from KOS: 60 Minutes Refusing to Play by Fox News Rules

[Coexist]

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!!!! Please all jump on the bandwagon, Networks - as fast as you jumped on the "Fair and Balanced" one.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/22/23152/9077
<snip>
The set-up: Why isn't the 60 Minutes gang from CBS News, specifically reporter Scott Pelley, playing the 'fair and balanced' game with the 'controversial' issue of the existence of global warming? The Public Eye, CBS News' viewer representatives, wants an answer to this outrage:

This Sunday, "60 Minutes" aired a piece on global warming. The piece, which featured correspondent Scott Pelley, largely took the existence of global warming as a given. But there are those who claim that global warming - and, specifically, the notion that human's are responsible for it - is a myth. I asked Pelley why the voices of the skeptics were not heard in the piece.

<snip>
What a refreshing change of pace from, say, Wolf Hume citing somebody from a rightwing astroturf organization, or Brit Wolf putting up a graphic from an editorial printed in the Washington Times and written by an oil industry exec without a second thought.

Usually, what happens is that the cable newsies would have gone out of their way, bent over backwards, to have found somebody from the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, or just a pundit with no background in global warming other than being a card carrying member of the vast rightwing conspiracy to "debate" the issue. Even when there isn't any debate. Because, god forbid, that in the triumphantist O'Reily-Hannity-Coulter era that anybody stand up and say with authority that everything in the world isn't an opinion that is up for debate, sometimes things just are the way they are.

[90-percent]

1. Utne Reader

Or some other left wing newstand mag recently mentioned a little factoid;

From memory:

Number of peer reviewed scientic reports that state global warming is a fact:

85

Percent of peer reviewed scientific journals that dispute global warming:

0%

Percent of mass media articles about global warming that refer to it as a "theory":

80%


this is from memory, but the numbers behind it are truly staggering and it shows you just how ill served people are by American Corporate Media!

-85% Jimmy

[Coexist]

2. Wow.

:wow:

[Lorien]

29. See post #28 n/t

[Lorien]

28. From the actual Utne reader sitting in front of me:

(I've posted this numerous times without a single reply):

GLOBAL WARMING "DEBATE"?

Number of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles about Global Warming published between 1993-2003: 928

Percentage that cast doubt on human caused Global Warming: ZERO


Number of hard news stories about Global Warming published by the NYT, LAT, WP and WSJ (abbreviations mine) between 1988-2003: 3,543

Percentage of those that cast doubt: 53%

SOURCE: Jan-Feb Utne reader, page 21

[panader0]

3. I live in southern Az., and we haven't had rain for 6 months

Even the hardy mesquite trees are dying from drought. No snow on the mountains. Miller Peak is 9850 feet tall with no snow for the first time in my 35 years here.

[Coexist]

5. last night, Lou Dobbs interviewed a scientist who had been muzzled

and wasn't anymore.

from the transcript:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0602/21/ldt.01.html
<snip>
Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration backed down from earlier, flat-out denials that global warming had anything to do with last year's fierce hurricane season. The retreat came after several scientists spoke up, saying they had been muzzled by NOAA public affairs' personnel about the possible connection.

<snip>
TUCKER: Once quiet scientists have begun speaking up, driven by concerns that far more than manipulated science is at stake.

SHEILA JASANOFF, PROF., HARVARD UNIVERSITY: It's enormously damaging to science. It's damaging to democracy at large. I mean one mistake that we shouldn't make is thinking that there are separate values for science and for democracy.

<snip>
James Hanson the director of NASA's Goddard Institute for space studies joins me now. NASA public affairs officials tried to silence him on his concerns and science on global warming. But James Hansen won't be silenced. He joins me tonight with new findings that he says proves that we're experiencing a serious global warming trend. First of all, good to have you here. JAMES HANSEN, DIR. NASA GODDARD INSTITUTE: Good to be here, and my caveats again, I speak as a scientist with 39 years experience but I don't speak for the government and I don't specify policy. I let the data speak for itself.

