Propagating AGW cultism is an essential element of BBC broadcasting, as Biased BBC’s Alan points out here…
“The BBC have beenbusy recently pumping out the propaganda to support their belief in man madeglobal warming. Many programmes have suddenly appeared about the Arctic andAntarctic….surely no coincidence.Many of the conclusionss are highly questionable and some outright misleading.
Apart from the ‘Frozen Planet’ advert for AGW we have these other programmesbombarding us with the ‘science’ or not…..
Natural World – 2008-2009 – 9. Polar Bears and Grizzlies – Bears on Top of theWorld
Documentary following a mother polar bear, a mother grizzly bear and theirnewborn cubs as they adapt to a warming world. (R) The shrinking Arctic ice may be making life much tougher for polar bears, butit is offering new opportunities for grizzly bears to the south.
Rowing the Arctic – Mark Beaumont and Jock Wishart head an expedition to row a boat to the 1996north magnetic pole, a point only now accessible due to the recent dramaticretreat of arctic sea ice.
Nobody has ever rowed so far into the Canadian high Arctic – a first in theworld of exploration and adventure, only made possible by the dramatic retreatof arctic sea ice in recent decades.
The Secret Life of Ice – Dr Gabrielle Walker looks deep within the ice crystal to try to discover howsomething so ephemeral has the power to sculpt landscapes, preserve our pastand inform our future. (R)
….’the records of ice and CO2 have moved in tandem for 800,000 years,scientists say this supports their theories of man made global warming….awarning difficult to ignore.’
Timeshift – Series 11 – 7. Antarctica: Of Ice and Men. Documentary which looks at why the most inhospitable place on the planet hasexerted such a powerful hold on the imagination of explorers, scientists,writers and photographers. (R) ….’The Antarctic needs protection…a fragile frontline of global warmingwhere the effects of global warming are most keenly felt.’
The 1996 magnetic north pole is far further south than the present MNP now asthe magnetic pole moves northwest about 37 miles per year….is ice melt due toyou driving your car to Tescos or is it more to do with the sun and perhaps thetilt of the Earth as it becomes more upright on its axis making the Arctic more’sunny’ and hot?
Does the link between temperature rises and CO2 as shown in ice records meanCO2 drives temperature rises? No…even Phil Jones from the CRU has had toadmit that temperatures show a rise 800 years before CO2 rises. So slightlydisingenuous of the BBC to make that link.
And is the Antarctic at the frontline of global warming? No….the Antarctichas seen increased ice for 30 years….who says so? http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
‘In recent years, the sea ice cover that surrounds the Antarctic continent hasbeen higher than average, even reaching near-record highs. Antarctic sea ice varies much more from year to year than Arctic sea ice, butoverall, ice extent around Antarctica has been growing slightly over the past30 years.’
and also snow cover is up…though moving around the world…..’overallNorthern Hemisphere snow cover was more extensive than normal this November,with most of the extra snow cover found in Canada and Russia. Snow covered anaverage of 36.2 million square kilometers (14.0 million square miles) ofNorthern Hemisphere land. This is 2.79 million square kilometers (1.08 millionsquare miles) above the 1971 to 2000 mean, and ranks as the fourth mostextensive cover in the past 46 years of satellite-derived snow cover records.’
Don’t forget that the “Row to the Pole” people never actually made it…
…due to the ice.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/30/the-telegraph-finally-figure-where-the-north-magnetic-pole-is-issues-microscopically-size-correction/
USS Skate managed it in 1958 due to the lack of ice – something else you won’t see on Planet Beeboid.
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/photo-north-pole-submarine
Entirely ignored by the BBC, of course, but of cnsiderable interest to fellow skeptics (the video is actually 2 hours long if you have the patience – you will find it very interesting!)
Four Climate Realists Testify Before The Canadian Senate
No programmes about the medieval Viking settlements in Greenland? Curious. Or not.
See my post above = Ref USS Skate
They did do one 20 odd years ago …
The most unintentionally entertaining aspect of BBC’s output over the past few weeks has been to see how much effort they expended trying to whip up public interest in the Climate, with the clear anmd specific intention that this would coincide with the Climate Conference in Durban.
Sadly for them, no-one gave a toss!
