Comments on: Wall Street Journal: Selectively Pro-Science

By: Scott Mandia

Scott Mandia — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 11:47:23 +0000

Do yourself a favor and read the list of climate zombies here:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

By: Directory

Directory — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 03:59:59 +0000

How is it that CO2 levels continued to rise during the entire time of “stalled” global warming, if CO2 is the cause of global warming? Isn’t it interesting that the polar cap on Mars was melting due to increased solar activity at the same time global warming alarmists were trying to tax us all for carbon emissions? When will the fraud end? Global warming appears more a religion for zealots than actual science, because real science if falsifiable. No matter when the evidence shows them to be wrong, global warming zealots think it still supports their quackery. When people start claiming that it is “settled science”, they stop being scientific and start being religious. If it weren’t for their pernicious impact on government policy, I would easily categorize them with the Flat Earth and Hollow Earth nuts.

By: Wall Street Journal Wolf to its Little Piggies: Trust Me « Global Warming: Man or Myth?

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:00:01 +0000

[...] be so bad. The track record of correct climate science in WSJ op-eds leaves much to be desired. In Wall Street Journal: Selectively Pro-Science, I showed that WSJ op-eds fail to properly inform 93% of the time. In another study, The Union of [...]

By: L’Inquisizione degli yahoo, Ultimora Notizie

L’Inquisizione degli yahoo, Ultimora Notizie — Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:37:25 +0000

[...] Spada dei Credenti che “sapientemente ignora” tutto della stampa e forse della vita, sembra invece che si sia voluto dar voce a tutte le opinioni, dimostrando, come [...]

By: Wall Street Journal – Dr. William Happer is Wrong Again « Global Warming: Man or Myth?

Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:45:05 +0000

[...] By my count, over more than a two year period starting in late 2008, the Journal published only 4 opinion pieces that supported the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change, but 39 that questioned it, attacked scientists or otherwise misrepresented scientific findings. Those trends have continued in recent months. Meanwhile, 97 percent of publishing climate scientists agree that human activities are significantly altering our climate. And our own National Academy of Sciences tells us, “Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for—and in many cases is already affecting—a broad range of human and natural systems.” [...]

By: L’Inquisizione degli yahoo » Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it

L’Inquisizione degli yahoo » Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:13:51 +0000

[...] Spada dei Credenti che “sapientemente ignora” tutto della stampa e forse della vita, sembra invece che si sia voluto dar voce a tutte le opinioni, dimostrando, come [...]

By: Wall Street Journal: Selectively pro-science

Wall Street Journal: Selectively pro-science — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:14:10 +0000

[...] –Our guest blogger is Prof. Scott Mandia, in a repost. [...]

By: Western Blot Reagents

Western Blot Reagents — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:58:36 +0000

Who owns the Wall Street Journal?, follow the ownership. Don’t we just love responsible organizations.

By: Cracking the Code: The Essence of Sustainable Development

Cracking the Code: The Essence of Sustainable Development — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 06:08:25 +0000

[...] Wall Street Journal Stance on Climate Change – http://bit.ly/faBFly [...]

By: RoyFOMR

RoyFOMR — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 02:02:18 +0000

I like the phrase anti-science. It has a poetic ring to it.