EU referendum’s Richard North leads the way yet again today in exposing that the IPCC 2007 report not only got it drastically wrong about melting Himalayan glaciers and disappearing Amazon rain forest, but also about serious food shortages in Africa. It’s deja vu – all over again! – because the IPCC report depended on inflated claims from a pressure group rather than scientific fact. The BBC, of course, as Richard points out, swallowed the bogus claims hook, line and sinker and in a chart about the impact of climate change, has this about Africa:
Projected reductions in the area suitable for growing crops, and in the length of the growing season, are likely to produce an increased risk of hunger. In some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50% by 2020.
But the BBC’s involvement in spreading these untruths about climate change in Africa goes much deeper and is much more sinister. As I pointed out last week, the World Service Trust, funded predominantly by grants from our taxes by the UK government and the EU, runs a scheme to ‘educate’ African journalists about the dangers of global warming, and to train them how to spread propaganda based on the premise that the West – as the main originator of CO2 emissions – is responsible for virtually all Africa’s woes. The Trust is deadly earnest in its mission, and recently published a lengthy and lavishly produced policy briefing on the topic. This, in the light of Richard North’s revelations, is a tissue of political proopaganda and misinformation. You need to read it it to realise the sheer scale of this lunacy. It beggars belief. Masquerading as ‘research’, it is actually a vitriolic polemic against the West. This is a taster:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) places Africa at special risk from climate change, in part because of its lack of capacity to adapt to changing environmental realities. Sufficient support to enable African governments and citizens to adapt to climate change will be a key ingredient of any successful international treaty. A major policy conclusion of this report is that meeting the
information and communication needs of African citizens should be considered as a critical component of adaptation strategies around climate change. Providing African citizens with the information they need to respond and adapt to climate change is just one component of probable forthcoming debates around climate change in Africa. A central issue is one of environmental justice. African citizens will be among the most affected by climate change but are least responsible for the greenhouse gases that have caused it. They cannot make just demands on the rest of the world, or determine properly their own political and other responses to this emerging crisis, without being informed about its causes and its consequences. African citizens need better information on climate change, but they also need far better ways of communicating their reality and perceptions on the issue to those principally responsible for causing it.
Thus, the BBC is hard at work with your cash, hell bent on a political mission to persuade millions of Africans that a series of cobbled together lies are the truth. Its co-conspirators are the EU and the government.
Andrew Marr could not resist asking William Hague this morning about his views on reports that some Conservative back benchers had expressed doubts about the veracity of the science of Climate Change.
The sneering way in which the question was asked, and the fact that it was asked at all, reveals all you need to know about the BBC’s stance on the subject.
Marr had clearly posed it as a “baiting” ploy, hoping that Hague would in some way embarrass himself, and by implication the Conservative party leadership, by giving an answer which was at odds with the IPCC / BBC concensus.
Hague, unfortunately, bottled it.
He should have taken note of the results of the BBC’s own poll last week, which seems to indicate that the concensus view among those who will be called on to express their electoral preference this spring differs somewhat from official Conservative policy.
A bad call.
The “Conservatives” should be miles ahead in the polls, but because they are now no different to Labour on all the major issues they are going backwards quickly.
It is difficult to asertain if their responses to BBC “journalists” are geniune or if they are scared to say anyting that the BBC would not approve of. Whatever the reason they will only have themselves to blame if they lose the election.
What is needed is straight talking not PR.
-Talking of the BBC being hand-in-glove with the European Union, this is how our BBC licencepayers’ money is being used on the BBC’s Mr. Dymond to promote Istanbul, and Turkey’s application to join the E.U.
http://www.en.istanbul2010.org/HABER/GP_628579
Look, the Conservatives sold their souls to the warmists long ago. Don’t expect any scepticism from the Cameroons. Any collection of idiots who try (and apparently fail) to get Lord Stern on board at this point in the climate change wars is not only seriously deluded but, worse, seriously incompetent. It takes a kind of reverse-genius not to secure a commanding lead in the polls against Labour but that’s what Cameron et al are achieving.
As I’ve commented before, the limp response of every Conservative spokesman both to the unwarranted aggression of BBC interviewers and on shows like Question Time or Any Questions only poses the question in electors’ minds as to whether or not the “opposition” is any better than the shysters currently in power. Unfortunately for the Conservatives it seems that the answer is increasingly “no”.