Scientists call out New York Times for incorrect claim about climate report

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Do I understand this thread correctly? The NY Times published a scientific article about a scientific study about climate change.

 

the scientists' "pushback" was that the study was published and readily available.

 

The NY Times corrected the error that they had obtained some sort of secret draft of the study.

 

I don't think I understand how any of the above leads to accusing NY Times of being 'fake news.' And in context of the posters who regularly dredge up actually fake "scientific news" regarding the climate change "hoax," didn't you see the scientists weren't refuting the study and it's grim findings? Isn't that really the most important part of the NY Times article?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

5 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

I wonder if anyone has looked towards the sun as the main culprit in the changing of the climates?  

 

Naw, no need.

 

Sadly, this place never changes. 

This thread is about climate change? I assume we had successfully redirected the conversation to the more pressing issue of how the NY times is Fake News.  These are not the scientific facts you are looking for.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

8 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

I wonder if anyone has looked towards the sun as the main culprit in the changing of the climates?  

 

Naw, no need.

 

Sadly, this place never changes. 

Scientists have looked at the sun as the main culprit. Conclusion was nope.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

3 minutes ago, ready4ONE said:

Do I understand this thread correctly? The NY Times published a scientific article about a scientific study about climate change.

 

the scientists' "pushback" was that the study was published and readily available.

 

The NY Times corrected the error that they had obtained some sort of secret draft of the study.

 

I don't think I understand how any of the above leads to accusing NY Times of being 'fake news.' And in context of the posters who regularly dredge up actually fake "scientific news" regarding the climate change "hoax," didn't you see the scientists weren't refuting the study and it's grim findings? Isn't that really the most important part of the NY Times article?

what part of fake news don't you get?  Once a comma gets put in the wrong place or someone in a pink hat weighs in on the topic it automatically triggers the fake news clause and every fact related to that news article is by extension fake.  Ergo sum Global Warming is caused by solar radiation.  

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, ready4ONE said:

Scientists have looked at the sun as the main culprit. Conclusion was nope.

United together we're more powerful than the sun.

 

That's the spirit, comrade.

[Tahoma 2,292]

5 hours ago, smilesammich said:

don't forget to bring your tax returns!

Trump: "I'll find out if I can borrow them from Mueller."

[ready4ONE 5,400]

4 hours ago, IAMX said:

United together we're more powerful than the sun.

 

That's the spirit, comrade.

Earth revolves around the sun, the sun does not rise and set on the will of Dear Leader.

[IAMX 3,055]

10 minutes ago, ready4ONE said:

Earth revolves around the sun, the sun does not rise and set on the will of Dear Leader.

 

#SurviveTrump

#Resist

 

 

Edited August 10, 2017 by IAMX

[Teddy B 17,252]

10 hours ago, IDWAF said:

I wonder if anyone has looked towards the sun as the main culprit in the changing of the climates?  

 

Naw, no need.

 

Sadly, this place never changes. 

We came to the conclusion that Venezuela's democratic socialism was the main cause for climate change on page one.

[eieio 1,594]

Is al gore still the pope like figure for the religion of man made global warming?

 

Basically all religions have beliefs that are unprovable.....the religion of man made global warming is no exception. 

 

The NYT is part of that religion.

 

Its fine that people are religious. Just stop forcing it on other people.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, eieio said:

Is al gore still the pope like figure for the religion of man made global warming?

 

Basically all religions have beliefs that are unprovable.....the religion of man made global warming is no exception. 

 

The NYT is part of that religion.

 

Its fine that people are religious. Just stop forcing it on other people.

The left suddenly have a thing for environmental religion and Islam. 

 

They call it progress.

[Tahoma 2,292]

Trump: "The U.S. and Syria stand strong against the FAKE religion of climate change!!!"

[Dashinka 24,437]

14 hours ago, ready4ONE said:

Do I understand this thread correctly? The NY Times published a scientific article about a scientific study about climate change.

 

the scientists' "pushback" was that the study was published and readily available.

 

The NY Times corrected the error that they had obtained some sort of secret draft of the study.

 

I don't think I understand how any of the above leads to accusing NY Times of being 'fake news.' And in context of the posters who regularly dredge up actually fake "scientific news" regarding the climate change "hoax," didn't you see the scientists weren't refuting the study and it's grim findings? Isn't that really the most important part of the NY Times article?

So the fact that the NYTimes tried to create some sort of a nefarious narrative of this study being kept hidden and they are providing us with some sort of 5th estate service by getting it to us is OK with you?  Sure they corrected the story because their narrative immediately fell apart.

[IAMX 3,055]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So the fact that the NYTimes tried to create some sort of a nefarious narrative of this study being kept hidden and they are providing us with some sort of 5th estate service by getting it to us is OK with you?  Sure they corrected the story because their narrative immediately fell apart.

They don't mind.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So the fact that the NYTimes tried to create some sort of a nefarious narrative of this study being kept hidden and they are providing us with some sort of 5th estate service by getting it to us is OK with you?  Sure they corrected the story because their narrative immediately fell apart.

I didn't say their mistake regarding the availability of the report was ok. They did correct that error. But the salient point is that they didn't misrepresent the study itself, or its "grim" conclusions, and the scientific authors didn't 'call out' the NY Times for misrepresenting the substance of the report.

 

The 'outrage' in defense of Dear Leader is misguided and frankly #sad.