Global Warming Special on Fox News Tonight

From Fox News:

Sean Hannity will have a special report:

Controlling your carbon footprint has become a global fad, but is it all just a con job? And how much green is it costing you? Sean investigates the truth behind the billion dollar industry!

9PM Eastern, 6PM Pacific, repeated 3 hours later on the same channel.

Channel 360 on DirecTV, 205 on Dish Network, check your local cable and satellite listings.


Sponsored IT training links:

We offer guaranteed 70-680 study materials including 646-205 questions and answers to help you competently prepare for 642-813 exams.


Advertisements

102 thoughts on “Global Warming Special on Fox News Tonight

  1. Anyone finds this online (youtube, newsgroups, torrent), please let us know!
    Thanx from the peeps outside the US without access to US tv.
    Regards,
    Wijnand

  2. I kind of wish this wasn’t being done by Hannity. He’s seen as a whack-job by everyone I know, and will not be helpful for the cause.
    In Massachusetts, most people will feel that if Hannity says it’s false?…it MUST be true. They won’t even watch the show.
    JimB

  3. OMG! Hannity is actually going to investigate something?! Where in the world did he find the time?
    I am with JimB in cringing. Sean is not well known for his logical arguments.

  4. JimB – What do you expect from a populace who repeatedly send the likes of Frank , Markey and Kerry to Washington ?

  5. JimB says:
    August 27, 2010 at 2:24 pm
    I agree there. The FoxNews coverage, especially from Beck, on CAGW tends to reduce the scepticism and increase the anger of the liberal people I know.
    -Scott

  6. JimB
    August 27, 2010 at 2:24 pm
    Most people who think Hannity is a whack-job are themselves are a little off themselves. He might be a bit of a meat-head, but hes least honest, and is defiantly smarter then any lying liberal newscaster that the Hannity haters love so much.

  7. oops thats what I get for trying to cram in a post while on break…
    … at least he is honest …
    OY

  8. yeah hannity is wackjob but occasionally a speck of truth gets through on these shows
    and i don’t have tv but i will take a look once it’s online…i hope it’s worth watching!
    i suppose i shouln’t hold my breath for “war, the great swindle”, and “debt money, the greatest swindle!”

  9. Well –
    some friends are worse for you than the worst enemy can ever be.
    Beware Sean Hannity, I say.
    I’d rather wear a pullover knit from barbed wire than get associated with him.

  10. Well for us out here in Clinger country we’ll bee watchin’. Ah’l be cleanin’ the squirrel
    rifle and ma will be puttin’ a possum roast in the cookstove.
    Sarc/off.
    Yes it’s Hannity, but I don’t expect Olbermann or Crissy Matthews to even attempt this.
    It will get it out in to the general public. Good for him…

  11. “”” JimB says:
    August 27, 2010 at 2:24 pm
    I kind of wish this wasn’t being done by Hannity. He’s seen as a whack-job by everyone I know, and will not be helpful for the cause.
    In Massachusetts, most people will feel that if Hannity says it’s false?…it MUST be true. They won’t even watch the show.
    JimB I presume that the people in Massachussetts don’t think Jean Kerrie is; how you say it; a Whack job ?
    Hannity is no whack job; not by a long way; but his voice is quite a bit of an irritant. I don’t listen to him for that reason; and fortunately I can’t pick up his T&V show.
    I have at times listened to that whole spectrum of radio personalities; and unfortunately; there really isn’t one of them who gets to the crux of the story. Most of them are from the modern generation who bypassed learning problem solving skills at school.
    And I gave up a long time ago trying to educate them. Some of them are far more capable of obfuscation, than revelation, and they don’t seem to know the difference. But they have the microphone; and if they just stimulate one person to think for themselves, it is probably a step forward.

  12. Well one purpose that Hannity fills is to be a lightning rod for the venom from all the people who are sleepless at nights over the TEA Party phenomenon.
    Try as the might; they can’t unearth any villains among the tea partiers; who are just ordinary folks who feel they are taxed enough already; for whatever unconstitutional reason their representatives want to reach deeper into their pockets.
    So they need a focal point to lash out at. Last election season they found Sarah Palin, and her designer glasses; good enough to go off on. So now they have a DB named Levi to keep up the needling. Anyone notice the strategy; in debating 101 textbooks it is called the ad hominem attack; and it is guaranteed to lose you more debating points than the strawman argument.
    So SH has a stainless steel hide so he can take it; and he gets his kicks from taking it from those who can dish it out, but don’t want to put their own heads up to collect the response. So pay no attetion to that man behind the curtain; he’s just the place to clean your boots on.

