Further, they then cite the UN release as though it were scientific consensus, when it is, in fact -- like Gore's stuff -- political maneuvering. As John quotes and comments:
Gray's statements came the same day the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change approved a report that concludes the world will face dire consequences to food and water supplies, along with increased flooding and other dramatic weather events, unless nations adapt to climate change.
As we have noted elsewhere, the U.N.'s IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one, and its findings have been subject to withering criticism. But the AP implies that the U.N's report represents a scientific consensus. Next:Rather than global warming, Gray believes a recent uptick in strong hurricanes is part of a multi-decade trend of alternating busy and slow periods related to ocean circulation patterns. Contrary to mainstream thinking, Gray believes ocean temperatures are going to drop in the next five to 10 years.
Now it's explicit. The elderly crank who "rails" and disagrees with the U.N. is not part of "mainstream thinking," notwithstanding the fact that, as the AP acknowledges, he is the world's foremost authority on hurricanes.
This is downright appalling, and far from honest journalism. Take this along with a spoonful of Carolyn O'Hara's TNR column handing gems from on high about how the new, independent, "citizen" sources for journalistic reports will never compare to the stuff that gets hashed out behind closed doors (the old "seeing sausages made" comparison crops up), and we have a not-at-all-surprising dose of arrogance from the High Priests of the Temple of "Knowledge" Sans Provable Data.
The more I see of this media sale of pseudo-consensus stuff, the more I am reminded of an old bumper sticker I saw when I was younger: "EAT SH*T. MILLIONS OF FLIES CAN'T ALL BE WRONG".
Exactly what are these people trying to feed us?