'Neither CBS nor ABC have included a skeptical scientist in their news shows within the past 1,300 days, but both networks included alarmists within the past 160 days -- CBS as recently as 22 days ago. When the networks did include other viewpoints, the experts were dismissed as “out of the scientific mainstream” or backed by “oil and coal companies.''
DeSmogBlog smears skeptics: 'The CPAC global warming panel taking place today in Washington features a cast of climate confusionists apparently seeking to permanently sink the GOP’s reputation on scientific matters. Alongside Milloy, the CPAC panel features Heartland Institute’s Joe Bast, CFACT’s Marc Morano, CEI’s Marlo Lewis and Frontiers of Freedom president George Landrith. 'With one exception — CEO of Abundant Power Group, Shannon Smith, a conservative who acknowledged in a recent tweet that “climate change is a reality” — the rest of the panel is stacked with a denier dream team...'
CPAC (Conservative Political Action Committee) Schedule here. 3/6/14 3:30 PM: 'What's the Deal with Global Warming?' 'An Al Gore fever dream? Real but with caveats? Real but irrelevant?' Location: Chesapeake D-F - Joe Bast, President, The Heartland Institute (Moderator) - Steve Milloy, Director of External Policy & Strategy, Murray Energy Corporation - Marc Morano, Publisher, Climate Depot - Dr. Marlo Lewis, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute - George Landrith, President, Frontiers of Freedom - Shannon Smith, Chief Executive Officer, Abundant Power Group
Will: 'Climate alarmism validates the progressive impulse to micromanage others' lives -- their light bulbs, showerheads, toilets, appliances, automobiles, etc. Although this is a nuisance, it distracts liberals from more serious mischief.'
Will on alleged 97% climate 'consensus':'When a Nazi publishing company produced '100 Authors Against Einstein,' the target of this argument-by-cumulation replied: 'Were I wrong, one professor would have been quite enough.'
John Holdren characterized Prof. Roger Pielke Jr. as being outside the 'scientific mainstream' at a Senate climate hearing for his views on extreme events and climate change
Pielke Jr. Fires Back at Holdren: 'When a political appointee uses his position not just to disagree on science or policy but to seek to delegitimize a colleague, he has gone too far.'
Pielke Jr. responds: 'It is rare for political appointee in any capacity -- the president's science advisor no less -- to accuse an individual academic of holding views are are not simply wrong, but in fact scientifically illegitimate. Very strong stuff.'
'Holdren's response is sloppy and reflects extremely poorly on him. Far from showing that I am outside the scientific mainstream, Holdren's follow-up casts doubt on whether he has even read my Senate testimony. Holdren's justification for seeking to use his position as a political appointee to delegitimize me personally reflects poorly on his position and office, and his response simply reinforces that view.'
'Is this really coming from the president's science advisor? Holdren is flat-out wrong to accuse me of omitting a key statement from my testimony. Again, remarkable, inexcusable sloppiness.'
'The bottom line here is that this is an extremely poor showing by the president's science advisor. It is fine for experts to openly disagree. But when a political appointee uses his position not just to disagree on science or policy but to seek to delegitimize a colleague, he has gone too far.'