Damian Thompson has certainly put the cat among the pigeons, or a more appropriate phrase may be he's set the sceptics against the believers, by writing about climate change.
Why? Well it appears the most read article on the BBC's website is one by its climate change correspondent Paul Hudson. Mr Hudson states that global warming is not happening and it's not likely to start again for 30 years.
Yes I know it's only one opinion, but it's possibly one the BBC could have done without, especially when they regularly force feed us with government propaganda on this subject. Have a read of Mr Hudson's article here.
Posts
21 comments:
SR - the article is seriously undermined because it refers to Piers Corbyn as some kind of authority. Corbyn was on a BBC messageboard I contribute to last year. He was pushing a theory about storms and was specifically peddling a theory about some superstorm that was going to devastate the UK last autumn. Obviously it didn't happen. His arguments were extremely unconvincing and, to be honest, he was ripped to pieces by other posters.
I don't know about Climate Change, but I know a raving loony when I see one.
Hi subrosa. I thought that you might be interested in these new Ladbrokes markets. ;)
Dundee East
SNP 1/8
Labour 9/2
Conservatives 100
Liberal Democrats 100
Dundee West
SNP 1/3
Labour 2/1
Liberal Democrats 100
Conservatives 100
Hello Alan. I don't think Corbyn is any worse or better than most of the others. Many were prophesising a wonderful summer here back in the spring - all because of climate change.
I must have missed it.
Thanks though for saying about Corbyn, I didn't know anything about the man.
Interesting Stuart, very interesting. Of course the odds will change in time but I'll keep more of an eye on them now.
Gordon's got his eye on a win too
I blogged about this BBC report on Friday too. I struck me as very "off-message" for the BBC.
Obviously the BBC trustees and management don't want to be seen as lefty propagandist mouthpieces and are trying to turn things around pefore it's too late and the Tories privatise it.
Mind you, Garage-Sale-Gordon might beat the Tories to flogging off the BBC if he needs more cash...
No doubt Lorenza, no doubt.
Del, I've not been reading my usual blogs much since my Mac collapsed last Wednesday so I missed your post.
I was sent the Telegraph article and thought, like you, it was strange of the BBC.
Many a true word spoken in jest Del. :)
Of course you may like to contrast the Hudson article with the one I blogged about here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8283909.stm
Where its business as usual, reporting on an interview given by the Government's Chief Energy Scientist, Prof David MacKay. Who says that CO2 emissions by Briton are "probably" twice as bad as figures suggest. No science to back up that statement, hence only "probably".
He wins my "Climate Change Fucktard of the Year" Award. Here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8283909.stm
Quite a change in only a couple of days. Maybe the BBC is getting as Schitzophrenic as the government now?
Have they disappeared the article yet ? I saved the page, just in case.
Delphius1. He expanded upon that " probably" on BBC R4 the other day. It is because we must now include the emissions coming from India and China in the manufacture of stuff bought by us.
Mystic Meg Speaks
The “Global Warming” hoax / scam is metamorphosing, as we speak and in front of our very eyes, into “Global Climate Change.”
The” Warming” bit has been well debunked, although somehow this information never gets anywhere near The Guardian, or any of the dead tree press or especially the BBC. It is as if they are all banging away at the chosen mantra until reality comes up and slaps them in the face. A bit like the IRA tactics; decide a line, stick to it, deny anything that could undermine the chosen line and then, when it is no longer tenable, retreat to a second prepared line of defence, equally as implausible , but similarly “defendable” and ad infinitum.
The World has never been in stasis, nor have its climates and the CO2 pumped out by cars and aeroplanes is nowhere significant to what is already there even before cars were invented. Volcanic eruptions and water vapour (FFSake) have a greater effect ,as have cows’ farts, but why let real science intrude on the wealth creation apparatus of a few. Incidentally, algae take in CO2 and turn it into biomass and sometimes useful stuff like oil and special nutrients. There will always be woolie clad protesters looking for a reason to be worried, needing a protest and march or two.
Now we are beginning to know that some the fundamental bases for the Climate Change hypothesis could be based on inadequate data and poorly organised measurement of tree rings in Siberia. Boing!
Hey, does anyone remember the founding father of controllecd panic vested upon The Great Unwashed; no not the Millenium Bug but the hole in the Ozone Layer. Where has that bloody hole gone?
So what is next, what is next to keep us preoccupied with fictitious worry whilst The Masters loot all our savings and impoverish us?
Water shortage and Global conflict, that’s what!
Yes there are water shortages and no, it is not a made up problem, this one. But, it is not the apocalypse now scenario, Tony Blair as E U President is more likely that one, but serious local problems of imbalance of water supply and population; people living in larger number numbers that are wise in aresa of the World where they really should not.
Fear not, it will be the next apocalyptic story and it the treasury will be looted, unless.
Read more: http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/circumlocuting-mandelsons-foreshite/#ixzz0TnmP3MgC
You heard it here first.
Don't forget now!
Unless you read Anna Raccoon?
Will respond later folks - eye not good and off to the Eye Clinic at Ninewells for 2pm.
Banned:
Whether he expanded or not, there are several problems with his "probably".
The first one is that by saying "probably", he's making a statement with no foundation, no science and no data. Remember, this is a person that advises on government policy. He should not be making such statements and advising government policies and spending billions on "maybes" and "probablys".
Second, aren't China's and India's emmissions their own problem?
I wouldn't be suprised if some new quango was brought in to look at this and money were poured in to create more jobs for establishment cronies.
We can only control with certainty and measure what happens within our borders. Lets spend money controlling the emissions here where we can measure the results and therefore justify cost-effectiveness and not get sent on some foreign emmissions guilt trip by Prof MacKay.
Delphius1 Was only saying what he said, not supporting it and what you say may be entirely true, 'probably' is.
Great Big Billygoat Gruff What happened to Swine Flu Pandemic, Acid Rain, Nuclear Winter, Reds Under The Beds,... ?
Del, I'm still of a similar opinion to yourself. (Have read your post now).
What utter nonsense banned, when did India and China's emissions have anything to do with us?
They're so desperate to get money from these countries they'll do anything.
Don't be surprised if the Dartford crossing, Channel tunnel etc is bought by either of them.
Ah Billy, yes Anna at her best. Water is the next oil, wait and see.
I do read Anna Billy :)
Post a Comment