Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

The New World Order

March 15, 2008

Love the picture

The reality you believe is – isn’t.

The New World Order

Is this scheme to establish a New World Order in fact a reality? Yes it is. If you do not believe this I encourage you to study the United Nations documents and also the treaties which, once ratified by individual nations, become INTERNATIONAL LAW. The United Nations created the Commission for Global Governance, if you don’t believe this, visit the United Nations website and look it up.

The Commission for Global Governance released a report: Our Global Neighbourhood, that predicates a world court, a global tax, and global police force. And the U.S. State Department Publication 7277 outlines a one world police force under the United Nations. So many prominent world leaders are calling for a one world government the intention is obvious. Yet most people are so occupied by life’s responsibilities, careers, sports and television, they have little time to study what’s going on in the corridors of power.

The coming one world government is being set up in the political arena under the flag of the United Nations, through organizations such as the Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Bilderbergers, and the Club of Rome whose members include many world leaders, media personalities and other influential people. The published goal of the Council of Foreign Relations for example is a one world government. And although most have never heard of many of these groups, they do exist, and they are very influential. The core of these groups hold to “illuminist” philosophy.

A second focus is economics with free trade agreements, the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the Bank of International Settlements. The coming global monetary crisis is intended to institute a universal debt-based currency controlled by the International Financiers and issued to individuals against biometric identification cards. This is all about control!

The third area of focus is religion. Organizations like the World Council of Churches and the Parliament of World Religions were established to introduce a new world religion. It is based on a pantheistic/humanist philosophy. Pay careful attention when you study the documents and reports published by the United Nations and related organizations. This philosophy is now being taught in the education system and has been implemented under programs such as Goals 2000.

The New World Order will be SOCIALISM. Read the United Nations declarations and treaties for proof of this fact. The individual will be subservient to the state. Rights and power reside in and derive from the state, not the individual.

United Nations documents all speak of collectivism. They claim that private ownership and management of property is not to the benefit of the human race. These things are cloaked in a pleasant language, and most people are taken in and deceived. Yet few bother to study these documents.

In the New World Order you will be in serfdom to the controlling elite! You will have no liberty, and no rights. The State will look after you for your best interests. Do you see how the governments of the free world are slowly becoming more involved in everyday life? This is exactly what socialism is. The government becomes involved in every aspect of personal life. Today we require a license for so many things. In Australia, farmers now require permission to farm the land they own. This is not freedom.

In the New World Order, private ownership of property will be abolished. You will only own what you need “after all this is best for the world.” “We need to be looked after.”

Terms such as ‘sustainable development’ mean depopulation and serfdom. The masses continue to fall for lie after lie after lie. Study history and you will discover that there have been very few free societies. Those that were free were either overthrown or fell into the trap of socialism, totally unaware of the dangers until it was too late. Socialism (communism) is always implemented through deception. History portrays a repetitive phenomenon . . . enslavement-revolt-freedom-apathy-enslavement. Enslavement frequently followed revolution because the people did not realize that socialism was slavery, not freedom.

Today environment is being used to make people feel guilty, enticing them to accept socialism as necessary. The environmental movement has been co-opted to strip private ownership of control and exploitation of resources. Many environmental ‘facts’ are lies, exaggerations and unscientific claims to manipulate the masses in the classic Hegelian Dialectic: create the problem, create opposition to the problem, then present your own predetermined solution. Global warming is a perfect example.

Source 

 This next story from the BBC
 Blair wants ‘climate revolution’  These elitists want you living as serfs. Your life will be ruled by a small unelected group of lunatics and psychopaths. It’s time to wake up folks. The UN is one EVIL CLUB

Tony Blair
Mr Blair believes the UN is the key to reaching a climate agreement

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has called for a “global environment revolution” to tackle climate change.

Mr Blair is on a visit to Japan to discuss global greenhouse gas targets.

In a speech to a meeting of G8 ministers building on the 2005 Gleneagles summit, he stressed the need for a “global deal”.

He suggested it should be led by the UN and that failure to act on climate change “would be deeply and unforgivably irresponsible”.

During his visit, organised by Climate Group, Mr Blair is due to meet climate change experts from China, Japan, Europe and the US.

The UN and the UN alone is the right forum to reach the global agreement
Tony Blair

He is attempting to guide attempts to secure a deal involving China and the US to slash emissions by 50% by 2050, on the first part of a trip that will also take him to China and India.

