Climate alarmism demands more discussion

Let’s face it, the actual fact is that the predictions of temperature failed. No one disputes that, at the moment, except for a few fanatical doomsayers. In actuality, the people who predicted an alarming rise in global temperatures are now trying to defend the failure of their predictions with not one, but many various reasons why they were wrong.

In other words, where everyone assured us there was consensus, there are now a bunch of scrambling fanatics grasping at a nonconsensus series of excuses. The liberal news media who have staked their credibility to the “alarming” increase (there is always some increase over the centuries after every Ice Age), are now reduced to embarrassedly parroting the words of phonies such as The Associated Press, which was caught in the climate-gate emails as being a fellow believer and supporter of the crooked East Anglia University crowd.

Have you seen the AP’s wrongful involvement mentioned in your local media?

What are we going to do about the current alarmist climate hyperbole? At some point in time, we have to point out that the news on the “climate change” has been wrong and discuss that.

There are problems with the environment that are, indeed, important and we can’t throw the baby out with the bath water. If our journalism majors from the 1970s, who have now taken over so much of today’s news outlets are to be believed, we’re doomed and there is no room for discussion.

If we look at the actual facts and the temperatures around us – they got it all wrong and are too small to admit it or to question it. And if we can’t discuss it, we need to be prepared for worse than that. We need journalists from other than liberal journalist schools.

Mike Sigman

Durango