Climate Change: Here's what a lie really looks like

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Of course, none of this is in the least bit surprising. After all, The Telegraph is the UK equivalent to the Moonie Times.

I'll grant you that The Telegraph is more of a tabloid, but such is the state of print journalism in much of the UK, and the U.S. is moving fast in that direction. However, once your rant abates you might note that the author of the article in the OP has been following this for a while, posted several stories on it. Also, the angle that some climatologists are cooking the books on global warming studies is not new.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Also, the angle that some climatologists are cooking the books on global warming studies is not new.

Neither new nor proven and often, as with the "East Anglia University scandal", totally debunked.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

I'll grant you that The Telegraph is more of a tabloid,..... the angle that some climatologists are cooking the books on global warming studies is not new.

At least you concede the point that the Telegraph is little more than a rag better suited to grocery store check out lines.

Your other point is illustrative that PT Barnum was correct in observations re. society at large.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

I'll grant you that The Telegraph is more of a tabloid, but such is the state of print journalism in much of the UK, and the U.S. is moving fast in that direction. However, once your rant abates you might note that the author of the article in the OP has been following this for a while, posted several stories on it. Also, the angle that some climatologists are cooking the books on global warming studies is not new.

This begs the question of why you constantly cite articles and op eds from the worst of what you acknowledge is a bad lot. I'm thinking of The Telegraph, of course, and also the Daily Mail, the Washington Times, Breitbart, Newsmax and CNS. Seems your efforts are directed more toward serving an agenda and less toward promoting truth and honesty. I take this as a clear indication of your overall lack of honesty.

[bobabode]

Wasn't the Daily Mail the one who had topless buxom gals on the second page?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Wasn't the Daily Mail the one who had topless buxom gals on the second page?

No, no, no, Bob. It was The Sun. And it was on Page 3.



When I lived in Princeton the local papers we had were the Trenton Times and the Trentonian. Like The Sun, The Trentonian was a tabloid and, also like The Sun, it had pinups but they were tamer and were shifted back to Page 6.



John

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Boreas

No, no, no, Bob. It was The Sun. And it was on Page 3.



When I lived in Princeton the local papers we had were the Trenton Times and the Trentonian. Like The Sun, The Trentonian was a tabloid and, also like The Sun, it had pinups but they were tamer and were shifted back to Page 6.



John

Oh my stars! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom) Part of the Rupert Murdoch empire. Now I know where he found Megan Kelly and Andrea Tantaros.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Oh my stars! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom) Part of the Rupert Murdoch empire. Now I know where he found Megan Kelly and Andrea Tantaros.

The difference between these two is that Kelly is actually very smart but Tantaros is dumb as a bag of hammers.

John

[Boreas]

Sorry to keep going back to this little fewmet but I keep finding little gems of irrelevance and dishonesty.

Originally Posted by whell

I'll grant you that The Telegraph is more of a tabloid, but such is the state of print journalism in much of the UK, and the U.S. is moving fast in that direction. However, once your rant abates you might note that the author of the article in the OP has been following this for a while, posted several stories on it. Also, the angle that some climatologists are cooking the books on global warming studies is not new.

Of course I noticed that and I found it pretty pathetic that the author needed to cite himself as a source. Some journalist!

More importantly, what significance do you attach to the fact that this guy has been spouting the same nonsense for a long time? To me, it speaks to nothing more than Goebbels' dictum about the "big lie".