He said: “Unfortunately the source of the emissions is irrelevant. It is the fact and amount of them that matters.

“The UN machinery is valiantly striving to put this deal together. The UN and the UN alone is the right forum to reach the global agreement.

“What I found, whilst still in office as prime minister, was that countries had their own environmental policy. They talked to other nations of course, but there was no centre where it was brought together.”

Varied roles

He also said that he could “see no way of tackling climate change without a renaissance of nuclear power”.

The Big Club and you’re not in it by George Carlin 

Global Warming Censored

March 11, 2008

Editor
This is a good article and confirms what I have been saying for a long time.

The debate cannot be over if it was never allowed to take place to begin with, and the media has become a Global Warming propaganda machine.

Neither of these situations should  ever be allowed to happen, nor should they be acceptable in a democracy.

Global Warming Censored

How the Major Networks Silence the Debate on Climate Change

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A study from the Business & Media Institute

By Julia A. Seymour and Dan Gainor

Full Report | PDF Version | Sidebars


Global warming crusader Al Gore repeatedly claims the climate change “debate’s over.” It isn’t, but the news media clearly agree with him. Global warming skeptics rarely get any say on the networks, and when their opinions are mentioned it is often with barbs like “cynics” or “deniers” thrown in to undermine them.Consistently viewers are being sent only one message from ABC, CBS and NBC: global warming is an environmental catastrophe and it’s mankind’s fault. Skepticism is all but shut out of reports through several tactics – omission, name-calling, the hype of frightening images like polar bears scavenging for food near towns and a barrage of terrifying predictions.The Business & Media Institute analyzed 205 network news stories about “global warming” or “climate change” between July 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2007. BMI found a meager 20 percent of stories even mentioned there were any alternative opinions to the so-called “consensus” on the issue.

• Disagreement Squashed: Global warming proponents overwhelmingly outnumbered those with dissenting opinions. On average for every skeptic there were nearly 13 proponents featured. ABC did a slightly better job with a 7-to-1 ratio, while CBS’s ratio was abysmal at nearly 38-to-1.

• Can I See Some ID?: Scientists made up only 15 percent of the global warming proponents shown. The remaining 85 percent included politicians, celebrities, other journalists and even ordinary men and women. There were more unidentified interview subjects used to support climate change hype than actual scientists (101 unidentified to just 71 scientists)

Full Report at Business and Media Institute

Climate change czar aims to paint province green

March 7, 2008
Editor

Welcome to the Old East Block.
Health care sucks in Ont. McGunity can’t figure it out
Education Sucks in Ont. McGunity can’t figure it out
Agriculture Sucks in Ont. McGunity can’t figure it out

But

This DUMB F@#K thinks he and his communist rabble can control the climate.
If this doesn’t wake up the fluoride drinking brain dead masses nothing will.

As went the Jews so do we follow: with nary a whimper

Please do not take my reference to the Jews in a negative light.
The fact is, they did not fight and neither do we.

Hitler would be proud

McGuitny – Bring on your Czar

 

March 29 I will have ever light on in my house. I might just go buy more and turn them on as well.

I have always had the greatest respect for the environment but this has nothing with the environment. This has to do with you giving up your rights as human beings.

Join me on the 29th. Protest this bullshit by turning on, not off, your lights. Send a message to McGuinty and his Czar.

The
GLOBAL GREEN AGENDA

Climate change czar aims to paint province green

Earth Hour initiative will see ‘guerrilla outfit’ set up to ensure Ontario government keeps its promises

Mar 07, 2008 04:30 AM


Queen’s Park Bureau
Premier Dalton McGuinty has appointed a climate change czar to lead Ontario’s fight against global warming.

Toronto Star Home paper of the CLIMATE CZAR

Green House Conspiracy

March 3, 2008
The hoax of Global Warming / Green House was exposed 17 years ago by CH 4 UK in this documentary entitled Green House Conspiracy.

So cold it's getting hot

February 29, 2008

Editor:
Love this statement found on page 2 of the story.
General Motors chairman Bob Lutz, who recently said that he personally thought global warming was a
“total crock of shit.”

I want to take this opportunity to thank the Financial Post, National Post and the Toronto Sun for finally getting the Global Warming Fraud into the mainstream press. Please encourage them to continue to expose this farce.

