Apr 242009
 

Twice in a week, the supposed flagship news media outlet in this country, The Australian, has published articles by journalist Greg Roberts purporting to represent the Climate Change sceptic argument in the most disingenuous manner this blogger has yet seen.


Roberts has a history of reporting in the manner of a Climate Change sceptic, and other baseless loopy issues, indeed has even done so for Fairfax as well as News Corp. This latest crusade by a journalist with less than shining research credentials is undoubtedly sanctioned by serial Murdoch arse-licker, Chris Mitchell, editor in chief for The Australian, known conservative apologist and Climate Change sceptic himself. Strange how those two classifications always seem to run together.
In short, Robert’s articles focus on the growth of sea ice on Antarctica’s east coast. Sea ice or “fast” ice is actually salt water which has frozen and fixed “fast” to the land mass of the continent. Sea ice, being of a totally different make up to shelf ice which is essentially compacted snow and therefore fresh water and found mainly on Antarctica’s west coast, does not have the potential to raise sea levels upon melting because of it’s mass and volume on calving from the shore. Sea ice bergs float lower and take much, much longer to melt, as anyone who’s sprinkled salt over an ice-filled beer esky will attest.
Shelf ice, which is what is currently causing climate science so much concern of late, being fresh water ice created by compacted snow falls, is of a different mass and displacement volume when melted, and does have the potential to raise sea levels, Far greater potential than does ‘fast’ ice.
Of course, it’s important from a sceptics perspective that facts not get in the way of a good story, especially when there’s a Labor government in office and relevant climate change responsible ministers are such easy targets for the dedicated conservative apologist.
Now, I’ll be the first to agree that the science of Climate Change is hardly conclusive, either pro or con, but to blatantly misrepresent the facts, or only select those which support a particular view without consideration of any others, is at the very least dishonest in my view.

  2 Responses to “Lies, Damn Lies and Conservative Newspaper Editors”

  1. The “coincidence” of being politically/socially conservative & a climate denier is hardly surprising. It’s rather similar in cause & effect to anti abortionists being pro capital punishment.
    Climate change, being a result of unfettered greed & exploitation of the natural world (land clearance) and the vast amounts of artifically & historically underpriced fossil fuel energy is the utlitmate, unarguable (rationally, as distinct from sophistically or solipsitically) result of follwoing their creed.
    To acknowledge this is too say “I was wrong”.
    Exactly like drug warriors who, seeing the utter failure of prohibition just take it as proof that stronger efforts are needed.

  2. The “coincidence” of being politically/socially conservative & a climate denier is hardly surprising. It’s rather similar in cause & effect to anti abortionists being pro capital punishment.
    Climate change, being a result of unfettered greed & exploitation of the natural world (land clearance) and the vast amounts of artifically & historically underpriced fossil fuel energy is the utlitmate, unarguable (rationally, as distinct from sophistically or solipsitically) result of follwoing their creed.
    To acknowledge this is too say “I was wrong”.
    Exactly like drug warriors who, seeing the utter failure of prohibition just take it as proof that stronger efforts are needed.