For a good Wednesday morning laugh, check out the Huffington Post article here
. In the article, Kelly Rigg dances an end-zone jig about a supposedly “independent review” of BBC news coverage regarding global warming. The review, responding to complaints that BBC was biased in its coverage, concludes that BBC was not biased.
So, just how “independent” was the BBC review? BBC itself selected the reviewer, Steve Jones. For more on Jones's lack of objectivity, here is what I attempted to post in the “Comments” section after the Huffington Post article:
“It speaks volumes that Steve Jones is the Huffington Post’s most credible, non-partisan source. Jones recently wrote that when he found himself sitting next to Margaret Thatcher at a formal dinner, he had to search desperately for a conversation topic ‘that would not end up with one of us pouring a bowl of soup over the other.’ Hmmm… only people on the fringe lunatic left would have such a reaction when finding themselves sitting next to one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century.
“And regarding global warming? Before taking on the task of evaluating BBC’s alarmist global warming coverage, Jones wrote:
“ ‘Nobody in their right mind can deny the frightening increase in the level of carbon dioxide … Nobody, that is, apart from those whose ideas about how science works come from some remote part of the solar system, rather than here on Earth.’
“Regarding global warming tipping points, ‘Most of those ingredients are evident today, but millions insist that the warming story is made up. It’s enough to make a frog laugh.’
“Do these sound like the words of an objective, nonpartisan referee? If you say ‘yes,’ then you just may be a fan of the Huffington Post. If you say ‘no,’ then you must be a ‘denialist.’
Rigg also criticizes the Heartland Institute for not allowing alarmists to freely post, edit, and change – without oversight – entries in the Heartland Institute’s ClimateWiki. This is especially amusing because the source she quotes criticizing the Heartland Institute policy praised Wikipedia and Michael Mann’s Real Climate Wiki (two wikis that do not allow skeptics to post, edit, and change entries without oversight). Pretty ironic, eh?
Even more ironic and amusing, I said I “attempted” to post the above comments at the end of Rigg's article because when I hit the “Post Comment” button, I received a message saying “Our moderators screen these comments before they are published.” Ironically, after Rigg railed about the alleged lack of openness in the Heartland Institute's ClimateWiki, the Huffington Post never published my comments.
Anyway, here is a link
to her article. Perhaps the Huffington Post will allow you to post comments where they have blocked me from doing so.