Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

Aptly enough imo Prince Charles refered to climate change deniers as the headless chicken brigade .

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Should Australian newspapers publish climate change denialist opinion pieces?

 
Should Australian newspapers, like Fairfax, publish opinion pieces that deny or seek to cast doubt on man-made global warming
 

Should Fairfax — or other media publishers — give a platform for climate change denialist opinion pieces?

The most recent example is Fairfax publishing a piece by John McLean, a member of the International Climate Science Coalition.

In the opinion piece, McLean repeats various lines designed to create uncertainty about the recent report by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and to impute a sinister motive on IPCC members of political and scientific deception.

 

 
 
 
 

When Fairfax saw mining billionaire Gina Rinehart buy a large stake in the company, the chairman Roger Corbett upheld the board's support for the charter of editorial independence. This was opposed at the time by Rinehart, although Rinehart board appointee Jack Cowin signed it.

 

Coincidentally, Rinehart is a big supporter of ICSC policy advisor Christopher Monckton and in a 2011 interview expressed her disbeliefthat "a small amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere" could lead to global warming.

 

The Rinehart shareholding controversy even saw Fairfax mastheadslaunch a new slogan "Independent. Always."

A part of the charter is that editors behave according to the Australian Journalist Association's code of ethics, the first standard being that journalists:

Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts.  Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis.


At the same time that Reddit /r/science decided to ban climate denialism, the L.A. Times also decided to introduce an editorial policy for its letters pages. Editor Paul Thornton wrote:

 
 
 
 
 
 
How does publication of  such fit with Australian Journalists Code of Ethics ?
Should we follow the lead of other Countries ?
 
nb please feel free to expand on this title and opening post in the manner which is the norm with general discussions.
 
Message 1 of 141
Latest reply
140 REPLIES 140

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

it that opinion or fact?

 

I do know its a fact that the scientists claiming global worming as fact did a U-turn and said its not global worming at all, its called climate change. 

 

The climate has been changing since the planet first existed, its natural. Not sure what all the uproar is?

 

BTW I dont open many links and there are way to many on this thread to open anyway. I got sick of clicking on them for them to be way off topic, incorrect or malicious 

Message 61 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming


@secondhand-wonderland wrote:

I know very little on the topic.  But one thing I do know is "Climate Change" or "Global warming" or whatever the latest buzzword they want to give the theory that  "man is destroying the earth," is more political than anything else.  It has always been a political issue.  Why? because it is government bodies and government grants that prop up the industry.  And thats what it is, a multi billion dollar a year industry that needs to be funded so as to keep the research flowing. (Most scientific reasearch is hungry for funding...)

 

I watched a doco recently called "The great Global Warming swindle" It really does have it's fair share of criticisms and rightfully so and some people have debunked certain parts of the show.  BUT what it proved to me more than anything else is this is an issue of diehard cpaitalists versing left leaning greens.  (Clearly it is a documentary produced my diehard capitalists)

 

And the ending does raise a great point about the development (or lack thereof) in parts of Africa.  They want nothing more than to have electricity and running water in their homes.  But now more than ever with the push for green energy they are being advised against burning coal and to move towards other (much more expensive) forms of power.  ie Solar and wind farms. Imagine everytime you want to cook a meal for your family you have to build a fire in your house sometimes using animal dung.....


Against Nature – Channel 4 tonight

March 8th, 2007 by Ben Goldacre in bad scienceclimate change | 130 Comments »

 

So as I’m sure most of you know, tonight there is a documentary about how we don’t need to worry about global warming.

www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html

Whatever your feelings about climate change, there are good reasons to to have serious concerns about the film:

It’s made by Martin Durkin. In 1997 he made a series called Against Nature for Channel 4. It targeted environmentalists, and presented them as ‘the new enemy of science’ and comparable to the Nazis. They were responsible for the deprivation and death of millions in the Third World.

 

As well as the normal objections to the content that you might have expected – and fair enough to have your opinion – there were much more serious problems. Channel Four eventually had to broadcast a prime-time apology. The Independent Television Commission ruled: “Comparison of the unedited and edited transcripts confirmed that the editing of the interviews with [the environmentalists who contributed] had indeed distorted or misrepresented their known views. It was also found that the production company had misled them… as to the format, subject matter and purpose of these programs.” Etc.

Now, it seems slightly odd to me to get the same bloke to make the same documentary after that’s happened, whatever your feelings on global warming and mankind’s role in it, but there you go.

 

http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/against-nature-channel-4-tonight/

Message 62 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

example of fact not always being fact...

 

for decades there were 9  planets in our solar system. Turns out that was not a fact after all now there are no longer 9 so for all that time it was not a fact as it was incorrect yes?

Message 63 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming


@chuk_77 wrote:

example of fact not always being fact...

 

for decades there were 9  planets in our solar system. Turns out that was not a fact after all now there are no longer 9 so for all that time it was not a fact as it was incorrect yes?


It was the scientific consensus of the time .

 

Message 64 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

The thing about this topic is you can spend all day comparing scientific fact/evidence, scientific theories/predictions, scientific opinions, computerised models, "denial" opinions/facts, historical references ect ect ect it all becomes very confusing.

 

One has to objectively approach the publications from whence all this information is contrived.  What is the adgenda of these publications? Are they peer reviewed scientific articles or are they just tabloid "lets peddle this topic because we know it sells newspapers" type articles.  IMO if the "science was out" without a shadow of a doubt then there would be no such thing as "denial." 

Message 65 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

it was wrong though so not a fact, you said its a fact if its backed up scientifically or words to that effect, but science is often wrong so should not always be looked at as an absolute

Message 66 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

for anyone interested ;

 

http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/globalwarmingswindle/

 

 

 

The great global warming swindle swindle

With all those other endangered species going extinct it's nice to know there's still a handful of global warming skeptics kicking around. ABC Science Online's Bernie Hobbs looks at the facts behind the vitriol in the film that's got everyone looking up the word 'polemic'.

 

Message 67 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming


@chuk_77 wrote:

it was wrong though so not a fact, you said its a fact if its backed up scientifically or words to that effect, but science is often wrong so should not always be looked at as an absolute


I don't totally disagree with you there Chuk .

A newspaper Editor however would  by the look of it be obligated to adhere to the scientic knowledge of the time ..in what he/she publishes ..not discredit or deny scientific evidence ?

Message 68 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

why? Their aim is to sell the media they write for. If their piece draws attention and sells they have done their job. Its good to make people think and debate

Message 69 of 141
Latest reply

Denial or seeking to deny man-made global warming

it's also their responsibility not to publish and feed us  bs.

 

Message 70 of 141
Latest reply