Monday
Sep232013
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Bob's dinner
Sep 23, 2013 BBC Climate: IPCC Climate: Sceptics I think my radio appearance this morning may have spoilt Bob Ward's breakfast, judging by the spluttering this morning.
Dinner will be no better - I'm due to be on the BBC TV news tonight. As I understand it there are two slots, one at 6pm and one at 10pm, covering different angles of the climate/IPCC story.
Reader Comments (107)
Are there direct links to the two interviews?
No he didn't. He said
I don't think this is controversial.
Steveta. Without mentioning the absolute level of CO2 and its proportion of the atmosphere this is not very informative.
Well done Bish, the tide does seem to be turning.
One of the current excuses they didn't use this time is that we've seen pauses in warming before CO2 was an issue, which is true. However this isn't even the first pause we've seen since man made CO2 was big enough to affect climate, it's the second. At best they can say is that we've had about 25-30 years of warming. For the rest of the 60 years it's either not warmed or cooled. The years since 1997 might also not seem long in chronological time but it's a third of all man made CO2 emissions. I've yet to see a warmist try to explain that away.
Glad that the tide is turning and that 'his grace' is well-positioned. I saw the 10pm news last night and I really liked the focus on Andrew's pile of books. In setting up and shooting it, the director suggested that this sceptic is credible and thereby the director was seen to be impartial.
One point of order. The BBC graphic deliberately chose 1998 as a start date for the lack of warming as this was an extremely warm year. It might be suggested that choosing this start date is dishonest/cherry-picking by sceptics and by accepting this unchallenged we set ourselves up for a future rebuttal.
I remember seeing (somewhere) that the lack of statistically-significant warming holds true if 1997 or earlier is also chosen as starting point. Is this the case?
Yep, great to see the good Bishop on TV One news here (NZ). We got it from Shukman's doom-mongering intro until his wrap, Andrew included.
Radical Rodent is right, though. The bulk of the piece was the usual unsubstantiated assertions or weasel-worded qualifications adding up to: WE ARE GOING TO FRY!!!!
But, as has been noted, this state of affairs (someone like Andrew interviewed by the BBC) would have been unthinkable three years ago.
Why didn't they have real sceptics like James Heartfield talking about the politics which is all people care about ? The science is irrelevant. You can always get 97% of terrified little wage slaves to agree to anything you want.
Green Capitalism: Manufacturing Scarcity in an Age of Abundance by James Heartfield
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Green-Capitalism-Manufacturing-Scarcity-Abundance/dp/1906496102/ref=la_B004OB12EO_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380024995&sr=1-4