From: France 24, 1 November 2015 (h/t to The GWPF)
A popular weatherman announced Saturday evening he has been sacked by leading French news channel France Télévisions for publishing a book which accused top climate change experts of misleading the world about the threat of global warming.
Philippe Verdier, a household name in France for his daily weather reports on the France 2 channel, announced in an online video that he had received a letter of dismissal.
“My book ‘Climate Investigation’ was published one month ago. It got me banned from the air waves,” said the weatherman, who was put “on leave” from the TV station on October 12.
“I received this letter this morning and decided to open it in front of you because it concerns everybody- in the name of freedom of expression and freedom of information.”
His announcement comes four days after France Télévisions chief Delphine Ernotte told French MPs that Verdier had been summoned to a formal interview that could lead to his dismissal. An employee who picked up the phone at France Télévisions on Sunday morning told FRANCE 24 that there were no PRs present to confirm or deny Verdier’s dismissal.
‘Many positive consequences to global warming’
The controversy around Verdier’s claims has likely been heightened by their timing, with his book coming just weeks before the start of a much-anticipated UN climate change summit, known as COP21, to be held in Paris at the end of November.
“I put myself in the path of COP21, which is a bulldozer, and this is the result,” Verdier told RTL radio station in October.
He said he was inspired to write the book after France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius met with TV meteorologists and asked them to highlight climate change issues in their broadcasts.
“I was horrified by this speech,” Verdier told French magazine Les Inrockuptibles last month. In his book, Verdier accuses state-funded climate change scientists of having been “manipulated” and “politicised”, even accusing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of publishing deliberately misleading data.
He also argues that there are “a great many positive consequences to global warming”, such as lower consumption of fuel used for heating and fewer cold-related deaths in winter.
“I am being punished for exercising my freedom of expression,” the weatherman told RTL.
Sad day for French democrisy
Yep that’s what we have – democrisy.
It’s a cross between democracy and hypocrisy. 🙂
French election = choosing between officially socialist party and closet socialist party
All mainstream parties are socialist, New Labour-like, or US Democrats-like. There is no US Republican party in France, except if you define Republican as “no gay marriage” and claiming there are too much taxes and inventing many more.
NKM (Les républicains), former communication sub-minister, former environnement sub-minister, says climato-sceptics are “connards”. (And Nicolas Sarkozy seems fine with that.)
Among the well known parties, FN (Front National) is the only climate skeptic party. FN is “extreme-right” (with a folklore of bare skins groups, pro-kollabo groups, and regrets of Pétain), anti-immigration, anti-free trade, “nationalist”, anti-European union, anti-corporations, pro-state planification, De Gaulle worship (yes, this doesn’t go well with Pétain love), socialist party (pro-nation-wide social security), with a love of nationalisation of “strategic assets” (what is not strategic for “nationalists”? candy fabrication perhaps)
People who fight for their right of choice of a medical insurance (*) are harassed by French Justice (French Justice doesn’t like to apply all European laws (called “directives”) until Europe force it to).
(*) Europe recognise this right in countries that don’t have a “legal”, ie. national, unique, medical insurance as UK, but European Commission claims this right doesn’t exist
In French medias, UKIP is “extreme right” and “nationalist”. For French “journalists”: UKIP = FN (pro-free trade = anti-free trade)
I am fairly certain that France Televisions is a state-owned TV station, similar to our BBC, full of holier than thou, finger wagging lefties. I hope he makes a lot of profit from his book, with the Streisand effect behind him that does seem likely.
I am afraid that this is nothing new, David Bellamy (a household name in the UK in the 70′ 80’s and 90’s) who worked at the BBC presenting wildlife documentaries, suffered the same fate when he also said that AGW was a fiction in the early 00’s.
“I am fairly certain …”
It is indeed. In much worse, even though you would find it hard to believe (“impossible n’est pas français”)
Bellamy had the advantage that he was past 70 and could retire. Philippe Verdier has the problem of making a living. Once again we see why most skeptics are near the end of their careers. This really is vile.
Where is Victor Lazlo when the French need him?
French Mathematicians Blast UN’s ‘Costly & Pointless Crusade’ Against Global Warming.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/french-mathematicians-blast-uns-absurd-crusade-against-global?ref=yfp
As long as alarmists vilify skeptics, then the alarmists can go on with their normal cushy lifestyles and not feel guilty about heating their homes, using electricity, driving cars, flying on planes.
These high profile cases are really helping ordinary people to grasp the process of “consensus formation”.
In which a group of people prematurely decide that they have the right to impose a consensus view, based on the assumption that it is a majority consensus – and then use that assumption to justify the removal or obstruction or defamation of all people who hold alternative views.
