There is an amusing you-tube clip with Americans Noel Sheppard and Glenn Beck talking about the BBC and how quickly and convincingly environment reporter Richard Harrabin caved to environmental activist Jo Abbess.
Have a look:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=216v5AoQcFQ
Apparently the BBC is refusing to comment on the Jo Abbess fiasco.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
God bless America and its Bill of Rights; anywhere else they would have you in court on a defamation charge quicker than you can say exxon.
There is no way the BBC can respond to this scandal without escalating it. If the BBC can stay low for a week, the scandal will peter out, and the media and the blogs will be all over something else. The BBC can then continue as normal.
“..this is not an issue of debate, this is an issue of Emerging Truth..”
Dearie me, even the late Phil Done (may his agnostic soul RIP) would be wriggling with irritation
More US style media enlightenment from the usual all male authorities?
This particular campaign is not likely to be balanced until we 50/50 m-f ratios across the spectrum of climate blogs.
gavin: “More US style media enlightenment from the usual all male authorities?”
You think so. I suspect if Roger Harrabin had more bollocks than Jo Abbess this thread wouldn’t exist.
I reckoned jo was street wise on the first thread and thought then we don’t see enough women acroos this debate to know where we stand with the media.
“If the BBC can stay low for a week..”
Let me think — that would be called ‘gutlessness’, wouldn’t it ?
Let’s see what the BBC Website says under “About the BBC – Purposes and Values”:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/purpose/
“Our values:
– Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest.
– Audiences are at the heart of everything we do.
– We take pride in delivering quality and value for money.
– Creativity is the lifeblood of our organisation.
– We respect each other and celebrate our diversity so that everyone can give their best.
– We are one BBC: great things happen when we work together.”
Hmmm — don’t see “gutlessness” in there as one their “Core Values”.
Ivan,
Having watched that video clip (great performance!), it would pay the BBC to be very, very gutless.
They also left out out, “we are a slimy bunch of leftist parasitic scum on a mission from captain planet”. And “who needs windmills when you can indulge in gratuitous planet salvation”.
But Cinders has a similar story of exposed fraud from their own ABC, via the Timber Communities newsletter, Trunklines.
I am a little concerned when Noel Sheppard was commenting, that graphic images were being shown as a backdrop during his comments – this in itself makes we sceptical of the overall motive of the Jeff Beck Story on this issue.
Louis, if you look closely at the background graphics, you will notice the Greenpeace logo there. Really quite apt to show the work of that extremist Organisation of thugs as a backdrop.
Maybe dear Jo is a member of GP.
But according to the Nature Blog, the BBC are talking to Nature:
The BBC told us …A minor change was made to the “Global temperatures ‘to decrease'” piece on our website to better reflect the science. A few people including the report’s authors, the world meteorlogical organisation, pointed out to us that the earlier version had been ambiguous.”
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/04/heated_row_over_cooling_articl.html
Jennifer
you have the nerve to accuse these people of not caring about the science. Unbelieveable.
The late great physicist Edward Teller said that he has fought three lots of fascists in his life: the Browns, the Reds and the Greens. Unfortunately, the battle with the last lot is not over yet.
SJT “you have the nerve to accuse these people of not caring about the science. Unbelieveable.”
Oh really SJT. When has the truth or the facts ever mattered to the AGW zealots?
Let’s look at Mr. Gore’ latest bit of propaganda shall we (warming to fellow skeptics, don’t watch if you have a weak stomach!):
http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/243
Now given the full range of nonsense delivered here by Mr. Gore it would by easy to attack just about anything that Mr. Gore says. However I’ll focus on one item where Mr. Gore undisputedly proves he’s either exceptionally stupid or just a bold faced liar.
In the early part of his show, Al drones on about the record low area of the Northern “icecap” last year (funny he never mentioned the record high level of the Antarctic icecap!). Anyway at about the 7 minute mark he goes on to say “Already, along the Arctic Circle” and proceeds to show 2 pictures of buildings collapsing and falling off of cliffs. The first was from Alaska but, get this, the second was from Daniel’s Harbour Newfoundland! Now if you check your geography, you’ll find that the latitude for Daniel’s Harbour is lower than that for London, England! Now I’ve heard London described in many ways but never as being along the Arctic Circle! If you do the math you will find that Daniel’s Harbour is some 1800 kilometres from the Arctic Circle. It appears that Al Gore’s geoextrapolation skills are even more advanced than James Hansen’s!
Now lest some of you AGW fanatics still somehow want to claim that the collapse in Daniel’s Harbour was somehow related to Global Warming I’ll save you the bother. AS per the item below, you will see that this has nothing to do with your religion!
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2007/04/16/second-landslide.html
Good grief!!
It’s gone too far and it’s way too late for the BBC to ‘stay low’ for a week.
If true to form the BBC’s next comment on the climate cooling trend will be claiming it’s rich folks’ kids dropping their supersize ice lollipops in the sea. The chattering classes go along with the notion that alcohol problems are due to middle class wine buffs rather than legless representatives of the great unwashed, so it would be consistent at least.
And let’s not forget that the planet is being pressure cooked by capitalism and wealthy individuals not paying enough tax. Tax will save the day – even though the IPCC don’t list it on page 16 of AR4 SPM. What was Jo Abbess thinking not to mention it? Harrabin would have asked for one more tummy tickle as he rolled over for the extra helping, and bingo.
I think Jo Abbess should be congratulated for a courageous act.
She and the BBC have arranged maximum publicity for the topic.
Meanwhile, the sun remains terribly quiet, and the solar physicists continue to debate whether it is a Dalton Minimum, a Maunder Minimum, or worse, that we face.
For those without [irrelevant] historical qualifications, the Maunder Minimum is when they held ice fairs on the Thames every winter….
It seems to me that the whole point of the news item in this thread has been completely lost in the moral and ethical drama thrown up by the censorship (blackmail?) side issue (which is certainly worth exploration – and explanation).
The news item at the core of the issue is the WMO’s Info Note #44 (which can be seen at:
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/info_notes/info_44_en.html) and was picked up and reported by Roger Harrabin.
In this Info Note, they waffle around a bit, but finally cough the salient piece of information:
“…the global climate on an average is warming despite the temporary cooling brought about by La Niña.”
“Temporary cooling brought about by La Niña”? On a global scale? Wow.
I think we have to accept this at face value – however qualified they choose to present it. We can’t on the one hand accept what one UN agency (IPCC) says as being the revealed truth of God, and on the other hand quibble with a significant
factual statement issued by another UN agency (WMO).
As I understand it, the IPCC’s AGW case (in simple no-nonsense terms) is this:
– atmospheric CO2 levels continue to rise due to “human activity” – i.e. burning of fossil fuels
– this rising CO2 level is “unequivocally” driving dangerous global warming (unless of course you are Ken Davidson, of The Age, in which case it is “catastrophic” climate change — see: http://business.theage.com.au/only-unannounced-offramps-could-make-links-viable/20080406-244i.html?page=2)
So – here’s the thing that has got me stumped:
Given that the ‘science is settled’ – and assuming that we still live in a universe that is governed by mathematics and obeys the laws of physics — can someone please explain the following to me:
– Firstly, how can such a huge portion of the southern Pacific Ocean suddenly and dramatically get cold enough to have a major impact on the climates of China, Canada and other large chunks of the globe — all at the same time that the atmosphere above is “unequivocally” being subject to ‘dangerous’ and/or ‘catastrophic’ warming as a result of rising CO2 levels? Where did all this ocean heat mysteriously disappear to ? And how ?
– Secondly, how can such a dramatic change take place during the southern hemisphere’s summer period when the sun should be in a perfect position (i.e. directly overhead) to exacerbate this ‘dangerous’ and/or ‘catastrophic’ warming ?
I am hoping that one of the many climate experts out there can clear this point up for me.
I am currently reading the IPCC’s Assessment Report 4, but so far I can’t find any discussion of this phenomenom which has been observed by the WMO (and reported in the BBC).
Ivan: checkout the map in Special Climate Statement 15
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/statements/scs15b.pdf
From Ivan’s post above:
Go to:
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/info_notes/info_44_en.html)
and you will get:-
WMO WEBSITE STRUCTURE HAS CHANGED
The page you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed or is temporarily unavailable.
Make sure you have typed the correct page address in the address bar.
Please click on ‘Home’ in the above breadcrumb to be redirected or add a new bookmark. We regret the inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.
I wonder what happened??
You should note that the report says that Eucla broke the record for the most days over 40C.
The previous record was in 1961.
So here is what you need to understand. If you plotted that temperature data against February averages you wouldn’t get the scary chart shown in the report.
So be careful. This is more likely to be a timing issue than a heating issue. And the timing is a matter of weeks. A week earlier and almost half of those days would have been in February and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Remember…. the hottest year in the USA was 1934-35.
Lawrie: WMO News 9th April 2008
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/news/index_en.html
links to this BBC report on the 4th
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm
“The World Meteorological Organization’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.
But this year’s temperatures would still be way above the average – and we would soon exceed the record year of 1998 because of global warming induced by greenhouse gases” etc.