So cold it’s getting hot

It may be cold, but CBC reassures us that calamity still looms

Terence Corcoran, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 29, 2008

Ah, the weather. It’s cold as hell out there. How cold is it? It’s so cold the CBC had to rush to assure all of us that global warming is still a big, big problem. With record snow falls, record cold snaps, the return of sea ice to the north, snow in the Middle East and a deep freeze in China, any sensible person might begin to wonder and even have doubts about global-warming theory and climate change. A little skepticism might begin to creep into the public sphere and threaten to undermine public belief in global warming.Fear not, says the CBC. We have nothing to worry about: climate calamity still looms. The good news is that the polar caps are still going to melt, hurricane risks are still mounting, drought conditions are more likely, forest fires are set to rage, and it’s going to get hot, hot, hot.

In response to the current global cool-down — provocatively labelled a possible New Ice Age by National Post columnist Lorne Gunter — the CBC has presented a full range of explanations and reassuring reports to calm a troubled population. At least three explanations exist:

This cold is normal According to Environment Canada’s David Phillips, the warm winters of recent years have been unusual, and what we have now across the country is just a return to the kinds of winters we used to get.

La Nina According to CBC Radio’s The Current, the cold is a function of La Nina, which is the cold sister of El Nino, the periodic weather system that makes things warmer than normal. Today’s cold is a La Nina effect.

But not so fast.

Climate change could be the problem. Under climate theory, as we know, all weather can be explained as part of the global-warming scare. Extreme weather events, such as frost on the Nile or wherever, are exactly the kind of weather developments we should expect from global warming. If it gets really cold suddenly, that’s because of global warming.

This explanation was offered up by a World Meteorological Organization official on CBC Radio. How cold is it? It’s so cold it’s getting hotter.

Above all, however, under no circumstances are we ever to begin to think that evidence of a cooler climate or colder weather (different things) are a sign that the great climate change theories of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore might be weak or even wrong.

As reassurance on this, on Wednesday night CBC Television’s The National brought in Andrew Weaver, of the University of Victoria and a lead author on IPCC reports, for the following exchange with reporter Kelly Crowe, introduced by host Peter Mansbridge:

Mansbridge So with all this talk of brutal cold and all those bulky snow banks, you might be wondering how an old-fashioned Canadian winter can still exist in these days of global warming. It’s a question scientists studying climate change get all the time. The CBC’s Kelly Crowe now with their answer.

Crowe It’s been such a wintery winter, Canadians can’t resist asking: Whatever happened to global warming?

Weaver Oh, it’s … it drives you nuts.

Page 2 Financial Post

Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

February 25, 2008

Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

Lorne Gunter, National Post  Published: Monday, February 25, 2008

Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.

The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January “was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average.”

China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.

There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has felt the pinch as home buyers have stayed home rather than venturing out looking for new houses.

In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.

And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its “lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.

The ice is back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.

OK, so one winter does not a climate make. It would be premature to claim an Ice Age is looming just because we have had one of our most brutal winters in decades.

But if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter’s weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature.

And it’s not just anecdotal evidence that is piling up against the climate-change dogma.

According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona — two prominent climate modellers — the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.

“We missed what was right in front of our eyes,” says Prof. Russell. It’s not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind’s effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on polar ice melt.

But when Profs. Toggweiler and Russell rejigged their model to include the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator (then back towards it again), the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the north was obvious in the current Arctic warming.

Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as “a drop in the bucket.” Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to “stock up on fur coats.”

He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.

The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.

It’s way too early to claim the same is about to happen again, but then it’s way too early for the hysteria of the global warmers, too.

National Post 

A Fight Against Windmills In Denmark

February 18, 2008

Editor:
Wind farms are quiet and cause no problems. That’s what we were told. Yet, in Denmark  people don’t want wind turbines near them because of noise, flicker and other problems. Both the industry and the govt. continue to ignore any and all of the problems associated with the wind industry. Why?

Property values do go down once a wind farm is built near homes.

That’s a fact.  

Local politics could short-circuit a national plan to concentrate wind turbines in the country’s windiest areas

Local councils in the country’s 28 windiest towns are digging in their heels against a national plan that would cluster the next generation of high-efficiency wind turbines within their borders, Politiken newspaper reports.

In order to meet its goal of doubling wind power capacity by 2025 as inexpensively as possible, the government will need to place 90 percent of an estimated 1000 land-based windmills, each standing up to 150m, in the windiest areas.

Facing the prospect of asking their residents to accept an average of 35 giant wind turbines, local councillors are already warning national politicians that they are preparing to put up a fight.

