Featured In The Fake News New York Times

I gave a presentation of historical climate change at the Washington State Senate a couple weeks ago, and the New York Times predictably lied about my presentation.

E.P.A. Head Stacks Agency With Climate Change Skeptics – NYTimes.com

I didn’t discuss the costs of climate policy, and almost the entire presentation was documenting historical climate change, not “denying” it.

New York Times – fake news, all the time. Here is the actual presentation I gave.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Featured In The Fake News New York Times

  1. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    Tony, your presentation was great. You are obviously making a serious impact if the NY Times has seen fit to slime you.

    Congratulations, you’ve arrived! Wear it as a badge of honor.

  2. Steve Case says:

    Yeah Tony the “Main Stream” media is biased as hell. Yesterday CBS News ran a story on the plight of killer whales in the Antarctic and blamed climate change. Tonight they did cover the latest Wikileaks story and then five minutes later said there was no evidence to support President Trump’s claim that his phone had been bugged.

    So they didn’t cover the facts of your Washington State presentation but called you a name instead. It’s what more and more people expect from the so-called US newspapers of record. President Trump rightly calls them the enemy.

    In November of 1942 Churchill talked about the defeat of Rommel in the desert and said, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” Is the Trump victory comparable to defeating Rommel? I’ll be 73 this year I hope I live to actually see the end of the beginning.

    On another note, I think the Trump victory was in part a artifact of Voter ID. I’d like to see Voter ID a requirement to vote for the national candidates. No ID? your ballot gets marked as “No Vote” for the national office.

    • RAH says:

      Joe Nova thought I was being overly pessimistic when I wrote that quote at her blog to describe where I believe we stand now to the battle against the scam of climate change shortly after the inauguration. I had to explain why I believe that it fit.

      I still believe it is the best description of where we stand today in the war against this climate change scam and will remain so until actual laws are passed to prevent government agencies like the EPA and NASA GISS from perpetrating such scams. No matter how many executive actions a President reverses or adds, in the end they are not permanent fixes. Only laws that are enforced can make difficult for this scam to rise again.

      But of course, as we have seen, even laws will not be a sure fix since the Federal government has time and again failed to adhere to it’s own laws. In the end it is only the vigilance and active demands of the people that can prevent our tax dollars from being used against us in the never ending quest of government to dominate us.

      • richard verney says:

        I consider that we are a long way away from defeating climate alarmism, and 4 years of the new administration will not be enough.

        We really need to see a drop in temperatures between now and when AR6 is written such that the pause has reappeared. This is looking increasingly unlikely as a La Nina has not developed, and if anything it appears more likely that we will in 2017 see a double El Nino (of course that is not certain but ENSO is presently in positive territory).

        • Steve Case says:

          Yeah, when it comes to climate, a lot depends on the weather.

          I don’t think Yogi ever said that, but he coulda.

  3. Anthony Cattani says:

    An exciting and factual presentation. Thank you for
    your excellent research and effort in gathering the unaltered
    historical facts relating to climate change. Of note was the attempt to
    discredit the presenter and ignore the presentation. The laughable
    stack of office waste paper being called peer reviewed studies is
    an old and tired lawyer trick often used in court or discoveries.
    I encourage you to continue along this difficult but necessary path.

  4. hunter says:

    The NYT, like nearly all journalist orgs today is reduced to calling those who disagree with their view on cliamte the equivalent of the “n word”.
    They cannot deal with the issues, they understand their side so poorly, they can only seek to silence by dehumanizing and censoring those who disagree.

  5. Gail Combs says:

    Good Job Tony.
    You know you are over the target when you draw enemy fire!

  6. Martin says:

    Many years ago I started noticing that when the media reported something that I actually had direct knowledge of, they invariably got it very wrong. From there it was a short mental step to realise that given they mis-reported stuff that I knew about, then why assume that everything else wasn’t mis-reported too !!

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey Martin! You are, of course, correct. I operate on the same principle; my default assumption is that anything the MSM says is certainly misleading, likely false, at best incomplete.

      A lot of people approach the MSM with a “team” mentality. ” They think, “CNN is lying, but Fox News is right!” or “MSNBC can be trusted but Fox is lying!” They believe their team but not the other team. They do not see that both teams work for the same owners.

      The mystery is why there are still people who believe any of it.

      • Gail Combs says:

        My Father-in-law, the owner of a newspaper, said the ONLY thing you can trust a news outlet to get right are the sports scores.

        And that is probably only because the Mafia would kneecap them if they didn’t. ?

  7. Tony, any chance of adding some (or all!) of those graphs you mention at your WSS presentation? I know it’s a lot of work but it might help to nail your points even more firmly. Thanks in anticipation. Matthew Robinson

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.