: heard on BBC2 (circa 20:00, 9th April, advertising a later programme)
Experts say it’s now or never to tackle climate change …
Taken literally, this is a very balanced presentation of the two main viewpoints on this subject. Some experts state that humans cause global warming and we must act now. Other experts regard that theory as scientific nonsense and see never as a more appropriate time to do the pointless and costly actions it recommends.
Alas, something in her tone persuaded me that the presenter did not mean it that way.
Nice link Niall – I particualry like this:
“Even doubling the amount of CO2 by 2100, for example, “will not dramatically increase the global temperature,” Dr. Shaviv states. Put another way: “Even if we halved the CO2 output, and the CO2 increase by 2100 would be, say, a 50% increase relative to today instead of a doubled amount, the expected reduction in the rise of global temperature would be less than 0.5C. This is not significant.”
“CO2 does play a role in climate, Dr. Shaviv believes, but a secondary role, one too small to preoccupy policymakers. Yet Dr. Shaviv also believes fossil fuels should be controlled, not because of their adverse affects on climate but to curb pollution.”
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=156df7e6-d490-41c9-8b1f-106fef8763c6&k=0
Now why can’t “our leaders” say things like this instead of getting everyones back up with the “impeding doom” statements.
A sensible debate would not be ammiss on the BBC.
There is a view that all this climate-change CO2 hysteria is being deliberately fostered by the government in order to soften up the Greens and their credulous Beeboid allies for the next logical step, which is to say: “Now we have no alternative but to build nuclear power-stations.”
White City will certainly be humming on the day that announcement is made…
Mind you, there is another point of view that says doomsday scenario is essential for the introduction of more taxes, more regulation and more European integration. Could be a combination of the two.
In the absence of an open thread, may I go OT on this one.
A slight drawback for an HYS:
What is the way forward for Iraq?
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=5983&&edition=2&ttl=20070410172528
You would think that if yet another BBC HYS is dedicated to Iraq, this is because some new and significant event should be considered.
So do the HYS editors, for whom this event is the Anti-American demonstration at Najaf on 9th April.
They accordingly inform us on the significance of the event: ‘Iraqi Shias are out in force protesting against US troops,’ and ‘Up to one million are expected after Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr branded the US forces “your arch enemy’.
However, contrary to the Beeb’s ‘Up to one million are expected’ [by whom?], most news reports after the event put the actual turnout at tens of thousands, with CNN as low as 5000-7000, which makes it a non-event.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&q=najaf&btnG=Search+News
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/09/iraq.main/index.html
And summrised by Gateway Pundit here:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/04/again-al-sadrs-protest-numbers.html
Not that I automatically believe the other reports, but at least they refer to the real event rather than to the turnout ‘expected’ [again: by whom? by Moqtada Sadr? by the Beeb?]
Now this HYS is closed after a mere 253 comments. Too embarassing, apparently.
here in America, the news did a story about it being the coldest April in decades, back to back with a doom and gloom global warming story…I don’t think anyone even noticed.
Helen said: “Mind you, there is another point of view that says doomsday scenario is essential for the introduction of more taxes, more regulation and more European integration. Could be a combination of the two.”
This would explain a lot – and how the EU can control a countries manufacturing.
The European Union Emission Trading Scheme is one such control where “… each participating country has a National Allocation Plan (NAP) specifying caps on greenhouse gas emissions for individual power plants and other large point sources.”
And this NAP “.. which is submitted to the EU Commission for acceptance. The Commission then decides if the NAP fulfills the 12 criteria set out in the Annex III of the Emission Trading Directive (EU Directive 2003/87/EC).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emissions_Trading_Scheme
If CO2 was proved not to cause GW, the EU commision would lose a lot of power over how countries run their industry.
There’s another argument that a large majority of scientific opinion suggests that man made climate change is a genuine concern and consequently more heed should be paid to looking at risk management approaches than listening to somewhat bonkers conspiracy theorists….
Not to say that the Beeb’s coverage isn’t pathetic though. Not representing the significant minority of genuine scientists who are sceptical (even the bonkers conspiracy theorists should get a bit of time), not representing the non interventionalist, market driven approaches to tackling it, constant wittering on about it every time its hot or windy for 2 days running…. crap crap toytown crap
The Left has seized on ‘global warming’ and Iraq because they appear to be two things about which it is correct , after generations of being totally and utterly wrong about everything else.
