PBS‘s Nova is taking money from one of the biggest bankrollers of climate change denial—and, surprise surprise, the resulting programming tells viewers not to worry about climate change. But PBS‘s ombud doesn’t see this as a conflict of interest—because Nova is a “consistently first-rate program,” and he trusts it.
Nova‘s conflict of interest was highlighted out by Climate Progress blogger Joe Romm (9/7/10), who had previously caught the Smithsonian promoting strange climate science after getting a grant from oil billionaire David Koch (Climate Progress, 4/1/10). Koch, who’s a major funder of propaganda rejecting the science of climate change, is also one of the main underwriters of the popular PBS science program Nova—which is in itself a case of strange bedfellows. (Another major sponsor of Nova is ExxonMobil, the other top funder of science-denial in support of oil industry profits.)
With the New Yorker‘s Jane Mayer (8/30/10) calling attention to the Koch family’s political donations—and mentioning the fear that David Koch’s contributions are affecting the Smithsonian’s exhibits—people naturally paid more attention to the donor credit for David Koch on a recent Nova rerun (8/31/10) called “Becoming Human.” What raised more than a few eyebrows was the program’s enthusiasm for climate change as a driver of human evolution—with a not-so-subtle suggestion that we should bear this in mind in our current era of rapidly shifting weather:
Narrator: It is a simple but revolutionary idea: Human evolution is nature’s experiment with versatility. We’re not adapted to any one environment or climate, but to many; we are creatures of climate change.
Geographer Mark Maslin: I think we should actually look to our proud ancestry and how we evolved in East Africa and say: “That’s how we survived that. We can survive the future, because we are that creature, because we are that smart.”
Note that Maslin is not actually a climate-change denier—he’s really a strong advocate for immediate action to restrict carbon emissions—but Nova quotes him as though he takes the don’t-worry-be-happy stance adopted by…well, people like David Koch. Why is that?
As usual, PBS insiders take the position that where you get your money from is absolutely irrelevant, once again rejecting the entire rationale for public broadcasting: “Nova, like all WGBH programs, maintains complete, independent editorial control of its content,” Nova executive producer Paula Apsell told PBS ombud Michael Getler. Getler, for his part, declares that “one rarely knows when or how, if at all, influence works its way,” and that “as a viewer of what strikes me and a lot of others as a consistently first-rate program, I trust Nova“—a hands-off stance that would seem to reject the entire rationale for having an ombud.
PBS‘s position echoes the Smithsonian’s—David Koch is “very interested in the content, but completely hands off,” museum director Cristian Samper told the New Yorker. And that’s Koch’s position as well; asked by Archeology magazine (2/17/09) if he was involved in the editorial content of Nova‘s evolutionary programming, he replied: “No, I am not. I’ve been following the Nova series ever since it first came on the air. I’m a great admirer.”
In that same interview, though, Koch describes a visit to Olduvai Gorge to inspect the Leakey digs, which he also bankrolls: “When I got there they had discovered a Hominin’s bones. They left them in the earth, waiting for me to arrive. And then when I arrived, they let me pull them out of the ground, which was kind of fun.”
Presumably the Leakeys let him extract those bones not because of his paleontological expertise, but because they knew it would make a major donor happy. Nova also knows that downplaying the dangers of climate change would make its major donors happy—and it aired a program that presented climate change as a positive force for good. If you want to believe that that’s a coincidence—well, all you have to do is trust Nova.
UPDATE: See FAIR Blog: “PBS Ombud’s Trust in Nova Only Goes So Far” (9/14/10)
A more interesting thing is how did this hoax that is global warming translate into almost total support from the drive by media?Al Gore’s horrible movie played in all the schools.Remember…the polar bears were going by by.Till we found out their numbers were exploding.So maybe the big picture is who “payed”for that?Where were balanced reply’s with the likes of Lord Montkin who trashed this whole notion long before the hoax was exposed.
While not wanting to associate myself with deniers like Michael above, I think that this post goes a little overboard. I consider myself more that moderately sensitive to AGW deniers, and my antennae didn’t sense anything amiss when I first saw the series in question.
