Wonder what you make of the suggestion carried by the BBC this morning that “One in six homes in England is at risk of flooding, says the Environment Agency, and climate change will raise that number without better protection”
The agency calculates that funding for projects that protect communities from flooding from rivers and the sea needs to double to £1bn annually by 2035. Without that, it says, economic damage worth £4bn per year could be the norm. The agency’s report uses data from the government’s projections of UK climate impacts, published on Thursday.”
The BBC just loves this sort of climate alarmism and never provides a voice to those who challenge the wild claims emanating from The Met Office and the other organs of eco-wackery. In this way bias is consistent and never challenged. What worries me is that the power and presence the BBC has in so many homes throughout this land gives this insidious propaganda a real menacing aspect- brain-washing so many into accepting the radical environ-mentalist agenda.
More billhooks from the establishment. Simply priming the pump for punitive tax rises from Greed-on McDoom.
Thing is the more the BBC comes out with this crap, the less the masses believe it.
What do I make of it? That the only thing rising faster than water levels will be insurance premiums 🙁
Not a problem – bring in laws ensuring new building projects have sufficient drainage capacity which must be regularly maintained.
Annual clearance and maintenance of drainage systems and water courses (ditches, streams, culverts etc) is a major contributing factor.
Post 9:52 – should read
"Lack of annual clearance …..
As I pointed out elsewhere, the BBC were using Toll Bar as an example of flooding due to Climate Change. This 9like the fires in Australia) is a blatant lie by the BBC.
Toll Bar flooding was caused by an old drainage system not being able to cope with the water run off. water run off is caused by the ever increasing demand for housing, roads etc because of our ever expanding population.
This is the truth.
Oh and in the same report the BBC also lied when they claimed that grape vines could now be grown in the UK that could never have been grown before. Another lie as vineyards existed in the UK during Roman times.
Until the BBC stops telling lies people will simply see through it.
1 in 6 homes? And set to increase with the global warming that computer models are predicting and therefore are CERTAIN to happen? Sounds like the statistical experts from Tehran have been seconded to the Environment Agency. Better take out shares in the sandbag industry. Wonder how many agencies and academics rely on the perceived threat of climate change in order to ensure that they get more funding to make ever more calamitous predictions (still on the hockey stick curve are we chaps, or has that bit of statistical jiggery-pokery been quietly forgotten)? T
Still they can be sure of help from fellow travellers at the BBC, who understand all about the need to extract lots of money from the taxpayer to fund their activities.
…the only thing rising faster than water levels will be insurance premiums…
My blood pressure rises faster every time the Beeb starts spouting about climate change.
2 female friends – both graduates in their 50s – convinced that MMGW is a fact – I cannot get them to question what they hear on the BBC – and even screaming 'look out of the flipping window' and question 'why you are wearing a pullover in June?' doesn't make them want to question more! It is on the BBC so it must be right!
Is the BBC at last wondering whether it is a victim of its own hysterical propaganda on 'climate change'?
Last night, 'Newsnight' at first regurgitated its Gore gospel, but then, via the gabbling Wark, seems to say: 'hang on a minute, is this irresponsible propaganda'.
(Available at BBC iPlayer, see from 36:43 secs in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/newsnight)
The science is turning against the Climate Change / Global Warming.
It has been a lucrative gravy train for many “scientists” and opportunists (Al Gore), and an opportunity for socialists and their media cohorts (BBC) to flex their bullying muscles. Soon it will be over; they cannot keep glossing over the facts for ever.
They global warming alarmists know it and are getting ever more hysterical in their calms to try and scare people back into their corner. The funny thing is that the claims get ever more apocalyptic the less and less the population accepts them with credibility.
Deborah said…
screaming 'look out of the flipping window' and question 'why you are wearing a pullover in June?'
Yes, it is shaping up for the third crap summer in a row – how many more until people notice the disconnect twixt propaganda & experience (hotter, dryer??)
"Yes, it is shaping up for the third crap summer in a row…"
Where are you, the Outer Hebrides? I've been in t-shirts and shorts since march. Long may it continue!
Cockney said…
Where are you, the Outer Hebrides?
No, West Yorkshire. It would seem that the North/South divide widens.
Its getting quite obvious that while the BBC are controlling the news being broadcast, real people are telling themselves how cold it is for this time of year.