This is a misconception. The Left (and its friends in the BBC) is wrong about both these matters as well. As ever, time will tell.
Robbiekeane, whilst appearing more reasonable than many, nevertheless dismisses skeptics as ‘bonkers conspiracy theorists’. Such ad hominem is sadly typical of the greenies.
I think Helen had it right when she said this is all about taxes, and control. For a government to acknowledge the fluffiness of the man-made warming hypothesis – thus negating the need for green taxes – would be like a turkey voting for Christmas. So they fund the scientists who are willing to propagate the party line and shun or dismiss those that do not.
This was not done, as suggested by Smelter, to bring the Greens on side in anticipation of increasing nuclear power. Before this whole sudo-debate started, the Greens were rightly considered by most right-thinking people as a lunatic fringe party with Communist sympathies, and their opinions were hardly thought to be relevant. But now, amazingly, these fascists are actually considered by many to be a serious party.
What an ignorant and scary political age we seem to be entering. Remember what happened in Europe in the 30s and 40s after lunatic lefties took power.
Andrew Cochrane writes:
“Before this whole sudo-debate started, the Greens were rightly considered by most right-thinking people as a lunatic fringe party with Communist sympathies, and their opinions were hardly thought to be relevant. But now, amazingly, these fascists are actually considered by many to be a serious party.”
This is a very good point and one worthy of consideration by any future historian trying to understand how politics worked in the early years of the 21st century.
The Green Party has failed to make any significant impression on British voters, yet its policies, once regarded as extreme to the point of lunacy, are now widely adopted by the next generation of statist authoritarians, like Milliband and Cameron.
This has come about, ‘Greens’ will tell you, because they have ‘won the arguments’ but what has actually happened is that they have surfed to prominence on a zeitgeist of which they are both a symptom and a cause.
This wave has been propelled by the chattering classes who control the media, doing their bit to make sure ‘Green’ ideas become the received wisdom of our times.
Thus, no longer does one need to win an election to gain power. Winning the ear of the media-controlling elite is sufficient.
Check out Melanie Phillips recent posting (and weep!):
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1490
97% of all greenhouse gases is water vapour – problem is you cannot tax this!!!
Jon writes:
“97% of all greenhouse gases is water vapour – problem is you cannot tax this!!!”
Shhh!
“”The United States empire is on its way down and it will be finished in the near future, inshallah,” Chavez told reporters, ending the statement with the Arabic phrase for “God willing.”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214709,00.html
Hugh Sykes and now Chevez – could this be a way of spotting the new marxist?
sorry last one should be on a different thread.
Newsnight tonight was a classic of the genre. Panel on to discuss the year-long ‘Ethical Man’ ‘experiment’ re. saving the planet. Sure, with a great deal of pain and effort he’d reduced household CO2 output by around 20%. The rest of the panel (Miliband, Tory person, Green person, Huhne) all slapped backs and discussed how best to get the rest of us onside.
Bjorn Lomborg was on a videolink and was ignored for the first 15 minutes of the panel segment. When he was allowed to comment, he explained that the CO2 cut being discussed, if extended right across the UK, would delay ‘global warming’ by about 7 hours in 100 years time, and that it might be better to focus money and effort on problems today.
Back to the panel, who completely ignored him, and carried on with their CO2 fantasies…
I also saw the Newsnight discussion. It was unreal.
This from Al-BBC online on the Duke Lacrosse “rape” saga…
“The BBC’s Justin Webb, in Washington, says the charges had outraged many Americans, reminding them of the treatment of black people by privileged whites in years gone by.
Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans were accused of rape, kidnapping and sexual offence charges following a complaint from a 27-year-old student from another college that she had been sexually assaulted after being hired to perform at a Duke University party.
But the charges have been dropped because of insufficient evidence that an attack had taken place.
The collapse of the case will lead to further dismay and soul searching, our correspondent says.
The local prosecutor Mike Nifong, who once called the lacrosse players a bunch of hooligans, is facing trial on charges that he withheld evidence.”
