to broadcast the game and to watch it. But
thank goodness Costas turned off the studio lights for a minute or two.
Here is an example of the biased reporting on MSNBC: EPA experts detail warming's health risks.
Government scientists detailed a rising death toll from heat waves, wildfires, disease and smog caused
by global warming in an analysis the White House buried so it could avoid regulating greenhouse gases.
CNN Meteorologist: Manmade
Global Warming Theory 'Arrogant'. Unprecedented snow in Las Vegas has some scratching their
heads — how can there be global warming with this unusual cold and snowy weather? CNN
Meteorologist Chad Myers had never bought into the notion that man can alter the climate and the Vegas
snowstorm didn't impact his opinion.
CNN Predicts Possible 'Century
of Fires' Due to Global Warming. CNN exploited a national tragedy on October 23 by finding
a way to blame global warming for wildfires. During the October 23 "Anderson Cooper 360: In
the Line of Fire," Cooper reported from Southern California saying, "People are wondering if these fires are a
result of global warming in some way."
BBC folds, then folds
again. The BBC appears to have serially caved-in to global warmist activism. There was much
online discussion this weekend about a Friday BBC global warming / La Nina related article suddenly changing
its wording and with it — its apparent balance. Today, news that an eco-activist has smugly
taken credit for coercing the change has joined the conversation.
Al Gore buddy owner of sunken
ship that left huge carbon footprint on Antarctic Ocean floor. You'd never read
this in the mainstream media: The owner of MS Explorer that sank, leaving a huge carbon
footprint at the bottom of the Antarctic Ocean Friday [11/23/2007] is an acolyte of
teensy-weensy carbon footprint crusader Al Gore. G.A.P. Adventures CEO and Explorer
owner, Bruce Poon Tip and Gore have similar ideals, "filling their schedules with speaking
engagements on environmental change to educate global audiences."
Media
bias proves to be a Gray area. It's not that [Dr. William] Gray is a media pariah. His
annual forecast on the number of hurricanes is dutifully reported and prominently displayed. But when
Gray talks about global warming — he's on the record as a strong skeptic of man-made global
warming — the media barely notice.
Weather Channel Founder Blasts Network.
The Weather Channel has lost its way, according to John Coleman, who founded the channel in 1982. Coleman told an
audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 3 in New York that he is highly critical
of global warming alarmism. "The Weather Channel had great promise, and that's all gone now because they've made
every mistake in the book on what they've done and how they've done it and it's very sad," Coleman said.
"... Let's hope the new owners can recapture the vision and stop reporting the traffic, telling us what
to think and start giving us useful weather information."
Weather
Stations Giving Bad Global Warming Data — MSM MIA. A few months ago, the blogosphere
and talk radio were abuzz with the story of how the nation's various weather stations and temperature reading
devices have been improperly located or badly constructed and how the data received from these improper devices
must be suspected as inaccurate. The MSM briefly mentioned this story but quickly dropped it like the
proverbial hot rock. … Do the researchers who turn this inaccurate data into justifications for global
warming theories really want to have proper data?
Global Warming
Lie of the Day: We're used to reporters making up scare stories about global warming, but when
scientists start to make up "drop dead" headlines, things must really be getting desperate in the climate
game. But yesterday, we were told that you'll get a heart attack from global warming. Fortunately,
we can look up the original research on the National Library of Science website, and waddayaknow? People
die of heart attacks whenever it's really hot. Or when it is really cold!
Scientists
Send Letter to UN: Give Up Futile Climate Change Battle. If a former vice president with
absolutely no formal scientific training in climatology or meteorology makes a statement about the world coming
to an end due to rising temperatures, media will fawn over him like teenyboppers in the presence of Elvis
Presley. Yet, if more than 100 scientists from around the world send a letter to the Secretary General
of the United Nations urging him and his organization to stop wasting time, resources, and money fighting a
futile climate change battle, crickets will be heard in newsrooms around the country.
Teresa
Heinz's Favorite Scientist: If you've paid any attention to the global warming debate, you've
heard of James Hansen. Hansen is the politicized NASA climate scientist who virtually invented the global
warming issue in the broiling summer of 1988 when he was the star doomsayer at Senate hearings called by
Al Gore. Since then, Hansen has received better press than Mother Teresa. In hundreds of interviews
and glowing profiles, the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies has been treated as objective
and/or infallible by an adoring mainstream liberal media.
The Money and Connections Behind Al Gore's Carbon
Crusade. Al Gore's campaign against global warming is shifting into high gear. Reporters and
commentators follow his every move and bombard the public with notice of his activities and opinions. But
while the mainstream media promote his ideas about the state of planet Earth, they are mostly silent about the
dramatic impact his economic proposals would have on America. And journalists routinely ignore evidence
that he may personally benefit from his programs. Would the romance fizzle if Gore's followers realized
how much their man stands to gain?
ABC's GMA Touts Environmentalist Who Boycotts
Toilet Paper. On Thursday's [5/10/2007] Good Morning America, the ABC program touted a liberal
New Yorker who is so concerned about the environment that he refuses to use toilet paper. GMA devoted eight
and a half minutes of the May 10 show to promoting the cause of Colin Beaven, a man who, in addition to his
bathroom stance, refuses to buy anything in packaging, won't use transportation, even elevators, and insists
that all his food be grown within 250 miles. … Somehow, the word "liberal" didn't appear in the GMA
segments. If this man isn't a left-winger, who is?
Media Promote Global Warming Fraud. On
the matter of global intervention to stop global warming, there seems to be no need for scientific evidence to
justify what is shaping up as a global carbon tax of 35 cents a gallon of gas on the American people.
