BBC’s Climate Question
By Paul Homewood
h/t Douglas Dragonfly
I would not recommend anybody follows Douglas’ example, and actually listen to all of this, for the sake of their sanity!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct3kk1
What struck me most was the sheer self-righteousness of it all. The presenter and contributors actually seem to believe they are saving wretched deniers from some satanic cult. A sort of cardboard cut-out version of “deniers” is presented.
Most of the programme is devoted to Sarah Ott, a young American who implausibly says she used to be a denier but now sees the light. There are all of the usual trigger-words; linking climate deniers to evolution deniers, bible bashers, republicans. But Sarah eventually escaped the Dark Side by listening to NPR, the American version of the BBC!
ClimateGate got a mention as well, which according to our Sarah deniers claimed disproved climate change.
Nowhere was there any recognition whatsoever of real debate. For instance, how much of the warming since the Little Ice Age is natural, the grossly overheating of climate models, what effect the tiny amount of warming has had on our weather, both good and bad. And so on.
Next up comes a report from Kenya, where the BBC tells us there is a major drought. Strangely though the BBC fail to make any attempt to show that the drought has anything to do with climate change, or is even unusual. Indeed Kenya has actually been getting wetter since the 1970s:
Precipitation Trend per Decade, 1971-2020; Kenya
https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/country/kenya/trends-variability-historical
This report from Kenya is a perfect example of how the BBC persistently report climate issues. Find a drought, flood or storm, and pretend it is caused by climate change without the slightest evidence.
Maybe the BBC’s Disinformation reporters should devote all of their time in future to exposing the BBC’s own disinformation, instead of inventing imaginary climate denying bogeymen!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
“But Sarah eventually escaped the Dark Side by listening to NPR, the American version of the BBC!”
Pardon? 😦
It’s always interesting that those who enjoy calling others “deniers” rarely tell us what is actually being denied. Especially when the “alarmists” change the problem from “global warming” to “climate change”. Everyone can be both right and wrong. No deniers any more?
I am not a climate change denier, I have read all the IPCC stuff and nite the uncertainty and that real world outcomes are not following the existential climate disaster script.
I also note that net zero emissions policy will actually make us more vulnerable to extreme weather events.
In the meantime British Gas quite openly tell me my annual gas bill would be £4500 without government financial support, last year it was £900.
Climate change didn’t do that, the government did ,and the government demolished all the power stations.
We have to preserve the best possible climate exactly as Lord created it.
Now who is an evolution denier?
How interesting that “Satan” is starting to get a mention now. The alarmists will try anything to attempt to put themselves on the right side of the issue……let’s not mention that terrifying word “debate”. But it is their refusal to debate which will lead inevitably to their failure to learn or understand, their ill-founded statements increasingly pointing to who the real deniers are, themselves.
Satan, being the traditional name of the source of evil, at a spiritual level, needs to be understood and exposed. I used to feel that evoking Satan was just an easy excuse to avoid the effort of serious psychological investigation. But I have changed my mind. I am increasingly convinced that this is a real force, acting as an influence, “a silent voice” in the mind, urging violence, deception, lying, etc. ..in fact anything which will lead to the crushing of the human spirit…and, of course, putting this all on to us! (Ironically, my computer just switched itself off at this exact point as I write this message!).
I believe we should all begin taking the influence of “the dark side” of life and consciousness a whole load more seriously.
Thank you, Paul, for your continuing energy and determination.
