Liberal media huddles to re-hype global warming

dailycaller.com ^

[Sub-Driver]

Liberal media huddles to re-hype global warming

Posted By Michael Bastasch On 12:10 PM 10/02/2013 In Daily Caller News Foundation | No Comments

The liberal media is scrambling to figure out if they are under-reporting the seriousness of global warming.

Journalists from left-leaning news sites are meeting in Chattanooga, Tenn., to discuss whether or not they have “blown it” when it comes to global warming coverage and how they can better portray the seriousness of the issue.

The Society of Environmental Journalists will be hosting a meeting on Friday that will discuss the media coverage surrounding global warming, which will include a panel of journalists from left-leaning news sites.

The panel will include: Daniel Grossman, contributing editor, National Geographic News Watch; Katherine Bagley with InsideClimate News; Peter Dykstra with Environmental Health News and The Daily Climate; Joseph Romm with ClimateProgress.org and the chief science editor of the Showtime TV series, “Years of Living Dangerously.”

The description of the panel on global warming and the media reads: “Have We Blown it? The impacts of global warming have been a concern since about 1988. How well has the media done in reporting on this issue? How can it do a better job in the future?”

“Many critics have accused mainstream media of confusing the public by reporting this topic as if the small (and often industry-funded) ‘skeptics’ were as credible as researchers representing the scientific consensus. This phony balance between real scientists and skeptics appears less common now,” the event’s pamphlet reads. “But many people say that journalism is still doing society a disservice, by under-reporting and downplaying the seriousness of the threats of global warming. We’ll look for lessons and advice from people who follow this issue closely.”

[Sub-Driver]

Ha, ha, ha............

[DBrow]

I get it. “Close out” the skeptics, don’t give any air time to dissenting views, and hammer the concept of the tremendous risk we face if all energy use is left uncontrolled by “global carbon governance”.

I imagine demonizing skeptics wherever they are found, as well.

[Little Ray]

I thought they were going to change it to “Anthropogenic Climate Change” so that they could blame ANY weather (hot, cold, rainy, sunny, etc.) on humans actually producing sufficient power, water, and food...

[PoloSec]

The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses. Vladimir Lenin

[oldenuff2no]

When caught in fabrications in a global scam and con game and exposed to be a liars, there is only one thing you can do.

JUST TELL BIGGER LIES.

[tet68]

The Society of Environmental Journalists

This is really getting out of hand.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Do all those websites put together get even 150 hits a day?

[BlueStateRightist]

“I thought they were going to change it to “Anthropogenic Climate Change” so that they could blame ANY weather...”

Take-home point of Seminar #1 at their little meeting: “ALL weather is evidence of human caused climate change.”

[nascarnation]

95% of people under age 30 learned this as gospel in school and to them it’s not even considered debatable.

[mjp]

When one reads between the lines of the report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), one will see that even its authors are tiptoeing towards the moderate middle. They now admit there has been at least a 15-year standstill in temperatures, which they did not predict and cannot explain, something sceptics were denounced for claiming only two years ago. They concede, through gritted teeth, that over three decades, warming has been much slower than predicted. They have lowered their estimate of “transient” climate sensitivity, which tells you roughly how much the temperature will rise towards the end of this century, to 1-2.5C, up to a half of which has already happened.

They concede that sea level is rising at about one foot a century and showing no sign of acceleration. They admit there has been no measurable change in the frequency or severity of droughts, floods and storms. They are no longer predicting millions of climate refugees in the near future. They have had to give up on malaria getting worse, Antarctic ice caps collapsing, or a big methane burp from the Arctic (Lord Stern, who still talks about refugees, methane and ice caps, has obviously not got the memo). Talk of tipping points is gone.