BBC edits out climate warming data in climbdown

BBC_LogoJust like the IPCC and its reliance on reports from activist NGO’s has gotten them burned, so has the BBC.

From the Daily Mail:

The BBC has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown over climate change claims made in Sir David Attenborough’s groundbreaking Africa series. In the last episode of the series, entitled ‘Future’, Sir David discussed the challenges facing the region.

Speaking over footage of Mount Kilimanjaro, Sir David made the assertion that ‘some parts of the continent have become 3.5C hotter in the past 20 years’. However, figures from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that since 1850 global temperatures have risen by 0.76C, causing widespread concern among viewers.

The comment, first broadcast in the final episode of the Africa series last Wednesday, was removed from Sunday night’s repeat of the show.

A BBC spokesman said: ‘There is widespread acknowledgement within the scientific community that the climate of Africa has been changing as stated in the programme.

‘We accept the evidence for 3.5 degrees increase is disputable and the commentary should have reflected that.

‘Therefore that line has been removed from Sunday’s repeat and the iPlayer version replaced.’

The BBC initially defended the claim, saying it was taken from a report by Oxfam and the New Economics Foundation, but in turn this report suggested the figure had come from a report by Christian Aid.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2276888/BBC-climbdown-climate-change-claims-David-Attenboroughs-Africa.html

h/t to WUWT reader steverichards1984

0 0 votes
Article Rating
78 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
KevinM
February 12, 2013 7:36 am

Wrong spin on this issue but Attenborough’s nature shows are otherwise very watchable.

Kon Dealer
February 12, 2013 7:42 am

Well if the 3.5 degrees figure had come from such respected scientific organisations like Oxfam, The New Economics Foundation and Christian Aid, I can fully understand why the BBC believed them.
Shame on the denialist viewers who complained.
they must all be in the pay of “Big Oil”
(sarc)

Ken Hall
February 12, 2013 7:51 am

“A BBC spokesman said: ‘There is widespread acknowledgement within the scientific community that the climate of Africa has been changing as stated in the programme.
‘We accept the evidence for 3.5 degrees increase is disputable and the commentary should have reflected that.”

No it is not “disputable”. It is WRONG. W.R.O.N.G. WRONG! Incorrect, without foundation in truth, erroneous and completely wrong.
I am greatly saddened to watch any of the BBC natural history programmes fronted by Sir David Attenborough now. He was once a reliable teacher of the wonders of nature, but now resembles a geriatric old duffer who is slowly losing his marbles and has difficulty keeping in touch with reality.
I despair that the BBC still use Attenborough and not Dr David Bellamy who was a much loved regular expert and activist on the BBC, who never let hype or hyperbole get in the way of truth, and who was a vociferous supporter of all real environmental concerns. Naturally, he is a scientists first and foremost and never ever saw the scientific proof of human induced global climate disruption.
Sir David Attenborough should have been retired by the BBC several years ago. He is now an embarrassment.

pokerguy
February 12, 2013 7:53 am

Kon Dealer…
Beautifully done. I was thinking much the same thing.

Nick in Vancouver
February 12, 2013 7:55 am

Priceless, keep it up people, the more they spin, the faster they fall.

February 12, 2013 8:15 am

Yet another manifestation of 28gate

Frank K.
February 12, 2013 8:15 am

Oxfam, WWF, NASA/GISS, Greenpeace, NOAA, BBC…the CAGW misinformation sources are indistinguishable to me any more.

Wamron
February 12, 2013 8:19 am

Attenborough is an idiot.
Its the British way that if someone “talks posh” he’s regarded as intelligent.
In actual fact, as a communicator, Attenborough is a serial failure.

Village Idiot
February 12, 2013 8:21 am

Remember to keep focusing on “Surface air temperatures = global warming” and skirt around the planet’s total energy balance figures….

Wamron
February 12, 2013 8:25 am

…BTW, apropos the earlier thread on faked images, do those here who have watched BBC wildlife programmes realise that large parts of the footage (scenes supposedly inside nests and such like) is fake? I used to buy stuff at a shop that supplied the materials used in the fake settings. I also know a guy who is a consultant to them on the creation of such sets.