Satan is the father of lies – Jesus the son of God said in John 8:44 “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” Much of what gets told to us by the media as coming from “scientists”, is a twisted edited version of the actual scientific papers which usually concentrate on some small aspect of climate and hardly ever have conclusions that are beyond doubt. Socialism, communism, humanism, eco-doom mongering, and predictions based on inadequate data all come from men wanting to ignore God and God’s righteousness. Thinking that we can change human behaviour by forcibly sharing (via theft and envy of those who have), or by scaring humanity with doom laden predictions if we fail to do what others want (they provide no solution other than to make us all poorer) comes from the devil. The people who deride the Climate Change deniers all have safe jobs usually dependent on taxes or grants from others and sell their doom laden predictions with all the sincerity of the deluded afraid to contradict the herd of other doom mongers depending on money to fund more research to confirm their hypotheses of doom rather than to disprove the link between CO2 and warming. Manufacturers of “green” products are following the herd and worst of all governments believe the claptrap and want us to go to “net zero” without having a clue about the consequences for those who aren’t rich enough to afford paying so much more for everything based on fossil fuels.
” The people who deride the Climate Change deniers all have safe jobs …” ….Strange you did not use distancing scare quotes or qualifiers such as ” so called climate deniers ” ..Can you explain why so many Church leaders have fallen for the lies of climate evangelism if Satan is the ‘father of lies “?
Yes it is a real “force ” Ian Phillips but not in the way you think . Not so much supernatural as a deep , archetypal current in the human psyche . Reading works such as [ particularly the chapter ” The Disaster Origins of Millenarian Movements ” ] Michael Barkuns ‘ Disaster and the Millennium and Norman Cohn’s The Pursuit of the Millennium and Michael Burleighs Sacred Causes will better understand the archetypal leitmotiv of apocalyptic millenarianism with its substratum themes of sin and redemption that climate catastrophism belongs to The Jungian psychologist Jordan Peterson could devote an entire podcast series to exploring radical environmentalist cults and the millenarian tradition
The use of the description “denier” is an implied link to the holocaust deniers and must be countered by the use of the description “believer” .
‘Denier’ being a descriptor of defective, not just wrong. You don’t have to debate someone who is defective.
As happened with the Covid fad. One who didn’t accept the government’s statements and instructions wasn’t just wrong, they were defective.
So then there is “misinformation.” It’s bad, but not necessarily wrong. Mostly just uncomfortable. “I wish you wouldn’t say that, so you can’t say it.”
And there is “conspiracy theory.” A pejorative. You don’t have to refute a theory if it is a “conspiracy” theory. People have many ideas about many things. Why refute them when you can just label them “conspiracy theories?”
Control the language and you control the debate.
” Micky R’s fallacy of thinking is the ‘false dichotomy ‘ as climate denier is as inherently nonsensical as ” climate believer ”
“Climate denier ” carries not only connotations of Holocaust denial moral equivalence but the imputation of a psychological malady and it is ironic that Skeptical Science’s John Cook – now a cognitive psychologist – hosted a course on denial in the employ of a university that evidently had no problem with Cook jokingly photoshopping himself as a Nazi officer .Nor did the cancel culture left wing agitators on his university campus .Isnt that odd ? Much like the old Marxist cliches ‘reactionary ” or ” capitalist roader ” to quote Robert Jay Liftons ” Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism : A Study of Brainwashing in China ” :
“The language of the totalist environment is characterized by the thought terminating cliche ” whereupon ” the most far reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief ,highly reductive ,definitive sounding phrases , easily memorized and easily expressed . These become the start and finish of any ideological analysis ……….Totalist language ..is repetitiously centred on all encompassing jargon , prematurely abstract , highly categorical , relentlessly judging ….in Lionel Trillings phrase ‘the language of nonthought ” ……the jargon expresses the claimed certitudes of the sacred science . Also involved is an underlying assumption that language ….can be owned and operated by the Movement .No compunctions are felt about manipulating or loading it any fashion …..For the individual person the effect of the language of ideological totalism can be summed up in one word : constriction .
Hows that for a new perspective on the linguistically compressed Orwellian term ” climate denier ” ?
The BBC are the climate change deniers as they deny there was any climate change until the Indusrial Revolution.
Yet another example of how a once relatively impartial , intelligent organisation who used to employ genuinely investigative reporters has been destroyed by the know – nothing swivel- eyed mediocrities of wokism .
Perhaps if the Bolshevik Brainwashing Corporation is really confident that their argument is unassailable they could broadcast a live debate between the two sides , with each choosing their own representatives , and no right of veto by the BBC ? Tom Heap and Moronbiot on the children’s team ? Shooting , fish , barrel ? And what chance of getting to the end without – surprise ! – a power cut in the studio ?
With so much of what is really happening to the climate being openly debated and discussed, these posts smack of sheer desperation. Maybe it’s a good sign. The more crazy and desperate they get, the more hope there is for the actual truth.
The reason for the desperation is because they want to implement Net Zero before the climate starts cooling as it will then make this project far more difficult to justify. Hence the cut from 2 degrees C to 1.5 degrees C.
It would not surprise me if the Net Zero project continued even if it could be shown the climate is cooling.
One of the many, many reasons why the licence fee BBC must be confined to history
Have you composed any arguments consisting of at least two paragraphs devonbluebluff ?
Mine was the Andrews Sachs scandal perpetrated by the talentless Brand and Ross.
@ johnfromcabanyal , which posts smack of desperation? The BBC’s posts or the comment posts by contributors to this blog page?
I was wondering that too !
The spread of poor science is widespread. I have just asked ChatGpt whether there are any scientific papers proving that rising CO2 is causing dangerous global warming. The answer started with James Hansen and then quoted the IPCC saying that the IPCC was not political. If an apparently serious AI source can repeat those errors is most concerning. Otherwise ChatGpt seems pretty good.
These AI answering systems read from approved sources. They are amazingly good at saying what these sources say, but if they read garbage they say garbage.
The interesting question is which sources are used? MSM is likely.
If you look at Jo Nova’s post on this you will find that there is a control on ChapGpt and the code is not open source. So whoever has that control will be able to set the answers.
Having actually read the Bible from cover to cover, I am always a little bemused by the casting of Satan as the bad guy. The Jewish god YHWH is a really nasty piece of work, cruel, capricious , an incorrigible liar and pretty stupid. Where he gets his reputation for infinite wisdom is a complete mystery, the Bible is a long history of his blundering incompetence. Satan, on the other hand, is polite, always truthful, a little mischievous maybe but certainly not evil. His contempt for authority is a virtue not a vice. In conclusion, we are the good guys, you, climate crisis bedwetters, are the sheep. Mint sauce.
“wretched deniers” or using academic jargon: WrD
I can already claim initials after my name, but I like this: John H., WrD
Here is a sample of my good company: William Happer, Richard Lindzen, Freeman Dyson, Bjørn Lomborg, Matt Ridley, Fred Singer, Roy Spencer, John Christy, Judith Curry, Steven Koonin, Craig Idso, . . .
Sarah Ott is an 8th grade teacher; not that there is anything wrong with. 🧑🎄
Sorry to be OT but I’ve just seen one of those infuriating ads that features a CGLI Einstein plugging smart meters. I think that it is pretty disgusting for them to be putting their own words into the mouth of a celebrated genius and pretending that he agrees with them. Maybe he would have agreed with them but I doubt it.
Totally agree. Cultural appropriation seems to be OK if the target is white and a foreigner. I tried ASA but got knocked back.
Apart from that, it’s all a lie.
Your dystopian future:
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/12/25/great-reset-home-heating-and-electric-car-charging-to-be-remotely-throttled-under-government-scheme/
You can make a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority about a adverts content
https://www.asa.org.uk/make-a-complaint.html
Yes Paul it was nauseating listening to that awful BBC ” The Climate Question ” program You may wish to issue a complaint in response to BBC Climate Disinformation reporter Marco Silva’s excitable rant as it concerns [ and I must say , the irony is hilarious ] this misinformation :
” how overwhelming the consensus is within the scientific community about the basic facts of climate change ….one study in particular suggests 99% of scientific studies agree : humans are causing climate change – its real …a recent study by the Climate Action Against Disinformation group has looked at how disinformation is affecting the way we perceive climate change ”
Notwithstanding the fact that Appeal to Consensus
– or rather the Bandwagon Fallacy – is a logical fallacy
, presumably Silva is referring to the Lynas et al 2021 paper ” Greater Than 99% Consensus On Human Caused Climate Change In The Peer Reviewed Literature ” However the skeptics who analysed the Lynas et al paper found that the study, and the publications title , is a sham .Only 19 of the sample of 3000 papers definitively quantify anthropogenic influence on climate while 2104 papers – the true consensus – make no claims whatsoever implicitly endorsing human causation. Indeed close to 99% of the papers reviewed failed to explicitly gauge the variable extent of human influence on the Earths climate system. Marco Silva is a disinformation specialist alright . He made the fundamental error of confusing causation with contribution and if he did not research the devastating reviews of the Lynas et al 99% consensus junk paper he failed in his role as a disinformation commissar . If Silva wants to examine ” how disinformation is affecting the way we perceive climate change ” he knows where to start : with himself
I thought the Australian Broadcasting Corporation had set the benchmark in asinine climate alarmism but the along comes the true pathfinder, the BBC with what must be one of the most childish efforts of puerile propaganda I have ever heard and I have heard a lot. Congrats to the beeb for hitting a new low in transmitted trash.
Climate change is only true in fairy tales
Meant for someone else but not for me.
Gore was out to get me
That’s the way it seemed.
Disappointment haunted all my dreams.
Then I saw the Beeb, now I’m a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind.
I’m a Mann, I’m a believer!
I couldn’t leave her if I tried.
Climate aid is more or less a givin’ thing,
Seems the more I gave the less I got.
What’s the use in tryin’?
All you get is pain.
When I needed sunshine I got rain.
Then I saw the Beeb, now I’m a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind.
I’m Greta, I’m a believer!
I couldn’t leave her if I tried.
Greta’s out to get me
Now, that’s the way it seemed
Disappointment haunted all my dreams
Oh, then I saw her face, now I’m a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind.
I’m in love, I’m a believer!
I couldn’t leave her if I tried.
Yes, I saw the Beeb, now I’m a believer
And not a trace of doubt in my mind.
Said I’m a believer
I’m a believer
I’m a believer
Said I’m a believer
I’m a believer
I said I’m a believer
I’m a believer
I left out the Do do dudus…
Perhaps they should have been included to give a truer expression.
That’s really very good.
An anthem!
Have you thought of taking this up professionally? This really is very good.
The shocking thing is how few words had to be changed. Neil Diamond wrote the original, sung by Micky Dolenz and The Monkees.
So, after the echo chamber of them reinforcing their beliefs (my sort of science isn’t done like that) they finally didn’t come up with any persuasive ideas to convince deniers. Nothing.
It was pure authoritarian “faith” – “just believe what we tell you” and you will be saved from the collapse of the world.
In short – the discussion was a failure.
I remain a careful sceptic; convinced of marginal warming in some places but probably nothing to do with CO2 and more to do with boring humidity and just maybe some earth core warming (or not!). It will cool in the next few decades.
By which time overpopulation will have caused many wars etc,
An enlightened take on COP 27 and 15 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5ypz6ZBo6w
The number of converts to the climate cult always seems very low in number and in intellect. Whereas those of us who have travelled in the opposite direction, having smelt a rat somewhere along the way, includes the only scientifically qualified founder member of GreenPiss, and the great Germans Luning and Varenholtz who admit in their book Die Kalte Sonne to having had great trust in the IPCC reports until they actually read one.
IPCC was set up to look at CO2 and climate ONLY! Its not surprising they do not look at the impact of non-human causes of climate change.
For example, X-rays, gamma rays, Coronal Mass Ejections, Hi energy protons etc. . Climate modelers have had access to additional solar data for about 6 years now but have failed to publish their findings – I wonder why?