ClimateGate Totally Ignored By TV News Outlets Except Fox

[Annie]

Some quick observations. I'm betting a good number of people who cheer this have not called for the arrest and imprisonment of those responsible for breaking the laws of hacking and releasing private info. I'm also guessing a good portion were upset when Wilson helped expose the yellow cake fraud and said he was full of shit. Then came along Drumheller who really blew the WMD shit to pieces. How many who are happy about this thanked those guys for exposing the fraud of invading iraq? Al gore is a fucking shit bag one peanut rung above dubya.....we all know that. But let's compare the whining of tv coverage on this compared to the virtual silence of the terrorist attack on a church in Tenn in July 08'. How many of the same people bitched about fox cnn cbs etc. on how little coverage was given?

GW has been blown way way out of proportion. No different than iraq being a wmd threat. But many children who discuss politics today are so fucking selfish they get caught up in the silly left v right playground that they can't see 5 feet in front of them from the dust kicked up by the stomping of whiners.

The persons responsible for the leaked emails should be found and charged. There should be a Commission set up to analyze the contents of the leaked info and any scientist found to be lobbing the political ball around should have any and all grants immediately revoked and if any of their submitted papers have had influence on legislation or policies they should be criminally charged for fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud. The only other observation is.....holy shit.......this should not be the Golden Chalice of being against GW pressures. Just like Iraq, if you know what you are talking about then "leaked" anything is just an extra side dish. This just helps show consistency by a certain group. They are equally ill informed whether it is an issue they support, like Iraq, or an issue they are against, like GW.

Actually I've said that whoever grabbed those should be prosecuted, though likely an insider. With that said, will likely qualify to being called a whistle blower, much like Daniel Ellsberg.

 

[IanC]

it would be pretty hard to invent a context for this stuff.

I am very disappointed that a whole section of the scientific community sold out for research money and public and govt approval. science is supposed to follow the facts, not just decide in advance what the answer is and then carve up the data to make it fit the hypothesis

 

[MaggieMae]

Doesn't New Zealand have a cow fart tax? Big money in flatulent livestock. Of course, they would fudge the results. I bet there are a lot of disappointed folks in the EPA now wondering if their plans for a new "gas tax" will go up in smoke.

If cow farts had been a primary cause of emissions causing global warming, one would think it would have begun long before now, back when dairy farming and cattle ranches were in their prime. But I realize it's the source of amusement among you, so carry on.
[Chuckle...]

 

[MaggieMae]

The Obama administration has another reason to hate Fox: it appears to be the only national television news outlet in America interested in the growing ClimateGate scandal.

Despite last Friday morning's bombshell that hacked e-mail messages from a British university suggested a conspiracy by some of the world's leading global warming alarmists -- many with direct ties to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- to manipulate temperature data, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and NBC through Monday evening have completely ignored the subject.

LexisNexis searches indicate that NPR appears to also be part of this news boycott.

By contrast, here are some of the stories news organizations apparently favored by the Obama adminstration have covered since ClimateGate broke:

ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Friday did a very lengthy piece about Oprah Winfrey ending her syndicated daytime talk show
ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Monday did a lengthy piece on new revelations involving the marital affair of Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.)
CBS "Evening News" Saturday reported a ten-year-old pianist playing at Carnegie Hall
CBS "Evening News" Sunday did lengthy pieces on the website FreeCreditReport.com not being free and the movie "New Moon"
CBS "Evening News" Monday did lengthy pieces about defective drywall and a man who makes money wearing t-shirts
NBC "Nightly News" Friday reported on Switzerland's supercollider being turned back on
NBC "Nightly News" Saturday did a somewhat lengthy report on food carts
NBC "Nightly News" Sunday reported the release of British singer Susan Boyle's CD, and then followed it up with another report Monday on her promoting it.
It's not that these aren't valid news stories, but should they ALL be of greater importance than a scandal involving scientists from around the world including some employed by NASA and American colleges?

