FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH
Kinda, sorta, might be a re-ping.
Posted on 08/13/2007 9:57:28 AM PDT by Eric Blair 2084
We in the news business often enlist in moral crusades. Global warming is among the latest. Unfortunately, self-righteous indignation can undermine good journalism. Last week's NEWSWEEK cover story on global warming is a sobering reminder. It's an object lesson of how viewing the world as "good guys vs. bad guys" can lead to a vast oversimplification of a messy story. Global warming has clearly occurred; the hard question is what to do about it.
If you missed NEWSWEEK's story, here's the gist. A "well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change." This "denial machine" has obstructed action against global warming and is still "running at full throttle." The story's thrust: discredit the "denial machine," and the country can start the serious business of fighting global warming. The story was a wonderful read, marred only by its being fundamentally misleading.
The global-warming debate's great un-mentionable is this: we lack the technology to get from here to there. Just because Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to cut emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 doesn't mean it can happen. At best, we might curb emissions growth.
Consider a 2006 study from the International Energy Agency. With present policies, it projected that carbon-dioxide emissions (a main greenhouse gas) would more than double by 2050; developing countries would account for almost 70 percent of the increase. The IEA then simulated an aggressive, global program to cut emissions based on the best available technologies: more solar, wind and biomass; more-efficient cars, appliances and buildings; more nuclear. Under this admitted fantasy, global emissions in 2050 would still slightly exceed 2003 levels.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1880150/posts
This is about the most blatant case of changing the data to fit the theory I have ever heard of. Let newsweek chew on this.
Missed that thread, thanks.
I respect him a lot. He's not a conservative, but he thinks clearly and is very good at exposing illogic on both the right and the left. He's the son of Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Samuelson, and the quality of his analysis reveals that his daddy taught him well.
...well, they’re admitting they are wrong and I guess that is something....
A Time cover in 2006 was more alarmist: BE WORRIED, BE VERY WORRIED.You don't get a much better example of the authoritarians lecturing to the perceived "little people" than this.
Newsweek and the rest of the MSM would not know a moral crusade if it spanked them with the business end of a 2 by 4.
The bottom-line test to see if someone really believes that GW is caused by us and extremely dangerous is this:
Do you support increased nuclear power?
If your answer is no, then you aren’t really all that worried about AGW.
The author still misses the point completely. He’s operating on the assumption that CO2 emissions are a problem, a premise that has been thoroughly debunked.
One way or another, our assaults against global warming are likely to be symbolic, ineffective or both.
In fact, I would add that many of our assaults are in fact counterproductive, creating unintended consequences that will make the problem worse. See the ethanol boondogle.
Lawrence Solomon's "The Deniers" (a series of articles on the view of scientists who have been labelled "Global Warming Deniers"):
Other References:
I see. So the laws of physics have been debunked. This is such a silly statement, it's not even funny.
Newsweek is certainly backpedaling after the abuse they took from last weeks issue. A total disgrace to all serious journalists.
At least this is a half step in the right direction.
“We in the news business often enlist in moral crusades. Global warming is among the latest. Unfortunately, self-righteous indignation can undermine good journalism. Last week’s NEWSWEEK cover story on global warming is a sobering reminder.”
It’s nice to see a journalist from inside the MSM admit that the MSM do have a bias and go on crusades about issues. They do takes sides, as we have seen with global warming or same-sex marriage or abortion or the war effort. So they do present the “news” of those issues through the prism of the politically correct bias on the issue. I’m happy to see this out in the open like this.
Clearly.
I don’t think so. I double checked every possible incarnation of this article in the search field and found none.
The funniest part of last weeks Newsweek article is that when they brought up the $29 million, with an m, that ExxonMobil gave to some think tanks over 10 years, they failed to mention that the Grant Junkies on the alarmist side received over $50 Billion....WITH A B!
CO2 accounts for 3-4% of the warming possibility. Water vapor accounts for far more.
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.