I still wonder about all the people who worried endlessly about the horse manure which was making life awful in Victorian London – someone projected that in 1980, horse manure would be so vast in London that the city would be inhabitable!
remember the cold and snow of last winter? Funny that the self same 'met office' doom mongers predicted a mild and dry 08/09 winter … http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2008/pr20080925.html
It has been widely reported that the BBC held an unpublicised conference at which eco-loon lobbyists convinced the high-ups there was incontrovertible evidence that MMGW was 'a fact'.
As a result, the Corporation abrogated its charter obligation to be impartial and has broadcast a more or less incessant stream of biased pro-MMGW propaganda since.
If there is any single issue that highlights the danger of having a monopolistic broadcast news source, it is this.
Fortunately, the evidence of our own eyes is so at variance with this nonsense that hysterically banging on in the way it does simply serves to demonstrate to most people how far removed from reality the BBC is.
In a curious way, by being so blind on ths issue, it is actually helping our case.
On the subject on Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever they are calling it tis week. The BBC are not biased, they just simply lie and make stuff up.
The problem I have with these kinds of reports is that they are not backed up with any kind of sensible evidence. It all seems like guesswork. Analysis derived from hypothesis carried out by so called "experts" – what makes them experts?
Cry Baby "what makes them experts?"Drips under pressure
"The problem I have with these kinds of reports is that they are not backed up with any kind of sensible evidence. "
Actually, they are. Unlike David Vance's assertions to the contrary, certainly. But then when has Vance let the facts get in the way of proclaiming that he's right?
The Met Office forecasts for the next – or even the next day – are not trusted much.
So it looks likely that the normally-sensible proles will ignore this latest MetOffice warm-mongering.
Oh dear, this will put a fly in the ointment re the gov'ts house building plans.
GBA (not anonymous)
Scott, …
empirical evidence against the AGW lie is given regularly on websites such as:
http://www.friendsofscience.org/
http://icecap.us/
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/
http://jer-skepticscorner.blogspot.com/
For the BBC's contribution to the debate: check this:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/lies_damned_lies_and_bbc_clima.html
Where can we find your evidence, other than the loaded computer predictions used by the self-interest lobby groups of the scaremongers?
Anonymous: "the loaded computer predictions used by the self-interest lobby groups of the scaremongers?"
I thought Biased BBC were going to take away the anonymous function to stop it being used by fucking morons?
(PS: previous Scott was me – hadn't realised I was currently signed in under a different Google Account. Sorry.)
I was recently speaking with a new collegue who referred to the AGW "Consensus". After asking him "what consensus, and pointing him to the many sources that express doubts on the subject he was shocked to find how weak the ocnsensus he'd been told about really was. I then pushed a bit further and asked where he'd heard about this near total consensus. I think everyone here will be able to guess his answer; the BBC. I just indicated that he had now been shown one example where the BBC is less than reliable, and that he may want to excercise a little scepticism when he hears anything else from that source.
He is not yet converted, but a seed has been planted.
Well Scott, seeing you're in 'defend the BBC at all costs' mode, how about addressing the issue of the BBC's refusal to report the growing amount of scientific data which refute the AGW hypothesis it so routinely champions?
Or are you just trolling, as usual?
I got some stats off the Met Office site for average UK temperatures which do, in fact, show a rise of average yearly temperature between 1961 and 2000 of 0.3 of a degree centigrade (11.8 to 12.1). This is/was in line with the claims made by the Met Office, on their site, of a rise in UK temperatures. However, what they do not state in their AGW spiel is that the margin for error in the statistics is 0.5 of a degree centigrade. Thus they cannot claim with any certainty that the temperature is rising at all.
I emailed them to ask for an explanation, saying I had obviously got hold of the wrong of the stick (hoping they'd be more likely to reply if they thought I was on-side) but, naturally, received no response.
If only Cameron had the balls to out these lies he'd ensure Labour were finished as a political movement. Instead he's all to ready to take the tax income accrued from them.
Not much chance of the Beeb airing this then…
http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3
or this…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25182520-2703,00.html
As the number of sceptical scientists increases, I am ever hopeful that the outpourings of BBC eco-wackos, jumped-up journalists, climate change doommongers and other worrying grandmothers will be permantly consigned to the dustbin.
