Monday, December 16, 2013

Foreign Policy magazine editors and journalists are "naive children"

Donna Laframboise on FP's selection of the UN IPCC as one of 100 Global Thinkers of 2013:
... Oh, dear. A magazine that can’t write 283 words without using the phrase “climate-change deniers” twice, is out there. I mean, really out there.

... the editors and journalists at Foreign Policy magazine are naive children. They’ve mistaken eco-apocalyptic fairy tales featuring planet-saving superheroes and wicked climate deniers for reality.

The notion that anyone is depending on that magazine’s power of analysis with respect to foreign policy is downright frightening.
Also named among FP mag's 100 Global Thimkers is this quartet of geniuses for proving that the 
devastation of Superstorm Sandy was partly our fault:
... Using the tools of a field known as "climate attribution science," the researchers compared, correlated, and analyzed data on weather and anthropogenic pollution such as carbon dioxide emissions. They examined a dozen meteorological cases from 2012, including superstorms, retreating Arctic sea ice, heavy rainfall in Europe, and intense heat along the United States' Eastern Seaboard.... ["Climate attribution science" would appear to be a "science" of rationalizing preconceived conclusions.]


Anonymous said...

"Climate attribution science" would appear to be a "science" of rationalizing preconceived conclusions.

Come on that's what journalism is all about.

You know what kind of story you want to write. Then you wait until an opportunity comes along and you leave out any facts that don't fit your desired story.

JR said...

Ok, that may be true of a lot of journalism, but the four honoured "thinkers" aren't journalists but scientists working for NOAA and the British Met office.