ClimateGate Totally Ignored By TV News Outlets Except Fox | NewsBusters.org

Well, let's see. Short of researching the transcripts of every cable news program going back to last Friday, I'd have to say that your "list" above is pretty picky. As I recall, last Friday the top news stories were that the Senate was set for final debate the following day on their health care bill, and most networks that INTELLIGENT people watch were focusing on that. Also of importance in the news was the new guidelines for mamograms and pap smears, widely discussed because widely controversial; and oh yes, Sarah Palin was about to embark on her book tour, Obama had just returned from his Asia trip and his accomplishments were at the fore, and of course continued apprehension over Afghanistan.

So forgive me if I happened to miss reporting on a bunch of e-mails (the text of which I still haven't seen) which just happen to coincide with the upcoming summit on global warming. And which just happens to be a MONUMENTAL issue for the far right to glom onto as an issue winner in order to get them back in power. Surprise surprise.

Your argument would be OK, if any of the "lengthy pieces" were about anything what you mentioned.

Btw, what Obama accomplished with his trip to Asia?

A goodwill mission among our biggest creditors, for one thing. Duh...

 

[Oddball]

Actually I've said that whoever grabbed those should be prosecuted, though likely an insider. With that said, will likely qualify to being called a whistle blower, much like Daniel Ellsberg.

Another too-delicious-to-be-true parallel with the Watergate scandal.

I can't wait for Michael Mann to come out and declare "I'm not a crook".

 

[MaggieMae]

Well, let's see. Short of researching the transcripts of every cable news program going back to last Friday, I'd have to say that your "list" above is pretty picky. As I recall, last Friday the top news stories were that the Senate was set for final debate the following day on their health care bill, and most networks that INTELLIGENT people watch were focusing on that. Also of importance in the news was the new guidelines for mamograms and pap smears, widely discussed because widely controversial; and oh yes, Sarah Palin was about to embark on her book tour, Obama had just returned from his Asia trip and his accomplishments were at the fore, and of course continued apprehension over Afghanistan.

So forgive me if I happened to miss reporting on a bunch of e-mails (the text of which I still haven't seen) which just happen to coincide with the upcoming summit on global warming. And which just happens to be a MONUMENTAL issue for the far right to glom onto as an issue winner in order to get them back in power. Surprise surprise.

You didn't read them? lol...Yet you are already jumping to conclusions? You should look at them, read them, understand what they mean. Then you can cry for a while after you realize that you've been duped by a scientific hoax.

She usually post the comment before she reads...

I challenge you to prove that statement. I have no intention of reading thousands of e-mails full of scientific gobbledygook. If you intend to attack me, at least be prepared to backup what you say. Next?

 

[MaggieMae]

Congress and UK Parliament both are looking into now. Really should keep up, sweetie.

Congress knows? Imagine that. Here I thought NOBODY knew except the right-wing blogosphere. At least that was the OP analysis.

Read!!!

US Senate Minority Report


.

Well I should have known that the Griping Old Party would have immediately glommed onto this story within 24 hours. My bad.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Doesn't New Zealand have a cow fart tax? Big money in flatulent livestock. Of course, they would fudge the results. I bet there are a lot of disappointed folks in the EPA now wondering if their plans for a new "gas tax" will go up in smoke.

If cow farts had been a primary cause of emissions causing global warming, one would think it would have begun long before now, back when dairy farming and cattle ranches were in their prime. But I realize it's the source of amusement among you, so carry on.
[Chuckle...]

However, if the EPA were given the authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant, it would also mean the government agency has the ability to regulate methane gas – which is primarily emitted from livestock. Sensenbrenner called this the “cow fart tax.”

“However, methane gas is much more effective in keeping warmth in the atmosphere than CO2, but has a much shorter half-life,” Sensenbrenner explained. “To show you how ridiculous this is getting, the EPA has got the proposed regulation imposing a cow fart tax of $175 a year on every head of dairy cattle in the United States and $80 for beef cattle, $20 per head of hogs.”

The Wisconsin congressman didn’t have a technological solution for livestock greenhouse gas emissions.

“I don’t know if we’re supposed to develop the technology to strap a catalytic converter on the back of a cow,” Sensenbrenner quipped.

