Skip to content

Attenborough’s Latest Propaganda Piece Ignores The Facts About Walruses

October 29, 2017
tags: ,

By Paul Homewood


Apparently tonight’s episode concerns itself with walruses, who (you guessed) are all “going to die” because of “melting Arctic ice”.

Below is the part of the programme’s introduction:

Ocean currents move heat around our planet and maintain a climate favourable for life. But our ocean system, in relative equilibrium for millennia, is changing at a worrying rate. Deep in the polar north, we meet walrus mothers and their newborn calves, searching for an ice floe to rest on. But with rising temperatures, summer sea ice is retreating – their battles to survive are becoming ever harder. As we begin to understand the true complexity of the lives of our ocean creatures, so do we recognise the fragility of their home.

It’s a pity the doddering old idiot, David Attenborough, could not be bothered to check the facts with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, who issued this press release earlier this month (my bold):


The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has found that the Pacific walrus does not require protection as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The finding follows a comprehensive review and analysis of the best available scientific information concerning the species, as well as local and traditional ecological knowledge of Alaska Native peoples.


The Pacific walrus is found throughout the continental shelf waters of the Bering and Chukchi seas and occasionally in the East Siberian Sea and Beaufort Sea. In its review, the Service paid particular attention to the impact to the species of the ongoing loss of sea ice in the walrus’s range.

While walruses use sea ice for a variety of activities, including breeding, birthing, resting and avoiding predators, they have shown an ability to adapt to sea ice loss that was not foreseen when the Service last assessed the species in 2011. Given these behavioral changes, the Service determined that it could not predict, with confidence, future behavioral responses of the species beyond 2060. Accordingly, that date was used as the limit for determining whether the walrus was likely to become endangered within the “foreseeable future,” under the ESA. Beyond that time, predicting behavioral responses becomes too speculative to be considered best available science for the purposes of a listing determination.

“Our decision not to list the Pacific walrus under the Endangered Species Act at this time is based on a rigorous evaluation of the best available science, which indicates the population appears stable, and the species has demonstrated an ability to adapt to changing conditions,” said Fish and Wildlife Service Principal Deputy Director Greg Sheehan. “If future circumstances warrant or new information comes to light, we can and will re-evaluate the Pacific walrus for ESA protection. In the meantime, the species will continue to be federally protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.”

Other stressors that were identified in 2011, including subsistence harvest, have declined. The Pacific walrus population appears to be approaching stability with reproductive and survival rates that are higher than in the 1970s–1980s.

The Pacific walrus will continue to receive protection in the U.S. under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Protections afforded under the MMPA include prohibitions on the harvest, import, and export of the Pacific walrus or walrus products, except by Alaska Natives for subsistence and handicraft creation and sale. In addition to monitoring the population, the Service will continue to work with the State of Alaska, coastal communities and other partners to conserve the Pacific walrus population and minimize the impacts of stressors where possible.

The decision today is the Service’s final action regarding a petition submitted to the agency in 2008 to list the Pacific walrus.



So far from declining, the Pacific walrus population is stable and doing better than it was in the 1970s and 80s, when Arctic sea ice was more extensive.

This episode must mark a new low in the reputation of the BBC.

  1. October 29, 2017 6:52 pm

    In addition where is the evidence that the “ocean system ” is changing at a worrying rate?

  2. Broadlands permalink
    October 29, 2017 6:58 pm

    None of this is really new…

    The Facts…. 2007 shattered records for Arctic melt in the following ways:

    —About 552 billion tons of ice melted this summer from the Greenland ice sheet, according to preliminary satellite data to be released by NASA Wednesday. That’s 15 percent more than the annual average summer melt, beating 2005’s record.

    —A record amount of surface ice was lost over Greenland this year, 12 percent more than the previous worst year, 2005, according to data the University of Colorado released Monday. That’s nearly quadruple the amount that melted just 15 years ago. It’s an amount of water that could cover Washington, D.C., a half-mile deep, researchers calculated.