And by doing this they can to some extent create the impression that there really was some sort of consensus – for what it’s worth.
It has worked in many areas of science and politics, certainly.
BUT – if people widely see that the purported consensus has been constructed in this manner, then they will cease to trust it.
Certainly when they discover that making simple factual statements can put a person in jeopardy, then they will recognize this as a form of persecution. Which it is.
Free thinking reasonable people are now a persecuted minority.
Which should be seen to be a shocking state of affairs.
Of course, it is only the same situation as people living under the Inquisition or under the Third Reich, but this time – it’s global AND it’s in the name of Science.
There’s a first time for everything.
Is it a consensus when it is imposed? Are the show trials far off?
Strictly, I suppose that a consensus is a consensus, however it is formed.
Watching the burning of heretics in Geneva, a commentator from the time explained that he asked (his father, I think) “why does nobody stand up and speak out against this”.
He received the reply, “then they would be next for the fire”.
Or something along those lines.
I should see if I can find that piece of writing.
I have been following the climate debate for the last few years and saw it gradually deteriorating into a clash of “skeptical reason” vs. mindless fanaticism. But I have never expected it to get that ugly, in France of all places, the nation that is rightly proud of its tradition of “skeptical reason” and regards it as as its intellectual hallmark.
Jaroslaw Sobieski, Hampton, VA.
Voltaire must be rolling over in his grave: “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it.”
Quite so! Voltaire must rotate heavily in his grave now! Todays french philosophers and journalists should be deeply ashamed if they don’t defend the freedom of speech anymore!
Here are some fitting quotes by Voltaire for this scandal:
“It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.”
“Prejudice is an opinion without judgement.”
“Common sense is not so common.”
“What is tolerance? It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each other’s folly — that is the first law of nature.”
And last but not least:
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
(The latter is often misattributed to Voltaire himself but is in reality from his biographer S. G. Tallentyre as a justified illustration of Voltaire’s beliefs.)
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
‘The media and political class now consider the [climate change industry] they’ve built as so potentially explosive that the naked flame of free speech must be doused. And since the truth hurts most, it will not be protected.’
*A.Bolt ref.
It’s no wonder he was sacked. How dare he use true science to refute the Scripture of Climate Science. Such heresy is unforgivable.
The sequel should be called “Climate Inquisition”.
good idea
“He said he was inspired to write the book after France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius met with TV meteorologists and asked them to highlight climate change issues in their broadcasts” Does anyone else wonder more about that meeting? I certainly do and wonder how many such meetings have happened over the past decade or so…..
So much for “Liberté, égalité, fraternité”. Je suis Philippe Verdier, Je suis Charlie Hebdo.
France 2 is a government operation. Is there private sector broadcast competition in France?
France Télévisions is the broadcaster of: France 2, France 3, France 4, France 5, France O (DVB-T channels) and Pluzz (replay TV)
French audiovisual public sector:
TV:
– France Télévisions (5 DVB-T channels)
– Arte (French/German “cultural” channel) (bilingual DVB-T)
– “TV 5 Monde” (mostly reruns of France Télé) (sat/cable)
– “France 24” (continuous information “BBC international” style) (sat/cable)
radio:
– Radio-France: FIP, France Bleu, France Culture, France Info, France Inter (or France Sphincter), France Musique, Mouv’ (the radio for the young)…
– RFI (Radio-France International)
I may have forgotten some stuff.
I believe China has a larger public sector TV/radio. So France public sector isn’t so bloated, (compared to the average communist country with >1 billion people).
And I forgot LCP/AN (La chaîne parlementaire/Assemblée nationale)-Public sénat which covers the “work” of politicians in the parliament, their empty talking points, and broadcasts the usual anti-capitalist anti-free trade propaganda.
Actually, there are two separate production teams:
– LCP/AN
– Public sénat
sharing one DVB-T channel.
Total:
– LCP/AN-Public sénat: shared DVB-T channel
– LCP/AN: sat/cable channel
– Public sénat: sat/cable channel
So there are I think 6 TV diffusion group: France Télé, TV 5 Monde, France 24, LCP-AN, Public sénat, Arte (with a total of 7 DVB-T channels and 5 sat/cable/DSL only channels)
Thanks. So I understand that Verdier will not find it easy to jump to a competitor.
There is the private TF1 (channel 1). Owned by Bouygues, the house builder. Subcontractor of Areva for the building of the EPR (Evolutionary Pressurised Reactor). Avera, owned by CEA, owned by the State.
Very independant channel … or not.
The owner of M6 was Suez, the energy and water company.
