Why does the mass media not show the other side of global warming? Are they afraid to be shown wrong?

Question

I don't understand why the mass media will show you the scientists who believe in global warming, but won't show you all the thousands who do not. Here's what I mean:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927b9303-802a-23ad-494b-dccb00b51a12&Region_id=&Issue_id=
http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/Scienceletter.htm
http://w3g.gkss.de/G/Mitarbeiter/bray.html/BrayGKSSsite/BrayGKSS/WedPDFs/Science2.pdf

Man-made global warming does not exist, and i can show more sources and proof here if i had the room, but you'll never see that stuff in the media. Why?

Answer 1

Of course the believers are afraid. Critical thinking always gets in the way of faith, which is why everyone who toes the party line on "environmental correctness" says, "The debate is closed. The majority decided that the Invisible Pink Unicorn exists, so failing to share our blind faith in it means there's something terribly wrong with you."
It's getting harder to be an atheist in a world of believers, and yes, evironmentalism as we know it --as Al Gore, PETA and Greenpeace know it-- is a religion... and the careers of skeptics, such as Michael Crichton, are burned at the stake for heresey. Like contemporary creationists, environmentalists "cherry pick" through the facts of reality, accepting whatever appears to support their beliefs and simply disregarding the rest.

Answer 2

The media schmedia. I don't give a fluff what the goons in the media say or don't say. I've personally examined the data and have found that the evidence supporting the idea of anthropogenic global warming is simply overwhelming. If you feel you can disprove the theory feel free to message me, as I always enjoy seeing a (hopefully) new perspective and a good debate. But bear in mind that I have little respect for a good number of the standard contrarian arguments (or the so called scientists who came up with them), and so apologize ahead of time if some of my responses seem a little abrasive.

Answer 3

They are afraid for the same reason the global warming crowd is afraid. The opposition to the idea of man made global warming is out there and has large amounts of evidence to prove its point. The evidence against the idea of man made global warming is so concrete and irrefutable that if the common person were exposed to it than they would be converted to the opposition or at least look more closely at the issue only to realize that there is no evidence to support global warming.
It is easy for the global warming crowd to dismiss any evidence that contradicts their idea by calling it the product of big oil or a right wing group. This way they never have to debate and defend their evidence against an opposition. Seriously when was the last time you heard of a debate between the two sides? Answer-there has never been a scientific debate. The opposition to global warming has been calling for a debate for years only to be ignored by the global warming crowd. My dream is to see a panel of scientists on both sides of the issue meet and discuss global warming on all major news networks so that people can hear both sides of the issue.

I have a feeling the debate would go like this:
Anti GW- You claim that global warming will create an increase in storms, how can that be? Storms are created by temperature differences, if the world warmed uniformly than the number of storms would decrease.
Pro GW- Um, Global warming is real
Anti GW- Why does CO2 rise after temperature on historic records of global temperature?
Pro GW- Um, big oil did the studies.
Anti GW- Studies show sun intensity is greater now than many years ago meaning the world is being hit by more cosmic energy would this cause warming?
Pro GW- Big oil
Anti GW- Why is mars warming also?
Pro GW- big oil
Anti GW- Numerous studies have shown that only portions of the ice caps are melting, that does not agree with the idea that the entire globe is heating up.
Pro GW- big oil
Anti GW- 95% of the greenhouse effect is caused by water vapor, a totally natural substance. Also humans emit less than 10% of the total CO2 output, most is released naturally by animals, how do you respond?
Pro GW- Big oil
Anti GW- You say there is a scientific consensus, this idea is completely false, it is a lie.
Pro GW- Big oil
etc...................

Scientists against the idea of man made global warming directly dispute studies done by the global warming crowd yet studies done by scientists against man made global warming are never even mentioned by the global warming crowd.
I love the answer given by someone above me about the white house censoring reports, if they are so concerned about censorship look no further than the main steam media, science debunking global warming is never even mentioned. Now even if you believe in global warming you have to admit the lack of coverage of the opposition, when was the last time you saw a story debunking global warming on CBS, NBC, or ABC, heres a hint its never.

Answer 4

Oh, but I disagree with you. Man made Global Warming does exist, only you have not opened your eyes to see it.

What color is the road outside your house? What color is the main route into town that buses use every day? What color are the parking lots around stores and shops in your area? They are all black right? BLACK is the color that absorbs the most heat. Haven't you and everyone else forgotten that in all this talk about Gas, Diesel, and Bio Fuels? We are rapidly paving the Earth's surface with a black material that gets hotter than heck in the summer when we should be paving the surface with WHITE material, not BLACK.

Take a little time to walk around and look at the roofs of houses, shops, stores, schools, government buildings, gas stations, warehouses, and any of the hundreds of other structures we have. Most of them are covered with a BLACK material instead of WHITE. So we are slowly making the Earth's surface BLACK which makes it hotter than it should be.

What a pack of dummies we are.

Soooo... to fix all this what do we do? We send hundreds of people off to a fancy summit meeting in Zurich to talk for ten days and come home. How many degrees did that meeting lower the Earth's surface temperature? None.

