New York TImes Is Biased!

A blast from the past "media and politics" angle, the New York Times distorts objective reality again:

"Part of [Gore's] scientific audience is uneasy. In talks, articles and blog entries that have appeared since his film and accompanying book came out last year, these scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore's central points are exaggerated and erroneous. They are alarmed, some say, at what they call his alarmism.
"I don't want to pick on Al Gore," Don J. Easterbrook, an emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, told hundreds of experts at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America. "But there are a lot of inaccuracies in the statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data." . . .
Criticisms of Mr. Gore have come not only from conservative groups and prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file scientists like Dr. Easterbook, who told his peers that he had no political ax to grind. A few see natural variation as more central to global warming than heat-trapping gases. Many appear to occupy a middle ground in the climate debate, seeing human activity as a serious threat but challenging what they call the extremism of both skeptics and zealots. "


Some might see this as confirmation of their long held skepticism about the global warming consensus. But the enlightened among us will just say, "Well, but not all "debates" have multiple sides -- the scientific consensus is clear: global warming is occuring, and humans are contributing to it. That's a fact-based empirical claim, not a faith-based "belief". There is no credible debate among intellectually honest observers about this, only about how much warming is happening how fast, what the likely consequences are, what we can/cannot do to halt it, and precisely how much human activity is contributing to it. Put another way, there is no real policy debate, only a political debate. Damn corporate media bias." (just a conjecture, in no way based on real events.)