Search Results for: climate

Tactical change of climate

By | |
16 Comments

The above video shows what could be called the power of nightmares- a form of Governmental abuse. The BBC yesterday published an article questioning the reality of global warming. One of the sickening things about the BBC is its ability both to change the climate of opinion, and use its journalistic license and political antennae to change course and retain its reputation. When will we get the apology for the rush to declare the debate on warming over? When will they admit they played a part in creating the hysteria which politicians like eager and brainless vampires feed on? Is it ever right to “abandon the pretence of impartiality” as Paxman claimed the BBC had? Now will they be returning to a semblance of impartiality? Why was this only a “pretence” in the first place? Will they not now still hanker after being proved right and keep pushing the MMGW hypothesis as “news”? The BBC’s coverage of climate, and its consequences in the political discourse of this country, represent one of the most powerful arguments against the BBC’s existence.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BBC IGNORES CLIMATE CHANGE FRAUD

By | |
Comments Off on BBC IGNORES CLIMATE CHANGE FRAUD

For years, the respected Climate Audit site has been warning that the famous “Hockey Stick” – a graph based on tree ring proxies used by the IPCC and Al Gore to “prove” their AGW propaganda – is inaccurate. Over the past few days, he has published conclusive evidence that it it is. The compiler simply took the most dramatic tree ring data and ignored the rest. The true picture is that surface temperatures have actually gone down. This was scientific fraud on a massive scale, and you can read about it here or here. The “hockey stick” graph was pivotal in the attempts to persuade the public to panic about AGW.

Chances of reading about this on the BBC? Absolutely nil. Today’s lead climate story is the Met Office warning that temperatures are going to rise by 4C by 2050. That, from a body that cannot even predict what will happen five days away.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BBC Once More Open to Climate Change Doubts…

By | | , , ,
Comments Off on BBC Once More Open to Climate Change Doubts…

It was a magical moment and, of course, the BBC captured it.

A 13-year-old Indian school girl has addressed world leaders during the inaugural session at the UN Climate Change Summit in New York.
During her speech, Yugratna Srivastava from Lucknow appealed to the world’s leaders to do more to combat the effects of climate change, asking “is this what we are going to give to our future generations?”

But later the BBC, wishing to be balanced, reported that not all the leaders were impressed…

Czech President Vaclav Klaus sharply criticized a U.N. meeting on climate change on Tuesday at which U.S. President Barack Obama was among the top speakers, describing it as propagandistic and undignified.
“It was sad and it was frustrating,” said Klaus, one of the world’s most vocal skeptics on the topic of global warming.
“It’s a propagandistic exercise where 13-year-old girls from some far-away country perform a pre-rehearsed poem,” he said. “It’s simply not dignified.”
……
Klaus said there were increasing doubts in the scientific community about whether humans are causing changes in the climate or whether the changes are simply naturally occurring phenomena.
But politicians, he said, seem to be moving closer to a consensus on climate change.
“The train can’t be stopped and I consider that a huge mistake,” Klaus said.

Whoops – sorry! That comment from the Czech President came from Reuters…couldn’t find it on the BBC – I wonder why?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

A climate of imbalance

By | |
Comments Off on A climate of imbalance

Sometimes the BBC’s bias still has the power to shock. Perhaps because they just assume that this bias is ok; they know it and they think it’s ok. Reading this article about drought and farming dificulties in California, the story came down to an environmental clash over some fish. The BBC report:

It’s not just drought. The reservoir is fed from the the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, an threatened estuary that is home to a tiny fish called the delta smelt. Environmentalists say the smelt is essential to the food chain, and that a decline in smelt populations has led to falling numbers of bigger predator fish like salmon and bass. Late last year, the US government’s Fish and Wildlife Service argued that pumping water out of the delta harmed the smelt. A federal judge ruled water supplies to Central Valley farms should be reduced, in order to protect the fish. Farmers are challenging the water restrictions in court. They are a well-organised lobby with powerful support.

Notice how “environmentalists say”, federal government acts, and local farmers “are a well organised lobby with powerful support”. Yeah, Beeb, environmentalists aren’t a lobby, they are professionals right? Who just happen to have a massive international industry and lobby behind them. And obviously it’s the local farmers with the powerful support (sounds fishy to me) because that’s why they’ve just lost this years crop and are left challenging in court.

What a travesty. Oh, and I also intensely dislike the BBC’s attempt to generate a Steinbeckian scene out of this story by linking it to that of Latino migrants towards the end.

PS: somehow the indefatigable BBC journalist failed to mention the sterling work of totally impartial and unfishy environmental “organisation” Save the Bay, advised by nobodies like these and directed by disinterested public spirits like these. (including people from Wells Fargo and Cisco, two of California’s biggest companies and employers).

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BBC Climate Blog

By | | , ,
50 Comments

The extent of the BBC’s faith in the global warming mantra was in evidence today as they worked up an articleto claim that- contrary to all the actual trendlines of temperatures in existence- we are facing a greater threat from climate change than so far believed.

It really feels like a flame-war between blogs- the more the BBC find their tendentious theory challenged by reality and by the people who inconvenientlly notice it, the more they ramp-up the rhetoric.

