Why does this not appear in the US Media?

Question

The evidence is mounting that global warming is NOT man made. Now, top scientists feel it is approaching 'proven'. Why does this not appear in the US Media?

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734

Answer 1

Sensationalism sells papers, not letdowns.  As always, the media is more concerned with profits than with printing honest news.  Yes, agw is close to being proven wrong.  But if the media won't report it, people will never know.

Answer 2

It seems extremely rude to dismiss what David Evans writes simply because he’s Australian... do only Americans have a worthwhile viewpoint on this subject?

He makes four important points in a straightforward way that is hard to refute.

1. The greenhouse signature is missing.

2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming.

3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001.

4. The new ice cores show that ... ...the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon.

Dana suggests that the satellite measurements may be flawed, but these are consistent with direct measurements from balloons. Even if point 3 were debatable he’d still have to disprove points 1,2 and 4 to dismiss “the whole premise of his article”.

David Evans was awarded a Phd at Stanford University, Palo Alto in 1989.

Answer 3

Because there is no such evidence and the media is not going to waste valuable air time on fairy tales. There are also no "scientists"--top or otherwise, saying any such thing.

Answer 4

The first article - because David Evans is an Australian consultant, not an American one.  I think only Australians would care about the global warming opinion of an Australian who isn't a climate scientist.  It's like if a geologist in your neighborhood said global warming was a big scam.  You might listen to him, but I wouldn't.

By the way, the whole premise of his argument is wrong:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...

As for the second one, we hear about the stupid Oregon Petition all the time.  All it proves is that as high as 99.9% of Americans with science degrees agree that humans are causing global warming.  See 'Lists of skeptical scientists' here:

http://greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/global...

Answer 5

because the communists in the media hate capitalism and hate freedom of choice.

And liberals in general hate progress, hate capitalism, and hate freedom.

They need myths like global warming to suppress human achievement and freedom.

It's also convenient for them to blame it all on Bush of course.

Answer 6

The following statement in Evan's piece struck me above all else:

"The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy."     -  Dr. David Evans

Answer 7

Well the australian news, sorry to say is not peer reviewed. It is not accepted as anything other than opinion. Peer reviewed journals are what you should be reading.  It is rather stupid to say global warming is not man made. Ofcourse global warming is not man made, its not made at all it is called climate change. Now if you said something like anthroprogenic global warming then people will understand what you are saying. Anthroprogenic global warming is easy to prove, not only is there mountains of data on the subject, but all you have to do is look up at the smog, to know that man made c02 does have an effect on the atmosphere if even a little bit. You should research convection currents if you want to find out about global warming. The ocean has all the answers not the atmosphere.

Answer 8

They're too busy reporting on news like Britney agreed to giving her ex full custody of the kids and Brangelina's twins' names.

Answer 9

Well I am an Australian and can comment on the Australian it is a rubbish newspaper the piece in question is an opinion piece not a story and is basically the same as this, which is the guys personal site

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/artic...

The guy wrote software for models, you know, the thing that deniers keep saying aren't reliable.

Your second link, you are kidding aren't you the petition is a well known phony put around by the Heartland Institute, which is why the media won't touch it.

And for DaveH:

Dr Evans did indeed obtain a Phd from Stanford in 1989, it was in electrical engineering.

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/artic...

Answer 10

The petition project is a scam.  Anybody with a degree in any science can sign it.  Did you ever look at the list and see how many are medical doctors?  Gee if my dentist does not believe in global warming, I better listen...yeah right.

Concerning the first one, why would the US media report on an opinion piece in an Australian newspaper?

Answer 11

considering the 2nd link, the paper has a biased opinion, to put it nicely.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?t*t...

the content of the article has been refuted too often to even consider.

as far as the Australian article, it's just fantasy.

they have a serious problem.

i have to go.

i'll try to post the link when i return.

Answer 12

Amazing that someone would give Crabby a thumbs up.  It boggles the mind.  I suspect they didn't read the article.  It wasn't exactly controversial as far as I could see.  Their scarenario is unravelling.  Let's hope it unravels completely before serious harm is done to our economies.