The irony is just too thick, I’ll leave it to WUWT’s readers to pass judgement on this one… Just The Facts
—
From ABC News – The Elephant We’re All Inside – Junk Journalism on Climate, or Too Big to Cover? – By Bill Blakemore – Excerpts Follow:
“A number of the world’s professional climate scientists are perplexed by — and in some cases furious with — American news directors.
“Malpractice!” is typical of the charges this reporter has heard highly respected climate experts level — privately, off the record — at my professional colleagues over the past few years.
Complaints include what seems to the scientists a willful omission of overwhelming evidence the new droughts and floods are worsened by man made global warming, and unquestioning repetition, gullible at best, of transparent anti-science propaganda credibly reported to be funded by fossil fuel interests and anti-regulation allies.”
—
“Why this decline in persistent coverage?
It seems unlikely to last; all responsibly sourced reports from around the world — “as solid as science ever gets,” say eminent climate scientists — suggest the increasing impacts will soon force news directors to offer more coverage and explanatory reporting to a public that will appreciate getting it.”
—
“‘A Crime Against Humanity’
A number of climate scientists have told this reporter they agree with those, including NASA scientist James Hansen, who charge fossil fuel CEOs are thus guilty of a “crime against humanity,” given the calamity that unregulated greenhouse emissions are quickly bringing on.”
—
“The Many Findings at Nature’s Edge
In our “Nature’s Edge” reporting at ABC News, begun several years ago with the aim of getting our arms around the daunting climate story by putting it in the context of all sorts of “news from where nature and human nature meet,” we have found some delightful and surprising new avenues opening up.
One of the basic premises of the Nature’s Edge reports, in both video and digital print, is that the global warming story is clearly a story about the question, “What will the humans do?” — and therefore a story about the need to understand human nature better — even overall collective human nature, as a species, so to speak — for upon it may rest any success in dealing well with this immense crisis.”
Read more: Bill Blakemore: The Elephant We’re All Inside – Junk Journalism on Climate, or Too Big to Cover? – ABC News
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There’s *not enough* alarmism in the MSM?? Must be a conspiracy. 🙂
Desperation or what??
They’re getting very strident, the end must be getting closer.
‘transparent anti-science propaganda credibly reported to be funded by fossil fuel interests and anti-regulation allies’
Personally, I’m getting sick of this connection, for I have seen scant evidence of any significant program.
Not one CAGW climate sceptic I know – and that’s quite a few – has received a cent or more from either asserted donor.
Those who believe in this line need to produce evidence or shut up, because it’s getting quite close to slander and class action. Show me an entry in a recent annual report and accounts of any groups who are funding as alleged and you might change my perceptions.
“all responsibly sourced reports from around the world — “as solid as science ever gets,” say eminent climate scientists ”
WHAT? Has the IPCC changed its rules? Or does this mean that “eminent climate scientists” consider pamphlets from the WWF as valid as say, Einstein’s theory of general relativity?
In that case, where has a theory by the WWF made a prediction that was tested?
I guess the “eminent climate scientists” share a room with Harry Reid’s insider source right next to a six foot invisible rabbit.
Could someone explain the word “science” and the scientific method to Bill Blakemore? And maybe “journalism”?
Wow! Junk journalism at is best.
However: it comes back to a very important point for sceptics:
1. Most of us believe there is some AGW is happening, but that its effects have been mostly beneficial. This will probably continue, but its effects will be small and dwarfed by natural climate cycles.
2. Alarmists try and link disbelief in CAGW – which is a classic example of bad, unsubstantiated science – to a disbelief in AGW.
This is the big lie in ‘climate science’: alarmists linking the BS theory of CAGW to the mildly interesting phenomenon of AGW.
“A number of climate scientists have told this reporter they agree with those, including NASA scientist James Hansen, who charge fossil fuel CEOs are thus guilty of a “crime against humanity.”” Ah, but only those in the Western developed nations, of course.
I am in dispair that nowhere does Mr. Blakemore question the “science”.
I know I keep saying it but until MSM starts to look at the real data CAGW hysteria will continue to thrive.
Junk Journalism on Climate – he should have stopped right there and saved some time
I’ve always suspected this sort of private pressure has been applied. The “consent” of the MSM has always looked partly “engineered” by high-pressure tactics. They’re the sort of tactic that expensive, savvy media consultants would suggest, and they’re the sort of thing self-righteous zealots would engage in anyway.
In the aftermath, when this madness delaminates, it will be interesting to hear more details of this emerge, when the MSM is challenged to explain its complicity in it.
I’m for free speech, but there are limits even to that and e.g. you can’t just stand in a crowded cinema shouting fire when there clearly is none.
Fortunately most people now are ignoring these people.
Unfortunately, that means if there ever is a real fire a lot people will ignore it.
Junk Journalism=“Nature’s Edge”
Here is the elephant in the room.
No trends in extreme weather
(several papers referenced near top of article)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/27/another-paper-shows-that-severe-weatherextreme-weather-has-no-trend-related-to-global-warming/
Warmists following fossil fuel money
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/01/follow-the-money-why-heartland-is-a-big-threat/#comment-909422
Despite all their tricks and all their grants they’re losing the scientific debate and they’re losing the public debate so they want to create a law which makes them right. However every time a CAGW activist drives a car or uses their computer they are an accomplice to the mythical wrongdoing of technological and scientific progress which inhabits their bitter narrow minds.
