How the ABC’s priests damn Fielding June 9, 2009Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: climate change, Global Cooling, global warming, Steve Fielding
How the ABC’s priests damn Fielding
Herald Sun, June 09, 2009
The ABC’s Jon Faine this morning gave Senator Steve Fielding a taste of the treatment he must expect from the ABC’s global warming faithful. None of Fielding’s questions on weaknesses in the man-warming warming theory were addressed – not one.
Instead, Faine asked whether we could take seriously a man who allegedly believed in “creation science” (which is not a question he puts to the many clerics who support warming theory).
He asked whether Fielding’s “religious approach” was interfering with his thinking.
He asked whether Field was “simply positioning” himself for more political clout.
He demanded to know why Fielding did not agree with Rupert Murdoch and give the planet “the benefit of the doubt”. (Mudoch, incidentally, is the one authority Faine cited.)
He insisted that “tens of thousands” of scientists backed man-made global warming theory, and that just a “handful” did not.
And the tone throughout was angry, hostile and even panicky. Faine then followed up with a much, much softer interview of a green alarmist from Environment Victoria prattling about “climate change”. First question:
Tell us about green jobs.
The alarmist was then invited to kick Fielding, which he did by sliming him, linking scepticism with denying that smoking kills. Again, the evidence was not addressed at all.
Yes, there were some hard questions of that alarmist, too. But they were of the “that’s not really green enough” kind.
Debate? We’re yet to be allowed a fair one.
Fran Kelly on ABC Radio National gives an equally soft interview to Chief Scientist Penny Sackett, not even asking her about Fielding’s main question – why the world hasn’t warned for at least seven years, even though CO2 emissions are rising. Nor is Sackett asked to respond to the criticism Dennis Jensen made in parliament of her critical misunderstanding of the response of temperature to carbon dioxide concentrations. She is not even picked up for her use of the loaded and misleading propaganda term: “carbon emissions.”
Jon Faine, in taking calls from listeners hoping to slime Fielding, let one caller accuse Professor Bob Carter, another sceptic, of having taking money to defend tobacco companies. So, suggested Faine, he’s just a “gun for hire”?
This libel – that Carter is so corrupt and unscientific that he would say something false for cash – is fiercely disputed by Carter, who adds that he has NEVER taken money from tobacco companies, and hasn’t accepted it from coal or petroleum ones, either. Faine’s caller claimed that this smear had been substantiated by Four Corners. I’ve checked the only two programs it’s made to specifically smear climate sceptics, and neither mentions Carter.
If the case for catastrophic man-made warming is so strong, why such vile smears of the sceptics? Surely a Faine need only point to, say, a chart measuring global temperature, as I’ve done. It’s the abuse and the refusal to argue in good faith that damns the believers most.