Credit where credit is due – the BBC has reported with a straight bat the sensible call by Conservative MP David Davis for a major re-think by his party of the £55bn that is being spent on useless ‘climate change’ measures. But it’s a drop in the ocean. Elsewhere the relentless barage of doom-mongering continues. This sordid, highly-selective, deeply dishonest piece from Richard Black continues his record of being the most biased science reporter filing in the MSM. Contrast that to an editorial in the Times this morning. Even though Murdoch’s sons, like the BBC, are ‘climate change’ fanatics, they at least concede that the CRU emails revealed practices and an outlook that were crass and anti-science. Something that Richard Black and his cronies are singularly unwilling to do.
DAVIS WARNING
Bookmark the permalink.
Quandary for the BBC – which angle to push?
Davis undermines Cameron vs Davis criticises global warming scam
what went wrong with the CRU is that they got involved with the politics of climate change, and abandoned the science of climate change
it’d be good if Dick Black started concentrated on the science of climate change, rather than the politics, but i suppose he has to think of his job, if the Dick reports honestly, he’ll end up on the dole
Oh look! Richard Black has finally mentioned Climategate.
I notice in the last article it mentions Michael Mann and his claim that despite the CRU e-mails (didnt mention the code is crap), MMGW is irrefutable. Isnt Mann being investigated? Isnt Mann completed tarred with the same brush as Jones? Oh Dick…..you forgot to mention that didnt you? Oh and Dick mentions James Hansen. Another one linked to the CRU. Dick…Dick, please make sure you put out all the facts. Dont lie. People dont believe the scam any more.
PM, the Radio 4 news programme, has its lead item on ClimateGate and Saudi Arabia saying they want no action until it is all sorted out. Comments followed by BOTH Black and Harrabin – and then an anodyne interview with the East Anglia University Vice Chancellor about the review he is setting up. Much will depend on who runs the enquiry – will it be a proper job, or a whitewash ?
It will be a whitewash, believe me. The word is that Lord Rees, a long time convert to the AGW religion, will lead the inquiry.
well its nice to see Dick Black back on the global warming propaganda machine, now hes on about the usual lefty wamest crap about man and carbon dioxide = dangerous catastrophic human iduced runaway climate change
it looks like this was prepared in advance for the copenhagen UN IPCC moonbat festival and before climate gate
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/8386319.stm
Just latched on to this page which, half down, has a drop down menu for a glossary, just below that is link for people to “Suggest additions”. Well thank you very much, my suggestion of ClimateGate is winging it’s way as we speak – wonder if the BBC will be truely impartial and add Climategate to the glossary? – assuming enough people suggest it of course.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/8393855.stm
I’ve added a few glossary items of my own:
Trick- A device used by climate scientists to distort data.
Hide The decline – Distortion of data to make it appear as if climate change is real. Useful for keeping the grant money rolling in.
FOIA- A law that doesn”t apply to climate scientists. (Just like the second law of thermodynamics.)
Travesty- The inability to explain what is really happening because the models are useless.
Neil Cavuto on FOX covers Climategate … http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FX-JhDJR44&feature=player_embedded .. what you wont see on the BBC.
Bad news for BBC’s ‘green’ dogmatists;
– good news for most Brits:
“Offshore wind farm plan scrapped”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/8393867.stm
I had seen a report just now that the UEA/CRU review will be led by a former civil sevant with no scietific background, Muir Somebody – not Rees, whose cropped up a few days ago -I think the Uni has backed off that idea after lots of protests that Rees is obviously in the AGW camp.
Thanks for that John – I heard that Rees was the favourite to lead the enquiry. Could it be that a non-scientist may do a better job (depending on his independance of course) than one of Toadys psedo-religious AGW scientists.?
John
This is the chap.
http://www.universitystory.gla.ac.uk/biography/?id=WH1193&type=P
Muir Russell took much of the blame for the massive overspend on the Scottish Parliament building.
His terms of reference do NOT look at whether climate change is real. It is all about the ethics and activities of the CRU staff.
Does NOT cover the key point – Harry’s File and the clear signs that the crucial programming/analysis by the CRU was a total dog’s breakfast, therefore utterly unreliable.
And it is the CRU work that is a primary plank in the argument that ther is ANY global warming – whether man-made or not. It looks to me from the leaked Harry’s File stuff, recording a staff member’s work over several years to try to put the research back together again, tht the hockey-stick is a fraud.
The BBC have used the term “leaked” rather than hacked/stolen on the Today show this AM.
You can be sure that the BBC knows full well that the emails/docs were never hacked/stolen.
Roger Harrabin desperate to hold the crumbling fake consensus, grudgingly giving as little away as possible like the little Dutch boy trying to stem the leaks in the dyke?
He has yet to describe the scandal in full trying to admit only ‘access blocking’ rather than the ‘Harry read me’ and the other more serious evidence.
The BBC has tried to ignore the climategate scandal and now they are having to run a damage limitation excersise rather than a damage denial excersise, expect to see the evidence split into seperate streams to reduce the impact, expect the BBC to try and reduce the scandal to a storm in a teas cup/personal animosity by individual scientists, classic damage limitation by people deeply implicated and involved in the scandal.
Credit where credit is due!
The usually useless BH(Sun 6/12/09) was actually pretty good this morning in that Stewart Lee gave himself-and us too a good question about faith…the Poet Laureates role elevates the culture but the Lords Prayer need not! I don`t agree but he was thinking and got me to do too…so hats off!
In a similar vein-a fine song in the style of Pooh Bah about Mandelson.Was expecting the usual tickle for this most pointless and venal of lightweights-but no…biting and well crafted. Come on Mitch Benn-match it for the Why Show next Friday if you can or dare!
Maybe we need a forum for the Beeb when they DO get it right!