Balanced Coverage Of Climate Crisis (scam) Undermines Science Or Something

First of all, what balanced coverage? Second, where is this balanced coverage they’re talking about? Third of all, science doesn’t care about balance, it cares about facts. And what we’re seeing is not science

False balance in news coverage of climate change makes it harder to address the crisis

Green Climate Thought PoliceWhat does media coverage of climate change have in common with coverage of COVID-19? Each has been an example of the media practice of “bothsidesism,” whereby journalists strive to present both sides of an issue, even in cases where most credible sources fall on one side.

Bothsidesism — also referred to as false balance reporting — can damage the public’s ability to distinguish fact from fiction and lead audiences to doubt the scientific consensus on pressing societal challenges like climate change, a new Northwestern University study has found.

“The devastating heat wave in Europe this week is a reminder that we need to take urgent action to slow human-caused warming, but the media is still giving air to the opinions of people who do not believe there is cause for alarm, which makes the problem seem less dire than it actually is,” said David Rapp, a psychologist and professor at Northwestern’s School of Education and Social Policy (SESP) who coauthored the research.

The argument that climate change is not man made has been incontrovertibly disproven by science again and again, yet many Americans believe that the global crisis is either not real, not of our making, or both, in part because the news media has given climate change deniers a platform in the name of balanced reporting, according to the researchers.

This is not journalism, it’s unhinged belief in a cult. Notice that they almost never actually show that the current warm period is mostly/solely caused by Mankind? Also notice, as I’ve mentioned ad nauseum, that they people who say they believe in this malarkey rarely practice what they preach.

In the study, the researchers found that false-balance reporting can make people doubt the scientific consensus on issues like climate change, sometimes making them wonder if an issue is even worth taking seriously.

In other words, how dare anyone give a contrarian viewpoint! And those who do must be shut down. Consensus is not science.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “Balanced Coverage Of Climate Crisis (scam) Undermines Science Or Something”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Conservatives always want to teach the controversy! We should discuss Intelligent Design along with Biological Evolution. We should discuss God’s Creation as well as the Big Bang Theory. We should give the 6000 year old Earth Model with the 4 billion year Earth theory. Flat Earth vs Unproven Sphere Theory? So sure, give the Is Not Theory of Global Warming (INTGW) equal time with the CO2 Theory of Global Warming.

    • James Lewis says:

      Dear Elwood:

      Well there was that old blood letting cure, wipe your apron to get birthing business, criminals have bumps on their heads, the earth is the center of everything…… and now……(get ready)…..


      Yeah, science has always been right….

      except when it was wrong….

  2. Jl says:

    Which makes perfect sense, seeing as there are several alternate theories and the agw theory has yet to be demonstrated by a simple experiment 120 years after its inception. “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts”. Richard Feynman

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Please describe the simple experiment you’re proposing. Thanks.

      • Jl says:

        An object emits LWIR (as all do), and CO2 absorbs and re-emits some of that LWIR that returns and warms the initial object-the agw “theory”. You’re welcome

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Does the Earth’s atmosphere (nitrogen 78%, oxygen 21%, argon 1%, CO2 0.04%, H2O-variable) keep the Earth “warmer” than if there was no atmosphere?

  3. st says:

    Prager U Video – Should Schools Teach Kids about LGBTQ?

  4. alanstorm says:

    False balance in news coverage of climate change makes it harder to address the crisis

    “False balance” is what we have NOW. We are getting one side – the side of the “scientists” paid by the government or organizations that have already decided that WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE! Eleventy!

    I wonder why these “scientists” keep reaching that conclusion when they’re being paid to do so. A real puzzler there.

  5. Hairy says:

    The fact that CO2 readily absorbs infrared radiation has been well known for over 120 years
    Not knowing or denying that is willfully ignorance
    Can you give an alternative explanation for the increase in Temps?
    Sun irradiance?
    Orbital change?
    Maybe so.ething supernatural like God?

  6. […] good friend and occasional blog pinch-hitter William Teach noted this morning how some on the left are claiming that, by allowing contrarian views to be presented, the media are […]

  7. […] good friend and occasional blog pinch-hitter William Teach noted this morning how some on the left are claiming that, by allowing contrarian views to be presented, the media are […]

  8. david7134 says:

    Jeff asking for a demonstration that would prove his hypothesis is one of his stupid tricks. The fact is that he must provide the evidence, if he can’t then by scientific law his hypothesis is void. He can’t get this straight and the carbon religion has never provided any evidence to support their trash, only correlation which rarely if ever is causation.

    But a good, simple experiment is to take two greenhouses with elements that do not block IR. Jeff loves to say that glass blocks IR even though it does not. Now, keep one house with ordinary air and infuse CO2 to high levels. Watch the temp and you would see no change in temp. Case closed. But Jeff can not accept this or any other proof.

Pirate's Cove