In this case, “it” refers to the British documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” (video available here) which presents the other side of the climate change debate the media and folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore don’t want you to hear.
As reported by News.com.au (emphasis added throughout):
Regardless of the answer, one of soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore’s primary sycophants, Laurie David, actually wrote an article for the Huffington Post Sunday tying the devastation to this small town to climate change and green principles.
I kid you not.
In a piece entitled “Putting the Green in Greensburg,” David sickeningly used a natural disaster to further her goal of destroying the American economy in the name of protecting the environment (emphasis added throughout, h/t NBer Sick-n-Tired):
As Al Gore and his band of not so merry global warming alarmists in buses and in the press try to convince Americans that they need to alter behaviors in order to save the planet, an inconvenient truth is being cynically withheld: this is going to cost a lot of money.
Of course, one of the delicious hypocrisies is that these are the same people who decry the current economic boom as only helping the rich, and state regularly and fervently that the poor and middle-class are being left behind.
At the same time, such mid- to lower-level wage earners should be saddled with exorbitant additional expenses to shelter them from a wolf that might never come knocking at their doors.
Makes sense, right?
With that in mind, the Chicago Tribune’s Laurie Goering wrote a fabulous piece recently exposing some of the potential costs of this exercise that most media don’t want you to know (emphasis added throughout, h/t Benny Peiser):
Have you noticed that most of the articles you see that are skeptical about man’s role in climate change come from foreign publications based in countries like Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada?
Why do you think that is?
Are the American press too emotionally attached to the issue -- and, in particular, the chief spokesman, soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore -- to even consider the possibility that the debate isn't over, and that their role as journalists is supposed to be to further discussion rather than squelch it?
While you ponder, an editor for Australia’s The Age, Melanie Griffin, published an absolutely delicious article Sunday slamming the upcoming "Live Earth" concerts about to be thrown in the name of global warming alarmism (emphasis added throughout):
Here’s something that is almost a metaphysical certitude: no major American newspaper, in the midst of all the current global warming hysteria, would dare do a front-page feature article questioning the merits of Al Gore’s schlockumentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”
Yet, there it was Saturday, covering almost two-thirds of the front page of Canada’s National Post, right smack in the middle, with a big picture of the Global Warmingist-in-Chief, surrounded by the shocking headline:
Even Climate Change Experts Say Many of the Claims in Al Gore’s Film Are Wrong.
So How Did it Become Required Classroom Viewing?
Think you’ll see that some day on the front page of the New York Times, Washington Post, or USA Today?
While you ponder, the article was just as skeptical (emphasis added throughout):
You haven't heard of Robert E. Murray? That's not surprising.
If there were an open dialog instead of continual blather about "settled science" when it comes to supposedly human-induced "climate change" and "global warming" (two concepts I like to collectively refer to as "globaloney"), Murray would have visibility. But, as Strassel writes, a different "climate," the political one, appears to be keeping him largely out of the public eye, despite his best efforts to break through.
You see, Robert Murray is a coal-company executive who has first-hand experience with what will happen on a much broader scale if the radical changes envisioned by Al Gore and others (whom I like to refer to as "globalarmists") ever get enacted:
Honestly, the arrogance of some Hollywood liberals knows no bounds. As they live in their million dollar mansions, and jet-set around the world in a manner that 99.99 percent of the population can’t fathom, these folks have the gall to tell others how they should alter their lives for the benefit of the planet.
The most recent example is Leonardo DiCaprio, the 32-year-old actor that has absolutely no formal training in geology, climatology, meteorology, or anything in any way related to complex earth sciences.
In fact, in the picture to the right, DiCaprio could easily be answering a question about just how much education he has in these or related subjects, as according to Wikipedia, Leo never attended college.
Yet, he has the unmitigated audacity to claim in his new film that if we don’t listen to him and other scientifically uneducated folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore, we’re all going to die.
As reported by The London Paper (emphasis added throughout):
There was a summit between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the leaders of the European Union on Friday that yielded as little results as it did attention from America’s media.
One of the issues on the table was whether Russia is going to provide more energy resources to EU nations starved for such.
Didn’t hear about this?
Well, that’s not surprising, for in the midst of the media’s ongoing attempts to create global warming hysteria while pushing the U.S. to participate in the Kyoto Protocol, our press have little interest in reporting how energy politics across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans are threatening economies around the globe.
