Proselytising for man-made global warming is a major theme running through many BBC alleged news items. If we get through a day without being asked to worry about the polar bears drowning or some other such invented headline grabbing nonsense, then some little greenie Beeboid has failed in his solemn duty to preach the gospel of the eco-wacko left to us sinners.
Any notion that our preening State broadcaster might approach the important topic of climate change in a serious and balanced manner is just so much, erm, hot air! You see for the Beeb the wisdom of Rev Al Gore prevails, “the debate is over” and now it’s time that we paid for our wicked excesses. (Literally, by accepting nefarious eco-taxation, for example)
I read this latest PR exercise on behalf of the anthropogenic global warming fanatics with some bemusement. The story here is that a study commissioned by the pro-AGW Government has found that AGW could lead to the possibility of the UK experiencing lethal heat waves in the summer but milder winters. Malaria outbreaks remain a possibility, oh and if that doesn’t get you, the floods will! Dog bites man. A real story would be covering one of the many reports which throw cold water on the scalded AGW topic – man bites dog!However even the tenured authors of this report acknowledge that “in conventional thinking” terms predicting these drastic temperature changes is “difficult.” I’ll say – if we can’t predict with any certainty the weather for the next seven days what is the likelihood of getting a four year forecast right? I also love the way this historically unprecedented putative heat wave is instantly linked to 6000 deaths, how scientific is that?
By way of balance, no one who disputes AGW claims gets to comment at all but good luck ensures that a spokesman for the NHS gets to declare that tackling climate change is a key priority for our Health Service. Sorry? An NHS which struggles to deal with lethal bugs in its own filthy wards is now out to tackle dangerous gases in our atmosphere? More taxes to pay for this brave NHS initiative?
It’s interesting to consider how this all works. The State Broadcaster propagates the ideology of its paymasters in Westminster, via a State funded report, and uses the State Health Service to underline just how awful things will be unless we change our lives and accept what the State declares to be best for us. Don’t know about you but Northern Ireland could sure do with some hot summers – I’ll buy air conditioning if necessary!
“Don’t know about you but Northern Ireland could sure do with some hot summers – I’ll buy air conditioning if necessary!
I will always remember living in Omagh watching the news about the heatwave hitting the mainland and me having to put on water proof shoes a wooly and a Barbour in which to venture to the local Spar.
I heard this too.
What a crock of sh*t.
I spend three or four months a year on a little island within 100 odd miles of Africa where it regularly hits 40C.
Loads of mosquitos, no malaria, hardly any aircon and the old folks live well into their 90’s.
I also used to live on the Gulf coast of Florida.
Bugs galore but malaria unknown.
These people must believe we’re all as ignorant and/or gullible as they are.
Well we’ve already had tosspot Harrabin & Shuckman dribbling on about a mild winter.
Funny but on my last gas bill it showed me how much gas I’ve used this year and the same for last year. I’ve used a lot more in the same period this year. Why is that do you think?
They’ve been going on about how mild the days are at the moment, but the nights are very cold still and as we all know it’s not unknown to get snow or a really cold spell later on in Feb or March.
Malaria or Ague as it as it was known in England, was rife during the little ice age with high death rates on Romney marsh and in the Thames estuary marshes of Kent and Essex. In the 1920’s there were outbreaks of Malaria in Poland and Russia as far North as Arkangel. So it seems unlikely that the .6 degree C of warming since 1860 is likely to have any effect on the spread of maleria.
This is just one more “Prepare to meet thy doom” scare.
Apart from that the latest figures from satellite and Giss data show that world temperatures are plummeting so all this is old news anyway.
Anyone for the Ice age scare again!
At a rate of what seems at least once a week, probably more frequently, the BBC suggests we all worry in the light of latest figures and analyses.
The BBC assures us that not only is GW happening, but is accelerating at some alarming rate and soon the poles will have melted, the sea levels risen and low-lying villages covered with a rising tide.
Apparently it’s all down to you and me.
We are regularly informed by the BBC that if our wicked capitalistic, CO2-producing ways continue, we will perish. We’re so brainwashed by all this many of us don’t even think to question it.
GW is still essentially an opinion, nothing more, based on tiny sample data and dodgy computer models and is now promoted as scientific fact, regardless of the lack of real evidence.
Diligent scientists calling for hard evidence are routinely disregarded by the BBC, who prefer sensational headlines.
The result is that many think the Earth is still heating up and hotter than it has ever been. But…
1999 was cooler than the year before and since 1998 the world has been cooling. The hottest day in history was in 1922 at Al Azizah, Libya 1922.
