roger harrabin @RHarrabin 11 Nov @billyblofeld @latimeralder @aDissentient This is wrong. BBC does NOT have an agreed approach to #climatechange which is why sceptics abound
Shame Harrabin once said this:
I have spent much of the last two decades of my journalistic life warning about the potential dangers of climate change
And he famously engineered the adoption of the ‘scientific consensus’ within the BBC.
And I can only assume from the tone that freerange sceptics ‘abounding’ is something not very welcome in the Harrabin brave new world.
A reminder of one of Harrabin’s Tweets from a while back…..
roger harrabin ?@RogerHarrabin @aniolesteban Earthquakes and volcanoes also boost economic growth. The Philippines mud slide was good for builders and undertakers.
Very caring from our Roger.
And then there was this:
roger harrabin ?@RogerHarrabin
Asking if climate change caused Sandy is like asking if gravity caused an old house to collapse when it did.
So a very definite link between climate change and storms…isn’t there?
In this recent report he claimed that:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says the jury is out on whether the frequency of tropical cyclones will increase, but Michel Jarraud said it was expected that the impact of storms would be more intense.
The Telegraph says the IPCC said something else:
Here’s what it says in its new report:
Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin… In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low.
What’s interesting when you read their [Those who say climate change produces more extreme weather] claims is that none of them is capable of producing any credible scientific evidence that “climate change” has anything whatsoever to do with Typhoon Haiyan. That’ll be because – as Benny Peiser notes in the Spectator – the science says no such thing.
A more recent Tweet from Roger:
roger harrabin @RHarrabin 13 Nov @BarryJWoods @etzpcm
Look at it decadally, Barry. Year by year is weather not climate.
Which is why of course he has headlines like this:
2013 ‘one of warmest’ on record
Apparently it is a ‘wake up call’ for us….
roger harrabin @RHarrabin 13 Nov @etzpcm There’s nothing incoherent about wake-up calls unless you are deaf. The piece was written in 30 mins on deadline. Not great but OK
Nice to see quality journalism counts at the BBC…any old rubbish as long as it’s on time.
And still peddling that theory of the oceans absorbing all that heat…which is why we have a pause in global warming…so they claim…without proof:
roger harrabin @RHarrabin 12 Nov @conservatarist @BarryJWoods @tan123 Higher sea levels = higher storm surges, warmer ocean has more energy. Creates greater storm potential.
A theory they now use to tell us that though hurricanes and extreme weather may not be more frequent they will have worse effects because of higher sea levels etc.
If there is no ocean warming…then that’s another theory out the window.
He also Tweeted this:
roger harrabin @RHarrabin 11 Nov
Rising sea levels and warmer seas will create conditions for ever-stronger tropical storms.
Tom Nelson @tan123 11 Nov .@RHarrabin So why aren’t tropical storms getting ever stronger?
Harrabin backtracks:
roger harrabin @RHarrabin 12 Nov @tan123 There are many conditions for storms. But rising sea level and hotter oceans create conditions for more damaging storms.
Getting grumpy…
roger harrabin @RHarrabin @BarryJWoods @conservatarist @tan123 Don’t misquote me. More heat = more energy. higher sea = higher surges,
Trouble is they weren’t misquoting him……Harrabin said ‘ever stronger tropical storms’.
Quality stuff from our campaigning friend of the earth.
Don’t misquote me…I didn’t say highly misleading twaddle.
Harrabin is correct on one level: the BBC doesn’t quite have a perfect, corporation-wide approach he agrees with yet. Not for lack of trying, obviously. They still allow the rare instance of “denialsts”, whom he thinks should be banned entirely from the airwaves. Anyone who uses Twitter should be sending him stuff about 28-Gate until he shuts up.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/alarmists-blame-typhoon-tragedy-on-global-warming/2830641751001
every time the horrible Harribin history is mentioned
this is all good … but … 12 mins 40
So the IPCC, the fount of all climate-related wisdom, comprising ‘the world’s top climate scientists’ – according to the BBC – tells us:
‘No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin… In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low.’