Old England
February 12, 2013 8:25 am

Kevin M
“Wrong spin on this issue but Attenborough’s nature shows are otherwise very watchable.”
Yes they are very watchable but Attenborough who, for many years, I had the greatest of respect for, has been 100% captured by the warmists and takes every opportunity he can to put out propaganda.
Even though the 3.5 deg C had been pulled all his comments were of increased temperatures, reduced rainfall, the increasing desertification and increasing size of the sahara and also snow loss on kilimanjiro due to global warming/climate change – points which have all been comprehensively, scientifically debunked.
I have always had the greatest respect for him, although it genuinely saddens me to say that I have lost that because of his ceaseless warmist propaganda in recent years.

Lance Wallace
February 12, 2013 8:28 am

I read the 100 or so highest-rated comments. Didn’t find a single one supporting the BBC spin. I wonder if the BBC takes notice.

Owen in GA
February 12, 2013 8:29 am

I used to love Attenborough’s nature documentaries. He gave me a glimpse of things that were beyond my ability at the time to go see for myself. Lately though, the guy seems to think that he has to pound home the CAGW meme with every episode. I was watching one of his documentaries on NetFlix and it sounded like a much older Attenborough voice added as a voice-over toward the end exclaiming how all this was in imminent danger due to the actions of man and catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Took a very enjoyable nature diversion and turned it into a preach fest…ruined the whole thing for me. Now I don’t know if I dare watch any of the old documentaries I remember enjoying years ago for fear the old guy will have defaced more of them with CAGW pap voice-overs.
I am with him on basic conservation measures, but this anti-industrialization nonsense has got to go!

Betapug
February 12, 2013 8:34 am

Attenborough was simply reading the script written for him by the producers.
The mood music background to tragic scenes, gives the whole game away despite their denial that “…. the programme’s score ‘told viewers how to feel’ at different points”….
‘It is part of the process of looking deeper and creating that more immersive experience”.
Watch and weep.

Rob Potter
February 12, 2013 8:35 am

“Sir David Attenborough should have been retired by the BBC several years ago. He is now an embarrassment.”
Absolutely correct, Ken. Yet who was it the BBC did can from their science and nature programs? David Bellamy who had the temerity to question the “end of the world” line the BBC was pushing.

Paul Westhaver
February 12, 2013 8:35 am

[snip – off topic]

Dodgy Geezer
February 12, 2013 8:38 am

I hope that someone is putting in a strong complaint to the authorities about this.
We had evidence that the BBC were over-egging the climate scare. Are they now to be allowed to change their program retrospectively and claim that they didn’t really broadcast this? Because that’s what it will look like to future historians…

Colin Gartner
February 12, 2013 8:39 am

Heh, 3.5 degrees increase in 20 years? This claim ranks up there with the gone-by-2035 Himalayan glacier story. It’s so patently absurd on its face, it’s laughable.

February 12, 2013 8:44 am

Great News. Does this mean the law for non payment of the license fee is ‘ disputable’ now?
/sarc

numerobis
February 12, 2013 8:47 am

A claim about “some parts of Africa” can’t be debunked by pointing to a global average. I am nearly certain that at least one weather station somewhere in Africa has seen 3.5C increase: it’s a big continent! But the claim seems ill sourced and too vague to mean anything. Good on viewers to challenge it. I presume you challenge all claims equally, right?

J. Watson
February 12, 2013 8:48 am

I’m certainly no warmist, and can’t believe I’m backing him, but you should give credit in this instance to Leo Hickman at The Guardian, who exposed this glaring error. It was not The Daily Mail, as you reference, and we live in hope that The Guardian’s environment and science journos might behave similarly in future, checking the facts rather than accepting guff from any green advocacy group.

apachewhoknows
February 12, 2013 8:48 am

Therefor it should follow that any end of movie, TV , book, news article, ect. with Al Gore’s claims on the tempature rise he claims should be reviwed and his claim/claims edited out.