  13. Unfortunately, Hannity is too stupid to do this right. He’ll make it a political slugfest not an open examination of the statistical basis for the global warming statements he’s attempting to refute.

  14. Oh, come on. ALL of the media are “Whack-Jobs”. It is that simple fact that things are as screwed up with the “MSM” as we see today. If those “leftist” are evil and wrong, then the “rightist” are guilty of the same. If you asked ANY of these guys (Inhofe, Boehne, Hannity, etc) what a strip bark, or a pine-cone proxy was, you would be embarrassed. They are the same POLITICIANS that Markey, Boxer and Kerry. They do not know anything. Yes, Markey, Boxer and Kerry should be removed, not for their position in the past, but for the same thing that we deplore of the current NAS and other “clubs” that seem to be under the impression that they can not be wrong.
    More of these silly reports will come out in the future, not because of any form of journalism, just that they are ethical wrong, and the “greenpeace types” so over-extended their capability.

  15. Of course, here in Canuckistan, we don’t get Fox News… Might upset the social order.
    By the way, up here we got a few feet of snow above 5000 feet last night. I think this will be remembered as a “recovery summer” for other reasons than intended.

  16. Good. All of the people viewing who don’t normally pay any attention to this blobal-warming and black-carbon-footprints will get of a view, on MSM no doubt, of what this is really all about: their pocketbook.

  17. LOL! People calling Hannity a whack job re-elect the likes of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over and over and over.
    Gee, if only MSNBC would do a GW special; that would surely make the lefties happy in Taxxachusetts and the dozen or so people that actually watch MSNBC.

  18. Scott says: “I agree there. The FoxNews coverage, especially from Beck, on CAGW tends to reduce the scepticism and increase the anger of the liberal people I know.”
    Liberals have mostly already drunk the Kook-Aid.

  19. Scott, too late, the left made it a political slugfest a long time ago.
    Hannity has the second highest rated cable news show, I don’t think he’ll listen to any of you guys telling him he’s doing it wrong………..and obviously most of the cable news viewers won’t either.
    Hannity’s rating is higher than the other three stations (CNN, MSNBC, HLN) added together.
    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/

  20. I think a lot of commenters are missing the point. Hannity is seen as a figure of the current political chasm that exists in this country. Yes, while his ratings are good, he isn’t exactly going to enlighten new people or those on the fence regarding this topic….he’ll just further instill the anger in people on that side of the issue. I truly think that in order for AGW/Green BS to be questioned by more people that need to wake up and question it, someone truly independent on the issue needs to come forth and present something like this and do so in a broad based, well received fashion. I’m sure much of what Hannity will say is truth, but I’m also sure he’s not going to win over too many new converts who already view him as a partisan hack (whether you think he is or not, many on the fence are not watching Fox News).

  21. The funny thing about Glenn Beck…. I wouldn’t let my kids listen to his morning show on the radio, before he went national and became a Friend of Bill…. and while he may seem to be channeling Howard Beale, what he has to say is pretty damn accurate. Topics that I’ve been researching for awhile, such as the influence of the Frankfurt School on the American social sciences, turn up on his show and in the proper context…. not 100% accurate, but close, real close.
    Think about it, folks. You’d prefer it was someone like Chris Mathews doing this, the guy who gets a tingle up and down his leg thinking of our current President? Dismissing the argument because it is Sean Hannity saying it is just another ad hom response. Let’s wait and see what his show has to say…. if it’s too far over the top, well, let the alarmists read it here first.

  22. The votes of those who regularly tune into his show have exactly the same weight as those who don’t!
    Don’t they have same right to illumination as anyone else?

  23. “JimB – What do you expect from a populace who repeatedly send the likes of Frank , Markey and Kerry to Washington ?”
    Welcome to my world…
    “LOL! People calling Hannity a whack job re-elect the likes of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over and over and over. ”
    Welcome to my world…
    “JimB I presume that the people in Massachussetts don’t think Jean Kerrie is; how you say it; a Whack job ?”
    Welcome to my world…
    Feels almost like groundhog day here.
    JimB

  24. I watched the first segment. It is actually a pretty good historical overview to this point. Moore formerly of Greenpeace is pretty clear and pointed – he skewers Gore – “not a scientific bone in his body”! Hannity has not detracted from the story at all.