Our media want the public to believe that the same organization that gave us the oil-for-food scandal can be
trusted on its dire predictions of calamity from alleged man-made global warming.
Twisting Science to Fit
the Global Warming Template: The global warming crowd does not take kindly to being contradicted,
either by critics or data. Of course, critics can be defamed and data can be skewed. But unless the
critics can be silenced, they can fight back and expose phony data. When it begins to look like predictions
of doom are not turning out sufficiently catastrophic, a full Orwell is called for. The media mobilize their
templates to completely re-cast the information.
Newsweek climate article
an 'editorial rag,' says warming skeptic. Newsweek magazine is being compared to
"editorial screed that violates basic standards of journalism" over a cover story that refers to global
warming skeptics as "deniers." The cover story, titled "The Truth About Denial," claims so-called
global warming "deniers" are a "well-funded machine."
The Campaign Against Bottled Water
Bottled
H20: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly. It's currently the best-selling beverage in the
country — and with global consumption rising — bottled water is averaging a
growth rate of 6% per year since 2008 with sales expected to reach about 233 billion liters
this year, overtaking soda by about 1.3%, according to market research group Canadean. [...] But if
you're spotted drinking from one[,] you may get some glares. The plastic water bottle industry
has been a lightning rod because not enough consumers are recycling. San Francisco even made
moves when they banned the sale of them last year.
And
Still More Environmental Epic Fail. First, all those places like universities (natch)
that are banning bottled water because there are too many plastic bottles in the waste stream? It
isn't working. (By the way, the bottled water craze was partly set off by environmentalists to begin
with — from their unfounded warnings about "dangerous" U.S. tap water that isn't dangerous
at all. [...])
Battling bottle ban in
Concord. A new shot has been fired in the battle in Concord over the plastic water bottle ban, with opponents now vowing to
repeal the controversial law — considered the first of its kind in the nation — that went into effect Tuesday [1/1/2013].
Bottled Water Going the Way of the 20-ounce Soda.
New York City is raging against salt, large sodas, and baby formula, allegedly for health reasons. San Francisco bans plastic grocery bags (as do many
Eastern LI towns), they regulate Happy Meal toys for sustainability and they have their eye on halting circumcisions because they're crazy. San Francisco
is also the city that wants to install GPS in cars so they can monitor peoples' travel and then tax them for it.
Hacks
nickel-and-diming us again. People are now drinking a lot more bottled water. So what's
the answer? Tax the water bottles -- slap a nickel deposit on every Poland Spring. "The only way
it's a tax," sniffed state Sen. Cynthia Creem of Newton, the moonbat pushing this latest tax hike, "is if
they don't turn in the bottle." This is a variation on the Turnpike argument. You don't like
paying the tolls, pal, well, you got an option... It's called Route 9.
In Defense of Plastic. It's
interesting to note that the current American obsession with bottled water came as a result of environmentalist
scares over possible chemicals in municipal tap water. Green radicals like the National Resources Defense
Council (NRDC) spewed horror stories of tap water full of rocket fuel, arsenic, germs, feces, lead, and pesticides.
Plastic bottles provided the solution. Now the pendulum has swung and we're all supposed to forget the
earlier scare mongering over tap water and obey the new scare over water bottles.
ABC Promotes Kicking the Bottled
Water. Stop and drop that water bottle, you're hurting the environment. That was the message
promoted by ABC "World News" on the July 8 broadcast. The segment blasted the bottled water industry
and promoted the decision of a "venerable" restaurant to take bottled water off the menu. "With every sip
are you actually hurting the environment?" teased anchor Dan Harris, before Eric Horng's report made an
undisputed claim that you are.
'World News' Hits the (Water)
Bottle Again. It must be summer rerun season because the July 9 ABC "World News with Charles
Gibson" report on bottled water sounded a lot like the one from a day earlier. For the second consecutive
night, ABC aired a story criticizing the bottled water industry for the environmental cost.
Bottled Water Bash: Networks
Continue Assault. Bottled water has been attacked recently for environmental damage, but now
Aquafina's bottler, PepsiCo is under fire for not previously disclosing the source of its water.
'Nightly News' Continues 'War'
on Bottled Water. In recent months, ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN have designated the bottled water
industry as the environmental "bad guy." The media have claimed the bottled water industry uses an
unnecessary amount of energy to bottle and ship its product — and therefore contributes to global
warming.
Bottled water:
No longer cool? Critics are asking: Why drink bottled water? After all, it's
pricey. … Empty bottles add to litter and solid waste. And, as a rule, bottled water is no
safer or healthier than the H2O that flows from municipal water systems. What's more, blind taste
tests, while wholly unscientific, often show that few people can distinguish between bottled and tap water.
Campaigners launch fresh attack on bottled water.
[An environmental group called] Sustain accused consumers and drinks firms of "bottling out" of their duty to protect the
environment and tackle climate change by continuing to buy bottled water in record quantities. The group's new report,
published this week, urges consumers to drink tap water "to save the planet". The move may put extra pressure on
drinks firms at a time when environmental concerns are in the public spotlight.
IBWA launches pro-bottled water
media campaign. The International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) is launching a
major media campaign in the United States in response to recent negative stories in the media
about bottled water and campaigns against it by advocacy groups and some city mayors.
UK bottled water boom
defies cynics. Bottled water sales are booming in Britain thanks to a new generation of
consumers who see the sector as more than glorified tap water and better for their health and well-being
than fizzy drinks.
Bottled water
'is immoral'. Drinking bottled water should be made as unfashionable as smoking, according to a
[British] government adviser. "We have to make people think that it's unfashionable just as we have
with smoking. We need a similar campaign to convince people that this is wrong," said Tim Lang, the
Government's naural resources commissioner.
