The Express Covers My New BBC Paper
By Paul Homewood
Success!!
The BBC’s coverage of climate change and related policy issues, such as energy policy, has long been of serious and widespread concern. There have been numerous instances of factual errors, bias and omission of alternative views to the BBC’s narrative.
Our 2022 paper, Institutional Alarmism, provided many examples. Some led to formal complaints, later upheld
by the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit.
However, many programmes and articles escaped such attention, though we believed they were equally biased and misleading. They include:
The third most active hurricane season
In December 2021, BBC News reported that “The 2021 Atlantic hurricane season has now officially ended, and it’s been the
third most active on record”.
It was nothing of the sort. There were seven Atlantic hurricanes in 2021, and since 1851 there have been 32 years with a higher count.
The article also made great play of the fact that all of the pre-determined names had been used up, implying that hurricanes are becoming more common. They failed to explain, however, that with satellite technology we are now able to spot hurricanes in mid-ocean that would have been missed before.
Hurricanes: are they getting more violent?
Shortly after Hurricane Ian in September 2022, a BBC “Reality Check” claimed “Hurricanes are among the most violent
storms on Earth and there’s evidence they’re getting more powerful”. The video offered absolutely no data or evidence to back up this claim, which contradicted the official agencies.
For instance, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) state in their latest review:
“There is no strong evidence of century-scale increasing trends in U.S. landfalling hurricanes or major hurricanes. Similarly for
Atlantic basin-wide hurricane frequency (after adjusting for observing capabilities), there is not strong evidence for an increase
since the late 1800s in hurricanes, major hurricanes, or the proportion of hurricanes that reach major hurricane intensity.
The IPCC came to a similar conclusion about hurricanes globally in their latest Assessment Review. However, the BBC
article failed to mention any of this.
The Norfolk village crumbling into the sea
Coastal erosion in Norfolk has been a go-to issue for the BBC’s climate change propagandists. In January 2023, a BBC News
reporter visited Happisburgh, one of the villages affected, and spoke to a resident. The report claimed that "punishing weather
conditions linked to climate change have eroded so much of the village’s soft sandy rock that her house is now the last one before
the cliff edge".
In fact, the coast in that part of Norfolk has been retreating for thousands of years, for reasons that are geological rather
than climatalogical. According to the British Geological Society: “It is likely that the Norfolk cliffs have been eroding at the present
rate for about the last 5000 years.”
The historical record also clearly details the loss of large chunks of the village to the sea since the Middle Ages. Following
a complaint, the BBC have been unable to offer any evidence for their claim.
Heat pumps are much cheaper to run
In BBC world, all renewable and low carbon technologies are wonderful. In October 2021, BBC News claimed that ‘heat pumps
are much cheaper to run’ than gas boilers. There is no truth in this, as the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit was finally forced to admit 16 months later.
Quite why it took them so long to correct such a blatantly obvious error is a mystery.
Svalbard: the fastest warming place on Earth
In October 2022, the BBC published a long report on the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard, reporting that ‘the temperature in
Svalbard has jumped 4C [sic] in the past 50 years’.
However, they failed to point out that temperatures in that part of the world plunged between the 1950s and 70s, and are now only about a degree higher than at the start of the 20th century.
Pakistan floods: one third of country is under water
Reporting on the dreadful floods in Pakistan in summer 2022, the BBC stated: “One-third of Pakistan has been completely submerged by historic flooding, its climate minister says.”
A quick map check would have told the reporter that this claim was simply absurd, as most of Pakistan is covered by mountains
and deserts. A subsequent BBC programme, More Or Less, admitted the claim was false, and estimated that the real figure was
about 10 percent. Incredibly though, Lord Deben, Chair of the Committee on Climate Change, made exactly the same false claim in a BBC interview in January 2023. The BBC interviewer failed to challenge him.
Puff piece for solar power
"Queen Elizabeth Prize: Solar team wins prestigious engineering award", was written in February this year, with the usual over-the-top praise for how wonderful solar power is and claiming that its uptake is rocketing. To illustrate its message, it used a graph showing share of power capacity.
Readers seeing it would naturally have believed that solar power is now a significant contributor to the energy mix. Unfortunately, the BBC forgot to explain that capacity and electricity generation are two different things, and that because solar power only produces a small fraction of its capacity (just 11% in the UK), it still only supplies 3% of the world’s electricity.
