Wednesday
May182011
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill HoL on BBC science coverage
May 18, 2011 BBC The House of Lords Communication Committee questions Brian Cox and Sir David Attenborough on BBC science programming. Is it just me, or do parliamentary committees only ever want to hear from people who aren't going to rock the boat?
That said, there is some interesting probing of the "how to deal with dissent" question, with Brian Cox looking somewhat uncomfortable at one point.
Video starts at 16:30, with the fun bit from 16:37, although the subject of climate change is also briefly broached later on as well.
<script src="http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Embed/js.ashx?8404 460x322"></script>
Reader Comments (28)
Not just you, I'm sure the Whitehall Mandarins will carefully select a suitably representative panel to be questioned.
'Some one had blundered'.....The charge of the Light Brigade to continue...
http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/
"Science doesn't have an agenda. Of course we should be biassed in favour of rationality" opines Brian.
This SHOULD be true for Science (with a big S) but climate science (with a small s) is patently a law unto itself because of the inordinate funding poured into it by politicians and interest groups and the inordinate fortunes to be made through compliance with the consensus.
"Anthropogenic Climatechangeism" is the biggest growth industry on the planet This of itself creates a vicious financial feedback loop which inevitably calls into question objectivity. Climate cientists are just cogs in this machine. They have no special status or claim to objectivity. IMHO.
It's a shame the video uses Silverlight. This doesn't work well, or even at all, on non-Microsoft platforms. Like mine.
Peter,
Works here under OSX with Chrome browser. I didn't get any sound to start with so put it in full screen mode and I got sound and then back to in-browser mode. Not sure if the two were connected though or just coincidence.
Silverlight....suck.
The use of silverlight is confirmation of an organisation out of touch with the reality of the IT age.
Silverlight didn't work for me and any attempts to load it when it popped up and suggested I do just that were rejected by Explorer.
And now, every time I hit an operation key on my PC, bloody Silverlight pops up and asks me if I want to load it. ARRRGGGHHH!!!
Silverlight? Pah! I still use Windows 2000, and MS, having insisted for years that IE6 was an ancient crock now says that it is necessary! They don't appear to supply it, though (even if I was interested)...
What is it with Brian Cox. You front a Tv series that's not original, read words written by others, have special effects done by others, editing by others, research for the program done by others...and suddenly he is an expert on the media!
Dr Cocks seems delighted with his new found importance.
I don't know about you, but I would take Brian's gig if offered to me. You have no idea where it can lead. Just look at Obama. He's doing the same thing, as are most of our "leaders". Must be nice not to have to live from one pension check to the next.
What is it about television personalities and the government? Alan Sugar, Margot someonewho makes over shops, Brian Cox, David Attenborough, etc- all get to be advisers to our leaders.
Bah handbag, as my son says.
"Install Microsoft Silverlight"
Not even at gun point.
But John they even named it after you!
Try this link for a non-Silverlight experience
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=8404
but uses WMP.
Things can only get better.
Dot from 'Enders tomorrow?
I get Silverlight crashes on both links. Can't be bothered to waste any more time on this...
Why are you complaining Bishop? You don't want to rock the boat either do you? Nobody wants to rock the boat. All wants reconciliation. How tweet.
Cox 17:03: "Of course the BBC should be biased in favour of good science. Science is't a pursuit that has an agenda. Science is the mechanism by which we get to the best conclusion we can given the available data"
I'm glad we have Brian to tell us what's "good science" and what's "bad science" and what the "Best conclusions" are (for the BBC).
Cox 17:03:50 "The BBC clearly doesn't have an agenda. It's agenda is to be unbiased"
That's right - no agenda atall. Certainly no left-wing, pro-EU, anti-israel, eco-alarmist bias. None atall.
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/
Cox has already shown his unthinking support of the warmistas and lack of appreciation of scientific method. The consensus should not be questioned, those that do are "nutters"
The video plays fine in Safari on my iMac (all Apple software updates applied). IIRC, Netflix also uses Silverlight and it works fine for that use as well. As for the lack of sound at the start of the video, the HoL audio/video people had the sound level turned way down, probably because they forgot to turn it back up after muting it while the current witness changed places with the previous one. They turned it back up shortly after the video started. They also muted it during the witness change that occurred just before the 16:30 point. I don't think the lack of audio is Silverlight's fault. (Don't get me wrong. I hate Microsoft and everything they do with a raving passion, but complaining about the use of Silverlight on your PC or Mac is a battle not worth fighting, IMO, and a losing one at that.)
They should use the BBC beau Brian Cox to breed new varieties of bats.
They can organise speleology holidays for the masses, inside professor Brian Cox
Cox says "there is a scientific consensus...and if you want to find out what it is you ask the Royal Society" (or words to that effect)
This illustrates two things. First ifs the total blindness within the BBC, and the establishment in general, to the damage done to the reputation of the RS by its blatantly partisan treatment of the AGW issue, embodying its complete reversal of its motto, Nullius in verba - it now means "trust us you peasants, how dare you question our word".
The second is the ease with which supposed scientists invoke an argument from authority, and continue to expect to be taken seriously. I appreciate Dr Cox actually has a day job as a physicist, but I wonder if his knowledge of particle physics, or his more modest skills as a musician (which is why he's on TV in the first place, I would suggest) really qualify him to comment on the proper conduct of scientific inquiry or opinion formation.
I suggest that no one who was so qualified would effectively suggest "because the Royal Society says so" as an answer to anything.
I once attended one of Cox's talks in which he said (quoting Carl Sagan word for word - which he does often) that any scientist talking outside their subject is as dumb as the next man.
So how come particle physicist Cox (made a professor on the strength of no more than 20 humdrum papers) is suddenly an expert on the media and answering political questions about the future of the BBC world service?
It has been suggested that Cox became a prof at manchester not so much for his science but for the publicity he brings the university. It is a fact that his publication record is remarkably poor for a prof.
A snippet from Brian Cox during this session: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mJr-NXHUbE. (Sorry about the html detritus above).