There has been a lot of talk about the edits the BBC made to a story on climate change in response to repeated emails by a single environmental activist. Michael Ronayne has created an animation of the before and after using Google Cache:
image changes every 5 seconds -click for the full sized image
For the story on what transpired, Michael has also supplied some links to commentary and the actual email exchanges:
Glenn Beck has commentary on the email exchanges:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/8412/
Blog bully crows over BBC climate victory
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/08/bbc_blog_bully/
From Jennifer Marohasy: There is an amusing you-tube clip with Noel Sheppard on Glenn Beck’s show talking about the BBC. Have a look:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=216v5AoQcFQ
Apparently the BBC is refusing to comment.
That thing flashes back and forth too quickly. Please slow it down so we can actually read the different versions!
REPLY: I agree, and I’m fixing that. The new version changes once ever 5 seconds.
Wow, trying to read transcripts really sucks. The speech is so disjointed and doesn’t make a lick of sense.
Wow. This is pretty amazing. Outright censorship based on extortion. It must be more desperate for the AGW crowd than we already thought. Why can’t the “science” defend itself?
This is news from yesterday.
Anyway, why are you all shocked about this? When the White House changes hands and the Dems have 60 seats in the Senate, then you can kiss honest data and an impartial media goodbye. It’s gonna get a lot uglier.
The Register did get a comment from the BBC:
“A minor change was made to the ‘Global temperatures “to decrease”‘ piece on our website to better reflect the science. A few people including the report’s authors, the World Meteorlogical Organisation, pointed out to us that the earlier version had been ambiguous.”
Of course, that’s not much more than a verbose way of saying “No comment.”
The Register’s article is the only thing I’ve seen that distills the transcript into something that’s easy to read, but that’s what their editors are for. The transcript at Marohasy’s blog is basic raw data, a copy of what appears to be the original web post at http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/2089 . I’m surprised that post is still up and that only a few comments have been made about it. I think we should keep it that way.
Oh – perhaps Jeff Alberts was referring to the Glen Beck transcript, not the Abbess/Harrabin transcript. Transcripts of spoken word speeches are often difficult to follow. Of dialogs, usually impossible. That’s why you never see a long quote from George Bush.
Jeff B
Why should it? You have a bunch thugs to tell us how to think. Who needs science!
I have a question about the last “apocalypse du jour”: The Hole in the Ozone.
The 2007 Nobel Prize for chemistry was given to Gerhard Ertl for his work on chemical reactions on the surface of crystals. Press releases implied that his work could explain or did explain the loss of the ozone in the stratosphere over the Antarctic. I have not seen any evaluations as to whether the CFC thesis or the reactions on crystals explained the loss of the ozone or which was predominant.
My question is: Do we know what causes the ozone hole in the stratosphere?
Impartial media?? I’ve forgotten what they is.
So long as the Presidency and a third of either house hangs on, the data is safe. (Thank goodness this is a republic, and NOT a democracy!)
Talk about Rewriting History, Time and Time Again….
Can you post the URL of the offending page please?
I guess Jo Abbess’es attempt to “censor” media coverage has had the opposite effect. It has not only brought the story to the attention of many people who otherwise have missed it, but it has also highlighted some of the tactics of the AGW fanatics and how easily the BBC can browbeat into following the party line.
Evan: it’s a little more tenuous than you might think. The House is subject to the rather iron-handed leadership of the Speaker, with the Chairman of the Rules committee playing a major supporting role. A simple majority gets even the most unpopular legislative through the House, no matter how strenuous the objections of the minority, even if they are a minority only by one.
It takes more than a third of the body to support the concerns of a minority in the Senate. It takes 2/5. 60 votes, not 67, are all that’s required to end a debate and move to a vote.
As for the President, all three major candidates have endorsed the AGW crowd to one degree or another.
I suppose I wouldn’t have wanted to be in this reporter’s shoes. This looks like a threat from Jo Abbess read the exchange at http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/04/07/climate-activist-got-bbc-change-global-temperatures-decrease-article.
