How media over-represents 15 times climatosceptiks fake science

[Alan Klein]

He doesn't rely on the New York Post, basically a tabloid, from whence the link you posted originates, for his information. You know, discernment of sources.

It doesn't matter if it's a tabloid.  Not everyone reads The Times, or the Washington Post, or the NY Times, all of which are biased in their reporting as well.  The point is there were many discussions, meetings and speeches on the climate at Davos.  Richard Attenborough made a speech on the "End of the Eden".  A 16 year old made a speech the "Our House is on Fire".  Climate change and environmental challenges remained a hot topic as public figures such as the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres; New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern; and the Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, spoke of the urgent and vital need to protect the environment and outlined the steps they were taking, or would take, to do this.  And the list goes on. Japan’s Prime Minister, and host of the 2019 G20 meeting, Shinzo Abe, said climate action would be a top priority at this year’s G20. He also announced that Japan would use its G20 Presidency to work towards a global commitment to reduce plastic in the oceans.  It would have been nice if he said he would fly to Davos next year on  a commercial Japan Air Lines.  OK.  He could sit in first class.

So for the average guy with his wife and three kids, who had to sit next to some fat, smelly person on their last Jet Blue flight to Disney World, reading about rich people complaining about how we pollute the environment while they fly in their own jets burning 2000 gallons per hour, seems rather hypocritical. 

[Alan Klein]

That's basically it, one needs to pick one's sources with a bit of care. It may also require a small investment in (quality) time.

Here's a more balanced news source of what went down:
https://www.reuters.com/davos/

But I'd prefer to not rely on just one source. And even if Reuters is a relatively unbiased source, it's not a peer reviewed scientific publication either...

Cheers,
Bart

It's rather insulting and frankly ignorant to assume what you read is "smarter" and more reliable and diverse than what I read.  How do you know what I read?  Or what I watch?  The fact is I read the NY Times, Washington Post, NY Post, and dozens of articles from different sources throughout the world. I even read Reuters.   I also watch MSNBC, CNN, FOX, CBS, ABC, NBC,BBC etc. etc.  Curious, when you read an article supporting your already preconceived beliefs, do you read it with a critical eye?  Or do you you just take it as gospel? 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Anyways, on a personal note I don’t mind if you’re pro or against, and if you’re in denial or not. But do not convince me with so called ‘scientific literature’ (being an engineer I understand the value of 'real' scientific data) that I should do this and can’t do that anymore and prescribe how I should live. I’m minding my own business and don’t interfere with you and your beliefs....

Amen, brother!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... And, I'm just wondering, what is it that you do not understand ...

Here we go again... that patronizing, condescending tone. As if you are the holder of truth, speaking to the unwashed masses.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

It's rather insulting and frankly ignorant to assume what you read is "smarter" and more reliable and diverse than what I read.

Where did I say that?

I made a general reference to the benefits of "picking one's sources with a bit of care". I also mentioned that "It may also require a small investment in (quality) time".

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Here we go again... that patronizing, condescending tone. As if you are the holder of truth, speaking to the unwashed masses.

That's your (biased?) interpretation.

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Other are probably just saying what they think their readers want to read.

And that goes, of course, only for the one side of the debate.

[RSL]

This is a "debate?"

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

This is a "debate?"

Hang on Russ, it might become one ...

Edit: Bernard certainly started it with the intention of becoming one.
But it turns out to be difficult to stay on topic.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

That's basically it, one needs to pick one's sources with a bit of care. It may also require a small investment in (quality) time.

Here's a more balanced news source of what went down:
https://www.reuters.com/davos/

Thanks for the link. Look what I found there:

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Thanks for the link. Look what I found there:

It's inevitable, Globalisation runs Climate change ..., amongst others (like flying to bring together people from around the globe).

Cheers,
Bart

[RSL]

But it turns out to be difficult to stay on topic.

No, Bart. It's IMPOSSIBLE to stay on topic in The Coffee Corner. We all need to stop drinking so much coffee. . . or whatever it is we're drinking.

[Alan Klein]

Where did I say that?

I made a general reference to the benefits of "picking one's sources with a bit of care". I also mentioned that "It may also require a small investment in (quality) time".

