Turbobloke i need your help

[Nuclearsquash]

Hello,

Today i read on the BBC News website the following article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4

now i took umbridge to the way the article was written and some of its contents. So i complained about it:

nuclearsquash wrote said:

The article fails to mention that the IPCC uses flawed statistics in its reports to governments. The article fails to mention that there is NO scientific consensus regarding climate change. The picture of the glacier is misleading, glaciers are known to grow and retreat on a regular basis, there is no mention of this. Whilst the Ice sheets of Greenland may be melting, it is not mentioned that antarctic ice sheets are currently thickening. If you are going to refer to climate change relating to human activity you should use the term anthropogenic, as climate change is a natural phenomena that has occured for billions of years.

i got a reply to this:

BBC guy said:

Dear Nuclearsquash, Thanks for your e-mail. It is always good to have constructive feedback on our output. Unfortunately I must disagree with your basic contention, that there is 'no consensus' among climate scientists. I would argue the very opposite. In fact, I can honestly say that I have not come across a single climate scientist - 'sceptic' or not - who disputes the basic mechanism that increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane etc. will increase temperatures. Sceptics who are not scientists, or whose distinction lies in a different area of research, do so volubly. But if one speaks of 'scientific consensus', should one not focus on the views of the scientifically-qualified? Glaciers and ice sheets do, as you say, routinely contract and expand according to natural fluctuations. But you will have seen recent studies suggesting that the Greenland and west Antarctic sheets may be slipping into the sea in a manner which indicates current changes are not part of a natural cycle. You will have seen coverage of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, without doubt the most comprehensive scientific study ever performed on any region of the globe, which concluded that the Arctic is warming rapidly and possibly irreversibly. I agree with you that there is a problem of terminology in reporting climate issues. We should try to use qualifiers such as 'anthropogenic' more often than we do. With best wishes, Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC Website.

Now i think he's very wrong, but i need help with links etc, an i know you Turbobloke are the man for the job, can you help?

Many thanks

Andy





>> Edited by Nuclearsquash on Wednesday 1st March 16:50

[TeamD]

Why not start with sending them the following thread?

www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?t=244952&f=141&h=0

[simpo two]

Check out www.abd.org.uk and click 'Environment'. Loads of stuff.

Should keep you happy and him pissed off

NB UK accounts for just 2% of world's CO2 emissions, so if we stopped every emission, completely, it would make sod all difference.

[ewenm]

Ask him if he's spoken to David Bellamy. And be sure to emphasise that you're talking about man-made climate change.

[nuclearsquash]

Thanks for the help so far, i intend to go a1 ballistic at the bloke and totally undermine his arguement. Hopefully turbobloke might lend his support too . I've just reached a point of where i have had enough of being lied to by the media, i'm seriously tempted to start a website detailing the counter arguement.

Again thanks so far

Andy

[polus]

What annoys me about the BBC news website is how they filter the "have your say" comments to substantiate an article (OK so you get the token 10%).

ewenm said:

Ask him if he's spoken to David Bellamy. And be sure to emphasise that you're talking about man-made climate change.

Yeah I noticed hes conveiently mingling the two...

>> Edited by polus on Thursday 2nd March 21:46

>> Edited by polus on Thursday 2nd March 21:57