Have a look outside. Is there a global catastrophe? Is there an ocean that is rising?
You can bet your bottom dollar that whatever the news item, some silly bugger at the BBC will find a way to blame it on global warming. They’ve forgotten the moral of the Emperor’s clothes.
Ok, so your rebuttal of man-made global warming, with its “tiny sample data” is based on a data sample of four dates, one of which is today, the data being “the world hasn’t ended.”
I see the BBC 10 0’Clock news ran this with full on hysteria! It’s the end of the world I tell you..the end…. what a laugh, the BBC confirms everything I said. Propaganda, not news.
Andy: It doesn’t matter, the BBC and the other liberals will simply call it something else.
Take the London Congestion charge. Now it’s a “Carbon” charge, so red Ken has given up pretending to be interested in cutting congestion and is simply going after 4X4’s.
As pointed out on C4 news this will only cut a few thousand tons of Carbon per year.
OK I think driving a big 4X4 around London is pointless but the biggest form of pollution from traffic are cars, trucks, busses and taxi’s sitting in miles of roads clogged up by Ken’s silly traffic calming measures.
And as Richard Littlejohn pointed out, most of the money raised by the existing charge is simply used to fund the thing, very little is spent on improving public transport or the roads.
Not that the BBC would tell you that.
Angry Young Alex
There are those among the Biased BBC suppoters with scientific backgrounds, and can I just remind you, that man made global warming is not proven at all. Now, I AM a fair man, and unlike the BBC, will put forward a fair and balanced assessment of global warming. The kind that has not been seen anywhere near BBC analysis for over a year (hell they invite George Monbiot on to talk about it, and he’s got a degree in zoology and knows nothing about climate change, or economics, sorry, pet hate there).
On the one hand, it is accepted that carbon dioxide traps heat of certain wavelengths emitted from the earth, this ‘in theory’ could contribute to a warming earth. A study of Venus’ atmosphere is very suggistive of such an outcome (runaway global warming due to high concentration of CO2 in atmosphere there). However, on earth there are lots of feedback effects, which reduce warming (or increase it). None of these effects are well understood. Now what global warming supporters have is the theory of CO2 trapping heat, and a correlation between higher temperatures with higher CO2 atmospheric concentrations over the last 30 years. It supports a theory. It certainly proves nothing. Then the IPPC have computer models. This part is the bit which is complete bollocks. The computer models are virtually unreliable. NO computer on earth is capable of accurately modelling the earth’s atmosphere. Ever wondered why no one can accurately predict the weather a week in advance? Why trust the IPPC and its computer models? They’re all based on assumptions, which are not proven.
Finally, the day I lost ALL respect for the global warming story was when the IPPC, with UN support, had the front to say they were 95% certain that man was responsible for global warming. This smacked of a political statement and not a scientific one, as science could not provide such a statement. Basically, in my opinion, the politicians thought they could get away with saying this as they had waited long enough to convince most people. It is has become too politicised now for me to be accepted as truth. Politics has overtaken the science.
I should add, that I don’t necessary think that the whole “WE must be scared of global warming” line is necessary a bad thing, whether it is true or not. We are running out of oil, we need an alternative. If this means we use our remaining resources more sensibly, and buys us time to find an alternative, then fair enough.
But as for global warming, surely every right thinking person must be skeptical of how things have been presented recently. It simply isn’t good science anymore.
Do you remember the days when the BBC used to broadcast long range weather forecasts for a month ahead? This included the famous ones in the summer 1976 which forecast normal rainfall, when over large parts of England not a single drop fell. Eventually the BBC stopped braodcasting them, but they still exist. One issued in mid January forecast a long dry spell in the latter half of January. Well where I live there is more water standing in the fields than I have ever seen and I even have a , hitherto unknown, stream in my garden.
So the forecasters not only can’t get an immediate forecast right, I have lost count of the number of times the weather at the time of the forecast is completely different from the forecast, but they can’t even get a monthly forecast correct. So forecasts for decades ahead need to be treated with great scepticism. In the last couple of months China has had its worst snow storms for 50 years and parts of Eastern USA their worst for 100 years. Funny global warmimg!!!!!
Angry Young Alex
“Ok, so your rebuttal of man-made global warming, with its “tiny sample data” is based on a data sample of four dates, one of which is today, the data being “the world hasn’t ended.””
No, I have plenty more to say, just didn’t want the post becoming overly long. Of equal importance was having a pop at BBC plonkers.
