Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

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

Powered by Squarespace
« Some weapons-grade sophistry | Main | Schools: not activist enough »

Science (it says here)

Roger Harrabin has a new three part series on the science of climate change starting next week on Radio 4.

Climate talks typically end in disenchantment and disarray, so will this year's summit in Paris be any different? In this three part series Roger Harrabin examines the science, politics and solutions of climate. In the first of this series he looks at the science behind climate change. Predicting the future climate is a pretty tricky business and over the last twenty five years or so its had a chequered history. Roger talks to the scientists about their models and asks if they are accurate enough or should they just be consigned to the dustbin. He takes tea with the leading US politician who simply won't be convinced of man-made climate change. He meets the "luke-warmers" who believe in climate change but don't think the planet will warm as much as predicted. He will also examine the current predictions and how confident we should be.

Expectations are set to low.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (64)

Prepare to have your backsides handed to you guys once again. The BBC rules.

Nov 12, 2015 at 1:12 AM | Unregistered CommenterAila

For me, my sentimental support for the BBC, as a taxpayer funded institution, has dried up. Of course I still watch and listen, but I no longer trust the BBC.

Nov 11, 2015 at 10:48 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

You speak for me. In fact, I rarely watch or listen unless another member of the household chooses to do so.
I do feel sad about it.

Nov 12, 2015 at 3:44 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

Ross: Numbers are not large, but concentrated in the higher educated part of the population.

Nov 11, 2015 at 9:57 PM | Richard Tol

Given the increasing amount of bilge on Radio 4 (evenhard core Leftie friends note its dumbing down) - viz. the current obsession with transgendering, I am not sure that "educated" is the word I would have used, Richard.

Nov 12, 2015 at 6:56 AM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

Moonbat, similarly - these days with George, has anyone 'heard the silence' and noteworthy lack of climate doom mongering emanating from out of his green church belfry?

Nov 12, 2015 at 12:40 AM | Athelstan.
It hurts to give credit to such a self-satisfied prig as Monbiot, but Climategate disenchanted him hugely.

Nov 12, 2015 at 6:58 AM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

You speak for me. In fact, I rarely watch or listen unless another member of the household chooses to do so.
I do feel sad about it.

Nov 12, 2015 at 3:44 AM | michael hart
We kicked the TV out years ago - we had in reality stopped watching it, and we both resented hugely funding such an odious organisation. BBC radio, the sports coverage is excellent on 5 Live & Extra, Radio 4 is mostly unlistenable to, and more than a few minutes exposure tends to make me want to drown the radio, Radio 3 too has been dumbed down.

I do have fun crossing swords with Capita (TVLA) over their licence letters.

Obviously - "We have no contract with you, please leave us alone"

"What is it about 'We do not have a TV' that is so hard to understand?"

and the one that shuts them up for a couple of years

"You are implying we are lying. Please put this on paper, so that we can take the appropriate action"

Or returning the letter unopened, addressed as it is to "The Occupier", marked "Not Known Here".

Childish? Maybe, but fun :-)

What is it you don't understand about "We

Nov 12, 2015 at 7:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

"Low expectations" wrong Bish "High blood pressure" is expected , knowing Harra is likely to pull something more devious & outrageous than we can imagine.

As a criminal Harra hasn't killed many people, but he goes on day day after day breaking BBC editorial guidelines.
However BBC Management are the ones responsible for failing to enforce the rules , so in a JUST world they should face the legal consequences, not just walk away with a fat pension intact.

Never mind that is JUST that the public get to hear the truth, not just a torrent of alarmism while the other skeptic side is suppressed from challenging it.

Nov 12, 2015 at 7:13 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Nov 12, 2015 at 7:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

In order to (successfully) lose myself from "the database", I took out a licence in the name of Oliver Charles Cupier. As you say, sparring with them is great fun - now fortunately over for me due to age.

Nov 12, 2015 at 7:32 AM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Constable

tomo 9.42 pm

Haven't heard that word for ages!!

Calling Josh, calling Josh.... Roger H and a dead chicken, please.

Nov 12, 2015 at 7:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterMessenger


what's on show here is akin to traditional Roman divination of the omens from entrails followed by declamation.

If the person who Google bombed Dame Julia with "Senna The Soothsayer" is reading here ..... you know what's needed :-)

I thought to riff on Wod-Jah with Rastafarianism and The Green Cult but I'm spoiled for choice

Nov 12, 2015 at 9:09 AM | Registered Commentertomo

Aila, Sadly on this subject the BBC does not rule. This is because it has abandoned its own editorial guidelines.

The BBC has decided that it won't give fair air time to catastrophic climate change sceptics. The reason being that the BBC thinks such people are obviously wrong. The BBC thinks that catastrophic climate change sceptics are like the people who think the Queens is a space Lizard - crazy folk.

Well, that would be fine if they had done proper research to evaluate whether catastrophic climate change sceptical views are so far gone that they are not even worthy of debate. But they haven't.

The BBC made the call to censor one side of the debate because they listened to 28 "experts". The BBC claimed they were leading climatologists.
The problem was that these "experts" were not experts at all. They were activists - many of whom had a personal interest in pushing their agenda.
The full list of "experts" is here.

Read and learn about the deceit and then consider this - if the BBC lies about their editorial independence on this subject, what else are lying to you about?

And, by the way, it was Roger Harrabin who arranged this conference and declared that (for example) Claire Foster of the Church of England has the expertise to predict the climate of the 21st century.

Roger Harrabin is the Tories weapon that is being used to destroy the justification for the license fee and the BBC itself. It’s not just on this website where people are asking why we’re paying for liars to feed us propaganda.

Links not working:-
List of experts:
Further Reading:

Nov 12, 2015 at 11:07 AM | Registered CommenterM Courtney

M Courtney 11:07 Thank you for that summary of the case for corrupted bias by the BBC. A good primer for anyone, whether as an individual, investigative journalist or politician, seeking to assess the BBC's value to the UK.

The pervasive propaganda gets thrown into so much BBC output. I get the impression that BBC productions HAVE to include a sly dig, or face 'disinvestment', as the Guardian likes to call it.

Nov 12, 2015 at 12:31 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

a few years ago I was amazed at the notion of "madrassa" in countries that got a lot of NGO money

Now I realize we have MORE of them

Nov 12, 2015 at 9:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterVenusCold

golf charlie
The Bishop's pamphlet The Propaganda Bureau is another source of information on the BBC's approach to "scientific experts" and CAGW [see blog side bar]

Nov 14, 2015 at 7:58 AM | Unregistered CommenterMessenger

Messenger, thanks. The BBC have played a major role in cultivating and devaluing the concept of 'experts'. Their choice of expert advice on restoring their own credibility, has been somewhat lacking, but their own experts have probably advised them, that they are doing the right thing, provided they are paid enough to continue advising them.

Nov 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

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):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>