Day Fourteen and Counting: Major Networks refuse to report on Climategate

[saveliberty]

NBC ran a story on TV tonight. I was out of the room, so I missed most of it. Seemed to focus on the fact it doesn't mean global warming isn't occuring. Suggested coal and oil would use it to drag their feet. Denial basically.

What part of noncable TV channels causes you the most comprehension problems NYcarbineer?

 

[Oddball]

It's been on every cableNEWs network.

I doubt that Katie Couric did many stories on the fudged up global warming denial studies funded by the likes of Exxon either.

Riiiiight...Don't report on the facts, just poo-poo that those who contest the AGW scam are "deniers" funded by energy producers.

Nothing like an unbised media, huh?

 

[Foxfyre]

The coverup of climategate by the liberal media and even fox news only shows how media behaves like the ministry of truth. Would they have reported this story if they have found the emails themselves? I really doubt and quite frankly our political world resembles a Brave New World.

I must have hallucinated the story on this i heard this morning on MSNBC, since no one is doing stories on it.

Oh it is being mentioned - interpret that as not being ignored. But on all the pro-AGW international media as well as US media that I've seen, it is being presented as a 'internet theft-leak' scandal, not a scientific scandal; or it is being portrayed as fodder pushed by skeptics and deniers, not something of concern for AGW promoters; or it is being glossed over as inconsequential and insignificant emails over a period of time and not representative of the body of scientific thought.

Are you seeing something different?

 

[Coyote]

They don't care about this story, it would invalidate years of hysteria and nonsense they have helped push.

Does it? Does it invalidate years of science that, frankly, still largely stands?

President Obama's top science adviser, John Holdren, agreed that the e-mails should be thoroughly investigated. At issue is whether they provide evidence of scientific malfeasance, or just bad manners.

"Scientists are human, and from time to time they display defensiveness and bias and even misbehavior of some kinds," Holdren said. "They're like any other group of human beings. They're subject to human frailties. I think the facts are not in on this particular case."

Holdren agreed that if the e-mails reveal inappropriate data manipulation, and that ended up in official reports, obviously those reports would need to be corrected.

"However this particular controversy comes out, the result will not call into question the bulk of our understanding of how the climate works or how humans are affecting it," he added.

Evidence from many different sources shows that the air and oceans are warming as a result of greenhouse gases humans are putting into the atmosphere. Jane Lubchenco, a scientist who heads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, gave a tabletop demonstration at the hearing to show how increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is also making the oceans more acidic.

Those explanations didn't reassure some Republican members of the committee. In response, Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) said he was stunned by their skepticism. He said if global warming is a fraud, it must be perpetrated by a conspiracy of scientists from all around the world.

"I just wanted to ask you if you're part of that massive international conspiracy," he said to the witnesses, adding with a note of sarcasm, "Are either one of your members of the Trilateral Commission, SPECTRE or KAOS? I just need an answer."

Holdren replied: "Congressman Inslee, I am not a member of any of those organizations, and I don't believe there's an international conspiracy. That would be an amazing thing indeed."

Holdren pointed out that national academies of science from all around the world accept the reality of human-induced global warming, as do other leading science organizations and the United Nations.

Inslee then noted that nobody else in the room had any other plausible way to explain why carbon dioxide is building up in the air and in the oceans. "And yet people are trying to gin up this controversy. You know why? It's not that they aren't intelligent. It's that they are afraid that we can't solve this problem."

 

[Big Fitz]

Let's assume just for a minute that you are correct and ALL of the stations you mention are catering to the left. If there are SO many people against leftist ideals, how is it that all of these news outlets stay in business?

I guess you haven't heard that their viewership is crashing, have you?

And they need a bail out because of it.

 

[rightwinger]

It's been on every cableNEWs network.

I doubt that Katie Couric did many stories on the fudged up global warming denial studies funded by the likes of Exxon either.

Riiiiight...Don't report on the facts, just poo-poo that those who contest the AGW scam are "deniers" funded by energy producers.

Nothing like an unbised media, huh?

No just like the people who fought anti smoking legislation received no money from the tabacco industry

 

[Oddball]

No just like the people who fought anti smoking legislation received no money from the tabacco industry

Nothing like a false analogy.

The anti-smoking legislation was chiefly driven by similarly cooked "research" by the UN's WHO, which was later admitted to be fraudulent.

But if you're good with policy being driven by fraudulent "science", I'll take that admission.