I was listening to our "8 cents a day " ABC NewsRadio this morning.
They had a piece on some birds in Peru who are becoming extinct as they continually migrate further up the mountain as the temperature increases.
They referred to a piece from some expert on BBC.
It was all about "climate change" and what happens to these birds as they feel the impact of a change in the weather. For example, the impact of a 0.5 degree increase and what could happen if it increased further.
NOT ONCE did anyone say CO2, AGW, emissions need to be controlled, etc etc etc.
NOT ONCE did anyone say we need to find a way to adapt to the ever-changing climate and do that for our wildlife too.
It was left to the listener to make the connection that mankind was bad and causing the climate to change leading to loss of wildlife, etc etc etc.
When will we get the alternative views we expect from a publicly funded media organisation? Do we need to legislate to force our publicly funded media organisation to provide alternative arguments and experts on various "defined" issues?
