The BBC posted a surprising story this past weekend that has skeptics cheering and alarmists hopping mad.
Here’s the opener:
This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.
The headline?
What happened to global warming?
By Paul Hudson
Climate correspondent, BBC News
This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.
But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.
And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.
So what on Earth is going on?
Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man’s influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming.
They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is. But what is the evidence for this?
During the last few decades of the 20th Century, our planet did warm quickly.
Sceptics argue that the warming we observed was down to the energy from the Sun increasing. After all 98% of the Earth’s warmth comes from the Sun.
But research conducted two years ago, and published by the Royal Society, seemed to rule out solar influences.
The scientists’ main approach was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature.
And the results were clear. “Warming in the last 20 to 40 years can’t have been caused by solar activity,” said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
But one solar scientist Piers Corbyn from Weatheraction, a company specialising in long range weather forecasting, disagrees.
He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.
He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month.
If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.
Read the complete story here at the BBC
If you have registered at the BBC to comment on their messageboards then you can comment on Paul Hudson’s blog here http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2009/10/whatever-happened-to-global-wa.shtml Keep an eye on it as I believe that the knives may be out for him from people like Jo Abbess. She was the bully who threatened the BBC’s Roger Harrabin for poking his head above the parapet, and actually got him to change his report! http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/08/bbc_blog_bully/
Phillip Bratby (23:19:25) :
“The greenhouse effect is the natural process by which the atmosphere traps some of the Sun’s energy, warming the Earth enough to support life.”
Yes but they forgot the H2O feed back. Man made CO2 traps more heat and that makes bunny rabbits cry leading to more humidity and big spiky toothed monsters appear in the sky.
I don’t know if it is the same guy but Paul Hudson is the weather man on BBC Look North (which covers Yorkshire, Humberside & North Lincolnshire). He comes across as an amiable and pretty level headed sort of bloke although with a penchant for brightly coloured jackets!
But for the BBC to come out with an article like this is amazing. Like the Vatican saying that contraception is a pretty good idea and they are thinking about appointing some women as cardinals.
OK, the article is easy to criticise and obviously sits firmly on the fence. But as the BBC takes care to broadcast at least one global warming scare story every day and almost NEVER refers to the fact that there even ARE some sceptical scientists, this certainly raised my eyebrows! What’s going on behind the scenes?
As other comment writers have suggested, this has to be a bit of insurance against the possibility that the wheels come off the AGW waggon.
Phillip Bratby (22:51:09) :
Paul Hudson is described as a “Climate correspondent”. The usual misleading alarmist and biased global warming reporters for the BBC are described as “Environment correspondents”. Maybe this is the first person the BBC has employed who has a bit of knowledge about the climate. Or maybe he’s the only member of this new department and so can easily be disposed of by closing the department. He seems to be out on a limb without a safety net. The BBC is full of people with chain-saws.
Paul Hudson is known as “Paul the weatherman” in Yorkshire, where for some time he has been the popular and humourous forecast presenter on the BBC regional channel ‘Look North’. It would seem he has been given the opportunity by the BBC to write about longer term climate and if this is a policy shift it is to be welcomed.
The ‘Enviromental Journalists’ belong to a clique called the SEJ (Society of Env Journos) and they are well connected to early copies of press releases from the Team, which they rush to print before each other. The rush to print bypasses their critical faculties (assuming they have any).
I sincerely hope Paul isn’t soon to be known as “Paul the roadsweeper”.
The BBC’s Richard Black’s blog can be found here, with comments a plenty on a number of subjects. Its usually taken over by three or four regular posters, for and against, back and forth etc between each other.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/
The Daily Telegraph has picked up the story this morning.
Re A Jones wanting a new scare, I made this one up a few months ago;
As the AGW scare is leading to increased taxation, it seems we need a tax-reducing scheme. How about an anti-scare?
A cursory look at the Global Warming fuss reveals the IPCC claim that mankind is putting up about +4 ppm/year of CO2 into the atmosphere; and this will increase the temperature at the earth’s surface by +1 degree C over the coming century.. causing untold havoc, melting icecaps, floods, & co., etc. So, we need to tax this nasty pyrotic habit.
Now this seems to be metascience of a most entertaining kind, and so I thought I’d produce some of my own, that would produce exactly the opposite prediction, but based on the same premises, and with simple conversion factors available to everybody ‘off the web’ as it were .