But plainly the BBC disagrees, via its climate spokesman and freewheelin’ loose cannon Harrabin. Perhaps if he’s so sure of his own science Roger the Dodger might challenge the IPCC – but first he should be aware that large chunks the ‘Summary for Policymakers’ part of their report (the bit the media focus on) disagrees with the main body because, well, it’s written by politicians and environmentalists as blatant warmist propaganda.
Dear, oh dear, what a lovely mess. Keep ’em coming, Alan.
‘There’s a blockin’ comin’, Ned’
Education & informationFor now, it’s propaganda & censorship.
We’ll see.
Grumpy can only work so long in the face of facts.
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/7e70
Harrabin is the bloated metastatic cancerous spider at the centre of the BBC’s putrid web of climate porn, spewing his pig-ignorant, middle class arts graduate vomit across the whole of the BBC’s slimy, corrupt empire.
There, that feels better! 🙂
In the context of Global Warming/Climate change, you put that mildly.
Its no wonder that causational climate scientists do not have much say on the BBC, when moronic nutjobs like Harrabin dominate journalism, Harrabin did successfully keep them out of that seminar of “the best scientific experts”.
Until causational or attributional climate scientists such as Henrik Svensmark have more say in the media than environmentalists, politicians and journalists the public are not going to learn much more than was revealed in the “Great Global Warming Swindle” in 2007.
What journalists should be doing is investigating CERN.
Now I know that Heuer successfully kept Kirkby’s CLOUD experiment results from the IPCC fifth assessment report, but I am wondering if Lockwood produced that bogus rebuttal of Svensmarks theory using low energy cosmic rays.
Svensmarks theory is proven using high energy cosmic rays, and that was confirmed by the CLOUD experiment, so why are the only people at CERN to leak this, Mensa members publishing this scandal in Mensa publications?
Is left-wing journalism about censorship of the truth and then making up dogmatic ideology for articles in the Guardian and the BBC?
Yes, and we are compelled by the law to pay Harrabin’s wages.
Mr Harrabin does not know what causes sea surges. Just because there might be higher sea levels doesn’t mean there will be higher sea surges. (What a prat). Also are higher sea levels due to higher sea levels or sinking land levels? What him spin out of that one what the pacific basin atols keep on sinking (which atols do by the way). The Hydrograhic office in Taunton releases every year their tide almanac and ever since the rise in sea levels have been mentioned, they have not changed their incredibly accurate tide times one jot. I’m sure that if they felt the sea levels were rising or about to, they would be screaming this news from the highest roof tops. Oh and whilst we are mentioning cosmic this and that, don’t forget about the Earth Tilt and planetary alignments which bring cooling and warming to the Earth.
OldBloke: London is sinking land levels. Rising sea levels could be out of date. And in Astronomy the “Earth Tilt and planetary alignments which bring cooling and warming to the Earth” thing is also out of date, unless you are talking about Global warming in spring and Global cooling in Autumn.
But I think you are talking about the Milankovitch effect which is now a currant issue in Cosmoclimatology. Other Astronomers have told me for a while now that the calculations show that the ice coverage cannot account for the effect, obviously because the Sun does not shine much on the Polar regions, and any way, the Earth receives the same amount of solar energy over a year than it would now, so the answer is cosmic rays again, and the relation with the speed of plasma within the Sun.
As the speed of the centre of the Sun relative to the centre of the barycentre of the Solar System determines the length of the solar cycle, calculating changes in these movements over time may well produce a future solution to the 100,000 year Milankovitch effect, as the inclination of the Earth’s orbit has a 100,000 year cycle relative to the plane passing through the barycentre.
So it looks like the solution to the Milankovitch effect is going to be Svensmark’s cosmic rays.
The BBC is going to be very upset about that, so censorship by the BBC will continue.
Harrabin graduated in English from Cambridge. I wonder exactly how this makes him qualified to discuss the science of climate change.
Harrabin is more than qualified to report on science. He’s in the same league as scientists
Scientific fraud is rife
http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2012/nov/02/scientific-fraud-good-science?commentpage=1
If Harrabin hasn’t heard of The broken window fallacy then he should shut the F*** up!