Extreme weather is the norm
The BBC uncritically reported the World Meteorological Organization’s latest claims that ‘extreme weather events are the new normal’. Yet this idea contradicts successive reviews from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Moreover, just a
month before the BBC ran the story, an authoritative study had concluded that there was no clear positive trend in extreme
events, such as floods, droughts, tropical cyclones or tornadoes.
Bee-eaters ‘worrying sign of climate change’
Last summer a few bee-eaters (see Figure 2) turned up in Norfolk, to the delight of twitchers. But for the BBC this news was worrying, as they reported: Rare ‘rainbow birds’ trying to breed in the UK was a worrying sign of how our climate is changing.
Pushed northwards by climate change, these exotic birds will likely become established summer visitors in the future, having been an early and unmissable sign in the past two decades that the nature and climate emergency has reached our shores. 18
In fact, as any half-knowledgable bird watcher would have told the BBC, bee-eaters have frequently visited England in the past. These sightings have been very carefully recorded in British bird books, as far back as 1793. Indeed, one archive alone lists 80
sightings between 1793 and 1957.
Trees threatened by climate change
According to the BBC, a study has found that many trees in cities in England are at risk of drought linked to climate change.
Many are already supposedly stressed. Drier weather under climate change is expected to have a big impact on trees, particularly in York, London and Birmingham, we are told. Yet Met Office data shows that these areas are not getting drier; nor is there any evidence that they will. Once again, the BBC is uncritically presenting a controversial study as factual.
Driest start to year since 1976
England certainly had a notably dry spring and summer last year. But maybe not quite as dry as the BBC would like you to believe. On 26 July 2022, their report claimed that it had been the driest January to June in England since 1976.21 It’s a pity they did not check the Met Office data first, which would have told them it had actually been drier in 1996 and 2010.21But ‘driest start to the year since 2010’ hardly has the same ring to it!
The article also featured a photo of a dried-up reservoir. In fact, this was trick photography, as the dried up part was merely a small area at the head of the Dowry Reservoir, near Oldham.
Similar images of the same part of the reservoir have often been published in past years, such as 2013 and 2019.
The full netzerowatch.com report written by Paul Homewood (with full documentation) is available at netzerowatch.com.
Comments are closed.
Paul: Congratulations, but this puts you in the much wider public domain. Please take care – we can’t afford to do without you.
Congratulations Paul!
BBC – quick, call in Marianna Spring!
Thanks so much Paul! This evening (4th August) on Radio 4’s “Feedback” programme, “Andrea Catherwood puts listeners’ comments to BBC Climate Editor, Justin Rowlatt “! I wonder how many of Radio 4’s listeners are being driven nuts, like myself, by the absurd histrionics of this scientifically ignorant PPE graduate?
you still listen to Radio 4!!!!!! i suppose it is good that someone still does
But who in their right mind LISTENS to Radio 4, pray?
Admission, I occasionally put Today on. To remind me why I no longer listen to it. This tactic always works.
Did you listen to it so that I don’t have to? What did he say?
I Love Winning!
Thanks, Paul, you’re not just pretty face.
Well done Paul. My concern now is that you will have your bank account cancelled.
Badge of honour.
Great stuff Paul. I look forward every day to reading your latest missive. Keep up the good work😀
Does anyone else object to paying the TV licence fee to this bunch of charlatans?
Don’t pay it then. Just stop and ignore the threats.
I’ve never paid it in my life.
I was visited by a Crapita thug once, a long time ago.
I was bigger than him and he went away.
I haven’t heard anything sense.
I declared I did not watch any live TV to TV licensing and got a refund and a letter stating I did not need a TV license valid 2 years and they would not contact me, but reserved the right to check out in person, no contact now for 5 years saved £157 x5 = £785.
Many of my elderly friends have ditched Sky for an illegal IPTV firestick set up costing about £90 a year, yet are reluctant to cancel the TV license, people are strange.
Well done Paul. We can but hope that it is the start of the beginning of the end of the climate change scam!
I love the smell of optimism in the morning!
🙂
(seemed appropriate in view of the apocalypse our very own one world goverment is going to wreak on us).
When thinking of the BBC editors, writers, and other media places that print codswallop, I wonder if there are relatives and acquaintances who mention this utter tosh during private encounters, say a weekend gathering .