February 12, 2013 8:49 am

This story popped up in the Graun om 8th February. Following on from the story it took me no time at all to find information about the station in a paper called “Raised temperatures over the Kericho tea estates: revisiting the climate in the East African highlands malaria debate”
Judith A Omumbo, Bradfield Lyon, Samuel M Waweru, Stephen J Connor, Madeleine C Thomson
From the paper it seems that: In the Tx time series (Figure 2a) a single break-point, with
an associated shift of 1.29°C, was detected in 1986. KMD
indicates the timing of this shift corresponds to a change
in the Kericho station location from the Hail Research
Center (35.27E, 0.37S; elevation 2184m) to its current
location (35.35E, 0.37S; elevation 1976m) at that time. The
sign and magnitude of the identified shift in the mean
temperature are both consistent with expectations given
the average change in atmospheric temperature with elevation
(lapse rate).
Later on there is a table that gives the Mean Temp increase as being 0.21°C per decade – so about 12% of the BBC figure.
Come on BBC it ain’t hard!!

February 12, 2013 8:50 am

The BBC and accuracy in the same sentence appear to be an oxymoron. I guess the English are learning some things from its former Colonies. Just not the right things.

jorgekafkazar
February 12, 2013 8:53 am

Ken Hall says: “No it is not “disputable”. It is WRONG. W.R.O.N.G. WRONG! Incorrect, without foundation in truth, erroneous and completely wrong.”
You mean, a lie? I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you! The BBC? Lying? (Amazing how they continue to dig the hole ever deeper.)

February 12, 2013 9:01 am

3.5C warmer, when from the record low 20 years ago to the most recent record high?
‘some parts of the continent have become 3.5C hotter in the past 20 years’. totally meaningless without context.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
February 12, 2013 9:05 am

I fear for Mr Attenborough’s mind in the same way that I fear for Mr Archibald’s mind. Is it age? Is this what I have to look forward to?

Filbert Cobb
February 12, 2013 9:07 am

DM were behind the timeline – Leo Hickman at the Guardian ran a blog post twitting Attenbore, Delingpole more or less reposted Hickman’s blog at the Telegraph, DM ran it a day later. Probably ran out of stories about minor starlets having wardrobe malfunctions on red carpets.

Ian_UK
February 12, 2013 9:09 am

And what about Kilimanjaro’s impending nudity? I’ve written to the BBC to complain about the lies spoken by (if not written by) Sir David. I’m not expecting an apology.

AnonyMoose
February 12, 2013 9:14 am

I look forward to a Ken Burns documentary on Global Warming Alarmism, with a slow pan across this story and the announcer describing the embarrassing followup.

February 12, 2013 9:20 am

The BBC could all be gone by 2035.

Dan from Durham
February 12, 2013 9:21 am

Like far far to many BBC documentaries and publications, they continually try to get across to the public the Warmists view point, it would be laughable if it weren’t our taxes that go towards funding this organisation that can’t even get their facts right in this otherwise excellent documentarie.

Jeff Norman
February 12, 2013 9:37 am

From the article:
Experts have also questioned the figure, with Dr Tim Osborn of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit telling the Guardian: “So I would say that our data do not support the claim of 3.5 degC warming in the last 20 years in some regions of Africa.”
Does this mean there is some data at the CRU that does support a claim of a 3.5°C increase in other regions of Africa? Is there anyone from the CRU that can give a straight answer that includes the truth?

Jeff Norman
February 12, 2013 9:42 am

So I went to the GISS web page to check on the African station data and found:
“All interactive content, such as global temperature maps or station data plots using a web form, is currently disabled.”
Is this new? I haven’t been there in a while.

Dave
February 12, 2013 9:55 am

The BBC is not a scientific body. Nor is Attenborough a scientist. His nature programmes are quite breathtaking because of the supreme skill of the cameramen and women who should take all the credit. His pontifications on AGW are so much hot air. I once had a conversation with him at the Royal Geographical Society and, in my opinion, found him to be scientifically illiterate.

zz
February 12, 2013 10:04 am

I first saw reference to the story here – itself being primarily a reference to the Guardian article.
http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2013/02/08/bbc-exaggerated-climate-change-in-david-attenboroughs-africa/
Perhaps the most interesting thing is that Attenborough held out from becoming a CAGW spokesman for the BBC for so long – stating that it was an area in which he has no expertise. I guess the BBC eventually ground down his principles.

johnbuk
February 12, 2013 10:06 am

Sadly the requests for David Attenborough to step down won’t make matters any better – standing in the wings is Prof Brian Cox (physicist) who will appeal to the masses (especially the younger ones) as he had some success as a pop star earlier in his career. Have a look at the Wiki page for him and you’ll see he has an impressive pedigree – plus he also a “humanist”. He is also a big fan of the scientific consensus and therefore the BBC can still toe the line as it were.

johnbuk
February 12, 2013 10:08 am

Mostlyharmless said “The BBC could all be gone by 2035.”
Bloody hell, this CAGW is better than we thought.

Owen in GA
February 12, 2013 10:25 am

AnonyMoose says:
February 12, 2013 at 9:14 am
I look forward to a Ken Burns documentary on Global Warming Alarmism, with a slow pan across this story and the announcer describing the embarrassing followup.

I wouldn’t hold my breath on that – Burns (like most of PBS) is totally taken in with the “Settled Science”. To do a good documentary, you really shouldn’t be part of the story.

Matt
February 12, 2013 10:25 am

jorgekafkazar,
“You mean, a lie? I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you! The BBC? Lying? (Amazing how they continue to dig the hole ever deeper.)”
Not every wrong statement is a lie. To show it was a lie you would need evidence that Mr Attenborough knew it was wrong when he said it.

Pull My Finger
February 12, 2013 10:28 am

[snip -off topic]

Nik Marsall-Blank
February 12, 2013 10:29 am

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of “science” at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.

February 12, 2013 10:39 am

Why are we not seeing those self-proclaimed protectors of ¡’Nullius In Verba’! ripping these BBC reporters / editors into quivering moronic shreds?
Why?
John

Richard
February 12, 2013 10:44 am

Owen
“I used to love Attenborough’s nature documentaries. He gave me a glimpse of things that were beyond my ability at the time to go see for myself. Lately though, the guy seems to think that he has to pound home the CAGW meme with every episode”
it’s not Attenborough, he has to narrate the scripts he is given . In the BBC you have to toe the line!!

Nik Marsall-Blank
February 12, 2013 10:44 am

I really think the core problem is that people are looking at the minutiae of climate. In the mid 1970’s scientists were worried about a marked drop in global temperatures, perhaps the next ice age? So that passed and say perhaps 5 years later people started to look at “climate”. Well, it warmed after the “false ice age 1976” and now everybody is saying we are going to melt because of AGW.
Looking at the temperature swings between glacial periods the change since the 70’s is like the planet waking up with a “zit” and saying it’s going to die.
If…if we are the cause of the warming then we will probably die out with the destruction we have caused. There will be lots of species left that survive and will be the future custodians of the planet. Just as previous events have caused major changes.
Should we question the will of God and deny him that which he created us to do?

Paul Westhaver
February 12, 2013 10:51 am

[snip – off topic]

Warrick
February 12, 2013 11:07 am

Agree with other comments – I used to really enjoy his programmes. I get too hot under the collar listening to this guff now. Pity. There are some real gems, but hidden like pearls in a pigsty. I’m afraid my nose is now too sensitive to the smell to find the occasional pearl worth the effort.

John Finn
February 12, 2013 11:25 am

Jeff Norman says:
February 12, 2013 at 9:37 am

From the article:
Experts have also questioned the figure, with Dr Tim Osborn of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit telling the Guardian: “So I would say that our data do not support the claim of 3.5 degC warming in the last 20 years in some regions of Africa.”
Does this mean there is some data at the CRU that does support a claim of a 3.5°C increase in other regions of Africa? Is there anyone from the CRU that can give a straight answer that includes the truth?

I thought Osborn used the GISS data (that you couldn’t find) but i’ve lost the link to the Leo Hickman article. The key Osborn statement for me was this
For the last 20 years there is a paucity of data over Africa. In African regions with data there is only one box where warming in one season is above 3 degC. More boxes show warming in some seasons between 2 and 3 degC. No African boxes show warming above 2 degC in the annual average temperatures.
This basically says that there is one region where warming was above 3 degC for one season. However, as Osborn himself says there is a “paucity of of data over Africa”, so it’s quite possible that the data for this region comes from a single station. While I think the global trend is fairly robust, I would take trends from specific regions of Africa and some parts of Sth America with a large pinch of salt.

