"Left" or "Right", the MSM lies

A lesson from WUWT to not trust MSM, regardless of political affiliation (slightly edited by me for clarity):

From: Jeff Goodell
To: Anthony Watts
Subject: Rolling Stone inquiry

Hi Anthony

I’m a writer for Rolling Stone, working on piece about upcoming IPCC report. I’m checking in with a few people to get their views on how they think it will be received. Thoughts?

Thanks

Jeff

Anthony's reply:

From: Anthony Watts
To: Jeff Goodell

My view is that AR5 is going to stillborn, mainly because it is already outdated by new science that won’t be included.

There have been 19 separate peer reviewed papers published in climate sensitivity to CO2 by 42 scientists since January 1, 2012 all describing a lower climate sensitivity.

There have been recent revelations in journals (Yu Kosaka & Shang-Ping Xie Nature 2013 and de Freitas &McLean, 2013 International Journal of Geosciences) that demonstrate ENSO (El Niño) in the Pacific is responsible for the 15 plus years of global warming slowdown known as “the pause”. These two papers strongly suggest natural variability is still the dominant climate control.

Then there is the lack of reality matching what the climate models tell us, such as this leaked graph from an AR5 draft:

Original from AR5 draft: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/ipcc_ar5_draft_fig1-4_with.png

Annotated version: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/ipcc-ar5draft-fig-1-4.gif

All this while global CO2 emissions have been growing steadily. The lack of temperature match to models, “the pause”, combined with these new ENSO findings tell us that global warming has gone from a planetary crisis to a minor problem in a Banana Republic where only a few vocal science rebels are arguing for immediate intervention.

The costs of mitigating the perceived problem are also staggering compared to the benefit, as the 50:1 project demonstrates:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw5Lda06iK0

best regards,

Anthony Watts

And what did Jeff Goodell write?

But, of course, this is nothing new. In 2007, when the IPCC released its Fourth Assessment Report, it was also nearly certain that human activity was heating up the planet, with grave consequences for our future well-being. And six years before that, when the IPCC released its Third Assessment, scientists were pretty certain about it too. But phrases like “high confidence” in warming do not, to the unscientific ear, inspire high confidence in the report’s finding, since they imply the existence of doubt, no matter how slight. And in the climate wars, “Doubt is what deniers thrive on and exploit,” says Bob Watson, who was head of the IPCC from 1997 to 2002. The final report has not even been released yet, and already prominent bloggers in the denial-sphere, like Anthony Watts, are calling it “stillborn.“

Rightfully, Anthony is a bit pissed:

What is most galling, is that Goodell asked me for my opinion prior the release of the IPCC AR5 report, then chastises me in his article for giving it. Whatta guy.