Jeffrey Kluger showed up on Saturday’s CBS This Morning to do what he does best: clang the alarm bells over global warming. The TIME magazine senior editor even went so far as to warn that Manhattan may soon be underwater.
Kluger was brought on to discuss a recent reading -- atop an observation station on a dormant volcano -- finding that atmospheric carbon dioxide is at its highest level in 2 million years. Back then, he informed us, sea levels were 66 feet higher than they are now. He then struck an ominous tone: “What this means is we are on the west side of Manhattan at this moment. If this keeps up to what it was back then, we would be swimming at this address.” [Video below. MP3 audio here.]
On Sunday, 35,000 protestors marched on the Washington Mall urging President Obama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, giving the Washington Post’s Steven Mufson ample space to hype the march. In the 20 paragraph expose, the Post fails to label the protestors as liberal once and does not include any quotes from supporters of the pipeline, instead choosing to hype their global warming hysteria.
Instead, the article is peppered with liberal quotes, while criticizing President Obama from the left:
Leaders of the rally said they wanted to press Obama to follow up on the strong rhetoric in his inaugural address about the need to slow climate change. The official posters at the rally borrowed Obama’s campaign slogan “forward.” The read: “Mr. President, Forward-on Climate.”
The New York Times made much of two small local liberal protests over the weekend, one at a New York State gun show, the other in the state capital protesting fracking. Vivian Yee's Saturday piece highlighted a scattering of protesters: "Despite Protests, Gun Show in Upstate New York Goes On and Draws Crowds."
The show had not attracted so many people before, City Center staff members said. And it had never attracted so many protests. As traffic snarled and parking spots filled outside the convention center, about two dozen members of the newly formed Saratogians for Gun Safety held up 26 painted wooden angels, copies of those a Connecticut artist planted in Newtown after the Dec. 14 shootings.
In 2008, as reported by Tim Graham at NewsBusters at the time, Thomas Friedman at the New York Times wrote that America ought to become "China for a day," so that Friedman's dream, in Graham's words "of a green revolution -- all those allegedly planet-saving taxes and regulations and product bans -- can be permanently enacted."
The mainland's totalitarian regime isn't merely not "green" in any meaningful sense. It also is often remarkably unconcerned about the health and well-being of its subjects. For example, a recent chemical spillp poisoned the water of millions (that's right, millions), and the government didn't bother telling anyone about it for almost a week. The story has received almost zero attention in the U.S. press. Excerpts from a January 7 story at the UK's Financial Times follow the jump (bolds are mine):
Politico’s Framing of Jackson’s Resignation from EPA: ‘After Four Years of Battling Republicans and Industry’
In their December 27 story about Lisa Jackson's resignation from atop her perch at the Environmental Protection Agency, Darren Samuelsohn and Erica Martinson at the Politico wanted readers to believe that occurred after "after four years of battling Republicans and industry while also giving the White House some heartburn along the way over her push for new clean air rules."
Please. It's not as if only Republicans oppose the EPA's energy-hostile agenda; last time I checked, most of West Virginia's national politicians, as well as many if not most of the state's coal miners who are losing their jobs as a result of out-of-control environmentalism, are Democrats. And I don't recall President Obama or the White House ever having any problems with what Jackson was saying or doing. The Politico pair also waited until the sixth paragraph of their report to mention Jackson's admitted use of an accountability-avoiding email account in the name of "Richard Windsor" to conduct official business. Excerpts from their report follow the jump:
Note to Chris Matthews: when seeking to slam Republicans for their supposed ignorance of science, try not to expose your own. On Tuesday's Hardball, Matthews—mocking the Republican congressmen vying for the chairmanship of the House Science Committee— committed this whopper: "As we all learned in grammar school—young people watching—trees absorb carbon monoxide."
As even an MSNBC host might know, carbon monoxide is a toxic gas produced when there is insufficient oxygen to permit complete oxidation. Think running car in closed garage. The greenhouse gas to which Matthews was presumably referring—and which trees are famous for absorbing—is carbon dioxide. Perhaps it was just a slip of the overworked Matthews' tongue, but when it comes to a guy who likes to jump down any available Republican throat, turnabout is fair play. View the video after the jump.
Ex-Barack Obama Administration $82 Billion Auto Bailout Czar Steve Rattner has a bit of a problem telling the truth.
What Rattner does not have is a problem with the Jurassic Press Media calling him on his serial flights of factual fancy.
AP Report on West Coast Gas Prices Moving to $4 a Gallon Ignores How They’re Already There or Really Close Elsewhere
Last time I checked the Associated Press was a national news service.
So in a story about how a refinery fire in California will likely cause West Coast gas prices to hit $4 a gallon, why did reporter Jason Dearen ignore the fact that prices are already at $4 a gallon in many parts of the country already?
I suppose the Associated Press deserves some credit for what appears to be a grudging acknowledgment that opponents of the oil and gas drilling technique known as hydraulic fracturing, aka "fracking," "sometimes mislead the public." Also, Kevin Begos's story does a good job of letting Josh Fox, producer of the fundamentally dishonest documentary "Gasland," hang himself with his own dodgy, reality-denying words.
But the credit pretty much ends there. Begos's report is a largely a study in false equivalence (y'know, everybody exaggerates -- except, Kevin, opponents do so serially while proponents do so rarely) and psychobabble (y'know, everyone uses "facts" they like and ignores the one that don't -- except, Kevin, for the inconvenient reality that opponents' "facts" are largely falsehoods). The problem is best exemplified in the final excerpted paragraph which follows the jump (bolds are mine):
The debate over natural gas extraction continues, but now celebrities are joining the ranks of left-wing environmentalists to try to prevent drilling.
