Chris Matthews show, Global warming, and CRU Hack

[seycyrus]

Woops, I apologize for the misleading subject heading as the events at CRU were not brought up at all, or even alluded to in the slightest. Not by Chris or any of the 4 members of his panel.

What they did tell you was that if you were a democrat, you should get in line with the rest of the democrats and and be pro AGW! They showed a poll (taken from Oct. 25th BEFORE the emails were leaked) that those who favored immediate action on GW were 83% democrat.

To further classify those who are hesitant regarding AGW they of course showed a few clips of Rush spouting.

And then there was the point that the people who have doubts, really just don't like Al Gore!

So, to sum up. If you have concerns about any of the tenets of AGW, you are a republican, who is a Rush-o-phile, and just don't like Al Gore.

Ouch! That shepherd crock sure is starting to hurt!

 

[Sorry!]

Woops, I apologize for the misleading subject heading as the events at CRU were not brought up at all, or even alluded to in the slightest. Not by Chris or any of the 4 members of his panel.

What they did tell you was that if you were a democrat, you should get in line with the rest of the democrats and and be pro AGW! They showed a poll (taken from Oct. 25th BEFORE the emails were leaked) that those who favored immediate action on GW were 83% democrat.

To further classify those who are hesitant regarding AGW they of course showed a few clips of Rush spouting.

And then there was the point that the people who have doubts, really just don't like Al Gore!

So, to sum up. If you have concerns about any of the tenets of AGW, you are a republican, who is a Rush-o-phile, and just don't like Al Gore.

Ouch! That shepherd crock sure is starting to hurt!

ok then. Is this just to start yet another AGW proponent bashing thread?

 

[Chi Meson]

How is this thread not political?

 

[seycyrus]

ok then. Is this just to start yet another AGW proponent bashing thread?

Oh no. I'd categorize this as an attempt to draw attention to certain media outlets apparent attempt at choosing the to make or unmake the news.

I say *apparent*, because after all, I only listen to NPR for 2-3 hours a day, everyday, check the CNN page throughout the day and watch CNN at night. I *could* be just missing the coverage of the CRU situation.

But then today watching the Cris Matthews show where one of the topics was something along the lines of "Why are some people critical of aspects of AGW"?. And to see CRU not even MENTIONED, not even in passing, not even so it could be dismissed. Why it sort of raises an eyebrow or two, or three...

Just remember, if you find any aspect of AGW worthy of more inspection, or have any doubts about AGW in any way, it is only because you are an Al Gore hating Republican who worships at the altar of Rush Limbaugh.

There is *no* other possible reason why anyone would question AGW, none, nada, zilch.

 

[seycyrus]

How is this thread not political?

Forgive me for not posting in the correct sub section, it was not intentional.

 

[mgb_phys]

I know a bunch of scientists at the medical research council, they spend most of their time avoiding other researchers seeing their work, arguing patent deals with various drug companies and back stabbing each other.
If their emails ever leaked out you would conclude that all of modern medicine was a conspiracy and go back to leaches.

 

[WhoWee]

I know a bunch of scientists at the medical research council, they spend most of their time avoiding other researchers seeing their work, arguing patent deals with various drug companies and back stabbing each other.
If their emails ever leaked out you would conclude that all of modern medicine was a conspiracy and go back to leaches.

Don't worry, after "health insurance reform", medical research might be next.