The IPCC's latest report landed this week to a very muted response.The man is outright delusional.
Or, more likely, so used to bending the narrative via Islamophobia he thinks it will work with climate science.
The IPCC 5AR WG2 report was, of course, reported on by essentially everyone, and editorialized on by the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, the Wall Street Journal.... and then I got tired of looking.
If Steyn can't even be honest about a basic little thing like the response to a widely discussed report, how can anyone believe him on anything else?
I think you're reaching here.
Isn't "muted" best understood as a characterization of volume/intensity/hysteria rather than of frequency or incidence?
I don't think steyn ever claimed to be a nobel prize winner.
rspung: so what?
No, it is not -- but even on those terms, Steyn is false.
Speaking of muted, Mann has apparently dropped (or been dropped by) former counsel Bernard S. Grimm...yet not a word of inquiry/speculation to be found as to why.
Rather peculiar considering the David Appel speculations associated with the coming and going of Steyn's representations.
Post a Comment