I received this email this morning from Roger Harribin, the BBC’s environmental analyst. It’s interesting because I received an email from the Guardian yesterday asking if I’d like to write a 200 word guest piece. Unfortunately it somehow ended up in my spam filter (which I found this morning) so I missed the 3 PM GMT deadline today.
Here’s what Mr. Harrabin wrote. I hope WUWT readers will come to aid, especially since skeptics are now apparently getting a voice in UK MSM.
From: Roger Harrabin – Internet
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 6:10 AM
To: [Anthony]
Subject: BBC query
Dear Mr Watts,
I am trying to talk to UK scientists in current academic posts who are sceptical about AGW.
I’m struggling to find anyone – but there may of course be a number of reasons for this. Please could you post my request on your website – and ask people to email roger.harrabin@bbc.co.uk.
We are looking for scientists, of course – not insults.
It strikes me that it might be useful to meet sometime to discuss a project I am planning on the weather.
I enclose my latest column
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8491154.stm
which touches on the difficulties of reporting climate change FYI.
I look forward to hearing from you
Yours
Roger Harrabin
If you know of a skeptical scientist in the UK that may be interested, please advise them of this. Thanks to all for your consideration. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I would recommend BBC reporters to watch Fred Singer’s lecture and maybe read the NIPCC report. That should be a solid introduction to AGW scepticism.
Every AGWr. will recognize the following words, of one their forefathers:
“When people attempt to rebel against the iron logic of nature, they come into conflict with the very same principles to which they owe their existence as human beings. Their actions against nature must lead to their own downfall.” “Mein Kampf”
“Freeman Dyson. though at the Institue for advanced study in Princeton, he is, of course, a Brit!”
As I recall, he renounced his British citizenship and became a U.S. citizen. Something to do with not being able to get British citizenship for his American-born children.
Slightly off topic, but I keep getting emails from David Milliband the UK environment minister. Latest text below, but I have to admit my responses are less than polite:
Bil,
For those of us who believe that climate change is the issue of our times, this year is absolutely crucial.
Internationally, we’ve got to firm up what we got at Copenhagen and then push much further. At home, we’ve got to cut our carbon emissions and challenge the sceptics.
There’s a lot to do and a lot of priorities to choose from
In Copenhagen, countries agreed to state their next steps around the 31st January – so why not get your views to me by then?
Should we spend more of our time focussing on the domestic arena or the international? Is climate finance the key issue or is it the nature of the treaty that we should focus on?
As someone who cares passionately about t hese issues, I want to know your priorities.
Tell me what your climate change priorities are for the year
Of course we can do more than one thing at a time and all of these issues are important – but we do need to prioritise.
Your campaigning over the last year pushed climate change to the top of the agenda – we need to keep up the push to take on the sceptics and expose those who only pay lip service to our issue.
Together, we’ll win
Ed
Jasper Kirkby
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1181073
Of course that is just a ‘real’ scientist, he probably wouldn’t say anything he wasn’t sure of. That said, I doubt he is losing sleep at night worrying about the earth baking.
Maybe they are just looking for a negative Gavin Schmitt and think that makes balance. Note anyone who says we aren’t sure Global Warming will be a catastrophe is a skeptic (a healthy thing).
It’s amazing that after reporting on climate change for several years, Harrabin doesn’t know any sceptics and obviously has never spoken to any of them. For too long he has had a direct link to all the alarmists at UEA, CRU, Met Office, Hadley Centre, Reading University. BBC bias is exposed by his lack of knowledge of sceptical scientists.
Isn’t it ironic that the man can’t find himselve the required people?
He never read something that is skeptical of AGW?
Watch it!
Trust. From my view as a psychologist, why was he crude and non receptive before now? His behavior tells us he is not to be trusted. Is he trying to “justify” his own bias and now suddenly put on an unbiased face?
Apologetics that are symbolized by jumping on the band wagon are very shallow. It seems he is facing a trainwreck and now is trying to jump on a safer boat. It is called media bias.
guardian motivation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/03/energy-bills-unaffordable-system-overhaul
elevation evil influence, green thinking..
Nils Morner?
Anthony,
On reflection, do not accept the premise of the question. WUWT now holds the high ground and you should be negotiating the terms of engagement. The MSM will be doing anything to undermine the credibility of this new sociological phenomenon. Also record all conversations!
