Posted on 12/05/2009 7:05:24 AM PST by Delacon
Edited on 12/05/2009 8:19:10 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
The Washington Post put ClimateGate on the front page, top left in Saturday
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
But the fact that they feel they NEED a response, other than ignoring the matter, is telling.
Exactly. This now opens up the subject for debate on the Letters To The Editor page. Enough pressure might be maintained to make them look deeper than just repeating spin.
The Washington Times is the more conservative periodical.
Yes, and it's owned by the moonies.
The post is a bit of a paradox. It is definitely liberal in it's op-eds and what it allows to be printed; however, it's not like the NYT. Unlike the New York Times, The Post is actually still capable of real journalism and will print stories such as climate-gate.
lol They wait three weeks to run a front page story on SATURDAY!!!
The Washington Post, “Last Month’s News Toady!”
Their environmental religion has been exposed for the fraud that it is. Now to get it labeled as such and removed from the classrooms.
Yesterday, someone posted an article from The Boston Globe (owned by the NYT and just as moonbat): Harvard professor weighs in on climategate. The article is strictly toe-the-party-line -- but most of the comments are terrific. Even some of those from sincere environmental types! I would hope that response would sway the Globe to more and fairer coverage . . . I suppose it might -- keeps up the pressure anyway!
I thought Pielke was not in the alarmist camp...but sice he is @ the COLONRADO facility maybe he has been tainted. Time for a little payback no matter. Investigate all of them, we should put them in an EcoPrison in S. AZ...Sheriff Joe will show them some warming!
There's nothing conservative about the Post.
I don't even believe the page number in that paper.
It just goes to show you that we need Mark Lloyd now more than ever.
The Pelkes. father and son, maintain that land use changes are a major contributing factor in the current warming since 1880.
None of the models properly deal with the urban heat-island effect and have conflicting adjustments to raw measurements.
The critical economic driver relies on CO2 increases and secondary amplifiers, feedbacks, for the accelerating future warming projected.
In that, they are in heated disagreement with the consensus argument.
They are members of the ‘lukewarmers.’
They do proffer a solution: a carbon tax.
The NYT is thinking, “Damn, now we’re going to have to publish our article next Saturday.”
If you really believe that, then go quietly from this place, and never return to utter those defeatist words here again.
When the 800-pound gorilla in the room can no longer be ignored, the MSM calls it an alleged monkey.
The focus is on the stolen e mails. The real damning evidence is the computer code.
Presstitutes and their john’s can’t understand the math, and it is real math, not the usual arithmetic mountainized for self esteem. The emails can be spun but the code cannot. it is fraud, pure and simple, no equivocating.
.......He likely got a heads-up from the Washington Post.....
Actually, he got a heads up and a warning from Sarah Palin.
Read all about it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2400733/posts
Now we are hearing a lot of “Even if global warming isn’t true...wouldn’t it be great to remove these pollutants and gases etc, etc, etc.”
Of course, as pointed out by many others, C02 is NOT a pollutant (thankfully), and man’s contribution of C02 as compared to natural C02 is neglible.
But, to remove it at what cost?
http://www.peopleforwesternheritage.com/PFWHRMAdditionalQuotes.htm
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.