My dad who worked for the WMO (set up most met stations in central south america) would be ashamed to have anything to do with them today I am sure. Until they go back to practising meteorology me thinks
Poor old BBC, they do sound a bit gutless in the face of rampaging zealotry. However, they do carry some useful stuff on historical weather events, which may interest Doug Lavers.
Whilst rummaging in the writings of Daniel Defoe, I found his book on the Great Storm of 1703. One of the linked sites is http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/understanding/1703_storm.shtml
Browsing on words such as DEFOE and STORM will turn up much other information.
It seems barometric pressure in 1703 was measured, by the Rev. Derham FRS, as 973 millibars. Between 8,000 and 15,000 people were killed, including the Bishop of Bath and Wells, who was crushed by a falling chimney. Queen Anne hid in the palace cellar. Thousands of ‘old growth’ trees were uprooted.
The clergy said it was God’s punishment for human wickedness, and preached on the subject for fifty years after.
Only a single weather event, but it puts New Orleans a bit in the shade, what, what?
Those who share my belief that history can, and should be seen as, an astringent check on bad science may also be interested in the Great Spring Frost of 1908, and the Great East Coast Floods of 1953. Oooh,no,no,no,no,no,yes. Quick, before the alleged Jo gets all this deleted.
Further searching reveals that the Bishop’s wife was also killed when the bedroom ceiling collapsed. No mention of an Abbess. And that was a snowstorm too in 1908. I remember it well.
One thing that strikes me about Jo’s post on the Campaign against Climate Change portal (http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/2089) is that no-one on that thread seems to have come out in support for her actions. Instead, several have soundly criticised her; I’d have expected a few approving voices, given the subject matter of that website. One commentator there has called this an own goal for environmental activists, and I’m inclined to agree; she comes across as someone unpleasantly eager to stifle any semblance of debate, and willing to utter (albeit vague) threats to promote her agenda. Maybe she simply misjudged the general reaction she would get, or the unexpected negative consequences of posting the whole exchange on the Campaign against Climate Change portal? If so, and in that respect, to my mind she appears not so much street-wise as she does naive.
Here is her new target
http://action.foe.org/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=24133
Gavin writes:
“But this year’s temperatures would still be way above the average – and we would soon exceed the record year of 1998 because of global warming induced by greenhouse gases” etc.”
Way above what average?
The temperature climb is awfully slow and dropping behind that vaunted gas.Gosh all that cooling in last year somehow dragged DOWN the CO2 emission rate in last year.
What can we do about it aside from James Hansen’s penchant for playing statistics?
An animation on the BBC story alteration is available here.
BBC before and after
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/09/bbc-before-and-after/
To stop the animation press the “Esc” key; to restart it press the “F5” key.
The original story which the Ministry Of Truth doesn’t want you to see is still available via Yahoo Cache but make a copy quickly before it times out like copies in Google and Live.
Global warming ‘dips this year’
http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=%22Global+warming+%27dips+this+year%27%22&fr=ush-news&u=reddit.com/goto%3Frss%3Dtrue%26id%3Dt3_6ellk&w=%22global+warming+dips+this+year%22&d=Nxe2VvH_QkkL&icp=1&.intl=us
Lawrie reports a bad URL:
“From Ivan’s post above:
Go to:
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/info_notes/info_44_en.html)
”
It’s just a typo or misformatted HTML, leave off the closing paren and it works for me:
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/info_notes/info_44_en.html
Gavin how much does Al pay you? I’m just curious how much the going rate is for selling out everyone you ever met, loved, or were related to.
Alex: Jo is probably quite capable of running her campaign alone. After a period of living in down town Sydney including Kings Cross I quickly became aware of how the locals survive on the streets after dark. The Cross was a vicious place for the unwary and one of the few rules was be careful with your trust. I carried little more than a weekly transport pass and a well hidden staff ID card.
This brings me to write another observation for the street wise. Internet groupies quickly become co-dependent and those on the fringe more so than others.
For a number of years several R/L acquaintances including scientists were busy on internet chat rooms that involved TG folk from all age groups. As the internet was almost anomous it seemed a great flood of mutual emotion overcame lifetimes of private suppression. This sudden outburst of “freedom” sure had the experts worried.
Victims of this intellectual “club” were often spouses and their children.
James: Although I can be considerate re someone’s sensitivities I generally make up my mind without outside help. Having said that, I know “scientists” can be a funny lot.
American comedian confuses substance with being a smartass. So what?
Gavin, the money doesn’t hurt either, does it?
James: was that just another tail end echo?
Try to be original please.