Mayors' bottle ban is no specious attack on Big
Water. U.S. mayors, having solved all other problems, resolved at their annual conference, in
Miami, to stop providing bottled water for employees and guests. ... And now it sounds like they will, 250
mayors or so signing on to sing the praises of their own municipal water systems while also sheepishly having
to confess that's where bottled water probably comes from in the first place.
US mayors ban bottled water.
The US Conference of Mayors on Monday [6/23/2008] passed a resolution calling for a phasing out of bottled water by
municipalities and promoting the importance of public water supplies. The vote comes amid increasing
environmental concerns about the use of bottled water because of its use of plastic and energy costs to
transport drinking supplies.
Bottled Water Tax Brings Only a Trickle
of Revenue. The city of Chicago's bottled water tax, which went into effect in January, may bring in
less than half of what revenue forecasters first said it would raise. Consumers appear to be buying their
water anywhere but in the city.
Bottled water industry fights back,
launches ad campaign to rebut bottled water bans. "The bottled water industry has
recently been the target of misguided and confusing criticism by activist groups and a handful
of mayors who have presented misinformation and subjective criticism as facts," the International
Bottled Water Association (IBWA) said today in a news release.
Activists
Reverse Founding Principles. First, the underlying idea of their campaign is
fundamentally flawed. In particular, they maintain that making a profit on water is wrong because it somehow
hurts communities around the nation where springs and aquifers provide the water. In reality, these operations
bring wealth to those communities. ... Furthermore, these operations do not deplete community water supplies as the
activists suggest. The aquifers, springs and other natural sources replenish via precipitation, a process
called "recharging." In fact, many have been operating sustainably for hundreds of years.
A
Congressman With a Thirst for Truth. There must be something in the water in this town. The nation
is entangled in two wars, a deep recession and a flu pandemic, and the people's representatives are hard at work
investigating the menace of ... bottled water? "I don't think we have to wait for a deadly outbreak of disease!" said
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), holding aloft a bottle of Coca-Cola's Dasani water. ... This much is clear, crisp and
refreshing: Bottled water has not killed anybody, and it's not even clear that it has made anybody sick. And,
as the committee learned, it is already regulated more strictly than other foods.
An opposing viewpoint: A New Reason to
Skip Bottled Water. There is so much wrong with bottled water that it's hard to know where to
begin. But let's start with the fact that bottled water is the most brilliantly marketed product ever
invented. The companies get it practically free out of a tap and charge you a dollar or more —
sometimes a lot more — for a quart or less). The plastic bottles pollute the environment.
Worst of all, drinking bottled water makes people less apt to be vigilant about protecting public water supplies.
The Editor says...
None of those is a reason to stop buying bottled water. If it's expensive, that's capitalism at work.
The bottles don't "pollute the environment" any worse than any other kind of plastic that can be found in
household garbage. And the "worst of all" argument is a non sequitur: I don't
see any connection.
A Fashion Trend Meets A
Watery Grave. The recession may be finishing what environmentalists started a few years ago: the
end of the bottled-water fad. Twice in the past week I have been in restaurants that just a year ago would have
been pushing still or sparkling water at their patrons from the moment they sat down. This time the waiters said
merely: "Tap water OK?" ... The rise and fall of bottled water may be the best case study yet in the strange politics
of trendy environmental causes.
The
brewing battle over bottled water could kill jobs. For more than a few years
environmentalists have fueled a movement to ban or significantly reduce consumer use of bottled
water. Dozens of universities and municipalities have already taken action to curb bottle water
use. But the impact of such a ban on the U.S. economy, especially in the current economic
climate, could be significant.
Aspen begins
battle against plastic bottles. City officials plan to spend about $30,000 on reusable, stainless
steel water bottles and filling stations in a municipal battle against plastic water bottles.
America Goes Insane Over the Weather.
America is now totally insane over the weather. Even the Weather Channel that used to simply provide reasonably
accurate, short-term information about the weather is now telling everyone we're doomed because global warming
is going to destroy the Earth.
Newsweek Quiz: What Isn't Causing
Global Warming? You would never know there was a single dissenting view from reading the Newsweek
story. The magazine isn't the only media outlet that has embraced an attitude of "The earth is warming,
it's mankind's fault and no one can question it." ABC, CBS and NBC all treated the IPCC report with that
same perspective.
ABC Won't Tell Who Caused
Ecological Disaster. Up to two million tires are at the bottom of the ocean floor off the coast
of Florida. They damage reefs, wash up on the beach and create a hazard for beachgoers. How did they
get there? Don't ask ABC News. With the power of government and the green movement of the 1970s, the
process was set into motion to build artificial reefs from used tires. All ABC could say was that
"someone" had gotten the idea going.
Heartland President Debunks Global Warming Myths.
The popular press features possible crises on their front pages all the time, because bad news sells and they
are in the business of selling copies of their publications and generating ad revenue, not reporting the truth
about complicated subjects. As they say in the business, "if it bleeds, it leads." These are the
same guys who told us Alar, saccharin, Red Dye #2, dioxin, a hole in the ozone layer, electric power lines, and
cell phones were all causing cancer epidemics, and that Y2K would shut down the nation's electric grid and banks.
Science and Global Warming: What Do We
Know? Wholly implausible scare scenarios are routinely disseminated to and through the media,
even though they are contradicted by real-world scientific evidence. Some of these scientifically
unsubstantiated assertions appear in former vice president Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient
Truth." ... Gore's cinematic assertions are repeated as "truth" by a largely sympathetic media that
seldom bothers to do their own research or mention contradictory scientific facts.
Green Issues Are the Place to
Be. Vanity Fair has more green issues than all the other magazines combined. … The profile
of Rush Limbaugh accuses him of enabling "environmental destruction." Another feature claims "almost every
move you make affects the health of the planet." From the second the alarm clock goes off, it argues, we
are killing Mother Earth.
How the Left Intimidates the
Media. Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was recently paid $20,000 by
Virginia Tech to tell the students that there aren't two sides to the global warming debate and
that the problem with the media today is that we don't have a fairness doctrine. Those
positions, which sound contradictory, betray the modern liberal agenda. They want to bring
back the fairness doctrine not to ensure true fairness and balance in journalism but to intimidate
and censor those expressing a view contrary to their own.
Pesticide-Free Schools — Full of Rats and
Roaches? Our local radio station ... is broadcasting "public service announcements" saying
pesticides used in the schools are "linked" to cancer, asthma and lower IQ scores among the kids. Probably
you are hearing the same announcements on your radio stations. They're produced by Earthworks, a
consortium of eco-groups, and sponsored by The Ad Council.
Post Glosses over Deaths Linked
to 'Silent Spring' Author. The book "Silent Spring" set in motion the banning of DDT and
needlessly cost millions of lives. The Washington Post chose to mark author Rachel Carson's 100th
birthday by barely mentioning that her actions "have remained controversial." That's quite an
understatement.
Bad Research,
Worse Reporting on Global Warming. In trying to prove that the Bush administration is throttling
research into global warming, the Union of Concerned Scientists rolled out some breathtakingly bad
science. … "The new evidence shows that political interference in climate science is no longer a
series of isolated incidents but a system-wide epidemic," Dr. Francesca Grifo, Director of the
UCS Scientific Integrity Program, said in a press release. … Grifo obviously doesn't appreciate the
irony when he trots out a poll that is so flawed that it is manifest evidence of exaggeration,
incompetence or dishonesty on his group's part.
[The topic of Global Warming is covered
extensively on another page.]
It's official:
San Diego paper is a propaganda organ. On Monday, the legacy media crossed a critical line.
The San Diego Union-Tribune announced, in a column with the grotesquely misleading title "Fair Reporting on
Global Warming" by its media columnist Carol Goodhue, that it will no longer cover both sides of the global
arming story, instead limiting itself to acting as a conduit for Green propaganda.
Media Promote Global Warming Fraud. On
the matter of global intervention to stop global warming, there seems to be no need for scientific evidence to
justify what is shaping up as a global carbon tax of 35 cents a gallon of gas on the American people.
Our media want the public to believe that the same organization that gave us the oil-for-food scandal can be
trusted on its dire predictions of calamity from alleged man-made global warming.
Climate Change in Plain English:
It is unrealistic to expect the public, policymakers, or the media to read and understand the full body of
climate-change literature. Instead, they must rely on publications put out by pressure groups with a
position for or against climate change, or on the verbal summation of a small number of high-profile
experts. But 30-second sound bites do not leave much room for qualifications, and, just as the
devil is in the details, the quality of science is in the qualifications.
Global warming killing the planet? It's not
fact — just hot air. Not since wholesale calamity was predicted as a result of the
so-called millennium bug has so much coverage been given to a topic. Miles' worth of column inches are
now dedicated to global warming. The predictions by media commentators are becoming more numerous and
more strident as each new piece of evidence appears to support their case. They have progressed from
possibilities to probabilities and are now becoming certainties. Global warming is a hypothesis, not
fact. And even if temperatures are increasing, that does not necessarily mean it is a result of human
activities, nor does it mean that the outcomes will necessarily be overwhelmingly detrimental.
Are the Media Giving You the Whole Story on
Global Warming? If you want to know the truth about global warming — or
acid rain, or the ozone hole, or any other environmental issue — you must keep in mind
that the media are not giving you the true story. And the reason for that is very simple. They
are reporting on the world as they see it: distorted through green lenses.
Vanity Fair Tells Conservatives
to Go to Hell. The two-page "Dante's Inferno: Green Edition" was part of Vanity Fair's
full-issue attack that even claimed Rush Limbaugh "has blinded millions of Americans to the climate crisis"
and accused him of "the environmental destruction that he did so much to enable in his multi-decade reign
of denigration."
Christian Science Monitor Favors
Mower Regulation. The Christian Science Monitor gave a green thumbs up to a recent EPA decision
mandating emission standards for new lawnmowers. It downplayed one detail about the increased
regulation — higher costs.
Dangerous Warming
Unlikely, MIT Climatologist Says. Global warming is unlikely to be a
dangerous future problem, with or without the implementation of such programs as the
Kyoto Protocol, according to Dr. Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of
Atmospheric Sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen, a member
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and one of the world's leading climatologists,
told a September 9 [2004] audience at the Houston Forum that alarmist media claims to the contrary
are fueled more by politics than by science.
AP Fumbles
Global Warming Story. In late March, the Associated Press ran a global
warming story that makes a number of misleading, if not downright inaccurate,
statements. Faulty "news" stories like this one, which mislead people all over the
world, do not reflect a consensus of scientists. It is alarming that a media outlet
as influential as AP would run a story this wrong … and that so many news editors would
be gullible enough to run it.
Global Warming: Why Can't the Mainstream Press
Get Even Basic Facts Right? Carbon dioxide accounts for less than ten percent of the greenhouse
effect, as carbon dioxide's ability to absorb heat is quite limited. Only about 0.03 percent of the
Earth's atmosphere consists of carbon dioxide (nitrogen, oxygen, and argon constitute about 78 percent,
20 percent, and 0.93 percent of the atmosphere, respectively). The sun, not a gas, is primarily
to "blame" for global warming — and plays a key role in global temperature variations as well.