‘I think that the 60,000 people that live here in our town would head straight to Copenhagen to protest,’ said John Christensen, chairman of the planning board of the Frederikshavn council in windy northern Jutland.

A number of other councils have already rejected plans to begin building new land-based turbines, many out of concern about problems related to noise and shadows created by the giant turbines.

‘There aren’t a lot of politicians out there saying, “We just have to have this, and we’re willing to risk our seats for it,” ‘ said Søren Hermansen, head of the Energy Academy on the island of Samsø, which this year marks 10 years of energy independence. ‘They don’t dare. If they force windmill projects on their constituents, they won’t be re-elected.’

Two other models for building new windmills, such as offshore windparks and an even distribution throughout the entire country have been looked at by the national Planning Committee for Land-based Wind Turbines.

Both, however, were found to be less cost-effective than concentrating new windmills in the windiest regions.

Source 

Winter sea ice could keep expanding

February 16, 2008

Recent cold snap helping Arctic sea ice, scientists find

There’s an upside to the extreme cold temperatures northern Canadians have endured in the last few weeks: scientists say it’s been helping winter sea ice grow across the Arctic, where the ice shrank to record-low levels last year.

Temperatures have stayed well in the -30s C and -40s C range since late January throughout the North, with the mercury dipping past -50 C in some areas.

Satellite images are showing that the cold spell is helping the sea ice expand in coverage by about 2 million square kilometres, compared to the average winter coverage in the previous three years.

“It’s nice to know that the ice is recovering,” Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, told CBC News on Thursday.

“That means that maybe the perennial ice would not go down as low as last year.”

Canadian scientists are also noticing growing ice coverage in most areas of the Arctic, including the southern Davis Strait and the Beaufort Sea.

“Clearly, we’re seeing the ice coverage rebound back to more near normal coverage for this time of year,” said Gilles Langis, a senior ice forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa.

Winter sea ice could keep expanding

The cold is also making the ice thicker in some areas, compared to recorded thicknesses last year, Lagnis added.

“The ice is about 10 to 20 centimetres thicker than last year, so that’s a significant increase,” he said.

If temperatures remain cold this winter, Langis said winter sea ice coverage will continue to expand.

Definitions for the global warming fanatics who can't tolerate disagreement with their views

February 11, 2008

Lorrie Goldstein

Sun, February 10, 2008
Finding the right words

Definitions for the global warming fanatics who can’t tolerate disagreement with their views

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN, TORONTO SUN

Despite repeated appeals to reason, decency and common sense, global warming fanatics continue to disparagingly refer to people who disagree with them as “global warming deniers” or as part of the “global warming denial industry.”

Their absurd, disgusting and juvenile attempts to suggest anyone who doesn’t bow down before their half-baked ideas, self-righteous prattle and mindless propaganda is comparable to a Holocaust denier, have gone on unchallenged for too long.

Enough is enough. It’s time those of us who do not believe New York is going to be wiped out by a 20-foot rise in sea levels caused by global warming either next Tuesday, or 50 years, or 1,000 years from now — they’ll get back to us on that — struck back with some mocking terminology of our own.

Ready? Here we go.

Feel free to borrow as many as you like and come up with your own. Fun for the whole family!

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

STEPHANE DION DISEASE

Definition: A medical condition in which you can’t decide whether to pull Canadian soldiers out of Afghanistan by February 2009, but are confident you can predict the climate of the planet 100 years from now, based on computer models.

JACK LAYTON SYNDROME

Definition: Obsessive concern about the negative impacts of global warming on Taliban prisoners captured by Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan.

GILLES DUCEPPE DISORDER

Definition: The belief that global warming will stop when Quebec separates from Canada.

ELIZABETH MAY FEVER

Definition: A chronic condition in which the subject spends large amounts of time and energy explaining that the last time she said something really dumb and incendiary about global warming, or anything else, it wasn’t actually as dumb and incendiary as it sounded. Either that, or it was all Stephen Harper’s fault. Take your pick.

AL GOREITIS

Definition: The mental state of anyone who piously lectures everyone else about reducing the size of their carbon footprint on the Earth, while personally living a luxurious, high-consumption, high-flying lifestyle that they condemn for anyone but themselves. Also known as “celebrityitis” and “Hollywooditis”.

DAVID SUZUKIITIS

Definition: The belief that everyone is entitled to their own opinion about global warming … as long as it agrees with yours and that if not, they should be jailed.