This report about Japan's 'weak' climate target is written from the perspective of true believers. Here's a good breakdown of the BBC's bias:
Numerical Evidence Of Richard Black's (And the BBC's) Biased Climate Reporting
Plenty of other heresy here as well.
happyuk07, cheers for the links, they pretty much shit on the warmist's cornflakes. Of course Scott M will be along shortly to put us right…
It's intriguing that whenever trolls like ScottM are challenged, they resort to ad hominem abuse, without actually addressing the evidence presented. There is plenty of evidence out there both on the internet and the dead tree media that there is at least a healthy body of opinion which disputes the so-called consensus about so-called Global Warming. One of the most reputable is the website "Wattsupwiththat" which regularly debunks some of the rubbish such as that ludicrous trip to the Arctic by those clowns who set out to prove a presumed theory rather than go with an open mind. This was presented on the BBC in a way that was the mirror image of the truth.
THAT is my beef with the BBC – that it refuses to put out any form of balanced argument – a good definition of bias in my book.
I don't look for bias towards MY point of view, just a fair crack of the whip for BOTH sides. Surely this is what their charter objectives state?
'I thought Biased BBC were going to take away the anonymous function to stop it being used by fucking morons?'
Canny be working as your still on here scrott !!
One of these day's all the MMGW supporters and the unintelligent (Read ScottM et al)
who suck in everything the halfwits at the BBC churn out will have to confront their own gullibility.
Then they will perform the same trick the BBC pull all the time, just remove it quietly from the agenda and never bother to mention it again.
Viola… no red faces, no need to justify their own stupidity, just scan round for another "cause" and pick right up on that.
Impressively thick….
Clearly they are mixing 2 phenomena.
Alleged rising sea levels (as per the picture) such as made attenborough say on V that by 2026 "most of Norfolk will be under water" which is pure & simple lies. Sea level is rising at a few inches a century & has been since the last ice age & even the IC forecasts only 14 inches by the end of the century.
And a possibly genuicne increase in the number of houses flooded because swamp land is being built on. The effect of this from any putative global warming is unknown. See the prediction a couple of years ago when there were floods & we were informed that the future would be full of floods & the prediction the previous year when there was a drought & the BBC predicted a future of drought.
On top of all these is the minor fact that after 30 years of alleged global warming temperatures this summer are where they started.
I've read quite a bit about climate change and it's all guesswork really!
Don't you just love the BBC? The latest bit of news that the Police are going to investigate 'some MP expenses' is a laugh.
As I have pointed out NUMEROUS times the worst exploitation of expenses has been by the Socialists. The Tories have been guilty of some stupid stuff (the Moat and the Duck house) but the SLEAZE involves Labour. WE all know that, but the BBC's headline would make you think twice.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8110022.stm
Try and find a mention of Labour in the article. BBC 1 News is reporting the story and the Labour MPs. I bet that as soon as they can find a tory the website will have TORY all over it.
Martin,
The more you complain about this, the more Nick Robinson will come on and remind everyone that it's both parties, and most MPs are just horrified that people loathe them. And then he'll endorse Ma Beckett for Speaker again.
More bollocks from the BBC on the 6PM News. The dopey female beeboid stated "last night we told you HOW the temperatures will rise over the next…."
No. The report made 'predictions'. They were not statements of facts. Within 24 hours the BBC turns a prediction into a FACT.
lies lies lies lies from the BBC.
um…1952 anyone?
http://www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk/the_lynmouth_floods_of_1952_exmoor
1953?
http://www.suffolkestuaries.co.uk/1953Floods/default.htm
And while we're on the subject: here is the synopsis of a History Channel programme called "Mega Disasters: Prehistoric English Floods"
"This series is a scientific examination of extraordinary Megastorms of the prehistoric era. We will use science and technology to recreate Megastorms from the past 100,000 years. For example, a storm in Sicily 8,000 years ago triggered an avalanche that created a devastating tsunami taller than a 10-story building that spread across the entire Mediterranean Sea slamming into the shores of three continents in only a few hours. This information comes from core sample analysis of the earth's layers over the past 3,800 years."
Me? I blame Bush.
David Preiser: Yep. I bet we will have the Nu Liebour Mafia out in full force over the weekend. We will get endless mentions of the 'similarities tot he Tory sleaze of the 90's'
Labour are corrupt. I have to totally agree with what Iran said about our Government today!!!
The pointless navel gazing indulged in by the global warming movement, and promoted to the point where I want to remove my own fingernails with pliers by the BBC, is worrying on several counts.