Well, this is perhaps not totally fair to them- but earlier this week there was a report released by the Met Office and covered by the Guardianwhich criticised global warming exaggeration. I didn’t hear anything about it on the BBC, and couldn’t find reference to it on the BBC website- showing perhaps that the BBC are not afraid to diverge from their climate mentors when a sacred cow is threatened. Yet when one scientist squeals that global warming is underestimated, it adorns the Sunday morning frontpage of the BBC website.

As the excellent Wattsupwiththat? website says, the BBC misreported the issue raised and misrepresented the qualifications of the scientist featured. Ignorance and bias going hand in hand, unsurprisingly.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

The climate inquisition continues…

By | |
58 Comments


I hope Umbongo will forgive my posting his comment here, but it’s rather good. The glee with which criticism of The Great Global Warming Swindle was publicised by the BBC was noted, for instance here on EURef. Little wonder then that this point of view is amplified and repeated, just in case we missed it (actually, I think we did fail to mention it “up top” so to speak…), today on the BBC:

“Another landmark in “impartiality” was reached today in Lisa Jardine’s “A Point of View” Radio 4 at 8:45 this morning. In slagging off anthropomorphic climate change scepticism she shows her deep misunderstanding of the origins of legal process in England by claiming that the English confrontational system of trial is a direct descendant of the Roman Republican system epitomised by the trials starring Cicero. That England’s system derives from development of the Common Law brought here by our Anglo-Saxon and Viking ancestors escapes her. But, of course, she is trying to make another rather more serious and controversial point. That point is that the system of finding the “real” truth by setting out the opposing “truths” epitomised by “An Inconvenient Truth” and “The Global Warming Swindle” might confuse the punters.

For her the “closely argued” and consensually accepted truth of the Gore film (although she admits that in a court of law – ah you see where she’s coming from – some of the “facts” were found to be . . . er . . lies) is contrasted with the outpourings of a “vocal tiny minority” through the Channel 4 documentary. She doesn’t claim that any of the facts contradicting AGW in the “Swindle” were lies but relies on the finding that the warmist scientists quoted/interviewed were misled into taking part in a polemic. She likes polemics but not if they contradict her “truth”. So we have on TV a simulacrum of (to her) the discredited English system of getting at “legal” truth opposed by her preferred “false but accurate” argument of the BBC impartiality mind-set of which she is such an enthusiastic proponent. She closed the programme by wondering if the vocal non-consenting minorities should (a la Hansen) be silenced – if not prosecuted – for daring to oppose the consensus.

Lisa Jardine is the daughter of Jacob Bronowski. The final image of Dr B, in his “Ascent of Man”, standing in the mud at Auschwitz is implanted in my brain. He wept and said that Auschwitz and, by implication, all the other hell-holes constructed by Man, is the unavoidable destination reached by the denial and silencing of truth. Were he still alive I don’t think Dr B would be proud of his daughter.”

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Happy New Climate change disaster year!

By | |
147 Comments

From the New York Times:

“A year ago, British meteorologists made headlines predicting that the buildup of greenhouse gases would help make 2007 the hottest year on record. At year’s end, even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record — it was actually lower than any year since 2001 — the BBC confidently proclaimed, “2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.””

Read the whole thing. The BBC is highlighted here I think for good reason: they are among the worst offenders. (via NewsBusters)

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

John A, formerly of the respected Climate Audit blog

By | |
43 Comments

, has submitted comments to the BBC in response to their current, doubtless passing, interest of sorts, in the arguments against reducing Western Civilization to subsistence farming as a means to avoid the fiery fate predicted by legions of global warming doom mongers.

Just in case his comments, for some predictable reason, don’t make it past the BBC’s censors, he’s posted them on his blog, BBC Black Propaganda #1 and BBC Black Propaganda #2 – interesting rebuttals worth a read.

Update (4pm): Coming up on 24 hours ago I submitted a comment in response to Steve Herrman, Editor of the BBC News website, and his post on the BBC Editors Blog, Climate Sceptics, yesterday. Lots of comments have appeared since then, but for some strange reason, mine, a perfectly reasonable, germane and on-topic comment, hasn’t. This is what I said:

Jeremy Paxman summed up the BBC approach quite succinctly:

“People who know a lot more than I do may be right when they claim that [global warming] is the consequence of our own behaviour. I assume that this is why the BBC’s coverage of the issue abandoned the pretence of impartiality long ago”,
Jeremy Paxman, Media Guardian, January 31st, 2007.

Scary stuff indeed! Perhaps Mr. Herrman or one of his minions would care to explain why this comment isn’t fit for publication on the BBC Editors Blog.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

With all the hoo-ha last week about the Climate Change Camp

By | |
32 Comments

– you know, the one that the BBC did so much to promote in advance with daily mentions on BBC Views Online, complete with directions to the site (though stopping short of “and it’s handy for those coming by air too – just look for the BBC helicopter above the camp!” – though that wouldn’t have been out of character), I was surprised that we didn’t see this prominent banner in the BBC’s extensive coverage of the protest, as featured in the Uxbridge Gazette, the local newspaper:

 

Banner saying 'revolution not runways'

“Revolution not runways” – revealing a wider agenda perhaps?

It’s surprising that the BBC missed this one, particularly since they ‘invested’ so much tellytax cash in the coverage of the story, a joint production with the Federation of Soap Dodgers and Association of Welfare Scroungers.

Thank you to an anonymous reader. Picture courtesy of the Uxbridge Gazette.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

That relentless climate…

By | | ,
24 Comments

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?”

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.