Climategate: MSM Writers Try to Ignore Scandal in Global Warming Stories But Readers Bring Them Back to Reality

An hilariously bizarre situation is happening in the wake of the growing Climategate scandal. Many of the mainstream media stories about global warming are simply pretending it doesn't exist. Perhaps they feel that by ignoring Climategate entirely that it will just go away. Unfortunately for them, the readers of these global warming stories keep bringing up the inconvenient truth of Climategate by mentioning the scandal in the comments section over and over and over again.

An example is this Houston Chronicle editorial which asserts in its headline, "As a crucial climate change conference nears, more evidence of a warming globe." And as the editorial reveals its "evidence," note what is conspicuously missing although the readers will bring it up much to the embarrassment of the Chonicle:


The Global Carbon Project study concludes that unless emissions are substantially reduced, the result would be a rise in average global temperature by nearly 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century. That is on par with previous worst-case scenarios outlined by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Scientists have estimated that temperature spikes above 2 degrees could have disastrous consequences, including large rises in sea level, droughts and stronger storms.

One of the authors of the study, Professor Corinne Le Quere of the University of East Anglia, says the conclusions raise the stakes for delegates to the Copenhagen gathering, who will try to hammer out a successor to the Kyoto Accords that committed signatory governments to emission reduction goals. The United States did not sign on to that agreement.


University of East Anglia? Hmmm... Where have I heard about this university in the recent past? Something about hacked e-mails, manipulated data, and a coverup? This editorial won't bring up the scandal that dare not speak its name but the readers are not shy about bringing it up over and over and over again:

Oh dear .. I think you have a bit of catching up to do.


Scandal? What scandal? We're as willfully clueless about this as Charlie Gibson is about the ACORN scandal.

Apparently, the clowns on the Houston Comical editorial board do zero research prior to sitting down at the keyboard to compose their lies. The "researchers" at East Anglia have been exposed as the perpetrators of a massive fraud by manipulating statistics. Yet, here comes the Comical citing the liars at East Anglia in support of their thesis. It's all over the news - even the Houston Comical. (Maybe the editorial board doesn't read the Comical - only the press releases of the DNC.)


AIIIEEEEE!!! Stop with the truth! It's too painful!

This is incredible. Warmists rig climate data, block publication of peer-reviewed papers challenging the AWG theory and the Chronicle publishes this scare-screed. The liberal media barons are flummoxed by thefollowing developments and like the 6 year old who finally realizes there is no Santa Claus, are in deep denial.


We will continue to believe in our global warming Santa no matter what the facts are to the contrary.

More unadulterated BS from the whiners on the Chronicle's Editorial Board. With these phoney scientists now exposed via some hacked emails and hundreds of other highly credentialed climate scientists saying the whole man-made global warming theory is a hoax, why a newspaper thinks it knows more than the skeptics is beyond me.


Dave, stop.

Considering the information that has come out in the last few days about the East Anglia researchers, this cannot be a well-informed and sincere editorial. The editorial board is either ignorant of the facts, deliberately obscuring them, or simply insulting its readers.


Stop, will you?

You are kidding me. Over the weekend we learned a server at East Anglia was hacked and emails were distributed that contradict Global Warming. In addition, they discuss how to overstate the findings in order to further their agenda. Yet, The Chronicle still blindlly pushes the Global Warming agenda. If that is not enough, tempatures have not risen over the last ten years. In fact, they have dropped slightly. How can any reader take a publication seriously when they refuse to report facts.


Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?

The ClimateGate scandal exposes man-made global warming fears as quite simply the best science that agenda driven activists can "manufacture". Claims that the UN IPCC is the 'gold standard' of scientific research have been forever tarnished.


Stop, Dave. I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave.

Hey Chron - quit being a stupid doosh and get your facts straight. It came to be known last week that these scientists were fudging data. Perpetrating Al Gore's fraud.


Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going.

The IPCC chefs and their lackeys in the press have cooked the books to create a Soviet casserole of lies, flavored with phony data, suppressed research, bullied colleagues and topped with a garnish of elitist arrogance. And they want us to not only to eat it, but to pay trillions for the privilige. They now have all the credibility of an ACORN ethics officer and the public is vomiting at the smell.


There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I'm a…fraid.

The Houston Chronicle editorial writers have completely ignored the breaking scandal that is evidencing the climate change hypothesis for what it is -- a pack of lies and manipulations delivered by establishment science. "Climate change" has always been about one agenda: Giving governments more power to control what you do. This one is so big and blatant even the mainstream media can't cover it up.


Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer, do.

How embarrassing for the Chronicle! With all that has happened in the past week, shouldn't you have at least taken the line out about the GCP saying '10-degree rise by the end of the century'? Don't you think it is out of your hands by now anyway? We are so close to the summit, how could recycling this old 'news' have any positive impact on the outcome? It just makes the 'collective' look even more foolish to people who have opened their minds and taken the time to truly evaluate the facts that are available to us. Why didn't you run a story on those hacked emals and bring us up-to-date on what is really going on?


I'm half crazy, all for the love of you. It won't be a stylish marriage. I can't afford a carriage. But you'll look sweet upon the seat of a bicycle built for two …

Bottom line here for the MSM; you can try to avoid mentioning Climategate in your global warming stories but your readers are sure to remind you of your deliberate oversight. Oh how they will remind you!

Does CO2 Drive climate change ??

The Global Warming climate change argument is based on the premise that climate change is driven by CO2, specifically CO2 created by humans. IE: car fumes, plane exhaust, factory pollution.

However, there is no proof that human created CO2 drives climate change, in fact scientists look at past major climate change events and find no evidence of CO2 beign the cause, human or otherwise.

Here is a good video starting to explain this issue.
Please start to educate yourself on this issue as to whether Global Warming is real or not.




Also, interestingly the founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, is sueing Al Gore for fraud hoping that the court case will settle this debate once and for all.



John Coleman, who founded the cable network in 1982, suggests suing for fraud proponents of global warming, including Al Gore, and companies that sell carbon credits.

"Is he committing financial fraud? That is the question," Coleman said.

"Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."



Coleman says his side of the global-warming debate is being buried in mainstream media circles.

"As you look at the atmosphere over the last 25 years, there's been perhaps a degree of warming, perhaps probably a whole lot less than that, and the last year has been so cold that that's been erased," he said.

"I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they've been scammed on this global-warming thing."


Coleman spoke to FOXNews.com after his appearance last week at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change in New York, where he called global warming a scam and lambasted the cable network he helped create.

"You want to tune to the Weather Channel and have them tell you how to live your life?" Coleman said. "Come on."

He laments the network's decision to focus on traffic and lifestyle reports over the weather.

"It's very clear that they don't realize that weather is the most significant impact in every human being's daily life, and good, solid, up-to-the-minute weather information and meaningful forecasts presented in such a way that people find them understandable and enjoyable can have a significant impact," he said.

"The more you cloud that up with other baloney, the weaker the product," he said.

Coleman has long been a skeptic of global warming, and carbon dioxide is the linchpin to his argument.

"Does carbon dioxide cause a warming of the atmosphere? The proponents of global warming pin their whole piece on that," he said.

The compound carbon dioxide makes up only 38 out of every 100,000 particles in the atmosphere, he said.

"That's about twice as what there were in the atmosphere in the time we started burning fossil fuels, so it's gone up, but it's still a tiny compound," Coleman said. "So how can that tiny trace compound have such a significant effect on temperature?

"My position is it can't," he continued. "It doesn't, and the whole case for global warming is based on a fallacy."