Newsweek makes the mistake that they accuse Lomborg of doing. "As Friel shows, Lomborg sourced that to a blog post and to a study that never mentioned polar bea

Newsweek makes the mistake that they accuse Lomborg of doing. "As Friel shows, Lomborg sourced that to a blog post and to a study that never mentioned polar bears." Here is the blog post: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2888 http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2888 It tries to debunk a WWF claim on the polar bears. After I found this out, I was not going to bother to read the rest of the article, I have a low tolerance for plain lying, and would flip out for something like this IRL. EDIT: Actually, the quote is tricky, is it saying that the blog post doesn't cover polar bears or that the study does not? Anyway, the link they provide to the study doesn't work. So it's hard to check their sources. Also, the study doesn't have to cover polar bears, Lomborg could just have been fact-checking the blog post, making it a more legitimate source (hey, it's Cato, a think tank, not that there's anything wrong with being biased, as long as you stick to the truth.). Conclusion: The Newsweek article is just sloppy journalism, I didn't even finish past the quote I provided, and they made too many errors before then to be taken seriously. MSM shouldn't get away with sloppy journalism.