They take the data and interpretations from David Fogarty, an indisputable hardcore climate activist, who would be employed until recently as the "climate change correspondent for Asia".
Just try to appreciate how crazy such an arrangement was. A biased activist who makes Lysenko fair and balanced in comparison was hired by an agency for which the truth and accuracy is the main asset.
And he wasn't employed for a proper job that should exist in peaceful times. He wasn't hired to cover all of physical sciences or the whole Wall Street or the culture. He was hired to cover just stories about a fabricated tiny appendix of one of the least significant, least hard, and least prestigious subdisciplines of physical sciences. And in fact, he wasn't supposed to follow the whole climatology because it would be still too hard for him; he would only cover the catastrophic climatology. And he wasn't even supposed to cover all of catastrophic climatology; he could make living out of climate change articles about Asia.
So he was inventing, cherry-picking, and spinning stories about the environment in Asia, its hypothetical dark future, and the mankind's hypothetical cause behind that dark future, especially the carbon dioxide. He was earning tens of thousands of dollars by writing the same junk you may still see on his Twitter account.
Fortunately, in 2012, Managing Editor Paul Ingrassia took over and came out of closet as a "climate skeptic". See YouTube videos featuring him.
Well, I wouldn't say that Ingrassia – who has previously worked for the Wall Street Journal in... Detroit – is a true climate sceptic. He just can't be counted as a full-fledged climate activist. And in fact, he didn't even pretend to be a clearcut skeptic. The most accurate wording we have is this one from Fogarty:
In April last year, Paul Ingrassia (then deputy editor-in-chief) and I met and had a chat at a company function. He told me he was a climate change sceptic. Not a rabid sceptic, just someone who wanted to see more evidence mankind was changing the global climate.Incidentally, the full quote mentioned by Junk Science (and, consequently, Climate Depot) is completely omitted by Media Matters for America and other far left sources that just say that Ingrassia is a "skeptic". Clearly, they mean this label as an accusation of heresy and their goal is to activate the remaining cells of their movement and make them work to hurt Mr Ingrassia.
The quote itself and other signs make it rather clear that Ingrassia is a classic example of a "lukewarmer". Similar people react to the social environment that surrounds them. These opportunists' courage and their spine's rigidity is arguably bounded from above but they have some personal integrity and if the external pressures decrease beneath a certain threshold, they just start to behave honestly. It's encouraging to see that the atmosphere at Reuters has improved sufficiently so that lukewarmers such as Mr Ingrassia may have corrected their and their agency's behavior in this way. This particular manager could finally have done something that is expected from his job – to require impartiality as well as genuine news and information from the correspondents instead of propaganda that may be fabricated pretty much at any moment, regardless of the existence of any significant events that Reuters should impartially cover.
52% of the climate hysteria we had seen before April 2012 is still too much, however. Moreover, there are many other agencies and news outlets that haven't been dehysterized, not even to Reuters' modest extent. But Reuters is an important enough agency and this order-one correction is moderately good news, anyway.
Incidentally, Spain chose an amusing way to get out of the out-of-control photovoltaic fiscal black hole. By a new royal decree, they de facto nationalized the Sun by stating that whoever absorbs the sunlight without taxation may pay up to EUR 30 million in fines. So be careful not to get suntan while in Spain. When you analyze what this bizarre decree is supposed to achieve, you may see that it was written by the sensible people. Nevertheless, the detailed steps meant to undo some absurdities from the years when the climate hysteria peaked look comparably absurd. Via soylentrefuge.blogspot.com.