It’s not often a BBC correspondent invites comparison to figures from Greek antiquity but B-BBC contributor Alan notes;
“There will come atime when we have an answer to the climate change question. When that timecomes somebody may well sit down and write the history of this period intime…the history of the media coverage in particular. If they did what might they find?
They would find a world respected media organisation with a duty to providenews regardless of vested interests which has had its name and reputationdragged into the gutter by a cluster of senior journalists and presenters whofailed to uphold the high standards of impartiality and truthfulness that theBBC demanded of them. Climate change alone would be enough to tarnish the BBC’s reputation but addonto that its coverage of Europe, immigration, the Labour Party, Islam,terrorism and the Middle East and there is hardly an area of world events thatthe BBC has not mislead the British and world audience on.
It is unfortunate that no one can trust the BBC to give them the absolutetruth….any report from the BBC now has to be double checked and cross referenced…preferablywith the original source material or with other news organisations or expertcommentators. A recent example of this comes appropriately enough from their environmentcorrespondent Richard Black.
Here he tweets an attack on Bush….
@BBCRBlack via Twitter
Canada accused of ‘muzzling scientists’ http://t.co/I8iq2AO1@BBCPallab – another echo of US under George W Bush?
Bush was fully prepared to believe in man made climate change…he just wanteddefinitive proof…which we still don’t have. Read the Bush clean air speechbelow from 2002.
Black then goes onto attack the ‘new’ attempt to reduce emissions of othergases as short term …..
‘The US is leading a new six-nation initiative aimed at curbing climate changeby tackling short-lived warming agents including methane, black carbon andhydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).
(but)…according to the science, tackling short-lived climate pollutantsdoesn’t prevent global warming – it just delays it….. emphasising short-termwarmers in the absence of meaningful action on CO2, to some observers, smacksof short-term politics and an unwillingness to get to grips with the mainissue.’
The ‘main issue’?
Here he is clearly still pushing hard for CO2 reduction policies as moreeffective…despite methane being a more powerful greenhouse gas….butnote….although global warming is such an urgent priority Black tells us thatCO2 reduction will only be effective from 2060….’tackling CO2 and not doinganything about the short-lived substances sees more warming in the next fewdecades – but beyond about 2060, it’s more effective than tackling theshort-lived agents.’
Black’s logic fails spectacularly….because although methane may disappearfrom the atmosphere relatively quickly…it only disappears if you stop puttingmore up there….you don’t cut the grass once every summer….you have to keepcutting….keep putting methane into the air and its effects continue….it isdifferent methane but with the same effect.Guess you shouldn’t ask that old riddle of Black…is a river the same river aswater flows through it?
According to both Plato and Aristotle, Heraclitus held extreme views that ledto logical incoherence…..“Heraclitus, I believe, says that all things go andnothing stays, and comparing existents to the flow of a river, he says youcould not step twice into the same river”
Black, the new Heraclitus? ….’from the riddling nature of his philosophy andhis contempt for humankind in general, he was called “The Obscure”and the “Weeping Philosopher”.’
Compare that to this from Geoffrey Lean in the Telegraph who is a convinced climatechange advocate himself:
Then you may want to look at what George W. Bush actually said and did ratherthan the cheap jibes from Black and Co.
In 2004 Bush started the Methane reduction plan….and it carries on today….
‘Writer Rod Dreher laments that the media has not given Bush credit for pushingthe 2004 Methane to Markets initiative through Congress. Dreher stated thatmethane is “twenty-three times more potent a contributor to global warmingthan the carbon dioxide emissions the Kyoto treaty aimed at cutting”. Theinitiative plans to reduce global methane emissions, the second largestcontributor to atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, in order toenhance economic growth, promote energy security, improve the environment, andreduce greenhouse gases. Other expected benefits include improving mine safety,reducing waste, and improving local air quality.
This is the up to date website for this programme:
Then look at this from 2002:
‘Jacuzzi vents’ model CO2 future – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17088154
Opinion presented as fact…
This isn’t the first time the beeb have quoted some obscure lecturer from a jumped-up polytechnic in support of warmism. Maybe they could ask Bono for his expert opinion next.
Worse than that, its lies and deceptions dressed up as facts, worse still its recycled trash from two years ago. And worse still its yet another bag of lies made by a bunch of gravy train ‘scientists’ and delivered to the public.
