BBC propaganda machine moves into overdrive on MET’s cooler forecast

Posted: January 14, 2013 by tallbloke in alarmism, media, Politics, propaganda

bbc_logo1The ‘Today’ news programme dealt with the talkshop revelations about the MET Offices new cooler decadal forecast in tones insufficiently reverent to the ears of high priestess of global warming, Julia Slingo, the BBC enviro-wonks have been working overtime to redress the problem. First, David Shukman deliberately mislead the public with his numbers only write-up on the sci-environment section, giving the impression 50 years worth of warming was going to happen in the next 5. Showing the graphs would have made it too easy for the public to see he was talking bollocks.



But the BBC was ignominiously obliged to correct the article a day later, and the ruse failed.

They then interviewed Julia Slingo on their ‘Feedback’ programme and let her explain how ‘Today’ had failed to stay ‘on message’. Then to ram it home, they used an old ploy. This consisted of offering some ‘listeners’ a chance to express their displeasure and accuse ‘Today’ of getting the story wrong.

But these weren’t just ordinary R4 listeners. No. They were pro AGW activists, one of whom, Hilary Gander, correctly declared herself as such when she rang the BBC to vent her spleen about the ‘Today’ report. But the BBC edited out hr self introduction to give other listeners the impression they were hearing the viewpoint of ‘an ordinary member of the public’.

Dressing activists in false flags is of course second nature to the BBC since the 2006 ’28gate’ event where they touted climate activists as ‘climate experts’ and subsequently spent 150k on lawyers to try to keep their real identities out of the public eye.

This is fraudulent, dishonest, and in breach of the BBC’s own charter on unbiased and open reporting. Not that they worry over-much about that when the cause of climate alarmism is at stake. Pravda is a paragon of unbiased reporting virtue in comparison these days. It certainly tells it like it is concerning ‘global warming’.

Head of news Helen Boaden has to go.

  1. Barry Woods says:

    the other ‘listener’ is a board member “Ruth Jarman” of Christian Ecology link, Operation Noah, and a quick Google will find her at climate camp, Copenhagen and handing in a protest letter to Downing Street, following yes, you guessed it a Campaign Against Climate Change March .. ( a high profile climate activist going back over a decade)

    Additionally the Campaign Against climate change, organised a petition lobbying George Entwhistle (BBC DG last year) worrying about the BBC’s climate change reporting..

    Perhaps she also told the BBC, who she was ( I BET she did),but out of hundreds of listeners that called in, just these 2 got to’feedback’ and lob softball questions to Julia Slingo..

    Roger Harrabin would have made mincemeat of Julia (ie 20 years slowdown, questions about models.)

    or questions why do you label the new models hindcast output, as ‘previous predictions’ which is where the story started..

    Roger did well on the today program, only quibble a causal listener, might not realize that a future anomaly of ~0.43C is pretty much where we are at now (average)

  2. Barry Woods says:

    Just spent ten minutes, googling gives the following

    Mission Earth: A Christian Response to Climate Change – Speaker Ruth Jarman – Director Operation Noah

    At Copenhagen

    Downing Street: handing in a letter Campaign Against Climate Change march

    Downing St another letter

    At Climate Camp – Dirty Coal



    National Climate Demo -Speaker: Ruth Jarman for Christian Ecology Link (who held a child in one hand and a polar bear in the other!),

    campaigning as far back as 2003

  3. vukcevic says:

    Latest global temperature forecast from the MetOffice is exceptionally unambiguous

  4. tallbloke says:

    You don’t need a thirty million pound computer for that Vuk. A four year old with a blue felt tip pen is sufficient. 😉

  5. michael hart says:

    The BBC practices a strange form of National-Masochism. Roger Harrabin has just posted this report of John Gummer’s “Globe Group”, a clade of parliamentarians gathering in London to rally the troops about how much legislative progress is being, and will be made, against carbon dioxide.

    Plenty of platitudes on parade from Gummer like
    “The tide is beginning to turn decisively on tackling climate change, the defining material
    challenge of this century”, and
    “This is a game-changing development …taking place across each and every continent.”

    Thing is, if I had been able to comment, I might have nearly congratulated Harrabin for almost telling the congregation some of the home truths in terms they may not want to hear. I wouldn’t call it balanced but he finished with a cruel blow:
    “But if they need a reality check, they might turn to a recent report from US think-tank World
    Resources Institute. It reveals plans for 1,199 power stations fuelled by coal.”
    Masochism in spades for those wishing to control global CO2 emissions in the windmills of their minds.

