Posted on 08/28/2018 8:05:24 AM PDT by DeweyCA
If ‘balance’ means giving voice to those who deny the reality of human-triggered climate change, we won't take part in the debate, say Jonathan Porritt... and 57 other writers, politicians and academics
We are no longer willing to lend our credibility to debates over whether or not climate change is real. It is real. We need to act now or the consequences will be catastrophic. In the interests of “balance”, the media often feels the need to include those who outright deny the reality of human-triggered climate change.
Balance implies equal weight. But this then creates a false equivalence between an overwhelming scientific consensus and a lobby, heavily funded by vested interests, that exists simply to sow doubt to serve those interests. Yes, of course scientific consensus should be open to challenge – but with better science, not with spin and nonsense. We urgently need to move the debate on to how we address the causes and effects of dangerous climate change – because that’s where common sense demands our attention and efforts should be.
Fringe voices will protest about “free speech”. No one should prevent them from expressing their views, whether held cynically or misguidedly. However, no one is obliged to provide them with a platform, much less to appear alongside them to give the misleading impression that there is something substantive to debate. When there is an article on smoking, newspapers and broadcasters no longer include lobbyists claiming there are no links to cancer. When there’s a round-the-world yacht race we don’t hear flat-earthers given airtime: “This is madness; they’ll sail off the edge!”
There’s a workable model for covering fringe views – which is to treat them as such. They don’t need to be ridiculed, just expected to challenge the evidence with better evidence, and otherwise ignored.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
Btw, these people say that "climate deniers" don't have to be ridiculed, immediately after ridiculing them by comparing them to flat earthers. In addition to being totalitarians, you can count on Leftists to be hypocrites.
If it wasn’t for “climate change” Chicago would still be under a mile of ice.
Climate change is called weather and has been happening since the beginning of time.
JoMa
Where’s the Goebbels’ pic?
You know damn right the climate is changing.....just like it has for billions of years.
Climate changes....that’s real.
As to how to control it..,that’s fake
They need to go smoke another joint. By the time they’re done smoking, the “climate” will change......again. These people are STUPID.
Is that anything like “Slaughter the deniers!”?. I suppose if they want to stop by, that’ll be fine.
When they can explain why climate change only happens during the summer, but not during the winter (news cycle), they might make some headway.
There are snow warnings in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Forty years ago this would have been proof we were entering a new ICE AGE. In fact, the Rocky Mountain area I left forty years ago should be under a mile of ice by now. It is not. Still free and clear.
I am so glad these clowns articulated the open-mindeness of the scientific investigation process so well. (Yes, that is extreme sarcasm).
Yes, climate change is real and has been happening since the Creation.
However, that mankind can have any more than a seventh order effect on it is fantasy.
Yeah...climate has changed all the time throughout natural history. Just like the Ice Age disappeared. And no amount of taxes levied could have stopped it. That is a scam and a flim flam.
Calling me a denier because i don’t except your pseudo science really hurts my feelings.
Note the "fringe voices pejorative designed to discredit and ridicule. Next, note the hypocrisy of acknowledging "free speech" because it's still politically correct to feign that, but in the very same sentence the author states, "no one is obliged to provide them with a platform".
So yeah, free speech, but Google, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, et.al., are justified in censoring an opposing view.
In other words, free speech, but only if the left approves, otherwise one is not entitled to free speech.
Obama said it was settled science ,LOL
It is because the “opposition” is near nonexistent and what they do NOT DO is differentiate between natural climate change and their sham, MAN-MADE climate change. As per the RAT play book, their shams are always about something that is always contentious and not clearly demonstrable.
No one expects the Climate Inquisition.
Yes, warmist idiots, there are seasons and variations. No, you anti-reality, anti-science retards, mankind is a minor, minor influence on those processes. Did you ever see the sun???
Assertions are not science. Blind faith is not science.
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.