    —The surface area of summer sea ice floating in the Arctic Ocean this summer was nearly 23 percent below the previous record. The dwindling sea ice already has affected wildlife, with 6,000 walruses coming ashore in northwest Alaska in October for the first time in recorded history. Another first: the Northwest Passage was open to navigation.

    • Nigel S permalink
      October 29, 2017 10:47 pm

      Gjøa was the first vessel to transit the Northwest Passage. With a crew of six, Roald Amundsen traversed the passage in a three-year journey, finishing in 1906. Gjøa was a 70 foot sailing vessel with a 13hp paraffin engine.

    • October 29, 2017 11:02 pm

      Broadlands your selective use numbers is such misleading rubbish .
      The Arctic has the same amount of ice now as in 2007

      and Geenland has record amounts
      of ice – that’s why it has record amounts of melt – the more in the more out in the normal cycle between Summer and Winter

      • November 1, 2017 12:21 am

        I see that Broadlands does’t come back with a reply to you and me and others at all.


    • October 29, 2017 11:03 pm

      and as for you comment on Walrus – did you not even read the article you are commenting on ??

    • Paddy permalink
      October 30, 2017 7:42 am

      How did walruses survive previous warm periods – or did they evolve during the LIA?!

    • October 30, 2017 8:04 am

      Good heavens, Broadlands, you really are rather deluded or is it dishonest?

    • October 30, 2017 2:47 pm


      you didn’t know that for a few thousand years,there were little to zero Summer ice in the Arctic,the last time during the MWP?

      Yet here we are in 2017,seeing a large colonies of Walruses anyway.

  3. October 29, 2017 6:58 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

  4. October 29, 2017 7:02 pm

    It would be unique nowadays if a BBC documentary failed to blame something on “climate change”.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:47 pm

      And they wind it into other programmes as well. Anything to promote their left wing agenda.

  5. October 29, 2017 7:05 pm

    You didn’t say that, in the opinion of many, the BBC has lost its honour.

  6. quaesoveritas permalink
    October 29, 2017 7:13 pm

    In a preview of the programme, David Shukman said:
    “There was a very moving scene in episode one, of a Walrus mother trying to get her calf onto a piece of ice and there wasn’t much left because it’s all melting.”
    From what I saw, the problem was, too many walruses, rather that insufficient ice.

  7. quaesoveritas permalink
    October 29, 2017 7:15 pm

    By the way, I sent an email to Shukman requesting evidence to support his statement, i.e. that all the ice was melting, but have so far received no reply.

    • HotScot permalink
      October 29, 2017 9:43 pm


      Can you publish Shukman’s email address please.

      I seethed in my kitchen, whilst overhearing my wife and daughter in the next room watching the effing rubbish spewed by Attenborough.

      The man is a luvvy, another publicity seeking celebrity no better than those on celebrity big brother or countryfile. They are interested in nothing more than promoting their celebrity status and lining their own pockets.

      • quaesoveritas permalink
        October 29, 2017 10:22 pm

        I received a reply in February to an email using:

      • HotScot permalink
        October 29, 2017 10:44 pm


        Much obliged. I will send my comments.

  8. October 29, 2017 7:25 pm

    The question is: will the BBC be issuing an apology since the BBC’s complaints department should rule that a lack of scrutiny of Attenborough’s claims means that the documentary falls well short of editorial standards?

    • Ian permalink
      October 30, 2017 11:13 am

      Unlikely, of course. I was watching the programme with my family and remarked to raised eyebrows that the rubbish spouted would be debunked in hours, as usually happens with this sort of propaganda. Thank you Paul.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:49 pm

      I presume this is a rhetorical question since there is no chance of that happening.

  9. Pauline Cornah permalink
    October 29, 2017 7:29 pm

    Love your website but, as a 72-year-old, not keen on “the doddering old idiot” comment about David Attenborough. I do feel such personal and derogatory remarks are not in keeping with the overall ethos of this site.

    • dennisambler permalink
      October 29, 2017 8:40 pm

      As an “almost” 70 year old, I agree. He is not a doddering old idiot, he knows exactly what he is doing.

      • October 29, 2017 8:49 pm

        I’d give him the benefit of the doubt, as such a prominent figure he was probably targeted by the eco-zealots at the BBC, fed with a steady stream of statistics and consensus nonsense until he turned.