Even if the excerpt you cite was evidence of influence (and I by no means admit to this as at all likely), it doesn’t have any bearing on modern day realities, aside from the obvious fact that humans inhabit all manner of environments. You seem to suggest that an examination of the idea of our origins being connected with climactic change is equivalent to an appeal to be complacent about the changes we face today. Not only did our ancient ancestors have no conception of the causes of the changes they lived through (much like Michael), they wouldn’t have been likely to effect them if they had had any. Neither of these is the case today; we both know of and are able to counteract these forces (which is not to claim perfect knowledge).
I’m halfway between “jhm” and the poster. I agree this isn’t really damning evidence of bias, but I don’t think that rules out a conflict of interest. However, Nova probably wants to have a reputation and to look kind of professional. They might try to not push things farther than a little sloppiness.
if you want to instantly lose a discussion on global warming…cite lord “not actually a lord” mockery, er monckton on the subject…you’ll note that micheal e is either too lazy or too stupid to actually spell the fraud’s name correctly
in related news: bjørn lomborg, one of the world’s most high-profile climate change sceptic is to declare that global warming is “undoubtedly one of the chief concerns facing the world today” and “a challenge humanity must confront,” in an forthcoming book.
other recent converts: dmitri medvedev, russian president, michael hanlon, british science journalist, stu ostro, weather channel senior meteorologist
march, april, may and june set records, making 2010 the warmest year worldwide since record-keeping began in 1880, the national oceanic and atmospheric administration says.
in august , nasa released a report confirming the meteorological speculations: 2010 is expected to be the hottest year on record, based upon the temperatures witnessed so far this year. nasa’s report, which states, â┚¬Ã…“2010 is likely, but not certain, to be the warmest year in the goddard institute for space studies record.â┚¬Ã‚Â
To any of you readers who might consider taking ‘michael e’, (see above) or his ilk seriously, first read some of the OVERWHELMING (as in 97% consensus) agreement among SERIOUS climate scientists in links such as these:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686) or http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090119210532.htm
Besides the scientific community, note the corporate and military believers in this listing:
http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensus.htm
And as even Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger remarked: “Well, as I said, that I believe the scientists. It is like when my child is sick and has a huge fever, and I go to 100 doctors, and 98 doctors says this child needs immediate medical care, and 2 say no, forget it, go home and just relax, I go with the 98. It’s as simple as that.” ( logicalscience.blogspot.com/2007/05/arnold-challenge-arnold-schwarzenegger.html)
You can also read scientific debunkings of these ‘skeptics’ / deniers in MANY places, such as
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/denier-vs-skeptic/denier-myths-debunked/
or http://www.logicalscience.com to name just a couple.
Note that the scientists who first began publishing doubts on climate change in the popular press were the very same scientists who also published similar reports to cast doubt on the link between cancer and tobacco, CFC’s and the ozone, and sulfur and nitrogen emissions to acid rain. They have, in internal communications, admitted their reports are only intended to give the impression a debate exists to delay action. They have never been “correct” in their findings because that is not their intention. (see http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/21-6 )
Just as the Republican cranks were wrong about the WMDs in Iraq, they’re wrong about this! Because they’re loud, obstreperous, and insistent doesn’t make them right – – we’ve seen that over and over again!
Look into the coming ice age.Tons of data on it.Started in the 70s.Russians still believe in it.They had their worst snow falls recently since 1945!Look into that data.Of course that data wont lead to a government…any government taking over aspects of your life so out with that.That is the one constant in all Dem policies.If you want to debate this hoax please do cite Lord Monckton and his videos.He will kick the cat piss out of all these loons.He has a simple offer to Al Gore ,President Obama,Pelosi-and their ilk.Anytime anywhere.Bring all your chief theorists.And that goes for the congress as well.Between getting backrubs and making a BILLIon dollars on Global warming Gore runs like a little girl from him.(And by the by have you noticed the crazy behavior lately of the VP cave man?)
BAMS departed green czar- remember him?????Wrote the book where he admitted “we will use global warming as a way to control huge portions of the economy through carbon taxes”.Sound like something you have heard before?Scientists?????Which ones.The ones at the top who admitted….. ADMITTED to cooking the books?Or those subsidized by government funds?
Global warming…gotta love it.If it warms it is global warming.If it cools it is global warming.If it rains or if it doesn’t.Snows or not.Tornadoes or lack of big blows in the warm turns on the oceans……all global warming.Ya gotta love a rigged game.
