global warming

Following the election, it became painfully obvious that mainstream liberal news outlets were out of touch with half of the country, and had a serious lack of intellectual diversity among their journalists. It appears that some of these media outlets are learning their lesson. The New York Times, for instance, has recently hired a conservative columnist named Bret Stephens, who published his first article last Friday.

His piece, titled “Climate of Complete Certainty,” was somewhat skeptical of man-made climate change. Because of that article, the New York Times learned another important lesson. Apparently, many of their liberal readers can’t handle any opinion that even remotely differs from their own.

take our poll - story continues below
Completing this poll grants you access to DC Clothesline updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

In his article, he complained that there was a wide gap between scientists doing thorough and rigorous research, and global warming cheerleaders who are over-hyping the threat of global warming. He warned that just because the data produced by scientists looks solid, doesn’t mean we should stop questioning it. “There’s a lesson here. We live in a world in which data convey authority. But authority has a way of descending to certitude, and certitude begets hubris. From Robert McNamara to Lehman Brothers to Stronger Together, cautionary tales abound.”

He goes on to say that he still believes that humans are contributing to global warming, but we can’t be certain of how serious the threat of that warming is. “Anyone who has read the 2014 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change knows that, while the modest (0.85 degrees Celsius, or about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit) warming of the earth since 1880 is indisputable, as is the human influence on that warming, much else that passes as accepted fact is really a matter of probabilities.”

Whether you agree with that or not, you have to admit that Stephens is putting forth a pretty uncontroversial opinion. He didn’t even deny man-made climate change. He merely suggested that it’s not an open and shut case, and we shouldn’t stop questioning the data.

And for that, liberals took to Twitter en masse and threatened to cancel their subscriptions to the New York Times. One twitter user wrote “Global warming deniers get enough of a voice with this administration, I’m disappointed you are giving them a voice at NYT.” Another added “Think it’s time to cancel my subscription.”

Despite an increase in subscriptions since Trump was elected, the paper continues to hemorrhage money; a trend which has been going on for years. It appears that they’re about to lose many of the subscribers that they’ve gained over the past few months. And so, the New York Times is about to learn its third lesson. Once you wed yourself to the far-left, there is little or no escape from bankruptcy and irrelevance. The moment you try to adapt to changing times, and try to offer more opinions, the far-left will turn on you.

Daniel Lang is a researcher and staff writer for The Daily Sheeple – Wake The Flock Up!