Note that Al-Beeb only sat that the case was dropped thru lack of evidence , they don’t mention the fact that the black woman who cried rape is a pathological liar and that Democrat District attorney Nifong tried to railroad the accused white boys in order to win votes amongst the local black community. No mention either that the leftist academics at Duke decided the boys were guilty without seeing any evidence. For these “professors” it was enough that a black woman had accused white boys of rape – by leftist logic they had to be guilty.
No mention either by Al-BBC of how the leftist
US msm also decided the boys were guilty and ran countless stories about the “poor rape victim” – all of which turned out to be lies.
Al-BBC could also have mentioned that while this supposed “rape” was headline news all over the msm another more shocking and true story was ignored. A young couple in their 20s were carjacked in Knoxville, both were raped (man & girl) , both were murdered and had their bodies burnt. Any guesses why this disgusting incident recieved no press in the US or at Al-BBC..? Oh yes, the couple were white – their killers were black.
Sorry, my above comment wasn’t meant to be on this thread.
O/T
This is interesting:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6547881.stm
O/T again (sorry – time for another open thread?)
Al-Beeb is showing signs of being mugged by reality with the kidnapped (sorry … “missing”) Alan Johnston. Listening to John Simpson earlier, one can’t help but detect a real sense of “we’ve been so nice to the Palestinians, we helped Hezbollah to their propaganda victory last Summer against the evil Israelis, we couldn’t have been more helpful and appeasng to the Islamists, yet they’ve still gone and kipnapped one of our own!”
Oh well, I expect they’ll just be blaming Bliar/BushHitler round the dinner tables. Surprised they haven’t given any coverage yet to Mossad conspiracy theories.
BTW, when was the last time BBC journalists were protesting about that kidnapped Israeli soldier a year back?
Indeed, funny how the BBC will look after one of their own – posters, campaigns, etc etc to get their kidnapped reporter back. Where was the outcry when 15 of our Navy were captured? Oh, nevermind, they didn’t work for the beeb..
As for “racial” killings, how about the story BBC is currently peddling about the female asylum seeker being “racially attacked” by white men, although no proof at all this was racially motivated and not because a) she was an asylum seeker or b) she was a woman being harrassed by males or c) that she just happened to be there when an angry bunch of yobs wanted a fight. Nevermind investigating, always take the race angle!
anon:
Or it never happened!
Nevermind investigating, always take the race angle!
Otis:
‘Al-Beeb is showing signs of being mugged by reality.’
I shouldn’t think so for a moment. They keep mentioning Gaza being ‘lawless’, especially since the Israeli withdrawal, as if the criminal gangs at issue have sprung out of nowhere in the last year. It will not even cross the Beeb’s mind that these are precisely the same gangs as before the Israeli withdrawal, except that previously the Israelis had been keeping them at bay.
There was an obituary at the end of the PM programme yesterday, which was used as a way of putting out more anti-American propaganda.
Can anyone recall who the chap was? Did he warrant 5 minutes of air time? I had never heard of him…
Otis,
Surprised they haven’t given any coverage yet to Mossad conspiracy theories.
Yes, but they allow the occasional HYS comment hinting darkly at what the Israelis would have to gain from Johnston’s abduction. Here’s one:
Added: Friday, 13 April, 2007, 08:29 GMT 09:29 UK
The kidnapping of Alan Johnston is awful and truly negative for the world’s understanding of the Palestinian issues. However, it is creating a lot of publicity right now for someone. Is all this media activity really what is needed? One also has to ask – who benefits if he is not broadcasting the facts about Gaza? Are there governments in the region who don’t like the information he conveys?
[Clerkenwellman], London, United Kingdom
Recommended by 1 person
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=1&threadID=5911&&&&edition=2&ttl=20070413094636
However, they seem to be allergic to the two comments I sent them on Johnston. The published the first one, and then dropped it like a hot coal a few hours later. Then they turned their nose up at the second one I sent a few days later and wouldn’t even put it up on their site.
“BTW, when was the last time BBC journalists were protesting about that kidnapped Israeli soldier a year back?”
errrrr the Israeli soldier didn’t work for the BBC?? Having said that whilst anyone would be concerned about a colleague having to go through such an ordeal this orgy of self pity and concern really should be kept away from public consumption.
who benefits if he is not broadcasting the facts about Gaza?