Look Nasa has proved certain warming areas.Period.Not GLOBAL warming.Data also shows a cooling trend over the last ten years over most of the world.We had the coldest winter last year and a hot summer in the NE.Get outa town you dont say.Just read a report that indicates sunspots, or lack of them- will effect the warming of this galaxy and our earth more than any other single issue.I say tax it.Anybody warming the earth by drawing in the sun(solar panels)should be promptly and punitively TAXED!Wind mills off course should get tax breaks because they are “fanning”the earth.Dudes Im only kidding.Dont elect any more numb skulls to your side on that platform.
Look believe what you want.Pay Al Gore his 100 mil.Collect your data and then twist it and turn it.LIsten to tennis pro’s and terminators.Just keep your frigging hands off of the peoples wealth.Keep your remaking of this country and the world to yourselves.Your elite brilliant selves.Your pet theories are fine.It is a free country. But Keep your hands out of my pocket.WE get it.No more use of oil gas and coal.No more nuclear.Electric high power lines causing cancer- so away with that….or at least tax all of it for redistribution of its filthy profits.WE get it.Come November you will too………GET IT THAT IS!
“Believe what you want” is clearly michael e’s motto.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
I’m not going to try to weigh in with my opinions on the validity of climate change science. However, I am concerned about FAIR. This is an organization which purports to expose media bias in support of a better news system to serve the public. In spite of that supposed mission, FAIR’s coverage shows absolute blatant bias in this case. Pointing out the potential conflict of interest at NOVA is a valid part of FAIR’s mandate. Editorializing against “climate change denial PROPAGANDA” (emphasis mine) is a rather obvious example of inserting thier own bias into the reporting. C’mon FAIR, you are supposed to be pointing out bias, not acting like hypocrites!
Richard Littlemore
Brigham Young University Professor Barry Bickmore has taken the time to check whether Monckton’s recent pronouncements can pass any objective standard of accuracy and he has found, “SPOILER ALERT: The final result is classic Monckton” â┚¬“ a carefully constructed, but infuriating opaque veil of academic references, a loose mix of relatively accurate facts, and a conclusion that is precisely contrary to that drawn by the experts whom Monckton claims to quote.
If you read Bickmore’s excellent and careful analysis, however, you get a reminder of why Monckton is successful in destroying people’s understanding of climate science. Per his usual form, he makes a short, ridiculous assertion, dressed in the cloak of implied scientific research and dares you to disagree.
Specifically, he said this to a committee of the U.S. Congress:
The â┚¬Ã…“global warmingâ┚¬Ã‚ that ceased late in 2001 (since when there has been a global cooling trend for eight full years) had begun in 1695, towards the end of the Maunder Minimum, a period of 70 years from 1645-1715 when the Sun was less active than at any time in the past 11,400 years (Hathaway, 2004). Solar activity increased with a rapidity unprecedented in the Holocene, reaching a Grand Solar Maximum during a period of 70 years from 1925-1995 when the Sun was very nearly as active as it had been at any time in the past 11,400 years (Hathaway, 2004; Usoskin, 2003; Solanki, 2005).”
It’s a mere 105 words of not quite deathless prose and a fairly clear conclusion â┚¬“ but, as Bickmore discovered, not one that is justified by any of the sources he has quoted. Unfortunately, it probably took Bickmore a week’s work to chase down all the references, to touch base with the experts in question and to report â┚¬“ in 3,500 words â┚¬“ the predictable result. Monckton has completely misrepresented his material â┚¬“ again.
http://www.desmogblog.com/christopher-monckton-humiliated-yet-again
Like an amoeba, Michael e responds to a variety of stimuli with a single response. And like an amoeba, that may be the extent of his range. ..You may want to readjust your expectations.
nasa july 2010 global map of surface temperature anomalies here
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2010july/
Regarding Michael e “The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.”
The rat David Koch is also underwriting the GOP campaign to knock off liberal Dem star Alan Grayson. He’s throwing hundreds of thousands of dollars into the mix, but we can beat the bast*ards at their own money game by each of us who supports Grayson sending him a few bucks! Google his site and send him $5 or $10…
Koch and the “don’t care” climate change crowd should strand on the Molasses Keys (there were 5 in ’97; now only 3) and face personal extinction as we Who KNOW wave them goodbye from the 7-Mile Bridge! Personally, this HOMONID diabetic sufferer would prefer to continue evolving with the Canadian Substance P “CURE”, stifled by the Obummer drug blockade. Sub-homonin Koch can self-extirpate now!