DavidS
REPLY: I think that is the wrong approach. Cautious bridge building might yield more results – Anthony
Consider this comment of Mr. Harrabin:
“We are looking for scientists, of course – not insults.”
Commenting:
Wel, Roger, folks in your line of work were mighty quick to insult those same skeptics and call them every foul name in the book.
But, no insults for you, eh! Well, aren’t you special!
Anthony
I have an audio recording of the newsnight programme. If you want me to send it just e-mail me.
Rod
REPLY: Thanks, I’m hearing impaired, and with Brit accent and no lip reading (visual) I won’t be able to comprehend much. – Anthony
He asks for “UK scientists in current academic posts who are sceptical about AGW.”
I would suggest ex-patriots only who fill this criteria to emphasize how the UK has a “brain drain”
He plays the big oil big funding card.
“You have to survey the history of the debate to see why: from the early days when climate science was emerging, the fossil fuel industry funded multi-million dollar campaigns promoting uncertainty to delay action to control emissions. ”
Climate science emerged thousands of years ago, buddy. where have you been. Frightfull global warming is what has emerged recently.
This strikes me as a deeply duplicitous. note the emphasis on being in a current academic post: a ploy specifically designed to exclude genuine expertise from the broad swathe of independent scientists whilst maintaining the fiction of some kind of balanced view so beloved of the BBC.
The same famous BBC balance which allows one major figure to present current affairs whilst being an avowed member of the Labour party who not only gave it donations but spoke on it’s behalf.
It is part of a counterattack as is the Guardian’s apparent change of heart but it is a pretty feeble one in view of how fast events are moving.
No this merely designed to show that could not find any serious sceptics so they can say nobody was willing to appear. And so cover their collective backsides if the worst comes to the worst, which it likely will.
Interesting though, I shall put into my submission to the Select Committee.
Kindest Regards
Sounds like a job for Diogenes.
Anthony may be correct. Keeping in mind that Chamberlain-esque appeasement may feed, not tame the beebeast.
There is also the “500 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming” http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
Perhaps Roger Harribin should do a report on this topic instead. After all despite the “science being settled” and the pressure of public opinion papers DID get published.
A determination of how many of these papers were written by “UK scientists in current academic posts” should highlight the state of suppression of independent scientific research in the UK. I leave the work of determining who fits the criteria to Mr Harribin since he is supposed to be an investigative journalist after all.
Retired Dave (10:31:40) :
The upshot is that there have been no jobs in the UK for climate sceptics (that’s not necessarily deniers) for a long time. Turn up at any of these establishments with an open mind, and you will be working in MacDonalds.
…Too right. I would never run the risk of being stitched up by the BBC and having my work rubbished just to provide Harrabin with his global warming vindication. My brother-in-law is a Professor of Geomorphology who never believed in the global warming fantasy from the day he first heard it, and he won’t speak to Harrabin either.
Look for your Aunt Sallys in another country, Harrabin. You are poison to working scientists here.
Phillip Bratby (11:08:59)
Yes, isn’t that quite amazing. I’m surprised it took so many replies for that to be recognized.
200 words for the Guardian! – the spam filter did you a favour. You can be quite sure George Monbiot’s scathing response to whatever you said would not be restricted to 200 words. As for the BBC – up until Newsnight last night which was a breath of fresh air – they have been almost as biased as the Guardian. They still haven’t investigated the real scandal which is the apparent scientific fraud in the adjustments to the surface temperature records.
2010 Background Info:
BBC Trust to Review Science Coverage
Outlet’s “accuracy and impartiality” to be scrutinized following criticism
By Curtis Brainard
http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/bbc_trust_to_review_science_co.php
Bill
Re: your comment: The geologists I know have been saying that AGW was “bad science” since at least 2004. I recently asked one of them why the “rock guys” haven’t been more vocal about why they came to that conclusion early in the game, and he just said, “We like our jobs — and we like *keeping* our jobs.”
Good point. I forgot to mention something: all the geologists I know work in the private sector, where individualism is encouraged and they are not required to have pre-approved views like those working in the public sector.
Oops, that brings up another good point: Are there any climate ‘scientists’ working in the private sector?
Anthony,
Will you be taking Mr Harrabin up on his offer to meet regarding a weather related story?
Cheers
Mark
REPLY: If he pays air fare and lodging to London, sure why not? -A