JunkScience.com

Their survey is at this link, a reasonably short one where question 13 happens to read: What issue(s) related to climate change do you think should be covered in future reports?

View original post 179 more words

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to

  1. And in addition to the blog piece I wrote above at JunkScience (thanks for the link to it here!), I also had some fun recently jousting with the NewsHour’s Hari Sreenivasan via a Twitter conversation, seen here: https://mobile.twitter.com/hari/status/232558230503567360

    Combine that with the links I have within the JunkScience piece and the problem becomes plainly obvious. It’s always been my impression that if the NewsHour cannot explain their way out of this long-term exclusion of skeptic scientists, they will have painted themselves into a corner for all the world to see, and they only make it worse with each sidestep they take. Imagine the domino effect for the commercial news outlets if the NewsHour is forced to publicly admit they were unfairly biased against skeptic scientists.

    People criticize me for the folly of such an idea, but I need only remind them we out number the mainstream media, and if a larger portion of the disinterested public begins to comprehend how the MSM is one heckuva good example of One Percenters who control more than they are entitled to, then the idea ends up not being so foolish after all.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s