Previous Environmental Hysteria Apologies? When Will Fractivists Say “Sorry”?
The Sierra Club has basically apologized for its environmental hysteria about a starving polar bear. When can we expect fractivists to say they’re sorry?
By Stephen Heins, The Word Merchant, LLC
There is an original December 2017 National Geographic magazine story about a gut-wrenching video and narrative of a dying polar bear video, which was the most visited piece in the publication’s history.
After 8 months, the National Geographic and the writer of this piece of climate alarmism and scare tactics have publicly APOLOGIZED (caps mine). Just amazing and it raises all sorts of questions about other instances of environmental hysteria
In all honesty, there have been many examples of the kind of reporting National Geographic did, replete with exaggerations and falsehood, lately. While I don’t have space to include them all, I have been researching the publication of a recent Stanford University study about climate warming and suicide in 2050 in US and Mexico.
First, I noticed that dozens and dozens and dozens of stories in the national enquirers of national media and the “near-tabloid science media” showed up on my Google search. All of this coverage on a highly speculative study looking 32 years into the future.
Here are a few examples of the headlines and media sources. Also, I have included a more complete list of all sources of environmentally prejudicial (a recent Time Magazine cover comes to mind) news sources (emphasis added to illustrate the tenuous junk science nature of the environmental hysteria conclusions involved):
- The Atlantic Magazine headline: “Climate Change May Cause 26,000 More Suicides By 2050”
- USA Today headline: “Global Warming Risk: Rising Temperatures from Climate Change Linked toRise in Suicides”
- CNN headline: “Climate Change Study Ties Warming Temperatures to Rising Suicide Risk”
- MIT Technology Review: “Climate Change Could Drive Tens of Thousands of Additional Suicides in North America”
Ultimately, the following additional news outlets also wrote a piece about the release of Stanford Study:
The Atlantic, USA Today, CNN, MIT Technology Review, Time Magazine, Atlantic Journal Constitution, Nature Journal, ScienceAlert, National Geographic, The Independent (UK), ZME Science, The Guardian, Philly Voice, The News Leader (VA), Scientific American, Fututity, Fortune Magazine, Discover Magazine, MSN, EcoWatch, You Tube, Newser, Nature Climate Change, Science Daily, Reuters, The Mercury News, Weather.com, The World News, Palm Beach Post, Chicago Sun Times, The Huffington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Climate Depot, HealthCentral, Public Health Newswire, Philanthropy, News Busters, Inverse, Common Dreams, UC Berkeley, E&E News, Press Reader, The Globe and Mail, First Coast News, New Scientist, The Daily Beast, American Public Health Association, Forbes, NOLA.com, Tech Times, Yahoo, Google, Climate Change Dispatch, RealClearEnergy, 2050Kids.com, Global Construction Review, Psychology Today, Grist, The Quint, Chicago Tribune, Carbon Brief, BW Business World, Stanford University, University of Washington, over 35 local TV stations, and many, many small presses and web sites.
It’s nice National Geographic apologized but when will we see the apologies for all the other environmental hysteria out there?