Sydney Morning Herald - spinning good news into bad

The double-standards in reporting issues relating to the climate is hilarious, especially in the alarmist press like Fairfax: any bad news is immediately linked to "global warming", whereas any good news is spun so that it's not really good news at all! Heads I win, tails you lose.

The "good news" in this case is that out of three models of glacier retreat in Greenland, the one that most closely fits the data has little to do with "global warming". However, here is how the Moonbat Herald spins it, having grudgingly conceded that the third model fits best (but whilst at the same time noting that even this third model is still related to "global warming" - phew). Count how many times the good news is caveated. And for good measure there is an "Everything's Actually Happening Faster Than We Thought" Alert:

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted in 2007 that sea levels could creep up by 18 to 59 centimetres (7.2 to 23.2 inches) by 2100 due to thermal expansion driven by global warming.

Such an increase would be enough to wipe out several small island nations and seriously disrupt mega-deltas home in Asia and Africa.

But [the] IPCC failed to take into account recent studies on the observed and potential impact of the melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, prompting the Nobel-winning body to later remove the upward bracket from its end-of-century forecast. [No mention of the myriad other factors the IPCC "failed to take into account", but which don't advance the "consensus" like, er, the sun?]

A new consensus [Science has nothing to do with consensus] has formed among experts that levels could rise by a metre or more by 2100, according to Mark Serreze of the National Now and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorodo.

"What has puzzled us is that the changes are even faster than we would have though possible," he said in a recent interview. [When has a global warming alarmist EVER said that something is happening more slowly than predicted...?]

Vieli cautioned that his findings, published in Nature Geoscience, are narrowly focused on one glacier, and that sea levels could still rise higher than the IPCC's original projections. [That's right, the data from one glacier ALWAYS shows less than what's really happening - never the other way round... How do they manage to choose the wrong glacier every time?]

Other Greenland glaciers behave differently, and the dynamics of the Antarctic ice sheet are still poorly understood [Hang on, surely the science is settled, right?], he noted.

Nor should the new study "be taken out of context to suggest that climate change is not a serious threat -- it is," he added. [Perish the thought]

The ice sitting atop Greenland could lift oceans by seven metres, though even the gloomiest of climate change projections do not include such a scenario. [But the Sydney Morning Herald article does, of course!]

Read it here.

UPDATE: The story actually originated from AFP (thanks to Climate Change Fraud), and the other media still gleefully parrot the alarmism...