Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« New climategate timeline | Main | WWF - another fake charity »
Monday
Feb012010

Blimey

Does this explain why the BBC are so vehemently alarmist over global warming? Because their pension funds are invested in green companies?

This could get ugly.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (20)

Incredible. I believe Mr. Gore (the investor), spent some time in Britain advocating this investment strategy to pension fund managers-- should we be surprised to find the fund's values shrivelling in the warming atmosphere...

Feb 1, 2010 at 9:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterGrant

Sorry if this is OT here but I thought it may be worthy of getting attention here?

The Guardian is definitively saying Phil Jones hid data now:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/leaked-emails-climate-jones-chinese

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM | Unregistered CommenterSteve2

PensionGate ?

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Hughes

"if the BBC pension fund is defined-benefit, why should they give a damn what they are invested in. We the taxpayers pick up the tab regardless." Are you sure? Won't they just have to depend on the Pension Protection Fund? It's funded by the non-broke schemes - at least until it goes bust itself.

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:21 PM | Unregistered Commenterdearieme

The BBC's pension boss has diverted funds into his hobby.

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Hughes

Well, Steve2, that Nurdgaia link is a good one. One of their remarks has made me realise that AGW is a Fundamental Invariant - it doesn't matter if every bit of evidence on which it is based is revealed to be bogus, the Theory is still true. It's a Theory of Irrelativity.

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:33 PM | Unregistered Commenterdearieme

Steve2, the Wei -Chyung Wang referred to in the guardian has a docorate in err!! mechanical engineering, remind me again what Patchys qualifications are in.... Ohh yea engineering,

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterDave"the denier"

Several ways to look at this - eg yer Grace's first para then his 2nd.

Here is my take on it.

(1) Beebers are mostly "urban-eco" worldview ( aka Islington Man ).

This drives their reporting on this subject - a "canteen-culture" of institutional eco-ism. Greg Dyke might say "hideously green".

(2) Their pension fund is "defined benefits" so the trustees only have to go through the motions and appear to get a decent return on investments - it dos not matter if investments do well or not. Anything that looks like an investment will do.

(3) This leaves their pension boss free to divert funds into his hobby-horse projects. (1) tells you the kind of things he will favour.

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Hughes

"On second thoughts, if the BBC pension fund is defined-benefit, why should they give a damn what they are invested in. We the taxpayers pick up the tab regardless."

Maybe the Beeboids are naturally inclined to 'ethical investments' of this sort anyway and there's a natural pushing of the pension fund in this direction. Easier when there's no prospect of it going bust because of poor investment decisions, because the public supplies the safety net. The fact that the pension fund is investing in The Low Carbon Future is an incentive for the Beeb to push AGW, although I doubt it's as simple as 'keep banging the AGW drum if you want a pension'. A positive feedback loop though.

I'm happy to be corrected but it looks as if a fair few of the other pension schemes mentioned in connection with the IIGCC are also Final Salary schemes ultimately guaranteed by the taxpayer. Shame about the churches, but they should know all about the virtue of poverty, and realise that you can't serve Mammon and The Lord.

Feb 1, 2010 at 10:46 PM | Unregistered Commentercosmic

Volte farce!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/david-king-climate-emails-speculation

Feb 1, 2010 at 11:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterPaul

Ahhh, again Gore behind it, the "Hypocrites on Parade"

http://www.aprilbaby.typepad.com/

Feb 1, 2010 at 11:22 PM | Unregistered Commentersdcougar

The IIGCC membership is a fascinating mix of achingly nice church and public-sector trustees with some seriously carnivorous City types. As yer Grace might say "and the lion shall lie down with the lamb".
PS Enjoying the book. Wife thinks I have gone mad with my choice of bedtime reading.

Feb 1, 2010 at 11:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid S

Isn't this Guardian story a re-hash of WUWT and CA story from last year?

What's up? Have the Guardian recognised the wheels are going to come off the Warmist bandwagon and are trying to make everyone think (when the dust settles) they were on the side of the angels?

Feb 1, 2010 at 11:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterStuck-Record

"And now for the rest of today's news from the BBC:

Mrs. Mary Wilson was awarded the first prize for her pink petunias in the Early Spring Flower Growers Contest in Maidenhead, Berkshire.

"I use cow manure," she said when asked about the size of her prize petunias. "They really love it, they do! I also use Met Weather forecasts, shredded up. The little darlings thrive on those, particularly with all the promises of warm weather. That sparkles them right them up!"

So -- what is new? Several days ago I pointed out that you are all paying the BBC a ridiculous amount of money for your Tele Tax. In Ireland, I am expected to pay €165, for what? The RTE? Fortunately, I know about Faraday cages. These are copper mesh screens that you can put around your tele so that the roving scanners can't see the emission of your tele.

The better solution is to flush the BBC and RTE down the sewer they crawled out of.

Feb 1, 2010 at 11:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

Stuck_Record,

There's an obvious hedging of bets in the meeja, increasing as time goes on.

You can imagine the calculations over Climategate and every new scandal:

Is it going to blow over?

Is it going to cause reformed AGW, but the main belief remains intact?

Is it the end of the scam?

In short, "Which way do I jump given what I've said before and what the editorial direction has been"?


Most of the trad meeja preferred to ignore it at first.


And then eventually :

Am I going to be left saying, "The consensus was that the king was wearing a new suit and all the best tailors said so, and anyway, naturism is a very wholesome and proper movement"?

Feb 2, 2010 at 12:31 AM | Unregistered Commentercosmic

Yentlemen,
I believe this be the correct bolg.
Memory was I asked for a translation from Scottishh Englishh tO USA engilish of a quantity of likour. The answere was that the wahzit tranlated to a tot in Merican englishh.
Weeelll. Keepin in ming that the typical marican tot (small child) weighs morna a few pounds, I draqnk a tot of scottisshh whiskey recently and i wnts to report that youse engishisshhmen can holds yur liqur muchas beteer than us mericans can.
youls truly
Westcostmerican

Feb 2, 2010 at 2:19 AM | Unregistered CommenterBill S

Bill S.

Obviously not a Irishman at all, at all. Take two aspirin and say three Hail Mary's in the morning.

Now if ye were to have a pint of the blond in the black skirt, ye'd be talk'n with a silver tongue and thrill'n the angels with yer brilliance, ye would. A regular O'Bama yer'd be, ye would.

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:56 AM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

Am I going to be left saying, "The consensus was that the king was wearing a new suit and all the best tailors said so, and anyway, naturism is a very wholesome and proper movement"?

'Tis possible, Cosmic, but yer king best stay out of Scotland because they might lock h'm up fer life.

Feb 2, 2010 at 4:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

Why does the beeb even have that fund if it's backed by the state? They get to exert power and distort the market by making whatever hairbrained investment choices they want but it's all guaranteed by the taxpayer.

Feb 2, 2010 at 7:20 AM | Unregistered Commenterdread0

Slightly O/T, but Harrabin made an interesting slip in a bulletin yesterday - he was talking about handouts for people with solar (voltaic) panels and suggested that an installation with an output of 2.5W would qualify for payments of around £900. He meant 2.5kW, but anyone who could confuse the two has no place as a science reporter, IMO.

Feb 2, 2010 at 8:16 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>