Weekend Question 1: Did You Know That the Global Warming Debate Is Over?

ANSWER: It really isn’t.

__________________________________

But earlier in the week, a 527 Media reporter for ABC, one Bill Blakemore, said it is:

(Blakemore) rejects ‘balance’ in order to justify excluding any skeptics of manmade catastrophic global warming from his reporting. He made his remarks at Friday’s panel discussion at the Society of Environmental Journalists annual conference in Burlington.

Blakemore lamented “the deep professional shame that I discovered two years ago,” regarding how he believes the media had been manipulated by skeptics of manmade catastrophic global warming.

“Of course [skeptics] play on the idea that we have to be ‘balanced,’” he noted.

“It was very lazy of us for 10 years when we were asked for balance from the [climate skeptic] spinners. We just gave up and said ‘Okay, okay – I will put the other side on, okay are you happy now?’” he said. “And it saves us from the trouble of having to check out the fact that these other sides were the proverbial flat earth society.”

What a sanctimonious jerk. This is a reporter covering news who has the gall to unilaterally claim that there is no debate.

Blakemore’s “proverbial flat earth research society” includes 17,000 signers of a 1998 petition that said, in part:

“there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

Nothing has been discovered in the intervening eight years that would prove them wrong.

I could do a post a mile long with dozens of examples of links I’ve saved to stories about attempts to exclude global warming skeptics from committee meetings, forums, conferences, and the like, not because they don’t have science-based points to make, but because they disagree from the so-called orthodoxy. Contrary to the false bravado of the “global warming is settled science” crowd, the global alarmists do not have science on their side. It is way too coincidental that the “solutions” they and their enviro friends fervently desire involve a radical reordering of society and a reduction in worldwide living standards (just as conquering global proverty through capitalism appears to be in sight).

One sure sign that somone who thought they were in control of a debate is really starting to lose it is that they try to marginalize opponents and shut off the debate. As long as enough people stay reality-based and don’t let the argument-starved bullies win, 30 years from now, and you can write it down, we’ll know who the real flat-earth people were.