The left claims that hydraulic fracturing, more commonly know as fracking, contaminated the water in Pennsylvania and Colorado, despite University of Texas at Austin researchers who found “no evidence” of that. Small town support for fracking is rarely talked about in the media.
At a screening of anti-fracking documentary “Gasland” in June, Alec Baldwin even claimed that fracking “causes cancer or can potentially cause cancer to an elevated number of people,” a rumor circulated around far-left sites like Daily Kos and AlterNet.
For some reason, being an actor in Hollywood makes you an environmental expert, and now Beatles legend John Lennon’s own son is joining the fray.
The new villain, same as the old villain, but with a twist.
TNT continued the Hollywood practice of condemning oil and gas in its June 12 episode of “Rizzoli & Isles.” The plot featured an ex-Blackwater agent, masquerading as a yoga guru, who kills a vegan student and a professor in order to hide his drilling for natural gas from shale. This episode was a triple decker for left-wing stereotypes.
The professor that was murdered had condemned hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, in a video saying, “fracking is an invasive way to extract natural gas. Proponents say it will liberate the U.S. from dependence on foreign oil. But, my research indicates it will destroy the environment.”
One of the two main characters, medical examiner Dr. Isles reinforces that idea later in the episode saying, “they pump hundreds of chemicals thousands of feet underground. It pollutes groundwater.” Even the villain ominously tells Detective Rizzoli and Dr. Isles (after tying them in their car, which is parked on a spillway) saying, “a few million gallons of water’s gonna come pouring through here. It’s pretty toxic, from all the fracking.”
The clear anti-fracking statements throughout the show are not new for Hollywood, and they leave out important facts. Researchers from the University of Texas at Austin recently concluded that “there is no evidence” of polluted drinking water caused by fracking. EPA administrator Lisa Jackson even told the Ithaca Journal, “We have absolutely no indication now that drinking water is at risk.”
The liberal news media, which has been anti-oil industry for years, has also portrayed fracking for natural gas in a negative light. The New York Times even had to print a correction in May 2011 after it overstated criticism of the practice. They were forced to admit “There are few documented cases [of water pollution], not numerous ones.”
The American Petroleum Institute has written that fracking fluid is made up of about 90 percent water, 9.5 percent sand. According to the director of the Armstrong Center for Energy & the Environment at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Kathleen Hartnett White, only 0.5 percent “is a mix, not of ‘596 chemicals’ but of just a few, such as guar gum, and emulsifier commonly used in ice cream. And remember: these chemicals are diluted in millions of gallons of water.”
‘Fracking’ Attack: NYTimes Won’t Give Up Fighting Natural Gas Extraction, Even After Embarrassing Itself
Even after being embarrassed by a series of misleading reports from reporter Ian Urbina in June 2011, the New York Times continues to lash out against hydro-fracking, the process of pumping chemicals and water into shale to extract gas.
Metro reporter Mireya Navarro pumped up on Tuesday a controversy manufactured by environmental opponents of fracking in upstate New York: "Institute’s Gas Drilling Report Leads to Claims of Bias and Concern for a University’s Image."
A report from a new institute at the State University at Buffalo asserting that state oversight has made natural gas drilling safer is causing tumult on campus and beyond, with critics arguing that the institute is biased toward industry and could undercut the university’s reputation.
The study, issued on May 15, said that state regulation in Pennsylvania had made drilling there far safer and that New York rules were even more likely to ensure safety once drilling gets under way in the state.
But a government watchdog group quickly raised questions about the study’s data and the authors’ ties to the oil and gas industry. And a newly formed group of professors and students is calling for a broader inquiry into the genesis of the institute, which issued the report only weeks after its creation was announced in April.
“This report reflects the interests of the gas companies, not scholarship,” said Jim Holstun, a professor of English and one of around 20 members of the newly formed University at Buffalo Coalition for Leading Ethically in Academic Research, which met for the first time Wednesday night. “We look very bad.”
As if the vast majority of academic research doesn't reflect ties to and interests of liberal groups. Navarro also faulted the report's authors for including passages they wrote for the (gasp!) "conservative Manhattan Institute."
The drilling process has roiled communities in Pennsylvania since it began in full there in 2008, with many residents complaining about air pollution and threats to groundwater aquifers. It has also proved divisive in New York, where the administration of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo is finalizing proposed regulations to allow drilling upstate.
E. Bruce Pitman, dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at the University at Buffalo, said in an interview that the idea for the institute came out of a series of seminars on hydrofracking issues held by the geology department last year that pointed up the need for a forum “for the exchange of ideas and debate.” The institute as a whole has yet to receive financial support from the industry, Dr. Pitman said, and its start-up budget -- about $40,000 --came from the college’s discretionary funds.
In their report, the shale institute’s researchers said they examined violations by Marcellus Shale drillers in Pennsylvania from January 2008 to August 2011. It said that the incidence of major “polluting environmental events” related to hydrofracking -- like contamination of local water supplies and spills -- declined by more than half in three years, “a rather notable indicator of improvement by the industry and oversight by the regulators.”
The report added that under New York’s proposed rules, which are more stringent, any problems “could have been either entirely avoided or mitigated.”
But in a searing critique issued nine days later, the Public Accountability Initiative, a local watchdog group, questioned the study’s claims, saying the rate of major violations had actually gone up. The group also took some of the authors to task for copying entire passages from a report they wrote last year for the conservative Manhattan Institute, without proper attribution.