Climate Cat out of the Bag? Potentially dynamite revelations

[chris watton]

G_T said:

Oakey said:

Updated List: Friday Morning We know the BBC has bias, I'm doing this more out of amusement now and the BBC has certainly not held back today!

A rundown of the climate related stories from the BBC since this 'leak';

Oakey, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you keep posting these News headlines as if to imply it's all part of the "global conspiracy".

Do you not think its far more likely that these articles are being published in anticipation of the upcoming climate summit?

Bit of both, without a doubt.

[Oakey]

G_T said:

Oakey said:

Updated List: Friday Morning We know the BBC has bias, I'm doing this more out of amusement now and the BBC has certainly not held back today!

A rundown of the climate related stories from the BBC since this 'leak';

Oakey, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you keep posting these News headlines as if to imply it's all part of the "global conspiracy".

Do you not think its far more likely that these articles are being published in anticipation of the upcoming climate summit?

No, I'm posting them to show the BBC's bias in this debacle.

One of their articles concerns Michael Mann whose credibility has been called into question with recent events, not only that but he claims to have resolved the issue of the mini ice age and the medieval warm period, something that had previously had them baffled for some time. A BBC News search on 'climategate' returns zero results, yet on Google there are 8million+ within a week.

A better question would be to ask you why YOU think the BBC have reported so little on the story that's taking over the internet and the rest of the world. I'm sure you have a perfectly valid suggestion?

Edited by Oakey on Friday 27th November 11:39

[G_T]

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Oakey said:

Updated List: Friday Morning We know the BBC has bias, I'm doing this more out of amusement now and the BBC has certainly not held back today!

A rundown of the climate related stories from the BBC since this 'leak';

Oakey, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you keep posting these News headlines as if to imply it's all part of the "global conspiracy".

Do you not think its far more likely that these articles are being published in anticipation of the upcoming climate summit?

No, I'm posting them to show the BBC's bias in this debacle.

One of their articles concerns Michael Mann whose credibility has been called into question with recent events, not only that but he claims to have resolved the issue of the mini ice age and the medieval warm period, something that had previously had them baffled for some time. A BBC News search on 'climategate' returns zero results, yet on Google there are 8million+ within a week.

I would think that's because the use of the word "climategate".

But the BBC has covered the story? The fact of the matter seems to be that because this evidence only seems to form a small part of the overall case for MMGW (I have the IPCC report in front of me btw). So even if the data and processes used by this party represent poor science they don't reflect the entire debate or undermine the data presented by other parties, like NASA for example.

A few bad apples don't spoil the bunch. Or in this case destroy the entire orchard.

That or its the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

[Project 644]

My complaint to the BBC said:

In a report had been commissioned in June 2007 jointly by the BBC Trust and BBC Board of Management entitled “From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel-Safeguarding Impartiality in the 21st Century”. It concluded: ‘There may be now a broad scientific consensus that climate change is definitely happening and that it is at least predominantly man-made… the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus’.

So, for starters I would like to ask the question;
Upon whose authority did the BBC cease to be an impartial Public Service Broadcaster, as required by its Charter, and become the judge, jury and sponsor of such dangerously specious political dogma so eloquently described as ‘…the consensus…’?
Also I would like to ask if this will now be changed in light of the recent revelations that any raw data or findings published by the Climate Research Unit is very likely to have been tampered with to suit the Anthropometric Global Warming Theory, rather than the theory being adjusted to fit the science.

In the last week I have found the BBC to be extremely biased about this story. A story which has had a slot on the news show on the Fox Network in America, a story which has had questions asked in the American Senate, a story which has both sides of the Global "Warming" argument up in arms. What have the BBC reported on in this week? The floods in Cockermouth with the occasional snippet of "flooding caused by global warming" thrown into the report, even though that is not the truth. Scientists across the world agree that isolated extreme weather conditions are not caused or affected by Man Made Global Warming.
So why is the BBC lying to the General Public on these issues
The BBCs news website has been inundated with all sorts of articles all of a sudden about “Global Warming”.
41. 'Commonwealth Talks Target Climate' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8382014....

40. '£4million Climate Study Launched' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/8381744.stm

39. 'Castle's Mexican Plant Rare Bloom' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/8381229.stm

38. 'Australia Emissions Plan In Chaos' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8382...

37. 'China Cabron Cuts Put Pressure On India' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/838212...

36. 'The Netherlands Leads the Battle Against Rising Sea Levels' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8362147.stm

35. 'Rich Should Help Amazon Forests, Summit Says' - Fri 27th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8380915....

34. 'Past Climate Anomalies Explained' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8381317.stm

33. 'Amazon Summit to Save Rainforest' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8380915....

32. 'New Flood Laws Revealed After Record Rainfall' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotl...

31. 'EU Climate Package Explained' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7765094.st...

30. 'Scottish Offshore Wind Future Set for £30billion Investment' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8379029.stm

29. 'Who Pays and Who Gains For Carbon Offsetting' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8378592.stm

28. 'Nigeria Set for 'Green Big Brother' Show' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8364871.st...

27. 'Obama Climate Summit Visit Hailed' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8379957....

26. 'Killing Cows for the Climate' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_838000...

25. 'China Unveils Copenhagen Targets' - Thurs 26th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8380...

24. 'Cows Survive Whitehall Farce' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8379759.stm (All in the name of Climate Change!)

23. 'Icebergs Heading to New Zealand' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8379...

22. 'Climate Policies Improve Health' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8377268.stm

21. 'US Pledges Major Emissions Cut' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8378890....

20. 'Climate Cash Controversy' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8376874.stm

19. 'Climate Change Help For The Poor Has Not Materialised' - Wed 25th: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8376009.stm

18. 'Liberians Facing Rising Flood Threat' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8375301.stm

17. 'Plan to Boost UK Woodland to tackle Climate Change' - Wed 25th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8377827.stm

16. 'This Year in Top Five Warmest' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8377128.stm

15. 'Mozambique Sea Level Rise: A Disaster Waiting to Happen' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8363045.st...

14. 'Rising Sea Levels: A Tale of Two Cities' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8366538.st...

13. 'Teenager Wins Trip to World Climate Change Summit' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire...

12. 'Australia PM Presses revised Carbon Emissions Scheme' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8375...

11. 'Copenhagen: What's your Solution?' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/8375378.s...

10. 'Climate is major cause of African conflict' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8375949.stm

9. 'US will Announce Climate Targets' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8375248.stm

8. 'Global Warming Science Alarming' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8375576.stm

7. 'Climate Change: Copenhagen in Graphics' - Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8359629.stm

6. 'State Leaders boost to Copenhagen' - Mon 23rd Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8373551.st...

5. 'Climate Change: What Price Will Future Generations Pay?' - Mon 23rd Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8374965.stm

4. 'Is Cumbria a victim of Climate Change?' - Mon 23rd Nov: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston...

3. 'East Antarctica Ice Sheet Losing Mass' - Sun 22nd Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8371773.stm

2. 'Fish At Risk In Acidified Oceans' - Sat 21st Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8369453.stm

1. 'Fishermen Spot Climate Change' - Fri 20th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/wales/2009/gre...

Number 38 is an article about how the Australian government are rebelling over the climate laws that the Australian PM wants to introduce, but the BBC has written a very biased article.
Number 34 is possibly the worst piece of journalism that I have read in a long time. One of the people caught up in the “climategate” scandal (Dr Micheal Mann) has been interviewed by the BBC and has found that there is nothing to worry about and the Anthropometric Global Warming story is completely true. How can the BBC trust this person to give a reliable and truthful quote when he has been implicated in lying to other scientists, governments and International Climate Organisations?

Numbers 14 and 15 seem to be the same story. Is this to clutter up the news pages on the BBCs website with “Global Warming” stories whilst other, slightly more important news, goes unreported?

Now let’s have a look at how many “climategate” stories the BBC put on its website since Monday.

4. 'UK's Climate Units Emails Hacked' - Fri 20th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8370282.stm

3. 'Email Arguments' - Sat 21st Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8371597.stm

2. 'Hacker Leaks Scientists Emails' - Mon 23rd Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/8374721...

1.'Email Impact' -Tue 24th Nov: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8377465.stm
Does this seem slightly biased? 41/4 It’s almost as if the BBC are trying to cover up the story. Indeed if I make a rundown of all the Global Warming stories before and after the CRU email leak the list looks like this.

Fri 20th Nov: 1 article
Sat 21st Nov: 1 article
Sun 22nd Nov: 1 article
Mon 23rd Nov: 3 articles
Tues 24th Nov: 10 articles
Wed 25th Nov: 8 articles
Thurs 26th Nov: 10 articles
Fri 27th Nov: 7 articles

The leak happened late on Sunday night/early Monday morning. Is this a coincidence? I am not a conspiracy theorist; I think that this is a little bit too obvious for a conspiracy, especially when the BBC is starting to be mocked by others in the media (who are covering this story).

These are some links to other media outlets that are running the story, as you will see from the links, the story has gone all over the globe. Why are the BBC trying to suppress what the General Public has a right to know and are paying through the nose for the privilege?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230122/Ho...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1230113/...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1230102/...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globa...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487047...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230635/Sc...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1230688/...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/ripples-of-c...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/artic...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/24/the-people-v...

http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Change-Exa...

