Liberal Media Push Their Political Agenda by Not Reporting Crucial

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Liberal Media Push Their Political Agenda by Not Reporting Crucial VOLUME 13 ISSUE 6 JUNE 2006 www.MediaResearch.org The Media Research Center’s Monthly Members’ Report Liberal Media Push Their Political Agenda INSIDE By Not Reporting Crucial Facts PAGE 3 Dear Friend, ABC’s Charles Gibson: Did you know that the immigration bill the facts — show that crime rates across-the- Another Liberal recently passed by the Senate and supported board are lower in those U.S. cities where law- Anchor by the White House, but emphatically opposed abiding citizens are allowed to own or carry by the House, would allow legal immigration guns. That’s a fact. But the elite liberal media ● into this country to double to 40 million over don’t talk about it much, if at all – not ABC, PAGE 4 the next two decades? That’s right, 40 million NBC, CBS, the New York Times, you name it. Bits & Pieces: more legal immigrants – that’s the number from Nor do the liberal media talk about how NYT Publisher the Senate and the abortion has affected Pushes Radical White House. (The Social Security since Roe Left Agenda, venerable Heritage v. Wade. More than 50 ‘Swift Boating’ of Al Gore? Foundation pegs the million children have number at 103 million.) been killed by abortion ● Yet polls show that only since 1973. That’s PAGE 6 17 percent of Ameri- horrible. And while the CNSNews.com: cans want immigration liberal media celebrate the Climate Change to increase while 77 “right” to abortion, they and the Art percent oppose more won’t discuss how those of Denial immigration. 50 million people, if alive ● Liberal bias by omission: Neither CBS, So what’s going ABC, NBC, nor CNN informed Americans today, would be PAGE 7 on? Why did the Senate that a Senate-approved immigration bill contributing to Social MRC In The News would increase legal immigration by at vote for what 77 Security and helping to ● percent of Americans least 40 million, and possibly 103 million, benefit those liberals who oppose? And why people over the next 20 years. support that program. PAGE 7 didn’t you and I and most other U.S. citizens Nor do the liberal media talk about how Avoid a Big Tax Bill! hear about the alarming immigration numbers? abortion kills more black children in America Because the Senate knew the liberal than any other action, that it has decimated the media wouldn’t and didn’t tell us. They black family, and that more blacks have been deliberately kept those vital facts out of their slaughtered by abortion – 12 million – than were stories. Not reporting important points or ever brought to this country as slaves. crucial facts in order to frame a story a certain The examples are endless. How about way – i.e., a liberal way – is bias by omission: that Catholic priest pedophilia scandal? Well, Don’t tell the people what they need to know actually, the Catholic laity-run National when it would hinder your cause. That’s the Review Board set up to address the problem liberal “news” business for you. concluded that 81 percent of the cases America’s Media For instance, don’t tell Americans that nationwide involved homosexual priests Watchdog more guns equals less crime. The statistics – Continued on page 2 MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER FLASH • JUNE 2006 Continued from page 1 oil would have to hit $86.99 (in inflation-adjusted 2006 dollars) sexually abusing post-pubescent boys, that is, young men – per barrel to be a “record high.” For gasoline, the national 12, 13, 14 years old. A problem? A scandal? Of course. But average would have to exceed $3.12 per gallon. It never did it’s not a pedophilia problem, as the liberal media claim. It is a that, and has, in recent weeks, dropped to around $2.87 per homosexuality problem. gallon on average nationwide. In inflation-adjusted dollars, gas Exposing that bias by omission and neutralizing it is what was more expensive in 1981 than it has been in 2006, period. we do at the Media Research Center. And thanks to our excellent And what of those reporters who know this? Well, the personnel and the gracious financial support of our donors, Washington Post’s David Montgomery said the facts didn’t the MRC is the best at what it does. America’s Watchdog. matter in this case: “Never mind the inflation-adjusted nerds No one comes close to the success of this organization. who point out that regular unleaded gas today is still cheaper Let’s look at a few more examples of bias by omission in than the $3.11 it cost in today’s dollars in 1981.” That’s liberal detail. The 40 million immigration number, cited above, was in bias by omission – deliberate