The Associated Press (AP) has officially sold out to globalist warming groups. The “news” outlet acknowledged it received a huge amount of “philanthropic grants” to the tune of $8million from climate change enthusiasts. You can expect them to start pushing a global warming and climate change agenda in their “news” going forward.
The Climate Depot’s Marc Morano described the move as “checkpoint journalism,” saying that climate lobbyists now have control of the AP to use as a means to output climate change propaganda.
“The AP will now have zero ‘obligation to serve as watchdogs over public affairs and government’ and instead be approved messaging lapdogs to their paymasters,” said Morano, who quoted the AP’s stated mission and objective.
“Will the AP ever offend [its] donors and look critically at the UN IPCC climate panel? Or NASA? It’s a laughable thought.”
The AP will now be under control of the Rockefeller Foundation and other globalist funded groups. No doubt they will now be pushing any climate agenda that they are told to push.
“This initiative, with the help of the Rockefeller Foundation and others, will enable us to closely examine efforts to cope with climate change, both the problems it poses and its potential solutions,” said AP Deputy Managing Editor Sarah Nordgren.
Of course, it’s convenient to keep the climate change narrative going, as it justifies some of the radical policies that the left is trying to push, like shutting down the use of fossil fuels and inviting everyone to rely on “green” energy, that is largely unreliable.
“The announcement illustrates how philanthropy has swiftly become an important new funding source for journalism – at the AP and elsewhere – at a time when the industry’s financial outlook has been otherwise bleak,” the AP admitted.
“This far-reaching initiative will transform how we cover the climate story,” says Julie Pace, the AP’s senior vice president and executive director.
The changes, however, violate the Society of Professional Journalists’ “Code of Ethics,” that journalists are supposed to adhere to.
Climate alarmists have been challenged though, with a new paper that has been published in PLOS Biology, that found that concerns around the acidification of ocean water – climate alarmists back up plan in case climate doesn’t warm – were “grossly overblown.”
After analyzing 91 studies, researchers found that the better the quality of the study, the more it tended to find only small effects on fish – in contrast, the more dramatic the results, the smaller the sample size, which would of course make those studies less statistically reliable.
“Experts” have warned for many years that ocean acidification will affect fish behavior and somehow make them more likely to be eaten by predators, stating that pH levels would rise higher and higher with more carbon emissions. But the study suggests these “experts” are exaggerating.
“We contend that ocean acidification has a negligible direct impact on fish behavior,” wrote the authors of the paper. They also noted that lower-quality studies are “published in high-impact journals and have a disproportionate influence.”
It’s no secret that climate change is big business, as it is allowing governments to literally make money out of thin air, using guilt and fear on citizens, so they accept to paying more tax to “combat” it.
James Delingpole wrote in 2016 that, “ocean acidification is a trivial, misleadingly named, and not remotely worrying phenomenon which has been hyped up beyond all measure for political, ideological and financial reasons.”
Citing author Matt Ridley’s writings in the Rational Optimist. “Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a backup plan by the environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm. I agree. That’s why I like to call it the alarmists’ Siegfried Line – their last redoubt should it prove, as looks increasingly to be the case, that the man-made global warming theory is a busted flush,” Ridley said.
Arizona Daily Independent News Network, reported on December 26, 2014, that NOAA had committed fraud in a Congressional testimony regarding the subject.
“It has recently been uncovered, that a NOAA scientist, Dr. Richard A. Feely, used ‘cherry-picked’ data in testimony before Congress in 2010,” the report said.
“They claim that our carbon dioxide emissions will produce ‘acidification’ of the oceans that will cause marine life to die. These claims ignore the fact that marine life evolved when atmospheric carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than now. The oceans have never been acidic, even when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher, but the pH has cycled within the alkaline range of 7.9 to 8.2 correlative to the Pacific Multi-decadal oscillation,” the report said.