  25. It’ll likely just be a preaching to the choir kind of thing, but maybe I’m wrong, his show does have good ratings. He is certainly a better host than O’Reilly, but O’Reilly tends to have better guests on his show.
    Red Eye is clearly the best show on Fox though.

  26. Second segment just as punchy, IMO. Hannity is simply the narrator. Pretty slicj interspersing of the usual questioners – Michaels, Lindzen, Horner, Monckton – he is one odd looking dude but conveys enormous confidence and conviction.

  27. Somehow I don’t think we need to worry about what folks in Ma will think. In Dec of 2005 they passed regulations that “cars sold in the state after 2015 must emit 30 percent less carbon dioxide, 20 percent fewer toxic pollutants, and as much as 20 percent fewer smog- causing pollutants than under federal standards.”
    They’re already gone!

  28. I don’t know why everyone keeps on about “scientific” disputes over fractions of this that and the other. The whole business is about political power and has been from day one. Scientific disputes can be settled and usually are, by rational argument. Political disputes on the other hand are usually ultimately settled with guns and bombs.

  29. Still pretty good. The third section focuses on Kyoto and the politics of trying to shackle the US economy. Gore is again skewered as having deliberately rejected the sense of the Senate in pursuing the agreements. Horner is pretty good. Hannity agains has not got in the way of the presentation.

  30. Agreed Bernie-this is a good report he is having other’s tell the story-like Monckton
    and others familiar here…

  31. I’m so glad you are more tolerant of opposing positions, Anthony.
    I know that means you won’t be pulling posts from people you don’t like, and that you’ll publish mine.
    FoX news is owned by foreigners.
    Anything they say that would influence American public opinion in this country MUST be taken with a grain of salt!

  32. I’m so glad you are more tolerant of opposing positions, Anthony.
    I know that means you won’t be pulling posts from people you don’t like, and that you’ll publish mine.
    FOX news is owned by foreigners.
    Anything they say that would influence American public opinion MUST be taken with a grain of salt!

  33. Watching the show right now.
    Actually, so far, it seems like a pretty good recapitulation of the distortions in climate science and of the Climategate emails.

  34. The fourth segment dealt with Climategate. McKitrick was very, very good. Clear, crisp and forceful especially on the weak inquiries. His best line was that he believed that Briffa had not read the papers that he was asked to summarize. Thhat will have some reverberations – but I woul not pull the pin of that grenade unless I was pretty sure what Ross will say in response.
    Again Hannity is simply there.

  35. Hannity is actually doing a pretty good job so far. I’m thinking that there are some people who will not be convinced even if Mann and Hansen were to confess on the steps of the Lincolm Memorial that they fudged the numbers. There are a lot of people out there who kind of mildly thing that AGW is the true explanation whose eyes might be opened by this report.

  36. Fifth segment – Cap and Trade. The money trail was interesting. No real explanation of what exactly will be traded and by whom and who will control the volume of credits. Roy Spencer was pretty feisty. They really missed an opportunity to drive home the point of what it will do to everyone’s electricity bill. That was an opportunity for a real hammer blow.
    I hope this will be useful until a more detailed summary is available.

  37. For those of who intereseted in the science – not so deep . For those of us interested in the swindle – spot on . Of course WUWT has covered both aspects for years . Thanks , Anthony .

  38. No real punch in the last segment. Only idiots buy “green” products. The real issue is where we may be forced to buy over priced products. I had hoped for the exposure of wind farms.
    Too rushed and poorly structured.

  39. I was surprised reading through the comments on this topic. It almost seems that some people had made up their minds about this program before it even aired. I watched the show, and will probably watch it again in 3 hours when it re-airs. I suggest you do the same (or catch the web version) before you begin making decisions. I thought Hannity did a credible job of a difficult task. From my perspective this is a very complex topic and I would be challenged to fully express all that has happened in a single one-hour program. Take the plunge and actually listen to what he has to say, or perhaps refrain from comment. I thought skeptics were all about avoiding attacks based simply on a person’s name or social rank.