Experts Expose
Flaws in Global Warming Extinction Predictions. A January 8 article
in Nature magazine created a media sensation by predicting global warming will cause
between 15 and 37 percent of the Earth's species to go extinct by the middle of
this century unless immediate and drastic action is taken. But no sooner did the article
gain the attention of the popular media than experts exposed its serious flaws.
Are the Media Giving You the
Whole Story on Global Warming? Most media reports ignore the evidence for
cooling and focus instead on records from land stations, which indicate a 1°F increase in
surface temperatures during the 20th century. What they fail to report is that this
increase was measured mostly in and around urban centers, and therefore
indicates urban — not global — warming.
The Myth of Catastrophic Global Warming: If the
continual resurrection of the issue of global warming in the media is not a consummate example of the Big Lie,
I'd be hard pressed to find a better one.
Recent Warming Is Not Historically
Unique: The twentieth century is not the least bit climatically unusual. So why the recent
media hysteria that the twentieth century is the warmest of the last 1,000 years?
The Global Warming Censors: Did you
ever tune in the network news and think you were getting a bedtime story in reverse? Instead of calming
you to sleep, every story seems to tell you of the phantoms under your bed, the ghosts in the closet, and the
monsters that plan to visit on the weekend. Dan Rather goes beyond that new frightening haircut. He
loves to forecast everything short of plagues of locusts as the summer begins.
Fire and Ice: It was five years
before the turn of the century and major media were warning of disastrous climate change. Page six of The
New York Times was headlined with the serious concerns of "geologists." Only the president at the time
wasn't Bill Clinton; it was Grover Cleveland. And the Times wasn't warning about global warming — it
was telling readers the looming dangers of a new ice age. The year was 1895, and it was just one of four
different time periods in the last 100 years when major print media predicted an impending climate
crisis. Each prediction carried its own elements of doom, saying Canada could be "wiped out" or
lower crop yields would mean "billions will die."
This article reeks with bias: Atmospheric Carbon
Dioxide Levels Highest On Record. Human activity such as fossil fuel exploitation, rice
agriculture, biomass burning, landfills and ruminant farm animals account for some 60% of atmospheric
[methane], with natural processes including those produced by wetlands and termites responsible for the
remaining 40%.
The Editor is quick to point out a few details...
Notice that the anonymous author of the article above attributes farm animal emissions to "human
activity" and he (or she) assumes that "human activity" is not a "natural process." Notice also
the use of the term, "fossil fuel exploitation." The author could have used the word "consumption"
but that wouldn't have had sufficiently negative connotations. (Crude oil is of no value unless it is
refined and put to use. Of course we're going to expolit it.) And the notion that
CO2 levels are the "highest on record" is no cause for alarm, since
accurate records of such things have been kept for only one century, at best.
New Research Adds Twist to Global Warming
Debate. Given the stakes in the current debate over global warming, the research may very well
turn out to be one of the most important climate experiments of our time — if only the media would
report the story.
Cosmic ray study fails to penetrate lead-lined media. Top Ten Junk Science
Moments for 2006. Swedish researchers provided experimental evidence that cosmic rays may be a
major factor in climate change. They calculated that just 5 years of cosmic ray activity can have
85 percent of the effect on the Earth's climate as 200 years of manmade carbon dioxide emissions.
Though the study was published in the prestigious Proceedings of the Royal Society A, the findings went
largely unreported by the Al Gore-smitten media.
Al Gore's Recycled Doom:
First came the warm wave of supportive publicity surrounding [Al Gore's] slide-show documentary "An Inconvenient
Truth." Katie Couric and Harry Smith and Oprah Winfrey all touted Gore as so warm, so vulnerable and
self-effacing, and his predictions so impossibly scary. … Now comes another warm wave of media smooches
and applause with the news of his plan for an international set of "Live Earth" concerts to promote massive
government action to curb humanity's excessive reliance on energy.
Warming fears do not add
up. Since the publication of the Stern review on the economics of climate change, global warming
hysteria has reached fever pitch. Which is not surprising, as the review was presented in terms carefully
calculated to engender alarm. It warns that climate change poses risks "on a scale similar to those
associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th century" and requires
immediate action. There has been something of a political and media frenzy ever since.
Media Bias on
Global Warming Called 'Inconvenient Truth'. A U.S. Senate committee hearing considering the
media's handling of climate change was told Wednesday [12/6/2006] that media bias on global warming was an
"inconvenient truth," although participating experts disagreed sharply over which side of the debate receives
preferential media treatment. "Journalists who have pledged to be neutral long ago gave up their watchdog
role to become lapdogs for one position," Dan Gainor, director of the Business and Media Institute (BMI), told
the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee. The "alarmist" press behaves "as if at any moment,
everything could go over the edge," Gainor said.
Time and global warming:
Time's 1974 piece was nowhere near as sensationalized or irresponsible as last week's global warming sermon.
With its moralizing tone, overheated rhetoric about "crashing climates" and "glaciers and ice caps turning to
slush," plus its parroting of the Green party-line about human-forced global warming, "Be Worried ..." couldn't
have been less fair or unbalanced if it had been guest-edited by Al Gore.
"I don't like the word 'Balance', Says ABC
News Global Warming Reporter. ABC News Reporter Bill Blakemore declared "I don't like the word
'balance' much at all" in global warming coverage at a journalism conference in Vermont over the weekend.