“I am about to send your comments to others for their contribution, unless you request I do not. They are likely to want to post your comments on forums/fora, so please indicate if you do not want this to happen. You may appear in an unfavourable light because it could be said that you have had your head turned by the sceptics. ”
And this part was really bizarre because she was the one who actually did the manipulating.
“Otherwise, I would have to conclude that you are insufficiently educated to be able to know when you have been psychologically manipulated. And that would make you an unreliable reporter.”
Mike
Jon Jewett: “My question is: Do we know what causes the ozone hole in the stratosphere?”
The following quote from a JunkScience.com article:
“The conceptual “ozone layer” is not some delicate, static and fragile wrapping about the outer atmosphere but rather a dynamic and highly volatile component, both created and destroyed by solar radiation. Ozone creation is a continuous process, so we can not “run out” of stratospheric ozone. ”
Since the “hole” appears over the Antarctice at a time when there is little to no sunlight, I would suppose the creation process of sunlight creating ozone (which is unstable) is stoppled or at least slowed to almost nothing. Unfortunately, most people are lead to believe we have a finite ozone layer that is being eaten away never to return. The same sloppiness applies when people fail to distinguish between AGW and natural global warming, and between immigration and illegal immigration in their discussions.
Now where did I put my SPF6 oil?
Here is my original post with comments about date/time stamp forgeries. This is why the date/time line is in red in the animation.
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/04/march-2008-rss-global-temperature-anomaly-data-slightly-above-zero/#comment-10475
The original BBC story has been cycled out of Google Cache but is still available in Yahoo Cache so make a copy before it is too late. There will be another recovery opportunity in about six months using the Way-Back Machine if it is not redacted first. Please make archive backups early and make them often.
Global warming ‘dips this year’
http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=%22Global+warming+%27dips+this+year%27%22&fr=ush-news&u=reddit.com/goto%3Frss%3Dtrue%26id%3Dt3_6ellk&w=%22global+warming+dips+this+year%22&d=Nxe2VvH_QkkL&icp=1&.intl=us
At the Ministry of Truth you can read the alternate reality yourself.
Global temperatures ‘to decrease’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm?rss
Please verify the accuracy of the animation by comparing it with the two versions the story referenced above. Only the first section was altered. To bad Roger Harrabin can’t capitalize NASA correctly but it must be difficult to take dictation and type at the same time, while under stress.
Now let us be silent as we wait for the outraged voices of the NutRoots denouncing censorship of the press!
Mike
Robinson:
“Can you post the URL of the offending page please?”
The BBC story is at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7329799.stm
Harrabin at the BBC has a history of writing alarmist claptrap that panders to western guilt about poor people in the developing world and most people’s general ignorance of science.
Unfortunately Google News doesn’t keep access to old stories, otherwise I’d post a few to give you a flavour of his ‘work’.
Jo got quite a few robust comments on the Campaign against Climate Change activists portal http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/2089
I haven’t read a single comment on that thread supporting her, or anything by her by way of rebuttal. I’m wondering whether she simply underestimated people’s reactions, when she made that exchange public on 4th April. If she expected to receive praise, it seems to have misfired badly, in my opinion.
Still flashes a little too fast for me–does that say in the middle:
It would have been a lot warmer if it hadn’t gotten so cold?
Tom: “REPLY: I agree, and I’m fixing that. The new version changes once ever 5 seconds.”
Thanks for the great animation, but I’m probably a slow reading guy who can’t read an article in 5 seconds. 10 seconds would have been good for me.
Jon Jewett,
I can’t answer your question, but as an aside: I heard a news report a couple of months ago that said that “Scientists now think that the effect of Chloroflourocarbons (sp?) on ozone is about 1/10th of what they thought it was when the freon ban went into effect”.
I wonder just how much money was spent on removing freon from the market. I also wonder how much energy is still being wasted on less effective alternatives.
