Please help offset our server and hosting costs and keep our site running! Any amount is welcome.

Get a Daily Digest via Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Latest Comments

  • HAHAHA, Jeff, I was wondering about that silence from the desperate one there fo... More...
  • Hi Russ! Thanks! I've had a reeely smart-arsed comment for him for about a week,... More...
  • HAHAHA, This one is a classic!!! Reports that the Mythbusters team were about to... More...
  • Leave off with the insults, A-hole. Just click on it: the site is unavailable. More...
  • HAHAHA, I didn't know about that Jeff. But then again I've not been on here very... More...
  • Good riddance, and don't let the cyber door hit you in the buttocks on the way o... More...
  • I guess you just couldn't take the embarrassment and humiliation any more. As yo... More...
  • HAHAHA, Good one Jeff! :D More...

Who's Online Now

We have 2463 guests online
christianbaby-ad
advert
media_brainwash

Given The Citizen’s thorough coverage of the climate change issue in the past, I am surprised to find no stories about the scandal rocking Britain’s prestigious Climate Research Unit (CRU) which has been a major part of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC).

Leaks of over 3,000 documents and e-mails show that some of the world’s top climate change scientists intentionally used various ‘statistical ‘tricks’ to fudge data to support their position on climate change and to suppress information that contradicted their findings.

They pressured peer-reviewed journals not to publish contradictory research and even got a nonco-operative editor fired. Furthermore, they systematically excluded scientists with dissenting opinions, i.e. they squelched open scientific debate on what was supposedly a purely scientific issue. This is apparently how the IPCC achieved its oft-trumpeted ‘consensus’ on man-made climate change.

Since taxpayers are being asked to spend countless billions on the climate change problem, I think that The Citizen and all media have a duty to fully inform citizens of this scandal and its implications for government policy, for locking ourselves into international commitments as well as for public spending.

By failing to bring this issue to the public’s attention, the media have in effect demoted themselves to cheerleaders and thereby betrayed their duty to fully inform the public. In doing this, the media have become complicit in leading the public into giving uninformed consent on an issue that is not nearly as clear-cut as some would pretend.

Source

Comments  

 
# Guest 2009-12-06 19:02
That's right, while the ship we are on is sinking, lets pretend it isnt, and argue over it some more without doing anything about it.

While we are at it. Lets assume that climate change is an absolute hoax (which by the way it is not), but lets assume it is.

What are some of the solutions to climate change.

Reducing our dependence on oil.
Cleaning up polluting industries.
Using clean energy.

Assuming climate change is complete rubbish, then doing the above things will only reduce general pollution anyway, so what is the problem. Unless it is that you actually like pollution.

Take Copenhagen as a perfect example of this. In Copenhagen 37% of the population commute to work or study each day by bicycle. Copenhagen is one of the happiest livable cities, and when you ask the people why they ride a bike most dont say, because of climate change, rather they say, because it is convenient, healthy, cheap etc.

Fighting climate change has side benefits, even if climate change is a hoax (which, it is not), so stop your conservative crap and get on board.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to Admin
 

Add comment

Avoid profanities/foul language. Stay on topic and PLAY NICE. Threats are not tolerated. Long links are shortened but still work. Emails not shown. PLEASE report all spam/inappropriate comments using the 'Report to Admin' link.


Security code
Refresh