  40. Well, Fox News certainly lined up a number of heavy hitters from the skeptics side. Almost looked like the NIPCC Convention. However, the program was designed for general public consumption, not for knowledgeable skeptics. The concluding note from Hannity though sounded like there may be another such program in the future.

  41. I especially liked how he let you know, right at the beginning, that his motivation was entirely partisan and political by linking environmentalists to Stalin.

  42. It’s a shame that this post started off with a “whack job” statement about Hannity. That person harmed us all by directing us off our message and encouraging comments about this misleading statement , likely by a troll.
    This post is not about Hannity, its about his message. He had the right message and we need more people to get it out of the blogosphere. He’s mainline and we need to respect that and thank him for his effort.
    I liked his script and his interviews. He got the message right and we need more of this reporting.
    However, I do take umbrage at his videos of spewing smokestacks. That problem has been cured in the US by criteria pollutant and air toxic rules that have nothing to do with CO2. That part of his visual presentation makes it harder for us as a whole to advance the thought that we are over-reaching. The criteria pollutant and air toxic problems are addressed under other programs.
    Lets get rid of the offending green and red and other historical, but not currrent air emissions.
    And let’s stop criticizing Hannity. He did very good job putting this together.
    This effort should be widely applauded.

  43. Hannity gives me a migraine after listening to him for about 5 minutes, but I struggled through the show best I could. I usually change the channel when he comes on. It’s good to see though, the information is being broadcast on the MSM.
    My work with getting involved in science blogs, but not with WUWT, is pretty much done now that my major gaol was achieved. Killing Cap-And-Trade. I read a post on Climate Depot that mentions WUWT. Climate Depot and WUWT cost a lot of people $1 Trillion in the carbon market. Makes me feel proud.
    “The Great Collapse of the Chicago Climate Exchange
    By 21st Century Wire
    By Patrick Henningsen
    Editor
    21st Century Wire
    Plagued by a free fall in carbon emissions prices and the perennial failure of Washington to pass any binding Cap and Trade Bill, it seems that the Chicago Climate Exchange is on its last leg, announcing that it will be scaling back its operations.
    Chicago Climate Exchange or CCX, is North America’s sole voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas trading and carbon “offset” projects in North America and Brazil. Rueters reported on Aug 11th that Intercontinental Exchange Inc, the operating body for the CCX, will be scaling back major operations this month, a move that includes massive layoffs. This is likely due to the complete market free-fall of their only product… carbon emissions.”
    http://21stcenturywire.com/2010/08/27/the-great-collapse-of-the-chicago-climate-exchange/

  44. I won’t believe that the CCX is on its last legs until Jan 2011. Remember, Congress will have two months during which they can do anything. The non-returning incombents have no check on their behavior.

  45. Dave L says:
    August 27, 2010 at 7:29 pm

    The concluding note from Hannity though sounded like there may be another such program in the future.

    This was not the first special Sean has had on Climate Change issues. He also has had fairly regular segments on his show related to the topic. You are correct. Tonight will not be the last night he has a special on it.

  46. Good work from Hannity, congratulations!
    With his top ratings for the 9 PM EST time slot he reached a lot of people.
    Fox News is, I think, the only big TV network that has a consistent anti-CAGW view.
    Also, they have a consistent anti-Chavez position. 😉

  47. Just watched it online here in Oz… was it two 7 minute segments? It felt like a trailer for a really impressive doco!
    Having said that, very interesting. “Follow the money” as always such good advice.

  48. I saw the whole show an hour ago. I didn’t notice any errors or any goofiness (i.e., claims that it is impossible for humans to alter the climate). Yes, there was some partisanship, but less than I would have expected. I have actually lived through the history of the modern environmental movement (I read Ehrlich’s “The Population Bomb” as a student during ’69-’70), and the historical comments seemed fair to me.
    Everyone who is playing whack-a-mole with Hannity (yeah, sometimes he annoys me too) should remember that this sort of show is put together by the producers and lowly researchers, not by Hannity himself. However, he does have the power to nix it, to wreck or misrepresent their research, etc. Hannity deserves credit for going ahead with the program, for having solid producers and researchers, and for not wrecking the work that they put into the show.
    That is all we can expect from on-air personalities, and it’s much more than we usually get from Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, et al.
    Hannity does not have to be a genius. He simply needs honest, bright people to do the grunt work and then he needs to use their work honestly. On that, he delivered tonight.
    Dave Miller in Sacramento

  49. Pretty good show given the time constraints. Was irritated by the email release as due to “hackers.”

  50. I watched in Oz with a couple of freelance documentary makers who only recently started to question their previous beliefs. They are now starting to question the AGW hypothesis after they were impressed with this documentary on Hannity. It is a pity that the MSM are so blinded by ideology as many people do not have satellite TV or Cable. They did not know Hannity so were not prejudiced by his commentary. I thought it was a pretty good effort considering the 1 hour time constraint.