omission. the Senate bill and in the proposal backed by the White House. The liberal media screamed about ExxonMobil’s The numbers were there, but as Newsweek columnist Robert “excessive” and “obscene” profits. Yet they didn’t report that Samuelson noted several days after the Senate vote, journalists ExxonMobil’s profit was 10.6 percent of its revenue while “failed” to “inform the public about what our political leaders Gannett, the parent company of USA Today and 90 daily are doing.” Samuelson’s post-vote column reached, through newspapers, enjoyed a profit of 16.2 percent. Newsweek’s circulation, about 3 million Americans. Yet In another area, the liberal media have been flogging the Samuelson’s important analysis, for which he deserves kudos, President’s low approval rating for months. A Harris poll in was not picked up by a single major network. It was discussed February found that only 25 percent said they have a “great on talk radio and on Fox News, but that’s about it. deal of confidence” in the White House. But what about the Samuelson noted further that Sen. Jeff Sessions held a public’s view of the news media? From the Harris poll, only news conference about the 40 million immigration number 19 percent had great confidence in TV news and only 14 prior to the Senate vote but the national media did not cover percent for “the press” in general. the conference. That’s bias by omission. The liberal media won’t talk about that truth, but we are. Then there are those “record high” gas prices. Since We’re giving you and the millions of Americans who visit our Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, the Big Three – ABC, Web site and read our reports the facts, the truth Americans CBS, and NBC – have run almost 100 stories on “record high” need to make informed decisions and to battle liberal media gas prices. And the Big Three have been wrong nearly 100 bias. Let us carry on this good fight. times. It’s a basic fact and a simple measure when reporting Ever forward, on economic data over time that a journalist always uses inflation-adjusted numbers. But not always, it turns out, if it threatens to neutralize L. Brent Bozell III your argument. The U.S. Department of Energy confirms that Founder and President WHAT’S SO FUNNY? Watch key moments of the MRC Gala & DisHonors Awards online at www.MRC.org Save the date: March 29, 2007 • The MRC’s 20th Anniversary Gala • Washington, D.C. YOU DON’T WANT TO MISS IT! MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER 2 FLASH • JUNE 2006 ABC’s Charles Gibson Yet Another Liberal Anchors World News Tonight As Elizabeth Vargas left World News Tonight on Bush Knew About 9/11 Plot maternity leave, ABC News had a chance to staff its evening “This is interesting news that we get now, and it may put news desk with a politically balanced anchor, but it didn’t. the President under a lot of heat today as the public learns ABC once again chose a liberal, Charles Gibson, to present that he knew, through his daily CIA intelligence briefings, the evening news to some 7 million Americans every that bin Laden had potential terror attack plans under weeknight. In so doing, ABC chose to hammer another nail way....It also calls into question what happened when Andy in its own Old Media coffin. Card, Andrew Card, the White House chief of staff, that Charles Gibson, ABC’s longtime co-host of Good morning went and whispered in the President’s ear, as the Morning America, took to the anchor chair at World News Tonight on May 29. What should conservatives expect from President was talking to a group of school students in Florida. him? More liberal bias. The selected quotes below exemplify Was the President really surprised?” Gibson’s conventional liberal approach on political issues. — Gibson’s introduction and question to White House For a complete set of Gibson’s quotes, see the MRC’s “Profiles correspondent Terry Moran on ABC’s Good Morning America, in Bias” section at www.MRC.org. May 16, 2002. Fawning Over Jimmy Carter Republican Platform Failed to Please Liberals “And now we turn to this morning’s awarding of the Nobel “The platform is, again, very strongly pro-life and rejects Peace Prize to Jimmy Carter. To his supporters who abortion rights, and the platform specifically comes out nominated him seven times over the last 25 years, it was against gay unions, and against legal protections based on an honor long overdue....He was the unlikely President, sexual preferences. So is this really an open, compassion- who came out of nowhere. He has become, in the opinion ate, tolerant party?” of many, the greatest ex-President of modern times.” — Gibson to Lynne Cheney, August 2, 2000 Good Morning — Good Morning America, Oct.