[fasttense]

9. Did you see Lou Dobbs angry rant against bushco last night?

I swear Lou is getting more liberal by the minute. One thing he certainly is is anti-bush. It seems the UAE royals sent over here to smooth the feathers of our politicians over the port deal have been railing against Lou. I'm surprised he is allowed to continue his show. He hardly ever has anything good to say about W.

[FlaGranny]

26. You actually don't need to be liberal

to be virulently anti-Bush. You just need a brain. I have a Republican next-door neighbor who has a brain and therefore is extremely anti-Bush.

[Coexist]

27. agreed - Dobbs seems to lean Libertarian to me. n/t

[Dr.Phool]

7. I think hurricane season is going to start in April this year.

They lasted until New Year's last year, and we had tropical disturbance in the Carribean in January.

[Coexist]

10. I think we're gonna' need a bigger alphabet...

or a male/female name per letter.

[lonestarnot]

11. Did they make any fake snow up on the S. & F. peak in Flag?

I let that one slip by me. No snow on the 4 peaks either. I have a "let it snow" in my kitchen window along with the IMPEACH HIM.

[Coexist]

12. I'm sorry - what is S.&F. peak in Flag?

I truly don't know what that stands for.

[lonestarnot]

14. San Francisco Peaks in Flagstaff.... Holy Indian country.

[Angry Girl]

31. Unfortunately the SF Peaks have been in serious trouble for a while

Hardly anybody gave a damn about the fact that this is sacred ground and the few who did were summarily ignored.

The streams and creeks that run through it have been drying up to nothing for a a few years now. The Snowbowl ski area expansion made things even worse (and wastewater snow, no less!). Basically, the last time I was there, a couple of years ago, the groundwater was in bad shape. It could only have gotten worse from there. :cry:

http://www.savethepeaks.org/savethepeaks/pagetemp/background.html

[Lochloosa]

18. Hey FLDem5.

I'm bidding a job in Land O' Lakes today. Your getting a new sports park!

[Coexist]

20. the 40 acres behind the Rec center on Collier parkway, right?

I am a member of the Sports Coalition. Our new football fields will be there!

[Lochloosa]

22. That's the one.

2 football fields baseball/softball fields (4) 2 soccer fields.
Oh and we have to avoid the pet sematery(sic)

[Coexist]

24. that Pet Cemetary was a BIG issue on the land sale.

Please do an extra special good job on my fields!!!
:toast:

[Lochloosa]

25. My company installs the Sports Lighting.

I'll make sure to "brighten" your parties for you.

Of course, I expect an invitation. :party:

[Dr.Phool]

4. It hits the nail on the head

Science isn't opinion. It's neither Democratic or Republican. And Michael Crichton is a FICTION writer.

[fasttense]

6. I saw that show, it was great. Every story had a anti-bush spin.

It totally surprised me. I had given up on 60 minutes as just a neo-crazy spin machine. Nice to find out I was wrong.

[Vinca]

8. To anyone who - drip, drip, drip - watched the 60 Minutes piece,

who are you - drip, drip, drip - going to believe? Fox News or your - drip, drip, drip - lyin' eyes?

[wicket]

13. I love this part:

Pelley brings up science fiction writer, and Bush partisan, Michael Crichton's anti-global warming efforts as an example of the kind of anti-global warming movement voices he could have turned to. Not to stand in stark contrast to the overwhelming support of actual scientists practicing in the field, but as a means of saying 'look, just because somebody people have heard of disagrees doesn't mean he knows what he is talking about'. Imagine that, just because you have a scientist who says that the world is round, doesn't mean that you have to run out and find a partisan for a conservative thinktank who says 'no, the world is flat'.

-snip-

What a refreshing change of pace from, say, Wolf Hume citing somebody from a rightwing astroturf organization, or Brit Wolf putting up a graphic from an editorial printed in the Washington Times and written by an oil industry exec without a second thought.

Usually, what happens is that the cable newsies would have gone out of their way, bent over backwards, to have found somebody from the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, or just a pundit with no background in global warming other than being a card carrying member of the vast rightwing conspiracy to "debate" the issue. Even when there isn't any debate. Because, god forbid, that in the triumphantist O'Reily-Hannity-Coulter era that anybody stand up and say with authority that everything in the world isn't an opinion that is up for debate, sometimes things just are the way they are.