  51. Policyguy says:
    August 27, 2010 at 8:05 pm
    It’s a shame that this post started off with a “whack job” statement about Hannity.
    He did very good job putting this together.
    This effort should be widely applauded.

    Agreed – Credibly done for a general audience.

  52. Okay, I just watched the entire special and can say unhesitatingly that this is a keeper.
    Considering the state of the media today, not to mention the state of the general population (ok the dimwit 52%+ that pulled the lever for the democratic socialist) this Climategate Global Warming special is the absolute best overview that has yet aired. Highly Recommended.
    And for all you trolls and/or handwringers/bedwetters that appear above (you know who you are: ‘OMG what will my cocktail party friends think when Hannity airs this‘), well, you can stay out of my foxhole if the stuff ever hits the fan. To paraphrase one of you, ‘with friends like YOU who needs enemies’.
    I mean really, panic and bedwetting before you even see the thing! LOL! Well at least you are all preserved for posterity in the archive of this thread. Jeez! Man up will ya!

  53. Considering each one of those segments deserve a one hour show minimum, I felt fair job was done. This was much better than the MSM treatment of a 30 second doom&gloom weallgonnadie and it’sallourfault soundbite. Would have loved to have seen a little cause & effect for past decisions (I really hate Silent Spring & the DDT ban, puts environmenuts on the same playing field as Mao & Stalin for deaths caused, and are you enjoying the current bed bug plague? he he he… I digress). More detail could have been placed into the cost of wind/solar/bio-fuel subsidies and the need for on-line backup power for wind/solar (again the need for a full 1 hour segment).
    The treatment of the “Nature trick” was not as I understood it. My understanding, from at least some of their excuses, was that they used measured temperatures vice proxy temperatures when the proxies dropped. Please correct me if I was wrong.
    All in all, though Hannity sounds like a broken record & a shrill for the Repubican party, it was worth watching for uninformed on the subject. It was not overloaded with scientific details (to make Joe 6 pack yawn & change the channel).

  54. I found the first two segments on the Fox News site, but couldn’t find the remainder. Does anyone have a link to them?

  55. I watched the show and found that it was easily digestible and well presented. The interviews were good and the show flowed well. While I didn’t learn anything new, I think that folks who don’t visit sites like this one will walk away with some solid takeaways.
    The reason why you won’t see this on ABC/NBC/CBS is that they are heavily vested in the left. 88% of those networks employees gave to the Democratic party according to the Washington Examiner.
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-Democrats-got-88-percent-of-TV-network-employee-campaign-contributions-101668063.html

  56. “StevenK says:
    August 27, 2010 at 7:28 pm
    I was surprised reading through the comments on this topic. It almost seems that some people had made up their minds about this program before it even aired. I watched the show, and will probably watch it again in 3 hours when it re-airs. I suggest you do the same (or catch the web version) before you begin making decisions. I thought Hannity did a credible job of a difficult task. From my perspective this is a very complex topic and I would be challenged to fully express all that has happened in a single one-hour program. Take the plunge and actually listen to what he has to say, or perhaps refrain from comment. I thought skeptics were all about avoiding attacks based simply on a person’s name or social rank.”
    Not sure if you’re referring to me, but my original position was that where I live, people will not watch Hannity, period…nor will they watch Fox News. Never seen such a group of narrow-minded, no, CLOSE-minded people. Remember that this state was settled by the Puritans, a group not known for scientific reasoning or open-mindedness 🙂
    JimB

  57. as mentioned above in aus, only one segment there.
    I DO disagree with negating Rachel Carsons work though.
    she didnt have an agenda except to.. if you listen..Regulate strictly, the aerial spraying of…pest and weedicide
    at that stage untested or barely,on humans and with very little real time/use data,
    it was the indiscriminate abuse of said chem!

  58. Hannity did a fine job and should be commended.
    ..and yes you can get FOX News in Canada with the News Package — at least on Rogers Cable. It is amazing the difference in coverage with RT and FOX as compared to CTV and CBC. A lot of topics — are only covered from one perspective in the MSM in Canada. If you watch FOX or RT it is obvious that there are alternative viewpoints, data and justifications for many issues. Anything skeptical of conventional wisdom is treated in a condescending manner on CBC. CTV simply ignores anything that is not a mainstream view. At least the weather channel has ceased broadcasting most adulatory comments about Margaret Mead and her promotion of AGW — that fabulous woman indeed! However they do not discuss any skeptical viewpoints that I can see.
    Cheers!

  59. Is it just two /-7min sections?
    cant find anymore on foxnew.com, but they said they would talk about the science but havent seen any, just 1st bit about Patrick Moore and 2nd bit about obama en C&T. There must be more.

  60. Brad says:
    August 28, 2010 at 5:26 am
    Call me when a reputable news stations does a story…
    ——–Reply:
    What’s your number, Brad? I’ll call and tell you Hannity did a fine job last night. It was logically presented and a damning case against CAGW watermelons. But then, as a geologist, I’ve been laughing at those clowns for years. I just hope you’re not one of them.

  61. We got all-time record temperature late june 2010 here in Finland. But how about the year 2010 generally? It has been rather cool. Winter was cold like “good old days” 1960’s. June was below average temp. June was really hot (+3 celsius over average) and August started record but continued really cold. Now it’s sure that summer 2010 won’t be much warmer than average. In northern part of Finland, e.g Lappland, it has been much cooler than average.
    This year 2010 will not be the warmest – far from it. And as i’ve heard, summer there in western Europe and Britain has been really cool. It looks like the global warming is in trouble – it stopped in 1998.

  62. They nailed it.
    Not too many details to boggle the general public, but left them with the take home message of corruption and the science is not settled. Even if someone couldn’t keep up with all of the examples, they left with the impression that there are hundreds of examples.
    Good for them.
    Hannity just introduced it, and did the commercial breaks.
    =================================================
    Brad says:
    August 28, 2010 at 5:26 am
    Call me when a reputable news stations does a story…
    ====================================================
    Brad, you must mean CBS and Dan Rather, right?

  63. Bernie and PhysicistDave,
    Spot on – I second everything you guys said and you said it better than I could have.
    I watched the with someone who isn’t that into this issue but she gets regular updates from me on the topic but still isn’t all that interested. For her it was a real eye-opener and she found it a little shocking that Obama was in deep on carbon trading.
    The entire global warming climate caper is a great story from beginning to end – Green nonsense from “Silent Spring” and “The Population Bomb” (I read them both in their day along with stuff like “The Secret Life of Plants” and other wonderful ’70s tripe) and just the fact that these two books were practically fact-free goes unnoticed and unchallenged in MSM in relation to the current climate debate.
    If any MSM vehicle were to really take this story, in its entirety from “Silent Spring” to Professor Mann’s (and Al Gore’s) million$ and demonstrate the weakness of the envirotards arguments – weak on science; weak on economics; weak on ethics; I believe that particular media vehicle would make a fortune. To me it is unbelievable MSM is missing the enormity of this story.
    Hannity did a good job. Let’s hope MSM takes this thing on and more people wake up to the scam.

  64. By the way, I don’t know “Hannity” so I guess I can at least be partly independant in my opinion of the show…if only I could find it.

  65. One hour was not enough! After all we have been inundated daily for 40 plus years with the fraud and it is now inside our schools and universities. Our kids do not stand a chance to ever hear the truth.I do not know if you are aware but here in Canada our kids have to believe in AGW, it is part of the school curriculum, they must answer correctly on their exams or they will fail to graduate. Google ” BC Science 10 and read the first section” This is Indoctrination. The Vile Site Desmutblog will have a goat over Hannity’s Green fraud … I can already feel them ascending to Environmental consciousness.

  66. @ Erik “…?playlist_id=87937” plays only the first 7.5 minute segment. Has anyone found links to all other segments?

  67. Sean Hannity won’t change the minds of the 30% hard core left (if they do watch (which I doubt)) and the 30% hard core right will lap anything up.
    But what he CAN do is reach a vast audience of folks in the middle of a political spectrum and lay out some facts for them.
    On balance – a good thing.