You can make a difference right now, this week. Paint, re-shingle, clad, or re-clad the roof of your house with a white material. White shingles, White Paint, White painted tin or aluminum...any of these will work. Your house will be 10 to 20 degrees cooler in summer and reductions in energy usage for summer air conditioning will be easily recognized.

Want to make a more positive difference? Paint your driveway WHITE to reflect heat. Use that same paint that the highway pavers use to put down white lines on the asphalt.

The problem is within 50 feet of most of you right now. The solution is so easy that it is crazy that we have not seen it or done something about it. No media push. No mass movement to go for White Colors? How come? There is no money in it for the Oil Companies...That 's why.

Answer 5

The two possibilities:

1. Global warming is an irreversible natural phenomenon. We CAN'T DO ANYTHING to STOP it, it will devastate our environment, especially in heavily populated countries like,
USA, China, Brazil, Japan, Western Europe, etc. We are POWERLESS to stop it.

2. Global warming is a man-made climate change, therefore we have SOME POWER to control what is happening. There is HOPE for the future, if we act, and control our emissions.

Given these two scenarios, which would you want to believe ?

We are powerless ?
Or we can take it upon ourselves to do something about it?

Answer 6

The White House edits government scientists reports on global warming, and has been caught repeatedly doing so. Perhaps that's how you were misinformed on the subject. The VAST majority of scientists knows we're in huge trouble when it comes to man made global warming, especially when you add natural global warming and indirect warming that both those cause, such as when permafrost melts, it releases a huge amount of warming, and when the worlds natural carbon sinks start to fill up and scrub carbon from the atomosphere more slowly. I know it's hard to accept that something you believe is a lie, but once you learn the truth you'll be better off for it. The fact is your argueing something that's already been settled, I'm afraid.

Answer 7

One of the most interesting reasons given is found in the book State of Fear by Michael Crichton. Summary from Wikipedia: Crichton's "most important theme has been lost in the discussion of the book's contrarian view of global warming. Late in the novel, a minor character introduces the ideas that modern governments, media and fundraising organizations use fear to control the opinions of their citizenry and therefore earn votes, ratings and donations respectively. According to this viewpoint, the current discussion of global warming is simply the latest in a chain of unscientifically verified threats including diseases caused by silicone breast implants and the threat of cancer from power lines. This is the State of Fear alluded to by the novel's title. The character attributes this effect to the interplay among political actors, attorneys, and the media, all of whom are said to engender fear in the general populace to their own advantage. Crichton juxtaposes the irrational "State of Fear" to a rational cost-benefit analysis. As examples he points out that DDT was effectively banned as an unproven carcinogen yet its replacement caused the deaths of both chemical handlers and millions of third-world people killed by malaria because the replacement was more toxic to humans and less effective against mosquitoes. Another example was the banning of low cost refrigerants such as Freon-12. In that case, the fear was the destruction of the ozone but the millions who starved due to spoiled food were never accounted for. ."

Anyone interested in a HUGE list of articles on how the media have distrorted things should go to Newsbusters and run a search on the term 'global warming'. Make sure you check the box for 'node'. http://newsbusters.org/search

Another interesting point is that people who are quick to point out global warming skeptics may have recieved money from 'big oil' typically are just restating talking points they've already heard and not investigated. Anyone that truly cares would look into the background of non-skeptics and find that a lot have recieved money from the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and Friends of the Earth(all considered 'pressure groups'), not to mention that nearly all of the scientists make money from global warming research. No problem, no job.

Michael Crichton actually set out to write a novel showing how terrible global warming will be for the earth(he's friends with Al Gore after all). After 3 years of research he came to the opposite conclusion. The end of the book includes a statement about this and his current views.

Answer 8

Because, if humans are contributing to global warming, and the entire planet goes greenhouse like Venus, then we're all screwed in the end. If humans aren't, and there's nothing we're doing wrong...then big deal. So it's better to show people that we may be doing something horribly horribly wrong, and look into way of fixing it, rather than ignore the problem and say, "well, that's just nature being nature. Nothing we can do about it."
Guess what. Even if it IS just nature...*I* don't want the Earth to die. Do you? If humans can problem solve a way to turn things around, it's worth looking into. People who turn aside the problem are just scared to admit that there might be a serious problem that humans - at fault or not...havea responsibility to solve.

Answer 9

I see extremely few scientists that are probably biased in those links due to funding or political idiocy, and no science whatsoever. None of that was proof of anything. On the other hand, there is tons of proof for global warming due to man. The subject may be somewhat politically pushed by liberals but that's only because conservatives have always fought science in favor of religious ignorance. Studies on global warming have been going on for decades and we only have more evidence. If you actually want evidence instead of ignoring the arguments on the other side, it's very easy to find.

Answer 10

because these are just a very few minority in the scientific community...

It is almost a widley accepted fact in the scientific community that global warming is happening and is as a direct result of human activities and CO2 emissions.,
Those scientists who don't believe it, are viewed to be living in the dark, not well informed enough or being paid by the coporate world to give misinformation....

As most scientists are paid by companies and governments who are run by politicians who also ignore the problem,
it is almost the same seen to be similar to the scenario how scientists in the 70's were being prodded by mysterious forces to say that smoking ciggarettes has no effect on your health...