Example of Media Bias:
On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people.
A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors. The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose.
Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy. We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation. …
Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:
1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.
What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?
Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new…. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals has been ignored in 2019. … (from a post by Mark Perry at AEI .org on October 1, 2019)
The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.”
1. Whatever your view on the issue of climate change, there is no denying that there are at least 500 experts who do not agree that catastrophic man-made climate change is upon us. They sent the letter to coincide with the UN’s “Climate Action Summit” during the UN General Assembly in New York last week.
What types of bias does the media display by ignoring this story?
2. Hiding viewpoints with which they disagree should not be the role of the media. How important is it that the media informs viewers/readers about these experts’ concerns?
Scroll down to the bottom of the page for the answers.
1. By not reporting on this story, the media display bias by omission, story selection and spin.
2. Opinion question. Answers vary.