• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The climate change conspiracy.

KLATTU

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
19,259
Reaction score
6,899
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Have you ever wondered how the LA Times, Associated Press, Weather Channel and your local media always seem to present similar one-sided stories on climate change, fossil fuels, renewable energy and other environmental issues? How their assertions become “common knowledge,” like the following?

Global temperatures are the hottest ever recorded. Melting ice caps are raising seas to dangerous levels. Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts have never been more frequent or destructive. Planet Earth is at a tipping point because of carbon dioxide emissions. Fracking is poisoning our air, water and climate. 97% of scientists agree. A clean renewable energy future is just around the corner.

It’s as if a chain of command, carefully coordinated process or alliance of ideological compatriots was operating behind the scenes to propagate these fables. This time, conspiracy theorists have gotten it right.

ICN and its Science First alter ego received their 2007 startup grant from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, where Sasoon once served as a consultant. They now derive the bulk of their funding from the RBF, NEO Philanthropy (aka, Public Interest Projects), Marlisa Foundation and Park Foundation. These and other sugar daddies are covered in a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee staff report, which describes a “Billionaire’s Club” of “left-wing millionaires and billionaires [which] directs and controls the far-left [US] environmental movement.”
ICN has active partnerships with the LA Times, Associated Press, Weather Channel, Bloomberg News and other media organizations that help coordinate and disperse stories. The Times promotes the “dangerous manmade climate change” meme and refuses to print letters that reflect skeptical vie
ws.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/01/inside-climate-propaganda/

Real science doesn't work this way.
 
This was vomited up on another thread.

At least the other poster understood that an advocacy group isn't the ones doing 'real science'.

If you actually read 'real science' is patently obvious that AGW is taken as a given since the consensus is so overwhelming.

But if one confuses advocacy groups with science, I'm guessing they have neither the capacity or interest in understanding science.
 
Same reason Jeffrey R. Immelt gets a seat at Obama's table. He's willing to push the agenda.
 
Same reason Jeffrey R. Immelt gets a seat at Obama's table. He's willing to push the agenda.

...Same sh$t goes on with the scientists. It was all in those climategate emails.
 
Have you ever wondered how the LA Times, Associated Press, Weather Channel and your local media always seem to present similar one-sided stories on climate change, fossil fuels, renewable energy and other environmental issues? How their assertions become “common knowledge,” like the following?

Global temperatures are the hottest ever recorded. Melting ice caps are raising seas to dangerous levels. Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts have never been more frequent or destructive. Planet Earth is at a tipping point because of carbon dioxide emissions. Fracking is poisoning our air, water and climate. 97% of scientists agree. A clean renewable energy future is just around the corner.

It’s as if a chain of command, carefully coordinated process or alliance of ideological compatriots was operating behind the scenes to propagate these fables. This time, conspiracy theorists have gotten it right.

ICN and its Science First alter ego received their 2007 startup grant from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, where Sasoon once served as a consultant. They now derive the bulk of their funding from the RBF, NEO Philanthropy (aka, Public Interest Projects), Marlisa Foundation and Park Foundation. These and other sugar daddies are covered in a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee staff report, which describes a “Billionaire’s Club” of “left-wing millionaires and billionaires [which] directs and controls the far-left [US] environmental movement.”
ICN has active partnerships with the LA Times, Associated Press, Weather Channel, Bloomberg News and other media organizations that help coordinate and disperse stories. The Times promotes the “dangerous manmade climate change” meme and refuses to print letters that reflect skeptical vie
ws.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/01/inside-climate-propaganda/

Real science doesn't work this way.

Oh well, these guys have blown it. They have badly over-reached, and not many people are paying attention any more. I can't think of a single real major policy they've been able to get enacted. Anything they recommend that requires major money is dead.
 
Oh well, these guys have blown it. They have badly over-reached, and not many people are paying attention any more. I can't think of a single real major policy they've been able to get enacted. Anything they recommend that requires major money is dead.

LOL. But they all sign those climate treaties. HAHAHAH.Makes em feel like they actuallydid someting
 
LOL. But they all sign those climate treaties. HAHAHAH.Makes em feel like they actuallydid someting

Climate treaties. That's rich. Climate kabuki.
 
You think this is a major policy that will actually accomplish something? I was under the impression that it was carefully crafted not to do anything.

Yeah you can really tell how effective this treaty is by how the warmists here have backed off their alarmism LOL.

Every third post is how we need to DO SOMETHING before it's too late!!!
 
A lot of people say the same thing, must be a vast conspiracy!

Or they are, you know, correct.
 
[h=2]Science into agitprop: “Climate Change is Strangling Our Oceans”[/h] Posted on May 2, 2016 | 156 comments
by Larry Kummer, from the Fabius Maximus website
The public policy debate about climate science shows the dysfunctional nature of the US media. Here’s another example of how propaganda has contaminated the news reporting of this vital subject, looking at stories about a new study of our oceans.​

"Bloggers exaggerate science papers."

Wow. Stunning observation there, Curry.
 
It's a guest post. Professor Curry did not write it.

by Larry Kummer, from the Fabius Maximus website

Ok. Stunning observation there, Larry. I suppose next he'll be telling us that *gasp* reality television is also presented in an exaggerated form!
 
[h=2]Science into agitprop: “Climate Change is Strangling Our Oceans”[/h] Posted on May 2, 2016 | 156 comments
by Larry Kummer, from the Fabius Maximus website
The public policy debate about climate science shows the dysfunctional nature of the US media. Here’s another example of how propaganda has contaminated the news reporting of this vital subject, looking at stories about a new study of our oceans.​

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Same old, same old. :sigh: Tentative conclusions become certainties - "could deplete" is not the same as "will deplete;" and so on. This false portrayal of what was actually written cannot be accidental, but appears to be a deliberate attempt tp mislead, and that is wrong, IMO. Yet it continues... :thumbdown:
 
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Same old, same old. :sigh: Tentative conclusions become certainties - "could deplete" is not the same as "will deplete;" and so on. This false portrayal of what was actually written cannot be accidental, but appears to be a deliberate attempt tp mislead, and that is wrong, IMO. Yet it continues... :thumbdown:

Increasing advertising revenue is their entire business model, and this is what it leads to.
 
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Same old, same old. :sigh: Tentative conclusions become certainties - "could deplete" is not the same as "will deplete;" and so on. This false portrayal of what was actually written cannot be accidental, but appears to be a deliberate attempt tp mislead, and that is wrong, IMO. Yet it continues... :thumbdown:

Greetings, Polgara.:2wave:

Same old, same old, indeed.:mrgreen:
 
Back
Top Bottom