Skip to content

What Harrabin’s Analysis Does Not Tell You

December 16, 2019
tags: ,

By Paul Homewood

 

I mentioned Matt McGrath’s contribution to factual broadcasting earlier:

 

image

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50799905

 

It contained within it this so called “Analysis” by Roger Harrabin:

 

image

 

Both Harrabin and McGrath frequently include this sort of “Analysis” within the BBC’s news reporting. The title suggests that it is some sort of objective examination of facts surrounding a certain situation.

More often than not, it is nothing of the sort. In this instance, it is nothing more than a reflection of Mr Harrabin’s own personal opinions and prejudices.

 

Let’s look at it closely:

He’s already been warned by environmentalists that he will be "humiliated"

Harrabin uses phrases like these to suggest this is an authoritative and factual assessment. In reality it is merely the views of a few of his chums from within his bubble of extreme alarmists.

if he tries to lead other nations whilst the UK is still failing to meet its own medium-term climate targets.

This is deliberately intended to give the impression that the UK is falling woefully behind other countries’ efforts to reduce emissions.

This is an outright lie

Since the Climate Change Act in 2008. UK emissions of carbon dioxide have fallen by 30%. For the rest of the EU, the figure is under 16%, while in N America it is just 8%.

Globally, emissions have risen by 11% in that time.

As for those “medium term plans”, surely he must know that Germany is still planning to keep coal power going well into the 2030s, and will be reliant on Russian gas for much longer still.

 

The UK’s climate advisers warn that tens of millions of homes must be insulated..

The Committee on Climate Change have recommended this, but have not told us the cost, which by all estimates is likely to be crippling and certainly not worth the energy savings.

For Harrabin to suggest that the failure to “insulate” houses is somehow remiss of the government is not objective reporting, but just political bias.

Other experts say Mr Johnson’s £28.8bn road-building plans are not compatible with eliminating CO2 emissions

And? Is Harrabin suggesting that the British economy grinds to a halt on the back of his personal obsession with climate change?

Either way, it is not his job to assess the country’s need for new road building.

 They say even fully electric cars won’t solve the problem completely – and urge the government to help people walk and cycle to benefit their health and the environment

At least he is honest enough to admit that we will have to give up our cars.

 

They also say expanding aviation will increase emissions.

Perhaps he would like to tell us “they” are!

But even “they” cannot deny that the UK can do nothing at all about international air travel. For instance, if we abandon the third runway at Heathrow, which is clearly being implied, the extra traffic will simply end up in Frankfurt or Schiphol.

 

Mr Johnson’s Brexit decisions will play a part too. The US won’t discuss climate change in any trade deal. Meanwhile the EU is putting a border tax on countries that don’t cut greenhouse gases. It will be impossible to please both.

Not for the first time, Harrabin is involving himself in party political matters.

For a start, it is not true that the EU is “putting a border tax on countries that don’t cut greenhouse gases”, though it has been discussed in theory. If they did, there would be an almighty trade war with China, where there would be only be one winner, and that would not be Europe. It would also result in massively increased prices for European consumers, which would probably lead to civil insurrection, Gilets Jaune style.

It is also not clear where the US fits in, as they have been cutting GHGs in recent years.

This whole paragraph reveals Harrabin’s anti Brexit and anti Trump agenda.

 

It is clear that this whole section, misleadingly titled “Analysis”, is nothing more than the political prejudice of Roger Harrabin and a few of his like minded chums. It certainly has no relation to objective and accurate journalism.

Worse still, he uses the views of “environmentalists” to hide the fact that he is really just presenting his own opinions.

FOOTNOTE

As we have seen, Harrabin claims that Boris will be “humiliated” while the UK is failing to meet its own targets.

Maybe Mr Harrabin would like to consider that Spain, which has just hosted the latest summit, has only managed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions since 2008 by 17%.

France, which hosted the Paris summit, has done slightly better with a reduction of 21%.

As already mentioned, UK emissions have fallen by 30% since 2008.

But you won’t see any of those facts in Harrabin’s “Analyses” .

44 Comments
  1. December 16, 2019 10:48 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate- Science.press.

  2. martinbrumby permalink
    December 16, 2019 11:03 pm

    His title is spelled incorrectly.
    It obviously should be ‘Anal Yeses’.