Contrary to most American media that ignored this dicey subject, the BBC covered the following Associated Press article Friday (emphasis added):
I really shouldn’t have eaten breakfast before reading a preview of the New York Times Magazine’s upcoming piece “Al Gore Has Big Plans” (h/t Dan Gainor).
After all, it’s one thing when sycophants like Sheryl Crow, Laurie David, and Leonardo DiCaprio gush over the former vice president in a manner akin to teenyboppers within earshot of Sean or David Cassidy.
But when such fawning superlatives like “prophetic status” and “intellectual mastery” are employed by a big-time journalist such as James Traub to describe a politician, uncoordinated peristalsis in one’s bowels could cause an embarrassing event without warning.
As such, the reader is cautioned to peruse the following quotes from this disgraceful article with as empty a stomach as humanly possible (emphasis added throughout):
The air continues to seep out of the global warming consensus balloon, ladies and gentlemen.
Meet Augie Auer, the former University of Wyoming professor of atmospheric science turned New Zealand meteorologist who isn’t buying what soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry global warming alarmists are selling.
As reported by the New Zealand Timaru Herald (emphasis added throughout):
Here is a story that should make every parent proud, even those on the left side of the aisle.
A high school student up in Portland, Maine, created a website for extra credit in her Honors Earth Sciences class. Called “Ponder the Maunder,” fifteen-year-old Kristen Byrnes took on the subject of global warming, and was eventually asked to examine the veracity of Al Gore's schlockumentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”
In her piece, Byrnes quickly demonstrated what few in the media, especially Gore sycophants Laurie David, Sheryl Crow, and Leonardo DiCaprio, were able to grasp about this farcical film (emphasis added throughout):
A few weeks ago, NewsBusters reported on the environmental think tank that believes having too many children is bad for the planet.
Comedian Jimmy Kimmel must have gotten wind of this daffy position, for his crew (time unknown) created a wonderful parody of Al Gore’s schlockumentary wherein the former vice president ties the global warming problem to various behaviors by children.
Entitled “An Inconvenient Youth,” this brief segment is guaranteed to even get a chuckle out of Gore sycophants like Laurie David and Sheryl Crow.
However, the reader is cautioned that this is a bit raw, and possibly offensive though well-intentioned (video available here, grateful h/t to NBer Hero Squad).
Did you hear about the nineteen Democrats that sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) expressing concern that a global warming bill being discussed in the House could reduce energy supplies and raise prices?
You didn’t? Want to know why?
Well, because other than Environment & Energy Daily, nobody reported it.
*****Critical Update: Complete text of letter follows.
Regardless, the short piece by Ben Geman was rather extraordinary (h/t Benny Peiser, subscription required, emphasis added throughout):
Do you hear that hissing sound? That’s the balloon that soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry alarmists have floated concerning a scientific consensus on man’s role in global warming losing air.
As the media continue to pound the table about the debate being over, another state climatologist has come out of the closet so to speak to voice his views about all things climate change.
As reported by the Columbus, Mississippi, Commercial Dispatch Wednesday (emphasis added throughout, h/t NBer dscott):
While global warming alarmists like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry sycophants continue talking about a scientific consensus concerning man’s role in “climate change,” the list of scientists that have grown skeptical of this nexus continues to grow.
Unfortunately, a media obsessed with advancing hysteria on the subject refuse to acknowledge the existence of such folks as they continue to pound the table about the imminent doom to the planet.
With that in mind, Sen. James Inhofe’s office (R-Oklahoma) is preparing a “detailed and comprehensive sampling of scientists who have only recently spoken out against climate hysteria [that] will be forthcoming in a soon to be released U.S. Senate report.”
Inhofe’s communications director, Marc Morano, published a few of these names, as well as their backgrounds and conclusions, at Inhofe’s EPW Press Blog Tuesday:
Did you happen to see the reports last week predicting that summer temperatures in the southeastern part of the country could reach 110 degrees by the year 2080?
Well, according to a study just released by the Roger Pielke, Sr. Research Group, the media took “an otherwise interesting and informative research article” published in the Journal of Climate and translated it “into an almost hysterical claim of future weather.”
Those who have been following the manmade global warming debate are well aware that every time the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issues another dire pronouncement, the media report the bad news every hour on the hour.
However, what if a new scientific study concluded that the IPCC cherry-picked data concerning CO2 levels in the past in order to make it look like today’s levels are out of the ordinary. Would the media report that?
Well, an article written by scientists Dr. Tim Ball and Tom Harris of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project was published on Monday making exact this claim (emphasis added throughout):
When President Bush receives protests as he travels abroad, it’s front-page headline news. Yet, when former Vice President Al Gore is so protested, the media couldn’t care less.
Although the Associated Press did report Gore’s visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina, to speak at a biofuels conference Friday, virtually no American media outlet picked up the story:
As Gore spoke, outside the hotel demonstrators on bicycles and wearing surgical masks chanted slogans against multinational agribusinesses, saying the biofuel boom will cause deforestation and turn arable land into deserts.
Sadly, there wasn't a lot of details in this piece about the actual protests. Thankfully, I received the following La Nacion article by e-mail yesterday with a translation that offered a lot more insights into the matter:
This one is really too funny, folks, and definitely requires all potables, combustibles, and sharp objects be properly stowed (grateful and humorous h/t to NBer dscott).
Despite all the carping and whining by folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his not so merry band of sycophant devotees about global warming killing polar bears, there is actually a baby boom occurring in this species in Canada’s eastern Arctic.
As marvelously reported May 3 by the Christian Science Monitor (emphasis added throughout):
During the 2005 disaster in New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina, you couldn’t turn on a television set without seeing some washed-out resident complaining about the terrible job the federal government was doing with rescue, relief, and evacuation.
By contrast, in the days following the destruction of Greensburg, Kansas, by an F-5 tornado, the only one complaining is the state’s Democrat Governor Kathleen Sebelius, who, as we’ll discuss later, might have been set up to do so by DNC Chairman Howard Dean.
Yet, have you seen any interviews with Greensburg residents unhappy with the government response to the disaster?
Well, on Wednesday, the website for WCBS-TV in New York published an article suggesting that “residents were overwhelmed by the immediate response, and that the governor's fuss was for her own good” (emphasis added throughout, h/t Gateway Pundit):
While the liberal media tries to make over a Kansas tornado to resemble their perfect media bias storm over Hurricane Katrina, the floods in Missouri may be a more analogous comparison. But the CBS Evening News wasn't going to allow local residents to blame the federal government without a rebuttal -- if the president was Bill Clinton.
On Wednesday night's newscast, CBS reporter Cynthia Bowers reported that residents were upset the feds didn't shore up the levees, as they failed to do after "the historic flood of 1993, which killed 48 people and did nearly $20 billion worth of damage to nine waterlogged states." But that shouldn't be associated with Clinton, Bowers implied: "Actually, it's not the federal government's responsibility to maintain every levee. Most of the hundreds of levees along the Missouri and Mississippi River are built and kept up by the people who live next to them."
Back in 1993, CBS Evening News reporter Vicki Mabrey didn't use the words "Clinton" or "Democrats" when locals began complaining about the government response, but ended the story on a sad note: "But the government has no way of keeping towns from asking for federal assistance, just like there's no way to guarantee the Mississippi will never flood again."
Here’s something you’re unlikely to see in an American newspaper or magazine: global warming might actually be good for the planet and its inhabitants.
This radical idea was advanced Monday by the German magazine Der Spiegel which did something I can’t imagine a U.S. publication having the nerve to do in this highly politicized environment: offer readers a comprehensive, balanced view of the pluses and minuses inherent in a warming earth.
How delightfully extraordinary.
Unlike most American media reports on this issue, Spiegel, in an article ironically titled "Not the End of the World as We Know It," wonderfully began with a little history on the subject to put things in a proper perspective (emphasis added throughout):
It's so easy, the cave men did it? LiveScience.com staff writer, Dave Mosher, wrote an article on Yahoo.com titled "Climate Change, Not Humans, Trounced Neanderthals" about Francisco Jimenez-Espejo, a University of Granada paleoclimatologist who “says a lack of evidence has left climate change weakly supported—until now. 'We put data behind the theory,' he said, filling in a large gap in European climate records when Neanderthals faded out of existence.”
He concluded from a detailed examination of evidence that Neanderthals disappeared from Earth more than 20,000 years ago at least partially because of climate change. As in global cooling.