If these media outlets can publish stories on this subject, why can’t the BBC? Have the government stopped the BBC from reporting fairly on this issue?
Why should I pay a TV licence, only to receive sub-standard journalism?

Looking forward to hearing back from the BBC on all these issues.

[convert]

Today's goolge search shows:-

Climategate 9,780,000 v dingleberries 230,000...


I guess dingleberries must be a bit of a slow burner then (hot)Airbag !

[Einion Yrth]

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

[G_T]

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

[jshell]

Expect lashings of 'Catholic Priests in Child Abuse' scandals as further smoke. Stuff that normally wouldn't make front page.

[mondeoman]

G_T said:

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Oakey said:

Updated List: Friday Morning We know the BBC has bias, I'm doing this more out of amusement now and the BBC has certainly not held back today!

A rundown of the climate related stories from the BBC since this 'leak';

Oakey, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you keep posting these News headlines as if to imply it's all part of the "global conspiracy".

Do you not think its far more likely that these articles are being published in anticipation of the upcoming climate summit?

No, I'm posting them to show the BBC's bias in this debacle.

One of their articles concerns Michael Mann whose credibility has been called into question with recent events, not only that but he claims to have resolved the issue of the mini ice age and the medieval warm period, something that had previously had them baffled for some time. A BBC News search on 'climategate' returns zero results, yet on Google there are 8million+ within a week.

I would think that's because the use of the word "climategate".

But the BBC has covered the story? The fact of the matter seems to be that because this evidence only seems to form a small part of the overall case for MMGW (I have the IPCC report in front of me btw). So even if the data and processes used by this party represent poor science they don't reflect the entire debate or undermine the data presented by other parties, like NASA for example.

A few bad apples don't spoil the bunch. Or in this case destroy the entire orchard.

That or its the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

When the few bad apples are the ones at the top of the tree, the ones that supply the majority of the data for the modellers to work from and the data is shown to be, shall we say, compromised, then yes, a few bad apples can and have spolied the bunch.

[Oakey]

G_T said:

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

Yes the BBC touched on the subject, mainly from the aspect of 'OMG Evil Hackers Steal data' but they've completely ignored the fallout as a result of this 'leak' / 'hack'.

You don't find it convenient then, that less than a week after this leak, Michael Mann has solved the MWP issue and the BBC are happily reporting this despite the fact Michael Mann's credibility has been called into question?

[Mr Whippy]

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

Yes the BBC touched on the subject, mainly from the aspect of 'OMG Evil Hackers Steal data' but they've completely ignored the fallout as a result of this 'leak' / 'hack'.

You don't find it convenient then, that less than a week after this leak, Michael Mann has solved the MWP issue and the BBC are happily reporting this despite the fact Michael Mann's credibility has been called into question?

Of course not, a 'true believer' has by definition, to be ignorant to facts.

Dave

Edited by Mr Whippy on Friday 27th November 12:25

[G_T]

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

Yes the BBC touched on the subject, mainly from the aspect of 'OMG Evil Hackers Steal data' but they've completely ignored the fallout as a result of this 'leak' / 'hack'.

You don't find it convenient then, that less than a week after this leak, Michael Mann has solved the MWP issue and the BBC are happily reporting this despite the fact Michael Mann's credibility has been called into question?

If by "find it convenient" you mean do I think the BBC are involved are co-conspirators in the great MMGW conspiracy, the honest answer is I don't know, but an unbiased glance would suggest its unlikely (as is the liklihood of most conspiracy theories).

[G_T]

Mr Whippy said:

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

Yes the BBC touched on the subject, mainly from the aspect of 'OMG Evil Hackers Steal data' but they've completely ignored the fallout as a result of this 'leak' / 'hack'.

You don't find it convenient then, that less than a week after this leak, Michael Mann has solved the MWP issue and the BBC are happily reporting this despite the fact Michael Mann's credibility has been called into question?

Of course not, a 'true believe' has by definition, to be ignorant to facts.

Dave

Very witty Dave. Apart from the fact that I don't currently believe in MMGW.

Don't let the truth get in the way of another one-liner though.

[G_T]

mondeoman said:

When the few bad apples are the ones at the top of the tree, the ones that supply the majority of the data for the modellers to work from and the data is shown to be, shall we say, compromised, then yes, a few bad apples can and have spolied the bunch.

But that doesn't reflect the state of the science does it?

If numerous other parties concerned are drawing the same conclusions (and they are) the failings of one group becomes less relevant. The scientific method is not as interdepenent and flimsey as a lot of people here seem to think it is.