Earlier this year, the Farm Bureau told the Business & Media Institute such a tax was plausible according to the EPA’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) for regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. However, Sensenbrenner speculated that such a tax could result in dairy products and beef disappearing from the shelves in supermarkets, as a British study he cited had warned.

Congressman Warns of 'Cow Fart' Tax Causing Beef and Dairy to 'Disappear' from Supermarkets

 

[Annie]

Actually I've said that whoever grabbed those should be prosecuted, though likely an insider. With that said, will likely qualify to being called a whistle blower, much like Daniel Ellsberg.

Another too-delicious-to-be-true parallel with the Watergate scandal.

I can't wait for Michael Mann to come out and declare "I'm not a crook".

 

[MaggieMae]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGKVk&feature=player_embedded

Shucks, I thought that was Glenn Beck in his Halloween costume pointing at another one of his famous "charts" that only he can figure out.

 

[MaggieMae]

It won't die:

Climategate: This story won't die | Midwest Voices



The MSM is going to be forced to decide whether to get ahead of this or not. The major newspapers have a problem in lack of investigative journalists. If they don't get moving, the New Media has the resources to deal with the 'code' which seems to be where proof will be found.

The MSM has been caught with it's pants down too many times. If they don't cover it properly, they will confirm to everyone that they have no scruples.

We'll see. CBS and ABC and WaPo all have 'bloggers' that have written about it, with critical eyes. Now the question, do they release these reporters, that are low paid just above internees? Sort of like Woodward and Bernstein in the 70's?

So now the righties are eager to hear what MSM has to say? Imagine that. I thought you thought they were all liars, except for FOX, Washington Times, Drudge, etc.

 

[MaggieMae]

The MSM has been caught with it's pants down too many times. If they don't cover it properly, they will confirm to everyone that they have no scruples.

We'll see. CBS and ABC and WaPo all have 'bloggers' that have written about it, with critical eyes. Now the question, do they release these reporters, that are low paid just above internees? Sort of like Woodward and Bernstein in the 70's?

There is a golden opportunity for any media outlet brave enough to tackle this one. I wonder, to be honest, if there are journalists around these days who would do what those two did.

So are you trying to tell me that if, say, Vanity Fair (which DOES have experienced, intelligent investigative reporters) did an extensive piece and, oops, discovered that these emails really did nothing to prove global warming is a hoax, that you would abide by such a report? Puleeze, don't make me laugh. If it had been a "liberal" who scientifically proved the earth wasn't flat, you wouldn't believe it.

 

[Annie]

Actually I've said that whoever grabbed those should be prosecuted, though likely an insider. With that said, will likely qualify to being called a whistle blower, much like Daniel Ellsberg.

Another too-delicious-to-be-true parallel with the Watergate scandal.

I can't wait for Michael Mann to come out and declare "I'm not a crook".

This comes 'close' on the "I'm not a crook..." But moreso to the repetitious 'context':

CRU’s climate ‘tricks’ - FP Comment

CRU’s climate ‘tricks’
Posted: November 23, 2009, 8:19 PM by NP Editor
Climate changeIs this how ‘tip-top’ scientists talk?
By Myron Ebell

In the case of the apparently scandalous leaked e-mails from the Climatic Research Unit in England, it’s all a matter of getting the context right. That’s what Prof. Michael E Mann, the fabricator of the celebrated hockey stick graph, told the Washington Post recently — that skeptics “are taking these words totally out of context to make something trivial appear nefarious.”

Let’s look at the context of a couple of these e-mails. Here’s one that looks pretty bad until you understand the context:

From: Ben Santer To: P.Jones, Oct 9, 2009. Subject: Re: CEI formal petition to derail EPA GHG endangerment finding with charge that destruction of CRU raw data undermines integrity of global temperature record: “Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted.”​

Now let’s put that in context. Dr. Ben Santer is a researcher at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. In the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Second Assessment Report (1995), he was the lead author of a chapter and cleverly cut off the early and later years of a dataset, so that the resulting graph would show that global temperatures were only going in one direction in recent years–rapidly upwards. In fact, temperatures were just as high in earlier years and had declined in the most recent years, but that data at both ends was cleverly deleted. This made the graph much easier to understand correctly. So the first bit of context is that Dr. Santer is an outstanding scientist of fine and upstanding character.

...
Financial Post
Myron Ebell is the director of Global Warming and International Environmental Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

 

[MaggieMae]

The airing of The Great Global Warming Swindle and the associated discussion on ABC TV should be a hoot. The ABC has structured the panel to try to get their preferred political position aired. The panel composition will minimize scientific discussion. It contains journalists, political pressure groups and those who will make a quid out of frightening us witless.

Three scientists with a more rational view to the doomsday hype were invited to appear on the panel and have now been uninvited as they do not dance to the drumbeat of disaster

Huh? That discussion, and the film, occurred over two years ago. Is it being re-run?

 

[Annie]

The MSM has been caught with it's pants down too many times. If they don't cover it properly, they will confirm to everyone that they have no scruples.

We'll see. CBS and ABC and WaPo all have 'bloggers' that have written about it, with critical eyes. Now the question, do they release these reporters, that are low paid just above internees? Sort of like Woodward and Bernstein in the 70's?

So now the righties are eager to hear what MSM has to say? Imagine that. I thought you thought they were all liars, except for FOX, Washington Times, Drudge, etc.

See that's the problem with you Maggie. You fail to hear the laments over the decline of the media. Some of us cringe to think what we would not know if not for new media, since the old cannot be trusted. I'd love for some of them to prove their worth once again. Which is why I said that I was surprised by some of the bloggers on MSM.

 

[Si modo]

The MSM has been caught with it's pants down too many times. If they don't cover it properly, they will confirm to everyone that they have no scruples.

We'll see. CBS and ABC and WaPo all have 'bloggers' that have written about it, with critical eyes. Now the question, do they release these reporters, that are low paid just above internees? Sort of like Woodward and Bernstein in the 70's?

So now the righties are eager to hear what MSM has to say? Imagine that. I thought you thought they were all liars, except for FOX, Washington Times, Drudge, etc.

Then I guess you were wrong yet again.

 

[Oddball]

We'll see. CBS and ABC and WaPo all have 'bloggers' that have written about it, with critical eyes. Now the question, do they release these reporters, that are low paid just above internees? Sort of like Woodward and Bernstein in the 70's?

So now the righties are eager to hear what MSM has to say? Imagine that. I thought you thought they were all liars, except for FOX, Washington Times, Drudge, etc.

See that's the problem with you Maggie. You fail to hear the laments over the decline of the media. Some of us cringe to think what we would not know if not for new media, since the old cannot be trusted. I'd love for some of them to prove their worth once again. Which is why I said that I was surprised by some of the bloggers on MSM.

That's her less-than-honest way of "keeping it honest"

If only the lamestream media were on this like they were with Watergate and the Pentagon Papers.

 

[MaggieMae]

I don't have to be a scientist to question why global warming studies have to be coded. On teh onehand they want us to buy global warming, yet the information regarding it's existence must be coded? Gee, somebody saw the temps spiking on my uncoded email. Oh no, my research is confirmed and another person knows. Please.

Global warming is nothing but a hypothesis at this point. Any hypothesis should be actively challenged and debated within the scientific community. Hiding information looks liek you ahve someting to hide, makes research more costly (unshared data) and delays a confirmation of the hypothesis. For something that is going to end life as we know it, you'd think scientitsts would be a bit mre cooperative. On the other hand, if it is just a hoax, then keeping things quiet while you suck millions of research dollars form governments make complete sense.

Coded messages, manipulated data and attempting to supress differing opinions is junk science pure and simple.

Although I appreciate your choice of words, hypothesis rather than hoax, I believe there most certainly IS a consensus that something is happening. The Big Question is how much MAN contributes to the problem.

