That climate change seminar

Much of the interest over the whole Roger Harrabin/CEMP kerfuffle has centred on the ‘high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts' (as the BBC Trust put it) decided that global warming was settled science and that sceptical views could safely be ignored.

We now finally, after months of digging, have the first insider view of the seminar.  Richard D North, a critic of the BBC and apparently the lone sceptical voice on the seminar has emailed TonyN at Harmless Sky to tell us the real composition of the panel.

The BBC crew (senior executives from every branch of the corporation) were matched by an equal number of specialists, almost all (and maybe all) of whom could be said to have come from the “we must support Kyoto” school of climate change activists.

Oops! Read the whole thing here.

Comments

[robin horbury]

I have been doing a little digging around what the BBC Corporate Responsibility unit now does. The answer is lots (on the lines that if you create a department, it will generate schemes that guarantee its own future). The language is enitrely touchy-feely jargon .

The main point of my post is that Mark Thompson has now endorsed a BBC environmental policy that is clearly influenced (if not written) by the AGW lobby. It dates back roughly to the time of the climate change seminar, so looks like there could have been concerted action across everal fronts. The main goal is to reduce the corporation's "emissions footprint" (see, for example, http://www.bbc.co.uk/outreach/2006_review/environment/going_green.shtml).
What it amounts to, rather chillingly, is that there is now an army of BBC environmental police checking every emission,

That's on top, of course, of "environmental analysts" such as Roger Harrabin who spew out endless AGW propaganda on BBC programmes. Would that someone would cap their "emissions"!