Monthly Archives: December 2009

The BBC remains predictably silent about the allegations against Dr Ravendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, despite further revelations about his conflicts of interests (to put it mildly) in the Sunday Telegraph and around the world. Meanwhile, the BBC World Service Trust, a body that soaks up cash from the UK Foreign Office and is the cosy-cosy gatekeeper to the UK’s international aid efforts, continues its frenzied efforts to spread Pachauri’s moonshine about ‘climate change’. This page says it all. In fact, the so-called Trust’s role is formally to spread such lies:

We aim to:
* Help people protect their food supplies and incomes as the climate changes
* Train and strengthen local media to raise environmental issues and stimulate debate
* Prepare local media to provide life-saving broadcasts during natural disasters; and
* Make sure all our work considers the effect on the environment

For “environment”, of course, read ‘climate change’. In the BBC’s eyes, the two are interchangeable.

The BBC, as we well know, will bust a gut to report anything that supports AGW. It is now also resorting to staging ludicrously simplistic rigged scientific experiments on Newsnight to persuade viewers that its ‘climate change’ crusade is legitimate. A What’s Up With That correspondent explains:

Here’s something I found shocking and that you don’t see every day: the British government’s former chief scientific adviser Professor Sir David King flagrantly lying on national television to boost the dubious idea that some foreign agency (the Russian secret service?) was behind Climategate.

This was in the context of BBC 2’s Newsnight staging a peculiar experiment, with a politically-correct black female “space scientist” heating two bottles – one containing “air” (last time I looked, that included carbon dioxide anyway) and one containing “atmospheric air with a greater concentration of carbon dioxide” (they didn’t say how much they were adding, of course, but I’d bet it was substantially more than 0.000388%!). Surprise, surprise — the latter bottle grew hotter… Of course it did. A greater amount of carbon dioxide will be warmer when heat is applied. This is not a surprise! The proportions are key, of course, as you know.

Newsnight itself characterised the effort right at the start as a “very unscientific experiment” — so why do it at all?! In fact the “science” as presented was misleading and selective to the point of deception.

The WUWT entry goes on to explain in detail why the experiment is an indicator only of the complexity and pitfalls of setting up such scientific experiements. Deception? The BBC misrepresentation of ‘climate change’ goes well beyond that. It’s systematic fraud.