This assumes he was doing so before he was kidnapped.
Of course the BBC is biased. But its wealth and influence put it beyond reproach.
Time to privatize it!
Had any of you heard about the left wing American novelist who died yesterday and had such coverage by the BBC ?
They broadcast a past interview with him from two years ago, in which he lambasted the “Bush Gang ” and said he spoke for many Americans who came from Vermont to San Fransisco who didn`t have a voice in USA politics.
This from the BBC, who hardly ever give coverage to anyone outside the LabConLib “gang”
So it goes…
Vonnegut wasn’t very good at all – his 15 minutes were up pretty quickly. You have to be a Beeboid of a certain age to feel the loss.
“‘BTW, when was the last time BBC journalists were protesting about that kidnapped Israeli soldier a year back?’
errrrr the Israeli soldier didn’t work for the BBC??”
Of course, but John Simpson recently said that the Beeb shouldn’t take sides. What is demanding (quite reasonably) that your employee be released from kidnap if it is not implicitly taking sides?
I have no problem with the BBC taking a stand on this one, as it happens, but I also think they should be just as ready to draw such a (correct) opinion in other cases, where it is not one of their own on the receiving end of some undoubtably criminal/ terrorist activity (and no I’m not talking Guantanemo).
Kurt Vonnegut was a major American author, perhaps one of its best. I would say he deserved his ‘five minutes of airtime’.
The BBC usually fails to acknowledge anything positive about America and would pick an anti-Bush interview to highlight anyone’s career even if they had ten interviews in the vaults on other subjects. Let’s call this one a draw.
Meanwhile it’s business as usual for the pro-islamist hacks at Al-BBC…
“Insurgents claim Baghdad attack
An alliance of insurgent groups linked to al-Qaeda says it carried out the deadly attack on the Iraqi parliament.
The Islamic State in Iraq said in a statement it had sent a “knight” into Baghdad’s highly-fortified Green Zone.
The claim came as lawmakers attended a special session of parliament to condemn the attack, which left one lawmaker dead.
In New York, the UN Security Council also condemned the bombing, describing it as a “heinous act of terrorism”.
In a statement read by the current chairman, UK envoy Emyr Jones Parry, the council called for “perpetrators, organisers, financiers and sponsors” of acts of terrorism in Iraq to be brought to justice.|
Notice how the Al-Beeboids put “Insurgents” in their headline despite the fact that even the liberal zombies at the UN describe the attack as terrorism . So Al-BBC now expect us to accept that a terrorist attack on the democratically elected parliament of a country is not terrorism but an act of “insurgency” – a word that implies for many people the idea of a legitimate group of freedom fighters rather than the callous murderers of innocent men, women and children . This gutless approach by our so-called “national broadcaster” is yet another reason why the British taxpayer should no longer fund the Korporation. If Al-BBc really believes people would willingly pay for it’s pro-islamist propaganda than it should have the courage of it’s “convictions” and go private. In a time of war against islamist extremism it is beyond belief that the British people should have to pay to fund a tool of the enemy.
One of Al-BBC’s favourite “charities” is Oxfam – a group who can’t help letting their obvious leftist worldview dominate their “charity” work. So when Oxfam launch a pro-Palestinian attack on the EU , it’s a match made in heaven for Al-Beeb…..
“Oxfam calls for Palestinian aid
Oxfam has called on the European Union to resume sending aid to the Palestinian government or risk its territories becoming a failed state.
A report by the British charity says the year-long boycott of the Hamas-led government has seen an increase in poverty in Gaza and the West Bank.
Oxfam said poverty levels had risen by 30%, basic services faced meltdown and factional violence plagued the streets.
This situation, it says, may prevent a two-state solution with Israel.
OXFAM SURVEY FINDINGS
Four out of five of 677 families saw a drop in their income following the boycott
50% of all the families reported losing more than 50% of their Income
90% of the managers running schools, hospitals and water services across the West Bank and Gaza said services undermined
Oxfam said the EU should not miss what it called an “opportunity to restore the faith of the Palestinian people in the Europeans’ role as an honest broker” of the Middle East peace process.
