BBC’s Fake Climate Check On Hurricanes
By Paul Homewood
The BBC’s Climate Check is unsurprisingly about hurricanes, and equally unsurprisingly does not tell the truth:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/58503854
Ben Rich repeats the BBC’s frequent lie, that climate change is making hurricanes stronger, expressed of course in the usual “scientists say” way. These are his exact words:
“Climate scientists believe that global warming is making them stronger”
It is of course true that some scientists say this, but equally many hurricane experts maintain the opposite, something you might have thought the BBC would have reported.
And, given this is supposed to be a “Climate Check”, you might have thought the BBC would actually have provided some facts, rather than just opinions. The IPCC were quite clear in their last Assessment Review, AR5:
IPCC AR5
They could find no evidence whatsover of any “significant observed trends” in tropical cyclone activity over the past century. All they could find was an increasing intensity of North Atlantic hurricanes since the 1970s, which hurricane experts such as Chris Landsea believe is part of the multidecadal cycle, the AMO. This is borne out by the fact no that robust trends in major hurricanes has been found in the North Atlantic in the past 100 years.
Little has changed in the latest AR6, which can still find no long term trends.
One particular omission in the video is the role of wind shear, high level winds which act to break up hurricanes. While Rich mentions this factor, he omits to tell viewers that scientists believe that global warming will increase wind shear.
This Climate Check has little to do with facts, and is little more than propaganda.
Attenborough will probably add that the seals he photographed were blown off the cliffs by climate change hurricanes!
Ben Rich is just one more “Jobsworth” employed by the world’s most biassed source of weather reports.
When they say “scientists say,” I imagine Jeremy Clarkson saying it.
The Bullsh*t Broadcasting Corporation has now become an extremist sect of the Climate Religion, prepared to ignore the holy writ of their own high priests of the IPCC. How long before they become totally heretical?
O/T. Read this and weep. Our brave new world is upon us.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9982253/Charging-points-electric-cars-preset-turn-NINE-HOURS-day.html
This is exactly what happens when Govt rhetoric driven regulation overrides the free market – CHAOS! The idiots are in charge of the roost.
‘Fears over impact of huge numbers of drivers plugging in their cars at same time’
You couldn’t make this stuff up.
One has to wonder how those battery-driven vehicles worked out down in Louisiana and elsewhere when hurricane Ida knocked out the power for millions. Can you jump-start a Tesla?
Gamecock;
Exactly. Government push a policy to Save The Planet, only for expected take-up to overwhelm the national grid!
What they’re actually saying is their policy is so badly thought-through that even years in advance of policy roll-out the country hasn’t got a hope in Hell of being able to safely deliver it.
Infrastructure overwhelmed, capacity shortages everywhere. Disastrous consequences for the business, commercial, economic and social fabric of the country.
No clue how to upgrade in a timely and cost-effective manner, either. If they did they wouldn’t rolling out this ‘plan’ to stop people from behaving as they’re mandating. (I can barely believe I’m typing such folly)
The policy they’ve dreamed up is itself so flawed they’re now dreaming up other ways of actively preventing the public from complying with the policy government want to make law!
Lunatics, meet asylum. Truly, this should be the nadir of green insanity.
‘We’re leading the world yet again in becoming the first major economy to pass new laws to reduce emissions to net zero by 2050 while remaining committed to growing the economy – putting clean growth at the heart of our modern Industrial Strategy.’
Surely a contradiction?! You cannot have an industrial strategy without inexpensive, reliable energy, and zero-carbon [sic] can’t provide that.
‘putting clean growth at the heart of our modern Industrial Strategy’
Effecting deindustrialization.
The best industrial strategy is to not have an industrial strategy.
more good news
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/11/power-struggle-europe-uk-grid-struggles-keep-lights/
See also
https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/09/12/climate-science-versus-the-media/
I think you have a typo your text should read, “This is borne out by the fact that no robust trends in major hurricanes has been found”
While real scientists demonstrate the validity of their theories, climate scientists merely believe…
Is anyone going to complain for the little good it would do?
“Climate scientists believe that global warming is making them stronger”.
Paul, you are fighting windmills just like Don Quixote. This is all about beliefs, not about facts or – God forbid – truth.
The fact is, that’s what they believe 🙄
“BBC’s Fake.”
Stop right there!
It really is quite appalling that a supposed fact-check from a supposed unbiased broadcaster completely fails to present the truth – that there is no agreement amongst scientists on this issue.
It’s not even as if it’s a core proof of Climate Change – not everything has to be getting worse. But they just can’t help themselves.
Climate Change is intentionally nebulous. Undefined. Hence, it can’t be proved. Nor disproved. It means just what they choose it to mean- neither more nor less.
There’s an interesting ad by OVO Energy currently running on radio/TV that starts by highlighting how unpredictable the weather is, then claiming that same weather is generating its energy. They clearly don’t realise how they stupidly destroy their own product proposition in the ad. I mean who wants unreliable energy (apart from Boris that is)?
They also lie about delivering 100% renewable energy, an impossibility.
Mr Nut Nut PM’s insanity is showing.
“That is the equivalent of six Hinkley Point nuclear power stations.”
That’s from the linked article.
I don’t suppose the six power stations are under construction?
Insofar as it takes about 10 years to build a nuke-station, ground-breaking ceremonies with gold shovels should have been about this time last year. Reports thereof have not been found.
APR 1400 reactors can be built in 6-7 years.
Japan actually managed to build a 1315MWe Advanced Boiling Water Reactor in just 39 months!
“it takes about 10 years to build a nuke-station”
Perhaps now but the first nuclear power stations came online in the 1950’s, I could google it but from memory the first was about 1953, less than 10 years from splitting the atom, I understand that fission and fusion are two different things but if we could get things moving so quickly back then, why not now?
Excessive regulation
It took over 20 years to get T5 at Heathrow built – most of that was “planning”.
A friend of mine is a planning inspector on the Sizewell C project, and the loops that have to be gone through to build one are numerous. The public planning enquiry process itself is lengthy, and that’s before the ground is even broken. Building standard nuclear power stations is both very regulatory burdensome and slow. They don’t appear overnight. Let’s hope the new generation of smaller, modular rectors can come to the fore and be much speedier, but I don’t hold out my hopes on that.
ilma630
unfortunately the nuclear quangos look to be jammed with process obsessed quangocrats with political and bureaucratic credentials and not many with relevant engineering or business skills.
The clear intent of the Greens and their allies in the blob is to do down SMRs with the same constipated process as has been deployed previously.
Have you seen the latest “guff” from the TUC – another nail in the rationalist coffin!!!!
This is NOT news but BBC propaganda.
BBC woke misanthropes reporting alarmist nonsense again, all paid for by the household TV tax.