Wednesday, November 14, 2007
BBC LIVES DOWN TO MY EXPECTATIONS
It seems my prediction that the chance of the BBC reporting the ocean microbe CO2 hoax being greatly improved by being proven untrue has turned out to be on the money. This from David Thorpe's blog
I was interviewed for BBC World Service's Newshour last night which you can listen to for a while on their website (the 20.00 hrs edition, about 20 minutes into the programme).
He then follows up with this
Which leaves some room for enquiry as to whom the "prominent environmentalist" is who did the heavy lifting in this conspiracy, by actually knowing enough science to write it. I would like to put forward a couple of runners.
George Moonbat, like him, is a Guardian journalist & makes considerable play of his ability to at least read scientific reports & pontificate on them.
Alan Thorpe the head of the NERC (government's science grant giving body). He has been prominent, in the same Guardian, promising to debate with sceptics in print or online but reticently declined to answer when one of the world's most prominent sceptics took up the challenge. It would certainly be improper of the head of a serious scientific body to get involved in such a hoax but arguably not much moreso than for a scientist duty bound to distribute scientific grants impartially taking sides in the subject under research. Thorpe is not a particularly common name. I should say that David has denied any connection with him & somewhat less credibly, ever having heard of this prominent alarmist. Alan Thorpe declined to answer my email.
I was interviewed for BBC World Service's Newshour last night which you can listen to for a while on their website (the 20.00 hrs edition, about 20 minutes into the programme).
He then follows up with this
1. I wish the sceptics would spend more time looking at the evidence for global warming and not waste their time with conspiracy theories: there aren't any.The meaning of the word "irony" seems to be unknown to this ass as indeed is the definition of "conspiracy".
2. The writer of the hoax is anonymous because we may be thinking of another. It wouldn't have my name on it.
Which leaves some room for enquiry as to whom the "prominent environmentalist" is who did the heavy lifting in this conspiracy, by actually knowing enough science to write it. I would like to put forward a couple of runners.
George Moonbat, like him, is a Guardian journalist & makes considerable play of his ability to at least read scientific reports & pontificate on them.
Alan Thorpe the head of the NERC (government's science grant giving body). He has been prominent, in the same Guardian, promising to debate with sceptics in print or online but reticently declined to answer when one of the world's most prominent sceptics took up the challenge. It would certainly be improper of the head of a serious scientific body to get involved in such a hoax but arguably not much moreso than for a scientist duty bound to distribute scientific grants impartially taking sides in the subject under research. Thorpe is not a particularly common name. I should say that David has denied any connection with him & somewhat less credibly, ever having heard of this prominent alarmist. Alan Thorpe declined to answer my email.
Comments:
<< Home
Indeed a fine example of BBC impartiality. They asked for whistleblowers on sceptical science being censored & "only" got 4, not counting 3 others which were already known & undeniable & therefore should be ignored
1. "I wish the sceptics would spend more time looking at the evidence for global warming and not waste their time with conspiracy theories: there aren't any."
I wish David Thorpe would stop lying through his teeth to reporters and spend more time studying - rather than blithely ignoring - all of the scientific facts and evidence totally contradicting his claims of catastrophic "global warming" instead of wasting time conspiring with anonymous individuals in secret in creating elaborate hoaxes in a vain, dishonest and malicious effort to try and discredit people he and his ecological-fascist friends of Big Government disagree with.
"...Reuters ran with the headline "Hoax Bacteria Study Tricks Climate Skeptics."
I suppose the headline, "Four Climate Skeptics Fooled by Elaborate Hoax Attempt; Three Briefly" didn't appeal to them.
No point in wasting good Reuters ink covering the fact that the vast majority of the skeptics who received copies of the hoax study didn't fall for it. (Look at the obviously fake graphs on the study and you'll see one reason why.)
"It's amazing how little it takes to warrant a wire story on Reuters these days."
http://www.nationalcenter.org/2007/11/fake-global-warming-study-fools-four.html
I wish David Thorpe would stop lying through his teeth to reporters and spend more time studying - rather than blithely ignoring - all of the scientific facts and evidence totally contradicting his claims of catastrophic "global warming" instead of wasting time conspiring with anonymous individuals in secret in creating elaborate hoaxes in a vain, dishonest and malicious effort to try and discredit people he and his ecological-fascist friends of Big Government disagree with.
"...Reuters ran with the headline "Hoax Bacteria Study Tricks Climate Skeptics."
I suppose the headline, "Four Climate Skeptics Fooled by Elaborate Hoax Attempt; Three Briefly" didn't appeal to them.
No point in wasting good Reuters ink covering the fact that the vast majority of the skeptics who received copies of the hoax study didn't fall for it. (Look at the obviously fake graphs on the study and you'll see one reason why.)
"It's amazing how little it takes to warrant a wire story on Reuters these days."
http://www.nationalcenter.org/2007/11/fake-global-warming-study-fools-four.html
# posted by 
: November 15, 2007
: November 15, 2007
Roy Spencer's comment.
November 10, 2007 - 05:29 ET by danbo
"An anonymous Brit has now admitted in a brief interview that he wrote the fake global warming research paper which is claimed to have fooled some of us "global warming skeptics". His stated purpose was to "expose the credulity and scientific illiteracy of many of the people who call themselves climate sceptics".
"I would argue that he has done just the opposite.
"Several of us (scientists and non-scientists alike) were able, within a matter of seconds to minutes, to identify the paper as a fake. We then spread the word, warning others of the hoax.
"Therefore, we showed that we do not, as the hoaxer claims, "believe almost anything if it lends support to their position". We did exactly the opposite.
"In contrast, the hoaxer himself shows that he continues to believe in urban legends. To the inteviewer's question: "Do you think humanity is to blame for the current observed warming?", the hoaxer replied, "Yes. The science could scarcely be clearer".
"This myth continues despite the fact that there have been NO scientific papers published with evidence that our current warmth is not due to natural climate variability, e.g., a small change in cloudiness, or precipitation efficiency, or general circulation of the atmosphere, or a variety of other possible explanations that do not involve manmade greenhouse gas emissions.
"Thus, I would say that not only did the hoaxer's attempt fail, he would do well to be a little more discerning about scientific claims from politicians and actors.
-Roy W. Spencer
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/amy-ridenour/2007/11/09/fake-global-warming-study-fools-four-reuters-runs-wire-story
Post a Comment
November 10, 2007 - 05:29 ET by danbo
"An anonymous Brit has now admitted in a brief interview that he wrote the fake global warming research paper which is claimed to have fooled some of us "global warming skeptics". His stated purpose was to "expose the credulity and scientific illiteracy of many of the people who call themselves climate sceptics".
"I would argue that he has done just the opposite.
"Several of us (scientists and non-scientists alike) were able, within a matter of seconds to minutes, to identify the paper as a fake. We then spread the word, warning others of the hoax.
"Therefore, we showed that we do not, as the hoaxer claims, "believe almost anything if it lends support to their position". We did exactly the opposite.
"In contrast, the hoaxer himself shows that he continues to believe in urban legends. To the inteviewer's question: "Do you think humanity is to blame for the current observed warming?", the hoaxer replied, "Yes. The science could scarcely be clearer".
"This myth continues despite the fact that there have been NO scientific papers published with evidence that our current warmth is not due to natural climate variability, e.g., a small change in cloudiness, or precipitation efficiency, or general circulation of the atmosphere, or a variety of other possible explanations that do not involve manmade greenhouse gas emissions.
"Thus, I would say that not only did the hoaxer's attempt fail, he would do well to be a little more discerning about scientific claims from politicians and actors.
-Roy W. Spencer
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/amy-ridenour/2007/11/09/fake-global-warming-study-fools-four-reuters-runs-wire-story
# posted by : November 15, 2007
: November 15, 2007 << Home