  68. a nice change at least!
    I DO take issue re Rachael Carson being sledged.
    she was against the UNcontrolled wholesale and reckless use of chemicals. she was correct!
    the organophosphates deildrin chlordates etc have all been proven harmful, and many banned, for Good reason.
    the old- but banning DDT killed millions.. line
    that was a WHO decision, they either had no Proof that is was safe?
    or proof it IS harmful they didnt want to admit to.
    they could have chosen to limit and control its supply and use, thats NOT Rachaels fault in any way.
    complaints against her are always from the agrichem supporters.
    Gore couldnt have given a damn but he or his admen? knew it would catch sympathy for really caring honest green inclined people.
    as the original greenpeace founder said, it all got railroaded.
    I no longer call myself green, but I still plant trees and moderate my useage.

  69. The best thing about the Fox news special comes near the beginning. There is a quick shot of Gore and Pachauri standing on stage receiving the Noble Peace Prize. Just before the camera cuts away, we see Gore winking at the audience! If this doesn’t show that Global warming is all a shuck, I don’t know what would.

  70. @ Jeff “ “plays only the first 7.5 minute segment”
    I know, hopefully fox news will make the rest of it available

  71. Hannity has a repeat slot on Sunday at 9pm eastern. I don’t know if it will be the Green Swindle or one of his shows from earlier in the week. I would put it at 75% that it would be a repeat of The Green Swindle.

  72. Thanks, Glenn, for the link to the ratings. It’s amusing to see that the supposed fringe Fox News which nobody watches actually has ratings equal to the other three combined.

    Total day: FNC: 1255 | CNN: 376 | MSNBC: 373 | HLN: 264
    
  73. RE: JimB: (August 27, 2010 at 2:24 pm ) “I kind of wish this wasn’t being done by Hannity…”
    Of course, this really would be a significant news event if the program had been hosted by Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow, but, unfortunately, I suspect anyone looking for that will be a long time waiting. I almost think that support from that quarter might cause some to doubt their skepticism. 🙂

  74. The best MSM documentation I have seen of the hijacking of a good movement.
    The same thing appears to be happening again with the tea party.
    How does a grass roots movement survive the selection of a leader or leaders?
    OT perhaps.

  75. If anyone finds out when Fox is going to show this again, or knows where it’s on the internet, please post it here.
    There are a lot of people that didn’t see it, and are now trying to find it.
    Thanks

  76. Watched the full hour show on Austar satellite, considering the time constraints it was as good as could be expected, nothing new to the informed but the political machinations of the whole AGW movement were well presented.
    The Obama connection to the Chicago Carbon Exchange was brought up, Glenn Beck has gone into that in great detail (George Soros, Al Gore et al)over the past few weeks so the political involvement should be clear to all.
    A follow up would be a good idea, with the futility of wind farms, the back up required, the price hike of food caused by Bio Fuel and its effect on the Third World, resources required for electric vehicles, and the export of jobs caused by electricity prices, (Aluminum production will go offshore in Oz if this happens here with the Emissions Trading Scheme) plus other mining jobs, for a start.

  77. I love how the summary of Hannity’s special given above makes it not at all clear what the conclusions of the show will be…
    /sarcasm

  78. Matt says:
    August 29, 2010 at 5:55 am
    ==================================
    Isn’t it amazing that someone like Hannity can make a clear believable and easy to understand presentation, and yet in over 50 years the people pushing it can’t.

  79. finally got to see it on repeat and it was excellent from start to finish. kudos to all involved, including Hannity.
    having a low opinion of all MSM, including the so-called “scientific” mags, means i don’t care who the messenger is, as long as the facts comes out. since Climategate, the only two hours worth watching have been on Fox. ABCCBSNBCCNNBBC should feel ashamed.

  80. Just found a recording of the show online here:

    Looks like 6 parts in all – The Green $windel – The Environmental Agenda – Part 1 of 6
    WayneC

  81. R. Shearer says:
    August 27, 2010 at 2:44 pm
    It was a billion dollar industry many years ago.

    Companies have been marketing products as “green” for many years now – appealing to environmentalism in general, not particularly climate change activists.
    It might appeal to the activists, but it’s just more money in the pockets of large corporations.
    There’s a sucker born every minute.

Comments are closed.