:rofl: :rofl:

[sasha031]

15. I just wrote and thanked 60 Minutes

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

I think that we should encourage them and thank them for honest reporting.

[Atman]

16. Grab your popcorn, but I need some "global warming" enlightenment...

I watched the 60 Minutes piece, and it certainly was pretty grim. But a couple of references were made to the fact that the earth hasn't seen a warming period like this in XX number of years. Here is what bothers me...I think one of the figures was around 100,000 years, or something like that. Clearly before any concern about greenhouse gasses from factories and cars and deoderant cans.

I'm only playing Devil's advocate, because it is a point that I've heard brought up by those on the right, and I don't have the knowledge to effectively counter it. Somebody 'splain it to me...if this is the worst it's been in 100,000 years or even 5-6,000, as I believe was one of the other estimates given, either way, the only other time the earth warmed like this was before any of the evils of the industrial age upon which almost all of the blame is heaped. I'm not in any way suggesting we aren't having a negative impact on the planet, warming included. I firmly believe we are. But how do I back it up when confronted with the very logical point that the planet has warmed before, and perhaps it is just cyclical?

As Stephen Colbert might say if he had me for a writer...My mind is adrift in the Doldrums of Obfuscation, just waiting for the Ship of Knowledge to guide me back to the Shipping Channel of Truth! Actually, even Colbert isn't that bad. Sorry.

[Coexist]

19. here is something:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Pre-human_global_warming

<snip>
Pre-human global warming
It is thought by some geologists that the Earth experienced global warming in the early Jurassic period, with average temperatures rising by 5 °C. Research by the Open University published in Geology (32: 157–160, 2004 <30>) indicates that this caused the rate of rock weathering to increase by 400%. Rock weathering locks away carbon in calcite (CaCO3) and dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2). As a result of this, carbon dioxide levels dropped back to normal over roughly the next 150,000 years.

Sudden release of methane (a greenhouse gas) from its ice complex (clathrate) has been hypothesized as a cause of past global warming. Two events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event and the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum. However, warming at the end of the last ice age is thought not to be due to methane release <31>.

http://www.search.com/reference/Global_warming?redir=1
<snip>
Sudden release of methane clathrate (a greenhouse gas) has been hypothesized as a cause of past global warming. Two events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event and the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum. However, warming at the end of the last ice age is thought to not be due to clathrate release .

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. We may need the precise wording they used

For instance, if you just say "this is the fastest warming in the last 100,000 years" it may well be because they can't work out temperatures over short time periods (like decades, rather than thousands of years) further back than that. It doesn't necessarily mean they know of a period of faster warming.

[SCDem]

23. What bothers me more about the 100,000 years

is that unfortunately we live ina neo-conservative religous fundy time where kids are being taught that earth has only existed for no more than a couple thousand years.

[Lorien]

30. Ice core samples

I have a scientist friend in Antarctica who has been studying climate change through ice core samples for 45 years. Ice cores can provide atmospheric content going back tens of thousands of years. There are cyclical warming and cooling periods, but they are gradual-often taking place over hundreds or even thousands of years, not decades. The current warming trend began with the industrial age, and has increased dramatically ever since, taking another "leap" in the 1970's and again in the 1990's-when SUVs became popular and deforestation increased due to the rise in soya and beef production.It isn't mere coincidence.

[Coexist]

32. I remember a great special on global warming on the Discovery Channel

and how the "conveyor belt" (Gulf Stream) stopped once before and how drastic the climate change was for areas like Britain's west coast. It was a very interesting show.

They used ice core samples to support that theory. If that conveyor belt stops, Tony Blair is going to be freezing his nuts off. Without the gulf stream, it would be as cold as all the other lands masses at similar latitudes. Yikes.

[hopeisaplace]

17. That's so great. 60 Minutes have really been doing their job lately

thank goodness...gives me hope again.

[Generator]

33. CBS news tonight also said:

"There's no other way to say this, Iraq is plunging into civil war." NBC managed to make it sound like it might happen. Just a comparison.