Writing in Forbes Peter Gleick
observes that
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board has long been understood to be not only antagonistic to the facts of climate science, but hostile.
This may have been the result of the appointment by Rupert Murdoch of
Robert J. Thomson
Mr. Thomson will soon become much more familiar to The Journal’s staff, because he is the one charged with executing Mr. Murdoch’s vision for the newspaper
and
Gerard Baker
Mr. Baker, a neoconservative columnist of acute political views, has been especially active in managing coverage in Washington
Peter Gleick continues
..But in a remarkable example of their unabashed bias, on Friday they published an opinion piece that not only repeats many of the flawed and misleading arguments about climate science, but purports to be of special significance because it was signed by 16 “scientists.”
..255 members of the United States National Academy of Sciences wrote a comparable (but scientifically accurate) essay on the realities of climate change and on the need for improved and serious public debate around the issue, offered it to the Wall Street Journal, and were turned down.
The WSJ editorial claimed that there is
No Need to Panic About Global Warming and
There's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.
On
many occasions Rupert Murdoch has made his
views on climate change clear
Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats. We may not agree on the extent, but we certainly can't afford the risk of inaction
We must transform the way we use energy, and of course not only because of climate change...
Quite clearly Rupert Murdoch is
not a man of his word.