As Paul H. demonstrates, the media types have printed so much wrong for so many years that an aware person would learn of these failings. For example, who in the UK doesn’t understand that internal loss of industry off-sources CO2 emissions to China? Or that Polar Bears are fine? Or that not every part of the world can warm two or three or four times faster than every other place?
I’m of the opinion the ClimateCult™ folks have mush for brains.
Regarding: “The article also made great play of the fact that all of the pre-determined names had been used up, implying that hurricanes are becoming more common. They failed to explain, however, that with satellite technology we are now able to spot hurricanes in mid-ocean that would have been missed before.” Another easily overlooked problem is that names are given to Tropical Storms before they become Hurricanes, and many Tropical Storms never become a hurricane! So using up names is not an indication of hurricanes.
Another example: Last year Hurricane Nicole was briefly a hurricane when near the Bahamas. However, Nicole was NEVER close to being a hurricane when it struck the central Florida east coast just below Vero Beach (we live just above Vero Beach), it it was claimed to have sustained (2 minutes in US) winds of 74 mph. The NWC posted a follow-up of story of Nicole (https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/95d77e39b6fb4959b691ce89961392c8) that included readings from more than 30 stations along the central Florida coast and three that were about 30 miles offshore. NOT ONE of them showed winds even close to hurricane force! Yet “official” agencies were claiming Nicole was a hurricane when it struck Florida. It was not… not even close.
If you go to the link above, there is a section on observations that confirm my own findings. The observations include a time-lapse video of a map showing the extent of tropical storm force winds and hurricane winds. There is no coloration that matches with hurricane winds! I’ve linked a screen copy of that video at landfall in Florida and it clearly shows both on the map and for various locations on the left of the image the actual maximum sustained winds that are typical for a modest Tropical Storm! The screen copy:
Check the photos that accompanied the report of several ocean front homes that had been destroyed. But they weren’t destroyed by hurricane winds! They were victims of nearly a week of strong onshore winds between a strong high pressure to the north and the approaching Nicole to the south (at the end of that period). If Nicole hadn’t come ashore, those homes would still have been destroyed as their underpinnings (sand) were eroded away by persistent strong high surf. Clear evidence in the photo showed that the road and all other structures directly west of the ocean front homes were intact with no tree or roof damages of any kind. They looked perfectly normal except for the oceanfront damages.
When I raised a question about the lack of reporting stations showing anything close to sustained hurricane force winds, the only reply I got was to look at a bulletin that had been posted about Nicole well before landfall. That bulletin referenced a report from a hurricane hunter aircraft — at altitude — that reported — possible — minimal hurricane force winds (at altitude) well before landfall.
Yet Nicole is counted as a landfall hurricane in Florida. A fiction designed to support the climate change narrative.
Paul: You might want to check out my book at amazon.com: Looking Out the Window / Are Humans Really Responsible for Climate Change? / The Trial of Carbon Dioxide in the Court of Public Opinion. It uses the scientific method to guide jurors (readers) through a “trial” where the IPPC is the Prosecutor, atmospheric CO2 is the Defendant, and the book provides the Defense by examining the evidence in nature (geologic records, ice core records, observed measurements since 1880) to clearly reveal no relationship between changing atmospheric CO2 and changing global average surface temperature. Contact me by email for more.
Well done Paul a good counter to the recent attack on Neil Oliver.
With regard to “Heat pumps are much cheaper to run” I saw or read something on the BBC possibly by Rowlatt that said something along the lines of heat pumps use one third the energy of a gas boiler but because electricity costs three times as much as gas the running costs are similar. I thought “Aye that’ll be right”
👍🏼👍🏼
Well done. But the Express will probably get another D notice now as it did when it was the only newspaper to report the first Climategate.
Could be Paul, that you are reaching a tipping point !
Congrats, keep up the great work!
Paul Homewood:
I have attached two new papers by Prof. Lu at U of Waterloo. Like Roger Pielke, he has had a difficult time at UW but was saved by having tenure.
Best regards,
Ted Dixon
A.E. (Ted) Dixon, PhD
Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Waterloo
CAP-INO Medal for Outstanding Achievement in Applied Photonics
Co-Founder and Co-Chair Scientific Advisory Board, Huron Digital Pathology
When you won a correction from the BBC about the false claim that heat pumps were cheaper than gas boilers did the BBC have to promulgate this fact around the BBC, specifically to Evan Davies on PM? If they did it seems that either Davies didn’t get the memo or, in his arrogance, decided that he knew better and continued to claim they were cheaper even after he had interviewed the leading expert in the field who told him straight they were more expensive.
(Apologies. My mind’s gone blank on the name and I didn’t want to lose my comment while looking him up).
Well done, Paul.
Imagine being forced to pay nearly a couple of hundred quid a year to listen to this disinformation on weather and also on the covid scaremongering . Using a David Attenborough timescale of 4.5 billion years the most amazing thing would be that there has been no major weather events and the earth remained relatively peaceful compared to other planets and stars and so friendly towards living creatures for this incredibly long period – if you believe it.
I will leave the weather to God (unlike Pope Francis who thinks God is helpless
or is sleeping in)
The weather is going to heat up in the future due to the sun (the major input)
as in the prophecies of Revelation but since God will bring this about – we dont know when – there will be nothing we can do about it.
Charles,
I well remember Sir Attenborough’s ‘conversion’ to a believer from a sceptic on an old BBC ‘double header’ on climate. He stood in awe as he was presented, at the Royal Society, with a graphic projection of Michael Mann’s hockey stick graph.
Having seen this ‘proof’ – I belieeeve !
At that moment all my respect for Attenborough vanished.
I can only conclude that this was the only way he could continue to get funding for his many BBC ‘world tours’ and to not be ‘cancelled’ by his employers and their obedient, non-questioning, followers.
Sad.
So he avoided the David Bellamy route for a few pieces of silver
Re Svalbard, Hubert Lamb noted that the coal port in Spitsbergen (Svalbard) was open to sea traffic for 3 months of the year before 1920 but for over 7 months of the year by the late 1930s. So there was obviously considerable warming of the Arctic in the early 20thC long before CO2 really got going after mid century.
I heard areal “beauty” walking into town this morning :- daughter was pushing granny in her wheelchair with mum beside them, I was walking a little faster but the snippet of conversation from mum I heard went like this “They keep telling us what the weather ‘s going to be like at the end of the century but, they can’t bl***y well tell us was going to happen tommorrow!”
Nice one mum, what a gem.
Congratulations. The MSM walls are slowly being breached. We must continue the siege.
Any publicity is useful but the GreenBlob won’t take any notice of anything in the Express. Now if you could get this in the Graun or Observer………..
Excellent job, Paul!
It’s disappointing you didn’t offer your exposé to The Grauniad first! Tut, tut. 😉
Nice one Paul!
Just visited to read the comments, froth lathered troll heads exploding all over the place!
A very encouraging number of positive posts too!
Laser-guided brain-busting truth bombs homing in selectively on only the emotionally deranged cultists. What’s not to like?
Well done, Paul. Keep up the great work.
Thanks Paul, your website is a boon to us when we try to put alternative views to our woke friends and relatives.
Well done Paul! Next up – The Guardian?
Just got a DAB radio and listen to GB News vs BBC R4. Refreshing
Refreshing, but only up to a point. The BBC says they don’t need balance because there is no argument, the science is settled – which is to misrepresent science – and anyone who disagrees is a dangerous charlatan. Sadly conversely GB News is not so robust in defence of facts and realities.
Whenever a presenter, or a guest like Andrew Montford or Ross Clarke, dares relate the truth they roll out one of a posse of the real dangerous charlatans, to counter with their rote disinformation: Donnachadh McCarthy, eco-‘journalist’ at the ‘Independent’; Jack Richardson, Head of Energy and Climate at Onward; Steve Masters, Green Party, Newbury council; Tom Burke, ex-government advisor on climate change and Chair of E3G; Prof John Grant lecturer in sustainable construction and climate change; just a few that come to mind; all of whose livelihoods depend on their shamelessly pushing the green crap.
Was the same story with Covid.
Obviously to try to keep the Witchfinders of Ofcom at bay.
Let’s pray that Mark Steyn has success against Ofcom at High Court.
Click to access 13522.pdf
Congratulations! It’s great if your hard work reaches a larger audience.
It was inaccurate reporting in The Media some 20+ years ago that led me to question their output. They damage their cause (it is a cause) with obvious bias. Just watched Packham 1. Very good until the sudden leap to CO2 is evil. I don’t think I’ll bother with Packham 2.
Packham is a woke twit. Ruined what could have been a great series.
They ALWAYS do (ruin any nature series) by constantly promulgating their misinformed BS – despite having wonderful, ever-improving, photography and camera work. I can’t watch them nowadays, at all.
Well done Paul, thanks from Anglesey.
“Net zero’s dam has burst, but the BBC is still papering over the cracks
For decades, the Beeb’s coverage has been shamelessly one-sided, presenting highly politicised theory as irrefutable fact”
Charles Moore, Telegraph.
Well done Paul, proof of proof were needed.
The BBC is run by cultural Marxists. They couldn’t care less about the weather . . . er . . . climate.
What they care about is freedom. They don’t like it. The climaty changy schtick has been useful for getting people to accept erosion of their freedom. They say ridiculous things about the weather, to get YOU to give up your car.
Paul points out absurd things the BBC has said. They don’t care. They are in the business of destroying freedom, and they will say anything that advances that cause.
“There are really aren’t more hurricanes? That’s okay, some people will believe it.”
We get similarly exaggerated stories in Australia from our ABC television.
Unfortunately, not to be outdone on the climates scare, the remaining channels of tv news have joined in with the hyperbole.
No wonder the people are being brainwashed . .
Good work Paul.
The only trouble is that ITV is almost as bad as the BBC. Since Guterres’ moronic statement about Global Boiling, ITV has been bashing the climate change gong with a vengeance. I just can’t stand it any longer.
Excellent news, Paul.
I have been an admirer of your work for some time.
I regularly tweet it to my 17K Twitter followers.
Great work Paul. I know that the weather’ forecast is one thing and a guess of the climate is supposed to be much more scientific but we have had 3 dreadful forecasts here, only 20 miles from Exeter, which have turned out to be completely wrong and another 3 less dramatic forecasts that also did not follow the scripts. It doesn’t give much confidence in their 50 year forecasts.
Very well done indeed Paul. Could be the first domino!
Unfortunately although the Express and other papers may print good articles
Highlighting all the climate misinformation (Translation total lies)
This wont stop the same paper printing articles all the Planet Boiling lies.
The ratio of Climate hysteria articles compared to Honest climate articles is very high. I estimate 100 to one or more.
If you want some more Climate hysteria you should watch Sky News they are even out doing the BBC (Bulshit Broadcasting Corperation)
Strangely if you go to Sky Australia you can find some Climate honesty.
But despite BBC admitting they lied don’t expect Ofcom (Official impartial Comedy)
to Censor the BBC anytime soon as it staffed by ex BBC heads.
Ofcom will keep there completely unbiased impartial and fair clampdown
on those fake GBNews reporting who had the temerity to question the always honest Government over Covid.
I switched on SKY SPORTS to watch the Women’s HUNDRED CRICKET only to be faced by a cricket pundit who seems to suddenly to be an expert on Climate and proceeded to broadcast a ‘lazy video’, probably from Greenpeace depicting fires floods, ‘the earth is on fire’ etc. without providing any evidence even though these are mainly down to bad environmental management and arson. I am cancelling my SKY box as soon as I can get through or may just cancel my direct debit. Why won’t these greens read the research.
Even the cricket balls burst into flaming meteorites – I’ve seen it – its the science
The BBC isn’t engaged in informing you. They are engaged in alarming you.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” ― H.L. Mencken
“Oh, dear, please save us from this climate emergency!”
“In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.” — Theodore Dalrymple
Understand that the BBC’s lies are NOT MISTAKES. Paul writes them to tell them that they have made a mistake. Their being wrong is INTENTIONAL. Mail showing up saying what they intentionally lied about was wrong causes them to look about and ask, “What do I do with this?” “Trash bin.”
Paul Homewood projects his decency on BBC. It is misplaced. He should not expect BBC to say, “Oh, gee, yeah, we got that wrong.” That’s what Paul would do.
BBC is committed to destroying your freedom. A few fibs along the way are justified by the ends. They are not decent people; they are not like you.
Try this for effrontery!
Prof Halpern said that while fear-based messaging in general is not effective, he defended its use in extreme circumstances.
“There are times when you do need to cut through… particularly if you think people are wrongly calibrated,” he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/06/britain-drilled-to-accept-lockdown-in-future-pandemics/
A man I would enjoy meeting in a dark and lonely place…
And I would happily supply some handy lengths of sawn
4 x 2 to help the meeting along.
Congratulations, Paul Homewood, for spreading the truth.