Number one, it is clear that many western governments, and in particular our own money grubbing McSporran, intend to use the fear of the calamitous prospect of a couple of degrees temperature rise (a prediction unsupported by any meaningful data, and if it were to be true a not unpleasant one in these temperate isles) as a reason to further raise taxation and simultaneously slow down spending on public works (like building effective flood defences etc). In parallel utility companies and insurance providers will leap onto the same bandwagon in order to increase their share of the booty. Of course, the BBC, a major beneficiary of the public purse, and the official mouthpiece of the ruling party will promote this tosh as long as its masters wish it to.
Number two, the UK economy is still in freefall despite what the BBC propaganda machine would have us believe. In particular the productive sectors which earn us the foreign income we use to pay for food and energy are being left to wither on the vine by McSnot and his cronies. The distraction of a panic about a non-existent threat and resultant idiotic measures to "tackle" this threat (control the weather) will only serve to take us into the vanguard of the low carbon economy group.
Along with places like Ruwanda and Ecuador.
Thirdly, there is a rising economic power in the east which has absolutely no interest in the West's climate obsession, except where it is able to use it as a lever for additional aid in order to pay for the development of "low carbon" technologies. This is guaranteed to raise their economic profile, unfettered by bollocks such as "cap and trade", toward the point where it begins to challenge that of the USA, which looks like it is falling for the global warming claptrap as readily as we are.
It is not clear how this rising star will handle its new found global muscle, but it a fact of history that once a nation achieves economic prominence, it is not long before it starts to flex its military muscles.
A very worrying prospect, and in this case based on historical experience rather than bent statistics.
I am hoping for a series of very cold winters in succession.
Wish this global warming caper would hurry up. The tomatoes and sweetcorn on my allotment could do with a lot more heat 😉
It seems these speculative press releases are always uncritically gobbled up and spat out by the BBC, you can be sure that you will be seeing more and more of these items, getting more and more unhinged as we approach the big Copenhagen climate conference in December. In the meantime, I will find it interesting observing how the BBC maintain this level of hysteria without once bothering to stop and analyse the myriad groups and special interests that position themselves and maintain this conveyor belt of alarmist gibberish. I’m sure we will be seeing more 'documentaries' and special 'debates' that will be firmly managed and on message as get nearer December.
Have a look at this.
The author, Peter C. Glover, directly nails the BBC over its MMGW bias.
On a broader issue, I've recently been reading a little more from perhaps the most persuasive anti-MMGW advocate, Lord Monckton; specifically what says underlies the 'Green' movement and its obsession with 'climate change'.
He seems convinced that what we are experiencing is a post-Berlin wall regrouping of the Marxist Left trying to bring about some form of world government through the UN.
I wasn't convinced by this at first but as time passes I am starting to think he is quite right and that explains. at least in part, why the BBC (ever an advocate of Leftist UN worship) has been so ready to join the parade.
Where are the Green party on this subject and what happened to common sense? Instead of praising mass immigration , the BBC should point out that millions of people coming into the U.K to adopt the western lifestyle is a disaster for our country. This just proves that the global warming story is an ideologically motivated tax raising con trick.
What shall we all celebrate today to keep the bread and circuses going.
How about celebrating a black nurse. My time in hospital employment as a decidedly pond life member was sometimes enlivened by shouts (rants had not been invented) from English nurses SRNs no less who had worked hard and devotedly to the top of the tree as Ward Sisters bemoaning the skiving Irish nurse but went ballistic when confronted with a black one, even worse than the Irish and that’s saying something!
I propose we celebrate the work and dedication given to the British hospitals by the Irish nurses and other Irish men and women who have mostly crossed the pond to USA and Canada, I kid you not.
And, Jerry Adams can pay back all his blood money he has received by false pretences over the years, taking the piss or what?
I'd be more prepared to believe the BBC's propaganda about climate change and the imminent global catastophe it will cause if the corporation decided to drastically cut back on its activities to save energy.
How much CO2 is generated making the unecessary rubbish that is 95% of the BBC's output? Why does the BBC send many more staff to distant events like the Olympics or the US elections than other broadcasters? Why does it boast of covering a car glorifying and very un-green sport like F1 motor racing?
The BBC is typical of eco-gloom and doom mongers like Prince Charles, Gore, Monbiot and the affluent 'green' Guardian types. It wants to tell everyone else to cut down on energy use but is reluctant to do so itself.