- Skeptics as ever show calm and logic, The Green team Media continue to show only an alternative reality by selecting only pro-green stories and hyping them. And trolls try to disrupt Skeptic blogs ..and it all matters cos Truth matters.
Media Manufacture a Consensus by only Airing Activists
Real Expert shines a light propaganda & on how consensus is MANUFACTURED
- Prof Stewart Franks on Radio 2GB Andrew Bolt with Steve Price, March 4 -
They * call it "The angry summer", but there is an "angry scientist sat in my chair !"
http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/7642 35 mins into broadcast.
- Aha ..This explains why the public believe there is a "catastrophe is a certain" 97% of scientists" consensus.
- Despite the "97% of scientists" consensus figure coming from that A BOGUS study, BBC, ABC, CBC media people only get to see scientists like Flannery, Dr Karl, Paul Nurse who are paid PR people speaking outside their own fields of expertise, whilst any scientists who don't toe the "catastrophe is certain" line are effectively banned.
- So those MEDIA PEOPLE exist in a world where "97% of scientists" consensus say "catastrophe is certain" so they have no problem in passing that lie onto the public.
* report published by climatecommission.gov.au
- The original article here Franks complains the MEDIA'S EXPERTS are not expert
|Real Scientist? no Media prefers REAL Activist Karoly
- Scientist complains : ABC won't broadcast him the expert, but chooses to broadcast "Professional Climate Scientists" who have no expertise, but depend on hyping up climate change for their careers.
- The expert the ABC chose to broadcast instead of him was Karoly who had published nothing relevant. and now has a suspect record
"Stewart Franks was interviewed by the ABC’s PM program, as was Karoly, on the alleged affect of man-made warming on the floods. The alarmist’s opinion was broadcast, and the expert’s was not."
He complained to ABC
"Dear Mr Uhlmann
I would like to protest the repeated interviews with Prof David Karoly with regard to the Queensland floods.
Since 2003, I have published a number of papers in the top-ranked international peer-reviewed literature regarding the role of La Nina in dictating Eastern Australian floods.
There has been no evidence of CO2 in affecting these entirely natural processes, irrespective of their devastating nature.
Why is it then, that someone without any publication nor insight in this key area of concern for Australia is repeatedly called upon to offer his personal speculation on this topic?"
Story on Bolt
alarmist Scientists based their careers on speculation about climate change ..and so get funds
- since then Karoly had an alarmist paper the media widely reported, but which never made it to publication and has still NOT cleared peer review 1 year later
The Journal of Climate : "Due to errors discovered in this paper during the publication process, it was withdrawn by the authors prior to being published in final form."
- retractionwatch paper-claiming-hottest-60-year-span-in-1000-years-put-on-hold
|Chris Rapley rampant warming activist : was allowed a platform on the normally rational BBC Material World
- Death Threats claim : Please Substantiate or withdraw
- Some things are easy to say and have huge impact BUT without substantiation are meaningless so can Chris Rapley show evidence for his claim "a number of my colleagues have received unpleasant emails ..death threats etc." made 25.39 mins into last weeks prog.
- A death threat will undoubtedly been reported to the police so PLEASE show evidence of this and the prosecutions. or WITHDRAW
I say that in the light that all previous claims have turned out to be hollow and I am not aware of any prosecutions for this.
- Given that the widely reported death threats at ANU turned out NOT TO EXIST (The Australian, 3 May 2012
- Delingpole opinion
- also "colleagues" in office or other side of world ?
..in the next week quentin muttered under his breath "we apologise for the politicking last week" ..not good enough
|On another BBC report about Lord Sterns wild prediction
- : Interesting to see that the BBC can imagine a few where fossil fuels will be left in the ground cos of CO2 limits, but cannot imagine a future where such ridiculous CO2 targets and Mega-subsidies are abolished.
Holding The Media To account on Their CAGW Hype
- I googled "Holding The Media To account on Climate Change" and all I got was this In activist blog complaining that an activist report had not been widely published in the media ...So I replied :
- So when one of the multinational billionaire eco-activist "charities" come out with a report, you think the media should deeply report it ?
- Why they are any different from any other well funded lobby group ?
- The media should seeking truth and you get that by searching facts. Starting off by getting replicated studies from peer reviewed reputable literature, but then taking it apart rather than fawning and accepting it at face value. To find the 10% that actually does stand up to close analysis.
- Then you have facts to spend tax money on. Rather than just throwing money at activists feelings.
.. of course my comment was rejected
|If it Hypes Greens it's allowed on BBC, if not "shush"
- Tim Flannery on BBC WS Newshour now, being free reign with his "climate commission report says China is going green"
.. this idea follows the "too strange to be true" rule
- (see the report in The Age "China pushes forward on renewable energy: report")
- Another report on China gives lie to Flannery's climate change fantasies
Outrageous Propaganada as ever BBC constructs alternative reality
- BTW I find on The Commission's website FAQ
"Should Australia have a carbon price when China is increasing its emissions?" too CONVENIENT they have suddenly manufactured their own rebuttal
- The BBC WS radio repeatedly reported yesterday "Tim Flannery" Australia's unexpert Climate Commissioner announcing it's new report that "China pushes forward on renewable energy"
- What it did not big up last month was that
1. the worlds biggest solar panel maker China Suntech went bankrupt last month with debts of $1bn, joining many other bankrupt solar companies, while others are precarious.
2. China is now adding more CO2 to the air every year than all Britain’s emissions put together, and that it's target is to DOUBLE it's CO2 by 2030, when it will be responsible for half the world’s total emissions.
.. what an alternative reality Green Activists and Green Media construct !
|Big Solar Panel makers going bankrupt
- ABC Good report on Suntech bankruptcy
- the BBC managed the story without the word bankrupt. (short report says "fallen into financial trouble." but video has a different tone : "China ..once seen as the flag bearers.. shine definitely come off" ) but that is after many fawning reports about how good they are "this is amazing scale of China's renewables industry , huge" etc.
- Well MIT Technology Review used a different headline Solar Downturn Casts a Shadow Over Innovation "..isn’t the only solar company teetering on the edge. Almost all of the world’s largest solar panel makers are in danger of going bankrupt within a year, "
- When it comes to Green the compliant media bigs up the positives, but is almost silent on the negatives.
- In the same BBC report above after gushing about suntech he moves onto Nova Solar .."We are VERY VERY Positive"
...oh what's this ? Nova Solar files for bankruptcy 19 Jun 2012..actually the BBC report finally ends saying "China's plans are for Greenhouse gas emmissions TO DOUBLE by 2030"
- I like the Economists headline about the situation Suntech's bankruptcy
Beyond Profit .."Unconfirmed rumours are swirling that the local government in Wuxi is already organising some sort of bail-out."... 6 weeks and nothins happened
- So Flannery's bigging up Green China seems quite different from reality.
PS now South China Morning Post reply China a green energy leader? Don't make me laugh