Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Left-Wing Groups Funded Climate Alarmism Journalism

#1
Syne Offline
https://www.dailywire.com/news/left-wing...ked-report

Five non-profit groups published a report Wednesday debunking mainstream media claims about the disastrous impacts of the so-called climate change crisis this year, which also included receiving millions of dollars to fund climate coverage.

The “Climate Fact Check 2022” report created by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), the Heartland Institute, Energy & Environment Legal Institute, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), and the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) highlighted ten fact checks of climate disaster claims made by several media outlets like The Associated Press, which took $8 million in donations from left-wing philanthropy groups to cover climate change.

“Climate alarmists and their media allies once again made a slew of claims about natural disasters being caused by manmade emissions in 2022,” the report reads. “And once again, these claims clashed with reality and science.”
...
One example the report included came from an article written by AP reporter Seth Borenstein, called “New abnormal: Climate disaster damage ‘down’ to $268 billion,” which said some worldwide natural disasters like the Pakistan floods, Hurricane Ian, and droughts stretching from Europe to China were “turbocharged by human-caused climate change.”

According to the Climate Fact Check report, the Pakistan floods and the 2022 monsoon season were within the range of natural variability and the wettest since 1961.

“If emissions are to blame, why was it so rainy then?” the report reads.
...
Mainstream media outlets blamed Hurricane Ian, the category four disaster that was the deadliest hurricane to strike Florida since 1935, on climate change for the storm’s rapid intensification. Still, the report references the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which points out that the Atlantic basin hurricane activity is within natural variability after a historically quiet first few months of hurricane season.

BBC News reported that Europe experienced its most severe drought in 500 years. However, the report asks if emissions produced by coal-fired power plants, SUVs, and cheeseburgers caused the lack of rainfall, then what happened in the European mega-drought in 1540?

“Is this money funding actual journalism or just rank political activism?” the report asks.

Reply
#2
confused2 Offline
Sea level is rising.
Predicting extreme weather events are likely to become less unlikely is a slippery platform to stand on. Taking the example of the worst drought in 500 years - on the one hand it is unusual and on the other it's inevitable depending on how you choose to spin the story. Given the natural variation of weather it will take at least 500 hundred years to demonstrate weather is 'unusual' compared to (say) the previous 500 years so coal mines, SUV's and cheeseburgers aren't a problem.
Meanwhile.
Sea level is rising.
Reply
#3
Syne Offline
There's no prediction involved. If 2022 monsoons were no worse than 1961, 2022 hurricanes were no worse than 1935, and 2022 drought no worse than 1540, it would stand to reason that between then and now there were lulls in carbon emissions...if those were the main culprit. "Within the range of natural variability" means that the record has yet to show anything alarming.
After the ice age, the sea level rose more than 120 meters. Should we have been alarmed this whole time?
Reply
#4
confused2 Offline
(Dec 30, 2022 09:25 PM)Syne Wrote: There's no prediction involved. If 2022 monsoons were no worse than 1961, 2022 hurricanes were no worse than 1935, and 2022 drought no worse than 1540, it would stand to reason that between then and now there were lulls in carbon emissions...if those were the main culprit. "Within the range of natural variability" means that the record has yet to show anything alarming.
After the ice age, the sea level rose more than 120 meters. Should we have been alarmed this whole time?

I know Syne to be an honest reporter so I'm going to accept his evidence that there is no evidence of any increase of land or sea temperature in the vicinity of the United States.

As an honest reporter from the UK I quote
Quote:An updated analysis of the annual UK temperature records from the Met Office shows that since 1884 all of the UK’s ten warmest years have occurred since 2002; whereas none of the ten coldest years have occurred since 1963.
More:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/pr...imate-2018

If it turns out that the UK Met. Office are using Leftist thermometers I hope it will be understood that I am myself being deceived without intent to deceive. The UK is a small country which can switch from Arctic to Tropical within a few hours - the significance of the quoted results is that (unlike US data) they don't conflict with other sources.

With no 'global warming' in/around the US there can be no mechanism for thermally generated storms to become more frequent or intense and Syne's claim that any such suggestion is a Leftist conspiracy is entirely justified.

If people have a problem with rising sea levels they can always buy houses on higher ground or copy the example of Holland which is almost entirely below sea level.
Reply
#5
Syne Offline
I didn't say anything at all about any land or sea temperature increase. Pretending otherwise is dishonest, either intentionally or with yourself.
If all the supposedly alarming weather events are linked to temperature, but none of these events are outside of the range of natural variability, why should we be worried about temperature?

Again, if none of the ten coldest years have occurred since 1963, why was there a comparable drought all the way back in 1540? All the cars and carbon emissions?
So if weather is still within the comparable range of history, temperature is just not a good metric of truly extreme or unprecedented weather.
Reply
#6
C C Offline
(Dec 30, 2022 12:53 AM)Syne Wrote: https://www.dailywire.com/news/left-wing...ked-report

[...] The Associated Press, which took $8 million in donations from left-wing philanthropy groups to cover climate change. [...]

And the AP itself proudly announced back in February that it and others had become receptive to "lobbying" and motivated journalism, in order to survive.

Climate grant illustrates growth in philanthropy-funded news
https://apnews.com/article/science-busin...a21a1ffb5f

EXCERPTS: The Associated Press said Tuesday that it is assigning more than two dozen journalists across the world to cover climate issues, in the news organization’s largest single expansion paid for through philanthropic grants. The announcement illustrates how philanthropy has swiftly become an important new funding source for journalism — at the AP and elsewhere — at a time when the industry’s financial outlook has been otherwise bleak.

[...] Five organizations are contributing to the effort: the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Quadrivium, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation.

[...] For many years, journalists and philanthropists were more wary of each other. News organizations were concerned about maintaining independence and, until the past two decades, financially secure enough not to need help. Philanthropists didn’t see the need, or how journalists could help them achieve their goals.

[...] Both sides had things to learn. For Carovillano, it was getting used to the idea that funders weren’t just being generous; they had their own goals to achieve. “This is a mutually beneficial arrangement,” he said.


The issue of whether Climate Change is wholly human-caused or part of non-anthropogenic, irregular cycles -- or a combination of both, is independent of Climate Change being exploited to implement political agenda and commercial profit (greenwashing). If mainstream channels officially reported next week a legit menace of AI taking over the world being promoted by respected scientists, no doubt that would soon be cultivated to serve political and commercial group self-interests as well. With debate over whether it was real or fiction being a separate, parallel development unfolding over the months/years.
Reply
#7
confused2 Offline
Quote:If all the supposedly alarming weather events are linked to temperature, but none of these events are outside of the range of natural variability, why should we be worried about temperature?
I think you have it the wrong way round. It is temperature we should worry about - the weather will follow along as it pleases.
Reply
#8
Syne Offline
Weather hasn't deviated from the natural range of variability yet. If weather is going to follow temperature....when? Next month, next year, next decade, next millennia?
When will the alarmist predictions actually become unprecedented in human history? They haven't yet. So it's only the alarmists making prognostications.

But it's completely to be expected that those making accusations about predictions would be the hypocrites actually making the predictions.
If "it will take at least 500 hundred years to demonstrate," you can only take it on faith right now. Your own little apocalyptic myth.
Reply
#9
confused2 Offline
^^ Is "Everybody killed in storms" what worries Americans or is that what the leftist press are presenting as a threat? In the UK we treat the ten hottest years in recorded history as "not much to go on". What the hell is going on in America?

Edit.. from an unedited post above..
I Wrote:The UK is a small country which can switch from Arctic to Tropical within a few hours - the significance of the quoted results [ten hottest years] is that (unlike US data) they don't conflict with other sources.
Reply
#10
Syne Offline
We have Democrat politicians in Congress saying the world will literally end in 12 years, but polls show that most American's don't care. The ones who claim they do only do so to virtue-signal, like those who bought a Tesla to save the planet, but now they feel uncomfortable driving one because Elon Musk's politics don't seem to align with their own.

Leftists don't really care about the things they claim to. They care about "looking like good people" or pushing their political agenda. Any people or causes they use to accomplish those ends are just tokens.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  La Nina keeps defying climate models + ‘Flash droughts’ are next big climate threat C C 0 97 May 30, 2022 03:18 PM
Last Post: C C
  At bioenergy crossroads, should corn ethanol be left in rearview mirror? (climate) C C 0 49 Feb 15, 2022 05:48 PM
Last Post: C C
  Stop telling kids they’ll die from climate change + Orbit affects climate variability C C 2 160 Nov 6, 2021 09:40 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Climate alarmism: Green activist exposes its profit, funding, career & agenda motives C C 0 157 Jun 30, 2020 10:32 PM
Last Post: C C
  How climate politics undermines climate science C C 3 508 Oct 25, 2019 10:45 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Harvey Most Powerful Storm in 12 Years + I Was an Exxon-Funded Climate Scientist C C 0 433 Aug 26, 2017 03:20 AM
Last Post: C C
  GOP rebels foil repeal of climate rule + Study reveals climate shifts thru the eons C C 0 490 May 11, 2017 06:56 PM
Last Post: C C
  Climate Change shifts clouds to poles + Disagreement in fighting climate change C C 0 534 Jul 11, 2016 08:03 PM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)