Russell Cook

Who should win the Award for Climate Change Propagandism? Hapless ‘reporters’ like Pam Wright? The list of finalist nominees might end up containing quite a number of much more prominent names.

It is a propagandist’s dream to live in relative obscurity while seeing his work repeated and embraced across the land. Let me show you how it is not Ross Gelbspan I dwell on, but his words and the outgrowth from them.

There’s no Pulitzer Prize or any other similar journalism award to be won from regurgitating a worn-out 20 year-old+ unsupportable accusation about crooked skeptic climate scientists, otherwise it would have already been awarded at least a decade or more ago.

Financially speaking, Merchants of Doubt, which purports to debunk global warming skeptics by revealing their nefarious sources of funding, is a dud. Three box office sales reporting sites, The Numbers, Box Office Mojo, and Pro Box Office all show ticket sales of barely over $190,000 from its March 6 opening date through the first weekend of April. It is still showing in a handful of theaters through June 20th, but my inquiry to The Numbers site yielded a response from Nash Information Services, LLC in Beverly Hills that “Sony Pictures Classics hasn’t reported any box office for this film since the weekend of April 3.”

What made Brian Williams inject himself into an Iraq war incident? Perhaps the reason is as simple as a juvenile desire to remain in the center of adoring attention. When prominent personalities in the global warming issue say things about themselves that isn’t accurate, that’s a whole other ballgame.

For about two decades we’ve been told the science behind human-caused global warming is settled, and to ignore skeptic scientists because they’ve been paid by industry to manufacture doubt about the issue. The truth, however, has every appearance of being exactly the opposite.

If five different instances of leaked memos from ‘anti-global warming’ interests are supposed to be proof that skeptic climate scientists are paid to lie the public in a manner parallel to the way shill experts were paid to lie by the old tobacco industry, wouldn’t that be more devastating if there was actual proof within the ‘anti-global warming’ interests’ memos to back up that corruption accusation?

…the IPCC’s core science conclusions could not stand on their own merits against skeptic criticism…

Yesterday I wrote the following letter to Cristine Russell in response to her March 12 article in the Columbia Journalism Review titled “Attack of the climate-denial books: Conservative think tanks fuel…

Quoting from another movie review:  “… there’s a lot to be angry about. And though Rosebraugh shines a light on plenty of jaw-dropping corruption, it plays out like a shrill rallying…