Donal Blaney highlights a brave stance being taken by the editor Newsnight, Peter Barron. He has hit out at the BBC plans to devote a whole day to campaigning on climate change. Apparently there will be a PLANET RELIEF DAY. The Mail reports his views HERE. He says: "People are understandably interested in this, but it is absolutely not the BBC's job to save the planet. There are a lot of people who think that, but it must be stopped." In addition, Peter Horrocks, head of television news, warned that the corporation should not be influencing people. He said: "We should be giving people information, not leading them." The BBC said last night the aim of Planet Relief is to debate the issue and not campaign on a single view. Well if that's the case, why do they have Ricky Gervais and Jonathan Ross fronting the whole thing? And why call it PLANET RELIEF?
Donal says he looks forward to Nigel Lawson getting equal time to put forward his arguments on this issue, and that pigs might fly. I'm sure they'll be offsetting their carbon trotter print...
47 comments:
The BBC's advertising of all forms digital - DAB radio, Digital set top boxes for its digital channels, plus the use of PC's to access its output have all contributed to a substantial increase in domestic electricity use.
The BBC is one of the biggest influences over increased energy use, and in therefore in their own eyes, global warming.
They are hippocrates of the first order.
Its all very well posting the same story over and over again. (I don't mean you, Iain, I mean all of us.)
Thre is more evidence for bias at the BBC than there is for climate change being a product of human activity.
Its about time we got together and challenged the BBC with a co-ordinated campaign. A campaign whose aims, among other things, was to have a public enquiry and to get the issue debated in Parliament.
The BBC is not just another broadcaster, it is a public broadcaster with a clearly defined remit, funded by a poll tax.
Over the last decade it has been subverted by individuals with a very clearly defined political agenda, who also, apparently, do not understand the concept of telling the truth.
The sheer arrogance of people in the corporation should be addressed, as should its entire recruitment programme. Bias is apparent everywhere, but it is the sin of omission, or the sin of choice, as evidenced by a story running on News 24 recently about the progress of a horrifically injured Palesinian child, (a victim of the Israele-Palestine conflict). No reason not to run the story, but it was a forgone conclusion that, although parelell stories about Jewish children could have been cited, they were not. The scandal being that that editorial decision has been scandalously predictable for some time, and is a clear indication, as any can be, that the BBC has an anti-Israel editorial stance.
What can be done?
I really think it is about time that all those people who regularly (including me) knock the BBC should take action, even to the point of public protests in order to make our position clear.
If anyone else is interested, feel free to email me.
The BBC are wrong, but it's also wrong to talk about 'debating the issue'. The reality and effects of climate change are not subjects for debate. They are scientific matters. How we respond may be political, but the facts themselves are beyond the competence of politicians. The more we talk about 'debating' global warming, the less we shall understand.
Ricky Garvais should be very careful. After his atrocious showing at the recent Wembley all day concert on all day on the BBC, he is serious danger of losing his fan base.
As for the over rated and over paid (on licence payers money!) WOSS, God Help the World!
If the world can be saved by profanities these two will undoubtably save it!
I have no doubt Al Gore will be given a special plug! Gordon Brown will come and a do a 'rap' on how many millions and billions he has, personally, put into saving the 'planet' and The new english pope. POPE BLIAR the FIRST will no doubt be invited, with Paddy Ashdown for a 'chat' with Wossy.
The backdrop will be of Cameron riding his bike with a Rolls Royce following him interchanged with John Redwood attempting to sing the Welsh National Anthem!
Sir Elton John will sing Candle in the Wind with words especially written to save the world!
Sir Cliff Richard will sing Miss you Nights with a rousing chorus of The Forever Young Ones,and dear old Vera Lynn will sing 'White cliffs of Dover'
The programme will end with Nelson Mandella (who else?) who will dance to african drums as the back drop sees the sun going down!!
Woss ends the show/programme/event with the immortal words 'The world is saved' 'Bless the BBC' and the lights go out on a memorable night.
The vast, vast majority of scientists believe that global warming is happening.
Fair and balanced doesn't mean giving time to some nutter to present their argument, especially someone such as Lawson who has no qualification to talk about a complex scientific matter.
Why not invite flat-earthers on as well?
Isn't he just so right - the BBC should not be following this pseudo political agenda.
It's the BBC John Birt narrative system at work.... which says 'Don't confuse us with evidence or ideas. We've already made up our minds.'