“Complaints include what seems to the scientists a willful omission of overwhelming evidence the new droughts and floods are worsened by man made global warming”
If they have this overwhelming evidence, why havn’t they presented it yet?
Come on guys, don’t keep it to yourselves!
This piece from Bloomberg today takes the prize for junk climate science journalism IMO.
Politicians Who Deny Climate Change Cannot Be Pro-Business
A sample,
Here’s what makes the general silence on climate and the mocking from the self-identified pro-business party so absurd: tackling climate change is the smartest thing we can do for both our public health and our private sector. Reducing carbon emissions from our power plants, cars, and factories cleans the air and saves a lot of money. At the macro level, the burning of coal alone costs the U.S. about $350 billion per year in health (asthma, heart attacks, and so on) and pollution costs. At the micro level, from companies down to households, the opportunities to get lean and save money are vast.
If reducing ‘carbon emissions’ saves money, how come it costs so much?
I don’t know if the author is so ignorant he doesn’t understand the difference between CO2 emissions, and particulate carbon, hydrocarbon and other noxious emissions, or whether he is indulging in deliberate deception.
It then goes on to quote the usual subsidy and rent seeking suspects.
Ignorance of science and economics wrapped up in one package.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-07/politicians-who-deny-climate-change-cannot-be-pro-business.html
I knew the Republican were a greedy bunch. But their party mascot too. What is the world coming to.
I would like to be able to direct idiots like Bill Blakemore to some reasonably accessible overview of Climate Science as we truly know it, that is agreed by the majority of us skeptics.
With this in mind originally, I wrote up my basic piece Curious Anomalies in Climate Science to be accessible by intelligent lay people yet acceptable to scientists. I always wondered why WUWT did not include a page of “introductions” pages and websites. I then realized that my personal take on the science might be too far out along the “skeptical” line for some here, and conceived the idea of a wiki that would be built by climate skeptics, that could answer John Cook’s “debunks” item for item in bite-size articles – and provide a good foundation for the return to good science – and rehabilitate many good scientists like Monckton and Tim Ball who have been shamefully smeared and tarred.
Then I wanted to include in the wiki, the ability to host reasonable research, as I find the work of Nikolov and Zeller to be. But since N&Z were dismissed here, IMHO unfairly, I had to get to the bottom of the problem… which led to my investigating Roderich Graeff whose ten years of experimental work clearly show me that we need to modify the statement (not the essence) of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This modification would answer all those who believe that 2LoT undermines the work of N&Z. Graeff has shown this in his hundreds of simple, clear experiments. But with a few notable exceptions like Prof Sheehan who has run conferences on contemporary challenges to 2LoT, the universities don’t even want to look.
Sound familiar, anyone?
I still hope to replicate Graeff’s work myself in time. I’ve visited him and have not a shadow of doubt that his work is of Nobel-deserving standard – and would indeed recast the foundations of Climate Science and put it on a far more secure footing. But by now, I’m too far out from even the mainstream of Climate Skeptics to cope alone – and I have other work to do. I want to pass on the management and development of the wiki because I still believe passionately that it is needed – for such as Bill Blakemore.
I would still love to see a page here with links to introductions that exist, like my own, even if it is felt that disclaimers are needed.
It’s getting sillier by the week, month, year. ….Lady in Red
Bill Blakemore, three initials for you.
BBC.
You are either dishonest or stupid.
Wow. I had to go to the link to confirm for myself it was a real ABC News piece. I thought for sure it must have come from something like The Onion.
Malpractice!! when the MSM picks up on the malpractice of the climate science community,
and NGO’s, enviromentalists, then they can shout about malpractice…staggering two faceness ..again. do your job journalists look into the sceptics claims then see who’s doing the malpractice???
I posted the following over there & several hours later it has not appeared:
Can anyone show us actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming?
Keep in mind that Nature puts out 96% of the CO2, man only 4% and Al Gore’s ice cores show CO2 increase FOLLOWING temperature by 800 years, unusual weather, melting glaciers, etc., is not proof that man is the cause, the climate was warmer in the medieval, Roman, Egyptian and Minoan times and water vapor causes more greenhouse effect than CO2.
So just what is the evidence anyway?
Thanks
JK
James Hansen never drives a car? Never heats his home or his office using gas or grid electricity? Never uses fossil fuel powered public transport? …. If he does, perhaps he would volunteer to stand trial for his personal crimes against humanity. Otherwise he’d be a phoney, wouldn’t he?
The overwhelming evidence that we are heading for a climate catastrophe would surely be a number of minor climate events leading to the deaths of millions of people? Hasn’t happened yet has it? Amazing therefore that AGW gets greater press coverage than tsunami protection. Go figure.
as time passes and all their fry n die or drown crud becomes proven false even to the most ignorant and credulous of the masees.
I have to admit I am really going to enjoy knowing so many of the prominent liars like hansen the mannikin flim flannery and karoly in aus..are going to be out or work, or shovelling crap for a living..
reading climate spectator an aussie online warmist pro govt rag tonight,
stating the global eradication of CFCs even though the science was unproven it was still proof they could do it..
ah
but they FAIL to mention we cut the cfcs and yet? they now find ozone holes up nth.
so that, like carbon lies…worked a real treat didnt it?
🙂
seem to remember ken lay and enron and a lot of profits to them over trading cfc shares too.
fool us once…BUT NOT twice!