This is worthy of a FAIR campaign IMO – everyone who contributes to PBS or NPR should sign a pledge of refusal unless the Kochs’ far-right ideology is no longer part of the programming.
@watermia, I agree with you, but based on past experience I doubt that NPR’s development decision-makers have the courage to turn them down, and survive notoriety they’d earn from the right wing noise machine.
David Koch also sits on the Advisory Board of National Geographic.
I wish this message could be delivered to NOVA. Have them prove their freedom from Koch influence by: 1) doing a program on the carcinogenic nature of formaldehyde, or 2) do a program on the state of climate science itself citing the 98% of the scientists who agree.
“Of course that data wont lead to a governmentâ┚¬Ã‚¦any government taking over aspects of your life so out with that.” says michael e. But if governments are all about taking over aspects of our lives when faced by the alledged bogus global warming data then why wouldn’t they also take over aspects of our lives when faced with data about an impending ice age? Global warming or global freezing each would present dire futures for nations would they not? An ice age whether bogus or real would be just another grand opportunity for the nanny state to interfere even more in our lives using mr. e’s reasoning.
Another record hot summer here in Minnesota, btw.
I agree with jhm and LT. But wherever there is a hint of bias from big donors seeping into public broadcasting’s content, it pays to ring PBS and NPR up. Keeps them on their toes!
I was watching “Becoming Human” with great interest until the end, when a bizzare “moral of the story” was added: “Maybe we don’t need to worry so much about global warming, since our ancestors were smart enough to deal with environmental change”. I was shocked by the lack of scientific evidence to support such a statement. We are now 5 – 6 billion people on the planet. We cannot simply migrate to follow food sources. We already have millions of environmental refugees, many due to the fact that our leaders find food aid more profitable than promoting sustainable agricultural. The rich nations — U.S. and E.U. — show every sign of hanging on to their monopoly of resources. We’ve seen it with water, energy, and land. Are we planning a man-made “die off” equivalent to some of the natural phenomena that shaped our history and evolution? Shame on NOVA for succumbing to the corporate “solution”, rather than supporting the common humanity that their program was supposed to be about.
There’s often this kind of confusion as though evolution is always “supposed to happen”.
Evolution is simply what happens, not some logical inexorable progression towards perfection.
Only people who plan and act with some notion of improvement in mind
can *engineer* an improvement, and as usual I fear for this race which is unable
to act even when the evidence is clear that action is needed.
Jim Naureckas Says: “Believe what you want” is clearly michael e’s motto.
actually jim, i’d amend that to “‘Believe what fauxnews tells you to believe’ is clearly michael e’s motto.”
I warned all of you about the egregious dope and fraud who calls himself michael e. Surely you see the signs of the poorly-educated, lowbrow reactionary–multiple question marks, God-awful spelling, the capitalizing of words and strings of words to make a “point,” and the ready believing of the most fantastic liars and mountebanks the world has ever known. It’s best to ignore him, and after a while, he may flutter away, back to Wingnuttia.
P.S.: Right you are, Albert Einstein.
With the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer (8/30/10) outlining much of the Koch family’s political donations jhm has no concern regarding the Koch sponsorship of Nova. A lot of people saw no reason to be concerned by Hitler, the pro lynching dixiecrats, or the Koch brothers. To me it is abundantly clear that there is every reason to be concerned. But maybe many of you trust your families future to an immoral partisan ideologue. Pass the Soylent Green please. PBS & NPR were obviously co-opted years ago. Read their original mission statements. But that does not mean that it is not very important that we all pay attention & get after them for their every shortcoming. Fair is to be commended for this post even if it were only to point out that an entity proven to be lacking in the most basic niceties of the social contract is sponsoring anything on PBS. Not that PBS lacks for sponsorship by corporate criminals. Monsanto, ADM, oil companies, Cargil, & on & on. If the Koch brother have their way you will be leading a life beneath that of a well cared for slave. Unless of course you are willing to collaborate. As more & more people fail to be able to appreciate the value of truth & beauty in their life we will rapidly descend into a Lord of the Flies kind of existence. Koch doesn’t even support a minimum wage or social security for old folks for Christ’s sake.
“Maybe we don’t need to worry so much about global warming, since our ancestors were smart enough to deal with environmental change” I would like to hear how you are going to deal with nothing to eat.
Well, maybe some viewers are not aware for example that the percentage of children with asthma has gone up & continues to rise dramatically as does the landslide of evidence that massive fouling of our environment has & will continue to have the most dire effects on our ability to live on this planet naturally in any sense of the word.
Believe what you want is clearly FRED’s privilege but like jhm they seem lost when it comes to making very important distinctions. For instance demonstrable facts v. opinion. Good one, Mr. Einstein.
The sad thing about this string of public comment is that Michael e is probably not the only culture warrior in the wood pile.
PBS is “corporate owned”, One look at all the sponsers of their programing confirms that. Give PBS enough cash and they will kiss the ass of (promote the cause) of their largest doners, which are corporations. I have said before, the people pay ther utility bills. The BIG corporate money pays for the programing. Support Link TV if you want independent World News, and programs.
WGBH consistently seems to be moving toward selling out and giving air time to “views” of those on the far right.
a number of years ago, when the right fought to eradicate government funding for GBH, their tactic backfired, causing viewers to rally with increased financial support.
When that tactic didn’t work, the right shifted its strategy and is now contributing to the station, buying it off, and demanding in exchange opportunities to present far right views as valid, scientific information. Shame on WGBH for allowing this and presenting far right views as credible…as just one more opinion from which to choose. The right is working to undermine and do away with intelligent programming and news.
I can’t tell you how disappointed I am with WGBH.
Sorry, this outrage does not fly. I think it’s important to note that there was essentially no outcry when this show first aired in 2009. A year later — AFTER the New Yorker story on the Koch family’s funding of Nova — viewers suddenly see all sorts of conspiracies and reason to boycott PBS. I believe there may be a great deal of presumptive bias at play here.
And, since ad hominem attacks seem to rule the day here, I find the Koch family activities over the past two decades to be quite troubling and I firmly believe that climate change is frighteningly real. But I also believe in evolution and this show made me conclude that our species ability to adapt will not be of much help given the scope and relative speed of the impending changes.
Such a shame. Public TV used to be a light in the dark, but I have quit contributing & watching, unless it’s Austin City Limits. Corporate takeover of Public TV is one of the saddest examples…. in an enormous world of corporate takeovers.
I love to watch my name raised in derision miles after I wrote anything.Shows Im hitting a nerve to people who have a lot of it….nerve that is.
Woodward and B…….Your debunking of Lord M holds no water.Rich Littlemore and Bringham young prof Barry Bickmore have done little more than say they disagree with Lord M.Ive read their asides and it is weak-weak.Ok everybody is allowed their opinion.To my mind the lord leaves them with tire marks on their backs.IM sure you think they could debate him.Doubt it.Congress ran scared as well as AL Gore and his experts.But I respect your right to believe as you will.I do not respect your right to use carbon emission( so called) science to infringe in any way with people lives(taxes).The science is not closed .And the side slinging propaganda is still well open for discourse
And do you not notice that you refer to the” science of climate change” and the “propaganda of anti climate change”?It is so obvious all the articles stated and your own words are biased beyond any counter thoughts.Start small.Tell me if it will rain tuesday next month(I have a party)And maybe I will believe you have found a way to tell me about a thousand years from now.
Gore just bought a house.Nine mil I believe he payed and 15 feet from the waters edge in an area he believes and has stated will be covered by water within a few short years due to global warming.What a goof!
As I said believe what you will.Allow us the same right without penalty.
micheal e is too stupid to know the difference between climate and weather…shocking
by the way..barry bickmore presents 3,500 words [a rather long “aside”, eh sports fans?] of counter argument [with multiple graphs] to point out the multiple errors in [not disagee with] one paragraph of Monckton’s nonsense…but of course our faux-fact man mr e would find it weak, he doesn’t understand numbers and he fluffs the not-a-lord cause he tells the lies low information dullards want to hear [and believe]
http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/the-monckton-files-solar-variation/
Again W and B believes anyone who thinks they are full of it- must be to stupid dullards who just cant understand the numbers you throw around like so much cow dung .Try hard to remember that the top scientists (yours)were caught red handed admitting they cooked the books for years.Your Green zcar admitted it was all a political ruse to gain power over the electorate.WE threw him out on his ass as well. And Bickmore….Bickmore is an interesting guy to quote.!I Love his work on restoring the ancient church as a Morman apologist.Hmmm.By the way why would you quote a religious man in this- no matter his training.Don’t all you libs believe that those who believe in God are in some way touched?ESPECIALLY a Morman.Remember Mitt?Look up top scientist against the global climate change being due to man and his evil ways scenario. Thousands of scientist are on that side of the coin too genius.So who to believe?I will err on the side of not giving you the ability to shatter the worlds economy’ and gain great control of such, for your pet theories.So Gores house is not under water….and it wont be….and he knows it wont be.He is a liar and it is sad you have to follow such men.But I have no problem with you reaching about to find those who agree with you.I have a big problem with the belief that all the economies of the world should be put under a central control of a new world order- to stop we stupid stupid mortals from killing ourselves.After all you know best right chiefy.I wont call you names for believing such things.Believe away.But hands off the rest of us Ok?And Look at the polls.Again they are turning against you. Bloody Stupid peasants your saying.Well well……So I will vote against giving you that kind of power if it is all the same to you..That and any other over reaching government controls.See once upon a time you could silence those who saw through your insanity.Now the worm has turned and yet your still singing the same old song(and insult) and yelling “dont look at that man behind the curtain.”The hour is getting late for you, and soon you will of shot your load and be on your way.Read the polls meathead.They get it.No body is buying this hoax or much else your side is selling.You see people reject being controlled.Even if your intentions are the best.And I of course am not so sure on that count.
So Did you figure out what the “weather” will be on that tuesday?How about the climate in Europe 6 years hence?I may be living abroad by then.How about the water level outside Gores house in nine years?He said that area would be under water….yet he spent 9 mil to buy it?????????????
June 21, 2010 New Study Reaffirms Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
A paper published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) underscores the widespread consensus among climate scientists that human activity is driving climate change.
The paper, written by William Anderegg, James Prall, Jacob Harold and Stephen Schneider, surveyed the work of 1,372 climate researchers. They found that nearly all published climate scientists agree that human activity is driving climate change. Their findings are consistent with a 2009 survey of scientists’ attitudes as well as a 2004 survey of the scientific literature on climate change.
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/study-scientific-consensus-climate-change-411.html
W and B
How can there be so many articles from thousands of scientists on the hoax that is climate change yet you state “Nearly all “published scientists believe otherwise.?Maybe……Be careful of using terms like” published” in the world of science.Do to the system- and the way it plays out, almost all scientists that are” published” are also using grants or get paychecks from the government.No conspiracy there ,its just the way it is.Why bite the hand that feeds you?AS always follow the money trail.
Your article Say’s the corporate media is backing climate deniers,but does not mention that most scientist who believe in climate change are in effect on the government doll and dancing to their tune.Much like those scientists who were willfully playing with the books so as to keep their jobs running on and on..Also remember there is no such thing as a consensus in science.That is a red flag word the usually indicates it is a theory……not factual provable science.And it is …a theory.Just a theory that the left used as a wedge to gain power(quoting Obamas ousted Green czar)..There are also a plethora of books on the coming ice age you could read.I read two and I do believe their “science”is more provable and predictable than global warming- though for now it is not the flavor of the month..It is very annoying to have a warm winter and have some brainiac say it is global warming…Then have the worst on record(Last year)and that also is global warming.I do love a rigged game.We also know that one sunspot ,or lack there of -can do more than all of mankind put together in its effect on climate change…And remember the reports on cow farts(Methane)being worse than all the worlds cars.So what to do?I prepose you read and believe as you would.And if the world stops its cooling trend, and actually warms more than it has in its traceable history (before we ever could effect it )than the science will be there to help us understand our options.If it keeps cooling and we start down the path of another ice age same thing goes.But if it is the ice age theory that prevails as flav a da month this season…. I will not ask the incoming Republican government to force every American to buy one chord of wood(bet Al Gore will be the first to buy up all the cut wood for sale) ,and one wood burning stove before the snow cometh.Or place an Ark toll before the storm.Or tax them to pay for the theory of climate damage (warming).I will not issue carbon credits for warming.Or umbrella credits for a rainy day.Or snow credits For those who agree to share body heat.I will stay pretty consistent on quietly but firmly asking the government to keep its hand off my wallet for its pet projects.
