If the facts don’t fit the models, simply change the words to fit the facts.
Although the headline in the Wall Street Journal speaks of “climate change,” the video at the top of the page shows a man walking through a snowstorm.
Hmmm. I wonder why they’d use a photo of a snowstorm in an article about “climate change”?
We’ve already watched them change the words from “global warming” to “climate change,” because their drastic global-warming scenarios never materialized.
Could it be that we are now watching the ever-so-sly Orwellian changeover from “climate change” to “global cooling”? After all, much of the United States did endure record low temperatures this past winter, and record snowfall.
Of course, even though the headline talks of “climate change, and even though temperatures haven’t risen in more than 17 years, the article itself still wails about global warming.
It talks of “mitigating global warming,” and insists that “only major institutional and technological change will give a better than even chance (of controlling) global warming.”
“Major institutional and technological change.” Hmmm. Could that mean “let us shove our hands even deeper into your pockets”?
See entire article, entitled “U.N. Climate Change Report Says Worst Scenarios Can Still Be Avoided”:
http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702303663604579498721229249160-lMyQjAxMTA0MDEwMzExNDMyWj
Thanks to Bob Mann for this link