Was the petition for Philippe Verdier, which has over 18.143 signatures, ever presented to the “powers that be” – whoever that is?
I think a new petition should be started which states the anti freedom of speech in French news media in clear terms. I wish I knew how to do this. I signed the first petition, posted it on my social media and got no responses. Is freedom of speech that passe? (to use a french term)? Somehow the word has got to get out, and I wish I knew how to do it. When will 60 Minutes (USA) do a story on this? – never. I guess “Freedom of Speech” is dead.
This whole thing is an outrage. I stand with Philippe Verdier.
Can anyone give us a brief on any general reactions in France?
Many people applaud loudly. Even journalists. Especially journalists.
Pretty much everyone misrepresents Verdier’s position.
The mainstream press doesn’t react much, except the conservative-backward-liberal-progressive-rightish-leftish-traditional-ecoloon (does anyone understand the official line of this newspaper?) “Le Figaro”.
The “man of the street” is more worried about the tax increases – up to 15000% for unconstructed terrains.
What if Northern Europe is very cold this winter as a result of the El Niño and then stays cold in 2016 as the ADO shifts combined with decreased solar output. The entire AGW premise is based on the recent CO2 rise co-incident with rising temps from the last LIA. If temps fall then CO2 phobia might wane and CO2 appropriation rise.
I guess there is no weatherman union in France. If the farmers union said the same thing in a book release there would be no firing of anyone.
Vive La Free Speech
There may be a job opening in St. Petersburg.
I don’t think his job contract prohibited publication or prescribed content or ordained preliminary censorship by the employer.
If so, he should go to court and a legal defense fund has to be be established ASAP to cover expenses.
It started as Political Correctness and Pseudo-Ecology. Now its truly the THOUGHT POLICE.
It’s called Minitrue.
Except I thought France belonged to Eurasia, not Oceania. The Neo-Bolshevist term may be different, but content, of course, matches.
Berényi writes “It’s called Minitrue.”
In another time, when I felt more secure, I would laugh at them with you Berényi, but nowadays the laughter sticks in my throat and sours my stomach.
The title of the WUWT post mentions the possibility of going “Back To The Dark Ages”.
I think a dark age, one that is precipitated by intolerance from AGW hypothesis’s purposeful exaggeration and from the IPCC’s irrational endorsement of pseudo-science, would be a forward to the dark ages of the kind that was outlined in Isaac Asimov’s far in the future based “Foundation” trilogy. I think it won’t be back to a dark ages like occurred from the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.
John
And so ends ”Siècle des Lumières” . The French in particular were so proud of it, now they let it pass before their eyes without comment. In their defense, the Germans, Italians, British and Americans are no better.
quote: “„I am being punished for exercising my freedom
of expression,” the weatherman told RTL.“
Lol, RTL germany wouldn’t let him say this…
http://www.europe1.fr/medias-tele/le-presentateur-philippe-verdier-evince-par-lelysee-tout-a-fait-possible-2530089
A la question de savoir si son éviction est la conséquence d’une intervention de l’Elysée, Philippe Verdier répond que “c’est tout à fait possible”. Mais Philippe Verdier martèle son point de vue : “On sait très bien que cette conférence ne va pas aboutir au prolongement du protocole de Kyoto et qu’elle ne sert à rien”.
If I correctly read this section reported from the interview, Mr. Verdier thinks that the decision may have been iimposed from the top levels of the current government. Correct me if I mis-read it.
When asked if his eviction was the result of an intervention of the Elisée (*), Philippe Verdier said “it is absolutely possible”. Philippe Verdier repeats that “We know very well that the conference will not result in the extension of the Kyoto protocol and it serves no real purpose.”
(*) President or presidential team
Actually it’s not what HE thinks, it is what the interviewer hints at. With some reasons, as It is common knowledge that such decision needs at least approval from the top levels of the government. It cannot be proven, though, and would most certainly be denied or “no commented”, since officially franceTV is independent.
Is it now time for a mass Anders-Behring-Brievik type effort against this peecee aristo class?
Probably not yet. I’d say we armchair enthusiasts for slaughtering them all will just have to wait until the hoi polloi discover there’s none of that leftard Marie-Antoinette state cake left — that they’ve finally eaten every last f##king crumb.
Until then, nous chompons!
Hey, here’s a Moral Maze* question for you:
Say you’ve just overheard a bunch of the aforementioned ABB types planning a schedule of quick visits to that state television station, the COP21 summit and a few other similarly worthy venues.
Do you carry on reading the menu or dash off to the bookies to place a few bets so that when the time comes you can celebrate in style for free? 🙂
* Revolting beeboid production.