BBC defended by Countryfile star: ‘Highlighting need for climate action is being impartial!’
By Paul Homewood
h/t glenartney
The sheer arrogance of this guy is astonishing!
The BBC’s impartiality has been defended by Countryfile contributor James Wong following a number of complaints regarding its coverage of issues such as climate change.
Botanist Wong – who has been a regular contributor on several of the Beeb’s nature shows – spoke to GB News after teaming up with Yeo Valley Organic to try and encourage people to embrace green spaces in order to improve their health.
The latest offering of wildlife show Planet Earth III also faced criticism after it was accused of exaggerating the demise of wildlife as a direct consequence of manmade behaviour on climate change.
The BBC responded to the Planet Earth complaints with a statement to GB News which read: "The evidence is clear from leading scientists and experts that some species are struggling to adapt to a world dominated by human activity and we do not shy away from including examples of this in the series.
"We also feature stories where we see animals adapting successfully to the challenges presented by the modern world."
Addressing the Beeb’s approach to its reporting of an issue like climate change specifically, Countryfile’s Wong defended the corporation, insisting that "highlighting the need for action and the climate crisis is being impartial".
He told GB News: "We are in a climate emergency. None or a very, very, very small percentage of the scientific community would disagree with that.
https://www.gbnews.com/celebrity/bbc-impartiality-defended-countryfile-james-wong#comments
For a start, no proper scientists say there is a “climate emergency”, it is a term made up by climate activists like the BBC.
Secondly, it is not the BBC’s job to campaign for anything.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
You can’t fix stupid…
But you will have a very successful career at the Hamas, oops sorry British Broadcasting Corporation. If not then The Guardian will welcome you with open arms.
The BBC used to see their duty as providing us with facts. That’s what led people to trust them. Now they see their duty as shoving their unsubstantiated opinions down our throats. They’re no longer trusted. QED?
They’ve been trying to mould public opinion on anything and everything forever, even in ancient shows like The Archers. It’s what the media do.
If I’d been interviewing Wong when he said that about very, very few scientists dispute the claims, I’d have asked him how many disputed the real reason for stomach ulcers – and we’re proved to be wrong.
Wong’s a botanist, he wouldn’t understand zoology.
Or meteorology, or atmospheric physics.
I’d have simply asked him what happens to life on earth if you force CO2 below 200ppm
The question for Wong is surely : “Where is the proof that humans are responsible for dangerous climate change ?”
This quote: “…some species are struggling to adapt to a world dominated by human activity…” worries me because it signals another subtle change in the propaganda: viz, that now, it’s not so much climate as people. Get rid of people and the problem is fixed….
The quote is almost correct but would be better written “…some species are struggling to adapt in a world where human activity is encroaching on their habitat…”. Unfortunately, as you say, Harry, they completely ruin it by evoking the meaningless ‘climate change’ Fortunately, there are some good organisations that are actually working away to do something about that. For example, I was heartened to read some weeks ago the countries are working together to preserve the areas where migrating birds rest during their long journeys.
On the other hand some species have done very well in man made environments
The growing population is a big problem as it is using up undeveloped land in third world and developing countries. And even though our birth rate has stalled, we are using up land to build houses because of our governments permitting uncontrolled immigration that is driving up the population. In Africa 80% of the population use firewood or charcoal to cook and heat. The response from the western world? Prevent them from modernising and building reliable fossil fuel generation, so they continue to fell the forests. They have no money to replant so if there is no natural regen then the forests are gone along with the top soil.
Population size would be less of a problem if third-world (an awful tag) countries were enabled to deliver cheap, available and reliable energy for their population. Large families would not then be the norm. Sadly, like the Gazan water pipes, our aid tends to get misappropriated.
Health, wealth and education naturally lead to population stabilisation and eventually to a declining population
Climate emergency, Humlum and Wijngaarden say there isn’t. That’s 2 more than none.
Rule for life: never say none, never say all, never say always, never say never.
Nor does the IPCC’s new chairman Professor Jim Skea.
“In interviews with German media, Skea said it is wrong and misleading for climate activists to imply that temperature increases of 1.5°C posed an existential threat to humanity.”
https://www.sustainabilitymatters.net.au/content/sustainability/news/ipcc-chairman-rebukes-exaggerated-climate-alarm-329382719#:~:text=In%20interviews%20with%20German%20media,for%20’saving%20the%20planet‘.
Arch Warmist Bill Gates is retreating too.
On Thursday, Gates made a sudden U-turn on his climate doom narrative and now expects “No temperate country is going to become uninhabitable.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/why-did-bill-gates-make-sudden-u-turn-climate-doom-narrative?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1848
He is Wong on that one!
“We are in a climate emergency. None or a very, very, very small percentage of the scientific community would disagree with that.”
Therapist to Wong: “Is this ‘climate emergency’ in the room with us right now?”
Wong displays totalitarian mentality. No unofficial beliefs allowed. It is evil. And it sure as hell isn’t scientific. It is the exact opposite of science!
‘very, very, very small percentage’
As Einstein noted, “It only takes one.”
I would say that the BBC needs representatives of at least half the world’s population to declare a climate emergency before it has some sort of argument for claiming there is a climate emergency. The world’s population is currently 8 billion, so it needs 4 billion.
From checking the latest figures for ‘jurisdictions’ that have declared a climate emergency (and most of these authorities will just be indulging in virtue signalling), it is only one billion, an eighth of the world’s population.
https://climateemergencydeclaration.org/climate-emergency-declarations-cover-15-million-citizens/
“2,348 jurisdictions in 40 countries have declared a climate emergency. Populations covered by jurisdictions that have declared a climate emergency amount to over 1 billion citizens.
Over 61 million of these live in the United Kingdom. In Britain around 95 per cent of the population lives in areas where the local authorities – over 570 councils all together – have declared a climate emergency.”
So local Councillors have declared emergencies. How many asked the people who live there? How many held a vote or referendum? How many made it an election choice issue?
Next to none i expect. These idiotic ’emergency’ announcements should not be seen as having wide support. Many are just done by the few luvvies who have seized power and the local populance goes ‘so what?’.
Our parish council was invited by a pressure group and the idiot county council to declare a ‘climate emergency’. I opposed and put a stop to any such stupid move.
I waste my time being a parish Councillor in order to stop the stupidity and waste that happens when sensible people dont take the trouble to be involved.
And councils are facing bankruptcy in large numbers, although we can’t be certain as so few are meeting their legal obligation to publish accounts!! Yep, imagine a company not publishing annual accounts.
The BBC’s obligations regarding impartiality are explained in its “Impartiality – Guidance note”, part of which states:
https://www.bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidance/impartiality
Well they obviously play fast and loose with the guide lines don’t they? Rather reminds me of those employment contracts offered which define your duties and also itemize, ‘any other activities that your line manager sees fit to give you’.
So not a specified contract then.
Here’s why we drift along with these crazy NET Zero projects and the BBC feels emboldened to push these delusions:
Just the first FIVE MINUTES of this near two hour video will give you the direction of travel, but this agenda isn’t just aimed at the Energy Industry. It’s encompassing EVERYTHING, including schools, neighbours, your place of worship, work, customers, governments and, of course, Media.
It’s nothing to do with ‘stupid’.
It’s, ‘Are you signed up to the Plan, as organised by the WEF and UN, with the help of at least one well known billionaire?’
Apparently not 🙂 , but it’s still an ongoing world wide force, and will continue to push the Climate Agenda, until it’s stopped.
Why do so many of these alarmist individuals seem to have little understanding of syntax and the rules of language.
When I used to watch countryfile (many years ago before that ginger woke idiot spoiled the programme) I understood it to be about farming and country life.
But, nothing to do with climate. So, how can one claim to be ‘impartial’ when including climate scaremongering into the narrative?
Using BBC and impartial in the same sentence is just silly – from refusing to call Hamas terrorists, to constantly peddling the faux climate crisis – it’s not impartial, it should be renamed the LBC (Leftwing Broadcasting Company) for accuracy
Bolshevik Broadcasting Company?
Well BBC, say no more, just hope their charter is not renewed?
In the days of the corrupt Rajendra Pachauri the corrupt IPCC was the go to lefty authority for climate. Now it’s saying there is no climate crisis it’s ignored.
“We are in a climate emergency.”
Remember, this is a POLITICAL declaration, not a weather phenomena. It literally has nothing to do with weather or climate.
Indeed, Net Zero isn’t about carbon or climate, it’s about global socialism and giving advantage to the third world who are exempt.
Just as Ottmar Edenhoffer of the IPCC explained thirteen years ago. His statement about climate policy being international socialism in disguise was 100% correct.
”One must say clearly that we redistribute defacto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.”
Unrestrained immigration is part of the same strain.
That the migrants aren’t carrying AK-47s doesn’t make them any less than invaders.
Confucius he say, “this guy, very Wong.”
“”The evidence is clear from leading scientists and experts that some species are struggling to adapt to a world dominated by human activity and we do not shy away from including examples of this in the series.” Exactly what evidence did they provide or is their opinion evidence as Dame Hallett has allowed for some but crucially not others ……a perfect example of how elastic “Impartiality” is for the ultra far left wokeists troubadours..
‘a world dominated by human activity’
The deification of Man.
Man is not even a toenail fungus to this Big Old Dirt Ball.
Time the BBC was made to stand on its own, it is not un-biased and many of its ‘Statements’ are incorrect as they do not approach the scientific society as a whole but only pick those supporting the BBC view, WHICH IS INCORRECT IN 90% OF ITS STATEMENTS re climate & even Countryfile has been corrupted.
You know the rabid eco-loons just cannot help themselves when the new Head of the UN IPCC says the climate alarmists are over doing it:
https://www.dw.com/en/climate-change-do-not-overstate-15-degrees-threat/a-66386523
Likewise, Bill Gates accepts there iis no ‘Climate Crisis’
https://trendingpoliticsnews.com/bill-gates-stuns-audience-by-denying-theres-a-climate-crisis-knab/?utm_medium=agg&utm_source=economics
Just go back to Christopher Booker many years ago
He was right but nobody listened
Bullshit Broadcasting Corporation does many wonderful things ( viz Music )
but their Climate bla bla coverage is a national disgrace
‘The evidence is clear from leading scientists and experts’
The ever popular climate ‘science’ appeal to anonymous authorities.