Three Years Since New York Times Announced Beginning Of The “Endless Summer”

Posted on February 11, 2015 by

ScreenHunter_7058 Feb. 11 07.18

The Endless Summer – NYTimes.com

The New York Times will not print the opinions of skeptics, because they only want to have accurate climate information on their pages. Last year they declared the end of snow.

ScreenHunter_6989 Feb. 09 21.41The End of Snow? – NYTimes.com

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Three Years Since New York Times Announced Beginning Of The “Endless Summer”

  1. FTOP_T says:
    February 11, 2015 at 12:40 pm

    I have tried several times to post comments on NYT articles. It seems their moderation policy is not to enforce decorum but to control thought. We are far closer to 1984 than I ever believed possible. Although the zealots are very much to blame, it is the erosion of the 4th estate, which no longer holds government accountable that has left us at the mercy of the progressive movement.

    The Brian Williams debacle is just the canary in the coal mine of how the narrative is more important than the facts. The Edward R. Murrow award should be buried alongside the marker for science, since both journalism and science have died under the boots of this movement.

    Reply
  2. Billy Liar says:
    February 11, 2015 at 12:51 pm

    He’s a food writer … he’ll swallow anything. In fact, he swallowed everything McKibben said in a Rolling Stone article in July 2012.

    Reply
  3. Gail Combs says:
    February 11, 2015 at 1:22 pm

    “The New York Times will not print the opinions of skeptics, because they only want to have accurate climate information on their pages protect their major investors.”

    There fixed it for ya.

    New York Times has vested interest in climate alarmism by Martin Cohen, December 2012

    One of the mysteries about the New York Times is why a paper so dedicated to accuracy and objectivity has for many years thrown all pretence of ‘reporting’ to the winds in its efforts to stop global warming. [I doubt the NYT was ever interested in accuracy and objectivity given Walter Durant. -GC]

    At one level, it seems to be a kind of misguided environmental evangelism…. But then again, at another level, behind its lofty rhetoric, the NYT has always been a business, run for profit. That’s why, during the Second World War, with newsprint rationed, it increased the proportion of advertising to news, rather than vice versa. And if business interests drive its news policy, that might explain why in recent years, it has been very much focussed on serving an energy agenda that fits very well the needs of its shareholders, notably two of its biggest investors, the hedge funds Harbinger and T Rowe Price.

    …The NYT is wrong on the details, and wrong on the generalities too. It is confusing scare-mongering that may be good for political campaigns with objective reporting – let alone ‘science’….

    So if the reporting is so bad, now come no one is stopping it? Yet the falling standards just might be serving a function for the paper.

    It’s well known that the NYT is ‘family owned’ – by the Arthur Sulzburger family. The family have a controlling interest and also own 20 percent of the Class A shares. It is less often noted, and certainly not at the bottom of the NYT’s scary pieces, that the paper has received significant investments from hedge funds with financial interests in the raising of the political profile of climate change science. From late 2007 and up to the time of the ‘peak’ in media coverage of the issue, late in 2010, the second largest Class A shareholder in the New York Times was Harbinger Capital Partners, a hedge fund run by Philip Falcone, with around 20 per cent, and the third-largest Class A shareholder was T. Rowe Price, with 10 percent. (Carlos Slim Helú, the Mexican telecommunications billionaire came next, with 7 percent.) [9] 7 In November 2010 the fund significantly downsized its investment in the New York Times Company, to 2.6%, selling the shares for barely half of what it had originally paid.

    In terms of conventional dividends, the Times was a poor choice for Falcone. However, Harbinger have energy interests that cannot have been harmed by a steady trickle of propaganda for raising the costs of energy. For example, in November 2012, Harbinger Group Inc. established an Energy Operating Business Joint Venture with EXCO Resources to create a private oil and gas limited partnership to purchase and operate EXCO’s U.S. oil and gas assets, for a total consideration of $725 million. Although foolish talk (including in the Times) of oil money funding ‘denial’ of Climate Change confuses many people, in fact oil companies (who also invariably own and exploit gas reserves) are one of the big winners of the political push to put up the price of energy by imposing a carbon levy.

    As for T Rowe Price, this fund (a long-standing investor in the Times) has important interests in biofuels, a sector whose growth is closely linked to mandatory targets for blending biofuels into ‘real fuels’ – all of course part of saving the planet from climate change. According to Seeking Alpha, as of January 2012, T Row Price had a tidy $330 billion invested in biofuels. The Times shares its interest, regularly running stories looking forward to the Brave New World of biofuels……

    Certainly helps explain the steady flow of over the top propaganda from the Gray Lady doesn’t it?

    Reply
  4. gator69 says:
    February 11, 2015 at 2:02 pm

    I’m looking forward to the end of this snow job.

    Reply
  5. emsnews says:
    February 11, 2015 at 5:37 pm

    The owners of the NYT are Bilderberg gangsters. They meet in super secret meetings all over the world to plot various things and Global Warming is one of these scams they are foisting on everyone. This is a conspiracy, of course, of very rich people.

    And if you write the word ‘Bilderberg’ in any media owned by Bilderberg gangsters, you are banned for life.

    Reply
  6. Andy DC says:
    February 12, 2015 at 2:19 am

    Every idiot knows that climate change causes lots of snow and sometimes little snow. Also average snow as well!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s