In this way, my junk-science unlike the IPCC stuff would be repeatable and reproducible by everyone and everyone at home … even by Gran and the Kids… to ‘prove’ that we are in mortal danger of Global Cooling. So here are the steps for my ‘end-of-the-world.alt’ scenario:
a) Man-made CO2 = + 4 parts-per-million(ppm) per year. Over 100 years this will amount to + 400 ppm
b) Henry’s Law indicates that the oceans absorb co2 from the air at a ratio of about 50:1. So for the additional 400ppm in the air, there wil be 50 x this amount absorbed in the oceans. So, the actual extra Co2 produced would be 400 x 50 = 20,000 ppm over the 100 years
c) Now of this 20,000 PPM, roughly 15,000 ppm was oxygen taken from the atmosphere, so we can say that the atrmosphere must have been depleted by 15,000 ppm ….. or 1.5% over the 100 years
d) A 1.5% reduction of the atmosphere equates to a 15 millibar drop in atmospheric pressure at the surface of the earth … or an equivalent 500 ft increase in pressure altitude at the surface.
e) This average pressure drop/increase in baro height will cause adiabatic heat-loss, and so GLOBAL COOLING at the surface, of around -1 degree centigrade …. which will lead to global cooling, untold havoc, freezing icecaps, sea-level dropping, desertification, & co., etc. …
“Really Scary!”, I hear you cry… “But Lo! we NEED to carry on burning stuff to keep warm to counterbalance the IPCC’s +1 degree warming over same the period!.”
Great stuff! Just think of the tax-saving!
I would not hold my breath. They will not give up so easily.
Until new scare is found, AGW will not be abandoned. Hopefully, people will be much more skeptical to “science”, funded by governments hoping for more power and new taxes.
Some editor’s head is gonna roll I suspect.
That’ll never happen again I bet.
a jones
999 alarmist articles to 1 sceptic article does not make unbiased.
There’s one person getting little or no mention here, and that’s Piers Corbyn. That may be because this renegade seems to be treading on everybody’s toes, by doing the unforgivable – long-term weather predictions. Whichever side of the AGW fence you are on (and he’s very firmly on the sceptical side), this is not “allowed”. Pro AGW people don’t like him because he’s showing up the dismal record of the models and one of the key sceptical arguments I keep seeing is that weather in the long term is unpredictable.
Funny nobody here has brought this up.
Well, chaps & chappesses, it’s hit the MSM in today’s papers, according to BBC Radio 2’s Sarah Kennedy. Mind you the Beeb are gradually retiring all the old guns who have that spendidly healthy “SCEPTICAL ” view of life, & all claims about it! My expectation has already bee posted!
This could be a straw man of course, putting up a “sceptical” article for it only to be shot down by “new incontravertible evidence” proving AGW! That’s the usual tactic by the AGW religeous faithfull. Comes under the heading of Climate Change Myths. Then again they could be doing as many have already said, covering their reare ends so that they can do like all losers, “we never really believed any of this stuff you know, we just reported the science as it was presented to us!”. There will be no backlash permitted, no blame apportioned, just a few “early retirements” or “moving on to pastures new”, etc.
As for those Greenpeace %$&£*ts (rude words the Prime Minister uses) sitting on the roof of the Houses of Parliament, why all the fuss, close the access door, bolt & padlock it, & leave them there for a month with no food, no water, no escape. I understand the temperatures may reduce over the coming days. They got themselves there, they have to get themselves down again, they should try using a bit of human ingenuity, none of this wasting £000’s of hard strapped taxpayers funding to remove them.
BTW, I have submitted a complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) regarding Friday evening’s little eco-nazi state advertisement, & one to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) under a charge of potential child abuse! I will let you know the outcome (if any, as one is a fake charity funded by HM Govmt).
AtB
I wonder what Mr Moonbat will have to say about this?…
Ironically, I became interested in “global warming” because of Paul Hudson. This is not some new person they have hired with a better understanding of the situation.
Paul is the local weatherman for Yorkshire TV, he attended and reported from the climate change debate held in Sheffield in 2007 which Al Gore addressed. I well remember Paul saying the most incredible things each night for months about global warming, while watching the local news, he was a real believer, at one point about 18 months ago he said “if things continue as they are we won’t see any more snow”.
Once I became better informed on the subject, I actually considered sending him some links to show him how silly some of his comments were, but as he was so far off the scale “alarmist” I didn’t bother. I’m glad to see he has finally come to some sense on the subject because he’s actually a funny and likeable guy on the TV and I felt kind of sorry for him swallowing all this nonsense.
One swallow doesn’t make a summer. The BBC’s output is soaked in global warming propaganda which won’t be undone by one or two minor reports.
More interestingly, there were two quotes from the report worth repeating:
1. Global warming is “a weapon of mass taxation”.
2. Global warming is a political tool to gain control of the Earth’s energy resources.
Says it all, really.
My guess is that this is the BBC hedging its bets, and it was triggered when all the shenanigans about the Yamal dataset came out. I’d expect that as the “climate” continues to “not warm”, and as more and more holes are punched into the AGW meme, we’ll see a higher and higher percentage of “cooling” stories from them, until we’ve turned full circle and they’re predicting the next ice age, and it will be all our fault because we’re mowing our lawn too much, or putting too many aerosols up into the atmosphere, anything that will make us feel guilty about the few luxuries we have worked hard for. It was after all the BBC that aired a program warning of an ice age in ’75 or ’76. By 2020, two generations will have passed since then.
What does surprise me is the reference to Piers Corbyn. That suggests that they are giving up on the “scientists'” ability to figure out where we are headed, and are prepared to consider the views of someone who is considered pretty controversial. I, for one, can’t wait to hear his insights.
People musing on the apocalyptic scare to follow global warming?