Annual weather phenomena really don't count, because one area of the globe can suffer a year of drought only to be flooded in the same time period the next year, or temperatures dramatically fluctuate from year to year. But there is definitely something to a warming PATTERN when all kinds of simple examples are right in our faces. When I was a child in the 50's, not to have it bitter cold and with at least some snow on the ground on Thanksgiving Day was unheard of. I live in northern New England, and today, November 26, 2009, the temperature outside is 60 degrees, and sleeping flies and hornets are lazily buzzing around wondering why their winter was so short.

 

[MaggieMae]

The Obama administration has another reason to hate Fox: it appears to be the only national television news outlet in America interested in the growing ClimateGate scandal.

Despite last Friday morning's bombshell that hacked e-mail messages from a British university suggested a conspiracy by some of the world's leading global warming alarmists -- many with direct ties to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- to manipulate temperature data, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and NBC through Monday evening have completely ignored the subject.

LexisNexis searches indicate that NPR appears to also be part of this news boycott.

By contrast, here are some of the stories news organizations apparently favored by the Obama adminstration have covered since ClimateGate broke:

ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Friday did a very lengthy piece about Oprah Winfrey ending her syndicated daytime talk show
ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Monday did a lengthy piece on new revelations involving the marital affair of Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.)
CBS "Evening News" Saturday reported a ten-year-old pianist playing at Carnegie Hall
CBS "Evening News" Sunday did lengthy pieces on the website FreeCreditReport.com not being free and the movie "New Moon"
CBS "Evening News" Monday did lengthy pieces about defective drywall and a man who makes money wearing t-shirts
NBC "Nightly News" Friday reported on Switzerland's supercollider being turned back on
NBC "Nightly News" Saturday did a somewhat lengthy report on food carts
NBC "Nightly News" Sunday reported the release of British singer Susan Boyle's CD, and then followed it up with another report Monday on her promoting it.
It's not that these aren't valid news stories, but should they ALL be of greater importance than a scandal involving scientists from around the world including some employed by NASA and American colleges?

ClimateGate Totally Ignored By TV News Outlets Except Fox | NewsBusters.org

Well, let's see. Short of researching the transcripts of every cable news program going back to last Friday, I'd have to say that your "list" above is pretty picky. As I recall, last Friday the top news stories were that the Senate was set for final debate the following day on their health care bill, and most networks that INTELLIGENT people watch were focusing on that. Also of importance in the news was the new guidelines for mamograms and pap smears, widely discussed because widely controversial; and oh yes, Sarah Palin was about to embark on her book tour, Obama had just returned from his Asia trip and his accomplishments were at the fore, and of course continued apprehension over Afghanistan.

So forgive me if I happened to miss reporting on a bunch of e-mails (the text of which I still haven't seen) which just happen to coincide with the upcoming summit on global warming. And which just happens to be a MONUMENTAL issue for the far right to glom onto as an issue winner in order to get them back in power. Surprise surprise.

Intelligent people watch the lame stream media???? I guess that we can conclude that the number of intelligent people are diminishing, because the people have switched to Fox. You must be one of the few intelligent people remaining, and one of the people who still watches the INTELLIGENT Lame stream media.

What did Obama ACCOMPLISH on his Asian trip?? I somehow missed that. Care to share??

The number of people who, collectively, watch news programs OTHER THAN Fox and MSNBC is three times as many. If you want a dose of right-wing BS, you watch Fox; if you want a dose of left-wing BS, you watch MSNBC. But the rest of us usually go elsewhere for NEWS, then to one of those channels to listen to the talking heads.

 

[MaggieMae]

Why don't you indulge all of we backward-assed provincial "CON$" and give us the real context of this one, edthelemming?

~Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center.

Again we have an "OUT OF CONTEXT" quote peppered with added words. Why wont you post the ENTIRE email that quote was manufactured from???
What do YOU have to hide??? Could it be they were discussing two particularly unscientific hack job papers rather than "the skeptics" in general, as your ADDED words imply???

POST THE WHOLE EMAIL and prove your added words don't change the context.
I predict you won't!!!!!!

After reading this, all I can say is for a cynic you are awfully gullible about global warming.

Odd then that poll after poll show that over 70% believe it's happening. Are we all stupid and only you are believable? I think not.