This is right out of Huxley’s Brave New World in which Winston Smith rewrote news and altered the archives of the news on a daily basis.
ROFTLMAO… it looks like Jo’s big mouth is getting her sent back to the abiss.
Sorry about the blink speeds, I have a tendency to like them fast and assume that everyone else is so inclined. You can stop the animation at any time by pressing the “Esc” key on you keyboard. The resume the animation click on the “Refresh” Icon on your toolbar or press the “F5” key on your keyboard.
In future posts I will be careful to include instructions pertaining to using the off/on switch.
This technology is know as a Blink Comparator and has many useful applications.
Blink Comparator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_comparator
Mike
Ozone is what protects us from the radiation from the sun.
Oxygen is naturally a diatomic molecule, which means it naturally wants to float around as O2. If O2 is hit by radiation, however, it gets “excited” and latches on to a third Oxygen atom, creating O3 (aka Ozone).
The poles are where both of these key ingredients are lacking. The Earth spins on its axis, making our atmosphere bulge at the equator and thin at the poles. the majority of the sun’s radiation falls away from the poles, also making Ozone formation less likely.
And Dupont scientists were the ones who “discovered” that CFC’s hurt our ozone layer right when their patent for freon was about to wear out. If you don’t know how patents work, if a person or company comes out with an idea, then they have complete control over it for a period of time. then any company can make a generic version of it and sell it. That’s why you have brand name medicines and generic ones. Luckily though, Dupont had a replacement coolant CFC free ready though.
A simple majority gets even the most unpopular legislative through the House, no matter how strenuous the objections of the minority, even if they are a minority only by one.
Let ’em.
Are you old enough to remember that old “do nothing” Ford? The crafty old fox hammered together a third of the house and vetoed the “veto-proof congress” around forty-eleven times and was never once overridden. One of the slickest (and least appreciated) runs in all of American political history. (No one properly appreciates the big D.) And all the while, his foes were deluded into thinking he was some sort of clumsy moron (he was an All American footballer and captain of his debating team in college).
To:
Jon Jewett (12:20:41)
Jon:
Buy, beg, borrow or steal a copy of: ” The Holes in the Ozone Scare: The Scientific Evidence That the Sky Isn’t Falling” (ISBN: 0962813400)
by Rogelio A. Maduro and Ralf Schauerhammer. It is over 10 years old, and thus does not contain latest information, but gets pretty close to the truth. Close enough that it has been roundly damned by the usual suspects. Ozone being depleted by CFCs was strictly a political event. Besides, DuPont’s patents were about to run out on F-12 and F-22.
BTW, I do worry about McCain’s attitude, but he keeps insisting he wont sign anything that “hurts the economy”, which I take as code that he really isn’t going to do much at all other than a few tax breaks for “alternatives”.
Harrabin at the BBC has a history of writing alarmist claptrap that panders to western guilt about poor people in the developing world and most people’s general ignorance of science.
He better pick one. He can’t have both this time. He’s ot to throw one over the side in order to have the other.
The irony is in the phrase ’emerging truth’. Yes, the truth is emerging.
============================================
If the animation is too fast for you fellows, when the image is showing you want to see and read, just click the STOP button on your browser. Refresh the page and it will animate again.
(You don’t have to post this, Anthony, if you’d rather make note of this method in your post)
I think the CFC thing was largely based on hypotheticals and not via observation. There’s been no net change in the ozone “hole” in over 50 years, as far as I know.
so these people have decided that all temp measurements cease in 2006!
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/temp/angell/graphics.html LOL more amunition for the scektics
Anthony,
Not a comment on the article, I just wanted to point out an interesting article about negative feedbacks by clouds.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/print/print.asp?id=21153&cid=39&cname=NBR
Re: the Ozone Hole
I don’t believe that it was DuPont scientists that proposed the CFC depletion of the ozone theory. (M.J Molina was/is from MIT, F.S Rowland from UC Irvine, and Paul Crutzen was from the Max Planck Institute.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Sherwood_Rowland
But, the management at DuPont did jump on the band wagon. After all, if a bunch of hysterical fools are going to believe some junk science and make stupid, harmful and wasteful laws, why shouldn’t someone make a profit??