Not only is it not true, its obviously false, starts with a false premise and theory and then extrapolates from that base. The bulk of dissolved CO2 comes from tens of thousands of deep sea volcanic vents and tectonic plate boundaries and animal life in the seas make full use of it.
Alan, if you want to read a balanced reportage of the climate change (I want to say scandal, but don’t want to introduce any perceived emotional bias into this) subject, then you could do no better than to read a copy of Christopher Booker’s book, The Real Global Warming Disaster.
I’m in the process of reading it myself and can thoroughly recommend it as a source of facts rather than socialist fantasy, dissembling, ad hominen attacks and deceit.
I read that book, it’s excellent. Coupled with Bob
Carter’s book, Donna LaFramboise’s recent book on the IPCC, Ian Plimer’s book, Nigel Lawson’s book, and of course “Watermelons” by Delingpole, you can get a pretty good idea of what we sceptics are up against.
Add Andrew Montford (Bishop Hill) and his dissection of the Hockey Stick Illusion. Blows the leading Warmists like Mann and Jones out of the water.
I’d recommend looking any of Christopher Monckton’s head-to-heads with climate zealots on YouTube. You get a very good idea why the BBC (and most MSM outlets) are running scared of him – he absolutely (and very clinically) annihilates his pro-AGW opponents in open, informed debate.
I’d also second the recommendation of Donna LaFramboises’ ‘The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert’. What an eye-opener that book is, exposing the myth of ‘settled science’ with forensic precision.
There are not many people in public positions of who you can say unequivocally “he is a lying little shit” but Richard Black is one of them. If only the bBC realised how their standing is dragged down and through the mud because they employ and give free reign to this excuse for a journalist.
But they surely DO know how much criticism Black attracts ?
Certainly the new “Science Editor” David Shuckman knows. And after so many public attacks on Black and Harrabin, senior BBC management must know. But they obviously have seen no reason to rein him in, to mark his card.
So he just goes from worse to worse. To be linked to Dan Ratheresque journalism with the “Fake but accurate” tag is about as serious a charge you could make against a “journalist”.
If I was Black I would be seeking to distance myself from the smears I helped push for the heaters with out any checks !
Richard Black is a useful idiot.
If its not the Sun or water vapour, and if its not CO2 then the only way the government can stop the climate from changing is to stop everyone and everything from farting. Starting with silly moo-cows like Richard Black.
He’s not even “useful” – that would put him in the same league as Charlie boy (who’s just stupid and gullible – Black is bordering on the criminal).
“Justice will overtake fabricators of lies and false witnesses.”
I wouldn’t credit Black with Heraclitus’ intelligence, to me he is an unthinking moron. When I read his childish scribble, it reminds me more of Lord Haw Haw than any Greek philosopher.
Bit of handwringing on Toady today – terrible drought in the UK – what to do, what to do? According to Ms Spelman, it’s the driest period in England “since records began, 100 years ago…”, and it’s been the wettest in Scotland “since records began, 100 years ago…” Prior to “100 years ago”, there were no records, no droughts, no floods, no weather, no climate. One would have thought, then, if the same thing happened 100 years ago, they’ve had plenty of time to construct some sort of national water distribution network infrastructure, no? Course not – too many profiteering water companies.
Then we were told of the dreadful acidification of the oceans, caused, of course by nasty CO2 which we’re all responsible for, and which is destroying corals and the shells of crustaceans. (This according, of course, to the BBC Climate Guru Richard “Don’t-I-look-like-Michael-Mann-and-emulate-him-in-his-lies-too” Black. I thought the ocean acidification nonsense had long been dismissed as such.
Then there were the poor Koala bears, which are disappearing fast – they didn’t actually say so, but by implication it’s bound to be our fault.
Must be a slow news day.
I wonder where Mr Lysenko AKA David Gregory is hiding? 😀
Just in case he is lurking without posting in case he makes a fool of himself again I enclose a wonderful graph.
Happy days eh? Each BBC trash science mumbo jumbo recycled bag of lies easier to debunk than the last. Still at least that lying corrupt ecofascist stooge Black can be relied upon to make a fool of himself.
I think you people have me all wrong personally.
I think they’ve “got it about right”
You are a Michael Mann impersonator, and I claim my prize.