Blakemore, who reported on August 30, 2006, "After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such
[scientific] debate" on global warming, said he rejects 'balance' in order to justify excluding any skeptics
of manmade catastrophic global warming from his reporting.
When Bad News is Good News: The
Spinach Story. While death and disease of any sort is tragic, the fact that a foodborne illness
has received so much attention at all is one indicator of just how safe our food supply generally is.
Despite the perpetual calls for additional federal oversight … Americans already enjoy the safest
food supply in human history — and it's getting safer every day.
Remember Global Cooling? In April,
1975, in an issue mostly taken up with stories about the collapse of the American-backed government of South
Vietnam, Newsweek published a small back-page article about a very different kind of disaster.
Citing "ominous signs that the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically," the magazine
warned of an impending "drastic decline in food production." … if you had been following the climate-change
debates at the time, you'd have known that the threat was: global cooling.
Ding-Dong, Global Warming is Dead!
A Los Angeles Times reporter in early December wrote, "Scientists studying Yosemite National Park's bountiful
wildlife have found that several animal species have moved to higher altitudes, an uphill migration possibly
spawned by the grinding effects of global warming on one of the nation's most protected wilderness." This
is not news. It is mere speculation clothed in the majesty of journalism, but rife with the reporter's
opinion that Yosemite's menagerie of mammals, birds, and reptiles are "possibly" responding to "the grinding
effects of global warming."
Cow emissions blow
up the atmosphere faster than autos. Environmental alarmists and much of the media refuse to look
at other industries and other reasons carbon dioxide is pumped into the air. … According to a United Nations
report released in late November (and widely ignored by the media), bovine flatulence is responsible for
18 percent of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. By contrast, it is estimated that the
U.S. auto fleet accounts for 6 percent of global CO2 emissions.
'Global
Warming' TV Special 'Misleads Public,' Scientist Says. A program on "global warming" set to
debut on the Discovery Channel Sunday night [7/16/2006] "misleads the public," because it relies on "just a
few scientists with a particular personal viewpoint on this subject," says a climatologist who has seen
the two-hour special.
Al Gore's Rhetoric Doesn't Match
Reality. The environmental left has been waging a fear campaign about global warming for
years. The news media in their addiction to the scary and violent is a willing accomplice. … The
global warming propaganda group Environmental Defense is also behind this campaign. The group has now
received $100 million in free air time (mostly from major networks) for advertising about the dangers
of global warming. They have invested $1.5 million or their own money and solicited the help of
the Ad Council to create the dramatic spots.
A convenient
lie: Atmospheric-science professor John Christy … says, "Doomsday prophecies grabbed
headlines but have proven to be completely false. Similar pronouncements today about catastrophes due to
human-induced climate change sound all too familiar." But the media can't get enough of doomsday.
AP Incorrectly Claims Scientists Praise Gore's
Movie. The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled "Scientists OK Gore's Movie for
Accuracy" by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP's bias and methodology. AP chose to
ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President
Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth."
Editor's Note:
Reviews of Al Gore's movie can be found at the bottom
of this page.
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High.
While the AP acknowledged the fact that bald eagle populations "were considered a nuisance and routinely shot
by hunters, farmers and fishermen" — spurring a 1940 federal law protecting bald
eagles — the AP underplayed the significance of hunting and human encroachment
and erroneously blamed DDT for the eagles' near demise.
The NY Times: Objective Journalism or Pro-Environmentalist
PR? "The Cost of an Overheated Planet" dominates the front page of the Tuesday [12/12/2006]
Business section, accompanied by a cliched graphic of a Planet Earth with a giant thermometer stuck into
it. Reporter Steve Lohr is no less certain that global warming exists, as he celebrates the head of
an energy company who favors federal regulations on carbon dioxide emissions.
ABC's
Global Warming Cattle Call: Things that, sans strict scientific scrutiny, most likely are
happenstance, anecdotal or not related to global warming at all now are going to be reported by a major
U.S. news network as proof positive of not just the man-made effects of global warming but that it lives
and breathes….
Drought Scare Goes Up in Smoke.
Global warming is increasing Western wildfires! At least that's what lots of news stories said in
response to a July 6 paper by A.L. Westerling of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography and three
co-authors. Like most scientific issues, though, this one is more complicated than the headlines suggest.
Hot & Cold Media Spin
Cycle: A Challenge to Journalists who Cover Global Warming. Since 1895, the media has
alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time
periods. From 1895 until the 1930's the media peddled a coming ice age. From the late 1920's until
the 1960's they warned of global warming. From the 1950's until the 1970's they warned us again of a
coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate's fourth attempt to promote opposing
climate change fears during the last 100 years.
Senator Inhofe and CNN Anchor in Heated
Exchange Over Global Warming Coverage. On CNN American Morning today [10/03/2006], Senator James
Inhofe, the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, engaged in a heated exchange with CNN
newsman Miles O'Brien over CNN's biased and erroneous coverage of global warming. Senator Inhofe
questioned the journalistic integrity of CNN anchor for, 'scaring a lot of people' with hyped climate
reporting. Senator Inhofe also questioned O'Brien about his 1992 CNN report regarding fears of a coming
ice age.
Santa Barbara News-Press loses five
editors. Five top editors and a veteran columnist resigned from the Santa Barbara News-Press
this week, complaining that billionaire-libertarian-environmentalist owner Wendy McCaw was undermining the
paper's credibility and sticking her nose into the newsroom. … An animal rights activist and
philanthropist, Mrs. McCaw, 55, often put her own personal touches on stories, including one opposing
the consumption of turkeys on Thanksgiving because of the suffering of the "unwilling participant."
Time Misses Climate. Time devoted a
recent cover to the "near-certainty" that humans are causing dangerous global warming. However, Time
offered evidence only of a warming, which could be either man-made or natural. Based on historic and
geophysical evidence, Time's story is likely to be as wrong as its 1974 cover story touting global
cooling! Newsweek did one the next year. Neither magazine understands the moderate, natural
climate cycle that history tells us has dominated the last 2000 years of Earth's temperature variations.
Did I mention there's another page
about Global Warming?
Everything you know is
wrong. For years, reporters have been alerting America to one scare after another.
Chemicals, cell phones, SARS — everything is going to kill us! You would think by now we'd
be doing nothing but digging graves. Instead, Americans are living longer than ever. Not that
you'd ever know that from the mainstream media.
The Bird-Flu
Scam: You can't make any real money without a boogeyman, and the new "Bird Flu" hoax is the
latest scam used to generate profits for pharmaceutical company insiders.
Hyping High Gas Prices, Hiding
Good News. During the Clinton years, network journalists argued (correctly) that strong economic
growth, a rising stock market, low unemployment and low inflation were the benchmark indicators of a good
economy. Today, economic growth is a phenomenal 4.8 percent, the stock market has been climbing
for three straight years, and inflation and unemployment are both low. But instead of trumpeting the
amazing "Bush economy," TV news has downplayed this recent good news while hyping the bad news of rising
fuel costs.
CBS, ABC, NBC Fuel Gas Price
Hysteria. The morning and evening news shows on ABC, CBS, and NBC haven't been just reporting
consumer discontent about higher gas prices but also actively stoking public outrage.
Media Drill 'Big Oil' Again on
'Record' Profits: NBC's Chip Reid subtly suggested oil company executives are a patently
dishonest bunch. … Yet while Reid worried about "Big Oil" profit margins, his own employer enjoyed
a profit margin higher than most American oil companies, according to data from CNN.com. General
Electric, the company which owns Reid's network, outpaced most major oil companies with a profit margin
of 11.05 percent.
Drivin' and Not Cryin'? When it
comes to gas prices, the media too often know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Flip
open a paper and turn on the TV and you'll learn that gas prices are rising again. "Stormy 6 Weeks
Ahead" says CBSNews and warns consumers to expect "pain at the pump."
Why Are Gas
Prices the Only Economic News? While the average nominal gas price has risen
above $2 a gallon, the networks routinely fail to adjust for inflation. In
today's dollars, gas prices were at least 26 percent higher in March 1981 after
the Carter-era inflation spiral. Gas prices today would have to reach $2.99 a gallon
to be a record.
And eventually they did.
A little warming, a lot of hysteria.
Not so long ago, the media fad was all about the coming ice age. Newsweek reported in 1975 that the earth
was cooling and the effects on food production would be catastrophic. Farmers in Northern Europe could
expect the growing season to shrink by two weeks by the end of the century. That didn't happen.
Fire and
Ice: Journalists have warned of climate change for 100 years, but can't decide whether
we face an ice age or warming. Thanks to the release of Al Gore's latest effort on global
warming — this time in book and movie form — climate change is the hot topic in press rooms
around the globe. It isn't the first time. The media have warned about impending
climate doom four different times in the last 100 years. Only they can't decide if
mankind will die from warming or cooling. … Journalists have taken advocacy positions, often
ignoring climate change skeptics entirely. One CBS reporter even compared skeptics of
manmade global warming to Holocaust deniers.
Let's put a
freeze on global warming hype. "Recently, media and politicians have virtually stopped
talking about global warming and are now referring to climate change instead," states [Dr. Chris]
de Freitas. "That's because predictions of doom and gloom from warming just aren't coming
true. But with 'climate change,' Kyoto advocates can now cite any change or phenomenon as proof
that CO2 emissions have upset the global apple cart."
"Too Hot" Not So Hot. The latest
triumph of the global warming crusade is a one hour HBO special entitled "Too Hot Not Too Handle" that is
premiering in several cities this month. … If we adopted every suggestion in the film, concentration of
carbon dioxide will still double this century. The reality avoided in the film is that China is
currently building over 500 coal-fired power plants; they intend to build one new coal fired plant every
week for decades to come, and no matter what we do in the US, emissions from throughout the world will
drive atmospheric carbon dioxide levels steadily upward.
Good News is Swept Under the Rug on Earth
Day. April 22 marks the activist-styled "Earth Day," when every environmental Chicken
Little with an axe to grind takes to the media and proclaims the ecological sky is falling.
Media Often Gets the News on the
Environment Wrong. The media has suspiciously changed its tune on a number of environmental
issues. For example, in 1987, the Washington Post editorialized the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve
is "one of the bleakest, remote places on this continent" but by 2000, the paper described the area as a
"unique, wild, and biologically vital ecosystem." In 2001, the media decried Bush's return to "old"
arsenic standards, yet said nothing when such "dangerous" standards were embraced for eight years under the
Clinton administration before they were changed only during the last few days of the administration.
Hurricane Hype Clouds Warming
Debate. ABC's Jeffrey Kofman sounded the alarm about storms so bad scientists "are now considering
adding a fearsome category 6. That's hurricanes of more than 175 miles an hour. Something no
one would want to meet head-on." No one did. Category 6 wasn't even added, and the chorus of
media hype about another deadly season of storms turned into so much hot air. That's right -- forecasts
for the 2006 hurricane season, which ends November 30, have proven entirely wrong. Instead of
17 tropical storms and hurricanes, we got only nine.
Are the Media Giving You the Whole Story on
Global Warming? If you want to know the truth about global warming — or
acid rain, or the ozone hole, or any other environmental issue — you must keep in mind
that the media are not giving you the true story. And the reason for that is very simple. They
are reporting on the world as they see it: distorted through green lenses.
Full-Court Press on Global
Warming. Aggressive focus on manmade climate change is far from a real "tipping
point" — it's a coordinated liberal media play. … Hello, global warming. Goodbye,
journalistic ethics.
Media in the Cold. The first thing we
have to do is fire all the reporters, editors and headline writers who have not got a clue about "global
warming" except that it scares … readers and sells newspapers. … Such stories are best distinguished by
how many times the words "probably", "may", and "could" occur in the body of the text. These are very
slippery words used by so-called scientists trying to justify their latest "findings."
Environmental
Education: School of Crock. If Americans are confused, it's because they are
spoon-fed by sources with little information, but with alternative agendas. Consider where
the average American gets that "information" on the environment. About 60 percent of
respondents in Roper polls cited mostly television and newspapers; about 25 percent credited
the government and 33 percent said radio or environmental groups. (More than one
source could be chosen.)
Good News About the
Environment: After over 30 years of steady progress and improvement, the media still chooses
to emphasize the negative and largely ignore the positive with their coverage of Earth Day events.
Hate
the SUV, but don't shoot the driver. Invariably when an SUV driver is
involved in an accident, the story focuses on the SUV. As though sedans,
station wagons and especially hybrids never make mistakes.
Destroying
America To Save The World. For nearly four years, network news programs have
presented a skewed view of global warming and the Kyoto treaty that liberal environmentalists
claim would cure it. Those same newscasts have all-but ignored the negative economic
consequences that ratifying Kyoto would have on the U.S. The network coverage also largely
ignored scientific evidence questioning global warming theory, while touting dramatic claims
of liberal environmental activists.
Surprise,
surprise: The New York Times gets it wrong... again. Far from being the boogeyman,
Western investment offers the greatest hope for the future of Indonesia. Thanks to Jane Perlez
and her confederacy of dunces, that hope shines less brightly.
Scaring for
money. Usually the horrible disaster never happens. Chaos from Y2K. An epidemic
of deaths from SARS or mad cow disease. Cancer from Three Mile Island. We quickly
forget. We move on to the next warnings. This is the story of a looming disaster that
never became an actual disaster — because the science that led to the terror was never
sound science at all.
Environmentalists
Plus Press Are Dangerous. The problem is environmentalists and newsmen feed on
one another and can become doubly dangerous. The most surprising at the moment are the
radical environmentalists, who have infected large parts of the press with distortion,
exaggeration, and seeming ignorance.
How the Media Get the Environment
Wrong: As strong environmentalism is one of the defining characteristics of the modern liberal,
it should come as no surprise that the media lean toward environmentalism in their coverage of key
issues. Yet politics cannot be the whole answer. Sensationalism and ignorance are also
to the fore.
Media Spin Obscures Improvement in Air
Quality. The Environmental Protection Agency's recently released Latest Findings on National
Air Quality confirms the good news that America's air quality is improving. Unfortunately, many
media outlets and environmental activists insist on telling the public otherwise.
Shenanigans at
Greenpeace — And the Media Yawns. After a year in which financial improprieties
gobbled up headlines like never before, it would stand to reason that a brewing scandal involving a major
international organization, millions of dollars, and alleged tax evasion would receive similar treatment. But
if that major international organization is famed environmental group Greenpeace, the media goes mute.
Hollywood's
Environmental Wackoism: Tinseltown's double standard hardly stops at freedom
of expression. One of the funniest sections of James Hirsen's Tales From the Left Coast
describes the stars' environmental elitism. Do as they say, not as they do.
Media Fosters Green Hobgoblins:
Every year reporters give the environmentalists fawning news coverage on Earth Day — not tough
scrutiny of their goals and motivations.
Clamoring for
Kyoto: The Networks' One-Sided Coverage of Global Warming. For years, liberal
environmentalists have insisted that only tough regulations on economic activity can prevent the climate
catastrophe of human-induced global warming. So far, these activists' biggest policy success has
been the 1997 Kyoto Protocols, which would have forced the United States to cut industrial emissions to seven
percent below 1990 levels, or 30 percent lower than current levels. But if the gloom-and-doom
predictions of environmental activists' are exaggerated or wrong, such severe cutbacks — which would have
increased energy prices and drastically reduced economic growth — are not necessary.
Nuclear Power Poised for a
Revival: The truth is spreading about France's highly successful use of nuclear power, holding
great promise for America's energy woes -- but the liberal media are spinning a different story.
Facts frozen out: Network News and
Global Warming: A study from the MRC's Free Market Project demonstrates that over the past five
years reporters have presented a highly distorted picture of the global warming debate.
The Big Polluters: CBS,
NBC And ABC Serve As Tribunes For Radical Greens. For years, liberal environmentalists have insisted that
only tough regulations on economic activity can prevent the climate catastrophe of human-induced global
warming. Their activism led to the 1997 Kyoto Protocols, which would have forced the U.S. to
cut industrial emissions to levels 30 percent lower than they are today, a massive economic sacrifice.
Kyoto was too onerous for both Democrats and Republicans, who rejected its basic principles in a unanimous 95-0 Senate
vote four years ago. President Clinton allowed Al Gore to sign the treaty, but never
submitted it for ratification. After all the rhetoric, only Romania ratified it. This spring,
President Bush finally threw it in the wastebasket.
The press corps covers global
warming. "I've believed for years and years that global warming is a hoax perpetrated on the
political world by Malthusian Greenies whose hidden agenda is a smaller world population and falling standards
of living."
