Movie Demonizing Skeptics  is a Sony film attempting to chronicle the merchants or deniers of climate change.   In other words it plays on the Merchant of Venice to align the skeptics on CC to essentially mercenaries. 


An article in the NYT’s written by Gillis backs the claims by the author, Dr Naomi Oreskes, of the book by the same name.  It is essentially the monthly event to re affirm the tribal beliefs and demonize those who do not go along.


Dr Oreskes is a historian who is connected in the movie with big money liberals like Jeff Skoll and movie makers who have a history of being shall I say Anti-business. 


WUWT Article Link  speaks to this movie in a intimate manner and how Gillis was not swayed by data from a Singer, another skeptic. 

Has anyone, from Al Gore to Naomi Oreskes, the New York Times, James Hoggan, or Ross Gelbspan ever provided anything beyond pure guilt-by-association accusations, have they ever provided a scintilla of evidence proving people such as Dr Singer operated under any kind of pay-for-performance situation, in which instructions were given to lie to the public and to knowingly fabricate reports everyone knew were false?


No, they haven’t. The idea that the New York Times seems to totally miss here is something I was told by a prosecuting attorney during my brief jury duty service just a day ago, that the accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the accused need not respond to the accusations to remain innocent, and that it is entirely upon the accuser to meet the burden of proof in the accusation. Not only is this the way the US law works, it is plain common sense.


After nearly two decades of a constant barrage of accusations that skeptic climate scientists are paid industry money to lie, the best the New York Times can come up with is “trust us, our source has third-hand hearsay evidence which we won’t question in any manner.” Elaborating on what I tweeted to Justin Gillis and another reporter after their hit pieces against Dr Willie Soon in February, there is no Pulitzer Prize to be won from repeating worn-out talking point accusations, but a Pulitzer could be won if reporters turned the tables on the people who created the accusations.



Could include a pic

This could also be inserted into the field above, or erased


Currently as a society, we are having a most difficult time discussing political issues.  What is driving this?   And why a rebirth in political culture would be a good thing.


Market Economy

Are "markets" dead as some would conjecture? Or is free enterprise what got us here?


Economic Theories

At the heart of economics there are several possible economic schools of thought, the essence of these schools of thought and how they relate to our lives.


Add Comments


Powered by Disqus