Bishop Hill Harrabin gotcha!
Apr 7, 2008 BBC Climate: other My favourite BBC environment correspondent, Roger Harrabin, seems to have been caught napping. A green activist called Jo Abbess wrote an email to Harrabin asking him to change an article he wrote to make it more acceptable to green opinion. Harrabin promptly wrote back to see if his changes were acceptable to her!
Abbess doesn't seem to be the sharpest tool in the box, because she promptly posted the correspondence up on a website.
The full correspondence is here.
from Jo Abbess
to Roger Harrabin
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:12 AM
subject Correction Demanded : "Global temperatures 'to decrease'"
Dear Roger,
Please can you correct your piece published today entitled "Global
temperatures 'to decrease'" :-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7329799.stm
1. "A minority of scientists question whether this means global
warming has peaked"
This is incorrect. Several networks exist that question whether global
warming has peaked, but they contain very few actual scientists, and
the scientists that they do contain are not climate scientists so have
no expertise in this area.
2. "Global temperatures this year will be lower than in 2007"
You should not mislead people into thinking that the sum total of the
Earth system is going to be cooler in 2008 than 2007. For example, the
ocean systems of temperature do not change in yearly timescales, and
are massive heat sinks that have shown gradual and continual warming.
It is only near-surface air temperatures that will be affected by La
Nina, plus a bit of the lower atmosphere.
Thank you for applying your attention to all the facts and figures available,
jo.
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Roger Harrabin
to Jo Abbess ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:23 AM
subject RE: Correction Demanded : "Global temperatures 'to decrease'"
Dear Jo
No correction is needed
If the secy-gen of the WMO tells me that global temperatures will
decrease, that's what we will report
There are scientists who question whether warming will continue as
projected by IPCC
Best wishes
RH
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Jo Abbess
to Roger Harrabin ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:37 AM
subject Re: Correction Demanded : "Global temperatures 'to decrease'"
Hi Roger,
I will forward your comments (unless you object) to some people who
may wish to add to your knowledge.
Would you be willing to publish information that expands on your
original position, and which would give a better, clearer picture of
what is going on ?
Personally, I think it is highly irresponsible to play into the hands
of the sceptics/skeptics who continually promote the idea that "global
warming finished in 1998", when that is so patently not true.
I have to spend a lot of my time countering their various myths and
non-arguments, saying, no, go look at the Hadley Centre data. Global
Warming is not over. There have been what look like troughs and
plateaus/x before. It didn't stop then. It's not stopping now.
It is true that people are debating Climate Sensitivity, how much
exactly the Earth will respond to radiative forcing, but nobody is
seriously refuting that increasing Greenhouse Gases cause increased
global temperatures.
I think it's counterproductive to even hint that the Earth is cooling
down again, when the sum total of the data tells you the opposite.
Glaringly.
As time goes by, the infant science of climatology improves. The Earth
has never experienced the kind of chemical adjustment in the
atmosphere we see now, so it is hard to tell exactly what will happen
based on historical science.
However, the broad sweep is : added GHG means added warming.
Please do not do a disservice to your readership by leaving the door
open to doubt about that.
jo.
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Roger Harrabin
to Jo Abbess ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:57 AM
subject RE: Correction Demanded : "Global temperatures 'to decrease'"
The article makes all these points quite clear
We can't ignore the fact that sceptics have jumped on the lack of
increase since 1998. It is appearing reguarly now in general media
Best to tackle this - and explain it, which is what we have done
Or people feel like debate is being censored which makes them v
suspicious
Roger
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Jo Abbess
to Roger Harrabin ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:12 AM
subject Re: Correction Demanded : "Global temperatures 'to decrease'"
Hi Roger,
When you are on the Tube in London, I expect that occasionally you
glance a headline as sometime turns the page, and you thinkg "Really
?" or "Wow !"
You don't read the whole article, you just get the headline.
A lot of people will read the first few paragraphs of what you say,
and not read the rest, and (a) Dismiss your writing as it seems you
have been manipulated by the sceptics or (b) Jump on it with glee and
e-mail their mates and say "See ! Global Warming has stopped !"
They only got the headline, which is why it is so utterly essentialy
to give the full picture, or as full as you can in the first few
paragraphs.
The near-Earth surface temperatures may be cooler in 2008 that they
were in 2007, but there is no way that Global Warming has stopped, or
has even gone into reverse. The oceans have been warming consistently,
for example, and we're not seeing temperatures go into reverse, in
general, anywhere.
Your word "debate". This is not an issue of "debate". This is an issue
of emerging truth. I don't think you should worry about whether people
feel they are countering some kind of conspiracy, or suspicious that
the full extent of the truth is being withheld from them.
Every day more information is added to the stack showing the desperate
plight of the planet.
It would be better if you did not quote the sceptics. Their voice is
heard everywhere, on every channel. They are deliberately obstructing
the emergence of the truth.
I would ask : please reserve the main BBC Online channel for emerging truth.
Otherwise, I would have to conclude that you are insufficiently
educated to be able to know when you have been psychologically
manipulated. And that would make you an unreliable reporter.
I am about to send your comments to others for their contribution,
unless you request I do not. They are likely to want to post your
comments on forums/fora, so please indicate if you do not want this to
happen. You may appear in an unfavourable light because it could be
said that you have had your head turned by the sceptics.
Respectfully,
jo.
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Roger Harrabin
to Jo Abbess ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:28 AM
subject RE: Correction Demanded : "Global temperatures 'to decrease'"
Have a look in 10 minutes and tell me you are happier
We have changed headline and more
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
--Previous Message--
: "This would mean global temperatures have
: not risen since 1998, prompting some to
: question climate change theory".
:
:
: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7329799.stm
:
: How one can make that statement in light of
: the graph shown here is beyond me
Apparently it's something to do with the unique way it's funded that makes the BBC so special.
(Via Benny Peiser's CCNet)
Reader Comments (15)
Fire and damnation are usually insufficient to persuade a BBC hack to change his deathless prose, so Harabin's willingness to comply with this harpy's demands shouldn't be treated too gently. He changed it beause he wanted to.
Jo Abbess does not want anyone - even herself - to get factual unbiased information. She does not want anyone to hear anything that might contradict the group psychosis.
Yes. If anyone ever updates "Popular delusions and the madness of crowds", AGW would be top of the list for inclusion.
This kind of propaganda has already been proven to be dangerous, and policies based on this pesudo-religion are causing food shortages and ever-inflating prices due to grain being grown for bio-fuels instead of as food.
The whole idea is to destabalise whole nations so they may be manipulated and controlled by the UN and its associate powers.
Very sinister. And nothing to do with climate. Everything to do with anti-capitalism and communism. Truth is suppressed (as evidenced above). These people are nothing less than parasites that aim to bring the free world to its knees.
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IN STRENGTH
Jo Abbess? Who is ths ignorant cretin and what the f$!K does she know anyway? Go live in a cave and bang rocks together if u want but dont expect me to follow you!!!