You want more dates/data? Coming right up:
Satellite data from NASA says the Earth has only heated by 0.04 of one degree in the last century, which would be expected from natural fluctuations.
The reason this data conflicts with the land-based temperature measurements that GW alarmists like to use is because they are less accurate and and are taken from cities, which are warmer due to their ambient heat (vehicles, buildings etc), expansion and replacing of trees and vegetation with asphalt. (source: science@NASA, October 20th, 2000).
It’s often claimed that historic C02 levels were far lower than the 370 million parts per million by volume of today. However the average level in the 19th century was 334 ppmv. Leaf analysis shows that almost 10,000 years ago the level was 348 ppmv.
C02 fluctuates, but there is no evidence that it causes warming. 50 million years ago, the atmospheric C02 level seems to have been around 2000 ppmv, yet temperatures were only around 1.5 deg higher.
You think a warm period is unprecedented?
During 800-1200 AD the Earth enjoyed a much warmer environment than it does now – closer to a Meditterranean climate in the north of England. The Romans are well documented as growing vineyards in the North of England.
Greenland is so-called as it was once so fertile and cultivated by the Vikings, before becoming covered in permafrost.
There was also a cooling period between the 15th and 19th centuries that was dubbed the Little Ice Age.
Statiscally, global temperatures have been static or falling since 1998.
Between 2003 and 2005 the oceans suddenly cooled, losing 20% of the heat they had gained in the previous 50 years.
Let’s hear some scientific evidence from you.
“The story here is that a study commissioned by the pro-AGW Government has found that AGW could lead to the possibility of the UK experiencing lethal heat waves in the summer but milder winters.”
The fun comes in that the BBC reports extreme cold in places like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, but makes no mention of “global warming” because that only happens in summer.
Here in Australia the Big Dry is over and Sydney is experiencing a typical English summer – its raining a lot. Temps are well down on average – we should be around 30C but its below 20C
This is clearly a result of the large La Nina in the Pacific. But a modern society like Australia can cope with weather change so long as it can use cheap energy – something the greens want to get rid of.
The BBC’s coverage of climate change is preposterously biased.
C’mon Alex, where is your scientific evidence? I’d like to hear some original scientific commentary from you.
dont forget ppl, when Al Beeb try to get u all to “switch off” on Earth Day, turn everything on, except Al Beebs propaganda, keep that turned off
expect a lot more climate change propaganda from the beeb over the next 2 weeks in the lead up to E-Day 27-28 Feb, 2008
“dont forget ppl, when Al Beeb try to get u all to “switch off” on Earth Day,”
What about the respirator?
A rise in temperature is good for mankind in general and that is a well known historical FACT. ALL of humanities most prosperous times have been during warm periods, not cold ones.
Warm periods 4-6 degrees higher then our present average temperature.
We should therefore be welcoming global climate change it is GOOD NEWS not BAD.
However future change seems on the evidence I have seen to be more likely to be negative, not positive.
If it does get colder, which it more then likely will, and soon. Will I be given a tax incentive to drive my BMW 7 series as much as possible?
Somehow I think not.
Welcome to the land of Nod.
We are playing god again and thats his job, he will not be happy.
This is a elitist plan that was started 20 years ago in our universities and then our schools. Our youth have been brainwashed and are too young to understand that this is the case. this is why all the talk and all the realities will make no difference.
Too much investment of countless billions in propaganda and otherwise useless technologies would be going to wast, if we all regained our senses.
This is why we are now stuck with this EVIL NAZI inspired bullshit. Even if it started snowing in July.
The entire western worlds future corporate capitalist prosperity is now dependent on selling this simply enormous lie to the rest of the world.
And the likes of Al Gore Zac Goldsmith and David Cameron know it.
It may be better then selling them tanks and guns but then thats not the point, or maybe it is the only point?
Government propaganda like this latest heatwave deaths scare should be transmitted as public information films rather than as news. BBC news, especially on TV, is downmarket enough without the inclusion of the latest ‘information’ designed to justify more taxation.
It’s interesting to consider how this all works. The State Broadcaster propagates the ideology of its paymasters in Westminster
I’d argue the paymasters are in the civil service; after all, will the BBC propagate the ideology of the Conservatives (no comment about how different from Labour they are or aren’t) if they win the next election? They sure didn’t propagate Thatcher’s ideology!