I saw Ed Begley(spelling?)has a new Tv show” Living with Ed”. Big time environmentalist.He talks the talk and walks the walk and tries to explain his beliefs.He does not seem to infringe on others rights.HE seems a gentle ,good man.Your outgoing leaders in contrast seem to believe it is their right to do just that(force we stubborn horses to drink their swill) .And I could not disagree more.
i’m unclear as to why you call last winter the worst on record? Mexico, the United States, central Canada, Sweden, and northern Russia experienced strong, sometimes deadly, cold-temperature anomalies, and in some cases, record-breaking snow this past winter. Meanwhile, the land surface temperatures measured by MODIS in eastern Canada, Greenland, northern Africa, and the Middle East were much higher this winter than they were in other years this decade.
the record breaking snow fall is consistent with the predicted results of global warming…
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/impacts/early-warning-signs-of-global-3.html
So if it snows its GW?If it doesn’t its GW?If it might- or if it might not it is still Gw??Ho hum you have not swayed me, and I feel I have not swayed you at all. I just saw where a glacier that was melting away… but now has recovered 80% what it lost in the last 5 years in just 6 months has an iron age copper mine at its base … 50 feet under the snow.In those times there was nothing as far as snow goes there.Before men could be blamed that there was no glacier .Of course there are millions of such instances.And you would site not the global temperatures that have gone down for many years but any spikes up.Or even trends up.So be it.And that discussion is worth having and debating.But the question is this idea the Dems always push- that amounts to “give us your money now or we will all die”And it is just not going to float.Not anymore.The worm has turned.And I tell you in all honesty that when the ruling paradigm changes we will work to deconstruct these powers you would give government to force their science(pseudo science to us)and their keynesian economic theories on us.Have no doubt that is what we wish.Obama has forced his will on a populace that recoils at such things.Climate science is only one of many such things.
I do not argue climate changes W and B.Any farmer knows sometimes it rains and sometimes it don’t.I do not argue that in the past it has warmed and cooled.Over millions of years.I wonder though if you would argue the “motivations”of our leaders to use those absolutes- for their own political purposes?I think that record;that “science”is crystal clear.And what is sad is this grab for power has disarmed the Democratic parties arguments not all of which are so free wheeling/loony ,and some of which even I agree with.I hope you can see that.
One of my best friends gave up a very lucrative life style and moved out into the boondocks.He lives almost completely off the grid and by his own hands he does for his family and himself..A very balanced life that would put most environmentalists to shame.He has a beautiful life that I completely respect and am amazed by.He is your poster boy.And he HAAAAAAATES Obama and his governments excesses upon the people. If you met him You would respect him as well I think right up until he opens up about The highjacking of the Dem party by the liberal socialist wingnuts.That is when you would cut him off. So You wish to ignore the elections this week…the Rush Limbaughs…..The tea parties and me.But the din is getting mighty hard to ignore.And just writing everyone off as well……….. all the names Ive been called on these blogs is – a loosing game.Believe in climate change.Live your life accordingly.Just leave my life alone because frankly I dont trust you enough to give you power over me.
Cheers
The right question how reliable it is
Wow – I just had the same experience that poster Edwina White had. I’m watching “Inside Hurricane Sandy” on Nova today New Year’s day) and I’m riveted. At the end of the program, the narrator starts saying “we cannot connect this powerful storm to climate change..” and I bolted upright. I couldn’t believe it, it was out of character with the interviews of scientists that I just saw on the program and the tenor shifted. The narration felt like an edit. I was shocked. The narrator continued and did cite sea level rise as the reason the storm was so destructive. I was really feeling weird at this point because I don’t remember Nova adding all encompassing claims to their programs like this before. When the program ended I was still sitting there watching when “funding by David H. Koch’ I thought ‘oh sh*T’s. I immediately started researching this connection and here I am on this page. *sigh* This is not good.