Recommended publications
  • From: John Mashey
    Another Attack on Consensus - Monckton/Schulte/Ferguson/Morano/Asher vs Oreskes & Consensus ANOTHER ATTACK ON GLOBAL WARMING’S SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS A Case Study of Personal Harassment and Amplification of Nonsense by the Denialist PR Machine John R. Mashey, updated March 23, 2008, V 7.0, replaces earlier versions ABSTRACT Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) - the idea that recent temperature rises are substantially caused by humans – is supported by a very strong scientific consensus. But for ideological or economic reasons some people are absolutely sure that it cannot be true, frequently attack it. They are often called contrarians or denialists as a result. They try to manufacture doubt on the consensus among the public, not by doing good science, but by applying PR techniques well-honed in fights over tobacco-disease linkage. These are amplified by widespread use of the Internet, which can quickly propagating nonsense faster than truth. A recent, well-coordinated transatlantic attempt to attack the consensus included: - A not-very-good anti-consensus paper written in the UK by an NHS King’s College endocrinologist, Mr Klaus-Martin Schulte, not obviously qualified for this task, - of which much was posted by Viscount Christopher Monckton at a Washington, DC denialist website of Robert Ferguson, and publicized by Marc Morano of Senator James Inhofe’s staff. - The non-story then propagated rapidly and pervasively through the blogosphere. - This expanded further into personal harassment of a US researcher, Dr. Naomi Oreskes. All this generated
    [Show full text]
  • Satirical Comedy Corrects Climate Change Disinformation
    Michigan Technological University Digital Commons @ Michigan Tech Dissertations, Master's Theses and Master's Reports 2020 “YOU DON’T NEED PEOPLE’S OPINIONS ON A FACT!”: SATIRICAL COMEDY CORRECTS CLIMATE CHANGE DISINFORMATION Shelly A. Galliah Michigan Technological University, [email protected] Copyright 2020 Shelly A. Galliah Recommended Citation Galliah, Shelly A., "“YOU DON’T NEED PEOPLE’S OPINIONS ON A FACT!”: SATIRICAL COMEDY CORRECTS CLIMATE CHANGE DISINFORMATION", Open Access Dissertation, Michigan Technological University, 2020. https://doi.org/10.37099/mtu.dc.etdr/1022 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/etdr Part of the American Popular Culture Commons, Digital Humanities Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other Film and Media Studies Commons, and the Television Commons “YOU DON’T NEED PEOPLE’S OPINIONS ON A FACT!”: SATIRICAL COMEDY CORRECTS CLIMATE CHANGE DISINFORMATION By Shelly A. Galliah A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In Rhetoric, Theory and Culture MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY 2020 © 2020 Shelly A. Galliah This dissertation has been approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Rhetoric, Theory and Culture. Department of Humanities Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Sue Collins Committee Member: Dr. Andrew Fiss Committee Member: Dr. Patricia Sotirin Committee Member: Dr. Joseph Reagle Department Chair: Dr. Patricia Sotirin Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Don't Need a Weather- Man to Know Which Way the Wind Blows
    don’t need a weatheR- man to know which way the wind Blows By John h. RichaRdson 100 ESQ 04• 10 First marc morano swift-boated John kerry. then he turned senator Jim inhofe’s office into the central clearing- house for climate- change denial. now, in his latest coup, morano and his band of odd- balls have convinced millions of americans that global warming is a hoax. PHOTOGRAPH BY MACKENZIE STROH 101 five o’clock shadow that makes him look like Barney Rubble. He was eaRly on the moRn- eleven when his older brother got him a job on the Reagan campaign placing sound bites with radio stations, which eventually led to a job ing oF novemBeR 17, with Rush Limbaugh and three years as communications director for gavin schmidt sat Senator James Inhofe, where he made the words Global warming is a hoax world famous. Now he’s forty-one and he’s enjoying the down- down at his com- time between political speeches, catching glimpses of the California ocean—on these lecture tours, he just runs and runs and runs until all puteR and enteRed he wants is a quiet place to drink a beer and smoke a cigar. his passwoRd. But a call comes in from Anthony Watts, a retired TV weatherman who runs one of the leading contrarian blogs, and he has astonish- it didn’t woRk. ing news about some e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. There’s explosive stuff there— stRange, he thought. in one, a scientist actually rejoices over a contrarian’s death.