        He has recently made sensible comments about no hope of changing temperature/CO2, focus should be on reducing plastic in the oceans.

      • roger permalink
        October 29, 2017 10:52 pm

        As a septuagenarian of 77 years I reserve the right to call out anyone who has allowed him or herself to be used for propagating lies in order to steal money for personal or crony use by way of regressive taxation.
        He should be ashamed to look those in fuel poverty in the eye whilst at the same time consorting with the rich in overheated homes and public offices.

      • Ian permalink
        October 30, 2017 11:14 am

        How about useful idiot?

    • HotScot permalink
      October 29, 2017 10:09 pm


      Quotes from Attenborough from an Interview with the Independent, 1998:

      “Secondary [scool] location? At Wyggeston Grammar School for Boys, if you were extremely bright, you took classics; if you were extremely thick you did woodwork. In between was science, then modern languages. I was in the science stream.”

      How very condescending of him. I achieved an ‘A’ in woodwork and I’m damn sure I could build a shelter in a hostile environment faster and better than the ‘legendary’ Attenborough.

      “Also at 16, I taught at slum schools – this was during the war – in Leicester.”

      Oh! How very troublesome for you David, having to teach at ‘slum’ schools. Too bad the slumerati (like me, because of course I was good at woodwork) don’t hang on your every syllable.

      “I got an open scholarship to Clare. The course was only two years. I would like to think that the two-year intensive degree course didn’t cut too many corners. You worked in the vacations. If you read science, you didn’t laze around on the river with girls – like people reading English and philosophy – but it was a paradisiacal time. I got a 2.1 in natural sciences.”

      A two-year intensive course! Is there such a thing? My daughter got her 2:1 at Southampton in Zoology, a three year course where she didn’t get the chance to laze about on the river, probably where she would have learned more than with her head buried in books.

      What an utterly obnoxious, self obsessed cretin.

      • Nigel S permalink
        October 29, 2017 10:52 pm

        My father’s physics degreee at Birmingham during WW2 was 2 years. He was then sent to Burma to fight the Japanese.

      • HotScot permalink
        October 29, 2017 11:07 pm

        Nigel S

        I trust he survived.

      • HotScot permalink
        October 29, 2017 11:46 pm

        Nigel S

        My Father in Law was an Oxford educated UN forester. He despised the greens.

        He worked with, amongst other global political figures, Castro to develop generational forestry solutions to alleviate poverty and generate wealth. He developed forestry practices and, with international aid, built factories producing plywood etc. All within a 5 year tenure.

        The day he shook hand’s with Fidel before leaving for a new project, Fidel was selling the machinery and equipment on the international market and levelling the factories, for his own benefit.

        He despaired at the amateur efforts of organisations such as Band Aid. He was at pains to describe just how their feeble efforts at raising aid for Africa would be swallowed by the corrupt governments and criminal organisations his UN knew how to avoid. His UN was a different animal to our current UN.

        Amongst his professional challenges were Peru, Burma, and Maiduguri, you may recall Maiduguri was razed by Boko haram recently and a group of young girls kidnapped and enslaved. A university town that, when my FIL started work there, was a single tin hut.

        My FIL passed away recently in his 90’s. His life’s work amounted to zero. Not because he wasn’t good at his job, but because his efforts were mis directed by amateur, zealous politicians who knew nothing but theory and ideology.

      • Nigel S permalink
        October 30, 2017 9:13 am

        Hot Scot; yes thank you. He also survived; Surabaya, Partition and Malaya, fair chance of not surviving any of those. Attenborough was born in 1926 so he probably went to Clare in 1944 and the 2 year degree story is probabaly accurate.

  10. Gerry, England permalink
    October 29, 2017 7:30 pm

    Peter Hitchens comments today in the MOS how the BBC was falling over itself to apologise for allowing Lord Lawson to state some inconvenient but you try calling them out on something when they spout left wing lies. Designed no doubt to make you give up before you get too far. Stop watching/listening is the best policy or even better, cut off their funding.

    • HotScot permalink
      October 29, 2017 10:16 pm

      Gerry, England

      I love listening to Peter Hitchens for his brutal honesty. I also enjoyed listening to his late brother for the same reason, and their opposing opinions on religion. Two intelligent men from the same family prepared to argue their point with conviction.

      Often painful to listen to, but that’s my problem, not Peter’s.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        October 30, 2017 1:53 pm

        My only issue with Peter Hitchens was in referring to football as ‘kicking an inflated pig’s bladder around’. This was beneath the man and a sad attempt to make a point against the most popular game in the world.

      • HotScot permalink
        October 30, 2017 3:28 pm


        I like Peter for the very reason you have an issue with him. But then I like Rugby which, by his definition, is carrying an inflated pigs bladder around. 🙂

        And I’m not entirely certain, but I believe cricket is the most popular game in the world.

  11. Gordon Buckley permalink
    October 29, 2017 7:50 pm

    Stopped watching that “doddering old idiot, David Attenborough ” years ago !!

  12. Athelstan permalink
    October 29, 2017 7:54 pm

    time was when God help them some of the family tuned in to attenboro’ and his nature stuff and found out he was no great shakes, the camera men and sound engineers are the real geniuses, all he does is stagger around and whispering total bollox and that was then.

    Now the stuff is fixed, filmed in a studio, not a mountainside in Alaska and the rest of it is just pure twaddle.

    The old giffer has gone walkabout into delivering purely adulterated lies, the silly old git.

    albeeb’s problem is that, they still hang on his every word but then think on……………….According to Hannan in the S.Torygraph and quoting a recent yougov survey Millennials 30% of, kids these days think that George W Bush murdered more people than Stalin a proper genocidal maniac, and 70% stated that, they’ve never even heard of Chairman Mao and this lot……….sing paeans to compo corbyn.

    Someone put the light out – oh …………….the tories, they’re trying!!

    Seriously with jezza it will be back to the fields, most of his momentum loons think ‘a few’ dead charges the revolucion: Viva, Viva Inglaterra Venezuela EU II – La republica popular Socialista, y murte a los capitalistas!!

    • HotScot permalink
      October 29, 2017 10:43 pm


      “If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain. – Winston Churchill”

      Your parents, and my parents, were happy to let you and I learn from our mistakes.

      Nowadays, learning by indoctrination is the solution, never make a mistake because your course in life is pre determined by certainty.

      I have burned my fingers on numerous occasions in life. Education to the highest level would not have taught me how to avoid burned fingers.

      I am financially poor, but intellectually wealthy (at least I like to think so) but offer no intellectual solutions to others problems. The best I can offer is ‘suck it and see’. If it suits you, do it. It might not be my choice in life, but your life is not my life.

      The only thing one must consider are the short term consequences of one’s actions. There are rarely long term consequences other than in one’s own mind. Physical or mental conditions from foolhardy actions notwithstanding, and obviously, sanctions resulting from foolhardy actions such as assault, murder, rape etc.

      We often see ourselves being engulfed by feral youth, but our parents had the same perception. To a greater extent, despite their mistakes, our peers have turned out no less moral and honourable than ourselves.

      The problem lies with our governments, embroiled as they are, almost daily, in scandals of corruption and sexual deviancy you, me, or our peers would never consider.

      We, the common plebs, are not the problem, we are the solution.

      We need to rid ourselves of politicians and do gooders. We are grown up enough to sort out our own problems without intermediaries.

    • Colin permalink
      October 30, 2017 6:36 pm

      Anthropomorphic bollox too, almost beyond parody, but I’m not sure if he writes this stuff. Interesting how his near contemporary David Bellamy has been cast into the outer wilderness following un PC pronouncements on climate change.

  13. October 29, 2017 8:12 pm

    Reblogged this on Wolsten.

  14. CheshireRed permalink
    October 29, 2017 8:45 pm

    A few years back the Guardian (of course, who else would it be?) ran a piece about walrus ‘facing disaster because of loss of sea ice’, including a photo of thousands of them on a beach. They inferred they were on the beach because all the sea ice had melted!
    In fact it was just a perfectly normal walrus haul out, where thousands congregate with their young.
    Was propaganda then and it still is today, witness yet more of the same BS. These people don’t hesitate to lie on demand as required.

  15. prcgoard permalink
    October 29, 2017 9:55 pm

    This item is much the same as in David Attenborough’s TV series on the Australian Great Barrier Reef, which for much of it was very good, with some dives in an advanced observation vessel. Towards the end he launched into the possible dangers to the reef, starting with that of “Sea Level Rise” !!! I am not sure of the other dangers, as that one completely put me off. He did not appear to know that when sea levels rise, coral reefs grow higher. Falling sea levels would make a mess of a reef, but if glacial conditions were setting in, the sea water would become too cool for the coral to survive and the reef would ‘die’ anyway.

  16. October 29, 2017 11:08 pm

    Ive posted on the bogus use of walrus for climate demagoguery a few times , ,

    • Gerry, England permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:56 pm

      Ah, Jim Steele, now there is a man worth listening to or reading. I learnt a lot from the Landscapes book.

  17. sixlittlerabbits permalink
    October 30, 2017 12:41 am

    LOL, David Attenborough, “the doddering old idiot,” says it all. I finally wised up with “Planet Earth,” where he and his “scientific” associates value animals over humans, and rejoice that human breast milk is contaminated by environmental toxins.

  18. Robin Guenier permalink
    October 30, 2017 8:05 am

    But wait – this “not endangered” finding is another Trump disaster:

    An extract:

    The Center for Biological Diversity, a conservation group that launched legal action to get Pacific walruses listed in 2008, said the decision could doom the species. “This disgraceful decision is a death sentence for the walrus,” said Shaye Wolf, climate science director for the center.

  19. October 30, 2017 9:05 am

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:
    Will they apologise?

  20. Malcolm Bell permalink
    October 30, 2017 9:07 am

    Steady on friends – we seem to be very excited here. We should not comment until we have seen the programme and we should not be abusive … ever.

    I have seen the programme and it was remarkable. The script about the Walruses was much more moderated than I expected albeit a little bit “warmist” but did not threaten either the end of the world or the species. I am not a warmist but can tolerate this level of suggestion – for consideration. I would have preferred no such remarks in the context but it was not extreme and I encourage free speech.

    I hope some of you might think the same or you discredit your argument.

    I do support David Attemborough unwaveringly on his work on the only real problem unequivocally caused by humans and which must be fixed: human population and its progresdive destruction of habitats. How do we halve the population over the next fifty years? Impossible I think. But I support “Population Matters” which DA is the figure head. No dodderer he.

    • A C Osborn permalink
      October 30, 2017 11:52 am

      Have you ever actually studied how much of the earth is still unspoiled by any kind of human habitat?
      Most of the damage is done by “Green intiatives” rather than normal living.
      Keep your “Population Control” to yourself.

  21. October 30, 2017 10:00 am

    As soon as Attenbore said ‘but in the last 30 years…blah blah…’ we knew what was coming.

    Arctic sea ice reached a cyclical peak in about 1979, so any subsequent decline only ‘proves’ whatever you want it to prove. Sixty years minimum of oceanic variations are more reliable indicators of what’s going on.

  22. Vanessa permalink
    October 30, 2017 10:19 am

    Again, a classic example of the BBC writing the script for a “well-loved” presenter to get its message across. Sadly, Attenborough is so stupid he does not know he is the vehicle !!!

    • October 30, 2017 4:33 pm

      ‘Useful idiots’ – Lenin quote.

  23. Europeanonion permalink
    October 30, 2017 10:35 am

    The BBC’s use of Attenborough rather reminds me of the way that one German dictator used the bumbling old Hindenburg: take an iconic figure and use him as a conduit for whatever purpose you have in mind, it gratifies your ends.

    I watched the first half hour of the show and was appalled at the Disneyfication of the show. Why in the world we have to be faced with anthropomorphism is beyond me, as if the brilliant camera work and the creatures themselves do not speak volumes. As a gesture, I turned the thing off, which probably denied me revelation and enlightenment not to mention the waste of the good work of the largely anonymous camera-people.

    I feel sorry for David. It is only right that someone that has done so much for the glamorising and appreciation of the wild should be reduced to this. I believe that he has always been in danger of doing so. As man has destroyed vast swathes of the wild in order to survive himself there is a nostalgia attached to creatures and their habitat and what threatens. But when David appeared with the Gorillas you knew that he had crossed a line and, as is the way, the possibilities of a mounting desire to put man in his picture, like some joint venture, was always on. They live and die in their own way much as we do and I for one would not appreciate anyone taking responsibility for me. A wildlife photographer can placidly watch a lion tearing some placid entity to pieces and have as a guiding rule, do not interfere. You are an interlocutor not an interventionist.

    Why go to the icy wastes to prove this thesis? Exchange errant housing development and over-population of our own country, Britain for the wasteland. Exchange the rapacious Orca for the teaming pods of builders, humanists, estate agents and Europhiles that would see our wildlife expunged and our landscapes blotted-out to little account in pursuit of illusory living standards and the brotherhood of man. Instead of broken-off bits of glacier some of us are clinging to increasingly imperilled villages and hamlets not to mention our history and lineage. The country as a whole is that lake into which all the rubbish of man’s conception has been hurled and while hitherto it wassubmerged it is now beginning to break surface to our astonishment.

    The great difference between us and the creatures, sadly, is that they have no idea of their being wiped-out but we do. The Nirvana that David scripts has never existed and it is the way of the world that when they were many we were few, there ways unobserved; it’s the balance that has changed. The contrivance of pulling at emotional heartstrings is the sort of grim determination that has got us to ancient energy remedies for 21st century problems. If the imposition of windmills and fields of photo voltaic cells is the answer then all it shows is a contrivance, the death of nature by other means.

    • quaesoveritas permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:42 pm

      “Why in the world we have to be faced with anthropomorphism is beyond me, as if the brilliant camera work and the creatures themselves do not speak volumes. ”
      I watched the bit about the Walruses and in nearly made sick. I genuinely believe that those making the films don’t know they are doing it. One day I hope that these films will be looked at in a similar light to the Disney documentaries, as sentimental twaddle.

  24. Barry Capsey permalink
    October 30, 2017 10:39 am

    It’s one of many BBC sacred cows, in common with the lefty-remainiacs, the limp-wristed ‘luvvies’, the pro-EU agenda and all the rest. The MOST stupid is the global warming £multi BILLION cash spinner, that costs US ALL so much in gweenie taxes etc. Great programme, but our David is due to be be gently put out to grass, with NO microphone!

  25. October 30, 2017 10:46 am

    I am inclined to agree with Malcolm and others that “doddering old idiot” is a bit harsh.

    These days, I’m pretty sure that all David Attenborough does is read the script that’s placed in front of him.

    The propaganda comes form the scientists who advise him, including Mark Brandon, Miranda Dyson, Philip Sexton. See this article at the so-called Conversation.

    “Blue Planet academic consultants on the message that humanity cannot afford to ignore”

    “As expected, the first episode of Sir David Attenborough’s Blue Planet II has been greeted with rapturous applause. But alongside the gasps of delight at the beauty of the natural world, the programme came with an urgent message for viewers which we can no longer afford to ignore.

    Produced by the BBC’s Natural History Unit in partnership with the Open University, and narrated by the world’s favourite natural historian, the series revisits The Blue Planet after a gap of 16 years.”

    Read the whole thing if you have a strong stomach. Or even add a comment.

    • Athelstan permalink
      October 30, 2017 12:48 pm

      He’s quite fond of stirring it, witness his irecent nterview with Shukman.

      “These days, I’m pretty sure that all David Attenborough does is read the script that’s placed in front of him.”

      hmm no editorial input?

      and then if so, does he [Attenboro’] not utterly compromise himself, spieling such guff and setting to build his own pyre.

      • November 1, 2017 8:42 am

        The linked article at the Conv says Attenborough “narrated” it, which I interpret as meaning he just reads the script.

