On David Marr and the greatest failure of modern journalism For years, most journalists in the mainstream media haven't just failed to question the global warming fear campaign. They have refused to even listen to any evidence against it, and have howled down those who dared present it. This has been the most shameful collective failure of journalism in the past 20 years. Journalists became propagandists, even witchhunters. If you think I exaggerate just watch the clip above from my time on the ABC's Insiders, which shows what happened when I mentioned the warming pause which had then lasted eight years. Note the scoffing of Annabel Crabb, now an ABC star in her own right. Note even more the rudeness and la-la-laa-not-listening routine of David Marr, the former ABC Media Watch host. The herd instinct at work. The true denialism. Or here is another example - the strongly warmist Age running this picture to mock sceptic Christopher Monckton over a symptom of his illness in order to discredit him and any who dared meet him: But the warming pause kept going, and is now so undeniable and so contrary to global warming theory that it has blown up this stifling "consensus." Professor Judith Curry, chair of the school of earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, describes the IPCC's desperate attempts in its latest summary to explain away a now 15-year pause in global warming: Here is the relevant text from the leaked final draft of the AR5 summary for policymakers: "Models do not generally reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10-15 years. The observed reduction in warming trend over the period 1998-2012 as compared to the period 1951-2012 is due in roughly equal measure to a cooling contribution from internal variability and a reduced trend in radiative forcing (medium confidence). The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the downward phase of the current solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing this reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that this difference between models and observations is to a substantial degree caused by unpredictable climate variability, with possible contributions from inadequacies in the solar, volcanic and aerosol forcings used by the models and, in some models, from too strong a response to increasing greenhouse-gas forcing. The IPCC acknowledges the pause and admits climate models do not reproduce the pause. I infer from these statements that the IPCC has failed to convincingly explain the pause in terms of external radiative forcing from greenhouse gases, aerosols, solar or volcanic forcing; this leaves natural internal variability as the predominant candidate to explain the pause. Natural internal variability is associated with chaotic interactions between the atmosphere and ocean... The IPCC refers to this as "unpredictable climate variability" in its statement above. My chain of reasoning leads me to conclude that the IPCC's estimates of the sensitivity of climate to greenhouse gas forcing are too high, raising serious questions about the confidence we can place in the IPCC's attribution of warming in the last quarter of the 20th century primarily to greenhouse gases, and also its projections of future warming. If the IPCC attributes the pause to natural internal variability, then this prompts the question as to what extent the warming between 1975 and 2000 can also be explained by natural internal variability. Many journalists must asked themselves why they never questioned an apocalyptic faith that is now collapsing. Why they mocked or shunned those who did. Such a sin against true journalism needs some explanation. Some newspapers are still actively promoting this obscene denialism. The Age, for instance, now has a scientist-in-residence, a warmist, who Age staff have been encouraged to consult when reporting on the release next week of the IPCC's report. What odds that any sceptical reporting will get through the Age filters?