    How many of these parliamentarians posses high-school mathematics, I wonder? Politicians are generally not stupid. Not at all. But how do they marry temperatures that refuse to rise (as now admitted by the Met Office), carbon dioxide emissions that refuse to lie down (sordid details in the report), and their impotence to do anything but inflict financial damage on the UK economy and hypothermia on it’s most vulnerable citizens?

  6. michael hart says:

    “You don’t need a thirty million pound computer for that Vuk. A four year old with a blue felt tip pen is sufficient.”

    -And a four year should have learned to not try swallowing everything they get to play around with… 🙂

  7. Stephen Richards says:

    vukcevic says:

    January 14, 2013 at 11:09 pm

    Latest global temperature forecast from the MetOffice is exceptionally unambiguous

    Ambiguous may not be the best word here, confused perhaps :))

  8. hro001 says:

    So, in effect, the only “public” voices the BBC chose to air were those of known activists. You know, if I had a suspicious mind (which, as everyone knows, I do not, of course!) I might be inclined to wonder who exactly called whom?!

    I know it happens over here at the CBC that sometimes a program producer will initiate a call to someone they want to hear from on air! Then they can control (and edit?!) the conversation.

    Of course, the BBC could easily put to rest the questions of one who might have a suspicious mind by making all the responses available in raw form.

    Such proactive behaviour on their part might go someway towards beginning to restore the trust and credibility they long ago lost when it comes to reporting on matters pertaining to climate change (amongst others).

  9. tallbloke says:

    I’ve accidentally deleted a comment from hro001 – apologies, please resubmit it.

  10. oldbrew says:

    The BBC is becoming more and more like Orwell’s Ministry of Truth. Quoting from Wikipedia:

    ‘For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate.’

    I rest my case.

  11. vukcevic says:

    People working for BBC weather and Met Office are not all blind to what is going on, but they have to follow the official mantra ‘global warming’.
    Occasionally they have an honest appraisal of causes, as I show here:
    No mention of the GHG or AGW.

  12. Barry Woods says:

    the really sad thing is – The activists BOTH probably told the BBC who they were (Hilary certainly did)

    yet the BBC CUT it out..

    So 2 Campaign Against Climate Change Marchers, (both founder members of activists groups) get to be ‘listeners’ complaining about the BBC’s reporting of climate change..

    and then soft questions get lobbed at Slingo..

    The CaCC even organised a petition, delivered to the BBC DG Entwhistle last September complaining about the BBC’s reporting of climate change (so a lobbyist group, trying to sway the BBC, get the only public feedback.

    The CaCC organised its followers to talk to feedback: (also via twitter)

    CaCC: “On the positive side, it shows that listener complaints can have an impact. Thanks to everyone who contacted the BBC!”

    CaCC Petition:

    And the CACC organise their follower to bombard the BBC with complaints:

    CaCC: “Join us again by raising your voice against Humphry’s misleading statements by completing the BBC complaints form, here

    as you can imagine, this group and other like them Greenpeace, Carbon Brief) have been doing this for years, raising press complaints, etc and totally gaming the system.

    The CaCC, refer to the Carbon Brief, for many examples of bad BBC reporting, in the links above ( editor Christian Hunt is ex Greenpeace, led the BP campaign, campaigned against coal, and was arrested on the roof of the Houses of Commons a little while back, and involved in the Zero Carbon Britain report.. Also a co-director of the PIRC (along with Dr Adam Corner – Guardian, PIRC inspired former PIRC director Franny Armstrong, Age of Stupid, to start 10:10 ) )

    The Carbon Brief is a wholey funded project of the media arm of the European Climate Foundation, lobby (hard) for 95% reduction of CO2 in Europe by 2050.. as Christian want that to happen by 2030 (zero carbon 30 report) he seems a safe pair of editorial hands..
    all the above is just a mere google away.

    but ECF grant pages is frightening


  13. oldbrew says:

    Roger Harrabin whingeing about ‘libertarian bloggers’ criticising the heroic Met Office.

    Concludes with usual ‘what if…2C…4C…’ waffle.

  14. tchannon says:

    Harrabin misrepresents.

  15. oldbrew says:

    …and taking licence payer money to do so.