"world" "news"

The BBC is now promoting the cold weather in Europe to one of the top stories. What about the fact that more than half the entire USA is under snow at the moment? In any case the worst period for cold is over for most of central Europe at least (I know whereof I speak- in Prague where I am the daytime temperatures were minus 12 celsius or so only a couple of days ago; I’m lucky my ears didn’t freeze off). The Beeb typically refer to this as Europe’s “cold snap”, implying that it’s a little aberration. Well, they’ll soon be able to catch up with the weather and report a warming, as is their wont. But it seems to me that more than half the USA under snow (average depth across this area 3.8 inches) is a much bigger story, yet it has been relegated to the status of a freak east coast winter storm. The BBC tend to concentrate on the effects regardless of the intensity of the weather (unless it suits them), ignoring the fact that Europe’s chaos- at the very least the UK’s- is in large part due to reduced capacity as a result of lower expectations following predictions of global warming. Yet again the BBC’s coverage- even of the weather!- is distorted by ideology. When there is no financial rationale behind a business, ideas do tend to take over like bindweed.


. So it’s a pleasant Sunday morning and I write this watching the trees in my garden gently sway in a light breeze. There is a little sunshine and it is a mild June day. Nothing very unusual about that. But I was expecting a visit by at least one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse having read THIS weather report which the BBC has been flagging up for the past 24 hours. We’re warned that there will be “Rare” gales which will be vicious. BBC forecaster Tomasz Schafernaker said the weather “was abnormal” for June. (Hint of global warming anyone?) Don’t know what it’s like for you but the only thing I see that is abnormal is the consistent pattern of the BBC getting the weather forecasts wrong. The BBC NI portal runs this as the second lead story this morning – must be a slow news day.

That relentless climate…

of climate change (global warming, when they can fit it in) reporting that has become virtually the BBC’s trademark is put in an interesting light by this saga of diligence on the part of bloggers (I presume scientists too, but maybe just enthusiasts).

Today the BBC have regaled us with British scientists’ latest grandiose attempts to predict the weather ten years ahead. The BBC assert that “Currently, 1998 is the warmest year on record, when the global mean surface temperature was 14.54C (58.17F).”

Well, perhaps they are out of date; indeed misled and misleading. According to the story I linked above, NASA’s data for the US was in fact skewed by a Y2K hiccup, and thus 1934 is in fact the warmest year on record– at least for the USA (other data were upset too, apparently, and generally in the direction of downgrading recent temperatures relative to the past, but this is the most notable example). Perhaps that would not affect the global data, but I suspect it would come close to upsetting those set-in-stone league tables of temperature which the (basically) man-made global warming proponents of the BBC hammer home at every opportunity.

Oh, and I suppose I should point you in the direction of NASA’s “new” data, which can be found here.

Update: Don’t miss HotAir’s analysis, including former Nasa scientist Bryan Preston’s view. “Can we at least get some peer review before we build the ark?”

Weather to notice or not

Yes, it’s Easter. Happy Easter to those in the “Christian world”!

It’s been a great weekend for climate change at the Beeb. Good Friday saw headline after headline drawn from the pre-release of one of the IPCC’s four reports expected this year. Now the main pre-report report is lurking both under Science and Nature and also under the Americas section, for some reason, although the IPCC met in, guess where? Brussels.

April 4th saw them see fit to report Scotland basking in warmth ahead of this Easter weekend; as if to show that weather stories arestories, even if they can’t boast any records.

Then we have, currently, a report from Mexicodetailing the drying up of a lake there. This begins with citing that well-known source of water disappearance, God, as one possible explanation, and then posits the alternative – man-made global warming. Yeah, that’s balance. The same source who cited God as the main culprit, a Ms Ortega Torres, also claims a dramatic reduction in rainfall and blames this on anthropomorphic global warming:

“Ms Ortega Torres has no doubts why the lake has shrunk so much.

“It’s because of climate change,” she says. “This area used to get around 300 days of rain a year. Now we are lucky to see 100 to 150 days. So the lake cannot be replenished.”

Faith abounding, apparently.

Because lost in the rest of the text, concealed as a contributing factor, is the massive increase in Mexico’s population and the demand that has placed on agricultural production and water consumption.

Worth investigating, I’d have thought- especially the source and specifics of the rainfall claim. I’d have thought that’s what editorial meetings are for.

But no, probably they’re for deciding not to cover record-breaking cold weather across much of the United States. And when I say record-breaking, I mean, RECORD BREAKING. That is to say, daytime historic lows in cities like Atlanta (1886), Augusta (1981), and Charlotte (1961). And it’s also pretty chilly in Nashville (hat-tip, Insta).

Bad timing, Auntie. High time to manage the news. I notice that the unwisely opened Have Your Say is dominated by MMGW sceptics, like this chap from Lithuania who comments:

“I dont like BBC as it provides us information about global warming. It provides us all arguments for, however, almost all arguments against are kept quiet.”

Indeed, Mr Kinselis, indeed.

[nb. all the above is not an argument against global warming per se, but against the dramatic claims made for MMGW. Evidence that record low temperatures are possible in this carbon benighted world needs to be carefully recorded and studied, and noted by both public and politicians worldwide. How are the BBC helping that along, I wonder?]