Is There a Major Conspiracy at Play? 

“Networks Ignore, Newspapers Mock N.Y. Climate Change Conference”

Networks continue trend of ignoring scientists who challenge 'consensus,' while newspapers find plenty of environmentalists to mock them.  

By Nathan Burchfiel and Amy Menefee
Genevieve Ebel also contributed to this report.
Business & Media Institute, March 5, 2008  

All three networks’ evening news broadcasts utterly ignored a gathering of hundreds of people – scientists, economists, other experts and interested lay people – aimed at dispelling the media myth that there is “consensus” on climate change’s causes, potential effects, and suggested solutions.  

Two major national newspapers mentioned the Heartland Institute’s conference, but relegated the story to deep within the papers and downplayed the gathering’s credibility and significance.  

In fact, none of the sources quoted in the major newspapers’ stories addressed substantive points made during the first day and a half of the conference – which ranged from the sun’s effects on the Earth to oceanic cooling cycles and the effects of limiting energy use in developing countries. Instead, newspaper reporters addressed – and distorted – the Heartland Institute’s funding, labeled attendees “deniers,” “flat Earthers” and “lost” and compared the meeting to “Custer’s last stand.” But debunking actual claims made at the conference – well, that might have involved a little work. … 

As mentioned in past issues of E-News, the immediate need for energy efficiency and a switch to alternative fuels is not dependent on the reality or solvability of climate change.  There are other compelling reasons.  See “Flashback Quarterback” in this issue for a hyperlink to a compelling reason.

If you answer the multiple-choice questions below and e-mail to lessonanswers@mymontebello.com with “Lesson answers” in the subject field, you will be credited toward a “certificate of recognition in community affairs” to be awarded in 2007 by a local nonprofit organization. 

(1)  What is troubling about this report?

(a)  That anyone still insists that climate change would be caused by humans, could have devastating effects, and could be solved by humans.

(b)  That scientifically-based views are being ignored.  

(2)  To decide on whether to do anything about energy efficiency and alternative fuels, we laypeople should

(a)  Learn much science.

(b)  See whether there would be other reasons which would compel a change in lifestyle.

April 10, 2008