Lib media and droughts

[Rick]

A four year drought (by some scientists' definition, nobody was dying of thirst ) has ended in California. What it does in southern california in winter while it is snowing in most of the rest of the country is rain, or snow at high altitudes. Lots of it fell this winter. The snow pack in some Sierra mountain areas was 25 feet.

During the drought, the lib media, global warmists all, strongly implied it was due to global warming without actually saying it, with comments such as we can expect more of this "as the climate changes".

Remember the publicity the lib media gave Lake Lanier, a reservoir that provides water to atlanta? The lib media went into a frenzy in 2008, feverishly reporting that some parts of the lake bottom not seen since the 1950s were dry. When it all ended with big rains during the winter of 2008-9, the camera crews scuttled off, along with their global warming allusions.

 

[Gipper]

Yes. This is common with the lib media. And, when one points out how cold it is or how much snow has fallen, the libs claim, "that's not climate that's weather you fool." As always, they are hypocrites.

Most "intelligent" Americans know AGW is a hoax concocted by the radical left to impose worldwide Marxism and make billions of dollars in the process. Sadly, there are many who are not intelligent and they fall for the lib media's lies and distortions.

 

[Hobo1]

Most journalists go to college and earn a BA degree.
From Wikipedia:

"Curricula leading to the B.A., however, often require a certain minimum number of the total degree credits be drawn from coursework in topical areas historically associated with the liberal arts - such as language, literature, humanities, mathematics, history, and social sciences. At Eastern Michigan University, for example, 75 of the minimum 124 credits must be earned in these subject areas - whatever the student may choose as a major or minor subject - including one year of study over two consecutive semesters of one foreign language."​

You probably notice the lack of any scientific courses. So when a journalist suddenly enters the world of possible climate change, its probable causes and possible results, journalists are totally lost. They are no wiser than the uneducated ditch digger that just arrived from Juarez.

They don't know that global warming (if it is happening), will be a slow process and we are technically only in the early stages. In fact, at the moment it is highly speculative whether we can actually see any changes yet. We don't even know if the melting Arctic glaciers are not simply the result of cyclical weather patterns normally experienced by the earth.

So don't be so hard on journalists. They can't help if they are ignorant. And those of us who are scientifically inclined have no desire to put on make-up and talk into a camera like it was a live person. The people who know the truth don't listen to them. And the people who don't know about science, well, they will believe any Chicken-Little gossip they hear from their neighbors or on TV.

 

[dahermit]

During the drought, the lib media, global warmists all, strongly implied it was due to global warming without actually saying it, with comments such as we can expect more of this "as the climate changes".

Remember the publicity the lib media gave Lake Lanier, a reservoir that provides water to atlanta? The lib media went into a frenzy in 2008, feverishly reporting that some parts of the lake bottom not seen since the 1950s were dry. When it all ended with big rains during the winter of 2008-9, the camera crews scuttled off, along with their global warming allusions.

It is the evil "liberal media", pushing their biased agenda.
Or, could it be that the media sensationalizes all news so that they can sell their product more effectively?
Which is more likely? Hummm? I wonder.

 

[Dr.Who]

"The risk of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming appears to be so low that it is not currently worth doing anything to try to control it, including geoengineering."


Read that last conclusion again. Remember this is the considered scientific opinion of one of EPA's most senior analysts; then think about the effort expended by EPA officials and the Obama administration, as described by Messrs Arnold, Sheppard, Moran and the Wall Street Journal, to suppress this respected scientist's opinion, so that liberal political entities can seize ever more control of the world economy, then tell me you don't smell a big, fat rat.

 

[Dr.Who]

"In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme predicted that climate change would create 50 million climate refugees by 2010."

Um, it's 2011.

 

[Hobo1]

"In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme predicted that climate change would create 50 million climate refugees by 2010."

Um, it's 2011.

Great point. Even if man's activity on earth is causing global warming, we have no proven way of solving the problem. We have no reliable computer models that can test alternative proposed solutions. So no one knows if cap and trade will be either an over-reaction or an under-reaction.

We are flying blind on this issue. Plus, any solution (if we needed one) would require the global participation of all countries of the world. The world has NEVER been able to gather the support of all nations to solve any global issue - and the chances of doing so within the foreseeable future is nil.

No scientific proof that a problem truly exists. No proven way of solving the problem if it does exist. No chance of implementing a global solution if we had one. Three strikes and you are out! Put Global Warming on the list of causes that are not worth worrying about.

 

[Rick]

It is the evil "liberal media", pushing their biased agenda.
Or, could it be that the media sensationalizes all news so that they can sell their product more effectively?
Which is more likely? Hummm? I wonder.

Then, eg, why didn't they "sensationalized" obozo and his highly questionable life and associations during the 2008 campaign? Instead, they kept nearly totally quiet. A republican with as iffy a past as obozo would have been gone over with a lib media microscope. No ifs, they protect their own.

 

[dahermit]

Then, eg, why didn't they "sensationalized" obozo and his highly questionable life and associations during the 2008 campaign? Instead, they kept nearly totally quiet. A republican with as iffy a past as obozo would have been gone over with a lib media microscope. No ifs, they protect their own.

I do not know...ask them. Perhaps his, "... highly questionable life and associations...", were not sensational enough to focus on. Nevertheless, I am sure it was a liberal conspiracy.

 

[Rick]

I do not know...ask them. Perhaps his, "... highly questionable life and associations...", were not sensational enough to focus on.

The answer to that is you need to read up and get at least half a clue.

Nevertheless, I am sure it was a liberal conspiracy.

The liberal media don't need to "conspire" - they all know what their agenda is (the Abortion Holocaust, promoting anti-white racial discrimination,facilitating the illegal alien invasion, raising taxes, appeasement, statism, ecofascism, suppressing free speech and religion, promoting the gay agenda, warring against limited government the constitution and democracy, promoting health care rationing and death panels, shilling for obozo) and promote it every chance they get.

 

[Dr.Who]

Great point. Even if man's activity on earth is causing global warming, we have no proven way of solving the problem. We have no reliable computer models that can test alternative proposed solutions. So no one knows if cap and trade will be either an over-reaction or an under-reaction.

We are flying blind on this issue. Plus, any solution (if we needed one) would require the global participation of all countries of the world. The world has NEVER been able to gather the support of all nations to solve any global issue - and the chances of doing so within the foreseeable future is nil.

No scientific proof that a problem truly exists. No proven way of solving the problem if it does exist. No chance of implementing a global solution if we had one. Three strikes and you are out! Put Global Warming on the list of causes that are not worth worrying about.

Most importantly we have no way of knowing, as is the case in so many aspects of nature, that warming and cooling are not normal variations that oscilate in a self-correcting feedback system.

In other words sometimes it gets warmer then balancing forces cause it to get cooler again.

 

[Dr.Who]

I do not know...ask them. Perhaps his, "... highly questionable life and associations...", were not sensational enough to focus on. Nevertheless, I am sure it was a liberal conspiracy.

The words conspiracy implies a planned and coordinated effort.

But if journalism schools are taught by liberal teachers, jounalists turned out are liberal, they become editors who hire liberal journalists, and it creates an atmosphere in the newsroom in which only liberal thoughts are encouraged then the results are the same. But it is more of a zeitgeist.

Then again when thousands of journalists working for different news agencies submit their stories to a single organization which then filters those stories and shares them with all the other journalists for publication all accross the nation that looks planned and coordinated.

 

[counterfiat]

but who owns the media organizations, that will tell you who controls how news is reported

 

[Hobo1]

but who owns the media organizations, that will tell you who controls how news is reported

The Jewish controlled media conspiracy never has created heartburn for me. The US, as a whole, is not overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Israeli cause. The news media is not school for the public. Anyone with an knowledge of national and world history (particularly modern history), knows that there are two sides to each story, and make a point of listening to both sides.

If you are a someone who runs around with political blinders, always following a preconceived notion about how the world and our nation should act, then you are going to listen only to the news media that tells you what you want to hear. Certainly their are people on the left and on the right who fall into that category; but I don't think any one group can persuade the country to follow a particular political doctrine.

On the whole, most Americans are smart enough and sufficiently educated to listen to both sides of a question and before they make up their own mind. Look at how Obama is falling in the polls as the country becomes aware of his weaknesses as a leader. Witness the 2010 elections, where all the liberal news media army of talking heads could not stop a Republican rout of the Democrats for Congressional seats.

Americans are smarter than most people give them credit for.

 

[Rick]

There is no doubt, absolutely none at all, that the media, especially the "news" media, is overwhelmingly liberal left. Just THINK of people they've had, past and present: brian williams, andrea mitchell, katie couric, dan rather, keith olbermann, bill moyers, diane sawyer, larry king, chris mathews - on and on - all liberals.

It certainly is not a subjective assessment. In the words they use to describe the political news, what they leave in and what they leave out, the individuals and entities they choose for "investigations", their lib/left ideology is present in the very warp and woof.

Bringing up israel is a laugh - it's been on the lib media shiit list for a LONG time, and many jewish libs criticize israel, largely ignoring the depredations of many dictatorships around the world. WHEN is te last time you heard them talk substantively about the PRC's forced abortions and huge criminal execution rate?

As for the jewish controlled media theory, here's the totality of that. The journalism schools in US universities are fortresses of liberalism, actually they are fortresses within fortresses given the lib/left control of the universities themselves. Anyone who gets into journalism is totally inculcated with the ideas of the leftwing before they get their first job. The media isn't liberal because jews have attained important positions in it, rather jews are predominantly liberal and are therefore attracted to an institution which is already liberal.