WEATHER CHANNEL PSYCHOSIS

Definition: Anyone who simultaneously holds the beliefs that last year’s mild winter and this year’s harsh one are both evidence of global warming. Possible symptoms include having your head explode because of all the BS you’ve jammed into your brain. More generally speaking, a term used to describe any self-proclaimed expert on global warming who doesn’t understand the difference between “weather” and “climate.”

KYOTO ACCORD SYNDROME

Definition: Delusional belief that the same political geniuses who keep promising to “fix” medical wait times can “fix” the climate.

SCHOOL BOARD SICKNESS

Definition: The belief that global warming can be solved by opening up a black-focused school in Toronto, which, come to think of it, seems to be the Toronto District School Board’s “solution” for solving pretty much every crisis it faces these days.

GREEN RIGHTS FEVER

Definition: A relatively new disease among Canadian human rights commissions, causing them to believe any journalist who writes about global warming is likely to expose minority groups to hatred or contempt. They just haven’t figured out how … Yet.

MEDIA MADNESS DISEASE

Definition: An affliction common among journalists who pontificate ad nauseam about what Canada’s policy on global warming should be, without ever having read a book on climate change or even knowing the difference between the Earth’s natural greenhouse effect and man-made greenhouse gas emissions. Possible cures include reading a Grade 8 science textbook.


• You can e-mail Lorrie Goldstein at lorrie.goldstein@sunmedia.ca

• Have a letter for the editor? E-mail it to torsun.editor@sunmedia.ca

NYT Takes on Al Gore and Climate Alarmists…Happy New Year!

January 1, 2008

Editor:
Welcome to 2008-the year the media does it’s job. Not likely, but we can keep their feet to the fire.
Just before Xmas I was listening to A Chanel News from London Ont. They were saying that the reason for the layoffs in the manufacturing sector was because of the “high Canadian dollar”. A few days later, when gas prices spiked, the same “news head” reported that the spike in the gas price was due to the “low Canadian dollar”. He went on to say the dollar had dropped 12 points. While it is true the dollar had dropped from it’s all time high,it was in fact still about par with the American dollar and the same as it was when they reported the reason for the layoffs.
I mention this because, as you read the story from News Busters, you will see another example of how the media works. This time from the BBC on the subject of global warming.

I was reading the novel 1984 by George Orwell, first published in 1949.  A book everyone should read. An example of the media  from 1984. Instead of the news saying “chocolate ration will stay at 30”. The news was changed to say rations will be increased from 20 to 25. The next day people were saying how great it was that their rations had been increased, even though they were decreased by 5

Welcome to 1984- Excuse me, I mean 2008.

The entire world can be powered by wind farms if we believe

NYT Takes on Al Gore and Climate Alarmists…Happy New Year!

Photo of Noel Sheppard.
By Noel Sheppard | January 1, 2008 – 10:29 ET

The new year is beginning with some very serious shots being fired across the bow of the manmade global warming myth and at alarmists using it to advance their deplorable agendas.

Moments after Investor’s Business Daily presaged that “2008 just might be the year the so-called scientific consensus that man is causing the Earth to warm begins to crack,” the New York Times of all entities published a rather shocking piece pointing fingers at folks like Nobel Laureate Al Gore for being part of a group of “activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels.”

This from the New York Times?

Hold on tightly to your seats, folks, for the shocks in this piece came early and often (emphasis added throughout):

Today’s interpreters of the weather are what social scientists call availability entrepreneurs: the activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels.

A year ago, British meteorologists made headlines predicting that the buildup of greenhouse gases would help make 2007 the hottest year on record. At year’s end, even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record – it was actually lower than any year since 2001 – the BBC confidently proclaimed, “2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.”

When the Arctic sea ice last year hit the lowest level ever recorded by satellites, it was big news and heralded as a sign that the whole planet was warming. When the Antarctic sea ice last year reached the highest level ever recorded by satellites, it was pretty much ignored. A large part of Antarctica has been cooling recently, but most coverage of that continent has focused on one small part that has warmed.

When Hurricane Katrina flooded New Orleans in 2005, it was supposed to be a harbinger of the stormier world predicted by some climate modelers. When the next two hurricane seasons were fairly calm – by some measures, last season in the Northern Hemisphere was the calmest in three decades – the availability entrepreneurs changed the subject. Droughts in California and Australia became the new harbingers of climate change (never mind that a warmer planet is projected to have more, not less, precipitation over all).

