> How can you tell when the media might be biased on global warming?

How can you tell when the media might be biased on global warming?

Posted at: 2015-03-12 
One thing about the drought in California no one talks about is how the people there rerouted all the water in the area to support the oil fields in Los Angeles. Much of this area is a desert naturally and can only support these huge populations because they take more water then what falls as rain/snow. Nature is just doing what nature does, this is not a problem created by so-called "global warming"

>>Talk about searching for some indication of an increase in droughts. Look at the graph. You see an increase? Look at the title and what they are presuming will happen? See a problem given the data? <<

It is a graph of the percent area of the western US that has been in drought. It shows exactly what it says – that more of the west is experiencing drought than it has since 1150-1160.

The fact that you are too stupid to read a graph is your fault – not the graph’s.

>>the discussion at the end. Leading to more rain and/or less rain WHILE saying colder la nina caused the droughts. <<

It says “cooler water temperatures----known as La Ninas” It is the water temperature that defines a La Nina.

The first three months of La Ninas are typically associated with:

1) higher temperatures and lower precipitation in the southwest

2) lower temperatures and higher precipitation in the northwest

>>Why don't they just say they have no idea at all???<<

That is what you should be saying.

From the sounds of it you don't even know what the causes of droughts are.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.10...

Regarding your article it states specifically that droughts are cyclical in nature in this region and they are unsure of what will occur in a warmer world in this specific region. They are not doing biased reporting. You are just reading what you want to read.

jello^tm



In other words, the solution is to use energy sources other than oil. Exactly what the "warmers" are saying.

When they blame a storm on climate change or a fire caused by arson . And they have no proof at the atomic level .

Dook, Learn the difference between a hole in the ground and the nether orifice your head is stuck in.

Learn the difference between:

Science and the news media,

The news media and media,

The past and the future,

Politics and science,

Bias and deception about bias,

Probability and knowledge.

The media is biased about everything.

Ot is "bias" wjen they pront what you do npt want to hear.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/02/california-megadrought/14446195/

Talk about searching for some indication of an increase in droughts. Look at the graph. You see an increase? Look at the title and what they are presuming will happen? See a problem given the data?

And the discussion at the end. Leading to more rain and/or less rain WHILE saying colder la nina caused the droughts.

Why don't they just say they have no idea at all???