Pull My Finger
February 12, 2013 11:33 am

[snip – I’m removing all references in comments to this off topic distraction – Anthony]

February 12, 2013 11:36 am

People have to pull the plug on the BBC for them to sit up and take notice. If enough people stop watching it, they might take a look at why – yes, I know they get the money anyway – perhaps mob reluctance to pay the fee might work, but it would take some organization. It needs a lot of people angry enough to protest and demand a cease to the fee being compulsory and/or charges brought against the BBC – the BBC should NOT be above the law. I rather think angry people ARE on the uprise, too many people right across society are being bullied, abused or discarded. Quite frankly, the whole MSM needs a wake-up call.

Jimbo
February 12, 2013 11:39 am

“Speaking over footage of Mount Kilimanjaro, Sir David made the assertion that ‘some parts of the continent have become 3.5C hotter in the past 20 years’.”

Attenborough should be beyond this type of misinformation / manipulation using visual means. Time and again they head for the great Mount as a sign of global warming and time and again it’s debunked.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/tag/mount-kilimanjaro/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/21/kilimanjaro-regaining-its-snow-cap/

Pull My Finger
February 12, 2013 11:41 am

[snip – off topic – see previous note – Anthony]

Stacey
February 12, 2013 11:50 am

Lightening Conductors and Strange People.
The odd thing about all of this is that Leo Hickman of Comment is Free if you Agree of The Guardener, was the first to get on his high horse about this exaggeration of 3.5C rise over the last twenty years in Africa. It’s as if he’s saying it is wrong to exaggerate to cover up all of his own exaggerations.
Hickman to the Villagers: There are Ten Wolves coming?
Attenborough: No No there are Ten Lions coming.
As for the BBC they spoil all science programmes because they have to keep on message.

Liberal Skeptic
February 12, 2013 12:01 pm

Attenborough isn’t the man he once was, he doesn’t write his own scripts, do his own research or anything like that anymore. He is reliant on others, and so errors and facts that if he’d been involved in the research and writing himself probably would not have made it past editorial have snuck into his shows.
I won’t let that stand in the way of my respect for his achievements though.
Even if he is a believer in catastrophic global warming, he is still a man of integrity and would only use scientific sources (I choose to believe.)

MikeB
February 12, 2013 12:08 pm

This is a great shame isn’t it. I find it so. The BBC’s nature programmes, and especially those by David Attenborough, are spectacular, amazing photography, world beating.
Unfortunately, some BBC script writer has decided to introduce a lie, but that is no excuse. For David Attenborough declares himself as being converted from a sceptic to a Global Warming Climate Change believer. Therefore, he implies that he has come to understand something about the issue.
But anyone who understands the first thing about global warming must know that we are only talking about a mere increase of a fraction of a degree in global mean temperatures over 130 years. This is the scale of the catastrophe that has befallen all of us.
So, a suggestion of 3.5 degrees in 20 years should set alarms bells ringing. It is simply absurd! An abrupt change of that magnitude takes us back half-way to the last ice age. So why did Sir David lend himself to reading out such an obviously ridiculous claim? Why did he not question it? Was he willingly complicit?
Ask yourself, do you think he is as guilty as the BBC and the person who wrote the initial lie?

Rhys Jaggar
February 12, 2013 12:18 pm

Remember that Attenborough also does freelance work, highly paid for Sky and others.
The question arises as to whether this was his independent input or whether he was following BBC dogma.
I suspect the former myself, and therefore it is he who should answer for it, not the BBC.

Hot under the collar
February 12, 2013 12:32 pm

OK I know we don’t normally have a need to reference the Guardian, but credit to Leo Hickman and this deconstruction;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2013/feb/08/bbc-global-warming-attenborough-africa

David Harrington
February 12, 2013 12:46 pm

I love David Attenborough, he is a true national treasure, but feared the last episode in this great series would have some alarmist BS included, and I was not disappointed.
I was shaking my fist at the screen when the bit about the snows of Kilimanjaro were said to being caused by warmin when this is demonstrably untrue.

