Climategate, AP Not Impressed

[elvis]

Now Sinatra, do you have an unbiased source?

Is there any such thing?

 

[Sinatra]

Now Sinatra, do you have an unbiased source?

If that is your stance, then you must dismiss the AP climategate report - as it was written by one implicated in the very story of climategate...

 

[Care4all]

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it

Here’s a recent story from the Associated Press:

By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter, Dec 12, 2009

“E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.”

Look in the mirror, fools. It’s right there in the CRU emails:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
It’s Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
Seth



___

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it « Watts Up With That?


When a reporter is part of an email thread where one of the respondents says:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

Hi All
Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a
letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??….if
it is not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
position.


Jim

It gives the appearance that he is not interested in reporting the other side of the story, especially when he is the instigator of the email thread by saying:

Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?

So, how then would the AP trust Seth Borenstein to do an “exhaustive inquiry” when he is part of the issue?

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

 

[Si modo]

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it

Here’s a recent story from the Associated Press:

By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter, Dec 12, 2009

“E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.”

Look in the mirror, fools. It’s right there in the CRU emails:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
It’s Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
Seth



___

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it « Watts Up With That?


When a reporter is part of an email thread where one of the respondents says:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

Hi All
Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a
letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??….if
it is not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
position.


Jim

It gives the appearance that he is not interested in reporting the other side of the story, especially when he is the instigator of the email thread by saying:

Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?

So, how then would the AP trust Seth Borenstein to do an “exhaustive inquiry” when he is part of the issue?

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

A journalist asking a second opinion of a scientist with respect to 'hyping' something in the mainstream press says a lot about collusion between the scientists and the press. If the science is not strong enough to stand on its own, there is the press to take care of the rhetoric.

 

[Sinatra]

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it

Here’s a recent story from the Associated Press:

By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter, Dec 12, 2009

“E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.”

Look in the mirror, fools. It’s right there in the CRU emails:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
It’s Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
Seth



___

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it « Watts Up With That?


When a reporter is part of an email thread where one of the respondents says:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

Hi All
Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a
letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??….if
it is not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
position.


Jim

It gives the appearance that he is not interested in reporting the other side of the story, especially when he is the instigator of the email thread by saying:

Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?

So, how then would the AP trust Seth Borenstein to do an “exhaustive inquiry” when he is part of the issue?

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

A journalist asking a second opinion of a scientist with respect to 'hyping' something in the mainstream press says a lot about collusion between the scientists and the press. If the science is not strong enough to stand on its own, there is the press to take care of the rhetoric.

No kidding. The "reporter" shows his bias for the counter-opinion by the very nature of his opinion. There was no reporting but outright advocacy. He was asking how he should respond - that is as damning a statement as a journalist can make!

And Care - take care to leave your hands off my threads. Thank you.

 

[Oddball]

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

What do you think the odds would be of Seth continuing to get in on all the IPCC insider scoops if he found the CRU e-mails to be fishy, if not outright smoking guns.

Like I said from the outset, this is like Tessio and Clemenza vouching for Don Vito.

 

[elvis]

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

What do you think the odds would be of Seth continuing to get in on all the IPCC insider scoops if he found the CRU e-mails to be fishy, if not outright smoking guns.

Like I said from the outset, this is like Tessio and Clemenza vouching for Don Vito.

no, Tessio was a traitor.

 

[Modbert]

Like I said from the outset, this is like Tessio and Clemenza vouching for Don Vito.

Your analogy is still inaccurate.

Also, Seth would have the biggest news story of his lifetime if he found such smoking guns. He wouldn't need the insider scoops.

 

[Si modo]

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

What do you think the odds would be of Seth continuing to get in on all the IPCC insider scoops if he found the CRU e-mails to be fishy, if not outright smoking guns.
....

Right.

 

[Modbert]

no, Tessio was a traitor.

I've told him that twice now. Maybe he'll listen to you.

 

[Sinatra]

Like I said from the outset, this is like Tessio and Clemenza vouching for Don Vito.

Your analogy is still inaccurate.

Also, Seth would have the biggest news story of his lifetime if he found such smoking guns. He wouldn't need the insider scoops.

Seth is a flat-earth global warmer BELIEVER. He was/is not interested in "scoops".

And the fact remains he was personally involved in the climategate evidence - and should not have had any part in reporting on the legitimacy of the scandal therein...

 

[Modbert]

Seth is a flat-earth global warmer BELIEVER. He was/is not interested in "scoops".

And the fact remains he was personally involved in the climategate evidence - and should not have had any part in reporting on the legitimacy of the scandal therein...

I do believe Seth believes the earth is round. Personally involved in the climategate evidence? You are really trying your best to get that nothing into something huh?

 

[Sinatra]

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it

Here’s a recent story from the Associated Press:

By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter, Dec 12, 2009

“E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.”

Look in the mirror, fools. It’s right there in the CRU emails:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
It’s Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
Seth



___

AP’s Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers – time for AP to do something about it « Watts Up With That?


When a reporter is part of an email thread where one of the respondents says:

On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

Hi All
Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a
letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??….if
it is not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
position.


Jim

It gives the appearance that he is not interested in reporting the other side of the story, especially when he is the instigator of the email thread by saying:

Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?

So, how then would the AP trust Seth Borenstein to do an “exhaustive inquiry” when he is part of the issue?

---

 

[Oddball]

are you saying that seth B should not question the information he gets and should NOT have asked for this second opinion?? pleaseeeeeeee!!!

What do you think the odds would be of Seth continuing to get in on all the IPCC insider scoops if he found the CRU e-mails to be fishy, if not outright smoking guns.

Like I said from the outset, this is like Tessio and Clemenza vouching for Don Vito.

no, Tessio was a traitor.

Only after Don Vito was dead....Apparently, that plot subtlety is lost on Dogshitbiscuit, too.

 

[Modbert]

Only after Don Vito was dead....Apparently, that plot subtlety is lost on Dogshitbiscuit, too.

Except Tessio had betrayed the family and Don Vito knew he was going to do it. The family that Don Vito built up and asked Tessio to be loyal to.

 

[Dr Grump]

I see no problem with a journo asking an opinion from an expert about the source....

 

[Modbert]

I see no problem with a journo asking an opinion from an expert about the source....

In other case, it would be alright to everyone. In this one? Not so much. Because it would mean one less than to make some bullshit over.

 

[Dr Grump]

I see no problem with a journo asking an opinion from an expert about the source....

In other case, it would be alright to everyone. In this one? Not so much. Because it would mean one less than to make some bullshit over.

The anti-global warming crowd would argue that grass isn't green, that the sky is not blue and that Bruce Springsteen isn't the greatest recording artist in the world.... heh.....

 

[Oddball]

The anti-global warming crowd would argue that grass isn't green, that the sky is not blue and that Bruce Springsteen isn't the greatest recording artist in the world.... heh.....

Oh, stop it.

If the same situation existed, whereby a given journalist who had his nose up Cheney's ass for ten years reported on the "credible" intelligence on WMD's in Iraq, you wouldn't believe it for a nanosecond.....And rightly so.

 

[Modbert]

Oh, stop it.

If the same situation existed, whereby a given journalist who had his nose up Cheney's ass for ten years reported on the "credible" intelligence on WMD's in Iraq, you wouldn't believe it for a nanosecond.....And rightly so.

Except that's not the same situation that you gave for an example.