Posted on 04/21/2006 6:41:56 AM PDT by rellimpank
Coverage of global warming demonstrates how unprofessional some journalists have become.
The campaign to convince us all of the coming disasters caused by global warming continues at hurricane force. There have been gloom-and-doom cover stories in Time magazine and Vanity Fair, and one-sided stories on ABC News and CBS's 60 Minutes.
The problem is that the stories start with the premise that global warming is here, primarily caused by human activity, and that this is the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community. As a result, rarely do any of the reports give any sort of a fair representation of the views by the thousands of scientists who disagree, as I demonstrated in a recent commentary.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
If WW-II didn't cause the great man-made ecological disaster, it isn't going to happen, simple as that. There might be global warming, but humans have less than nothing to do with causing it.
Less that 1 C increase in 100 years. YAWN!
Global warming is a reality.
There is absolutely ZERO doubt about global warming.
Now, the CAUSE of global warming, that is a different story.
In fact, the big flaw in the left's thinking is not that they are concerned about global warming, but that they have zero concern about GLOBAL COOLING.
Global Cooling is what will happen when the earth returns to an ice age, which has been proven to happen before and will happen again as these cycles tend to repeat themselves.
The irony in the whole thing, is that when the earth starts cooling, it will be humanity's capacity to produce C02 that will help stabilize the earth's atmosphere and reduce the dramatic swing that we go through every 40,000 years.
See #3.
This is redundant...
The problem is there is consensus that greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are increasing and that global tempretures have increase and there is probably some relationship. But that is where the consensus stops. There is no consensus that these whacked out computer models which have been manipulated to exagerate the effects of man-made greenhouse gases. There is also no consensus on that global warming is responsible for every natural disaster that occurs. The media likes to imp-lie because there is consensus on some aspects of global warming theory, there is consensus on even the whacked out doom and gloom part, which there is not.
The media better speed up the story becasue some star watcher is predicting an asteroid hitting the earth in May 06.
That is at best a wild and unsubstantiated guess, at worst a delusional deception to satisfy the "scientist's" sense of self-importance.
When a doofus says thing like "fact" and "certain", having been wrong 100% of the time previously, it becomes an obvious joke.
The trend of the last nine years, the last 90, the last 900, or the last 9000 is pretty much meaningless in the context of global weather analysis over time, and man's role in it.
It's amazing how we've survived:
Overpopulation
Killer bees
Acid rain
Gypsy moths
Global cooling
Nuclear meltdown
Nuclear annihilation
Automation
Chilean grapes
Saccharine
Paraquat
Fossil fuel depletion
Swine flu
Ebola
Ozone depletion
We've been doomed so many times, what's a little global warning?
That's crossed my mind when all the media frenzy was just beginning as well.
Weather! That's what we used to call it.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make though.
Which is one reasons for all the frenzy. The fear is that temperatures will continue to drop and expose their bs. I think they figure if they can rush some policy changes in now, they can take credit for the drop in 5-10 years. "See, we made some changes and the temps dropped."
The guy spews opinion as fact. Can't stand him. Or his wife.
The entire lot of the LSM should be inducted in to the Joseph Goebbels Hall of Shame.
It will be interesting to see the reasons floated if that comes to pass.
At the core of this idiocy is the notion that weather paterns or climates are something that will remain static forever. Everything is in a constant state of change. It is the height of arrogance to suggest that humans (the hair on a pimple of a flea's butt) can change things one way or another.
Now if we accept the premise that conditions will change on our planet, I will take a warming trend over a cooling trend (ice age) any day.
The theory is (the hate humans crowd), global warming will cause the ocean currents to shift.... get this.... and cause global cooling. Sheesh. So, the idea is out there already.
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.