    [Show full text]
  • "Introduction." Climate Change Scepticism: a Transnational Ecocritical Analysis
    Garrard, Greg.Goodbody, Axel.Handley, George.Posthumus, Stephanie. "Introduction." Climate Change Scepticism: A Transnational Ecocritical Analysis. London,: Bloomsbury Academic, 2019. 1–40. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 29 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781350057050.ch-001>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 29 September 2021, 14:46 UTC. Copyright © Greg Garrard, George Handley, Axel Goodbody and Stephanie Posthumus 2019. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 1 Introduction When we started writing this book in the year 2016, it seemed the worst possible time to write about climate scepticism. From a scientific perspective, the argument was basically over: the Summary for Policymakers of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had stated: Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. This has led to atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers, have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely [95–100% probability] to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. (‘Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers’) Moreover, an unprecedented array of international scientific organizations had offered the IPCC their support. Dozens of national and international academies of science, including the British Royal Society and the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, published statements confirming that the IPCC process is sound, and its conclusions commensurately robust.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Denial Machine 11/24/16, 410 PM
    Meet The Climate Denial Machine 11/24/16, 410 PM Meet The Climate Denial Machine search Blog (/blog) ››› November 28, 2012 3:16 PM EST ››› JILL FITZSIMMONS (/authors/jill-fitzsimmons/156) ABOUT THE BLOG Like 2.7K Tweet 123 474 (/blog/2012/11/28/meet-the-climate-denial-machine/191545#disqus_thread) Our blog section features rapid response fact- (/printmail/664189)(/print/664189) checks of conservative misinformation, links to media criticism from around the web, Despite the overwhelming consensus (/blog/2011/07/07/heartland-institutes-climate-contrarians- commentary, analysis and breaking news from enjoy/185131#surveys) among climate experts that human activity is contributing to rising global temperatures, Media Matters' senior fellows, investigative 66 percent of Americans incorrectly believe team, researchers and other staff. (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2011/11/public-learning-scientists-agree-on- climate-a-game-changer/1#.UJ0pPIex8-x) there is "a lot of disagreement among scientists about whether or not global warming is happening." The conservative media has fueled (/research/2012/10/24/timeline-fox- FOLLOW US ››› news-role-in-the-climate-of-doubt/190906) this confusion by distorting (/blog/2012/09/24/utter-nonsense- 10-scientists-who-have-criticize/190093) scientific research, hyping (/research/2011/11/30/climategate- Follow @mmfa 244K followers redux-conservative-media-distort-ha/184559) faux-scandals, and giving voice (/blog/2011/07/07/heartland- institutes-climate-contrarians-enjoy/185131) to groups funded by industries that have a financial interest in Like 660K Like on Facebook blocking action on climate change. Meanwhile, mainstream media outlets have shied away (/blog/2012/11/13/how-the-right-scares-the-media-into-ignoring-cl/191350) from the "controversy" over 40k climate change and have failed to press (/research/2012/11/13/study-tv-media-covered-bidens-smile- Recommend on Google nearly-twic/191341) U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change Discourses and the Influence of the Denial Machine on Left and Right
    STUCK IN DENIAL VERSUS MOVING WITH SCIENCE: CLIMATE CHANGE DISCOURSES AND THE INFLUENCE OF THE DENIAL MACHINE ON LEFT AND RIGHT NEWS MEDIA Master‘s Thesis in North American Studies Leiden University By Luuk Ferenc Leonard Zegers S1746340 18 January 2018 Supervisor: Dr. E. F. van de Bilt Second reader: Dr. N. A. Bloemendal 1 Abstract Fossil fuel industry giants in the United States like ExxonMobil sponsor contrarian science to distort the public image of the (virtually non-existing) debate on whether anthropogenic global warming exists. The efforts of this so-called ―Denial Machine‖ seem to bear fruit: despite scientific consensus, Americans remain divided on the issue of anthropogenic climate change. Liberal Democrats are more likely to follow the consensus view (79% believes the planet is warming mostly due to human activity), whereas only 15% of the Conservative Republicans supposes this to be the case. Dunlap and McCright argue that conservative media outlets function as an echo chamber for the contrarian voices of this Denial Machine. Liisa Antilla argues that the conservative media is not the only side responsible for this echoing—in their quest for ―journalistic balance,‖ mainstream and progressive news outlets (including the New York Times) have also presented contrarian voices as ―experts‖ in the past. With these insights in mind, this study maps the climate change discourses and source-use of two opposing poles in the U.S. media landscape in the months prior to Trump‘s election: the New York Times on the Liberal Democrat side; news weblog Breitbart on the Conservative Republican side. The results show that these opposing poles conduct their climate change reporting on completely different levels: while the conservative Breitbart seems stuck in denial, hence condemned to the debate-level, the liberal Times has passed this level by accepting consensus and focusing its reporting on the consequences of climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Fos Extracts - 2012
    FoS Extracts - 2012 Contents 2012-12-29 .................................................................................................................................................. 14 EPA’s Lisa Jackson to Step Down .......................................................................................................... 14 John Kerry Nominated for Secretary of State ......................................................................................... 14 Green Energy Costs May Accelerate Europe’s Decline ......................................................................... 14 Carbon Taxes in Ireland .......................................................................................................................... 14 Why It’s the End of the Line for Wind Power ........................................................................................ 15 Silicon Valley’s Green Energy Mistake .................................................................................................. 15 This is Called Cheating ........................................................................................................................... 15 Beyond Bizarre: University of Graz Music Professor Calls for Death Sentences for Skeptics .............. 15 2012-12-22 .................................................................................................................................................. 16 Unleashed: Monckton Releases His AR5 Reviewer Comments ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Here,” the Physics Fact Book, 1999, 4
    The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism NOTES Introduction 1. Peter Gwynne, “The Cooling World,” Newsweek, April 28, 1975, p.64; Crystal ball image by Eva Kröcher under GFDL 2. Photograph by Dawn Guenther, all rights reserved 3. “EPA Awards $17 Million to Support Research on the Impacts of Climate Change Twenty-five universities to explore public health and environmental facets of climate change,” EPA press release, Feb. 2, 2010, http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/ admpress.nsf/e77fdd4f5afd88a3852576b3005a604f/806e135c0522699b852576cd006b4813!OpenDocument Chapter 1: Mankind in the Grip of a Madness 1. "The Nobel Peace Prize for 2007," Nobelprize.org, http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/press.html 2. Al Gore photograph by Kjetil Bjørnsrud under GNU Free Documentation License 3. Al Gore, The Nobel Lecture, Oslo, Dec. 10, 2007, http://nobelpeaceprize.org/enGB/laureates/laureates-2007/gore-lecture/ 4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtml 5. The Nobel Peace Prize 2007, http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/ipcc-lecture_en.html 6. HULIQ, http://www.huliq.com/44398/un-climate-panel-chief-pachauri-gore-accept-nobel-peace-prize 7. An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It by Al Gore (Rodale, 2006) 8. Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis by Al Gore (Rodale, 2009) 9. Al Gore, statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, January 28, 2009 10. Image spoof by Anthony Watts 11. Al Gore image by US Government Images, http://globalwarming.house.gov /tools/assets/files/0127.jpg; James Hansen image by Bill Ebbesen; Bill McKibben image by Evan Derickson under GFDL; Nicholas Stern image by the International Monetary Fund; Tim Flannery image by Mark Coulson, 5th World Conference of Science Journalists 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Heartland Conference Establishes Post-Climategate Consensus
    June 20, 2010 Heartland Conference Establishes Post-Climategate Consensus “New scientific discoveries are casting doubt on how much of the warming of the twentieth century was natural and how much was man-made, and governments around the world are beginning to confront the astronomical cost of reducing emissions. Economists, meanwhile, are calculating that the cost of slowing or stopping global warming exceeds the social benefits.” So spoke Senator James Inhofe on the Senate floor on May 17th, reading into the record the mission statement of the climate conference he was scheduled to be speaking at that very moment. Rather than addressing the Monday lunch session of Heartland’s Fourth International Conference on Climate Change, the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works remained in Washington, responding to the prior week’s Kerry-Lieberman “climate bill” proposal. The Oklahoma Republican, who had assured attendees of last year’s ICCC on Capitol Hill that no cap-and-tax bill would ever pass the Senate, now stood before C-SPAN’s cameras doing what only one major news organization – Fox -- had done before him: acknowledging the existence and significance of the 700-plus scientists, economists, policymakers, and concerned citizens gathering some 600 miles away in Chicago. And their collective objective to “build public awareness of the global warming ‘realism’ movement,” so that “sound science and economics, rather than exaggeration and hype” might “determine what actions, if any, are taken to address the problem of climate change.” Had the mainstream media acted responsibly, then every word spoken at the first major post- Climategate climate colloquium would have indeed built public awareness of the implausibility of manmade global warming and, consequently, any job-killing legislation, treaties or regulations designed to “control” it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Serengeti Strategy
    IT IS 5 MINUTES TO MIDNIGHT ® Feature Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2015, Vol. 71(1) 33–45 ! The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: The Serengeti strategy: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0096340214563674 How special interests try to http://thebulletin.sagepub.com intimidate scientists, and how best to fight back Michael E. Mann Photo credit: Brocken Inaglory. Abstract Much as lions on the Serengeti seek out vulnerable zebras at the edge of a herd, special interests faced with adverse scientific evidence often target individual scientists rather than take on an entire scientific field at once. Part of the reasoning behind this approach is that it is easier to bring down individuals than an entire group of scientists, and it still serves the larger aim: to dismiss, obscure, and misrepresent well-established science and its implications. In addition, such highly visible tactics create an atmosphere of intimidation that discourages other scientists from conveying their researchÕs implications to the public. This ÒSerengeti strategyÓ is often employed wherever there is a strong and widespread consensus among the worldÕs scientists about the under- lying cold, hard facts of a field, whether the subject be evolution, ozone depletion, the environmental impacts of DDT, the health effects of smoking, or human-caused climate change. The goal is to attack those researchers whose findings are inconvenient, rather than debate the findings themselves. This article draws upon the authorÕs own experience to examine the ÒSerengeti strategy,Ó and offers possible countermeasures to such orchestrated campaigns. It examines what responses by scientists have been most successful, and how to combat the doubt-sowing that industry has done regarding the science behind climate change and other fields.
    [Show full text]
  • How Koch-, Oil-Funded Climate Deniers Inserted Themselves Into Natural Gas Debate in Israel
    How Koch-, Oil-Funded Climate Deniers Inserted Themselves Into Natural Gas Debate in Israel DESMOG CLEARING THE PR POLLUTION THAT CLOUDS CLIMATE SCIENCE Home Research Database Series About Desmog Media Resources Contact Us How Koch-, Oil-Funded Climate Deniers Inserted Themselves Into Natural Gas Debate in Israel Itai Vardi | March 5, 2016 DeSmog recently revealed the latest troubling chapter in the story of Israel’s nascent oil and gas boom – a saga of revolving doors, multinational fossil fuel intrigue, and significant American political intervention. But there’s another interesting tale to tell, one that has gone unnoticed by many observers. http://www.desmogblog.com/...3/05/how-koch-oil-funded-climate-deniers-inserted-themselves-debate-over-natural-gas-israel[4/26/2016 3:33:35 PM] How Koch-, Oil-Funded Climate Deniers Inserted Themselves Into Natural Gas Debate in Israel Individuals and groups associated with climate denial or science obfuscation have recently inserted themselves into the raging public debates over the use of Israel’s newly discovered natural gas fields. Sparked in 2010, the contentious debate surrounding the offshore fields has largely revolved around how to allocate royalties and ownership rights rather than whether to extract the enormous amounts of gas in the first place. There are many reasons for this narrow framing. One is the inability of Israel’s environmentalists to shift the discourse in a way that will take into account the global imperative of keeping most fossil fuels in the ground to stave off climate catastrophe. As was evident in the lost battle over the construction of the Trans-Israel Highway, another privatized infrastructure project, the country’s greens always seem to be a step behind quick global investors and multinational corporations.
    [Show full text]
  • Jay Lehr Science Director the Heartland Institute [email protected] 312/377‐4000
    Jay Lehr Science Director The Heartland Institute [email protected] 312/377‐4000 “Are these United Nations IPCC people really serious about alarming the world, yet again, that we will all die if we do not stop emitting CO2 immediately? They are not entitled to their own facts, no matter how many times they continue to cry wolf about our common future. “The fact is that the IPCC's climate models have failed to predict the lack of global warming while atmospheric CO2 continues to increase. The natural experiment for the last 18 to 20 years has provided us a confident answer that atmospheric CO2 is not an important player for controlling the globe temperature. So the IPCC would do everyone a great favor by telling us what they propose: To achieve their aims, the world must have zero emissions of CO2 by 2100. “When will IPCC admit that their scare mongering is simply not working anymore? Our wonderful planet is not IPCC's private casino parlor.” Willie Soon Astrophysicist Policy Advisor, The Heartland Institute [email protected] 312/377‐4000 “The IPCC and the world’s press seem to be in a unique co‐dependent relationship. It has been about a year since the IPCC’s first press event on AR5. That report was old news long ago. Few other bodies employing repeated lavish junkets could garner this much press attention for recycled announcements of dire conclusions at odds with their own facts. “The probabilities cited by them aren’t scientific; they aren’t actual probabilities. They are just the opinions of fallible human beings dressed up to look scientific.
    [Show full text]