Yesterday, in a little read post because I didn't have time to do the BlogMad or BlogExplosion thingee, I said that the Earth had been hotter in human history.

Don't let anyone tell you that serendipity doesn't exist.

CNN published this story.

"...recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia," the study said. Well, of course. There was a little ice age 400 years ago.

I'm going to leave that argument, and return to another pet peeve of mine: the myth of journalistic impartiality. The headline for the story reads: "Study: Earth 'likely' hottest in 2,000 years". The quotes around "likely" implies that CNN doesn't believe in Global Warming.

Then, about three quarters through the article, there is a sentence that stopped me cold: "Watch as lawmakers argue saving the planet could ruin our economy". That single sentence, a link to a video, shows that CNN not only believes Global Warming, but that there is a definite left-leaning slant to the story. To be fair, the link was added after the story was written, no doubt by a web master who buys into Global Warming. That it escaped the editorial process shows that the headline writers and the editors disagree.

Journalists are human. They can no more be objective, despite all their protestations, than I can. Or you can, for that matter.