You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby aardvark_admin » Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:00 am

Well it looks like someone actually complained to the media council about Stuff's "our way or the highway" approach to climate change reporting:

https://i.stuff.co.nz/environment/clima ... -complaint

Sadly, the complaint was not upheld.

Thank God the flat earthers aren't running our newspapers!
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby Muscular Jam » Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:31 pm

aardvark_admin wrote:Well it looks like someone actually complained to the media council about Stuff's "our way or the highway" approach to climate change reporting
Not at all Bruce. What it actually said was that Andy Espersen (retired psychiatric nurse and psychiatric social worker) "complained that Stuff policy took no account of the Global Warming Policy Forum, a body of equally eminent scientists coming to somewhat different opinions from the IPCC."

So who are these "eminent scientists" that make up the GWPF, and who is funding it? Its hard to say since the foundation has rejected freedom of information requests to disclose its funding sources on at least four different occasions. When it started its headquarters were in the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining. Technically it is a charity, although in 2014 the Charity Commission ruled that the GWPF had breached its rules when it "blurred fact and comment" (what a wonderfully British euphemism!). Its chair is Nigel Lawson, and it states that is "deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated". Hmm, no mention of the science?

But what about the "eminent scientists"? Well, the director is a social anthropologist who was employed as an historian of ancient sport at the University of Frankfurt. It doesn't get much more eminent than that, right? The advisers they listed included the usual suspects: David Henderson (economist), Sir Samuel Brittan (economics correspondent for the Financial Times), our very own Bob Carter (an expert on The Functional Morphology of Bivalved Mollusca), Vincent Courtillot (engineer, on record as stating that his collaboration with oil companies Total and Schlumberger has no influence on his research and results, glad thats sorted), the wonderful Freeman John Dyson, (well known to sci-fi fans for his Dyson sphere that hides extraterrestrial civilisations from us. Interestingly Dyson agrees that one of the main causes of warming is the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulting from our burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal and natural gas, but states that his "objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it's rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have", so kind of a token protest I feel), and so on in descending importance...

Do you want me to continue? Like I said, lobbyists spreading fantasy and FUD. Like you said, A good newspaper should separate fact from fantasy.
Last edited by Muscular Jam on Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby aardvark_admin » Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:38 pm

What I want to know is...

If Stuff isn't accepting viewpoints and opinions counter to the "accepted" belief that climate change is man-made -- will they stop reporting on Trump's claims that it's all a scam? Or will they still use every excuse to get a clickbait headline from the POTUS?
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby Muscular Jam » Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:43 pm

Nah, trump mentions gets nearly as many clicks as Princess Diana, they are here to stay. Nice attempt to change the subject though ;->

The Media Council quite rightly agreed with you that there was no need to publish fantasy, noting "unless the scientific consensus on climate change shifts markedly, or important new information comes to light, it is unlikely complaints alleging lack of balance, because the climate change sceptic viewpoint is not included, will be successful."
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby Perry » Sun Dec 23, 2018 7:46 pm

More to all this hoo-hah than meets the eye? Shaw thing.
Perry
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby j_sheley » Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:05 am

What is very vexing about the CO2 global warming claptrap is that CO2 by itself does not contribute to global warming. I know what you are thinking:
“What sort of addlepated monkey dreck now? We all know that a relationship between CO2 and heating of the atmosphere exists!”
The explanation is very simple:
CO2 converts infra red wave lengths (EG 4p2um) in sunshine to longer wavelengths and vibration energy (*heat*).
I will state that there are only four significant sources of global warming:
1) The sun’s electro magnetic energy(EG light + magnetic fields)
2) Radiolytic decomposition (EG uranium, plutonium, thorium ect)
3) Meteor impacts.
4) Heat from earth’s molten core.

The sun is by far the largest contributor to global warming.
SO what is the relationship between carbon dioxide concentration and global warming? Again a simple explanation is available:

1) The energy emitted from the sun is NOT a constant.
2) Solubility of CO2 in the oceans is governed by water temperature. CO2 is less soluble in water as the water temperature rises.
If the Sun’s radiant energy increases, then the ocean's water temperature will increase. As the water temperature in oceans increases then more CO2 enters the atmosphere.
Have any of the anti- fossil fuel fascists presented data from the last 400 years indicating that the sun’s energy applied to the earth’s surface is a constant? (Hint: NO)
If you think that I am full of monkey blather then let me know.
j_sheley
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 12:42 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby phill » Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:28 pm

your full of ( i go a lot further than monkey blather )
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )

i might live and eat in a sewer .. but hey look how many of these shiney things i have got
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1699
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby Perry » Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:56 pm

Ad hominem responses, now?
Perry
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby phill » Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:55 am

more answering his request
and avoiding typing out what has been typed out thousands of times already to obviously no gain
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )

i might live and eat in a sewer .. but hey look how many of these shiney things i have got
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1699
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: You know the media is lost when... (11 Dec, 2018)

Postby Muscular Jam » Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:38 pm

j_sheley wrote:The sun is by far the largest contributor to global warming.
Umm, yeah, thanks for stating the obvious.
j_sheley wrote:1) The energy emitted from the sun is NOT a constant.
Umm, yeah, again thanks for stating the obvious. For starters there is an 11 year sunspot cycle.
Image
j_sheley wrote:2) Solubility of CO2 in the oceans is governed by water temperature. CO2 is less soluble in water as the water temperature rises.
As most school children could confirm, yes.
j_sheley wrote:If the Sun’s radiant energy increases, then the ocean's water temperature will increase. As the water temperature in oceans increases then more CO2 enters the atmosphere.
Not if but when. Yes, this is called a positive feedback mechanism. Other examples would be increased temperature producing more water vapour, itself a greenhouse gas, or increased temperature releasing methane trapped under the tundra.
j_sheley wrote:Have any of the anti- fossil fuel fascists
Fascists now? I thought AGW was a communist plot? Its so hard to keep track of these ad hominens.
j_sheley wrote: presented data from the last 400 years indicating that the sun’s energy applied to the earth’s surface is a constant?
Say what? That was your point 1). You've just gone in a complete circle. The sun’s energy applied to the earth’s surface is not, never has been, and never will be constant. I've already mentioned the 11 year sunspot cycle (ok, I know technically its a 22 year cycle, but lets not confuse the poor guy). Its been directly observed for 400 years, but it can be estimated for the last 11,400 years using dendroclimatology. There's also the precession of the equator and precession of the ecliptic which have been known since the the broze age. Then there's the Schwabe Cycle, Gleissberg cycle, Suess cycle, Hallstatt cycle, and I bet there's more I haven't heard of. Don't get me started on the 235 million year Galactic year cycle. And Carl Sagan was discussing the faint young Sun problem in the 70s[/quote]
j_sheley wrote:If you think that I am full of monkey blather then let me know.
I'm not familiar with that term so I don't feel qualified to comment on that, but this is exactly why newspapers don't want to waste their time printing letters by the ill-informed unless there are any new scientific developments. "The sun is by far the largest contributor to global warming", I'm going to treasure that one.
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Previous

Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests