Posted on 09/07/2004 7:29:53 AM PDT by ZGuy
This is not your father's National Geographic any more. Once a coffee table staple with gorgeous photos of people, places and things, it now more resembles a host of other slick lobbying mags, pushing today's popular issues.
Last month's cover story was "fat." This month it's global warming, a subject that actually lends itself to quantitative fact-checking, of which National Geographic apparently did little.
I will start with the first misrepresentation of facts. When I get to this article's word limit, I'll still have 75 percent of them left. . . .
It begins with a picture of a flooded rice field in Bangladesh . . .
The first article starts with the melting of Sperry Glacier. . .
Next column: "The famed snows of Kilimanjaro have melted more than 80 percent since 1912." . ..
Two pages later, we read, "Human activity almost certainly drove most of the past century's warming." That's not true either.
Seven misleading statements in three pages. There are 28 more. When the truth gets this stretched, that's more than one person's work. Instead, it's a process, where scientists tell editors what they want to hear, editors don't check the facts and, ultimately, we all pay with very bad policies. Unfortunately, it's all predictable.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Now, THAT's a feeble excuse!
Watermelons don't melt - they rot!
National Geographic made a point of hiring individuals who had worked in the Clinton administration. Some had no background in the sciences other than law...but they are lending their left wing bias to the magazines perspective.
When I was a kid, and even when my son was a kid, National Geographic was a wonderful magazine. The organization even sponsored various expeditions, etc.
I quit subscribing when they began outrageous propaganda for wacky liberal causes.
I think the anti-hunting article on the black-tailed prairie dog pushed me over the edge. (For all those in (as Rush would say) Rio Lindo -- the black-tailed prairie dog would have been poisoned to extinction 30 years ago if hunters had not made it profitable for ranchers to protect prairie dog colonies instead.
No, just an astute observation and a prudent unwillingness to engage in grade school captiousness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.