Comments on: Houston Chronicle: Former Environmental Writer Documents Origins of Left/Alarmist Bias at the Paper

By: Joe Guyton

Joe Guyton — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:10:54 +0000

AGW is a quaint little theory that has had nearly two centuries to produce proof of its validity. That its proponents during that lengthy period have failed to offer anything beyond anecdotes and computer forecasts which collapse is off-set in turn by Lindzen’s proofs that the earth’s energy budget and sub-tropical mid-tropospheric temperatures do things it could not do while the theory’s atmospheric CO2 continuously rises. “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” Albert Einstein.

AGW has been proven wrong by the empirical facts, and the propagandists at the Chronicle cannot counter the science. Their jihad to capture our freedoms by hoax will ultimately fail as events make a mockery of their efforts.

By: Robert Bradley Jr.

Robert Bradley Jr. — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:33:37 +0000

The front page article was matter-of-fact (job losses in industries fearing a cap), while the editorials are very climate alarmist. Houston is a regulatory loser under cap-and-trade, and the Houston paper preaches the gospel of climate fear–and much more so than its own science writer seems to believe–at least by the blog entry I linked.

I do know that 1) the general public is not buying the global warming hype and 2) the Chronicle readership is not buying it either. The polls and subscription numbers do not suggest otherwise in my opinion.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:44:16 +0000

Wait, so the paper leans left but Clanton comes out against cap-and-trade in a front page Sunday edition? A little contradictory, isn’t it? Also, Libertarians are one of two things: money-grubbing p—–or conservatives too stupid to understand what Libertarian really means.