Interesting thought on the liberal bias effectively working against their cause. The MSM in the US is generally too superficial in their news coverage to deal with this type of situation. This combined with the cherry picking of topics (which they report – Climategate being an example) does create an open flank that can be strategically utilized.
This subject (AGW) requires in depth reporting as you correctly point out and the only group doing solid reporting and inducing fresh subject content here is Fox cable news. They have been reporting on the scandal, but not to the degree or depth necessary to racket the story up to the next level.
Another point you make is that environmentalist groups that are true to their cause need to quickly distance themselves from the IPCC and AGW. In my opinion they need to represent that they care about the environment first and foremost and are not advocates of AGW as a method in bringing down capitalism and installing progressive socialism.
However, they need to act fast or risk being caught onboard an obviously sinking movement that will tarnish their credibility.
I believe the UK Telegraph (not the Guardian) is more deserving of a hat tip for covering the scandal from its beginning. It’s been amazing to watch the effect of the internet (best website for information is WUWT ) on the progression of this story and how it’s grown since November of last year despite MSM coverage.
In the end, people don’t like being lied to and “played” by parties seeking to capitalize via a scam, which this clearly was…
..the backlash will be significant.
I think you are crediting the UK papers with instigating investigations whereas the true investigator who is coming up with the facts is Richard North on his EU Referendum blog http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/, and the UK mainstream papers have been pushed by their readers to cover the story mainstream.
North seems to be a bulldog with a passion for the truth.
What your post is essentially saying is that Liberals in the US are dumber than the Republicans?
I was initially scared like most people were I believe, by the first Gore predictions some years ago, but when I investigated further, I found that there were so many holes in the science that AGW is simply not credible.
Maybe other people are also doing their own research and coming to the same conclusions?
Now with the release of the Climategate emails and more importantly, the Harry_Read_Me file with the data, which are all available on the internet for anyone to read (except the Liberals apparently), opinion is definitely changing.