AGW “Communications Strategy”
It’s Winter = cold weather = stories about cold weather”, Check
Things people associate with cold = ice, snow , Check
Christmas = Santa = North Pole, Check
Cold weather and animals = polar bears, grizzly bears, Check
Global warming conection = Melting ice, Check
And so it goes on, because they think we are all stupid, and because they believe wrongly that they are the clever ones (actually its the other way around)
Missing connection:
“91% of the world’s glacial ice is in Antarctica, where the average temperature is around minus 40 degrees Celsius. The melting point of ice is zero degrees. So for the ice to melt on any scale the Antarctic temperature would need to rise by around 40 degrees…….(not 2 degrees over decades) Yet Warmists constantly hail any sign of Arctic melting…. (as proof of warming)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/
They know you are all stupid so the BBC will show you pictures of ice melting, normal calving at the sea/ice edge margin, as proof we are all doomed because of warming.
Cue polar bear in comfortable in zoo, Richard Attenborough on Camera One, and, “Action!”
One of the camerawomen from Frozen Planet was on Women’s Hour this morning, whinging about how the scientists “with no political agenda” had all the facts, and that she couldn’t understand how the right-wingers could dispute it.
Totally missing the point that the real debate is about whether or not man contributes to climatic changes.
Why do the left have to simplify every argument? It’s like their instant reaction to nationalsim, patriotism or opposition to the EU. They automatically start ranting about a hatred of foreigners and completely ignore the fact that patriots tend to support every country – and it’s people’s – right to identity, democracy and freedom from rules forced upon them by unelected bureaucrats.
These scientists have no political agenda? Since when? What about “the cause”?
Not to mention that their nice fat juicy government grants would dry up immediately if they didn’t come back with the ‘correct’ data.
Believers can’t debate. Its simple: they are right and you are wrong. Why are you wrong? Because you are evil. Simple too. Straw man, knocked over, proof. Besides, everyone agrees, so there is no need even to discuss it. If you are not evil, you are mad, swivel-eyed. You protest you are not either evil or mad? – Simple, someone’s paying you, case dismissed.
Human mind beyond reach, and without irony, everything they say about you is true of them.
Posted this in the Telegraph a couple of days ago, so I’ll give it an airing here, too:
I don’t understand.
I don’t understand why, when all the ‘evidence’ for alleged global warming, or man-made climate change, or climate disruption, or whatever label it currently wears, is eroded scientifically before our very eyes, there are some whose blinkers are so firmly welded to their heads, they can’t see the same as me.
I don’t understand why, when from schooldays I’ve appreciated that the climate is in a constant state of flux, and glacials and interglacials follow each other with obvious and unremitting regularity, someone says that it’s all down to an innocuous, inert trace gas, which is essential for life, and which has been present in greater or smaller quantities for ever.
I don’t understand why these same people insist that because of the increased level of carbon dioxide the global temperature is consequentially rising, when, in fact, it isn’t, and there have been higher temperatures in the past, and CO2 levels have been both higher and lower than they are now.
I don’t understand why, supposedly rational human beings leap onto this idea that we are changing the climate, when it clearly manages to do that all on its own, and always has done, and always will.
I don’t understand why governments seem to think that handing vast quantities of our money to third world dictatorships is going to stop the climate from changing, and prevent this Holocene from progressing into another ice age.
I don’t understand why, when it is evident that the climate progresses in infinite cycles, often tied up with other cycles, both within the planet, and extra-terrestrially, certain people in positions of power seem unable to grasp this, and think that there is something else at play.
I don’t understand, when there are vast quantities of resources on and in the earth to continue our exploration and development of fossil-fuel based energy, why certain politicians believe it is more prudent to “invest” in sources of power which are more expensive than necessary, and clearly unable to cope with the demand imposed upon them.
I don’t understand why, when confronted with contrary evidence, these “climate scientists” feel the need to obfuscate, hide or delete data, or make it generally unavailable to anyone else who has an interest, and who might just be in a position to prove them wrong.
I don’t understand why the BBC, and main stream media in general feel the need to take a view and a stance on one side of the argument, and deny those on the other side a legitimate voice.
Most of all, I don’t understand why these same people are foolish enough to think that I and most of the intelligent, informed world are predisposed to believe them.