We don't blame those around here who can't help themselves because they don't know any better. However, we do hold to account the dishonest journalists & editors & news organizations -- including their colleagues who don't respond with corrections & apologies -- who blatantly, if not intentionally, publish disinformation (propaganda in some circles) to confuse the American public about what the climate science & leading climate scientists say.
Unfortunately, these kinds of distortions are all too common in the press nowadays and so we must all be prepared to respond to those journalists and editors who confuse the public with such inaccuracies.
The title itself is a distortion of what Jones actually said in an interview with the BBC.
The article [in the Daily Mail] also incorrectly equates instrumental surface temperature data that Jones and CRU have assembled to estimate the modern surface temperature trends with paleoclimate data used to estimate temperatures in past centuries, falsely asserting that the former “has been used to produce the ‘hockey stick graph’”.
Finally, the article intentionally distorts comments that Jones made about the so-called “Medieval Warm Period”.Time for science journalists at the Chron to man up before it's seen as just another Daily Mangle, if not just another ExxonMobil mouthpiece.
re: The post-Copenhagen view of U.S. climate policy in Europe