Conclusions drawn solely from "bad data" shouldn be revised though. But I think the counter-arguement here is that there weren't any.

I'm not certain of course, but that would explain the lack of coverage more so than a media blackout.

[otolith]

IL_JDM said:

The funny thing is, the leaked emails state that the BBC should not be questioning man made global warming, and since the emails have leaked, the BBC haven't!

I think the problem is that the BBC does not consider itself to have a primary duty to report the truth without fear or favour - rather, I think that it considers itself responsible, in a paternal kind of way, for controlling the tide of public opinion. So long as the corporation is convinced at an editorial level that MMGW is a real and pressing concern, it will consider telling the truth about any story which is damaging to the maintenance of public confidence in MMGW to be irresponsible and dangerous.

Like I said, it's the same thought process by which you decide that it is more important to get the "right" decision on going to war than to be honest about the evidence for WMDs, or that it is more important to "send out the right message" about drugs than it is to publicise the truth about the harm a particular drug causes. It's a process of denying people the right to make their own mind up on the balance of evidence by pre-judging and pre-filtering the evidence they are shown.

They mean well, but they have no right to behave in this way.

[Mr Whippy]

G_T said:

Mr Whippy said:

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

Yes the BBC touched on the subject, mainly from the aspect of 'OMG Evil Hackers Steal data' but they've completely ignored the fallout as a result of this 'leak' / 'hack'.

You don't find it convenient then, that less than a week after this leak, Michael Mann has solved the MWP issue and the BBC are happily reporting this despite the fact Michael Mann's credibility has been called into question?

Of course not, a 'true believe' has by definition, to be ignorant to facts.

Dave

Very witty Dave. Apart from the fact that I don't currently believe in MMGW.

Don't let the truth get in the way of another one-liner though.

I believe in MMGW, by definition humans are inefficient and that inefficiency produces among other things, heat.

We also partake in activities which generate heat on purpose for a specific use, and as a consequence of inefficient processes. And lots of others.

How much we contribute to the global temperature though, among all the other processes occuring, is what is important.


When scientists at the leading edge of this work are knowingly going against good scientific process, or plain lying, then they are doing the arguement no favours at all!

Dave

[Halb]

I sky plus QT and watch it the day after usually due to time constraints, will be looking forward to this one

[s.m.h.]

No-one has said exactly how much data is shared between the contributors to the IPCC.
I read somewhere the CRU were the largest and most influential of them all.
If they are found, as seems, to have been falsifying data for who-evers benefit, then all the data must be questioned.
Also the point of the same groups of people making up the peer review board, passing whatever they wanted as fact and ejecting those whose opinions did not suit.
The BBC may not see it as newsworthy, but 8million plus on Google search would indicate there's another reason for their lack of interest.
I think the emails won't be the most damning part. Once the data has been thoroughly examined, I think there will be some major problems. This as I understand, may take months , with Copenhagen in a few weeks I can't see that anyone without a vested interest in the whole carbon trading BS would be wanting to sign anything.

[indi pearl]

jshell said, "Expect lashings of 'Catholic Priests in Child Abuse' scandals as further smoke. Stuff that normally wouldn't make front page."

Now this is a story about how the Catholic Church,the Irish Goverment,local goverment and even the police kept the lid on such despicable behavour for 30 or more years. Complainents (victims of the abuse) were ignored,were accused of telling lies or even termed mentally defective.
Compare this globaly small experiment in population misdirection to MMGW and it will be 50 years before the BBC will broadcast the story of how the majority of the worlds population was fed and believed a crock to justify higher taxes,punitive laws and loss of personal freedoms.
The comparison between both of the above is quite startling but I doupt anyone at Auntie is bright enough to spot it

[Oakey]

G_T said:

Oakey said:

G_T said:

Einion Yrth said:

G_T said:

the biggest conspiracy in human history. Quite frankly I find the prospect of MMGW far less frightening.

What you do or do not find frightening is quite spectacularly irrelevant.

As are your posts from what I can tell.

Yes the BBC touched on the subject, mainly from the aspect of 'OMG Evil Hackers Steal data' but they've completely ignored the fallout as a result of this 'leak' / 'hack'.

You don't find it convenient then, that less than a week after this leak, Michael Mann has solved the MWP issue and the BBC are happily reporting this despite the fact Michael Mann's credibility has been called into question?

If by "find it convenient" you mean do I think the BBC are involved are co-conspirators in the great MMGW conspiracy, the honest answer is I don't know, but an unbiased glance would suggest its unlikely (as is the liklihood of most conspiracy theories).

You think it's a coincidence then that an issue that has been bothering climate scientists for some time, and is also a central part of the CRU leak, has suddenly been resolved, by one of those implicated in the CRU no less?