The current AGW movement is about money-and power. See this latest about the World Bank: http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSBKK28941120080404?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNews&rpc=22&sp=true
It seems that the vultures are circling about.
Jeff,
I was in power plant management of operations and maintenance before I retired. Billions were spent on the replacement for CFCs. And (according to the popular media-it may be true) for a while the value of the R-12 smuggled into the country exceeded the value of illegal drugs.
For a while, production of R-12 was banned in the first world while it was still being made in places like India. And the Indians, not being completely stupid, found that they could make a lot of money smuggling it into the US and other countries.
It sort of reminds you of the Kyoto Accords.
Regards,
From Jo’s site climate change etc.. it seems that the extreme element is now trying to get away from the global warming theory and moving on to overpopulation pollution etc.. good on them. There was never any argument with that. Maybe we can all find a common ground now. All that is left are the poor ol “climate scientists” and their careers who are going to have to eventually admit that human produced C02 does not force (significantly) global warming. Maybe they can concentrate on hurricane modelling etc for the future.
I don’t blame Jo one bit.
She believes in a cause, and she fights for it. She does what a lot of people on the other side are simply just too lazy to do…she picks up her pen and writes.
Give her credit for that. Good for her I say.
For a lot of people it’s just so much easier to sit in chair and just complain about things, and do nothing else.
We also can also pick up our pens and write to the BBC as well. I think Roger Harrabin is a reasonable man, and everyone here has the chance to give him your point of view. Show him that we can do it without using the bullying tactics.
The BBC is a media source now controlled by a delusional illogical minority, and rabidly controlled by an unscrupulous ignorant director, who holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a shit by the clean end.
Re. BBC changed article, I wrote complaining that they had apparently submitted to the demands of an activist. The reply I received is below. Needless to say I then replied asking about “a minor change”, “better reflect the science”, why the WMO “pointed out……….”, especially after Harrabin had initially said to Jo Abbess more than once that he saw no reason to change the report as the BBC were simply quoting the WMO. (Did the BBC ask WMO to change the story so that they could?? You have to wonder)
(BBC reply to my criticism)
Dear Reader
There has been considerable interest in the story about global
temperatures authored by our correspondent Roger Harrabin, and the
alteration made to the text after publication. A minor change was made
to the piece on our website to better reflect the science. A number of
people, including the report’s authors the World Meteorological
Organization, pointed out to us that the earlier version had been
ambiguous.
With thanks for your mail, time and interest.
BBC News website
New low for solar flux-68.0
================
Sorry, Pierre, but i do blame her. She went beyond advocacy into not so veiled threats. Obviously she felt her position was so tenuous that threats were needed.
What can i say about that
She believes in a cause, and she fights for it. So do nazis, skinheads, klanners, etc., but we don’t admire them, do we?
I can think of several names to describe Harrabin, but “reasonable” would not be one of them. Not to say people shouldn’t write to him to let him know just what people think of what he did.
Actually, this entire episode has provided conclusive proof how the BBC in general, and Harrabin in particular, can be manipulated to achieve the goals of the extremists.
Pierre stated he doesn’t blame Jo for doing what she did. I agree. Even though she’s so far out in the fringe, she has a right – perhaps even duty – to try everything her little mind can conceive to pillage anyone who goes against her losing agenda.
She is wrong, and we all know that. But showing the world how easy it is to manipulate the BBC is a joy in itself! Can you imagine how often their news is manipulated by the more powerful? Think of that one!
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com
Criticism acknowledged. Thank you.
I certainly wouldn’t go so far to compare these people to skinheads and Nazis…I’d be a little more careful with the loose lingo here.
I believe most of these folks do have good intentions. Many are just plain misguided. Like it or not, this is what free societies are about…being active in what you believe in. Of course I don’t agree at all with what these kooks are promoting. But we have to do a lot more of some of the things they’re doing.
We need to get out more and start educating people.
Gore is out there recruiting 1000s to make presentations. What are we doing?
We’re reading these blogs and getting valuable info from them, and complain about kooks taking over. Talking’s fine, but that aint enough. We’ve got to get out and connect.
I’m putting together my own presentation to show in companies, trade groups, and the school where my kids attend. I intend to do something about it…and I’m sure I’m not going to make any friends doing this.
I don’t mind the criticism from the readers here – but I’m sticking to my guns. I’m not taking anything back.
kim,
Would you provide with the link with the solar flux data?
I’d much appreciate it.
Jeff,
You call it threats, I call it leverage. It’s business. Sort of like either you do what the boss tells you, or you’re fired. It’s the real world.
If our side had the chance to use such leverage, I’d say go for it!
But we don’t. We’ve got the facts, but we’re still losing. We’re a team, but without equipment or a playbook.
Pierre said:
“We need to get out more and start educating people.
Gore is out there recruiting 1000s to make presentations. What are we doing?
We’re reading these blogs and getting valuable info from them, and complain about kooks taking over. Talking’s fine, but that aint enough. We’ve got to get out and connect.”
Actually that’s being done across the board, Pierre. For example, the Heartland Institute sends monthly newsletter/updates to almost every elected official in the Nation on climate change, education, budgets, etc. They also provide speakers as requested for all types of meetings. Then there’s Mark Moreno who sends periodic reports on the environment in general and cc in particular that goes to thousands, if not hundreds of thousands.
I personally send email reports to over 100,000 subscribers of “The Mysterious Climate Project” database (in spite of Comcast efforts to derail the project) and speak at numerous events including schools. Anthony periodically appears on the FNC (and perhaps others that I don’t view).
The Pogies have been stopped dead in their tracks and have entered panic mode. This is evidenced by polls and the fact Goofy Gore had to put together a $3 million advertising package in an attempt to stop their hemorging of believers.
This blog is sooooooooo important because it provides many of us with up-to-date information that you won’t find in the Lamestream Media (ABCNNBCBS) and others. Many of us then take this information and use it as input in our individual efforts in keeping the public informed.
Now that nature and the Dragon Slayers have slowed down – if not stopped – the Pogies, we have to continue the onslaught until it’s turned around!
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com
This is typical of the BBC. Its supposed to be independent but has it’s own agenda and left wing political bias mainly because the majority of it’s staff are recruited from the left wing press … the Guardian and the Independent. There is an independent section however which allows complaints and will challenge programme makers and news editors live on air based on “consumer” complains and can make the news staff very uncomfortable. Its called Points of View:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/consumer/tv_and_radio/points_of_view/
even tells you how to complain about the BBC
you can e-mail it at :- pov@bbc.co.uk
Unfortunately the next series of programmes starts on the 20th April, which is a bit late but I think it is still worth deluging it with e-mails and at lest it’s independent of the new desk. Best of luck!
McGrats, That’s not 3 million in advertising, it’s 100 million a year for the next three years.
Mike
That’s alot of money…
put together a $3 million advertising package in an attempt to stop their hemorging of believers.
This blog is sooooooooo important
Yes, but you need to take two of those zeroes of the sooooooooo and add them to the $3 million.
This is typical of the BBC. Its supposed to be independent but has it’s own agenda and left wing political bias mainly because the majority of it’s staff are recruited from the left wing press … the Guardian and the Independent.
Oooooh. A light begins to dawn. (In These States, it’s the journalism schools that do it.)
The link for solar flux data was requested:
http://www.drao-ofr.hia-iha.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/icarus/www/sol_home.shtml
There is lots of interesting stuff on that page.
Arrrrgggg……..
Mike and Evan said almost the same thing:
:McGrats, That’s not 3 million in advertising, it’s 100 million a year for the next three years.”
Yup… forgot a few zeros!