Suggestions:
1. The Bible – hey, it did the job for 19 centuries, it’s just had a little local difficulties. The moralising priests need more power, so they’ll do it.
2. Magnetic reversal – now this one COULD be real, but the timing is difficult. We’re all doomed unless we understand how to stop it happening, find a way to survive the flip or get off planet earth like yesterday!
3. The Chinese – they’re on the march, their military is greater than 1 million strong, they’re racist about the Japanese, so help! Slitty eyed yellow man will make you kiss his ass forever unless we invade Iran!
4. Electromagnetic waves – the dangers of mobile phones and high internet usage – you’ll all frazzle your brains if you do it and, if your kids do it, you’re a BAD, EVIL PARENT!!
5. Bill Clinton still fancies your daughter! Wherever you are, whatever you do, LOCK YOUR DAUGHTER UP SAFE!!
6. Sex – it’s immoral, it’s dangerous, it makes more people, it’s a transmission mode for HIV: STOP IT!!
7. Classical music – listening to it when young means you won’t be a mean, hard sonofabitch when you grow up. So America will be a land of wussies, mummy’s boys and generally asskissing slaves to the Vietnamese!!!!
I’m sure you can all dream up several more.
Roll over MI6 and the BBC (oh, I forgot, they developed cross shareholdings decades ago……)
Al Qaeda and Taliban Being Helped By Global Warming:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=209_1255215867
a terrorist tax…?
Regarding the Beeb’s silly animation piece at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/04/climate_change/html/greenhouse.stm, they say “Most mainstream scientists believe a human-driven increase in “greenhouse gases” is increasing the effect artificially.”
Surely that used to be “The vast majority of mainstream scientists etc…” Perhaps we are getting a little toe in the door at last.
Is nothing sacred?
Next thing you know the late night comedians will start making jokes about Al Gore ~~~ and the audience will be laughing hysterically.
Its a difficult call this one, is it just a token attempt at balance from the BBC, are they testing the water for a change in policy?
Whatever the reason behind the report Its certainly been jumped on by the global warming crowd, applauded by the side that rcongnises the debate is far from over and the science is far from settled. On the other hand the people who ignore the apparent facts and belive that the science is settled have really had there noses put out of joint as after all the bbc has been one of there best friends in promoting only one side of the debate just look at
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=109
Im sure the BBC reserchers are reading sites like this and climate audit and are perhaps realising that
1 people are no longer just looking at the MSM to see whats happening there are effectivly audited on what they publish these days through blogs and forums on the internet and there is a distrust building up in the ability of the MSM to be neutral and balanced
2 They have seen that very little of the findings of pro AGW community can actually stand up to rigourus scrutiny and are now perhaps thinking that they have shown neglect in the biased reporting they have been pushing.
3 Some people belive that the BBC is just the Propaganda machine for the goverment in the uk could they be getting us ready for the climate talks in copenhagen not securing a replacement for kyoto?
Whatever the reasoning behind the publication of this story I think this shows that a wheel has come off the AGW bandwagon I however feel the wagon still has lots of wheels hopefully we can build an momentum and get the rest of the wheels to fall off
Overall this is a victory for the truth but how big a victory only time will tell
Phew! That’s a relief. Panic over guys, situation back to normal. Clearly Paul Hudson had a bad week, & was snorting some illegal substance whilst at the wrong end of a bottle of something & popping happy pills. He is completely derranged:- Quad vide
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8299426.stm
WAGTD! Yet again.
Thank goodness, I was beginning to think the BBC was becoming rather impartial & balanced, delivering high quality reporting & factual science, just like it used to!
More Memory Hole shenanigans from the BBC?
From the amount of hype building in both the blogosphere and the mainstream media about this apparent “U turn”, this BBC story was propelled to the top of the BBC “MOST POPULAR STORIES NOW” list. This has had mainstream correspondents in the “dead tree press” salivating at the prospect of exposing the BBC’s discomfort at being exposed so widely.
However, as I checked the “MOST POPULAR STORIES NOW” to write this article, the “What happened to global warming” story has vanished from the list!
Is this credible? With the world waking this morning to the biggest BBC U-turn in decades being reported ever wider throughout the world’s mainstream media, (with accompanying links) one would logically reason that this would INCREASE the number of hits to that BBC page? But NO! Alas, the hits for that page have stopped! Apparently more people are interested in reading about a letter that the once legendary double act Morecambe and Wise showed that Ernie Wise wanted to break the act up in the early days.
More people are apparently interested in an obscure story about “Worthing’s birdman contest”
REALLY? or has the BBC succumbed to PRESSURE FROM THE ALARMIST LOBBY AGAIN???
This was never a genuine change of heart from the BBC. Now we see their back-peddling for all they are worth.
James Delingpole Of the Telegraph indulges in a little mischief. Under the main heading of his piece.
“£6 million ‘Bedtime Story’ climate change ad”
Is listed as Religion.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100013199/governments-6-million-bedtime-story-climate-change-ad-biggest-waste-of-taxpayers-money/
Anthony, you could do an article entitled: “What happened to What happened to global warming?”
It is very strange that this globally exposed story should suddenly disappear from their most popular stories list so quickly!