Martin
February 12, 2013 12:53 pm

Sir David Attenborough is a Fellow of the Royal Society – he should therefore have an obligation to make sure that the words that he speaks on scientific matters are based on the facts. It is a shame that he sometimes bears his responsibilities so lightly!

johanna
February 12, 2013 12:53 pm

To the apologists who say that Attenborough is not to blame because he is just reading a script – I say balderdash. He is a professional of many decades’ experience. He is famous. He doesn’t need the money.
In these circumstances, how can he not take responsibility for the words that come out of his mouth?
His unscripted public statements of the last few years indicate that he is just a Grumpy Old Man who hates most of humanity. There is no obvious inconsistency between his personal views and the scripted ones.

PMT
February 12, 2013 1:01 pm

It’s sad to see Mr Attenbourghs deline:-

His bedfellows:-
http://populationmatters.org/about/people/patrons/
and that article in The Telegraph:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9815862/Humans-are-plague-on-Earth-Attenborough.html

CodeTech
February 12, 2013 1:31 pm

Someone should make a version of “Inconvenient Truth” with all the inaccurate and over-hyped bits removed. I suspect it would be 3 seconds long and consist entirely of the words “Hi, I’m al-Gore”.

February 12, 2013 1:43 pm

The BBC spokesman said: ‘There is widespread acknowledgement within the scientific community that the climate of Africa has been changing as stated in the programme. We accept the evidence for 3.5 degrees increase is disputable and the commentary should have reflected that.”
No the evidence is not “disputable”. It is wrong, just plain wrong and also totally incorrect, even it is quite in error and totally without foundation.
The BBC should bring back the estimable and wrongly ignored Dr David Bellamy in place of the clearly failing David Attenborough.

Nick Kermode
February 12, 2013 1:49 pm

David Attenborough says “some parts of the continent” and in the same paragraph you reference “global temperatures”. He may still be wrong and/or irrelevant, I havent checked, but this post is a complete strawman comparing his statement to something he wasn’t even talking about. Show no parts of Africa have warmed by 3.5 degrees then he’s wrong. I’m sure no one will bother, not sure why you would given the relevance of the statement by itself anyway.

steve
February 12, 2013 1:59 pm

‘some parts of the continent have become 3.5C hotter in the past 20 years’
may or may not be true but it has nothing to do with global climate change. sounds more like regional weather (or desperate cherry picking depending on your cynicism). some parts of Oxfordshire have become 7 degrees colder in the past week.

johanna
February 12, 2013 2:14 pm

I have just seen a promo for this show, which is on TV here on Saturday night.
I wonder which version we will get?
Nick Kermode, the point is that even if a couple of temperature stations support the assertion (and there is no evidence for that), it is misleading. Africa is vast, its temperature stations are few and not likely to produce state of the art records, and there is nothing remotely scientific about Attenborough’s statement. OTOH, it supports the crumbling edifice of CAGW at the expense of objectivity.

David L
February 12, 2013 3:27 pm

Nick in Vancouver on February 12, 2013 at 7:55 am
Priceless, keep it up people, the more they spin, the faster they fall.”
Sadly I think they are like a gyroscope. The faster they spin the more stable they become!

Latimer Alder
February 12, 2013 3:39 pm

You might like a little further background to why the Guardian wrote their article…
http://mygardenpond.wordpress.com/2013/02/10/the-power-of-a-tweet-two-examples/
Ruth Dixon was the first to alert them of the whopping great error in the BBC coverage.
She is far too modest to take much of the credit but I just had the pleasure of buying her a drink….and also her husband, lest eyebrows be raised.

Jimbo
February 12, 2013 3:59 pm

In 2006, Sir David admitted that he used to be a sceptic but now believed it is one of the major challenged facing the world.
‘I was sceptical about climate change,’ he said.
‘I think conservationists have to be careful in saying things are catastrophic when, in fact, they are less than catastrophic.
‘But I’m no longer sceptical.
‘Now I do not have any doubt at all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2276888/BBC-climbdown-climate-change-claims-David-Attenboroughs-Africa.html#axzz2KjOI0700

YET his skepticism failed him when he said:

‘some parts of the continent have become 3.5C hotter in the past 20 years’.

