Skip to comments.Reuters Takes Sides on Climate Change
Posted on 07/24/2009 9:53:16 AM PDT by AJKauf
That the press in general is sympathetic to the tenets of global warming and environmental alarmism in general is nearly beyond dispute. But Reuters, the wire service that U.S. news outlets heavily rely on for international news, has taken its environmental bias further and has crossed the line into open advocacy.
Consider a few graphics I captured at various Reuters reports during the past week. (GRAPHICS at link)...
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
I could go for some globull warming right now.
This has been one of the coolest summers around here that I can recall. Average temp for Pittsburgh area so far is 71 degrees.
Dennis Miller had the man who founded The Weather Channel on his radio show last night. The man no longer owns the channel by the way (it was established for a couple of million dollars at it was recently sold to another Big Media company for $4billion). This man was long out of the picture by that point (so he didn’t reap the rewards on that sum).
HOWEVER, he spent a good portion of his spot on Mr. Miller’s program talking about cyclical trends in weather patterns and how this entire “global warming scare” is a SCAM.
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
My guess? Reporters can’t do math - and don’t understand science - makes ‘em easy to “play”...
(As Asimov pointed out, the the flat-earth types aren't far from being "wrong," since Earth deviates from being flat by only eight inches per mile. When it comes to matters of science, a spit in the ocean is still a spit in the ocean.)
The burden of proof, in any case, rests upon those who claim "AGW" is a clear and present danger. Those of us who believe the whole hypothesis is (1.) flawed and (2.) primarily a political straw-man being pushed upon the public as an excuse to expand tyranny really have only to sew doubt.
We do not have to "prove" AGW is ridiculous or even "wrong," only that the proponents of this bogeyman are engaged in politics, not science.
Dr. Schmitt, when he resigned from the Planetary Society, late last year, may have put it best when he wrote, ""Consensus", as many have said, merely represents the absence of definitive science."