Paul Hudson, the BBC weatherman who in October was forwarded some of the Climategate emails (those relating to his article “What happened to global warming?“) has been gagged by the BBC. From the Hull Daily Mail:
When contacted by the Mail, the weatherman said he was not allowed to comment and asked us to speak to the BBC press office.
A BBC spokesperson said: “Paul wrote a blog for the BBC website on October 9 entitled Whatever Happened To Global Warming. There was a big reaction to the article – not just here but around the world. Among those who responded were Professor Michael E Mann and Stephen Schneider whose e-mails were among a small handful forwarded to Paul on October 12.
“Although of interest, Paul wanted to consider the e-mails as part of a wider piece, following up his original blog piece.
“Last week, Paul spotted these few e-mails were among thousands published on the Internet following the alleged hacking of the UEA computer system.
“Paul passed this information on to colleagues at the BBC, who ran with the story, and then linked to the e-mails on his blog this Monday.”
Hudson posted a brief follow-up to his original article on October 12, the day he was forwarded the emails. The emails weren’t mentioned in that blog post nor in the five subsequent ones written prior to the CRU story breaking last week. If Hudson wanted to “consider the emails as part of a wider piece”, he wasn’t in any rush to do so.
(Note – the Hull Daily Mail article appears to misquote Hudson’s blog, stating: “I was forwarded the chain of e-mails on October 23”. It actually says: “I was forwarded the chain of e-mails on the 12th October”.)
The BBC motto is and always has been, if in doubt edit it out. Gag the reporter and pretend nothing has happened.
The BBC are acting exactly like they have something to hide, they are desperate to kill the scandal because they are involved upto their dirty dishonest necks in dubious practices, insider trading, nudge nudge wink wink, lying, cheating and dirty tricks and blackballing dissenters/deniers/sceptics preventing them from getting BBC airtime.
I would just love to see the blacklist and what names they contain!
I don’t see anything about Hudson being gagged. What I do see is a lie from the BBC about what he was actually sent. In Hudson’s blog post about it, he says that he was forwarded “a chain of e-mails”, and that “the e-mails released on the internet” appeared to him to be the same. Nowhere does he say he was forwarded only a few that were comments specifically about his article.
Yet, the BBC defense appears to be that Hudson had only a select handful of those emails and not the whole incriminating package. His choice of the word “chain” could go either away, I admit. But it does imply that there were more than a “small handful”, as the BBC claims.
That makes a huge difference as to whether or not he sat on the story, and whether or not the BBC is telling the truth, or lying to cover up their own complicity. I know which I think it is, but let’s see how that plays out.
“don’t see anything about Hudson being gagged”
From the article: “the weatherman said he was not allowed to comment”
“Nowhere does he say he was forwarded only a few that were comments specifically about his article.”
On his blog he links only to the emails relating to his article. In his follow-up post he states: “As you may know, some of the e-mails that were released last week directly involved me and one of my previous blogs, ‘Whatever happened to global warming ?’
These took the form of complaints about its content, and I was copied in to them at the time. Complaints and criticisms of output are an every day part of life, and as such were nothing out of the ordinary. However I felt that seeing there was an ongoing debate as to the authenticity of the hacked e-mails, I was duty bound to point out that as I had read the original e-mails, then at least these were authentic, although of course I cannot vouch for the authenticity of the others.”
On the basis of this I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt (for now). I’m not so sure he was planning to do an article on them, as is claimed by the BBC Press Office.
Climategate
Let’s see:
a) subverting the peer review process
b) stacking the UN IPCC
c) obstruction of the Freedom on Information Act
d) breach of university and state ethics codes
… and we haven’t even talked about the data yet.
Climate Science – the new Ponzi scheme!
p.s. – Is this what Science is all about? Meet the new boss (science), same as the old boss (religion). When are they issuing funny hats to scientists?
p.p.s. – Who needs Wall Street when you have Science?