This morning, the BBC focuses on a new government scam to insulate our homes , then there’s fawning coverage of heroic Chris Huhne the ecoloon’s mission to try get a binding treaty at Cancun, and oh, by the way, don’t worry because it’s getting warmer (even though the army has had to becalled in to deal with the heaviest snowfall in Scotland for 50 years after the coldest start to December since 1659). There is a wearisome and continuing common thread to all this BBC hot air in that the usual econuts are quoted throughout, warning us that the end of the world is nigh because of AGW; the message is that we must all support the government and the ruling class in their maniacal plans to impose more taxes to save us all.
However, in the real world, outside the BBC bubble, there are important developments that you will never see reported on the BBC. Around 1,000 scientists active in climate and climate-related fields (many of them formerly part of the UN IPCC process) have published a ground-breaking new report comprehensively debunking the AGW mythology and lies. Here is an extract:
“In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didn’t happen…Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data” — Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, specializes in alternative energy, thermal transport phenomena, two-phase flow and fluid and thermal energy systems.
If you have time, I also recommend a reading of Donna Laframbois’s marvellous tracking of the UN IPCC lies-assembly process. Effectively, far from being rigorous science, it’s a chance for each of the lead authors to plug their own work. This is another report you won’t see reference to anywhere on the BBC.
Last night, I had a long chat with a BBC man I last saw during 1983 in Derek Amore’s days at BBC Radio London. He subsequently became one of the key developers of the BBC website. He’s out of it now; but the point he made was important. Departing deputy director general Mark Byford – he believes – imposed on the newsgathering and editorial operation over the past decade a centralised control that included rigid policy lines on issues like global warming, where the BBC maintain there is a “consensus”. This, he explained, was a deliberate approach aimed at creating supposed consistency, but its impact on editorial independence has been disastrous. Mr Byford, of course, is an automaton Stalinist by instinct, and so it all seems plausible – the editorial soul of the BBC (if it ever existed, which I increasingly doubt)was hijacked by a leftist control freak.
A light hearted commenter recently said here that at least the Red Sea shark attacks were not being attributed climate change. Spoke too soon! Dame Nicky’s tittering coquette suggested it, 6.30- R5, to an international shark quango man who readily agreed.
No, its not down to climate stuff. The shark attacks are in fact an Israeli/Mossad plot, according to an Egyptian official.
Getting warmer, is it?
Yet another warning from Joe Bastardi – he issued plenty in time for last year’s snowy shenanigans, remember? he tells it like it is:
http://climaterealists.com/?id=6814
Joe Bastardi is my hero, he’s a legend in our office where we look to him for our long range weather forecasts.
.. and Piers Corbyn
The UN’s IPCC is the “engine” of the Warmist cult – and its processes for producing its mammoth “reports” are corrupt to the core. It is the IPCC that the BBC uses to argue that there is scientific consensus, it is the IPCC that people like Chris Huhne hide behind when pushing economically-damaging policies.
The BBC reluctantly carried the occasional report on the most egregious inaccuracies/falsities in the last IPCC report. But never has it given any recognition to the well-founded arguments that the IPCC is at best a propaganda outfit, or that its reports are predetermined by its incestuous selection of lead authors for each chapter.
Ross McKitrick has been one of the main critics of Warmism – and of IPCC processes. Naturally his evidence was mostly sidelined in the various UK reviews/whitewashes of Climategate. But this paper is worth a read – he tears apart any illusion that the IPCC is truly authoritative or properly run :
Click to access iac.ross_mckitrick.pdf
The climategate emails? The BBC still claim the were hacked/stolen despite there being no evidence to back this up. They refused acknowledge them or to even pubish them citing some legal crappola for some time.
Look at the difference now with the wikileaks theft of documents and emails, not a stolen or hacked to be seen!
A thousand scientists and an explosive report, big news? The BBC will ignore it for as long as they can get away with it, if they do get around to reporting it you can bet the CAGW cultists will be directing the attack.
And of course, Norfolk Constabulary have, so far, been rather reticent (a year later) in coming up trumps with the results (ANY results) of their “in depth investigation”…
BBC appointments interview panel.
Post: Assistant deputy sub-editor, Environment
First question.
“Do you believe in man made catastrophic climate change?
Candidate: “Err Yes, of course”
Interviewer: “Sorry, you hesitated. Next candidate please…”
Climate groupthink depends on never admitting doubt. Which is why Harrabin and Black and all the rest carry on pumping out tosh, not a chink anywhere in their armour. No mention of the Thousand Scientists Reject AGW report. Constant recycling bogus Met Office statistics about this being the warmest third Wednesday afternoon in November since the Late Pliocene age.
This is supposed to ba News reporting organisation, not part of an advocacy group. I despair.
What i find quite amazing is the total lack of any debate about what is going on in Cancun. The latest i have heard is that the Government has committed to spend £150 billion to ensure we reduce our carbon footprint. More than any other country in the world. I would have thought that was worthy of discussion. And what about the morning phone in on Radio Five between 9-10 a.m. As far as i am aware they have NEVER discussed Climate Change (Global Warming, AGW Warming, Dangerous Climate Change etc.,) because they know that many people would phone in with a sceptical viewpoint and that is absolutely not allowed on the BBC unless they can be shown to be lunatics or in the pay of Big Oil etc.,!
“Based on this newest research, we now know the following:
* The climate models are definitely, and spectacularly, wrong.
* The IPCC (and the UN’s Cancun conference) is wrong.
* Al Gore and all other leftist/liberal/progressive hack politicians are wrong.
* Stupid, greedy billionaires are wrong.
* Hollywood celebrities and MSM reporters are wrong (okay….nothing new here).
* Self-righteous, self-misinformed, lame “science” writers are wrong. (Dudes, climate models are not science; they’re fancy spreadsheets projecting non-empirical, non-proven output about as scientific as a Ouija board or a crystal ball otuput.)
* Catastrophic positive climate feedback is wrong.
* Powerful, negative climate feedback is correct.
* 31,000+ skeptical scientists are correct.”
http://www.c3headlines.com/2010/12/nasa-peer-reviewed-study-finds-low-sensitivity-to-co2-doubling-the-uns-ipcc-global-warming-science-i.html
Oh and Harrabin, Black, the BBC and Cameron are wrong.
Never in the field of human idiocy has so much money been wasted by so few.
Goodby, Britain, goodbye…
Im locked in a tussle with a chap over in Paul Hudsons blog. Some interesting reading, although I fear the comments section has been much been taken over by myself and the other guy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2010/12/2010-global-temperatures-a-dea.shtml#comments
Regards
Mailman