Cheers,
Bart

Okay I'll pass off the tone as a misunderstanding between languages.

Boy, it's not easy being a deplorable.😏

[Robert Roaldi]

https://files.springernature.com/getResource/Full%20Text%2041467_2019_9959.pdf?token=IULUvIufpS8AXE43riPpExKrcZMUcwpHIO0w4yhOno61RnG9Vz6%2Fr7GCrI5AcBi92o1n3tikPjKFkiYotkHNpNM75Zwrwg1JnULfD6ql3lbxDcg7HwKui%2FaVf0c006KjuCh%2FZ3DLB4IVSRfpmhKqICjMwRJi78FVezezsmb4UQoz8APBqsKXJKHvKxkyTujh6R1Se4bGQnT7HNP7lnlhp40M0VnqSPp7kwO%2Fuk2bUqy4COccDRtTVCPDgs7U4YSWypRQua9%2FSVF2DhQwoqi9s1MFpmIzT6zluH6nT8%2F3tKZbQ0YkJp70BIAJLjpI6sqe

This article is absolutely essential.

I would appreciate if comments could focus on the role of media on the widespread misconceptions about global warming.

Cheers,
Bernard

Things may be going off the rails.

[BernardLanguillier]

Amen, brother!

This is far off topic, but is probably the core of the issue.

Do you realize that this attitude is deeply incoherent with your patriotism?

Let me elaborate.

You love your country, the US, and I understand because it’s a great country on many accounts.

Now think about what it means to be a patriot. In essence, it is to love a man made concept (this country) that has no reality besides the set of rules the people living there, mostly total strangers, have agreed to comply to.

So there would be nothing to love at all without the deeply rooted acceptance that you do interfere with the business of millions of strangers and that they do interfere with your business.

And a majority of these rules are extremely constraining to your freedom of running your business. And you love those constraints because they are the essence of this object called The US that you associate yourself so strongly with.

Worst yet, many of these rules have been imposed by international treaties the US has signed because of a sound understanding that the world needs global alignment for the good of its citizens beyond their own little selfish desires.

So “amen brother” is deeply incoherent with your patriotism.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Alan Klein]

This is far off topic, but is probably the core of the issue.

Do you realize that this attitude is deeply incoherent with your patriotism?

Let me elaborate.

You love your country, the US, and I understand because it’s a great country on many accounts.

Now think about what it means to be a patriot. In essence, it is to love a man made concept (this country) that has no reality besides the set of rules the people living there, mostly total strangers, have agreed to comply to.

So there would be nothing to love at all without the deeply rooted acceptance that you do interfere with the business of millions of strangers and that they do interfere with your business.

And a majority of these rules are extremely constraining to your freedom of running your business. And you love those constraints because they are the essence of this object called The US that you associate yourself so strongly with.

Worst yet, many of these rules have been imposed by international treaties the US has signed because of a sound understanding that the world needs global alignment for the good of its citizens beyond their own little selfish desires.

So “amen brother” is deeply incoherent with your patriotism.

Cheers,
Bernard

The road to serfdom.

[jeremyrh]

Please explain to me how can you discuss the press coverage of a certain topic - be it climate change or Cristiano Ronaldo's latest feat - without discussing the topic itself. You say the press coverage is biased in a certain direction, because the press must be corrupted to do so (Fox news etc). I suppose if the press coverage is biased, the topic is still debatable and uncertain?

No - the basic scientific situation is clear. There is no value in discussing it here, since neither you nor I have the knowledge or expertise to do so. It is however interesting to discuss what is the reason that deniers are given so much coverage.

[faberryman]

It doesn't matter if it's a tabloid.

To some, apparently not. One source is as good as another.

[BernardLanguillier]

The road to serfdom.

No, the need to realize that a country and serfdom are the 2 sides of the same coin. You can’t get one without the other.

Now, those realistic about their condition are able to describe it with a word less negatively charged than serfdom, such as citizenship?

Cheers,
Bernard

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... So “amen brother” is deeply incoherent with your patriotism...

You jumping of the deep end aside (a rhetorical joke)...

... when you stop flying, driving gasoline cars, eating meat and using anything derived from fossil fuels (your Nikon has a lot of plastic)... then we can talk.