media bias


Blogging has definitely been light as of late. It must have something to do with global warming. It’s been so damn hot lately.

Along these lines, Best of the Web posted this juxtaposition today:

Two Newsmagazines in One!

• “Ultimately, however, it’s a mistake to use any one storm–or even a season’s worth of storms–to disprove climate change (or to prove it; some environmentalists have wrongly tied the lack of snow in Vancouver, the site of the Winter Olympic Games, which begin this week, to global warming). Weather is what will happen next weekend; climate is what will happen over the next decades and centuries.”–Time.com, Feb. 10

• “As the worst heat wave on record spawns wildfires that are destroying entire villages, Russian officials have made what for them is a startling admission: global warming is very real. . . . There may turn out to be a bright side to Russia’s devastating weather: one of the nations most responsible for driving climate change may finally start trying to do something about it.”–Time.com, Aug. 3

And a few more links:

Expert: Win climate change debate by easing off science

“Climate scientists — stop talking about climate science. We lost. It’s over. Forget it,” Foley told a surprised audience during a featured panel discussion on the last day of the three-day forum.

Is Environmentalism a Luxury Good?

Add environmentalism to the long list of things the Great Recession may have successfully pulverized.

Keep your experimental windmills away from school buses

Recognizing the turbine was spinning dangerously fast, nearby workers attempted in vain to shut it down.

More than 400 feet of blades came loose, flying into nearby fields and narrowly missing a number of parked school buses on a neighbouring storage lot.

Wow! The mainstream media is waking up.

The greatest scandal connected to global warming is not exaggeration, fraud or destruction of data to conceal the weakness of the argument. It is those who are personally profiting from promoting this fantasy at the expense of the rest of us.

Al Gore is the most visible beneficiary. The world’s greatest climate-change fear-monger has amassed millions in book sales and speaking fees. His science-fiction movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” won an Academy Award for best documentary and 21 other film awards. He was co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his “efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.”

Meanwhile, Mr. Gore was laying his own foundations. As he was whipping up hysteria over climate change, he cannily invested in “green” firms that stood to profit in the hundreds of millions of dollars (if not more) from increased government regulations and sweetheart deals from connected politicians and bureaucrats. The multimillionaire climate dilettante was given a free pass by reporters, who refused to ask him hard questions about the degree to which he was profiting from the panic he was causing.

[…]

Given the clear conflicts of interest of those who both promote and profit from climate-change alarmism, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize should be rescinded.

Is the Nobel Foundation listening?

Many reasons have been put forward as to why the mainstream media have largely presented a one-sided view of the global warming debate. But, new revelations in the UK suggest they may also have been talking their book:

STRIKING parallels between the BBC’s coverage of the global warming debate and the activities of its pension fund can be revealed today.

The corporation is under investigation after being inundated with complaints that its editorial coverage of climate change is biased in favour of those who say it is a man-made phenomenon.

The £8billion pension fund is likely to come under close scrutiny over its commitment to promote a low-carbon economy while struggling to reverse an estimated £2billion deficit.

Concerns are growing that BBC journalists and their bosses regard disputed scientific theory that climate change is caused by mankind as “mainstream” while huge sums of employees’ money is invested in companies whose success depends on the theory being widely accepted.

Despicable if true.

What was I thinking?

It looks like Tyler Hamilton’s job is safe for now.

Tyler Hamilton is feeling the heat. He is clearly worried that if governments back off taking precipitious action to slay the climate change bogeyman, his livelihood as a “senior energy reporter and columnist” is at risk, which perhaps explains this strange post on his blog Clean Break:

George Monbiot slams Canadian government for thuggish ways

Heat author and environmental activist George Monbiot has what I believe is a column that accurately describes how Canada is viewed internationally as world leaders head to Copenhagen to hammer out some sort of climate agreement. The column is titled “The Urgent Threat to World Peace is … Canada.” I would argue it also accurately describes how many Canadians view the actions — or inactions — of their own government. Please read, and please pass around. It’s time to get viral.

While supporters of catastrophic views of climate change often point to their critics as somehow being in the pocket of “big oil” insufficient attention seems to be paid to the motivations and incentives of the climate change alarmists. Tyler Hamiliton has made a career writing about renewable energy. His blog posts of late suggests he is feeling threatened.

Maybe its time for us to also get viral and let his employers at the Toronto Star know that anything he writes on renewable energy and climate change is now suspect. He has obviously been captured by the interests he is supposed to report on. So much for journalistic integrity.

As to Monbiot’s idiotic ramblings, it is worthwhile checking his sources. Parroting the specious claims of Canada’s enviro-left lends little credence to his thesis that Canada is some sort of climate-change thug. After riding the climate change issue to relative fame and fortune, Monbiot must also sense he is now on the wrong side of the issue. Sorry George.

The chicken littles and their MSM friends are in denial.

For those of you who don’t know, the surface temperature of the globe, as a whole, has not warmed-up by anyone’s calculation since at least the turn of the century (January 2001) and depending on your dataset and statistical technique of choice, perhaps has far back as January 1997. And all of this non-warming occurred over a period of time during which the global emissions of CO2 increased faster than ever before (thanks primarily to China). In fact, anthropogenic greenhouse-gas forcing is about 5 percent greater now than a decade ago (about 16 parts per million).

To many folks who have, for years, been fed a constant course of “the-world-is-heating-up-faster-than-ever-before-and-you-are-the-cause,” 9 to 12 years of no warming at all seems to indicate that something is amiss with this mantra.

This was reflected in a Gallup Poll last spring which found the highest percentage yet of people who think that “global warming” is being “exaggerated.” And this number has been growing.

Haven’t we seen this before?

A huge ice shelf in the Antarctic is in the last stages of collapse and could break up within days in the latest sign of how global warming is thought to be changing the face of the planet.

The enormous Wilkins ice shelf is now barely attached to land. The latest reports show that a thin sliver of ice attaching it to the Antarctic’s Charcot Island is rapidly collapsing and threatening to break.

It was the same picture and storyline last year:

A vast ice shelf hanging on by a thin strip looks to be the next chunk to break off from the Antarctic Peninsula, the latest sign of global warming’s impact on Earth’s southernmost continent.
Scientists are shocked by the rapid change of events.

Glaciologist Ted Scambos of the University of Colorado was monitoring satellite images of the Wilkins Ice Shelf and spotted a huge iceberg measuring 25 miles by 1.5 miles that appeared to have broken away from the shelf.

Watts up with That? has the full story here.

How are we to debate the real implications of climate change if the MSM keeps making things up?

ht: SDA