  3. Pancho Plail permalink
    December 16, 2019 11:15 pm

    I still hold the hope that now Johnson has an unassailable majority, he will initiate a new and comprehensive review of environmental issues, especially based on the mass of peer reviewed science from the last few years. This seems to be showing that “the science” is a lot more complex than previously thought, and that CO2 is an increasingly unimportant driver.
    Part of this review should include some measure of the effectiveness of the strategy being taken, together with its cost.
    The public will then have a simple statistic on the costs involved. For example, they might be able to see that the country had spent, say £30bn in one year, reduced CO2 emissions by 1% and this has resulted in a decrease in the rate of rise of a few thousandths of a degree.
    It would put “extinction” into perspective.

    • Mack permalink
      December 17, 2019 1:16 am

      Senor Pancho, the old Boris was a bit of a climate change skeptic. Alas, the new Boris also has a new young filley in tow who happens to be a believer. As long as she remains flavour of the month I fear ‘carbon zero by 2050’ will remain his mantra. But, ever the pragmatist, I expect Boris will eventually come to his senses when he realises that he can’t turbo boost the economy whilst hamstringing it with eco nonsense. We shall see.

      • bobn permalink
        December 17, 2019 1:31 am

        He’ll come back to the light when he ditches the bimbo. She cant be that good in bed that he sacrifices all his integrity.
        Yep, and thats how women rule the world. The way to a mans heart is below his belt.

      • Pancho Plail permalink
        December 17, 2019 9:26 am

        I appreciate that loins may overrule logic, but my suggestion of measuring outcomes would allow people to see for themselves that it is not sensible and would build pressure to act sensibly. As a sop to the squeeze there are plenty of good, environmentally sound things that can be done regarding waste and recycling, and promoting more efficient use of the energy we have, that I for one would wholeheartedly support.
        But as a backstop I already have plans in place to line rooms with packaging waste stuffed into boxes which are then stacked around the walls to insulate them, and provide a smaller living space to heat.

      • A C Osborn permalink
        December 17, 2019 1:16 pm

        Pancho, unfortunately that would be a major fire hazard, better to to buy an electric blanket and some extra pullovers.

    • Gamecock permalink
      December 17, 2019 12:23 pm

      Silly Pancho. You expect Boris to be a statesman. He is just another politician.

  4. swan101 permalink
    December 16, 2019 11:24 pm

    Reblogged this on ECO-ENERGY DATABASE.

  5. It doesn't add up... permalink
    December 16, 2019 11:55 pm

    They is probably the pronoun for Richard Black, possibly including Bob Ward, or even Roger Hallam. But perhaps Harrabin should be challenged to identify his nameless experts. I do wonder the extent to which his mutterings have been undermining the public perception of the truthfulness of BBC reporters.

    What he cannot bring himself to analyse is why China and other economically successful countries remain unconvinced by the “climate emergency”. What the UK does in the face of that is politically irrelevant, just as its politicians and media carbon obsession is climatically irrelevant.

    • Derek Reynolds permalink
      December 18, 2019 11:46 am

      ‘They’ are The Hierarchy Enslaving You.
      They often don’t have names, as they seek anonymity and paper trails come to nought. Their game is power – for the sake of it.

  6. Athelstan. permalink
    December 17, 2019 12:20 am

    horror-binology, it’s pure hogwash.

    Strewth rog’ he’s incapable of analysis, all he does; spouts is ecomentalist faux statistical guff written for him by, name any gween NGO.

  7. Athelstan. permalink
    December 17, 2019 12:29 am

    I note a pic of theresa ribera chairpompous of the madrid climate circus, another one who knows less than a gecko about the science of climate dynamics but she knows how to BS in fortissimo – for eu-pedro sanchez and spain.

    the COP is a d**k measuring competition for the latino world, a chance for jumped up despots to shout the odds, of island presidents to blame the west for their political socioeconomic failures, a strut for the ’56’ and a utter farce insofar as, the Anglosphere should be concerned – ‘concerned’ did I say, actually we should be associated: not at all.

  8. December 17, 2019 6:47 am

    That the Biased Bullshit Corporation still employs the likes of Harrabin, McGrath, Shukman, Heap etc etc shows how biased they really are.

    And still the BBC sends in its ‘heavyweights’ such as Huw (boring fart) Edwards to tell us the inside view of the BBC is that it is not biased:
    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/12/its-time-to-end-the-vitriolic-attacks-on-the-bbc/

    • Pancho Plail permalink
      December 17, 2019 9:29 am

      I note the Huw has had quite a reception from Speccie bloggers, me included. His view was, shall we say, a little unpopular.