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com
MCGrats,
Thanks for the reply. Sending the e-mails and messages to every public official has of course its merits, and has a useful purpose. But it’s starting at the wrong end. Politicians have a finger in the air, and are only checking the direction of public opinion, and respond accordingly. We have to do kore to change the direction of public opinion, and that is only possible from the bottom up.
Maybe we’ve got the top covered, but the bottom is lost for now. We’ve got to do more there.
I think folks like Singer, McIntyre, etc. (and of course Anthony) are doing an invaluable service. Without them, this would have been lost a long time ago.
And I’m glad that you yourself have entered the fray, and I have added your site to my favourites. Every truthtrooper more we can add will be needed.
Pierre Gosselin
Flux Density 04.10.2008 = 0067.7
another link, LOUISXIV Canadian Observatory
http://www.drao-ofr.hia-iha.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/icarus/www/current_flux.shtml
Hi folks, if you’re interested in seeing just how often the bBC changes articles you could do worse than checking out News Sniffer. Here’s the diffs for the article above.
With enemies like Jo Abbess we don’t need friends. The level of ineptitude exhibited Jo Abbess and Roger Harrabin is truly mind-boggling. Clearly neither Jo Abbess nor Roger Harrabin understands how the Internet works. If we can trust the date/time stamps in the original news story and Jo’s Email journal here are the two values which are of interest.
* BBC Story: Page last updated at 00:42 GMT, Friday, 4 April 2008 01:42 UK
* Last Email: date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:28 AM
At a minimum the original story was on the Internet for 9 hours and 46 minutes. On a high profile site like the BBC, every search robot on the Internet copied and indexed the page multiple times. While the original page in no longer “publicly” available at Google and Live, but is available at Yahoo, rest assured that Google, Live and Yahoo retain private copies of everything for a very long time. And then there is the Wayback Machine which will not open its treasure drove until six months have expired. Trust my when I say that nothing is ever truly deleted from the Internet. The truth is always out there!
Roger Harrabin is an old pro and I would have expected better of him. It is as if he wanted to be caught or had done this so many times before that he truly believed that no one would call him on it or both. Roger’s undoing was that he evidently did not realize how incredibly stupid Jo Abbess was.
Jo Abbess is an absolute delight. In one BLOG posting she set the cause of AGW back thirty years. She confirmed everything which the Climate [Skeptics | Deniers | Nonbelievers | Nonconformists | Infidels | Atheists | Heretics] have been saying about the manipulation of the media for years. One has to wonder if Jo is a double-agent working for Exxon-Mobil or the Bush Administration, so extensive is the damage she has committed. If she had none absolutely nothing the story would have disappeared in the 24 hour news cycle but not now.
Keep up the good work Jo; we are all pulling for you. Rest assured that all over the Internet thousands of computers are now tracking your name waiting for the next pearl of wisdom you will share with us. We remain your most obedient and adoring fans.
Dr. Nir Shaviv addresses the causal link between cosmic radiation and clouds. http://www.sciencebits.com/SloanAndWolfendale
I received a reply from Roger Harrabin to my email:
“Subject: Return Global Temperatures decreasing article to its original state
Body:
Before you buckled under the pressure of one climate warming activist. ”
Roger Harrabin replied:
”
1 ) I didn’t
2) I am sure we can all agree with that
RH”
As a way to demonstrate his jounalistic integrity, perhaps Mr. Harrbin would be so kind as to interview Dr. Shaviv regarding his profession view on the causal links to climate change and publish the discussion in the BBC.
How about the direct route? A report on AquaSat and Argos would do just fine.
Hi, my first post. Very important work being done here, thanks for that!
How do you assess this new BBC article “Forecast for big sea level rise”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7349236.stm
Does scientific evidence support these claims? If not, maybe a similar approach as was used towards mr. Harrabin could be used to make this latest article more in line with reality?
[…] to “correctly” label the planet’s major source of plant food as a pollutant, but the climate itself has failed to continue its warming […]