Even the Guardian was not just sceptical, they outright denied the claim. Maybe Attenborough should have kept some of his skepticism; he much not have then found himself shamed and in so much hot water.
Should the world cool, what the heck is Attenborough going to say then? I was sceptical, then I was convinced, then I was sceptical? I like Attenborough’s documentaries, but he has been ensnared by the Warmists at the Beeb who have fooled him. A sad end, but there is still a chance for him to see the light. TIP: Attenborough see AGW theory which says that most of the warming will be at the poles at night. See urban growth in Africa and UHI. See activism in the IPCC etc.

johanna
February 12, 2013 5:13 pm

Jimbo, I am surprised to see you lining up with the apologists – “he was ensnared” etc. Bulldust. As I said above, he is a professional, rich, famous and not entirely stupid. He has said that humans are a plague on the planet (presumably excepting him and his family and friends).
It may be that he has lost his marbles, or that he is just a Grumpy Old Man (US readers may miss this reference to a TV show). Attenborough has ridden the Green wave for decades, and it is about time that he was held to account for it. Like a few other BBC legends, he has been given a free pass for too long.

pjkkerr
February 12, 2013 5:30 pm

You could tell Attenborough had joined The Cause from his series surveying the plant kingdom, filmed at Kew Gardens. In one episode he listed the requirements of plants: water, light, minerals… but didn’t mention carbon dioxide.

David Cage
February 13, 2013 12:53 am

Attenborough is an example of the way that relatives of successful people can get into positions they thoroughly do not deserve to be in. What is good in his programs is entirely the work of his researchers and what is trash and misinformation is entirely his own work like these claims on climate.
Since BBC is funded by a special form of taxation rather than choice is has a duty to be impartial which is has knowingly and deliberately violated. To think people here go to prison for not paying for this organisation even when it knowingly violates its charter that justifies this compulsory payment. Has no one in the organisation any integrity?
Even its supposed removal perpetuated the mealy mouthed lie that has already done its damage.

thingadonta
February 13, 2013 1:12 am

Christian AID-why have one god when you can have 3. Why have slight warming, when you can have 3.5? Same difference.

John Finn
February 13, 2013 3:32 am

Nick Kermode says:
February 12, 2013 at 1:49 pm
David Attenborough says “some parts of the continent” and in the same paragraph you reference “global temperatures”. He may still be wrong and/or irrelevant, I havent checked, but this post is a complete strawman comparing his statement to something he wasn’t even talking about. Show no parts of Africa have warmed by 3.5 degrees then he’s wrong. I’m sure no one will bother, not sure why you would given the relevance of the statement by itself anyway.

Oh come off it, Nick. I’m the first to jump on ‘fake’ sceptic arguments if they’re obviously wrong, but Attenborough is talking through his a**e (again!) and has being doing so for a while now. He’s used his position as a ‘national treasure’ to promote the case for CAGW. I’m afraid he’s set himself up to be shot down.
The facts are that Tim Osborn found just ONE region in Africa which had warming above 3 deg C for just ONE season. But it’s worse than that. Osborn explains about the ‘paucity’ of african data. He can say that again. If he’s found a dataset which represents a specific region then I doubt that data comes form any more than ONE station. I’d like to know a bit more about the location of that station. How well-maintained is it? Has there been any recent development or land clearance in the area?
But if you’re happy with cherry-picked regional data Nick here’s one for you: Between 1692 and 1711 mean ANNUAL (not seasonal) temperature in the Central England region increased by 2 deg C, i.e. more than any African region over the past 20 years (according to Tim Osborn).

johnmarshall
February 13, 2013 4:48 am

Attenborough is, I am afraid, well past his best. His comments are directly contrary to his training as a geologist. He has turned into a tub thumping alarmist thanks to the PC BBC.

oldfossil
February 13, 2013 10:44 am

If I channel-surf to a nature doccie and I hear that sad, dry, dreary voice croaking out the alarmist doctrine, I push the channel change button immediately.
Look, the man is pretty adventurous and he’s trying his hardest to (mis)inform people about nature and I know I should respect him for that. It’s a personal thing. He just gets on my tits.

Ilma630
February 13, 2013 12:10 pm

A misleading headline – “data”?

February 24, 2013 12:11 pm

A bit more about the source of the 3.5 degrees claim here on my blog http://mygardenpond.wordpress.com/2013/02/24/more-about-the-bbcs-africa-temps/
And thanks, Latimer Alder, for the mention upthread (and for the drink) 🙂

%d bloggers like this: