The BBC, the ABC and the Spectator

I like putting things together when they seem to bind, albeit awkwardly.

First, there has been the release of the damning review of the BBC’s handling of climate change matters:

Christopher Brooker’s  report, The BBC and Climate Change: A Triple Betrayal, shows that the BBC has not only failed in its professional duty to report fully and accurately: it has betrayed its own principles, in three respects:

First, it has betrayed its statutory obligation to be impartial, using the excuse that any dissent from the official orthodoxy was so insignificant that it should just be ignored or made to look ridiculous.

Second, it has betrayed the principles of responsible journalism, by allowing its coverage to become so one-sided that it has too often amounted to no more than propaganda.
Third, it has betrayed the fundamental principles of science, which relies on unrelenting scepticism towards any theory until it can be shown to provide a comprehensive explanation for the observed evidence.

“Above all, the BBC has been guilty of abusing the trust of its audience, and of all those compelled to pay for it. On one of the most important and far-reaching issues of our time, its coverage has been so tendentious that it has given its viewers a picture not just misleading but at times even fraudulent,” Christopher Booker said.

Then over at our ABC is a supposed news story based on a photo montage of Climate Change in Tuvulu, which could easily fit the description of tendentious that gives the viewers a picture not just misleading and possibly worse. (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-09/tuvalu-kiribati-climate-change/3720408?WT.svl=news0)

A three-year study by Australia’s CSIRO (am I the only one who has a seriously sinking – excuse the pun – feeling about this organisation) and the Bureau of Metereology suggests the Pacfic’s small island states can expect rising sea levels, more heavy rainfall events, more very hot days and more cyclones.

I understand the last of these predictions at least is highly disputed.

And there is in the most recent edition of The Spectator a wonderful article by Nils-Axel Morner who has held a number of very senior poitions in Sweden and been president of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution.

His conclusion:

There is a scandal that should be Sealevelgate.  As with the Hockey Stick, there is little real-world data to suport the upward tilt.  It seems that the 2.3mm rise rate has been based on just one tide gauge in Hong Kong (whose record is contradicted by four other nearby tide gauges).

When you exclude unreliable stations, the 68 remaining ones give a present level rise in the order of 1mm a year.

We must learn to take the environmentalists’ predictions [particularly the computer-genenerated ones] with a huge pinch of salt.

I would highly recommend the article.

And where does that leave the ABC’s photo montage; and since when a photo montage constitute headline news?

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to The BBC, the ABC and the Spectator

  1. m0nty

    The Guardian demolished the Spectator piece in no uncertain terms. He’s the new Uri Geller. Check out the rotated graph on page 18 of his pamphlet for rank stupidity.

  2. JC

    Lol… you’re prsenting George Moonbat as the demolisher? hahahhahahahahahahahahahhaha

    M0nster, you’re such an idiot.

    I now take about what I said about your earlier on another thread and would say, you’re Sanchez’s equal in the stupidity stakes.

    You can try as much as you like, but this climate change things is going nowhere anymore. It’s dead in the water.

  3. Jarrah

    “Lol… you’re prsenting George Moonbat as the demolisher? ”

    See, CL? This is ad hominem. Do you get it yet?

  4. C.L.

    Yeah, I do.

    Your definition of an ad hominem is: any wholly personal, play the man critique launched against somebody you support.

  5. ar

    See, CL? This is ad hominem. Do you get it yet?

    There’s ad hominem, and then there’s ad hominem. This was ad hominem. Do you get it?

  6. Louis Hissink

    m0nty,

    Helps to read the explanation with the graph you ridicule – When you do that then rank stupidity ends up elsewhere but not in Morner’s camp.

  7. Louis Hissink

    Tuvulu,

    There was an earlier study done by the scientist wife of a Australian Navy officer some years back that showed no sea live rise. (My source is impeccable) She was, however, upset when her report was doctored by the Tuvulu government for political purposes (extracting money out of the World Bank). At the time it was still possible to download the tidal data via the internet until mysteriously access ceased.

    So the CSIRO’s latest effort isn’t surprising.

  8. dakingisdead

    “Together, these two untampered datasets indicate that global mean sea level trend has remained stable over the entire period 1992-2007,altogether eliminating the apparent 3.2 mm/year rate of sea-level rise arising from the“adjusted””

    This is not the only report that has come to the same conclusion. But then m0nty would probably support the NSW protection of their position and the squelching of their own people’s reporting.

  9. m0nty

    m0nty,

    Helps to read the explanation with the graph you ridicule – When you do that then rank stupidity ends up elsewhere but not in Morner’s camp.

    Maybe he could have gotten away with it if he’d tilted the graph to match the GRACE trendline. But that would still produce an upward trend for the TOPEX/POSEIDON line.

    What he’s saying is that if you tilt the graph to match the averaged-out trendline, the averaged-out trendline looks flat! Thus the trend is flat, QED! Bloody idiot.

  10. bh

    Back in the 80s, I worked for the old State Electricity Commission. There wss a lot of respect for the CSIRO back then.

  11. cohenite

    The response of the Pacific Islands to sea level rise, which has been slight as measured since 1993, see Figures 11 & 12,is complex and can actually involve increases in land size .

  12. johno

    Monty

    Can you tell me why I should believe George Monboit, a leftist alarmist with a long track record of being a gun for hire for anyone who wants to attack sceptics, and Mark Lynas, who is a climate writer and a climate adviser to the President of the Maldives, a country that is trying to scam money from the West over fears of alleged sea levels rises.

    I note that neither Monboit nor Lynas is a scientist, whereas Professor Mörner has a PhD and has published over 500 papers in a 42 year academic career.

    Lynas has a degree in history and politics.

  13. m0nty

    johno

    Can you tell me why I should believe Nils-Axel Morner, a failed diviner, graveyard desecrator and LaRouche associate, none of whose qualifications are functionally related to the subject he’s talking about?

  14. johno

    Back in the 80s, I worked for the old State Electricity Commission. There wss a lot of respect for the CSIRO back then

    .

    The CSIRO is funded by the government so it will do the bidding of the government. If the politicians believe in dangerous man made global warming, then the CSIRO scientist will do their master’s bidding.

    I had some dealings with the CSIRO’s Government Relations branch in the 90s and it was very obvious to me that the CSIRO closely followed the government of the day’s agenda.

  15. johno

    none of whose qualifications are functionally related to the subject he’s talking about

    Are Monbiot and Lynas’ qualififications functionally related to climate or ocean science?

    His qualifications are more closely related to science than either of these two.

  16. Mother Hubbard's Dog

    The totally daft aspect of the ridiculous concern over the supposed risk to Tuvalu caused by global warming is that all its islands are coral reefs or atolls. This means that they will always be just a metre or three above sea level, whatever sea level is. They were a few metres above sea level during the last ice age. Since then, sea levels have risen around 80 metres and the coral has grown with it, so they are still a few metres above sea level. If the sea level rises another metre this century, so will the islands.

  17. m0nty

    Are Monbiot and Lynas’ qualififications functionally related to climate or ocean science?

    His qualifications are more closely related to science than either of these two.

    They don’t need qualifications to point out what a charlatan Morner is.

  18. cohenite

    Nils-Axel Morner, a failed diviner, graveyard desecrator and LaRouche associate,

    And you are a licorice chewing, addle-brained idiot.

  19. m0nty

    I hate licorice! You take that back!

  20. Mother Hubbard's Dog

    Can you tell me why I should believe Nils-Axel Morner, a failed diviner, graveyard desecrator and LaRouche associate, none of whose qualifications are functionally related to the subject he’s talking about?

    m0nty, that’s a bit like saying why should I believe anything an alchemist, Hermeticist and occultist says about physics, optics, or calculus. (Isaac Newton was all of the above.)

  21. m0nty

    LOL, Morner is no Newton.

  22. Bruce

    One of the memes emerging from Climategate 2 along with ‘The Cause’ is ‘BBC impartiality (ho ho)’. Alex Kirby BBC environmental journalist in email 4894:

    “I can well understand your unhappiness at our running the other piece. But we are constantly being savaged by the loonies for not giving them any coverage at all, especially as you say with the COP in the offing, and being the objective impartial (ho ho) BBC that we are, there is an expectation in some quarters that we will every now and then let them say something.”

    I’d add ABC impartiality (oh please give me a break!) except that is purely my invention.

    They’d have a leg to stand on if the science was running their way, but it ain’t.

  23. johno

    that’s a bit like saying why should I believe anything an alchemist, Hermeticist and occultist says about physics, optics, or calculus. (Isaac Newton was all of the above.)

    I agree. Monboit, Lynas and Monty are keen to highlight Morner’s skeletons in the closet rather than focus on the substance of his claims about the rising sea level scam.

    Sounds a bit like trying to shoot the messenger as you don’t have the qualifications to adequately deal with the message.

  24. Mother Hubbard's Dog

    Morner is no Newton.

    True, but it illustrates the point that someone who is a charlatan or completely off the radar in one or more areas may have something worthwhile to say in another area. Morner has a lot of papers to his credit.

  25. m0nty

    What is that anyway, a reverse Godwin? Just as it’s completely ridiculous to make a comparison between a relatively normal politician and Hitler, it’s completely ridiculous to make a comparison between a crank scientist and Newton/Socrates. Perhaps we need a new name for that.

  26. wes george

    As soon as the Coalition comes to power, following the sage lead of Bob Brown, a broad media inquiry into bias at the ABC should be established focusing on the topic of Climate Change. If the ABC is found in noncompliance with its charter then an oversight committee should be establish to ensure that in future debates of national significance all sides are fairly represented.

    It should be made clear to the ABC that they are the state-owned media and as such are required by law to serve ALL the people of Australia equally. They are not a free, privately-owned media and therefore have no right to skew news coverage or editorial content to fit their own cultural/political biases, because they serve the public as a whole and are funded by the public.

    The only legitimate reason to have a state-funded media is to fairly and objectively as possible inform the voting public on current affairs so that the public may be better informed when they go to the polls. To have an ABC which is in practice the ministry of information for one side of politics is not just damaging to the best interests of our nation but a corruption of the whole process of democratic governance on par with ballot box stuffing to steal elections.

    Perhaps the Coalition will be too timid to take on the ABC when they come to power, and who can fault them? Keating repeatedly boasts it was he who cemented the ABC’s position of permanent power as the voice of “progress” and the Left will not allow the ABC to be forced to comply with its original charter without a fight. But it’s a fight worth having if we are to save Australia from an endless stream of Leftist idiocy from taxes on the air we breathe to catastrophic people smuggling policies to covering up of corruption in parliament.

  27. Arnost

    [(Fe,Ni) 3 C]:

    The response of the Pacific Islands to sea level rise, which has been slight as measured since 1993, see Figures 11 & 12,is complex

    It’s driven principally by ENSO. In the case of a La Nina – the water piles up in the west – leading to flooding. But this has always been so.

    John Daly identified this way back – and also happened to have a plot of Tuvalu going back to the 70’s. See this John Daly page.

    And see this for the most current sea level anomalies
    http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70056/IDO70056SLI.pdf

    I questioned BoMs David Jones on this a couple of years ago on Weatherzone… there are other graphs and links to good info at or just prior to this time.

    Linky

  28. daddy dave

    There is a scandal that should be Sealevelgate.

    This is true.
    Few journalists show even the slightest interest in asking tough questions about sea level rise. Like, when’s it supposed to start happening?

  29. Johno

    Wes – I agree that the ABC should be held to account for its biased reporting, but it will not happen so long as Greg Hunt is the Liberal Party’s spokesperson for climate change and Turnbull is responsible for the ABC. They are both warmerists and Turnbull is so far to the left that he probably thinks the ABC is fair and balanced.

    There will need to be a reshuffle before the ABC will be held to account. And the Coalition will need to get some balls.

  30. daddy dave

    Global warming is just one way the ABC is biased.

    As for Turnbull, I’ve reluctantly come to the conclusion that on balance he’s a negative for the Liberals.

  31. daddy dave

    Wes, the danger is that you need to be certain of the outcome before you start such an enquiry. In other words, there has to be a smoking gun that will convince the public. If you had such an enquiry and the results were ambiguous, you lose.

    Right now I’m not seeing a smoking gun. The 4 corners episode on live cattle exports had more potential for that than climate change.

  32. Lazlo

    The key phrase in the CSIRO / BoM nonsense is “can expect”. WTF does that mean? They say: never mind what has actually happened, which we can measure, we “can expect” it to become worse than we thought. It is pure, unadulterated junk science.

  33. JC

    The 4 corners episode on live cattle exports had more potential for that than climate change.

    That was Tony Jones wife that led that mendacious junk. He later raised that particular program on Q&A without offering any conflict disclosure.

    They are so brazen these days that it’s incredible. I guess they know they have the government on their side so they push.

    Funnily enough I don’t think time gets in the way of using old biases against them. In fact it could help in certain ways. That program alone could be the spark needed to use against them.

    They have plenty of evidence.

    Furthermore running an Inquiry is pretty much dependent on the person that heads it, the experts used to give evidence.

    It’s potency would also be hugely dependent on the timing and it would be best to get it in early in the life of a new liberal government when there’s a lot of tailwind and the public forgives any perceived transgressions.

    They don’t have the balls though.

  34. Gowest

    The ABC Jouro’s are in trouble and they know it. Age is catching up to many, and the old reliable of ALP pre-selection looks to be a poisoned chalice. I would expect a shift towards the Libs to get into their good books over the next year or so.
    The ABC will suck up to whomever is going to win the next election, just like they have every other time.

    Fairwork has also gone too far, now they are worse than workchoice ever was, causing real fear in the business community and jobs to leave the country. It seems that Business will be forced to go back to our past when “private security” was employed to break strike pickets, because the police wont. A growth business for bikers perhaps?

  35. A growth business for bikers perhaps?

    More like something to keep the Army busy while it waits for the war against Iran.

  36. David Palmer

    What do people on this thread think about the BoM continuing to quote temperatures anomalies against the 1961 to 1990 average?

    Is this just a deliberate attempt to hide the fact that the rise in temperature has stalled since the end of the 1990’s?

  37. Boris

    I think news ogranisations are in a difficult position here. If 95% of scientific publications say ‘A’, news ogranisations will report it with the same proportion. Anything else will be attacked as skewed, and rightly so.

    This does not mean they are correct, but they are not the source of this bias.

  38. Dennis Kolberg

    Google ” BBC Climate Change superannuation” and see why the BBC can’t stop bleating climate change.

    To measure a 2mm rise in sea levels, the best way is to use 14,000 dipsticks.

Comments are closed.