      • December 17, 2019 9:50 am

        415 comments and counting. I don’t recall ever seeing any Speccie article having that many comments (all adverse as far as I have looked).

  9. December 17, 2019 8:25 am

    Improving the roads should cut the irrationally feared emissions by having fewer vehicles stuck in queues or slow-moving traffic, or at least reducing the delays.

    Getting people to walk or cycle doesn’t work for time-poor commuters or tradesmen carrying equipment, to name just two groups. The whole CO2 drama just leads people into illogic and foolishness, for no benefit.

  10. Chaswarnertoo permalink
    December 17, 2019 8:39 am

    CO2 warming is NEGLIGABLE. Sun cooling is worrying.

  11. Saighdear permalink
    December 17, 2019 8:42 am

    Compliance is the name of the game, isn’t it? but there’s compliance and Compliance – and according to some UK Gov dep’ts, there is a NEED for Hunger to Comply amongst is subscribers. …. and this will become more of a problem as time goes on – if you ain’t got you ain’t goin’ to get the work ….or trade or …..

  12. December 17, 2019 8:42 am

    The BBC still have not replied to my complaint about the Matt McGrath report
    Climate change: ‘Clear and unequivocal’ emergency, say scientists . hat I sent on the 8th of November. I got an email on the 16th of November saying a reply may take little longer before we can reply and how they normally reply within weeks. I phoned to prompt them on the 3rd pf December and was told I would get a reply within a couple of days. I phoned again yesterday and was told there is no limit on how long they may take to reply.
    The BBC complaints framework does not mention a maximum time or what to do if you get no reply either

    Click to access complaints_framework.pdf


    BBC original Matt McGrath report
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50302392
    This is in the NEWS Science and Environment. This report states in bold “A global group of around 11,000 scientists have endorsed research that says the world is facing a climate emergency” This was repeated all over the place in the normal Climate Change believer papers websites etc.
    It took Sky Australia and Rebel News to debunk it as a website sending out links to subscribers that anyone could then click like on. They took the list of names and job titles down from the site but I found a copy elsewhere. A search for the words containing scientist returned just 610 results while student returned 972 and researcher returned 1455
    many other occupations were listed.
    So maybe when the BBC and Matt McGrath are caught out on a lie it is there policy to ignore complains. As the BBC said Maybe For example a production team may already be working on another programme or have gone on location. Yes very busy with more Fake Climate Change stories.

    • Pancho Plail permalink
      December 17, 2019 9:31 am

      They obviously don’t consider it an emergency!

    • Chaswarnertoo permalink
      December 17, 2019 1:57 pm

      30,000 qualified scientists ( verified ) signed a document stating AGW is cobblers. I tried but you have to be in the USA, AFAIK.

  13. DavidMC permalink
    December 17, 2019 8:59 am

    Who might be advising the new Government other than the hand picked nutters that already were? Might the planned shake-up of the Civil Service represent at last a point of entry to get some balance into those inner discussions?

  14. Harry Passfield permalink
    December 17, 2019 9:06 am

    BBC News the other day exhibited an incredible paradox in its promotion (it’s what they do) of what the solution is to climate change and a ‘zero-carbon’ country. They were advocating what was essentially a State-contolled, Socialist solution as a way of life yet, at the same time, and as a means of achieving this end, they were promoting the idea that the way forward was to create a (Capitalist) ‘carbon market’ which would enforce a low carbon existence through market forces (but God help those who can’t afford to play – or pay).

  15. Stuart Wakefield permalink
    December 17, 2019 9:18 am

    Hi Paul, are members of the public allowed to go to the COP25 meetings and have a say?. My interest is in tidal power, it is a never-ending source of power. The UK has some of the best sites in the world. We are too far north for solar power and it is useless in winter when we need more power. WEG’s “wind energy generators” are dependant on a steady breeze and is not reliable. Nuclear power has the double problem of cost and waste. Our local power station uses gas imported at a high cost to produce electricity so we can charge our electric cars? What is the point of that?

  16. Rowland P permalink
    December 17, 2019 10:41 am

    There is a complete list of climate “deniers” attached to the European Climate Declaration which states that there is no climate crisis/emergency. This Declaration was presented to Antonio Gutteres, UN Secretary General, who spouted outright lies in his introductory speech at the Madrid jamboree. Of course, there has been no mention of this in the MSM.

    Time to write to Boris and my new MP.

  17. Phoenix44 permalink
    December 17, 2019 10:57 am

    How does the BBC get away with running a pretty long piece entirely populated by a single political viewpoint?

    We have to remind the BBC, its governors, the government, that science is science, and politics is politics. If the BBC ran articles saying that “experts” have said we must cocoon everybody in bubble-wrap because of gravity, nobody would think that saying that was silly was being anti-science. It is the same with Climate Change. The fact it is “real” doesn’t make every solution that might slow it down or prevent it what we should choose.

  18. David permalink
    December 17, 2019 11:50 am

    After the Americans’ total flight ban following 2011 we were told that due to the absence of con-trails, cloud cover over the States was dramatically reduced, presumably also reducing its global warming effect. Does this mean that the current level of flights worldwide is masking a significant drop in true global temperature? I have not seen this proposed anywhere else.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      December 17, 2019 5:39 pm

      When the aeroplanes were grounded the temperature increased because the shading effect of the con-trails had gone. Something the alarmists ignore as it clearly shows that cloud has a mainly cooling effect.

  19. DAVID permalink
    December 17, 2019 11:53 am

    My apologies, I meant 9/11.

  20. Paul Reynolds permalink
    December 17, 2019 12:16 pm

    Is there no way of calling this blinkered brainwashed fool Harrabin to account? Surely he is flagrantly flouting the BBC’s own guidelines.

  21. Gamecock permalink
    December 17, 2019 12:47 pm

    A journalist warning the PM?

    Like Prof Dent warning Dr No.

    ‘That heaps enormous pressure on UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson.’

    Nah. Not really.

    • Saighdear permalink
      December 17, 2019 1:17 pm

      Tell / Advise Boris et al to look at the Gridwatch site this now – I DARE NOT mention what is happening for fear of causing offence……

  22. Robin Guenier permalink
    December 17, 2019 3:10 pm

    In any case, Matt McGrath’s report on the Madrid outcome is misleading. For example, he says this:

    After two extra days and nights of negotiations, delegates finally agreed a deal that will see new, improved carbon cutting plans on the table by the time of the Glasgow conference next year.

    In fact, the actual decision (-/CMA.2) says this:

    EncouragingParties to use the opportunity in 2020 to reflect the highest possible ambition in response to the urgency of addressing climate change…Acknowledges the growing urgency of enhancing ambition… Recalls that each Party’s successive nationally determined contribution will represent a progression beyond the Party’s then current nationally determined contribution and reflect
    its highest possible ambition, reflecting its common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances.

    There’s a lot of other stuff (https://www.scribd.com/document/439906437/FCCC-PA-CMA-2019-L-4) but that’s the essence of it. And encouraging ‘highest possible ambition’ and recalling how successive NDCs ‘will represent a progression’ is clearly not the same as agreeing ‘a deal that will see new, improved carbon cutting plans on the table by the time of the Glasgow conference’ – especially in the case of an original NDC (e.g. China’s or India’s) that said nothing about carbon cutting. And the reference to ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ only confirms this.

    Nothing has changed. Nor will it in Glasgow.

  23. Washington 76 permalink
    December 17, 2019 4:56 pm

    Dec 9, 2019 Climategate Rebunked – Marc Morano on The Corbett Report

    t’s been a decade since the leak of emails from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia exposed the lies, obfuscations and dirty tricks behind the climate change orthodoxy.

  24. George Lawson permalink
    December 17, 2019 5:47 pm

    How can such a biased and global warming fanatic be let loose as a BBC reporter when the BBC tries to claim that its reporting is not biased.? There is surely some strange link between Harabin and the BBC management that we are not party to when the management is prepared to allow such blatant inaccuracies to be reported to the world, and in doing so are prepared to ignore the BBC constitution which calls for balanced reporting. The sooner the Prime Minister sets up his panel of enquiry into BBC bias and subsequently change the current disgraceful management the better.

  25. December 17, 2019 8:01 pm

    Right now 8pm R4 prog about Disinformation
    with Angela Saini
    “. From the dangerous anti-vaccination campaigns
    to *those who deny the reality of climate change*,
    she assesses the scale and extent of the threat we face”
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000c9sm

    * “Inferior” is @AngelaDSaini’s book on how science got women wrong.

    If Saini says “look Disinformation over there” that’s make me wonder if she is projecting
    I see stuff like she tweets her claim a sciency guy disagress with her
    She blocks him and deletes her own disputed tweet.

    Also see someonetake her second book apart
    https://quillette.com/2019/06/05/superior-the-return-of-race-science-a-review/

Trackbacks

  1. Boris Johnson and the Green Death - Scceu.org

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: