It’s obvious the global warming rhetoric is too hot when even climate alarmists criticize it in the pages of a national newspaper. New York magazine’s literary editor David Wallace-Wells published “The Uninhabitable Earth” in that magazine July 9. Some, like Vox’s David Roberts hit the panic button and insisted this wasn’t even telling the whole story about how bad things would get because of manmade climate change.
A peer-reviewed research report published last week by three highly qualified researchers with the agreement of seven others similarly accomplished charges that the entities reporting historical and current worldwide temperatures have adjusted their data to show global warming which has not actually occurred. The trio has concluded that this data is "not a valid representation of reality," and that as a result, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 "Endangerment Finding" — essentially that global warming has been occurring and continues to accelerate due to human activity — is, in the study's words, "invalidated." The establishment media's silence has been deafening.
Green bullies are at it again, this time trying to shame museums into dropping conservative philanthropist David Koch and his money.
A group of alarmist scientists wrote an open letter claiming museums like the Smithsonian’s Museums of Science and Natural History in Washington, D.C., and the American Museum of Natural History in New York City have compromised their “integrity” by accepting money from him.
Those who say climate change is a threat to the planet continue to call for actions against climate skeptics.
On May 19, PBS’ “Moyers & Company” played a clip of scientist, David Suzuki, calling for politicians skeptical of man-made climate change to “be thrown in the slammer.” On day later, a tweet by well-known alarmist Michael Mann suggested that skepticism could be a “crime against humanity.” As least far back as 2006, and as recently as March 2014, liberal journalists and radical scientists have advocated punishing people who doubt catastrophic, man-made climate change.
Charlie Rose, during a panel discussion about the new UN report on climate change, had the audacity to insult global warming skeptics as “climate deniers” even as he brought on a so-called expert who once predicted the “greenhouse effect” would cause “food riots” all across North America...in 1995.
Everyone remembers the great North American Food Riots of ‘95? Right? Well that crazy scenario was dreamed up by one of the UN report co-authors Princeton University professor Michael Oppenheimer. On PBS's Charlie Rose show Oppenheimer dismissed climate change skeptics as people who “just like to stand away from the crowd.”
A group seeking access to climate scientist Michael Mann’s emails through Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act (VFOIA) has a surprising new group of news media allies.
From wire agencies to liberal Atlantic Media, Inc., 17 news groups have supported the release of documents, according to Columbia Journalism Review.
The New York Times is quick to forget the past when it doesn’t promote their agenda. In Nov. 2009, the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was involved in the “ClimateGate” scandal, but that didn’t stop the paper from hyping leaked information from an upcoming IPCC report on Aug. 20.
However, the BBC reported that the IPCC has said those leaks were “misleading.” That didn’t stop the Times from publishing a front page story by Justin Gillis, the paper’s resident alarmism reporter.
That article downplayed the inaccuracies and information revealed as part of the ClimateGate scandal labeling them as “minor errors.”
Imagine if it were discovered that free-market think tanks were caught vetting scripts of Fox News programs, intervening to prevent free-market sceptics from receiving air time, and consulted with the network about how it should alter its programing in a free-market direction. The howls of outrage would be loud, long and unrelenting from other news networks, the wire services, and leading U.S. newspapers.
What I have just described, and more, characterizes a decade-long relationship between the British Broadcasting Corporation and UK-based climate scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) -- except that the BBC is government-funded and disproportionately controls the flow of broadcast news in the UK. What the UK Daily Mail has revealed today as part of its ongoing review of the second set of Climategate emails released before Thanksgiving has caused Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation to write that the BBC is "in cahoots with Climategate scientists." What follows are excerpts from the David Rose's Daily Mail story (bolds are mine):
Almost exactly two years since damning email messages were released from Great Britain's University of East Anglia showing a pattern of deception and collusion between scientists involved in spreading the global warming myth, a new batch of such correspondence has emerged that seems destined to get as little press coverage as the original ClimateGate scandal did in November 2009.
James Delingpole reported in Britain's Telegraph Tuesday:
Ken Cuccinelli, the conservative Attorney General of Virginia, came under attack on Friday night's All Things Considered on National Public Radio. This is one angle of Climategate the national media have noticed. But they pitch the battle as Cuccinelli vs. Science or Cuccinelli vs. Academic Freedom.
What's most infuriating is the notion that it's Cuccinelli who's "politicizing" science, and not Michael Mann's openly politicized e-mails explaining his data manipulations and plotting to censor his political opponents. Somehow, the Union of Concerned Scientists is painted as non-political.
Host Michele Norris began: "The University of Virginia says it will fight a demand from the state's attorney general. He wants the school to turn over private e-mails and documents related to a former professor's climate research. The case has sparked a national debate over academic freedom."