Category Archives: Richard Black

Greenies, supported tirelessly by the BBC, never give up in their efforts to persuade us that we are all going to hell in a handcart. The UN, of course is the revered cheerleader, and today – as their ‘climate change’ fascism seems to have stalled a tad after Copenhagen – this corrupt Hydra has turned its attention to the need for ‘biodiversity’. There’s a special year devoted to it. So seriously does the BBC take this threat that it has sent Richard Black on a jolly to Berlin to watch the revered secretary-general deliver his hellfire sermon that we must stop our wicked ways. To him, there is no doubt what’s wrong:

The expansion of human cities, farming and infrastructure is (sic) the main reason. Dignitaries including UN chief Ban Ki-moon…will speak at the launch in Berlin. Mr Ban is due to say that human expansion is wiping out species at about 1,000 times the “natural” or “background” rate, and that “business as usual is not an option”.

As usual, Mr Black – in pursuit of his greenie zealotry – obviously thinks the science is totally settled and the words of Mr Ban are the Holy Writ. It’s the Wicked West to blame, as always. Shame that he could not do a little journalism and look for alternative views – this, for example from the Watt’s Up With That? blog. It points out that despite all the hot air about extinction:

Very few continental birds or mammals are recorded as having gone extinct, and none have gone extinct from habitat reduction alone. No continental forest bird or mammal is recorded as having gone extinct from any cause. Since the species-area relationship predicts that there should have been a very large number of recorded bird and mammal extinctions from habitat reduction over the last half millennium, I show that the species-area relationship gives erroneous answers to the question of extinction rates.

Complex stuff, but it shows just how deeply, deeply one-sided the BBC always is in its science coverage.

Is this a greenie fanatic, our friend Richard Black, in retreat? Lost for words, so therefore back-pedalling madly? At bay? Or just more BBC hot air? You decide! One thing is for certain. Writers like Black would never accept for a second that there might be something wrong with their over-arching ‘climate change’ fantasy.

Richard Black, reporting self-indulgently and with puffed-up arrogance about his earth-saving role at Copenhagen, notes:

Most of the real deals are done behind closed doors guarded by security guys with stern faces and impressive pectorals.That’s where the important countries and blocs reveal more of their real demands, where trades are bartered between national delegations. Reporting it is a nightmare.

So that’s how the new world government that Richard wants to much will operate? Thugs barring entry to lesser mortals while the “important” shadowy blocs impose their lunatic will on the rest of us? Yet our intrepid Richard seems only to be breathless with admiration, and proudly tells us how he procures the crumbs from their dictatorial tables. And meanwhile, he and the rest of his 35 cronies at Copenhagen continue to spew out their lying propaganda.

This morning, the Times reported that the World Meteorological Orgainsation, using data from CRU, and with the clear purpose of influencing the discussions at Copenhagen, had claimed that this year had been the fifth warmest on record. Hours later, our dear BBC environnment correspondent Richard Black reports the same story. He mentions that there’s some controversy about the figures – and about CRU – but without a peep about the key propaganda point. He seems to take the whole thing at its face value, and ignores completely that these weather organisations are involved in a massive rigging exercise. Not only that, his story is illustrated with a blazing sun and a rigged graph that is a crude schoolboy variation of the hockey stick. How much more blatant can you be?