Gore's Manipulation Allowed By Mainstream Media Climate Change Bias – Continues With CRU

“It is a characteristic of all movements and crusades that the psychopathic element rises to the top.” ~ Robert Lindner

How much longer will Al Gore get a pass from the mainstream media? A little bit longer if their failure to react to the devastating revelations of files hacked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia is a measure. Their behavior reflects how most, especially from the left, have abetted the scientists who deliberately perverted climate science.

We now know Gore’s errors are based on the global-warming fraud orchestrated by a few scientists centered round Phil Jones, Director of the CRU. Emails between those climate scientists, identified by Professor Wegman as publishing together and peer reviewing each other’s work disclose the complete manipulation of climate science and the Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Bishop Hill provides a useful summation of some of the outrageous comments and actions. What is missing is the nasty vindictive tone that permeates almost every item.

What are the mainstream media going to do? How can they ignore the biggest scandal in science history and then claim any credibility? We already have a strong indication because they either don’t cover it or claim, like Andrew Revkin of the New York Times, there is nothing of consequence. No surprise because he was in direct communication with the CRU gang. Other left-wing outlets have similar reports such as the Guardian in England and Harrabin at the BBC. Delingpole at the Telegraph identifies some vapid responses.

Gore Gets a Pass

Gore appears on TV or radio programs, but with tight terms of engagement. He appears alone, will not debate and likely defines the pattern of questions. He has no qualifications in the subject, has never published any peer-reviewed papers, yet is given total credibility. Indeed, he is not even asked about it. He has produced material on climate with multiple errors but made no attempt to correct them. He attacks with slurs and invective anyone who dares to question his claims or the errors. Who are the flat-earthers now? He is never asked about the money he has made exploiting the errors. He is never asked about funding, affiliations or sponsors. He is never asked about his unjustified condemnation of the lifestyle of citizens while his is more profligate than theirs (carbon footprint). When asked it is usually done to allow him to gloss over the facts.

Despite this he obtains invitations to high-rated mainstream programs and is treated with deference and fawning attention by supposedly unbiased hard-questioning media. He’s allowed to puff, preen and pontificate from a position of moral superiority. His recent appearance on Larry King’s program is a perfect example of unjustified pandering and lousy journalism.

Interviews are carefully selected to reduce any chance that he face people who know and understand the science. It’s easily controlled on radio or television, but meetings are a bigger problem. Keynote speeches are relatively easy because it’s normal to have no questions. Some groups are supposedly friendly and expect questions. Such was the case when Gore spoke to a recent meeting of Environmental Journalists. He expected only favorable questions. At the meeting Phelim McAleer, an independent documentary producer, confronted Gore about inaccuracies in An Inconvenient Truth. Gore dodged the question and McAleer’s microphone was disconnected when he pressed for an answer.

Read the rest of the article