The Daily Mail photo is very misleading in that it leads you to believe that the bears in the picture are the ones who are stranded, rather than just resting on a convenient berg. The error is compounded in the other stories because the photo caption is accepted as gospel and then reprinted. But except for possibly the original attribution, I see no malice here. For example, in the ENS piece, the misleading photo and caption are present, but the other two pictures show bears walking on rocky ground. Surely if they wanted to put together a deliberately misleading piece they would not have included these shots too.
No, TB, the last thing I'd assume is that you're an idiot. For one thing, look how effectively you have deflected the argument from whether or not the facts are true to whether or not the press can be trusted. The implication you are propagating is that the press must be ignored when it talks about global warming. Instead of arguing the facts about the issue in question, we're talking about polar bear pictures. And that is not idiotic, that is very clever.
Off Topic » in reply to Really.
Point taken. You are absolutely correct.
The whole thread (42 posts)
- Those poor, lost polar bears...
- Saw an article on a helicopter which was shot down.
- Things must be slow at work, TB.
- Blogs, Limbaugh, etc.
- How are the spotted owls doing?
- Beats the hell out of me.
- re: How are the spotted owls doing?
- Screw the spotted owls!
- How are the spotted owls doing?
- A clarification...
- Not really.
- Blogs, Limbaugh, etc.