I think the so-called Conservatives are worse than Labour. Quite a feat
can’t find the link but the beeb coverage yesterday was headlined by thinking that the warming might be a good thing in Britain, i.e. heat related deaths would be outweighed by pensioners not freezing to death.
i say this all the time, but the problem with the beeb’s climate change coverage isn’t that they infer that most experts agree it’s happening (which is indisputable), but that they always run away with any new hysteria (paper says it’ll be four, five, A HUNDRED TIMES WORSE) and that there’s no attempt at a cost benefit analysis of wrecking the economy vs just coping with some of the effects. If there’s a normal distribution where the outright socialist conspiracy deniers are at the far left then the beeb is at the equivalent far right George Monbiot end.
If you look a little deeper, you will find that the constant pushing of the climate change agenda is in fact simply the government’s underhanded attempt to prepare us all for Peak Oil, which is very real, and very very scary.
Bjorn Lomborg argues that increased deaths through heatwaves will be balanced several times over by reduced numbers of deaths from hypothermia. Not that the BBC would know that.
Malaria ended in England when we drained the swamps, more particularly the fens and the Isle of Axholme. Not that the BBC would know that.
” . . the government’s underhanded attempt to prepare us all for Peak Oil, which is very real, and very very scary.”
I wouldn’t be too scared since, predictably, this report has been ignored by our government and its PR transmission belt (well, using the BBC search engine, I can’t find any reference to Cambridge Energy Research Associates since a World Service mention in 2006).
The reason that the Westminster scum are all on the climate change bandwagon is simple.
MONEY MONEY MONEY. It’s a way for the pigs at Westmister to screw us for more taxes without people daring to kick up a fuss.
ALL I repeat ALL politicians are lying scum and they will all jump on the bandwagon with the BBC.
Just a thought on the Great Malaria Doom:
Mosquitoes don’t suffer from the malaria parasite. They are just the vector that takes the parasite from one host to another. For malaria to return as a problem, then by standard epidemiological principals, there would have to be a sizeable reservoir of the disease within the human population that it could spread from. If the parasite is not present, then it doesn’t matter how many mosquitoes breed in the foetid swamps of the Bluewater shopping centre car park, if the chances of any of them biting a malarial host are zero then the odds on any of the same mosquitoes going on to bite a second person are zero over a very large number ;¬)
Or to put it another way, avoiding a malaria outbreak is much more a matter of immigration control – human that is, not insect.
It’s one thing to turn on the news and be given a whole lot of nonsense about climate change but to turn on Waterloo Road (which I quite enjoy watching) and being preached at yet again about the danger of anthropogenic climate change is beyond a joke.
There is scientific evidence that CO2 traps heat, because of the nature of the molecule. However, so does ozone and you know what happens if we don’t have an ozone layer.
No computer in the world can successfully calculate ALL the factors relating to energy transfer between the earth, space and atmosphere and so no predictions are wholly accurate.
As for oil, there are groups who believe we’ll never run out of oil. The truth is we can now access oil that we couldn’t access 10, 20 years ago thanks to advances in technology which enables us to extract oil from places we never dreamed of.
It’s all about money. The government wants our money. As if that wasn’t obvious.
Tim Blair reveals the eco-zealots’ latest ACC wheeze: if it’s cold it’s global warming.
The reason for colder climates is that convection in the deep ocean is altered by an increase in temperature, so there is less movement of undercurrents which typically bring warmer water to northern Europe. So ultimately some areas will become colder because of the earth heating up.
That may be true but then if the earth is cooling down it will have much the same effect on northern Europe so anthropogenic-global-warming zealots can’t lose.
If it gets hot – it’s our fault; if it gets cold – it’s our fault.
Either way we’re screwed!
“As for oil, there are groups who believe we’ll never run out of oil. The truth is we can now access oil that we couldn’t access 10, 20 years ago thanks to advances in technology which enables us to extract oil from places we never dreamed of.”
Quite correct. Centuries at least, given the unexplored oil fields and untouched oil shales of the world.
This may extend to millennia if we tap the vast reserves of methane hydrates at the bottom of the ocean.
Has anyone else noted a marked deterioration in the BBC AGW ‘evidence’reporting? I mean it was never very good to start with but now its taking a nosedive into comedy!
If David Gregory is out there, please go and take a look at the ‘antigreen blog’ there is an article by some German scientists who pick the CO2 induced AGW theory to pieces(bigtime).
