[ NOTE FROM JOABBESS.COM : ALL UNEXPLAINED QUOTATIONS ARE TAKEN FROM TRANSCRIPTS OF THE SIMPSONS EPISODE “FRAUDCAST NEWS”, UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. ]
[ AS AN INTERESTING ASIDE, IT’S CURIOUS THAT THE SIMPSONS CARTOON MAKES MORE SENSE THAN A GREAT DEAL OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA JOURNALISTS WHEN THEY ATTEMPT TO WRITE ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. ]
“I’m going to change this town’s accurate impression of me – I’m going to buy every media outlet…It’s time to win back the love of those hateful morons.”
Amy Turner at The Sunday Times (“yeah ! I’m a feeeeeature cooooolumnist”), in my humble opinion, makes a really poor show of comprehending what’s really going on in the “Blogosphere” (“now there’s a thousand freaks xeroxing their worthless opinions”) :-
https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article7043753.ece
As the Blogger Tim Lambert (“the pen is mightier than the flaming bag of poop”) at the Deltoid makes clear, her article could easily be criticised as a blatant attempt to frame the whole Blogging world with her own narrative (or probably that of her ultimate boss, Rupert Murdoch), seemingly deciding on her readers’ behalf who to accept as the “big fish” in the Blogosphere, and who to dismiss as “the amateurs”; and then quoting one of her trusted “big fish” Roger Pielke Jr :-
https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article7043753.ece
“…Among these minnows are controversialist bloggers like Tim Lambert, who are professionally unqualified to engage in the substance of most debates (certainly the case with respect to my own work)..”
Now Amy Turner should really have done some more research, in my view. She clearly hasn’t checked Pielke’s views out, and simply allows his explanation of the situation to stand as accurate.
If, however, she were to read Tim Lambert she would find out how Pielke’s views are not necessarily valid :-
https://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/10/pielke_pity_party.php
Why does it seem to be important to Amy Turner to use both Roger Pielke Jr and Steve McIntyre (another of her “big fish”) to cast doubt on the veracity of Tim Lambert’s work ?
Is it because Tim Lambert (“no, I won’t take your blood ponies”) has started to uncover the failings of Amy Turner’s colleague, Jonathan Leake (“monopolistic, self-aggrandising…stinky pants”) ? :-
https://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/03/leakegate_jonathan_leake_strik.php
If you think that’s devious and warped, check this out from Amy Turner’s piece :-
“[Steve] McIntyre founded the Climate Audit blog in response to attacks made against him on Real Climate, a blog for “climate science from climate scientists”, and uses it to campaign for scientists to release information not published in peer-reviewed climate studies. Only in this way, he says, can people begin to rebuild trust in the science establishment which was so damaged by Climategate.”
Er, hang on a minute. Wasn’t Steve McIntyre actually one of the people behind Climategate ? I mean, he might not have been the hacker behind the liberation of the e-mails from the University of East Anglia, but his whole reason for living, since around 2002 or even earlier, appears to be to bring down, obstruct and delay the progress of Climate Change Science.
Steve McIntyre is one of the (legend has it) godfathers of Climate Change denialism, the anti-science movement that spawned Climategate. James Delingpole, despite his stature as supposed “chief” Climategate promulgator, can only hope to play choo-choos at the knees of such a great denier-of-the-facts as Steve McIntyre allegedly is.
Isn’t Climategate all about inventing an excuse, any excuse, or any string of any excuses at all, not to accept Climate Change Science ? And wouldn’t that suit Steve McIntyre’s apparent aims ? Why is he allowed to dictate his own version of reality (“nothing is more pathetic than self-delusion”) by claiming that people have lost trust in Climate Change Science ? And why do the mainstream journalists interview and quote him ?
Amy Turner (“non-violence never solved anything”), whether she knows it or not, is, to my mind, involved in some heavy revisionism here.
I would suggest she speak to some real, live, actual, mainstream Climate Change Scientists (so not the self-confessed “skeptics” such as Roger Pielke Jr, John Christy, Uncle Tom Cobley…), and ask for their opinion about who she should consult for the facts about Climate Change and the world of Climate Change Scientists.
Failing that, she could ask Tim Lambert, who is an excellent researcher and accurate reporter and who is very well qualified to engage in the Climate Change debate, as was apparent in his encounter with Christopher Monckton (“since when are public figures fair game for satire?”) :-
https://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/02/debate_with_monckton.php
“It’s not possible to control all the media. Unless you’re Rupert Murdoch. He is one beautiful man…I couldn’t agree more.”
https://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Fraudcast_News
https://www.tv.com/the-simpsons/fraudcast-news/episode/325918/trivia.html