What did we miss?” — Open Letter to the Editor of The New York Times

I view the entire climate issue as completely unsustainable; the collective thing is based on disinformation, from the notion that the ‘science is settled’ about deadly catastrophic man-caused global warming, to the feeling that ‘Exxon knew that but instead created disinformation campaigns to deceive the public about what they knew.’ It’s like viewing a crumbling building with spreading cracks and wondering how soon the whole thing goes down, or like a topped dam where it’s a wonder it hasn’t collapsed yet. Or perhaps it’s akin to how Titanic builder Thomas Andrews must have felt upon fully comprehending the situation in front of him in the remaining minutes of April 14, 1912 – things are still nearly level at the moment, but it’s purely a matter of time when the existing damage starts bringing in fatal amounts of accumulation that cannot be stopped. The climate issue will sink, it is a mathematical certainty. The self-inflected damage was actually done long ago to seal its fate, when its arrogant pushers decided to use character assassination and disinformation as a tactic to counter critics while hoping nobody would question that maneuver.

I just don’t yet know which ‘iceberg’ incident will be the one to begin the process of sending the issue to the bottom. Meanwhile, I try to give that iceberg a nudge toward this looming colossus recklessly speeding straight toward its inevitable doom.  Continue reading

SCOTUS Agrees to Hear Case on Colorado Dispute over Climate Change; (it should throw that case and all the others out)

I don’t just write about these things, I try to get something done. Upon learning the news on Feb 23 that the Supreme Court will be adding the effort to hear the concerns about the Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County situation, I fired off the verbatim email below to the main lawyer representing the energy companies (I spelled out the individual web links instead of embedding each one as I’ve done below; the bold highlighted words below where highlighted the same way in my email). Continue reading

Ofcom Complaint – [ the 2025 version ]

Relentless, I am. So here we go again with my continuing saga on imploring the mighty BBC news organization to do their core job. Call me “old school” on the matter, but news outlets are obligated – in my opinion – to report the news with no partisan slant, and to view information provided to them with a jaded eye, questioning any aspect of it where something just does not look right, and demanding not one but multiple rock-solid sources before publishing major accusations. In the case of the mid-summer 2020 report in which ex-Greenpeace operative Kert Davies brought the BBC ‘evidence’ which supposedly fit their program series titled “How They Made Us Doubt Everything” about the fossil fuel industry ‘ran disinformation campaigns to deceive the public’ … the BBC program producers should have first cast a basic ‘due diligence doubtful eye’ on whether Davies’ ‘evidence’ was verifiably true or not. They apparently did not, a basic violation of BBC’s own guidelines about gathering material. From that basic failure, they conveyed factual inaccuracies to their listening audience.

As I first detailed in my July blog post, when I spotted how the BBC strangely reworded their program title to eliminate the very phrase that was the core of my official complaint I filed, it was a ripe opportunity to refile my complaint. Now, here we go into the last available step in the complaint process. Continue reading

To Be a Journalist or not To Be

With the far larger question of whether a genuine journalist’s own freedom of the press is in peril if he or she starts asking rough questions concerning any angle of the orthodoxy of “the science of man-caused global warming is settled” / “skeptic climate scientists are on the payroll of the fossil fuel industry to undercut the settled science.” Continue reading

“Denial, Disinfo & Doublespeak” May 1 U.S. Senate hearing: open letter to those who can do something about it

I don’t merely write about the fatal faults within the accusations about ‘fossil fuel industry disinformation campaigns employing liars-for-hire scientists,’ I try to alert influential people who have the capacity to get to the bottom of whether the accusations have any merit. The key promulgators of the accusations can be placed under oath either within some upcoming court action in the ExxonKnew lawsuits, or they (and their weak-links-in-the-association-chain) can be put under oath in U.S. House or Senate hearings. One such opportunity for the latter is possible on May 1, 2024, in a Senate Hearing titled “Denial, Disinformation, and Doublespeak: Big Oil’s Evolving Efforts to Avoid Accountability for Climate Change” Who’s one of the hearing witnesses which was probably a bad idea for the Democrat majority to invite? Geoffrey Supran. Continue reading

“Climate Homicide: Prosecuting Big Oil For Climate Deaths” Part 2

I wrote about the main fault with the ludicrous draft paper submitted to the Harvard Environmental Law Review in Part 1, namely the paper authors’ enslavement to a particular set of literally worthless ‘leaked industry memos’, and the funding association of one of the authors, David Arkush. But as usual, there’s more. Arkush apparently has quite a basic problem with making authoritative statements — hold that thought for just a bit. First, let me say I don’t simply write about these collective situations, I try to get something done about them. Continue reading

DailyClout: A Letter to the Editor: “When the MSM Misleads about January 6th, What Other Disinformation Do They Push?

Note: I tipped Naomi Wolf to the two specific items below after I read her “Dear Conservatives” article, and she asked to compile my pair of tips into an 800 word submission to her DailyClout website, where it was published after a bit of a delay on March 24th.

To the Editor:

Dr. Naomi Wolf, who nobody would term as a right-wing zealot, admitted to being misled about the January 6 Capitol riot (“Dear conservatives, I’m sorry I believed so many media lies”), noting how the man with the face paint and Viking horns hat is revealed in never-seen footage inside the Capitol being tranquilly led around in the building by Capitol police; he’s not the violent insurrection leader the mainstream media portrayed him to be.

There’s more: namely, the basic question of why MSM reporters never asked how or why that man, previously seen in 2019 as a prominent climate strike march leader, switched his political viewpoints 180° just over a year. Surely they’d use that to illustrate how persuasive “right-wing propaganda” can be.

This lack of curiosity by the MSM doesn’t end there. Dr. Wolf’s realization that the MSM is less-than-forthcoming on particular information was quite abrupt. My distrust of the news media grew over years.

Ultimately, this is all about asking tough questions. During my youth in the ’70s through the ’90s, journalists could be counted on to question authority. These days, not so much.

Allow me to illustrate via my own questions concerning the ‘climate crisis’ issue.

Continue reading at DailyClout: A Letter to the Editor: “When the MSM Misleads about January 6th, What Other Disinformation Do They Push?”

Ofcom Complaint

Well, I was warned at the very least. But as the old adage goes, “nothing ventured, nothing gained.” If not a single one of us holds the mainstream media accountable for the demonstrably biased inaccuracies they put out, then they will never admit that they commit that kind of journalistic malfeasance, and they’ll keep doing it with reckless abandon. Continue reading

The Dead Global Warming Issue exemplifies the Mainstream Media Journalistic Malfeasance Problem

A recent news item about a journalism school dean praising the ‘deep analysis’ presentation of PBS NewsHour reports, in conjunction with the NewsHour opening a bureau right at his school, prompts cause for concern about whether journalism schools have stopped teaching old-school hard-nosed reporter tactics in favor of spreading ‘save-the-world propaganda’ under the guise of it being outright “news.” Continue reading