The BBC are so sure of their superior status that they have narratives for what will happen as well as for what is happening and for what has happened.
The ancient Greeks also had a narrative which could well apply to the BBC - 'hubris is followed by nemesis'.
I pity the poor guy who's trying to stop it all - Peter Barron. His career will be mincemeat in 5 seconds.
It's worth noting that the "Geat Global Warming Swindle" has been largely debunked since it was broadcast with much of the evidence in the show proved to be wrong or to have been used very selectively.
As for Nigel Lawson, what are his scientific qualifications ?
Given their general uselessness, I suggest we give the high management of the BBC their own one-day special, and call it HAND RELIEF.
Strapworld,
Don't forget, there will be a docu-insert about how orthodox Jews have TWO dishwashers, the bastards. Obviously they are not only at the forefront of global warming, but global dishwashing as well.
Flat earthers, sir,should not be classed as 'Nutters' that is unfair.
The 'vast,vast majority' of scientists you refer to,EZRA,you will find, if you research, are all in establishments and fields that rely on funding from the very organisations that benefit from the biggest scare story since EUGENICS spread across the globe!
When NASA gets its facts wrong and has to admit the hottest years were in the thirties and not recently! When scientific evidence proves the earth was hotter some 600 years ago..it should make you think a little.
Politicians need fear to keep the people 'down' this is the latest in a long list of scares!!
winkled weasel..
At least they are Clean bastards!!
One always knows their plates are well and truly clean.
Theodore John Kaczynski also known as the Unabomber,made many of the points NOW being discussed by global warming when he published his 1995 Manifesto.
He was wrong to bomb people,but he knew where things were heading.
Worth reading again.
Great, another chance for Ricky Gervais to die on his arse again.
If a genuine debate is wanted, then don't get Nigel Lawson: he is not a climatologist. Get Bjorn Lomborg to put the point of view that it's happening but we should just cope with it, and get a climatologist who agrees with the sunspot theory to put that point. But don't let viewers get the impression that scientific opinion is evenly divided.
Ezra the vast, vast majority of scientists believed that we were entering an Ice Age in the seventies - they were wrong!
I trust the BBC will have a representative from the Institute of Mathematical Physics at Braunschweig, who state that the whole principle of greenhouse gases is a fictitious mechanism, disproved by the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, "nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such a mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation", and "there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet".
There may well be a political consensus, there isn't a scientific one.
I am sick to death of all broadcasting media who use 'personalities' to front this kind of thing, or charities, or favourite landscapes, or 'I can do Brain Surgery in 3 Days' programmes.
daily referendum - there has rarely be a consensus as strong as the one over global warming.
Giving Nigel Lawson a public platform to give his opinion on a scientific matter makes no more sense than asking a badger to play a didgeridoo. And I wouldn't expect that on Newsnight either.
The Great Global Warming Swindle was completely ignored by MSM , and claims were therefore never "largely debunked"..
Scientific opinion will never truly be divided whilst research funding awarded to man made global warming believers outstrips that available to the agnostic community by a huge factor. (funny how the man made proviso is deliberately left out when insults about flat earthers are bandied about)
I suspect Nigel Lawson's scientific qualifications are no less than Al Gore's. (and the BBC would never question any that hypocrite's claims)
In any case it is not, I suggest, the remit of a public funded broadcaster to close down any sort of meaningful discussion and present their views as gospel.
teesbridge&weasel
you both gave me a really good laugh
"hand relief"
and orthodox jewish dishwashing.
Much needed as I sit hunkered down in my west london bunker listening to whistles and horns, celebrating diversity and multiculturalism.
Well said Peter. Neither is it the BBC’s job to help “children in need.”
Here's science that albeeb will not cover
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Falsification_of_CO2.pdf
and
http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge219.html#dysonf
Man made global warming is now an industry with huge vested interests.
Governments can use it to increase taxes; lefties and Trots can use it to attack capital creation; universities and academics get loads of grants and work; businesses get to build and make new things that are "better" than old things.
Why does anybody believe climate change forecasts of 60-100 years out when they cannot get the weather forecast right any more than 3 days ahead?
Wasn't Nigel Lawson involved with government investigations into global warming 20 years ago, when they wanted to expand nuclear power? He may not have "scientific" qualifications, but he has considerable experience/knowledge in this field.
Although, a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, may not be an obvious credible Climate Change expert. And the left(BBC) will discredit him too easily.
Use of scientists would clearly be preferable.
The latest ICM poll gives Labour a 96 seat majority.
Funny - not seen much about it on here?
anonymous 2.25pm
When, dear one, was that poll conducted?
I think you will not be gloating by the time the next polls are published. Even those close to your party will report a Conservative lead!
Brown Bounce? back into the mire dear!
Anonymous said...
The latest ICM poll gives Labour a 96 seat majority.
Funny - not seen much about it on here?
August 27, 2007 2:25 PM
Really! I wonder how this pole was constructed, who responded and how many don't knows there were?
Another contrived piece of garbage to try and convince people of how popular Brown is.
Nigel Lawson's interesting perspective on GW is not questioning of the science but does question whether or not investing billions (trillions?) into reducing CO2 emissions is the optimum response. The main alternative being argued for by Lord Lawson is adaptation (along with targeted support and assistance to those areas most deleteriously effected by GW).
The GW debate aside, what is wrong with programmers? Hardly anyone ever wants any subject rammed down our throats for a whole day.
What has happened to variation on TV? We get reality shows now going out every night for a fortnight. Does everything have to be over-exposed nowadays? Maybe that's the way they guarantee we are faddish - ram something down our necks so we get bored quick and want the next dose of the mediocre.
how will we tell the difference from a normal BBC broacast?
Sleaze investigation over Muslim funds for Labour
The Electoral Commission is investigating one of Labour's donors
Labour is involved in a new "sleaze" probe it has emerged.
It followed allegations that a Muslim businessman used a "front" organisation for secret donations.
The Electoral Commission confirmed it is investigating a group called the Muslim Friends of Labour, which gave the party £100,000 a month between April and June.
It is the first such inquiry since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister in June.
Glasgow-based Imran Khand is alleged to have injected large sums into the organisation. But as his cash did not go direct to Labour, his identity remained secret.
Until recently the organisation donated only small amounts, but it is now the party's second biggest non-union donor.
The probe comes hot on the heels of the ending of the "cash for peerages" inquiry, which saw Tony Blair questioned three times over claims that major donors were promised knighthoods.
The Muslim Friends of Labour - registered to a PO box in South London - is an "unincorporated" association, which it means it does not have to identify people who give it money. But the commission is investigating its status amid allegations that it is actually a members' association, made up "wholly or mainly" of members of a political party.
If so, it would be breaking the law by failing to disclose the details of any donor of more than £5,000.
Labour MPs have repeatedly condemned Tories for accepting cash from the Midlands Industrial Council, another unincorporated association.
A Labour spokesman said: "MFL agreed to register with the Electoral Commission as a matter of best practice.
"It was able to assure the Labour Party that all donations received by it had come from permissible donors."
Mr Khand could not be contacted.
wytj
Oh dear!,
The global warming nutters are making excuses again? Let me put this as simply as I can for you,
There is NO global warming! The planet has been cooling since 1998 AND the figures the lobby has been using are wrong because putting temperature sensors in a city(where most sensors are put) Is going to give data that is higher than it should be, this is known as the heat island effect.
People like Ezra and norfolk blogger cannot debate points or answer in a logical way they have to throw insults! WHY? are these people scientists or have they just swallowed the propaganda that Al(grofaz)Gore spews out? do they even understand science and independent verification? my guess is that the vast majority of pro global warming people could not even tell you the % of CO2 in the atmosphere and what % of that is manmade! As for "concensus" Its not long ago that there was a concensus among scientists that CHOLERA was caused by bad smells! Just because the pro global warming scientists who have had money thrown at them (as long as they stick to the party line of course) have hogged all the media airtime does not mean that there arn't many scientists who are able to prove that the CO2 theory is rubbish! The many scientists who doubt the AGW theory have been silenced and insulted and denied funding so instead of making ignorant and stupid statements like "the vast,vast majority" why don't you find out both sides of the debate?
The moral of this is, stop running off at the mouth BEFORE you know the full facts! Instead of listening to AL(grofaz)GORE go out and take the time to learn the facts in an independent way! IF you do I think that you will be very surprised!
aThe BBC is infested with luvvies and overgrown student activists and people a vegan bookshop would look twice at. The corporation needs to show some guts and appoint the blood-spittingest, lefty-hatingist special Commissioner with the power to sack whichever employees he thinks aren't pulling their weight and expose those who use the license payer's cash to push the Islamo-Leftist, Green, anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Military, anti-Monarchy anti-Capitalist Dave Spart-of-Tufnell-Park agenda. Start with the clown who, from the BBC's IP address, accessed the Wikipedia article on Hezbollah and changed 'terrorist' to 'freedom fighter'. The Beeb is broken.
WW - The bastards! The Jews aren't just richer than anyone else, and secretly rule the world, but now they've got the cleanest dishes! It wouldn't surprise me to hear they had two microwaves as well. It makes me sick!
WW - if you want to see intelligent, robust protests about the Beeb, go to http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com Lots of intelligent, literate, well-reasoned protest and the BBC is well aware of them and tries arguing with them sometimes. Of course, they haven't got a case.
Re the mythical "global warming" ruse, the South Sea Bubble des nos jours, I see the sun managed to clear out the Ice Age several millennia ago without the help of mankind, who hadn't evolved yet.
Ezra,
I met this bloke with a didgeridoo and he was playing Dancing Queen on it. I thought, "That's Aboriginal."
Just so people don't think you are the only comedian on here.
Geezer
The importance of Nigel Lawson to the Global Warming story is not related to the science of it all. Nigel Lawson has explained how Margaret Thatcher saw political merit in encouraging the Global Warming debate, as a way of weaning the British away from their comfortable dependence on politically unstable fossil fuel sources (Coal and Oil) and encourage them to back the nuclear option.
From this, the various committees were established, and the funds flowed. The rest, as they say, is history (if not science!)
As I understand it:
1) The evidence for climate change (i.e. the globe is getting warmer) has widespread, almost universal, scientific support.
2) However, the evidence that the changes we observe are man-made is much more controversial.
3) Those who wish governments to invest heavily in windmills, etc., tend to emphasise point 1), gloss over point 2) and label those who disagree with them 'climate change deniers.'
4) The same people are often to be found in opposition to nuclear energy, even though the use of nuclear energy is probably the best way to cut down on carbon emissions.
5) All this goes over the heads of the people who work in the BBC, very few of whom are scientists or read anything other than The Guardian or The Independent.
So, 'global warming' is now showbiz. Absolutely bleeding knockout.
Next up 'Diana - the Musical'.
Followed by 'Peak Oil - the ballet'
These guys at the BBC are completely off the planet. Why do they think we need this pap?
No wonder ratings are plummeting. Time for a serious rethink about programming and culling of a few of these cretins - probably about fifty or so.
I'm afraid any meaningful scientific debate on Global warming is irrelevant as the greens/liberals/media/polititians have made it impossible.
IMHO the question to ask is why. For the greens and liberals is obvious-they are idiots. I say this because they cant embrace the ultimate logic of their stance. (Supposedly)We are the cause of global warming therefore less people=better world. Shouldnt they be campagning for sterilisation and euthanasia on a global scale to combat the problem. Anything else is surely rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
My curiosity are the motives of the media and western politicians. For them Global warming represents a wonderfully PC way of attacking China and to some extent India. These are fast growing economies that are a huge threat to the interests of the West and a way has to be found of neutralising that threat. Enter the Global warming lobby who can tell China its in the interests of rhe whole world that they slow down.
To back up trumpeter's point on Nuclear power:
The following is taken from the NEI (Nuclear Energy Institute) Website:
An International Energy Agency (IEA) analysis found that nuclear power’s life-cycle emissions range from 2 to 59 gram-equivalents of carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour. Only hydropower’s range ranked lower, at 2 to 48 grams of carbon dioxide-equivalents per kilowatt-hour. Nuclear energy’s life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions are lower than wind (7 to 124 grams of carbon dioxide-equivalents) and solar photovoltaic (13 to 731 grams of carbon dioxide-equivalents), according to the agency. The life-cycle emissions from natural gas-fired plants ranged from 389 to 511 grams of carbon dioxide-equivalents per kilowatt-hour.
Why can the BBC not pay their way, rather than through the BBC license tax?
As it is pointed out on Guido's blog on the labour donations from Muslims.
This is a story that could have legs.
'angry soldier' makes the point that Brown seen accepting money from Muslims and not giving our troops the proper equiptment to fight...the muslims..is a terrible indictment on the Labour Party.
I do hope the tories follow this story with energy!
Just think Mr Cameron if it was you accepting such..what would the reaction of the Labour Lot be? exactly! so please give them as good, if not better, treatment!
This is a shocker.
This is the BBC and here is your favourite, cuddly arms outstretched, Andrew MARR.
THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE!
Just to give you a bit of a clue as to what we're up against I'd like to introduce you to the most Orwellian declaration of intent that I have ever read in a mainstream British newspaper.
The journalist who wrote what you are about to read, felt secure enough in his own elite, establishment role to lay his totalitarian beliefs on the line in his own column and, as the newspaper's editor and owners were content to see such material published, one must presume that they also were not averse to seeing such a Brave New World imposed upon the dumb, British herd.
This is what was said:
"Widespread and vigorous miscegenation (race mixing)... is the best answer...
Teachers are the most effective anti-racist campaigners in the country, this means more than education in other religions, it means a form of political education. Only people who understand the economic forces changing their world, threatening them... have a chance of being immune to the old tribal chants.
And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress...
I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good.
Stamp hard on certain 'natural' beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off...
A new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too."
When I read this article I felt the hairs stand up on the back of my neck.
1984? Animal Farm? We had arrived, we were there already. It wasn't paranoia after all, it was very, very real.
It didn't matter what we did, it didn't matter what we said, it didn't matter what we wanted, it didn't matter how we voted, the same old dark manipulators would always be in charge and we better start getting used to it, or else.
The liberal commissar responsible for the casual sabre rattle recorded above, was none other than that most languid Master of political ceremonies, Andrew Marr, top bloke at the BBC and one of the most powerful political journalists of the age.
The chattering classes have every bit as much of a hold over our lives as the politicians do.
They hand our opinions to us on a plate, they shape our beliefs and attitudes. Everything the media throws at us, from cradle to grave, affects the way we behave and think.
Shiny eyed zealots such as Andrew Marr and Tony Blair do not care what we want or feel, they care only for the promised land that their wisdom, their insight and their determination will lead us on to in the future.
So now you know.
Now you know what THEY have been doing all this time.
Now you know what THEY have been thinking all this time.
Now you know what THEY are still doing and thinking and will carry on doing and thinking until THEY are stopped.
And they won't stop, you know.
They won't, all of a sudden, come to their senses. They won't change their minds and have some kind of Damascene conversion when they realise what terrible damage their idiot, schoolboy Bolshevism has done to us.
You see, we don't count, they do. We don't know, they do. It'll be good for us in the long run, you see.
We don't seem to have realised that "repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good". We don't seem to be aware that if evangelistic upper-crust brainboxes like Marr and Blair "stamp hard on certain natural beliefs for long enough" and "kill them off", why, we'll all live happily ever after in their global, elite-run Wonderland!
That's us Andrew Marr is talking about, folks.
The British people.
Actually, as Marr is Scottish and Tony B is Scots-Irish, I reckon their desire to "coerce", "repress" "civilise" and "miscegenate" is aimed pretty exclusively at the English.
Which is why this website is titled as it is.
This is Andrew Marr:
Anonymous 8:56 PM
"THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE!.... etc etc.. ad nauseum"
What a load of incoherent garbage.
Can anyone make sense of it?
OK here is my real problem with this crap.
Within the last month I have watched a article on the local BBC news program showing a father and son team taking good in date food from bins outside a supermarket. This has been going on in the States for a while and they even have a name for it ( was given Forgot)
My problem is that I have to put the last crumb in a stinking recycle brown bin even with a bio Bag, whilst these supermarkets throw everything out in their packaging, because they have paid a landfill TAX.
Its bloody stupid.
In the USA NPR (National Public Radio) sponsered an Intelligence Squared debate - 'Global Warming is not a Crisis'.
If the BBC are not actively pushing one view, perhaps they could do something similar?
Judith
Do you have a reference for the comments from IMaP in Braunschweig? It looks well worth following up.
So Peter Barron
Newsnight covers Football ?
So Michael Crick won't be touring with the world with the World Cup Team again ? now Paxo is so worried about the Newsnight funds and cutbacks and the Helicopter will be returned,and the taxis will stop ???
I very much doubt it -good try though
Nice to read in Private Eye that there was an 'apology' from the BBC after Ian Dale had complained about biased broadcast news.
Post a Comment