Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 20
When one reads Frank Rich's recent comments -- Op-Ed Editor of the New York Times on how the news media, especially the big networks, fictionalizes the news for money, and in the process distorts the truth (his words not my words) and points fingers to CNN as the initial big practitioner of this fictionalization process -- not that the other networks have not followed suit and likewise have become big practitioners of "stories"-- one begins to wonder why should we waste time listening to the news. No wonder viewership has been going down.

Then I read yesterday a write-up in the Wall Street Journal (Page A-11) by a Professor of the University of London basically laying out the fraud (my words) that this whole Climate Report publication is and the whole issue of government vetting of the scientists that are allowed to participate, and one has to wonder how any individual is supposed to judge and arrive at any reported truth in an objective manner?

Can one really label a panel of scientists INDEPENDENT when it requires government-vetting? Can one say that a report is unbiased and untouched by political and/or ideological considerations when every scientist on that panel is supposed to reach consesus with the same government that approved his participation?

What I found amazing is that the rules ("rule 10 I believe is called) requires that the scientists that participate in the panel need to reach "consensus" with his government? Excuse me!!! Can one really call this process unbiased and scientifically sound? Who are they kidding ... independent?

And, these are the same folks who hypocritically denounced Exxon for having supported think tanks that are opposing and exposing this hoax?

Is this the selection and vetting process, the process that is used as proof-positive that this whole climate change claims that man is the cause of global warming is settled science? Who are they kidding? ...I think just the naive and the uninformed. I have to say, no wonder they have to vett their scientists ...they need to be careful who they put on their panel for sure.

And then to top off one's skepticism one reads about the poll that was conducted asking these same selected group of scientists that participated in pulling together this INDEPENDENT write-up on climate change, whehter they were pressured in any manner to change or modify their procedure and conclusions. Amazingly, 60% of them admitted having been pressured by their governments and others in one way or another.

Could you imagine a panel that is supposed to judge the truth of an important climatological event, and they are pressured to ensure that they come up as close to a predetermined position as possible?

And even then, these perpetrators of the climate hoax fail to read the fine print, and the report gets published showing that sea levels, at the very worst may, and I stress may... go up 1.5 feet in 100 years, and they go livid because they wanted Polar Bears to drown now!!! with all their glacial melting exaggeration. .... nice try.

By the way, something very similar happened to me years ago when I participated in a panel at an Energy conference. In this panel we were supposed to discuss issues of refining and renewable energies and the final report was supposed to reflect the views of the presentation made by each of the panelists. This was a meeting in Washington D.C. sponsored by the U.S. Dept of Energy and the Ministry of Mines and Hydrocarbons of Venezuela.

What the panelists in our group wrote and turned into the Dept of Energy as a final written draft, as a write-up representative of the balance of all our views-- including a minority opinion, as compared to what came back a few days later to describe the panel's conclusions in final form --- was like night and day. I protested, and was told that this was what the White House wanted and there was nothing they could do. So this whole exercize was just a put on; a cover. The answer was already politically pre-determined by ideology on not by expert's opinions on that panel.

Well from the description of this professor's article in the WSJ, I think the same thing is happening with the climate change report.

And these same folks have the gall to call this report INDEPENDENT and settled science. And now, the biggest liar of them all, and inventor of the internet, Al Gore is being nominated for the Noble Peace Price. Has our liberal elite gone soft in their ability to reason correctly? Boy, are we in trouble. ....stay tune.

Madame Butterfly
Print the post  


What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.