This is a new one, in my experience. I’ve witnessed many a Warmist complain about the news media not providing enough (doomsaying) coverage of anthropogenic climate change. Further, they’ve taken to whining when news allows skeptics to debate and reply. I don’t think I’ve seen a Warmist make this case, though
Climate change reporting should be obligatory
By any objective standards, the global climate and biodiversity crisis should be front page news almost every day. Rationally, you would expect updates on the battle to maintain a habitable biosphere to also be leading most TV and radio news bulletins. We do not, it seems, live in a world governed by reason
Let’s note one thing: people often think of the word “obligatory” as something one should really do. Many bloggers will write headlines like “Obligatory Post On Something”. But, looking at the dictionary, we get “required by a legal, moral, or other rule; compulsory.” So, some of that is by actual government.
Climate breakdown has been labelled the “problem from hellâ€. Sphinx-like, it appears both remote and abstract, yet simultaneously overwhelming and complex. If ever a crisis seemed designed to stymie humanity’s ability or will to confront it, this is it.
While Ireland’s collective response to the climate crisis has been woeful, the 2017 report by the Citizens Assembly revealed a previously untapped public appetite for radical action. This in turn gave the political impetus for the creation of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate Action (JCCA).
People get most of their information via the media, and the prominence it gives to a story shapes how seriously the public regard it. Since the climate crisis is covered only fitfully, and often simply framed as a dispute between opposing factions, it’s hardly a surprise that so many people have no idea just how dire the situation already is.
The JCCA report recommends: ‘the imposition of climate change content quotas on all licensed broadcasters’ as is now the case for news and current affairs. This is a bold, potentially transformative proposal, as it would require broadcasters to develop expertise and real depth in this crucial field.
And boom, there it is: governmental laws requiring certain coverage of Hotcoldwetdry, and you know that the regulations would require it be covered only towards the Warmist side, while disallowing skeptical coverage. And they could get away with it in much of the world, where they do not have anything like the 1st Amendment, which protects freedom of the press. The Cult of Climastrology is most certainly Authoritarian.
~97% of greenhouse gasses come from natural sources and there is nothing we can do about it.
Scientists have calculated that termites alone produce ten times as much carbon dioxide as all the fossil fuels burned in the whole world in a year.
Besides Greenhouse gases, CO2 in particular, are but a fart in the wind of global warming when compared to the variation in energy imparted by the sun due to solar cycles.
Obligatory reporting.
So it is written, so let it be done.
https://youtu.be/UmIJCGQzCiU
Satellite radiative observations, ocean heat content, ice cap mass observations, as well as fundamental physical principles, support the same warming trend.
Of course satellite observations match….https://realclimatescience.com/2019/04/adjusting-good-data-to-make-it-match-bad-data/
Satellite radiative observations, ocean heat content, ice cap mass observations, as well as fundamental physical principles, support the same warming trend.
The FBI was in charge of looking into Hillary Clinton’s server too and what did they find? A whole litany of lawlessness but of course the conclusion was she didnt MEAN to break the law. Obstruction of justice could put several of her cohorts in jail for bleach biting servers and drives as well as taking a hammer to phones because? Because they were subpoena’d. This is obstruction. The intent was clear. Destroy evidence of a CRIME>
Now how does that relate to warming. This whole litany of data which says its warming is put together by people from raw data collected and then disseminated. How do we know the data is real? How do we know the RUSSIANS are not in charge of the weather and they are trying to destroy the USA and most specifically DEMOCRATS.
Its pretty cold in Russia. We had a couple polar vortexs this last year and we all know RUSSIA has cold weather. A lot. Its the Russians I tell you.
They are beaming data to the sattelites and changing the data to make it look like its warming so the USA will discontinue fossil fuels making Russia the richest nation on earth.
EVERYTHING CAN BE TRACED BACK TO RUSSIA!!!!!
Jl: Of course satellite observations match
Without understanding why and how the adjustments were made, you can’t make a claim that the adjustments were in error. We understand that it is easier, however, to wave your hands.
Mangoldielocks: How do we know the data is real?
The data is collected by many different groups of scientists using independent methodologies. The raw is data is available, and you can collect your own data, even publish your results.