Posted on 11/10/2005 11:17:09 AM PST by Dad was my hero
Obvoiusly Ailes read 'State of Fear" by Michael Chricton
He's just trying to increase his ad revenues
running lackey capitalist pig dog that he is.
Thanks for the laugh, Mr. Ailes! Non-scientist Laurie David is just as much of a "leading authority" on global warming as non-scientists RFKjr and AlGore are. Apparently "passion and dedication" are an acceptable substitute for the actual possession of facts.
My wife is an environmental scientist (as well as a staunch Republican - I'm the Conservative). She is privy to much documentation regarding the issue. She is convinced that the data are correct, the earth is warming. She is not convinced though that the cause is man-made as opposed to naturally cyclical, neither are her colleagues.
whats the highest.
According to the Bible: Noah's flood
environmentally concious in her daily living
We all should be. If you aren't....you suck!
"She is not convinced though that the cause is man-made as opposed to naturally cyclical, neither are her colleagues."
I believe that is Michael Crichton's position, and if RFK, Jr. and Laurie David can be called as lay "experts" on the issue, then so can Mr. Crichton.
Maybe Rupert Murdock has warmed up to the global worming (misspelled on purpose, thank you) night crawlers.
Sign the Global worming accord-save Holland.
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my FoxFan list. *Warning: This can be a high-volume ping list at times.
I have never heard the term SCAG.
Just additional reasons to avoid tuning into FoxNews anymore. It's sad what's happened there. Brit's show is it for us.
Hence, when the polar caps melt more, because of an increase in temperature, the resulting increase in water level covers more dry ground. That, in turn, exposes less dry ground to the sun's rays, which produces a cooling cycle.
It is a cycle that has been going on ever since there has been dry land, polar caps, and oceans.
Then they are mistaken.
Personally, having a long enough history as a liberal and being able to sniff out bias in either direction, I have felt they were closer to center (mostly right center) than any other network I've seen.
The other networks are liberal. But that's got nothing to do with it. The editorial shows on Fox are all geared to a right wing audience and--SHAZAM!--that's their audience. Their nightly news guy, Brit Hume, is a right winger. Ailes is a right winger. It's a right wing network. There's nothing wrong with it. The market clearly wanted one. But it's pretty jokey to think that a show on global warming somehow means they've become CNN.
Yeah, I think it started about the same time that Rupert Murdoch got into bed with Hill and Bill several months back.
Thanks for the ping!
Sounds fine to me.
I would say he needs to read it. I'd recommend it to anyone in this thread, as well. It pretty much drives a stake through the heart of the environmentalist whacko movement.
I like Cavuto's show. He doesn't sound liberal to me.
Cavuto, Gibson are OK. I just never watch during that time of day.
As a News Corp. employee tasked with working on one of the many subsequent “follow-up” reports to this, I can’t tell you how utterly sickened I am by this overt politicization of our news product.
None other than Rupert Murdoch himself - at a recent New York meeting of News Corp. executives and political bigwigs from around the world - announced that every arm of News Corp. - including its broadcast division - will be spearheading a media blitz called “Cool Change”, wherein anyone within earshot of a News Corp. publication, cable, web or broadcast outlet, will be presented with stories aimed at “inspiring people to change their behavior” and “reduce their carbon footprint”. (Look for the Fox “E-Team” promos to start popping up all over the country).
Murdoch also announced that he intends to see News Corporation become “carbon neutral” by the year 2010! (Unless he plans to fire every employee and stop breathing himself, I honestly don’t see how this will happen).
As someone responsible for putting one of these follow-up stories on the air, I was told in no uncertain terms that the words “global warming” would not be used in the piece; that these pieces were to refrain from the political hot potato that surrounds such buzz words. Well, instead of using the words “global warming”, we’re going with the softer, slightly less political phrase “climate change.”
A rose by any other name.
When I pressed some colleagues about NASA’s evidence of global warm...er “climate change” on Mars, Neptune, Triton, and Jupiter, citing how there is no human activity on those planets that could be responsible for global warm...er “climate change” there, the standard response varied from non-sequitors like “it’s a controversial topic” to “so you’re saying it’s OK to keep polluting here?!?!?”
As a Fox employee, let me just state how heart-sick and disappointed I am that News Corporation is now going to be engaging in an all-out media blitz to help perpetuate one of the most heinous hoaxes ever foisted on modern man: that we humans are causing our earth to get warmer.
It appalls me to think that we may very well be “inspired” to put our economy in the tank to “fix” a problem that we not only didn’t create, but that in truth simply doesn’t exist.
It appalls me even further to think that I have a hand in this, yet am unable to do anything about it short of throwing my job away. Were I younger without so much to lose, I would do this and have - in fact - done this in the past: walking away from jobs on principle. As a father of two with one of them about to enter college, having principles costs a lot more these days.
I only hope that truth will eventually win out in this, despite my job-related efforts to push this particular piece of propaganda and rubbish.
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.