Perhaps you might take a good long look at some real scientific evidence(peer reviewed) and get back to us? I can asure you that we await your analysis with great anticipation.
back in 2000/1 Al Beeb did actually have balanced reporting when it came to global warming.
i dont know whats happened since that time, maybe they hired a couple of unqualified ppl to report on the “science”
On radio Scotland this afternoon there was a report from Afganistan from a hospital where patients had had limbs amputated. Nothing unusual about that you say. But these limbs had been blown up but were suffering from severe frost bite caused by appalling snow storms and the worst winter in decades!!
Several times recently I have heard reported on the BBC the ‘fact’ that there was record low amount of ice in the Arctic last summer. What is never mentioned is the unusally large amount of ice there was off the North coast of Iceland last winter.
The wheels are slowly falling off the AGW bus – 9 years of cooling since 1998, coldest January (globally) for 15 years, snow falling in Tehran and Saudi, etc, etc – but the Beeb still push the warmist position like mad.
Must be an important shibboleth to them for some reason.
I tend to believe it is for the simple purpose of justifying further daylight robbery by highwayman Brown and his far less able colleague Mr Darling on the grounds of saving the planet.
Anything more sinister would require my imagination to endow the Beeboids with far more intelligence than the bulk of evidence suggests they own.
I wonder how much actual measured climate data will be required to get them off this particular trip. I can picture Humphrys, Naughtie and the rest still reporting the warming threat as the first glaciers creep down Wood Lane.
With a bit of good fortune they could become polar bear food.
idiotboy – thats why the term has changed from global warming to climate change, so they can catch every single weather event as proof of mans destruction of mother earth
A Fable of Global Warming
If global warming is a reality, then can someone at the BBC tell me why my living room is so blood freezing cold at the moment?
I’ve got the storage heater up full blast and it’s still as cold as Penguin poo in here.
Explain that one eh Dr. Gregory?
Oh I should explain to BBC types that a storage heater is what some working class people use to warm their houses during winter.
Unfortunately I don’t have a huge open wrought iron fireplace in my gaff, nor an army of coal-wallahs in the basement stoking a gigantic boiler with shovelfuls of coal for six shillings ha’penny a week or whatever you bastards use for fuel and slaves in you massive houses paid for off the backs of working Mums, helpless grannies and the poor and the infirmed.
How you lot even sleep in your beds at night is beyond me.
The BBC. Working class enslavement. It’s what we do.
If you’d leave it at things like “there are countless scientific papers disputing AGW” people might take you seriously. But no, you have to add “If the world is getting hotter, how come it was cold this morning?” or “If global warming is caused by human activity, how come there’s no hot water in my boiler?”. It doesn’t really count as evidence.
Oh, and People’s Front: Penguins being birds, and therefore warm-blooded, their poo is probably fairly toasty. I don’t think we need further proof that man is destroying the planet.
“man is destroying the planet”
This is a scientifically meaningless statement. The hypothesis put out by the IPCC is almost as vague and scientists are turning against it in droves.
Here are just a few.
i used to b a denier, then i saw this
‘The hypothesis put out by the IPCC is almost as vague and scientists are turning against it in droves.’
Philip, even my 8-year-old daughter understands the concept that if you set up a body or an organisation specifically to find evidence of something, they probably will. IPCC anyone?
you’re right Rob, there is a direct link between the decrease in pirates and the rise in global temperatures
I was ‘taught’ at school, that there was probably only 20 years of oil left and that Britain would be a patchwork of islands due to Global Warming by about 2020.
When that doesn’t happen, can we please put this MMGW bullshit to sleep, or will we just extend the time period to 2050?
Mr Anon | 14.02.08 – 2:09 pm | #
Aaaaargh – my eyes – my ears; I repent, I repent; please forgive me for ever doubting the most high Prophet Algore (PBUH) and save me from this dastardly (hotness,coldness,wetness,dryness,windiness, calmness – whatever).
its a good job that the use of subliminal messages is outlawed, Al Beeb has a bit of a history of being the first to use them on radio and TV.
“… Penguins being birds, and therefore warm-blooded, their poo is probably fairly toasty. I don’t think we need further proof that man is destroying the planet.”
You haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about.
Get some real facts and figures on this issue and and engage in the debate instead of trying to be clever will you?
Now go away.
You bloody Americans just don’t get sarcasm.
Let’s face it, the temperature of post-penguin fish is not much stupider that ‘global warming doesn’t exist because we’re having a cold snap’. We can either debate this with science or we can debate it with bollocks. But you can’t ask for science and provide irrelevant anecdotes.
And you bloody Alex’s don’t get anything.
1. I’m not American.
2. You know nothing about science.
Bugger off and go and talk bollocks elsewhere.