Global Warming: Not Everyone Shuns Balance

By October 31, 2006Global Warming

OK, now here’s a guy who isn’t going to be invited to speak to the Society of Environmental Journalists coven any time soon….

Michael Palmer, general manager of the ABC and Fox affiliates in Bangor, Maine reportedly sent an e-mail to his staff over the summer (after they had covered the premiere of Al Gore’s fantasy film) saying that when Bar Harbor was under water, they could do global warming stories but, “until then, no more.”

Wait — it gets better. According to this story in the New York Times, Palmer said he wanted no more stories broadcast on global warming because — among other reasons — “The issue evolved from hard science into hard politics and despite what you may have heard from the mainstream media, this science is far from conclusive.” Palmer went on to say that he placed “global warming stories in the same category as ‘the killer African bee scare’ from the 1970s or, more recently, the Y2K scare when everyone’s computer was going to self-destruct.” Think he’s been reading the blog….? He’s absolutely dead-on right on all these points.

Of course, the NY Times was obligated to interview James Hansen, resident global warming hysteric, telling Palmer that it’ll be glug-glug for him soon enough up there in Bar Harbor. Maybe, or maybe not. Mark us down as siding with Michael Palmer and his courageous view. He can teach Bill Blakemore and ABC a thing or two about balance.

Join the discussion 7 Comments

  • mperella says:

    The solution of global warming
    I have discover the possible chemical reaction which can added to the cars to give out oxygen please download this video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8653481098209905202 and forward to all the organisation which can act on this new theory.It is free video copy 51 minutes.
    my telephon is 0021362756085

  • Andrew Worth says:

    Pat, I don’t think you read Bill’s comment carefully enough, He said: “all scientists researching global warming have been in total agreement for the past 10 years” You on the other hand rely on nonclimate scientists, and a very few climate scientists not active in researching global warming, as authorities on the issues. If you’re having heart surgery, how many plumbers do you need to take the place of one heart surgeon?

    This is a much better analogy than you will want to believe because climate science is complex.

  • Pat Cleary says:

    Bill:

    As we’ve said many times here, does this look like consensus to you?

    http://blog.nam.org/archives/2006/05/an_inconvenient.php

    Thanks for writing,

    Pat Cleary

  • Bill Malkin says:

    Hi Pat

    There’s no censorship. It’s just that all scientists researching global warming have been in total agreement for the past 10 years about the causes of, problems resulting from, and solutions to, global warming, so there is actually no dissenting view to censor.

    Cheers
    Bill

  • Pat Cleary says:

    RS:

    But why hold Mr. Palmer to a higher standard than the rest of his colleagues in the mainstream media? They have shown zero interest in balance, only declaring that the debate is over, when it’s not.

    The censorship is happening every day. Look around you. How often do you hear the dissenting view? Not very often. Time to open up the airwaves. Mr. Palmer should relent only after the hysteria subsides and the contrary facts and views are espoused on CNN and the networks.

    Thanks for writing,

    Pat Cleary

  • RS Deese says:

    If Michael Palmer is certain that an open debate about the evidence would support his contention that climate change as a result of human activity is not real, then he should make room for such a debate. That fact that he’s imitated the behavior of a fundamentalist cleric and issued a fatwa forbidding any further discussion of the issue suggests a fear on his part that the facts would not support his case.

  • kaz says:

    I suppose you could ignore all the findings and the hotter weather and put your head in the sand.

    If a doctor told you that you had cancer and if you acted now you could save your life even if you didn’t feel any major symptoms?

    Would you not beleive him and wait until you were on your deathbed- by that time it is too late or do something about it now.

    Would you not take his advice?

    It may be too late already to stop the current warming trend as it takes 20-50 years before the effects of carbon emmited today come into action, but sitting there and doing nothing for reasons of self interest is surely a crime against future humanity.