MSM Coverage of Climategate Warmaquiddick [UPDATED]

Lots of people will be all over this, as well they should. Here’s an early entry from Ed Driscoll. At issue is how the MSM will “cover” the greatest scientific scandal of the past 100 years. So far, the AP seems to think that the answer is to double down and claim that the warming that hasn’t occurred since 1998 has accelerated.

You may recall that a couple of months ago the BBC astonished the world by walking back its claims about AGW, actually presenting the evidence developed by skeptics. This was in the face of the Copenhagen summit where the mechanisms for exploiting the lies cultivated for many years by a coalition of portions of the scientific community, unelected internationalist politicians, and enterpreneurial mountebanks were to be instituted, all in the name of saving the world. This was to involve the redistribution of billions of dollars and the shackling of the economies of developed nations, in exchange for the promise of green collar jobs in Utopia and polar bear welfare in general.

Reeling in the polls, Gordon Brown has begged Obama to make his presence felt in a big way at this conference—unaware, apparently, that Obama has so squandered his political capital at home in pushing domestic schemes for redistribution that he hasn’t any left to squander on this particular stage. And now comes the smoking gun evidence that there was indeed a conspiracy to doctor the data at CRU and related facilities, and to suppress contrary evidence. The person who leaked this information should be an international hero, but is met instead with blatantly hypocritical denunciations on the part of the MSM, which happily followed their instructions to gin up panic, because it gave them the aura of access to special knowledge, and demonstrated their unique concern for the condition of Mother Earth.

As has become the pattern, this new information will at first be deployed only on Fox, and that will be taken by the legacy media as prima facie evidence of bias, the White House will again impute sinister motives to them, et cetera, but eventually as Americans, who have become increasingly skeptical of the claims of Warm-Mongers become aware of the scale of deception, the MSM will be forced to blame the scientist whom they once revered for deceiving them. And once again, their complicity in their own bamboozlement will receive only rare consideration from a handfull of reasonably honest authors.

And this overview is simply excellent.

UPDATE: “This is not a smoking gun. This is a mushroom cloud.” Link to Andrew Revkin spinning wildly at the NYT.

Not a single piece on this at ScienceDaily.com.

CNN sucks (but you knew that).

Melanie Phillips on the totalitarianism.

Inhofe unloads, calls for investigation.

About Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.
This entry was posted in Too Lazy to Categorize. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to MSM Coverage of Climategate Warmaquiddick [UPDATED]

  1. Pablo says:

    I’m truly entertained by the references to hacking, and especially by Mann’s “I’m not going to comment on the content of illegally obtained emails…” non-denial. First, let’s assume that there was a hacking. Next, let’s ignore any and all other possibilities such as an inside leak, or a nitwit using P2P networks with these files exposed. Finally, let’s get all indignant over the unassailable conclusion we jumped to in the first place, which is unassailable because we find it convenient.

    There doesn’t appear to be any evidence of hacking taking place. Let’s run with it anyway.

    Hilarious. And my comment at Real Climate pointing out this knee-jerk conclusion jumping never made it out of moderation. I’m guessing that it wasn’t sufficiently scientifically rigorous.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Bob Reed says:

    The one of the ideological pillars of the scientific community is repeatability, and peer review; that’s why for most other programs NASA has gone to great lengths to make data available to scientists world-wide for independant scrutiny and analysis.

    And that is one of the reasons that the whole AGW crowd, chanting, “The science is settled!” or “The debate is over!”, has annoyed me so over the years; but especially how they witheld the data and computer models that they used to base their pronouncements. That’s not how it’s done, except in cases of the most sensetive national security research, and was a dead give-away of the lack of confidence in their underlying data, methodology, assumptions, and analytic technique which yielded their “solutions”…

    And that’s why the furball surounding this is sooooooo sweet! Not only does it expose the poor methodology, the lying, and the attempts at covering up, but exposes the frantic “by any means necessary” mindset of these folks who immediately are damning the source of these revelations in a cheap attempt to diminish their connivance by “shooting the messenger”…

    This combined with the recent cold spells will go a long way twards convincing the average low information voter that AGW was never real, and plans meant to “address it” were simply covers for another agenda.

    You’re right that it will take a while to get out; hell the NY Times win’t even publish the text of the notes talking specifically about maintaining the charade! But it will comeout, through a thousand POWIP like sources and be disseminated to the average joe…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Topsecretk9 says:

    Poster Asimov has been digging in the real smoking gun — the programer and code

    http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=118625&page=13

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Topsecretk9 says:

    I also find it quite interesting there still is no mention of the controversy on Michael Mann’s wiki page. Wonder how many entries have been zapped?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Mann

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Dan Collins says:

    Good point, TSK9.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Its not climategate. It’s Warmaquiddic.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Tofu Charlie says:

    TV news starting to pick it up: Australian Lateline (report + studio interview), Russia Today, Fox News…

    And then there’s this Climate Change PSA that’s emerged with polar bears falling out of the sky… disturbing stuff:

    http://catastrophist.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/msm-videos-cru-hack-climategate/

    Whatever happens with the investigation into “scientific fraud”, tainted models/data, and/or the FOIA file-deletion angle, this is a PR disaster — perhaps the biggest ever.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Dan Collins says:

    Thanks, TC!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Enoch_Root says:

    goddammit – the world is flat I tell you! flat as a pancake! how many scientists have been martyred for not believing? can you say Cultural Revolution on a Chinese scale? I mean, Mao would be proud of all the careers of deniers destroyed over the years!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Pingback: Holdren Implicated in Warmaquiddick

  11. Woo hoo! I hope this really catches on, the whole -gate thing is so leftist centric.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Dan Collins says:

    I also like Gorebacle.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*


7 − two =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe without commenting