“International aid should be provided impartially on the basis of need, not as a political tool to change the policies of a government,” said Oxfam International Executive Director Jeremy Hobbs. ”
As you would expect with an Al-BBC story on two of it’s political soulmates we find no conflicting views allowed to intrude on Oxfam’s support for the terrorist thugs of Hamas. If this was a story on Migration Watch for example, Al-Beeb would have made sure that a pro-immigration group would have been given plenty of quotes and probably the last line in the story. But, of course, no such balance when it comes to a bunch of hand-wringing leftists promoting a bunch of murderous anti-semitic islamists. Notice how Oxfam tool Jeremy Hobbs says that whatever the politics of the Hamas government they should still be given international aid. Yes, I guess a little thing like calling for the destruction of five million Israeli jews shouldn’t stop us financing Hamas. Oxfam also doesn’t explain where all the billions that the Palestinans have already received from the EU has gone – could the money possibly have gone on rocket launchers, suicide belts, machine guns and car bombs ? Naturally Al-Beeb doesn’t think of asking.
Here’s a story from France Al-BBC will avoid like the plague..
http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/04/paris_blues_a_cop_killing_at_t.php
It’s about a French cop killed by a gang of “youths” a few days ago. Imagine the coverage the Korporation would be giving this if it was the Police who killed a “youth”…..
“Oxfam” should be in quotes. Remember when Oxfam was an Oxford based charity which raised money for famine relief? Now like all the others its a vast campaign group of media studies graduates writing press releases for their former classmates in the media
Quote:
“90% of the managers running schools, hospitals and water services across the West Bank and Gaza said services undermined”
This kind of lie is repeated all over. The people propagating it lie big and shamelessly. It doesn’t take much to discover that hospitals, schools, and all such services are run by UNRWA, which saw no ban or decrease on funds. The bans in question are those destined under the Oslo Accord for the government of the Palestinian Authority for creating an independent economy to eventually replace the endless charity, which the PA diverted instead to purchasing armaments and paying salaries to the members of various gangs bent on perpetuating the war.
Something’s gone very wrong … Al-Beeb have actually reported a good news story from Iraq.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6555339.stm
“British forces kill Iraq gunmen”
Someone’s head will roll for this.
I have gathered lots of pictures from various sources of the mass protests that have taken place in Moscow this past Saturday (and tomorrow in St.Petersburg). Please visit my site!
http://chicherin.blogspot.com/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6551689.stm
I’d like to draw people’s attention to this outrageously biased story on the BBC. It claims Jon Cruddas has no facebook site and is in fact backward. This is wrong as he was one of the first candidates to set up a group and it has 126 members. They don’t even bother to do proper research!
lol. the bbc is not biased.
although i would be happy to hear why!
I said this in the open thread without having seen this thread (I have been on holiday, that’s my excuse), sorry all.
…
I think there is a lot of dubious nonsense talked about global warming, but I happen to agree with the large number of wind turbines needed.
Why?
Because I think it is essential we move away from energy sources where we rely on anywhere apart from our own country.
Not gas and be beholden to Russia. Not nuclear and be beholden to sources of uranium. Not coal and be reliant upon imports. And certainly not oil and be beholden to the Arabs.
Yes we need more HEP, wave power and lots more wind power, all from the UK and nowhere else. I only wish we had the conditions for more solar power.
Unlike Al Beeb where it is do as I say not as I do.
(We all know that they are keen on wind turbines until they have to have them anywhere near their own homes.)
I would be happy to have a turbine or two near my house.
Here’s a thought to limit the impact of the turbine farms – build them up and down the sides of the motorways, then even the hippy tree huggers can see the benefit of the motorways. I have noticed it being started to be done in Belgium and Holland, why not here too.
…
The US is moving along in its pursuit of alternative to petroleum from the Arabs.
Even more so it is well advanced in plans for enormous solar panel ‘farms’ in the Arizona Desert, which could dramatically cut their dependance on non US energy especially possible Russian gas and Arab oil.
They are pursuing this policy for geopolitical and economic reasons, not ‘green’ reasons, but in this case the ‘logic’ coincides.
Strange thing, though perhaps not so strange as it is pro not anti American, but I’ve not seen too much about this on the IBC…
Jamal:
http://radicalmuslim.blogsome.com/
Got your name and number pal…..;)
Filithy little Islamofacist.