another story of bush editing science

ladies and gents,
another scary story of climate science being edited for political reasons.
stephen.
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml

ladies and gents,
another scary story of climate science being edited for political reasons.
stephen.
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml

:shock: :shock: :shock:

Bloody hell .... well, at least investigative journalism in America isn't as dead as I thought it was. An excellent peiece that really shows the Bush Administration as being a danger to the world and in the pocket of the oil companies.

The best thing you can say is they are being disshonest in spinning science, the worst is that they are intentionally decieving the people of America. I'd have to say it looks like the latter.

Bart.

That's a big "BUT" before jumping to a hasty conclusion that the sky is falling (and indeed it might be) it is advisable to also know the following about journalism in the US. Certainly it is not dead but it is also frequently slanted.

Consider that there are political elections coming up and the minority party (also called Democrats, or liberals or leftwing) has been involved in a concerted smut campaign to discredit the current administration at all costs. This effort at what we "Yanks" call:”Bush Bashing".

Some politicians from the minority party are so insanely desperate to get elected that many of the radical "left", we call them, have been attempting to influence a large part of the American print media to participate in this continuous negative and derogatory attack. The “left” has elicited the aid of a one deviously clever guy named James Carville to orchestrate this type of dirty politics campaign in an effort to find favor with voters before the November elections.

Now all of the above represent my personal opinions on the matter. My only concern is that before anyone takes information from a one-sided media source like CBS, CNN, NBC, ABC and the BBC, seriously you need to carefully weigh the spin they have put on it. Don’t fall for the malarkey they lay on you at strictly face value. Also keep in mind that the right wing or conservatives also known as Republicans, which is the current majority also do the same thing.

www.cnn.com/CNN/anchors_reporters/carville.james.html

That's a big "BUT" before jumping to a hasty conclusion that the sky is falling (and indeed it might be) it is advisable to also know the following about journalism in the US. Certainly it is not dead but it is also frequently slanted.

Consider that there are political elections coming up and the minority party (also called Democrats, or liberals or leftwing) has been involved in a concerted smut campaign to discredit the current administration at all costs. This effort at what we "Yanks" call:”Bush Bashing".

Some politicians from the minority party are so insanely desperate to get elected that many of the radical "left", we call them, have been attempting to influence a large part of the American print media to participate in this continuous negative and derogatory attack. The “left” has elicited the aid of a one deviously clever guy named James Carville to orchestrate this type of dirty politics campaign in an effort to find favor with voters before the November elections.

Now all of the above represent my personal opinions on the matter. My only concern is that before anyone takes information from a one-sided media source like CBS, CNN, NBC, ABC and the BBC, seriously you need to carefully weigh the spin they have put on it. Don’t fall for the malarkey they lay on you at strictly face value. Also keep in mind that the right wing or conservatives also known as Republicans, which is the current majority also do the same thing.

www.cnn.com/CNN/anchors_reporters/carville.james.html

I'm sure there is always spin of some sort but in the above case the fact speak for themselves. The examples of edits show very clearly that the Bush administration is trying to re-write science to suit it's own ends.

It is simply not acceptable for an administration to do that and the Bush Administration needs to be condemed for doing that.

Bart.

Hi Bart,

If this guy is so censored how is it the "60 minutes" got this guy to talk? Hey this is the game these pathetic journalistic organizations play. They attempt to sensationalize this type of material for the sake of ratings. That allows the network to charge even more for their advertising. Most likely it is a sham. Most of these media yokels only publish one side of the issue. That should sound a very large alarm!

Of course you are free to believe what ever makes sense to you. That is the key here; each of us has our own view of reality.

If you really want to think about it, most of us in the world are manipulated by marketing efforts of those with the deepest pockets. I venture to say that no one really knows the "REAL" truth about anything. We only have a version of what we think is the "REAL" truth.

When you read a newspaper do you believe what it says just because it is in print? Are items on the front page more honest than items on the back page? How about the case of the media editors posting an editorial on the front page where any reasonable person would normally expect to find just facts…not opinions? It might not be so bad if the newspaper would at least label the editorial as opinion.

If you listen to a broadcast or see a movie does that strike you as the "REAL TRUTH"? Or do you simply want to believe it? Or upon closer inspection, is this the truth as the broadcaster or the producer of the movie wants you to understand as their version of the truth.

Again this is just my point of view but it seems to me that as a global society we are far too quick to condemn and make critical judgment on issues we lack sufficient information. Of course if one is guidable enough to believe what is in print, on the radio or television at face value then one may be influenced by the guys with the most to gain but not necessarily who is really telling the truth.

Just my 2 cents.....

Arnie

Perhaos we are too quick to condem but in the case of global warming I'm affraid the opposite is the case, we are too slow to condem.

We are buggering up this planet and we are letting our governments get away with not doing anything about it. You hit the naill on the head when you said that in general the people with the money get more of their way with the media. In this case the people with the money are not the Environmental Scientists but the oil lobby. They are the ones pulling the strings here and actively working to change the 'facts' presented to the people for their own ends.

What does a non-political hard working scientist have to gain by telling lies? Nothing, what does the oil lobby have to gain by telling lies? BILLIONS!

The article presented evidence of the edits done by the White House, they speak for themselves. The restrictions on the scientist also speak for themselves. No government should be stiffeling scientific debate on a matter as fundamentally important as the very future habitability of our planet! What evidence can you present that the Bush Administration is not trying to down-play Climate Change and not putting restrictions on scientists free speach?