Checking that link to make sure it really goes to a Times piece? I understand, I’ve checked it about nine times, and I still don’t believe it:

When judging risks, we often go wrong by using what’s called the availability heuristic: we gauge a danger according to how many examples of it are readily available in our minds. Thus we overestimate the odds of dying in a terrorist attack or a plane crash because we’ve seen such dramatic deaths so often on television; we underestimate the risks of dying from a stroke because we don’t have so many vivid images readily available.

Slow warming doesn’t make for memorable images on television or in people’s minds, so activists, journalists and scientists have looked to hurricanes, wild fires and starving polar bears instead. They have used these images to start an “availability cascade,” a term coined by Timur Kuran, a professor of economics and law at the University of Southern California, and Cass R. Sunstein, a law professor at the University of Chicago.

The availability cascade is a self-perpetuating process: the more attention a danger gets, the more worried people become, leading to more news coverage and more fear. Once the images of Sept. 11 made terrorism seem a major threat, the press and the police lavished attention on potential new attacks and supposed plots. After Three Mile Island and “The China Syndrome,” minor malfunctions at nuclear power plants suddenly became newsworthy.

And, of course, those that have invested huge amounts of money in green alternatives as well as carbon credit manufacturers – Saint Albert Gore, for example! – benefit tremendously every time attention is drawn to a weather-related issue that can be used to incite fear in the population:

Many people concerned about climate change,” Dr. Sunstein says, “want to create an availability cascade by fixing an incident in people’s minds. Hurricane Katrina is just an early example; there will be others. I don’t doubt that climate change is real and that it presents a serious threat, but there’s a danger that any ‘consensus’ on particular events or specific findings is, in part, a cascade.”

Once a cascade is under way, it becomes tough to sort out risks because experts become reluctant to dispute the popular wisdom, and are ignored if they do. Now that the melting Arctic has become the symbol of global warming, there’s not much interest in hearing other explanations of why the ice is melting – or why the globe’s other pole isn’t melting, too.

Amazingly, at this point Times author John Tierney addressed studies previously reported by NewsBusters while similarly pointing out how absurd the media’s lack of coverage of said items was:

Global warming has an impact on both polar regions, but they’re also strongly influenced by regional weather patterns and ocean currents. Two studies by NASA and university scientists last year concluded that much of the recent melting of Arctic sea ice was related to a cyclical change in ocean currents and winds, but those studies got relatively little attention – and were certainly no match for the images of struggling polar bears so popular with availability entrepreneurs.

Could have read that at NewsBusters, right? Same with this:

Roger A. Pielke Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, recently noted the very different reception received last year by two conflicting papers on the link between hurricanes and global warming. He counted 79 news articles about a paper in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, and only 3 news articles about one in a far more prestigious journal, Nature.

Guess which paper jibed with the theory – and image of Katrina – presented by Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth”?

It was, of course, the paper in the more obscure journal, which suggested that global warming is creating more hurricanes. The paper in Nature concluded that global warming has a minimal effect on hurricanes. It was published in December – by coincidence, the same week that Mr. Gore received his Nobel Peace Prize.

Incredible. Suddenly, the New York Times is acting as a media analyst exposing liberal bias. How exciting.

Yet, Tierney wasn’t done, for in his conclusion, he pointed his pen at the man most responsible for inciting all this hysteria:

In his acceptance speech, Mr. Gore didn’t dwell on the complexities of the hurricane debate. Nor, in his roundup of the 2007 weather, did he mention how calm the hurricane season had been. Instead, he alluded somewhat mysteriously to “stronger storms in the Atlantic and Pacific,” and focused on other kinds of disasters, like “massive droughts” and “massive flooding.”

“In the last few months,” Mr. Gore said, “it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter.” But he was being too modest. Thanks to availability entrepreneurs like him, misinterpreting the weather is getting easier and easier.

So true. Hopefully such will become less easy in 2008 if more writers like Tierney start acting like journalists instead of the green advocates they’ve been since Gore’s schlockumentary was released in early 2006.

After all, it will truly be a happy new year if newspapers like the Times regularly publish articles tearing to shreds the deceptions fostered by Gore and his sycophants thereby shedding light on this issue, and, just maybe, allowing America to prevent a recurrence of the kind of costly foolishness that halted the construction of nuclear power plants decades ago.

News Busters