The New York Times is an ‘Effing Rag
It seems that hypocrisy is the order of the day around here. This time, the New York Times is balking at giving space to the hacked emails concerning “global warming” because they were “illegally gotten.” From the NY Times Earth Blog:
The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.
Then the “blogger” gives a link to “plenty of sources” where you could read the emails and documents. Naturally, as legitimate bloggers around the web report on the story, the writer, Andrew Revkin, gets defensive:
The line above has been widely interpreted below and around the Web as implying that The Times is laying off looking into these documents even as the paper has been quick to publish or report on other documents of uncertain provenance. A quick scan of the original news story and these posts shows that we’re actively reporting on and citing these documents. And of course there’s more to come.
But you still haven’t published the emails that show that these eco-terrorist scientists have fudged the data to push their “global warming” theory.
The comments in this Volokh Conspiracy post are priceless and deserve your reading. By now you all know that the NY Times has about as much validity in claiming to be an unbiased news source as Chris “tingle me” Matthews and Keith Olbermann have. The readers there provide plenty of anecdotes about the NY Times publishing private or ill-be-gotten emails and other info when it discredits Republicans, Bush, theories they don’t support.
Meanwhile, I still don’t see anything about this scientific hoax being reported on NBC or NPR or CNN. No wonder they’ve lost readers/viewers and are going broke.
6 Responses to “The New York Times is an ‘Effing Rag”
Leave a Reply
(Be sure to answer the anti-spam question!)



on 23 Nov 2009 at 8:15 pm # Keith
Jeff,
Since you first posted on this, I’ve been following the posts several places.
Seems the BBC have finally given some prime time coverage to the matter (I don’t have TV so don’t know how it went) however:
According to Bishop hill blog, the Guardian (formerly one of the two top selling quality newspapers in the UK) is not only burying coverage well into the middle of the paper, but is also deleting dissenting / critical comments from its’ website.
Have Fox covered the leaked mails yet?
K
on 23 Nov 2009 at 8:22 pm # Keith
One of the commenters on your last post questioned whether anything crimminal had occured to be prosecuted.
Looks like it might have done:
-Destruction of documents and data subject to freedom of information request.
-Conspiracy to mislead parliament*
to name two
Keith
*and mislead the rest of us - settled science my arse!
on 24 Nov 2009 at 10:14 am # MAJ Mike
Golly gosh!! The NYT won’t publish illegally secured documents?
Didn’t stop them from publishing stolen national security documents that alerted Islamo-terrorist as to how we were following their cell phone conversations and financial transactions.
They only print that which fits their pre-determined world view.
Bastards.
on 24 Nov 2009 at 5:54 pm # James Nelson
Well they didn’t have any problems publishing the Pentagon Papers. Which I approved of, btw. Stuff like that is what news organizations are supposed to do. Must be the new slogan is “whatever fits the narrative,”
on 24 Nov 2009 at 7:41 pm # Dr. T
Even worse, the other day the AP published an article stating that “new evidence” shows that global warming is accelerating. So, not only are they downplaying the evidence of falsified data, deceptive climate models, and suppression of conflicting data, but they are claiming that things are worse than the pseudo-climatologists told us!
Actions speak louder than words. Everyone who believes that anthropogenic global warming is destroying the planet should commit suicide immediately. We’ll have less CO2 production and fewer methane-emitting assholes.
on 26 Nov 2009 at 5:53 am # Keith
Apparently the CRU wasn’t the only AGW pushing body that’s been witholding its data and code from other researchers:
NASA has been refusing to allow other scientists test its data and methods.
Anyone in the US want to start filling in FOI requests?
Anyone inside NASA unhappy with shit that is going on there want to liberate the info?
Anyone want to go see their Congress varmints?
No need to risk a lifetime with Bubba as your cell mate for hacking it out.
Now, Why the FUCK isn’t Fox running with this story?
From a different angle, I’m going to be leaving friendly gunny comments on some of the AGW sceptic sites, I think we have a chance to make some new friends,
afterall we are no strangers to “research” that usese carefully cherrypicked and “corrected” data sets to confirm the researcher’s prejudices.
We are also familliar with having “critical theory” used to be-little or dismiss our criticisms when we are painted by the MSM as “illiterate”, “racist”, “bitter”, “industry funded”, “mentally deficient and therefore susceptible to right wing lies” …insult de jour…
Keith