UK ads banned for overstating climate change

From The Times

Ed Miliband’s adverts banned for overstating climate change

by Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor

the Advertising Standards Asociation has banned Ed Miliband's  Environment department from running misleading nursery rhyme  advertisements on climate change.

The adverts' claims 'were not supported by science'

TWO government advertisements that use nursery rhymes to warn people of the dangers of climate change have been banned by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for exaggerating the potential harm.

The adverts, commissioned by Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, used the rhymes to suggest that Britain faces an inevitable increase in storms, floods and heat waves unless greenhouse gas emissions are brought under control.

The ASA has ruled that the claims made in the newspaper adverts were not supported by solid science and has told the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) that they should not be published again.

It has also referred a television commercial to the broadcast regulator, Ofcom, for potentially breaching a prohibition on political advertising.

The rulings will be an embarrassment for Miliband, who has tried to portray his policies as firmly science-based. He had commissioned two posters, four press advertisements and a short film for television and cinema, which started appearing in October last year in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate talks.

They attracted 939 complaints — more than the ASA received for any advertisement last year. The deluge posed problems for the ASA, which is not a scientific body, so it decided to compare the text of Miliband’s adverts with the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Based on that comparison, it ruled that two of the DECC’s adverts had broken the advertising code on three counts: substantiation, truthfulness and environmental claims.

Of the two banned adverts, one depicted three men floating in a bathtub over a flooded British landscape, and the text read: “Rub a dub dub, three men in a tub — a necessary course of action due to flash flooding caused by climate change.”

It then explained: “Climate change is happening. Temperature and sea levels are rising. Extreme weather events such as storms, floods and heat waves will become more frequent and intense. If we carry on at this rate, life in 25 years could be very different.”

The second showed two children peering into a stone well amid an arid, post-climate-change landscape. It read: “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. There was none as extreme weather due to climate change had caused a drought.”

It then added: “Extreme weather conditions such as flooding, heat waves and storms will become more frequent and intense.”

It was these additional claims, rather than the nursery rhymes or illustrations, that fell foul of the ASA, which ruled it was not scientifically possible to make such definitive statements about Britain’s future climate.

The ASA said: “All statements about future climate were based on modelled predictions, which the IPCC report itself stated still involved uncertainties in the magnitude and timing, as well as regional details, of predicted climate change.” It added that both predictions should have been phrased more tentatively.

The ASA did, however, reject other complaints, including one suggesting the DECC adverts were misleading because they presented human-induced climate change as a fact.

Miliband said: “On the one issue where the ASA did not find in our favour, around one word in our print advertising, the science tells us that it is more than 90% likely that there will be more extreme weather events if we don’t act.”

Greg Barker, shadow minister for climate change, said: “It is so unnecessary to exaggerate the risks of global warming, and also counterproductive.”

Read the complete article here

========================

Here’s the website where the ads originate from ActOnCO2

Here are some of the advertisements in question:

ActonCO2_Twinkle

Hey_Diddle

Jack&Jill

Advertisements

163 thoughts on “UK ads banned for overstating climate change

  1. Sounds good, looks funny … why not deliver the next IPCC report in such way?
    Would exactly match the level of science behind and what these guys think politicians would understand.

  2. “Rock a bye baby on the tree top, When the wind blows…”

    Hurricanes will be more severe and frequent with climate change..blah, blah, blah.

    Indoctrinating ’em in prep school is far too late…

  3. The name of their department is the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Let me guess which side of this they are going to be on. Does anyone think they would EVER try to push anything that disputes or downplays climate change? I can hear it now, “Congrats everyone on debunking climate change. Oh snap!! Now we haven’t any jobs!!”

  4. I am wondering how the government paid for these ads.

    So the used the British people’s tax in order to pay for this ad which indirectly tries to persuade them to pay even more tax (such as carbon tax) and to give up their freedoms (like travel allowances)?

    Vilmos

  5. I will bet a case of Newcastle Brown Ale (as long as my local Costco has some in stock) that none of the US MSM picks up this story…which I will post on DotEarth.

  6. ActOnCO2 has also been running a poll on Facebook for many months. Their first version offered three options. The alarmist option “I’m doing everything I can to reduce my CO2” got the least votes after many months. This did not jive well with the government, so they have replaced it with a new poll this week and each of the three options leave no room for skeptics/rationalists to vote.

  7. They should have used a different nursery rhyme:

    Oranges and lemons, Say the bells of St. Clement’s
    You owe me five millions, Say the bells of St. Pachauri’s
    When will you pay me? Say the bells of Old Gore.
    When I grow rich, Say the bells of Jones ditched.
    Here comes a candle to light you to bed.
    Here comes a chopper to chop off your head.
    Chip chop, chip chop, the last man’s dead.

  8. The ASA did, however, reject other complaints, including one suggesting the DECC adverts were misleading because they presented human-induced climate change as a fact.

    Looks like the National Air Conditioner is still a go.

  9. ….heat waves will become more frequent and intense….

    Looking out the window I see cold waves are doing that not heat ones.

  10. But how much damage has been done in the last six to twelve months of their exposure? And how much more have they ploughed us into unpayable debt with this campaign?

  11. The guardian.co.UK described the Advertising Standard Authority’s adjudication as a mild rebuke of the government’s ads, saying

    ‘The Advertising Standards Authority’s only criticism was that a claim that “flooding, heat waves and storms will become more frequent and intense” should have be phrased more tentatively.’

    The Times headline “UK ads banned for overstating climate change” is misleading. The ASA said two of the four press ads shouldn’t appear again in their current form, which means they could appear again if revised.

    The adjudication can be read at

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/13/scienceofclimatechange-climate-change

  12. As an Aussie, I’m thrilled whenever and however the poms get a beating. But their government is so so bad, even I’m feeling just a teenie weenie bit sorry for them.

    The volume of money sinfully wasted by the UK govt has to be hurting the average pom in the street. They have a chance later this year to toss out this incompetent mob and replace them with another incompetent mob. A change is as good as a holiday they say.

  13. “Incy wincey spider
    Climbed up the spout
    Down came the rain (due to climate change)
    And washed the spider out
    Out came the sun (due to climate change)
    And dried up all the rain
    Incey wincey spider
    Climbed up again “.

  14. Odd.

    I thought the UK had banned nursery rhymes as being demeaning towards children and hence a violation of their human rights.

    Maybe it was just a prescient dream.

  15. …within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is” (Dr David Viner of the CRU, Independent 20 March 2000)

  16. This is why its not funny.govt ministers, fully paid up members of the new religion, all in safe seats. Wide eyed and on message. Hope for another poor summer and cold winter, maybe then they will find something else to ” believe” in.

  17. I believe that Old Mother Hubbard knows what to do with the current crop of climate bureaucrats.

  18. This seems a very appropriate time to link again to my article carried here and at Air vent

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/crossing-the-rubicon-an-advert-to-change-hearts-and-minds/

    The series of scare adverts carried on British TV referered to, caused me to look into the politics behind the AGW scare. The politicisation of the thin science is clear for all to see as The British Govt -the leaders in climate change science and scare mongering for a decade-steadily manipulated and funded data to prove their case.

    They then used it to change ‘hearts and minds’ on social issues which seems to have a resonance with Obamas America.

    The result is taxation on an increasingly grand scale, a non existent energy policy and attempts to scare the Britsh population into changing their habits in order to meet the Govts political agenda.

    Fully referenced, with extracts from various Parliamentary committees, the adverts were the tip of a truly frightening Orwellian construct.

    tonyb

  19. I much prefer
    Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water.
    Jill came down with half a crown and it wasn’t for fetching water.
    Analagous of course with self named climate scientists paid for scientific endeavour but actually sharing a bed with all and sundry so called green organisations.

  20. “…within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is” (Dr David Viner of the CRU, Independent 20 March 2000)”

    Mary had a little lamb
    It’s fleece was white as snow…

  21. Just for the record; this is a brief snapshot of the UK’s Ed Milliband. Source: Wikipedia.

    He is a typical member of the populist muppetry, which currently ‘governs’ the UK, having done nothing useful in his life, nor had any experience in the real world outside politics. He has no scientific background nor experience and therefore is the perfect choice to be the minister responsible for ‘climate change’.

    Edward “Ed” Samuel Miliband (born 24 December 1969) is a British Labour politician, who has been the Member of Parliament for Doncaster North since 2005 and is the current Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. Before that, he served as the Minister for the Cabinet Office and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. He is the younger brother of David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, and together the two are the first siblings to sit in the Cabinet simultaneously since Edward, Lord Stanley and his brother Oliver in 1938.

    After graduating from university with a BA in Economics, Miliband became a Labour Party researcher and rose to become one of then-Chancellor Gordon Brown’s confidants, being appointed Chairman of HM Treasury’s Council of Economic Advisers. Miliband was elected Labour Member of Parliament for the South Yorkshire constituency of Doncaster North in the 2005 general election. Brown appointed him Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office in his first Cabinet in June 2007. On 3 October 2008, Miliband was promoted to Secretary of State at the newly created Department of Energy and Climate Change in a reshuffle.

  22. The ASA in thier final adjudication relied purely on the IPCC report (2007) as the justiifcation for rejecting all the complaints made about the science that were made by thousands of people. There is one complaint that they did not consider, that the ads were political, which is being considered by OFCOM. Their adjudication came with a letter saying it was secret until March 17th. The campaign cost GBP 6million of taxpayer’s money. It’s a disgrace, but typical of the current government.

  23. Everyone here in the UK knows that Miliband is a complete idiot, yet he’s angling to be our next prime minister! And he could well be yet! In the coming weeks we’ll have an election here – which will almost certainly result in a ‘hung paliament’, which means no overall control. A vote of no confidence will bring the new government down – Labour will finally realise that Gordon Brown is a liability and elect a new leader…Miliband.

  24. Baa Humbug, that’s a shame how you feel (we don’t feel the same way about you). Why such distaste for the English?

  25. Vilmos
    I believe the recent series of ads cost in the region of six million pounds.
    They didn’t even stop the ads during the investigation. I’m sure if it had been a sexy beer ad or something with less than half the complaints it would have been suspended straight away! or am i just being cynical?

  26. I was a complainant, the ASA adjudication was a dreary tosh filled, cop out.
    As for Miliband, he should hang his head in shame (but then they have no concept of shame – must be our failed education system and lack of moral fibre and guidance), these propaganda ad’s are precisely that, government produced scare-mongering, hyperbole and utter lies, no surprise again, that Nu-labour is responsible.
    Baa Humbug (23:02:02) :
    Your summation is correct, get rid of one lot, the Blue Tories take over from Nu-labs, plus ca change?

  27. What do you expect from a [snip] which father was convinced marxist?

    Reply: The US interpretation of the that word is different from the UK version. ~ ctm.

  28. .
    What hope for the UK when you have muppets like Milliband et al running departments titled with Orwellian glee “Department for Energy and Climate Change”?

    Fourth rate no-hopers, soon to be ejected from Parliament.

  29. Well, regarding the TV advert my letter from the ASA didn’t read that way. I’ll have to re-read it to see what I missed as to my eyes the letter seemed to say that the advert was OK.

  30. Eany-meanie Vice President Gore
    Catch a liar by the claw
    If he squeals let him go
    To spread his tales of fear and woe

    Apparently, the above was used in the selection process that resulted in Choo Choo being appointed.

  31. There’s a series of ads running in Australia called ‘100 places’ – it goes through a variety of differnet places around the world, usually of natural beauty, that you should visit before climate change destroys them forever. I think they only run on SBS.

    The other night I was watching and they had a 30 second spot about how you should go to the himalayas, as all of the glaciers and snow will melt by 2035.

    Obviously they didn’t get the memo, or decided they’d spent the money and would run it anyway. I thought about complaining to the national adveritising standards but couldnt’ be bothered.

  32. Remember that there was a quarrel between Department of Energy and Department of Climate Change?

    (Dept. of Climate Change? Are they mad? )

    Quarrel solved by merging the two departments……

    Now my guess is; ASA will be merged with these departments.

  33. “The deluge posed problems for the ASA, which is not a scientific body, so it decided to compare the text of Miliband’s adverts with the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).”

    Which isn’t a scientific body either!

    It’s too little too late but this is basically good news – the TV ads make my blood boil and I’m talking about danger to health here… I don’t suppose I’m the only one who gets so annoyed!

    But this also needs following through – we are bombarded with advertising from the public, voluntary, and private sectors carrying lies about the state, scope, and effects of climate. Most of these ads should be banned on the basis of veracity but that means people have to jump through hoops to familiarise themselves with the classes of unnacceptable content and then they have to spend time putting in a complaint to the ASA.

  34. Heatwaves? What heatwaves? Oh they mean those glorious barbecue summers we haven’t been having…

    Morons!

  35. I thought that seemed familiar. El Reg has tracked a similar event. Or perhaps this one is part of the lot mentioned above, although I cannot see offhand why it wouldn’t likewise be banned.

    From Oct 9 2009:

    Climate porn campaign drowns dog for £6m
    Your taxes at work

    Taxpayers are paying £6m so their children can be scared out of their wits. It’s not Halloween, but a new climate change TV advertising campaign that begins tonight, which features a young girl watching a dog drown.

    The ad campaign is put together by “Act on CO2”, the cross-department publicity machine that describes itself as “the pre-eminent behaviour change brand on climate change communications across Government”.

    Nature magazine simply calls it the Worst. Climate. Campaign. Ever. You can see it here.
    [embedded video]
    (…)

    From Oct 21 2009:

    ASA to probe drowning dog climate ad
    Think of the children

    The Advertising Standards Authority will investigate the Government’s £6m TV spine-tingler designed to change our behaviour. 357 complaints have been made to the ASA, a self-regulatory body.

    The first tasteless ad features a girl watching a cartoon dog drown, engulfed by a flood – with the advice that only by reducing “everyday things like keeping houses warm and driving cars” can we avert a watery fate for our pets, our children’s pets, and our children’s pets’ children:
    [embedded video]

    Most complaints focus on the fact that it is too terrifying – while others have complained that the scientific evidence doesn’t justify the nightmare portrayed, albeit in cartoon form.

    Ministers haven’t helped in their statements defending the taxpayer-funded ad splurge. Minister Joan Ruddock claimed: “It is consistent with government policy on the issue, which is informed by the latest science and assessments of peer-reviewed, scientific literature made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and other international bodies.”

    But that’s not quite true.
    (…)

    Terrify them early and often, as that is what it’ll take to save the world. Yeah, right.

    Let’s see them have Lucy berate Charlie Brown for letting Snoopy drown by not using curly light bulbs. That should be a wildly successful ad campaign, for sure.

  36. Just tried reading the ASA Final Adjudication document reproduced at The Guardian.

    Basically, the ASA seems fine referring to the IPCC as the authority.

    The ads just stretched things a little further than even the IPCC does.

    For example, the ASA noted that the assurances of certainty by the IPCC included not just quantitative but also qualitative assessments.

    The IPCC is the authority and nobody will question them. We used to have this problem in the Dark Ages, didn’t we?

  37. “kwik (02:00:32) :
    Remember that there was a quarrel between Department of Energy and Department of Climate Change?(Dept. of Climate Change? Are they mad? )”

    Ministry of Silly Walks was a sketch satirising exactly how government creates wasteful departments and quangos.

  38. Stu (00:25:42) :

    We must preach the sooted-up albedo version of fleece as white as snow:

    Mary had a little lamb.
    Its fleece was black as charcoal.
    And every time it wagged its tail
    You could see its little eyes roll.

  39. Wren (22:21:47) :

    “After reading the Times article by Jonathan Leake, read ASA’s Final Adjudication, available at guardian.co.uk

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/13/scienceofclimatechange-climate-change

    Now ask yourself if Leak is an accurate reporter?”

    ===============

    On a point of accuracy for you last sentence – that would be ‘Leake’?

    Unless there are multiple journalists named Jonathan Leake there seems to be a history of articles by someone so named on the Times/Sunday Times web site. Until very recently wherever they could Leake’s articles gave staunch support to the AGW/HiCC concept. Now they seem to me to be slightly less strident and more seeking likely to seek angles that cover some middle ground. (Not easy in this area of discussion.)

    I don’t claim that he (and his sub editors) get it right. But if you claim they are always wrong then at least we who dislike the idea of paying for government propaganda of any stripe can take comfort that several hundred articles written about climate science by Mr. Leake since the start of the millennia can also be considered highly suspect.

    Since those articles may then be directly compared with all the others written by different journalists at the time it would suggest that you are saying that almost the entire body of journalistic output related to AGW/HiCC for the last 10 years is suspect.

    Is that what you are saying? Or are you simply spouting opinions from the Deltoid who, interestingly, seemed not to be too interested in publishing the list of Leake articles that I had prepared some weeks ago and offered to him as evidence for his anti-Leake campaign.

    For the record – I am naturally suspicious of press articles no matter the side(s) of a subject they seem to put forward. Re-hashed press releases are the least acceptable. ‘Investigative’ work can be more pertintent but that is not guaranteed. Once a suitable amount of material has been read one can make the likely adjustments to content from different writers and sources quite readily. I think I get better than 90% accuracy.

  40. UK politicians are such pompous self-deluded morons I think that the adverts should be run as unintentioned self-mockery.

    It’s hardly going to convert the undecided and it’s propaganda of the Ho Chi Minh variety. At least come gangster rap would have given it street cred, but this is Marxist propaganda devised by the suburban elite.

    Having lost the scientific argument they should at least be allowed to have the best nursery rhyme. The UK will have no problem with emission targets the way our economy is going. Maybe that’s what it’s all about – making us have something to feel happy about as our industry disappears.

  41. “TonyB (00:11:44) :

    This seems a very appropriate time to link again to my article carried here and at Air vent

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/crossing-the-rubicon-an-advert-to-change-hearts-and-minds/

    Thanks for the link. Are such plans really underway? The introduction of a CO2 quota system in a way equals the Cuban unit payment and has interesting repercussions on the value of money. It also offers interesting possibilities for shady dealings. Do they still drive that forward in the UK?

  42. The trouble is that we all suffer from (marxist-defined) false consciousness. We need to pay these idiots to tell us what to believe- Flash Gordon and his pet Milipede. I even got a dose yesterday when listening to a radio programme on double-entry bookkeeping. The tosh about carbon footprints. When all our politicians and the British Bucket Company go on carbon-free diets, I shall listen to what they say, but only after the first 6 months, just to test their sincerity.

  43. These ads have NOT been banned. Your Headline is completely wrong! Please correct it.

    I too complained to the ASA about the Act on CO2 “Bedtime Story” ad and received the adjudication in full a couple of days ago. I am outraged that the response. The covering letter states in its opening paragraph:

    “The ASA Broadcast Council considered that the TV ad did not breach the Code in any respect, for the reasons set out in the enclosed adjudication. The same ad is also currently being shown in cinemas and, as far as the Codes are concerned, following the Council’s decision, it can continue to be so.”

    It is a complete whitewash.

    You can read the full adjudication document here

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/13/scienceofclimatechange-climate-change

  44. Wren (22:21:47) :
    Wren (22:52:09) :
    The Guardian is the Government’s mouthpiece, of course it said that.
    But just read the last line of the Adjudication.
    Those Adverts SHOULD NOT APPEAR IN THEIR CURRENT FORM.
    If you live in the UK you would know that our children are being Brainwashed by these adverts and their school curriculum, it is an absolute disgrace.

  45. Baa Humbug (23:02:02) :
    They have a chance later this year to toss out this incompetent mob and replace them with another incompetent mob

    So true, they all follow the same Tree Hugging BUllS**T.

  46. TonyB (00:11:44) :
    It has been pointed out before that the UK Government new about the Himalayan glaciers 2035 being wrong back in 2004 (if I remember correctly) after a team of british scientists looked in to it.

  47. Rub a dub dub
    Three men in a tub
    These ads need a scrub

    Rub a dub dub
    Three men in a tub
    Climate science need a scrub

    Rub a dub dub
    Three men in a tub
    IPCC needs a scrub

    Rub a dub dub
    Three men in a tub
    Millibands should be scrubb’d

    This could be fun

  48. I think Graham’s comment that this is Marxist propaganda devised by the suburban elite right on.

    But we should consider ourselves fortunate indeed that our government cannot to rub two thoughts together to come up with any kind of real working plan.

    The UK high commission in Canada for instance has been thinking outside the box after it found no one interested in their chatty and gossipy media office and staff. Media report they hired a former fund raiser from the cancer sector to promote climate change policy as a security policy the way they masked the closure of the commission’s passport office. But from what I can find on the web, Canadian media have not done any stories on the UK plan other than someone new was hired to replace the media office. How much money was wasted there, I wonder?

  49. So Leake got it wrong yet again. This is not a surprise.

    The ASA did not find any problem with the television adverts at all and did not find them misleading. The only fault they did find was in relation to two of the press adverts, and they said these two press adverts should be more tentative in regard to future climate, although the adverts were not exaggerated or misleading per se:

    “Because, in a European context, there was a probability of greater than 90% for some events but a probability of greater than 50% for other events and because all statements about future climate conditions were based on modelled predictions, which the IPCC report itself stated still involved uncertainties in the magnitude and timing, as well as regional details, of predicted climate change, we concluded that the claim “Extreme weather events such as storms, floods and heatwaves will become more frequent and intense” in ad (b) and the claim “extreme weather conditions such as flooding, heat waves and storms will become more frequent and intense” in ad (c) should have been phrased more tentatively to reflect that. However, we considered that the imagery of UK flooding in ad (b) and of a drought in ad
    (c) were not themselves (and particularly not in the context of a nursery rhyme “what if” presentations) exaggerated or misleading.”

  50. Aww, they were only taking Schneider’s 1989 admonition to heart:
    “We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
    The balance was just a bit off, that’s all. As the S.S. Climatanic founders, the crew must keep busy rearranging the deck chairs.

  51. Have you guys overlooked this rather curious shift in position (if not actual complete volte-face) concerning climate change by James Lovelock:

    http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/162506/How-carbon-gases-have-saved-us-from-a-new-ice-age-

    “We’re just fiddling around. It is worth thinking that what we are doing in creating all these carbon emissions, far from being something frightful, is stopping the onset of a new ice age.”

    As far as I know, this short article in the Express is the only primary report of his talk at the London Science Museum (a very curious fact in itself).

    When the article was republished on Prison Planet, one of the resident warmist comment trolls seemed very discomforted by it and at first suggested that Lovelock’s apparent 180 degree turnabout in the AGW debate could only be the result of mischievous “cherry picking” of quotations from his talk. Later, however, he came back, smugly asserting that he had found proof that Lovelock had been misquoted in the form of a second account of a talk given by Lovelock at the Science Museum which did not tally in details with that in the Express. It then turned out, however, that either he didn’t notice, or thought that we wouldn’t, that this second account actually referred to a previous talk given by Lovelock in September 2009. This is the account of the previous talk:

    http://www.prismmagazine.co.uk/2009/09/dont-save-the-world-save-yourself/

    I hadn’t seen this article before (as far as I can ascertain using the WUWT search function, it seems that neither have you guys), and I was rather amused that the warmist troll had inadvertently brought to light this choice Lovelock quotation which would otherwise have been buried by history:

    “The earth doesn’t behave like model predictions. I find it extraordinary that climate scientists put their names against such predictions (of the way the world will change) when there are such great uncertainties… What makes them persist with wrong climate models? Perhaps they had no option, given how much Government rely on certainties… They (climate models) are the battleships of climate change and the scientists have to sail in them.”

  52. “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water.”

    I never did understand the physics of that.

  53. “Digsby (05:14:59) :
    [Lovelock:]”They (climate models) are the battleships of climate change and the scientists have to sail in them.””

    Ships of fools.

  54. Baa Humbug (23:02:02) :

    “As an Aussie, I’m thrilled whenever and however the poms get a beating….”

    Careful now, Mr. Humbug! We do get some beating everywhere nowadays, dont we? We certainly do here in Norway. And I think there are some beatings going on down under as well.

    Remember, all the tough Vikings lost their heads when Olav the Holy gave them the choice; Believe in God, or loose your heads! Now, its only the gullible left.

    hehe.

  55. They have taken control of all most all of the lines of information. And most all of the levers of power. And they have huge piles of taxpayers money for propaganda, and they still can not quite make the sale.
    Huhrra for this band of skeptics, we’ve got them surrounded and on the run!
    I guess you can’t fool all the people all the time.

  56. In this instance I think Jonathan Leake wrote quite a balanced report about the ASA verdict. Good job!

    We talked in a previous thread about the photoshopped flood pictures, and I think this now is a good example about what NOT to do (overstate the science) when trying to communicate scientific conclusions to the people.

    I think I have to repeat again that I am very happy about Mr. Leake’s reporting. Among other things it shows me the importance of discarding my own useless preconceptions and the importance of being open for new ideas and thoughts (about people as well as issues).

  57. “Have you guys overlooked this rather curious shift in position (if not actual complete volte-face) concerning climate change by James Lovelock:

    http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/162506/How-carbon-gases-have-saved-us-from-a-new-ice-age-

    I noticed that the last time it was posted, and I found it very strange coming from Lovelock (who has typically been extremely alarmist about climate change). I found his views previously to be strange as well, as his notion of Earth as a self regulating organism kind of runs counter to CAGW, as far as I understand his theory. Humans are after all a part of the system… according to the Gaia hypothesis the Earth operates on an intelligence which surpasses any kind of human knowledge- that suggests to me that what ever we’re doing, it’s most likely directed by Gaia itself/herself, so no need to worry. ;)

    (if you look at the long term trend of CO2 over very large scales, the trend is downwards. If it ever went below a certain level life on Earth would certainly be in trouble. Perhaps humans were actually bought forward by Gaia in order to release more CO2 into the atmosphere? That’s my take on Gaia and CO2 anyway. A bit philosophical but when you’re talking about big pictures you kind of need to be).

  58. DirkH (05:30:13) :
    Digsby (05:14:59) :
    [Lovelock:]“They (climate models) are the battleships of climate change and the scientists have to sail in them.””

    Its the Titanic. But there are torpedoes…..;

  59. The sad part about the ASA’s ajudication is that the IPCC report is seen as the benchmark of climate change truth. Whilst that remains the position of panels who adjudicate on such issues, then I am afraid that there is no hope for a balanced outcome in, for example, the climategate enquiry.

  60. @ Mike: “Why would anyone take the Times of London as a source for accurate news reporting?”

    Indeed, why would anyone take anything that ANY newspaper states as a source for accurate news reporting? But still, experience tells me the Times is much more likely top be accurate than the childish alarmism of The Guardian, The Independent and the NYT.

    In this case, the facts of the report are easily verifiable, so what’s your point?

  61. I too received the ASA’s response to my complaint about the tv advert.
    I could not believe their ‘findings’ – all based on the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment – it did not ‘breach their code in any respect’.
    Oh – right – the science is settled, then. That’s good to know.

  62. son of mulder (05:25:04) :
    “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water.”
    I never did understand the physics of that.

    They had to go uphill to tap the melting Himalayan glaciers…

  63. It appears to me we are seeing a fracture in the ranks of the warmists. Some still want to build scary scenarios while others are looking to stand back a little while still promoting AGW. This was also evident in the IOP article.

    So, we now have warmists attacking warmists. Very interesting and could get even more interesting as time goes on.

  64. A C Osborn

    ” just read the last line of the Adjudication.
    Those Adverts SHOULD NOT APPEAR IN THEIR CURRENT FORM.”

    This judgement applies to only two of the four press adverts. The
    ASA has nothing whatsoever critical to say about the TV advert where CO2 is depicted as black smoke forming a monster shape in the sky nor about the statement that “40% of the CO2 was coming from ordinary everyday things like keeping houses warm and driving cars”.

    Which form of advertising has more influence over children – newspapers or tv?

    Just to remind you, the TV ad can be seen here:

  65. I took exception to WWF’s “Sponsor a Polar Bear” ads because the WWF don’t in fact run any polar bear sanctuaries and their “scientists” would actually sooner SHOOT an approaching polar bear than save it. I could find no connection at all between the “sponsor a polar bear” ad campaign and any direct action to save polar bears from drowning due to vanishing polar ice. I found the ads wholly misleading.

  66. “Extreme weather events such as storms, floods and heat waves will become more frequent and intense”

    I thought the new narrative from the “computer models” down to Al Gore talked about lower frequency but high intensity.

    For example from today’s climate audit on hurricane research:

    http://climateaudit.org/2010/03/13/hurricanes-2010/

    “Existing modelling studies also consistently project decreases in the globally averaged frequency of tropical cyclones, by 6–34%”

    It seems like this could be sufficient to claim the ads have no scientific basis. These guys should at least use the same alarmist playbook!

    James

  67. btw – according to the letter I got from the ASA this story is confidential until Wednesday 17th March. It was only scheduled to be made available to journalists under strict embargo on Monday 15th March (tomorrow).

    Obviously this unjustified demand has failed – if anyone can see any good reason for the ASA to have taken this position I’d be interested to hear it. A quick check just now on the ASA site shows it is not reported there so perhaps they think it is still “under wraps”. The only angle that springs to mind is news management to avoid the Sundays, but perhaps I’m missing something?

  68. The UK ads remind me of a radio ad that played repeatedly during the warmest summer months of 2006 in the USA. (Fervor pitch targeting AGW was high at that time, following the release of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”.)

    Female voice: “Melting polar ice with a dirty look. Shrinking glaciers, a nudge. Then dying coral reefs pushed us … hard. Rising ocean temperatures and extreme weather, an upper cut. And record breaking heat waves hit us right where it hurts. Has it occurred to anyone that maybe the earth’s trying to get our attention?”
    Male voice: “We can still reduce greenhouse gas pollution. To find out how, go to fightglobalwarming.com. Brought to you by Environmental Defense, The Robertson Foundation and the Ad Council.”

    Going to that site, their main recommendation is to replace all of your incandescent lights with compact fluorescents.
    I’ve always wondered if these entities might be on the payroll of “Big Compact Fluorescents”.
    The Ad Council does receive funding from the US Government for certain PSA’s, but it is unknown if this particular ad had any funding from Uncle Sugar.

  69. Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
    Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the king’s horses and all the king’s men
    Tried to advertise him together again.

    Little Boy Blue,
    Come blow your horn,
    ……….;
    But where is the boy
    Who looks after the sheep?
    He’s in a hurricane shelter,
    Fast asleep.

    London Bridge is falling down……..
    Fix it with scads of scary ads, scary ads…..

    Mary, Mary, quite contrary,
    How does your garden grow?
    Under spring’s cloudy skies
    And a foot of frost and snow

    Old King Cole was a merry old git
    …….
    And he called for his fiddlers three.
    Mike Mann, Phil Jones and Gavin Schmitt
    They tweedle deed and tweedle deed
    But couldn’t play worth a spit

  70. You should read up about how FDR used children to get them to support his socialist programs. It is disgusting. And now we have the public school system trying the same thing.

    It’s really not new that governments do this stuff, for their own reasons, for instance taxing people. Or giving grants to scientist to support government’s hoaxes.

    As to the joke about stopping a new ice age … well that’s as funny as we are melting the earth.

    The biggest travesty of all was banning DDT with a hoax. 35 million Africa children have paid the ultimate price for that hoax.

  71. about [snip] time, the UK government wastes far too much taxpayers money on stupid pointless lying ads

  72. Baa Humbug 23:02:02

    I can understand your resentment of us Poms taking the Ashes from you last year, but don’t let it blind you to the failings of your Mr KRudd (I believe he spells it that way, though personally I prefer it with a “c” and no capitals). You are fortunate in having a choice to make fairly soon, and one between distinctive parties. As you so correctly note, our choice is much more limited. Yous truly is “The Lucky Country”

  73. You should post a link to the actual ruling. In it, it is quite clear that vast majority of complaints were thrown out. However it should of been stated the probabilities to better inform viewer e.g. 90% chance of more extreme weather events globally. There is less certainty at smaller regions so this should have also been reflected in any future use of ads.

    Most of this is actually reflected in the article so whats with all hyperbole statements in the comments. The ASA agreed that global warming and resultant climate change is occurring. The ruling lists those consulted such as IPCC, Royal Society, World Meteorological Organization as well as 19 other national or international academies.

  74. Sou (04:59:17)

    In related news, cigarette packets in the UK have had their labels changed to be more tentative:

    Smoking kills, but then so to do many other health and occupational safety factors, so you might not die younger than otherwise
    Smoking seriously harms you and others around you, unless you are smoking by yourself out in the countryside, or others around you are already smokers and likely to die soon
    Smoking causes fatal lung cancer, usually, unless something else kills you first or you have really, really lucky genetics, and you’ll be fine
    Smoking can damage the sperm and decreases fertility, but if you are a young lad you still better be careful
    Stopping smoking reduces the risk of fatal heart and lung diseases, unless you are still obese and not exercising, in which case, you might as well smoke
    Smoking clogs the arteries and causes heart attacks and strokes, in some people, but we don’t really know why some people seem to have no problems, but chances are you won’t be so lucky

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_packaging_warning_messages#United_Kingdom

  75. Bernie (05:47:52) :

    Ric Werme:
    What ever happened to the Science Museum poll?

    Conviently forgotten, it was going the wrong way with a strong majority against AGW.

  76. Wren (22:21:47) :

    “After reading the Times article by Jonathan Leake, read ASA’s Final Adjudication, available at guardian.co.uk

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/13/scienceofclimatechange-climate-change

    Now ask yourself if Leak is an accurate reporter?”

    ===============

    On a point of accuracy for you last sentence – that would be ‘Leake’?

    Unless there are multiple journalists named Jonathan Leake there seems to be a history of articles by someone so named on the Times/Sunday Times web site. Until very recently wherever they could Leake’s articles gave staunch support to the AGW/HiCC concept. Now they seem to me to be slightly less strident and more seeking likely to seek angles that cover some middle ground. (Not easy in this area of discussion.)

    I don’t claim that he (and his sub editors) get it right. But if you claim they are always wrong then at least we who dislike the idea of paying for government propaganda of any stripe can take comfort that several hundred articles written about climate science by Mr. Leake since the start of the millennia can also be considered highly suspect.

    Since those articles may then be directly compared with all the others written by different journalists at the time it would suggest that you are saying that almost the entire body of journalistic output related to AGW/HiCC for the last 10 years is suspect.

    Is that what you are saying? Or are you simply spouting opinions from the Deltoid who, interestingly, seemed not to be too interested in publishing the list of Leake articles that I had prepared some weeks ago and offered to him as evidence for his anti-Leake campaign.

    For the record – I am naturally suspicious of press articles no matter the side(s) of a subject they seem to put forward. Re-hashed press releases are the least acceptable. ‘Investigative’ work can be more pertintent but that is not guaranteed. Once a suitable amount of material has been read one can make the likely adjustments to content from different writers and sources quite readily. I think I get better than 90% accuracy.
    ======
    OK, I’ll correct my sentence.

    Incorrect: Now ask yourself if Leak is an accurate reporter?”

    Correct: Now ask yourself if Leake reported the ASA’s adjudication accurately.

    Like you I am “naturally suspicious of press articles.”

  77. Digsby (05:14:59) :
    ““We’re just fiddling around. It is worth thinking that what we are doing in creating all these carbon emissions, far from being something frightful, is stopping the onset of a new ice age.”
    I noticed that stance of Lovelock’s too recently, as I continue to see parallels between his Gaia theory of the Earth having self-regulating properties being borne out more and more by the actual science. In response to one of the more recent threads (not sure which), I happened to search for of some of what he actually said, and as so often happens got side-tracked.
    Even though he’s wrong about our C02 being able to stave off an ice age, he’s certainly right that C02, far from being our enemy is our friend (I don’t know, but am guessing he’s aware of the beneficial effects the increased C02 has had on plant growth).
    I also love that quote “The earth doesn’t behave like model predictions”. He gets it. We should welcome him to the ever-burgeoning ranks of climate realists. It should be fun to watch as the cargo cultists prepare the bus to throw him under.

  78. In other related ASA news on 2 other climate change ads:

    The separate ASA adjudication on the 2 TV/cinema ads (the one with the drowning dog, and the one with the car exhaust chimney) has already been made on March 10th. There is a press embargo until March 17th… although I expect that anybody who was one of the complainees will now know the result, having received a letter from the ASA.

    Without wishing to reveal the result of these adjudications, I would suggest that nobody get their hopes up about the ASA criticising these 2 ads.

    The main substantive issue of complaint for these ads is whether “Scientists say….” (followed by AGW explanation) is misleading, since it implies all scientists say, as opposed to some scientists. The ASA is using the IPCC as the source of what scientists say.

  79. @ son of mulder you dig the well where the aquifer is. When I was growing up our house was on the top of a local ridge. We had significant problem with flooding basements every time he had a lot significant rain. If the stuff under the top of the hill is sand, and the stuff at the bottom of the hill is clay, you dig the well at the top of the hill.

  80. Son of mulder (05:25:04)

    LOL

    “I never did understand the physics of that.”

    Digging a hole for a well on top of the hill does seem like a waste of effort.

  81. @Mike It depends on what they are reporting on. I will believe the UK Telegraph on some issues like health care, and reject them on others.

  82. It is nice to see that not everyone has gone off the deep end (i.e. the ASA). I would be furious if my tax dollars were used to pay for this kind of advertising.

  83. son of mulder (05:25:04) :

    “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water.”

    I never did understand the physics of that.
    Jack was in fact hoping that Jill would exhibit the same lack of comprehension. It never was anything to do with water.
    It rarely is.
    It’s just an allegory.
    He is everywhere.

  84. I love the idea of nursery rhymes used this way!

    What’s hysterical is that one of them points to drought, the other flooding….??? I guess you could have a flood during a drought, maybe even a drought during a flood!!

    Mary Mary quite contrary,
    How does your garden grow?
    With CO2 and flooding,
    and drought now,
    Don’t you know?

    Works for both sides, though….like There Was A Crooked Man for Pachauri,

    Humpty Dumpty for the IPCC….

    And a host of others just crying to be warped!!

    http://www.famousquotes.me.uk/nursery_rhymes/nursery_rhymes_index.htm

  85. I’m with Tom Arnold on this. As another complainant, the ASA’s decision was as close to a whitewash as possible. The ASA has form for “green washed” decisions. Most complaints by wind farm objection groups are brushed aside while those by developers against objectors are upheld. Our own group only got a sensible decision by appealing to the independent adjudicator.

    The stance is hardly surprising, the Chairman is a NuLabour apparatchik and the CEO is on record as supporting AGW, climate change, etc etc.

    Don’t expect Miliband to be embarassed. It will all be spun away. These people have no sense of shame what so ever.

    Still, even this is better than the total whitewash that most of us expected.

  86. The final result of adjudication on the TV fairy tail and the 4 press ads a, b, c, and d is that “press ads b and c should not appear again in their current form.”

    What the phrase “not in their current form means in practice, is anyones guess. Based on the adjudication, the ads were in violation because they stated probable events with too much certainty, so possibly they will have to add a conditional clause, but not much more.

    Interestingly, on the matter of causing distress, this is apparently ok, because advertisers are allowed to alarm people as a warning. “We considered that based on the ipcc analysis of the data and its projections on trajectories plotted from that, the nursery rhyme of possible effects of climate change in the ads were not disproportionate to the risk and were not unduly distressing.”

    So there you have it. Climate change is alarming and the ads weren’t distressing anyway.

  87. marchesarosa (04:08:56) :

    These ads have NOT been banned. Your Headline is completely wrong! Please correct it.
    (…)

    The headline at the Times’ article:
    “Ed Miliband’s adverts banned for overstating climate change”

    Since this post is reporting the Times’ article, “correcting” the headline for this post would be misrepresenting the Times’ headline. Thus the Times has to go first.

  88. Miliband is destroying Englands reputation.

    An obvious fascist using totalitarian propaganda ans surpresseing tecniques.
    Screaming “Denier” and frightning children trough nurcery rimes.Why dont you Englishmen report him to your MI ? Labour and Miliband is making England Orwellish and Torys have capitulated.Who`s defending democracy in England today?

  89. marchesarosa (07:06:40) :
    I am on your side they should all have been banned, but 2 were (sort of).
    see my comment here A C Osborn (04:23:55) :

  90. More from the Autonomous Mind blog

    “Only one of the ten different groups of complaints has been upheld, a trivial matter that does nothing to prevent this propaganda continuing to be broadcast. The ASA has refused to uphold the other complaints because it has accepted as fact everything the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) said in the response it submitted.

    But the real issue here is that DECC – and by definition the government – has relied squarely on information from the discredited Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to justify the alarmist, exaggerated and plain misleading claims made in the advert. ”

    http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/asa-rejects-complaints-about-alarmist-co2-advert/

  91. Interesting, ironic and sad that it is the Advertising Standards Authority that will stop the promotion of bad science and not the science community and not the other educated, intellegent leaders of our governments.

  92. Slabadang (09:34:05) :
    UKIP, one of the very small parties is the only one, even the Royalty buy in to AGW.

  93. [snip – appreciate what you are saying, but we don’t allow religious discussions on WUWT]

  94. Wren (08:02:28) :

    OK, I’ll correct my sentence.

    Incorrect: Now ask yourself if Leak is an accurate reporter?”

    Correct: Now ask yourself if Leake reported the ASA’s adjudication accurately.

    Like you I am “naturally suspicious of press articles”.

    ===========

    Hmm. Good save! Or it would have been but for the existence of the earlier comment. At least the ad hom is constrained to an unexceptional level of criticism in the second version.

    That said I have little interest in how the ASA’s adjudication in presented. The chances of them being any sort of valid assessor of advertising funded, through government, by the tax payer is small to non-existent. After all that is where their own income originates one way or the other.

    How the population interprets the information forced upon them is much more interesting to me. The source of the information is of lesser consequence, though most people seem to seek soources with which they feel comfortable.

  95. The thought occurs that if ‘the science is settled’ and other such mantras, why is so much UK taxpayer dollar (Okay, pound) being spent on such propaganda? Surely if catastrophic man made climate change is so axiomatic to be self evident, then why does the public need to be bombarded with such messages?

    Could it be that the British proponents of AGW are panicking?

  96. Syl_2010 (08:29:19) :

    Son of mulder (05:25:04)

    LOL

    “I never did understand the physics of that.”

    Digging a hole for a well on top of the hill does seem like a waste of effort.

    ————–

    Well, yes and no.

    In the context of the nursery rhyme I suspect the real suggestion is now hidden but may have little to do with water.

    However in a social context there was good reason for digging a well some way up a hill, perhaps even near the top.

    You get the pick of the (often naturally filtered) water from the water table. This was likely to be of much better quality (read healthier) than water from lower levels.

    There were good reasons why larger houses for the more prosperous local landowners were built, lke castles before them, at higher levels. Not the least was the better quality of any water available nearby – whether from a stream or from a well. For a start the number of decaying dead animals in the field would usually be less. Perhaps more importantly the sewage form ‘the big house’ would flow down to lower levels and contaminate the water further down the hill. Living in the valley was probably not so good from a health POV, though having cold running water in the abode might have been seen as an advantage. (Well, people had little understanding of health matters in those days.)

    So if one was seeking good quality water (in the right sort of landscape) climbing a hill to find it would have been a wise decision. In some parts of the world it probably is a wise decision to this day – though with the spending in AGW/HiCC to date any such health problem realted to clean water could probably have been pretty much eliminated already.

    For some the plus point of not spending the money on water supply would be that the poor quality supplies help to keep population levels down.

    We can have strange sets of values in play.

  97. As long as we are telling fairy tales:

    Once upon a time there was a dear little chicken named Chicken Little.
    One morning as she was scratching in her garden, a pebble fell off the roof and hit her on the head.
    “Oh, dear me!” she cried, “the sky is falling. I must go and tell the King,” and away she ran down the road.

    By and by she met Henny Penny going to the store. “Where are you going?” asked Henny Penny.
    “I’m going to tell the King the sky is falling,” answered Chicken Little.
    “How do you know the sky is falling?” asked Henny Penny.
    “Because a piece of it fell on my head,” she replied. “May I go with you?” begged Henny Penny. “Certainly,” answered Chicken Little, and she hastened on, followed by Henny Penny. Turning up a shady lane they met Cocky Locky.
    “Where are you two going?” asked Cocky Locky.
    “Oh, we are going to tell the King the sky is falling,” answered Henny Penny.
    “How do you know?”
    “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny.
    “A piece of it fell on my head,” cried Chicken Little. “May I go with you?” asked Cocky Locky. “Certainly,” answered Chicken Little.
    Then away went the three, Chicken Little, Henny Penny and Cocky Locky.
    By and by they came to a pond where they met Ducky Daddles.
    “Where are you three going?” he asked.
    “The sky is falling and we are going to tell the King,” answered Cocky Locky.
    “How do you know?” asked Ducky Daddies. “Henny Penny told me,” said Cocky Locky. “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny. “‘A piece of it fell on my head,” cried Chicken Little.
    “May I go with you?” asked Ducky Daddies.

    “Certainly,” they answered.
    By and by whom should they meet but Goosey Poosey, carrying a basket of gooseberries to market.
    “Where are you four going?” she asked.
    “The sky is falling and we are going to tell the King,” answered Ducky Daddles.
    “How do you know it is falling?” asked Goosey Poosey.
    “Cocky Locky told me,”answered Ducky Daddles.
    “Henny Penny told me,” said Cocky Locky.
    “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny.
    “A piece of it fell on my head,” cried Chicken Little. “May I go with you?” asked Goosey Poosey. “Certainly,” said Chicken Little.
    Then Goosey Poosey followed Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Cocky Locky, and Ducky Daddles until they met Turkey Lurkey.
    “Where are you five going?” asked Turkey Lurkey.
    “The sky is falling and we’re going to tell the king,” answered Goosey Poosey.
    “How do you know?” asked Turkey Lurkey.

    “Ducky Daddies told me so,” answered Goosey Poosey. “Cocky Locky told me,” answered Ducky Daddles. “Henny Penny told me,” said Cocky Locky. “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny.
    “A piece of it fell on my head,” cried Chicken Little. “May I go with you?” asked Turkey Lurkey.
    “Certainly,” said Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Cocky Locky, Ducky Daddies and Goosey Poosey.
    So away they went until they met Gander Pander. “Where are you six going?” he asked.
    “The sky is falling and we are going to tell the King.” “How do you know?” asked Gander Pander. “Goosey Poosey told me,” said Turkey Lurkey. “Ducky Daddies told me,” said Goosey Poosey. “Cocky Locky told me,” said Ducky Daddles.
    “Henny Penny told me,” said Cocky Locky. “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny.
    “A piece of it fell on my head,” cried Chicken Little. “May I go with you?” asked Gander Pander. “Certainly,” answered all the little feathered folks.
    By and by they became tired, and sat down to rest, when out from behind the rocks jumped Foxy Loxy.
    “Where are you all going?” he asked, with a sly grin.
    “The sky is falling and we are going to tell the King,” they all replied together.
    “How do you know?” asked Foxy Loxy squinting his wicked eyes.
    “Turkey Lurkey told me,” said Gander Pander.

    “Goosey Poosey told me,” said Turkey Lurkey. “Ducky Daddies told me,” said Goosey Poosey. “Cocky Locky told me,” said Ducky Daddies. “Henny Penny told me,” said Cocky Locky. “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny.
    “A piece of it fell on my head,” cried Chicken Little, “and we are going to tell the King.”
    “You are not going the right way. Shall I show it to you?” said Foxy Loxy.
    “Oh, certainly,” they all answered at once and followed Foxy Loxy, until they came to the door of his cave among the rocks.
    “This is a short way to the King’s Palace; you’ll soon get there if you follow me. I will go in first,” said Foxy Loxy.’
    Just as the little feathered folks crowded around the dark narrow hole, eager to follow the sly fox, a little gray squirrel, with very bright eyes, jumped out from behind the bushes and whispered to them: “Don’t go in, don’t go in, all your little necks he’ll wring, and you’ll never see the King.”
    But the sharp ears of Foxy Loxy heard the warning, and, quick as a wink, he turned and caught Gander Pander.
    Just as he was about to twist Gander Pander’s neck, the little squirrel threw a big stone and hit the old fox right on the head.
    “The sky surely is falling,” groaned Foxy Loxy, creeping into the darkest corner of his cave.
    Happy to escape from the wicked old fox, away ran Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Cocky Locky, Ducky Daddies, Goosey Poosey, Turkey Lurkey and Gander Pander.

    By and by they came to the beautiful palace in which lived the wise King, and upon being brought before him, they all shouted at once; “Good and wise King, we have come to warn you that the sky is falling!”
    “How do you know the sky is falling?” asked the King. “Because a piece of it fell on my head,” said Chicken Little.
    “Come nearer, Chicken Little,” said the King and leaning from his velvet throne, he picked the pebble from the feathers of Chicken Little’s head.
    “You see it was only a little pebble and not part of the sky at all,” said the King. “Go home in peace and do not fear because the sky cannot fall; only rain falls from the sky.”

    Weary but wiser, the little feathered folks left the palace and started on their long journey homeward.

    Chicken Little is hurrying
    Umbrella ‘neath her wing.

    She thinks the sky is falling fast
    So goes to tell the King.

    But, after she has spread the news
    And all is told and said

    The good old King just laughs at her

  98. And this one comes next:

    There once was a shepherd boy who was bored as he sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. To amuse himself he took a great breath and sang out, “Wolf! Wolf! The Wolf is chasing the sheep!”

    The villagers came running up the hill to help the boy drive the wolf away. But when they arrived at the top of the hill, they found no wolf. The boy laughed at the sight of their angry faces.

    “Don’t cry ‘wolf’, shepherd boy,” said the villagers, “when there’s no wolf!” They went grumbling back down the hill.

    Later, the boy sang out again, “Wolf! Wolf! The wolf is chasing the sheep!” To his naughty delight, he watched the villagers run up the hill to help him drive the wolf away.

    When the villagers saw no wolf they sternly said, “Save your frightened song for when there is really something wrong! Don’t cry ‘wolf’ when there is NO wolf!”

    But the boy just grinned and watched them go grumbling down the hill once more.

    Later, he saw a REAL wolf prowling about his flock. Alarmed, he leaped to his feet and sang out as loudly as he could, “Wolf! Wolf!”

    But the villagers thought he was trying to fool them again, and so they didn’t come.

    At sunset, everyone wondered why the shepherd boy hadn’t returned to the village with their sheep. They went up the hill to find the boy. They found him weeping.

    “There really was a wolf here! The flock has scattered! I cried out, “Wolf!” Why didn’t you come?”

    An old man tried to comfort the boy as they walked back to the village.

    “We’ll help you look for the lost sheep in the morning,” he said, putting his arm around the youth, “Nobody believes a liar…even when he is telling the truth!”

  99. Anthony – may I humbly suggest, following on the theme from some of the contributions here, that you host a contest for nursery rhimes with an AGW slant. Here is my entry:

    All around the CRU
    The skeptics chased the numbers
    Phil and Keith tried desperately
    To cover up their blunders!

  100. “Stu (06:10:46) :
    […]
    (if you look at the long term trend of CO2 over very large scales, the trend is downwards. If it ever went below a certain level life on Earth would certainly be in trouble. Perhaps humans were actually bought forward by Gaia in order to release more CO2 into the atmosphere? That’s my take on Gaia and CO2 anyway. A bit philosophical but when you’re talking about big pictures you kind of need to be).”

    Makes sense. James “Death Train” Hansen thus works against the spirit of Gaia. Probably as we’re talkin’ she’s already sending out a reptilian monster from the bottom of the sea to get him while he’s asleep.

  101. or this……..

    Bake a stick, fake a stick, Michael Mann,
    fudge me a stick as fast as you can,
    splice and cherry pick so none can see,
    then see it lionized by the IPCC

  102. I also complained formally and received my letter outlining the judgement yesterday.

    Basically it takes the word of the IPCC as gospel (sorry for the religious connotation….) and rejects almost all of the substantive points of the complaints on this basis.

    So – no victory for commonsense here, just the same old whitewash we always get in this country.

    I had to endure yet another bit of BBC-driven AGW support this morning on the (spineless) Andrew Marr programme, when he “interviewed” (i.e provided a platform for) the new head of Greenpeace.

    I hate the Conservative party as much as I hate Labour, but I will vote for them in order to get rid of this bunch of eco-mentalist loonies

  103. A C Osborn (10:12:28) :

    They are still using IPCC quotes that have been discredited by later studies.

    No they’re not.

  104. Last week’s letter from the ASA requires me to keep the contents of the report confidential; however, since the online Guardian has disclosed the report in its entirety (!), there’s little point.

    I think that Jonathan Leake of the Times is doing his best to portray the result in a positive light, but the fact remains – the ASA did not uphold the bulk of our complaints, the exceptions being the two press ads where there was a disparity between the “likely” and “very likely” effects of climate change. To me this seems to be a relatively minor point.

    The ASA state that (concerning the IPCC’s work) “We concluded that it was reasonable, and not misleading, for DECC to have relied on that evidence at the time the ads appeared.”

    Of course, much has emerged since then to challenge the IPCC’s work, but the ASA can still argue that at the time the ads were produced and shown, DECC was acting in good faith. They will thus be able to avoid causing embarrassment to DECC, whatever happens to the IPCC; remember that in the UK we are probably less than two months away from a general election, and that ASA’s Chairman is Chris Smith, who is also the Chairman of the Environment Agency, a believer in carbon rationing for all citizens and a Miliband ally.

    Although I’ll be appealing (as will many others, surely) I think this is a case of moving on to the next battle. Ofcom is still investigating a possible breach of the law against political advertising, and I think there is a good case to be made.

    This is what I wrote to Ofcom on 3rd November 2009:

    “This complaint is about the Government’s TV advert “Bedtime Stories” that was first aired on 9th October 2009 at 20.45 on ITV1 and which is part of their “Act on CO2″ initiative.

    In Section 4 (Political and Controversial Issues) of the TV Advertising Standards Code, it states: “No advertisement: (a) may be inserted by or on behalf of any body whose objects are wholly or mainly of a political nature, (b) may be directed towards any political end.” In the Notes to Section 4, it states that: “The purpose of this prohibition is to prevent well-funded organisations from using the power of television advertising to distort the balance of political debate. The rule reflects the statutory ban on ‘political’ advertising on television in the Broadcasting Act 1990.”

    It increasingly appears to me that, among its other qualities, this ad is mainly of a political nature and directed towards a political end. On Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Miliband’s website http://wwwedspledge.com there has (as of Sunday 1st November 2009) appeared this page (apologies for the long link): http://www.edspledge.com/advert-tell-a-friend?
    utm_source=taomailandutm_medium=emailandutm_campaign=100146+Ed’s+Pledge+-
    +the+advert+they+are+trying+to+banandtmtid=732-100146-2-442-195575

    On this page, Ed Miliband urges readers to use a web form to tell their friends to watch the advert and join the Ed’s Pledge campaign. This is what he writes: “The advert they are trying to ban. As part of an effort to raise peoples’ awareness of man-made climate change and what we can all do about it, the government had this advert made. Now, whipped up by the sceptics, nearly six hundred people have complained about it in a bid to get it banned. Don’t let the sceptics silence us – use the form below to tell a friend to watch the advert and join the Ed’s Pledge campaign.”

    Ed’s Pledge appears to be definitely of a party political nature; recently, as you can see from the website (http://www.edspledge.com/success-letter ) Ed Miliband has used this resource to muster co-signatures on a letter to David Cameron, urging him to persuade Conservative MP Ken Clarke to retract comments made about building wind farms. This campaign would thus appear to be wholly or in part about gaining political advantage over the Conservatives.

    As such, by linking the “Bedtime Stories” advert to Ed’s Pledge, on a political web page displaying the Labour Party name and logo, Ed Miliband (and by association, the Department of Energy and Climate Change, sponsors of the advert) would appear to be in breach of Section 4 a) and b).”

    As I said, on to the next battle.

  105. “In his book “The State In Capitalist Society” Ralph Miliband analyses the functions of the mass media. For Miliband advertising is political, that is, it reinforces the existing social order and thereby the rule of the capitalist class. Advertising does more than merely inform it also persuades. It not only aims to persuade the potential customer to buy it also persuades them that capitalism is the best system. The company not only sells its commodities it also sells itself and thereby also the system of which it is a part. It cannot sell itself without also selling capitalism.”

    This is true Marxism, spending our money to pay for political propaganda. The advertising doesn’t actually have a purpose other than indoctrination and to counter public opposition. They will then claim that they have overwhelming support, even though they know full well that they don’t.

    The latest figure I saw was 28% support in the UK for AGW. If they show adverts like this, I guarantee that support will plummet even further. Patronising puerile stuff like that won’t be well received.

  106. son of mulder (05:25:04) :

    “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water.”

    I never did understand the physics of that.

    The Malvern Hills, where I live, are famous for their wells. The Hills are just a large lump of granite and dolerite, and the water comes out up to a few hundred feet above the surrounding (sort of) plain. Quite a lot of Ca in the water. We locals get it free, hehe! And I wash my car in it (but not often).

  107. Propaganda written for children, and with contempt for the intelligence of their audience.
    Keep digging :)

  108. Rub-a-dub-dub,
    Three men in a tub.
    And who do you think they be?
    The butcher, the baker,
    The candlestick maker.
    Turn them out, knaves all three.

    Ah-ha! The butcher sells beef, the baker burns fuel to heat his ovens, and the candlestick maker uses refined metals and heat.

    All three are far more responsible for global warming than an average person. The flooding is their fault! They deserve to be sent adrift in a tub!

    Lousy bunch of knaves. Off with their heads!

  109. In a similar vein, it may be of interest for readers of this blog that Northern Ireland’s environment minister Sammy Wilson banned this type of political pro-AGW nonsense TV ads from the British Government over a year ago.

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/environment–minister-sammy-wilson-bans-adverts-warning-of-the-effects-of-climate-change-14180104.html

    Environment Minister Sammy Wilson has banned government television adverts in Northern Ireland warning of the effects of climate change, it emerged today.

    The DUP man said he was not prepared to allow “insidious New Labour propaganda” about the impact of climate change which would have been screened on UTV.

    “It was the sheer arrogance of them saying ‘we are doing this’ and yet they have had no consultation with my Department whatsoever. This is a devolved responsibility so they were also wrong constitutionally,” he said.

    Mr Wilson said the adverts attempted to tell people that simple measures like changing their lightbulbs and turning off TVs from stand-by mode could help prevent them “wrecking the world”.

    He told the Belfast Telegraph: “The vast majority of people are not prepared to accept this view of life any more and are certainly not prepared to bear the massive financial consequences.”

    The Minister said all the focus groups involved in producing the ads, which are also being shown on Channels Four and Five, and Sky, were based in England and he wrote to then Minister David Milliband to stress “hands off Northern Ireland”.

    “Since then, the Scottish administration has also said no to these adverts, which I would like to think was encouraged by my position and the Welsh Assembly, while being more timid, has taken a similar view,” he said.

    The Green Party today however accused Mr Wilson of contradicting himself and warned his outdated opinions are preventing action to tackle fuel poverty and the provision of more jobs.

    Steven Agnew said: “He has always said he will support measures which will encourage energy efficiency and these adverts are all about people supporting measures which can help energy efficiency — whether you agree with climate change or not. So Sammy is now contradicting himself.

    “He seems to think that climate change is a belief you can argue for or against but when he had been asked to provide alternative explanations comes up with solar variations which have also been investigated by scientists.”

    Mr Agnew said: “Certainly there are now very few who would agree with him.”

    Mr Agnew, the Green Euro-candidate for this June’s election, argued the Green ‘new deal’ promoted by new President Barack Obama had shown how fuel poverty and climate change could be tackled while providing new jobs.

    Mr Wilson insisted, however: “I have no difficulty with energy efficiency and I take my Ministerial obligations in this regard very seriously, but I believe there is virtually a fear factor in how this whole climate change issue is being addressed.”

  110. These ads are so Monte Python like. They just have to be someone in middle management taking the p#**.

  111. Yeah Binny, it’ll be the ones who didnt really get what Python was about- taking the P out of these middle management twits!

    (The Pythons REALLY hate accountants)

  112. The Miliband brothers are from a family of Marxists, liars and traitors. They well know how to lie and commit treachery on their own nation: their father lied about their background (they were traitors) to get into the UK, and their grandfather joined the invading Communist Red Army and butchered their own Polish neighbours. I would not trust them on any level whatsoever: they are the worst of the worst. See my two posts:

    http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/carbon-capture/

    http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/death-by-eco-fascism/

  113. “The adverts, commissioned by Ed Miliband…”

    I don’t know who this Ed is, but I know there is a David Miliband. Not that I know much about English politics, but Dave Miliband is, from what I know of him, a sort of English version of Al Gore. They’re probably brothers. But whatever the case…

    They should produce a new type of fortune cookie. Call them M&Ms, for Miliband and Miliband. Inside each “cookie” (all green, btw) is a message about the consequences of global warming. Of course, like the M&M we all know and enjoy, once you get past the coating and chocolate (melted of course, from the global warming)… nuts, just like the Milibands!

  114. Wren (22:21:47) : “After reading the Times article by Jonathan Leake, read ASA’s Final Adjudication, available at guardian.co.uk
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/13/scienceofclimatechange-climate-change
    Now ask yourself if Leak is an accurate reporter?

    Yes.

    Jonathan Leake says “The ASA has ruled that the claims made in the newspaper adverts were not supported by solid science”
    which seems a reasonable interpretation of the finding
    “all statements about future climate conditions were based on modelled predictions, which the IPCC report itself stated still involved uncertainties in the magnitude and timing, as well as regional details […] and we concluded that the claim […] should have been phrased more tentatively to reflect that.”.

  115. Well not surprised. Everytime I hear, see or read about Milliband he comes across as clearly having no idea of the science, an ultra-hysteric and a politican who realises his own portfolio and his own job are dependent upon hysterical, Hollywood-science stunts such as this one.

    He is the classic Chardonnay Socialist (as we like to call them here in Australia). Happy to have to good life and a position in society, (through no effort of his own) but to appease their guilty conscience have to resort to socialist mantras and double standards as a deflection. And its the Chardonay Socialists that are the first to preach about reducing consumption, and getting people to pay more for basic services. Easy for them to say!!

  116. In Britain they are called champagne socialists.

    (We are clearly more upmarket than you colonial types, cam)

    ;-)

  117. This kind of advertising paid for by the taxpayer makes me hopping mad, as does the appeal to emotion – esp as it’s aimed at terrifying children. Shame on them all.

    The recent floods in the UK over the last few years have absolutely nothing to do with global warming, and everything to do with short-term greed and stupidity, which has allowed large-scale surburban building on flood plains, Not only is this foolish in itself, but the modern habit of tarmacing and paving everything leaves nowhere for rain run-off to soak into the earth; add the neglect of the storm pipes and (in ruaral areas) the silting up of drainage ditches through lack of famr labour, and there you have it.

    I was staying in Berks a couple of summers ago when the massive floods occoured and many friends had their houses under water. Unless you have witnessed something like that you have no idea of the repercussions which go on for months if not years: hassles iwth insurance companies, people *ordered* by the Health & Safety Exec to have their kitchens etc ripped out and all their furniture put in skips – broken marriages, nervous breakdowns…

    And all becuase of institutional inefficiency and ignorance in the first place!

    In the Lambourn valley which fflooded right along its length, the locals had for the previous few years been forbidden (even the kids!) to set foot in the stream or touch any vegetation therein; consequently – funds and staff being in short supply – there was a huge buildup of weed which greatly exacerbated the floods. Meanwhile the sluice gates, which up to this generation had always been maintained by the locals in each village and closed in times of heavy rain, to flood the meadows above each of the villages and not the houses, fell in to disrepair because they were the repsonsibility of the ‘Envirnoment Agency’ (as was the river, which in spate is about 15 ft wide and 4ft deep). Consequently there were no functioning sluice gates to close, so weed and tree debris built up against the village bridges, and all the houses adjoining were under water. No-one could remember the Lam ever flooding before, in living memory.

    In Thatcham, a sprawling suburbia a few miles the other side of Newbury, half the town was flooded that week. The local historian wrote a scathing piece for the local paper pointing out that the houses worst affected were in ‘Water Street’ and ‘Flood Street’ and similarly named places – and asking why developers had been permitted to build in those areas, which were (as their names indictated and older residents were well aware) prone to regular flooding in the past.

    It’s sickening that semi-educated morons get into government and then spend OUR money on pernicious propaganda rather than studying the practicalities of how to manage the environment which actually affects how people live, and acting accordingly.

    Part of the problem of course is the centralisation of decision making, nowadays – the remote people in charge, whether ministers, apparatchiks, or quangos – are far mor interested in setting or hitting their goverment ‘targets’ than taking advice from people on the ground, let alone allowing htem to manage their own ‘environment’

  118. Great article.
    How can these scientists predict the climate in 40 years time, when there is so much that is unknown ? Surely they should base any assumptions on things that can be measured, such as a rise in sea levels. After all, surface temperatures go up and down, but the rise in sea levels reflects both melting ice and thermal expansion.

  119. Romm, Gore and Hansen are treatable. I am sure Gore regrets inventing the web which allows people to fact check his dogma.
    The more they lose traction, the more hysterical they become.

    Should we borrow from Wendy’s “Wheres the Beef” ad and question the warming claims?

  120. This the problem with government ‘regulation’ (actually control – regulation is an incorrect term).

    The government produces an advertisement. Said advertisement is suspect. You turn to the government to determine weather such is true. People become reliant on these entities to determine weather what they see or do is ‘correct’ or not, rather than taking everything with a dose of skepticism.

    The majority are quite happy to go along with things since ‘it must be right because the [government] watchdog says it’s alright’.

    Governments are not to be trusted. Period. This doesn’t mean that governments should not exist, or that they don’t do good things; but the majority of instruments the government executes are not brought about with the interests of the people in mind.

    This is particularly true of any proposed Global Warming action: 100% of them do not have the interests of the people governed as the reason for enacting them.

  121. Seems like the ASA is the only sensible organisation in this ridiculous country. Perhaps they should take charge of the AGW bandwagon and knock some sense into the politicians.

  122. @ Sam (17:17:45) : I’m right with you, mate. This idiotic, incompetent, corrupt bunch of morons currently in Government have to be voted out this coming May. Vote LibDem, Greens, UKIP, Jury Team, …, just about anything if it means we can oust those deceitful, authoritarian bureaucrats who collectively have brought this country to its knees, and continue to steal our money to pay bankers and ignore our protests against inappropriate property development.

  123. Hey diddle diddle
    It’s time for a fiddle
    Who cares what the real science says
    We do want we want to whom we want
    ‘Cause we know it always pays.

    Hey diddle diddle
    It’s time for a fiddle
    Let’s cook the books like the bankers
    We’ll have such fun at the taxpayers’ expense
    ‘Cause we’re a bunch of w*nkers.

  124. Hey diddle diddle
    It’s time for a fiddle
    Labour numpties dance to Brown’s tune
    Cleggie scowls to see such scum
    Cameron just licks his silver spoon.

  125. EcoHustler Newsflash

    This is not a chimney

    It’s still big, it’s still dirty it’s still inefficient… and guess what?… you’re still paying for it! Families will have to pay a new levy on electricity bills for at least the next 20 years in order to fund this dubious technology that keeps us bound to burning fossil fuels for years to come…

    http://ecohustler.co.uk/2010/03/13/this-is-not-a-chimney/

Comments are closed.