"Six paragraphs into the story, Revkin kicked his spin machine into overdrive. "The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material is unlikely to erode the overall argument," he wrote.
In short, he dismissed the evidence rather than reporting it. While he couldn't ignore the story because it's too big, he did the next best thing -- tell his readers the news doesn't matter...The other angle that Revkin has addressed only in passing thus far is the fact that his close connections in the global warming community make him a part of the story. E-mails to, from and about Revkin were part of the online document dump. Power Line dug into some of those notes." http://www.aim.org/aim-column/andrew-revkin-spins-climategate-story/
From Accuracy in MediaFor fairness, balance, and accuracy in news reporting
These hacked emails are not a smoking gun they are a mushroom cloud.
This Revkin ploy was used by Noam Chomsky about 911. 911, the biggest historical event in a half a century, whose aftermath will effect the coming century said, "Who cares? There are more important things to think about."
The Slimes are gatekeepers, not for the left, but for the cabal of oligarchs, and their zionist/neocon administrators. They represent the ongoing theft of the nation as tax payer's money go to fight two illegal wars based on another lie.
This fraud is too big to cover up. Global criminal investigations are coming. It appears the Slimes can’t stand the heat, so they will get out of the kitchen. The goose will still get cooked though and the Slime's reputation will suffer once again.
From the same article ""The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won't be posted here," he wrote -- as if the Times hasn't published illegally obtained news before.
Blogger Ed Driscoll aptly called that sentence "a staggering moment of hypocrisy" on Revkin's part. Michael Goldfarb of The Weekly Standard added: "If Revkin's position is that he will not reproduce publicly available e-mails simply because they put the authors -- whom he happens to agree with and whose increasingly questionable agenda he happens to support -- in a bad light, then he ought to consider another career."