  26. Ian Wilson permalink
    October 30, 2017 11:17 am

    Sir David may be wrong on this issue but he has done an enormous amount of good in informing us about the natural world and helping to protect it. I feel “doddering old idiot” is inappropriate. Even the most honourable aren’t right all the time. Let’s treat him with the respect he deserves.

    • A C Osborn permalink
      October 30, 2017 11:55 am

      Do you mean that he has no responsibility to ensure that what he is asked to say is not the truth.
      Or are you condoning that because he has done good it balances out doing bad?

    • rapscallion permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:00 pm

      I think not. Firstly he has to take responsibility for what he is saying, even if it’s put in front of him by somebody else. In this instance he lied. Secondly he gets no respect from me after saying that Brexiteers “did not understand the facts”, He compounds it by saying that the referendum “an abrogation of parliamentary democracy” Just who the hell does he think he is?

    • mikewaite permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:59 pm

      I believe that he is being treated precisely with the degree of respect that he deserves.

    • tom0mason permalink
      October 30, 2017 9:31 pm

      There used to be good people, and real scientists that the BBC used who both entertained and informed us. Sadly the BBC removed these people as they kept a more independent and skeptical eye on all the AGW/Climate Change hog-wash that came along.

      Who remembers Professor Robert Winston or David Bellamy

  27. AlecM permalink
    October 30, 2017 11:39 am

    Perhaps he should liaise with Donald Tusk?

  28. Rah permalink
    October 30, 2017 12:04 pm

    With all the fat healthy Polar Bears in evidence, the Alarmists are searching desperately for a new Climate Change Icon. A new polar “canary in the coal mine”.

    • AlecM permalink
      October 30, 2017 12:15 pm

      Paint the bears yellow?

  29. quaesoveritas permalink
    October 30, 2017 12:27 pm

    As I am approaching 70, I agree that Attenborough should not be criticised on the grounds of age alone.
    What particularly annoys me about these “documentaries” is the Anthropomorphisation of the animals and the use of music to manipulate the thoughts of those watching.
    Not only is this intrusive, but it is often difficult to distinguish the genuine sound effects from the music.
    I genuinely sometimes have great difficulty in watching the programme because of this. This is an increasing problem with documentaries on t.v.
    I think the BBC should offer the option of a “music free” version of the programme.

    • Athelstan permalink
      October 30, 2017 1:01 pm

      “As I am approaching 70, I agree that Attenborough should not be criticised on the grounds of age alone.”

      “should not be criticised on the grounds of age alone.”

      mea culpa but maybe…………………..

      You’re quite right………………… but he is rightfully or, imho wrongfully venerated and is used as such ‘the great attenborough’………..his persona advertised to an extent [ex the beeb] that his speaking is promoted like the holy see declaiming ‘ex cathedra’. And thus, to advocate all sorts of BS suppositions*[1] implying them to be read as incontestible truths and in my book that makes him a very mischievous dissembler.

      * man made warming, ocean acidification, barrier reef is dying, Himalayas are melting, sea ice disappearing, seals in trouble, seas ’emptied’ of sharks, Penguins and Walruses, polar bears besides.

    • October 30, 2017 4:36 pm

      Hit the mute button and press ‘subtitles’.

      • quaesoveritas permalink
        October 30, 2017 7:46 pm

        The subtitles obscure a large part of the screen, and distract from the images because you have to keep looking away from them to read the subtitles. Also, it means that you can’t hear the genuine sound effects, if they are genuine that is, which i doubt sometimes.

    • Athelstan permalink
      October 31, 2017 11:52 am

      I quite enjoyed stuff like ‘Life on earth’ but then again, he ain’t no Bronowski and certainly no Kenneth Clark – ‘Civilization’ was essential viewing and TV at its very extraordinarily patronizing best but you don’t mind taking it from a Masterly pedogogue……………..with an acid wit, just gorgeous.

      • Athelstan permalink
        October 31, 2017 11:53 am

        pedagogue even…!

  30. The Great Walrus permalink
    October 30, 2017 1:02 pm

    Arctic Report:
    Everything is just fine up here — wife and kids having a wonderful time. Ice everywhere, mussels in abundance, and the haulouts are great fun! Only the encroaching journalists are a problem.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: