NewsWeek Says Global Warming Is A Hoax, Only The Title Is Accurate

NewsWeek Says Global Warming Is A Hoax, Only The Title Is Accurate

As the magazine covers show, the “censored media” has lied to Americans a long time.  The top left, right and bottom covers/articles all warned us that Earth was going into Global Cooling and that we would starve to death from hunger, and that the science was settled about that. They were so wrong so fast that they reversed course and came up with “Global Warming” instead so the same political scam of scaring people into giving up freedom and prosperity, to them, could be continued.  The top center cover, is true.

Talking as a scientist, it is appalling how politicians have corrupted science on this issue.   Thankfully most scienists have not been corrupted as we pointed out last week http://aun-tv.com/2015/10/only-24-to-36-of-scientists-believe-in-obama-style-global-warming-ted-cruz-sierra-club-debate/    As you will read below there is a movemnet to try and fire any TV meterologist that refuses to go along with the scam.  The scammers are very threatened by the fact the majority of TV degreed meteorologists weather anchors believe “Global Warming” is or could be a scam.

  • Only 24 percent of the survey respondents agree with United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assertion, “Most of the warming since 1950 is very likely human-induced.”
  • Only 19 percent agree with the claim, “Global climate models are reliable in their projection for a warming of the planet.”

Only 19% agree, instead of the 98% we are falsely told by the media agree.

 

Below Jeff Jacoby of Boston Globe does excellent job of exposing the scam. 

INTRODUCING  ‘s Aug. 13 cover story on global warming “denial,” editor Jon Meacham brings up an embarrassing blast from his magazine’s past: an April 1975 story about global cooling, and the coming ice age that scientists then were predicting. Meacham concedes that “those who doubt that greenhouse gases are causing significant climate change have long pointed to the 1975 Newsweek piece as an example of how wrong journalists and researchers can be.” But rather than acknowledge that the skeptics may have a point, Meacham shrugs it off.

“On global cooling,” he writes, “there was never anything even remotely approaching the current scientific consensus that the world is growing warmer because of the emission of greenhouse gases.”

Really? Newsweek took rather a different line in 1975. Then, the magazine reported that scientists were “almost unanimous” in believing that the looming Big Chill would mean a decline in food production, with some warning that “the resulting famines could be catastrophic.” Moreover, it said, “the evidence in support of these predictions” — everything from shrinking growing seasons to increased North American snow cover to record-setting tornado outbreaks — had “begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it.”

Yet Meacham, quoting none of this, simply brushes aside the 1975 report as “alarmist” and “discredited.” Today, he assures his readers, Newsweek’s climate-change anxieties rest “on the safest of scientific ground.”

Do they? Then why is the tone of Sharon Begley’s cover story — nine pages in which anyone skeptical of the claim that human activity is causing global warming is painted as a bought-and-paid-for lackey of the coal and oil industries — so strident and censorious? Why the relentless labeling of those who point out weaknesses in the global-warming models as “deniers,” or agents of the “denial machine,” or deceptive practitioners of “denialism?” Wouldn’t it be more effective to answer the challengers, some of whom are highly credentialed climate scientists in their own right, with scientific data and arguments, instead of snide insinuations of venality and deceit? Do Newsweek and Begley really believe that everyone who dissents from the global-warming doomsaying does so in bad faith?

Anthropogenic global warming is a scientific hypothesis, not an article of religious or ideological dogma. Skepticism and doubt are entirely appropriate in the realm of science, in which truth is determined by evidence, experimentation, and observation, not by consensus or revelation. Yet when it comes to global warming, dissent is treated as heresy — as a pernicious belief whose exponents must be shamed, shunned, or silenced.

Newsweek is hardly the only offender. At the Live Earth concert in New Jersey last month, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. denounced climate-change skeptics as “corporate toadies” for “villainous” enemies of America and the human race. “This is treason,” he shouted, “and we need to start treating them now as traitors.”

Some environmentalists and commentators have suggested that global-warming “denial” be made a crime, much as Holocaust denial is in some countries. Others have proposed that climate-change dissidents be prosecuted in Nuremberg-style trials. The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen has suggested that television meteorologists be stripped of their American Meteorological Society certification if they dare to question predictions of catastrophic global warming. Read More, a lot more at: http://www.jeffjacoby.com/334/hot-words-on-global-warming

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *