Tom Barr writes: The BBC is up to its old tricks, using any old snap to support its warmist position.
Apparently desperate to support the Marrakech Alarmist Junket still reeling from the election of Trump; in its “news” (using the term loosely) piece “2016 ‘very likely’ to be world’s warmest year” it originally illustrated its assertion “2016 has seen high temperatures lead to devastating droughts in many parts” with a photograph of numerous dead cattle:
Archived here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20161114131317/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-37949877
The trouble is that this picture is Getty Images # 57127741 which was, in reality, was taken over a decade ago on March 16, 2006.
See it at: http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/license/57127741
Perhaps somebody at the BBC has done something for their £4bn a year and pointed out that misleading the public like this, and not giving a fig for the facts, is lazy journalism and is bound to get spotted, for free: The picture and its caption have now magically changed to a Massai lady with a water drum balanced on her head along with the incisive claim “High temperatures can lead to devastating droughts”. Genius reporting.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
As with the endless complaints about pics of power stations – do you think the junior picture editor who illustrates these things puts any thought into it?
They pick a vaguely relevant stock photo.
Even this website does that!
If it were an article about possible delays on the No. 42 bus route to Islington I would agree with you. When they are ‘reporting’ a pack of lies with a view to reinforcing a political agenda and scaring the population half to death I’d expect a little more diligence tbh.
Citation! Or crawl away.
Notice how Griff excuses lies, when they are being done by his team.
Griffie, do you understand what you just said? “We know the truth, just repeat the meme, my flunkie.” [Love that word, meme!]
I grow tired of ‘meme.’ Could we go back to ‘dichotomy?’
I LIKE this meme! [Think Star Trek’s Scotty.] Dichotomy doesn’t mean the same thing.
The finest and best whatchamacallits now uses vaguely relevant photos for their finest and best educated viewers?
Hah! So much for such a vaunted publication.
Both BBC and viewers, with rare exceptions, are oxymoronic to finest/best/educated.
Wait!
I almost described Griffypoo!
Only Griffypoo, never had any of those good qualities.
2016 will without doubt be the warmest year ever
================================
And food production has never been higher. Human lifespans have never been higher. The percentage of people dying from famine and disease has never been lower.
So tell us again why humans should fear warming? Why should human beings, an animal that cannot survive temperatures below 27C without technology, why should we fear warming of the earth, when the average temperature of the earth is 15C?
Why should humans, one of the best adapted animals on the planet to deal with heat, an animal that has almost no natural defense against cold, why should humans fear warming of a planet that is on average much too cold for human survival?
If we are talking about the warmest year ever, how about the temperature back at the dawn of our oral history, the book of Genesis. The only place on earth that Adam and Eve could have survived naked is the tropical jungles. Because while the Polar regions warm and cool with the climate, the tropical jungles have been the same temperature for millions of years.
Griff… Learn to read. The headline says ‘likely’. That is not ‘without a doubt’.
The ‘data’ they claim to use is the fully-adjusted NOAA/NASA/CRU, which is a consolidation of interpolations and extrapolations into an estimate, and does not contain error bars. These are the ‘data’. For which the past has been ‘cooled’ and the later years ‘warmed’.
And, playing fast and loose so-far, say that this is the warmest in the recent millennia, fully ignoring the Medieval, Roman, Mycenaen warm periods, and the Holoscene climate optimum.
So, not to factual… Their report or your summary.
Likely is standard scientific lay term for expressing statistical probability of the results presented…
RSS/UAH are adjusted too you know and the adjustments to surface temps (at least) are perfectly valid…
(If I get time I will refer you to Judith curry’s blog entry showing how technique is valid)
The results presented cannot have a statistical probability because for one year you cannot in any way accurately account for all the factors in something like a temperature. This is not a large sample and a correlation but a single figure. What’s the probability something is 10? That’s the sort of question you are claiming has a probability.
The desperation of global warmists became so hysterical after last Wednesday that The Independent produced this other piece of drivel, where they try to vent the “scientific truth” that Earth is about to become Venus: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-game-over-global-warming-climate-sensitivity-seven-degrees-a7407881.html
Most of times I am just amused by the preposterous doomsday prophecies of Warmists, but in the last few days I am really disgusted by them. It’s a whole new level compressed into little time…
Thanks Lucius. That was a fun couple of minutes poking the hairdressers at the Independent who are convinced they understand nonlinear planetary atmosphere physics. No disrespect to hairdressers who are content to admit that they don’t understand nonlinear planetary atmosphere physics intended. I certainly don’t.
Is that like the conspiracy theorists on YouTube ‘Twin Towers’ video comments, who cannot understand momentum, energy, and a resting mass?
How on earth did that comment wind up in the mod’s hands?!? What word in that needs to be assessed? Bizarre.
nonlinear?
The liberal press and liberal academia have moved beyond closed minds (nay, nay, nay I can’t hear you) to active propaganda.
Climategate (organized effort to stop the publishing of scientific papers that disprove CAGW), Mann’s hockey stick paper (what appears to be deliberate manipulation of data/analysis to create a hockey stick), and the manipulation of GISS temperature data are some of the many examples that support the assertion that for liberals facts, logic, and integrity of process no longer matter.
The liberals/cult of CAGW are on the wrong side of the most important scientific questions in recorded history. We live in interesting times.
November 14, 2016, Ocean temperature anomaly
http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2016/anomnight.11.14.2016.gif
The graph below shows the NOAA/NASA hottest ten years of the 21st century plus 1998, and of course they show 1998 as being average in temperature. They do this so they can claim years after 1998 are the “hottest ever”. But if you check out the UAH temperature chart below, you will see that it shows that 1998 was hotter than all subsequent years, by quite a bit, except for the last year 2016 when the temperature exceeded the highpoint of 1998, in Feb. 2016, with a temperature one-tenth of a degree hotter than 1998.
The NOAA/NASA graph and the UAH chart are telling different stories. Who are you going to believe? UAH, with no political agenda? Or, NOAA?NASA with a huge political agenda?
http://assets.climatecentral.org/images/uploads/gallery/2016GlobalNumbers_TopTenYearsUpdate.jpg
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_October_2016_v6.gif
Is this a hockey stick which I see before me,
The handle toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee.
I have thee not, and yet I see thee still.
Art thou not, fatal vision, sensible
To feeling as to sight? or art thou but
A hockey stick of the mind, a false creation,
Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain?
Apologies to the shade of WS.
The BBC News website seems to think they are dealing with simpletons because it has a sub-heading: “What is climate change?” – yet then they show a graphic of temp as an anomaly!! As if the ‘simpletons’ they are aiming at will know that. No, all the BBC wants to do is frighten them with a chart that (we know) only shows less than a degree change in around 100 years, yet the ‘simpletons’ will think the world is melting. The BBC misleads. (Nation Shall
SpeakTell Lies Unto Nation?)This BBC article is typical of the distorted presentation they’re up to these days….
What climate change deniers, like Donald Trump, believe – http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articles/37936740
The late Sir Anthony Jay, joint writer of Margaret Thatcher’s favourite television comedy series “Yes, Minister”and “Yes, Prime Minister”, who was employed by the BBC for nearly ten years claimed that the three letters really stood for Bloated, Biased and Creepy
He also wrote this brilliant comment by Jim Hacker, Prime Minister.
“Computer models are no different from fashion models: seductive, unreliable, easily corrupted, and they lead sensible people to make fools of themselves.”
There is another faked image of a guy on a large parched piece of land with a hoe. No way is it anything other than a setup
The hoes are mainly the climate scientists.
Nigel S —
“The hoes are mainly the climate scientists.” Just saw your comment. A little late but I got a good laugh out of it.
Eugene WR Gallun
Climate Change —
&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAmerican_Gothic&docid=CcaAUvXJ0GqtNM&tbnid=bEhydOcQ2okipM%3A&vet=1&w=4973&h=6001&bih=609&biw=1120&ved=0ahUKEwjlhMC0oqnQAhUQ8WMKHcYtBLMQMwhgKAAwAA&iact=mrc&uact=8[/url]
[url
Of course this will be the warmest year on record. Homogenization of current data and “corrections” applied to past temperature data will insure that outcome.
Channe; 4 is even worse than the BBC with its climate change propaganda.
It had an excellent article on Trump and fighting climate change on Sunday night, followed by a segment on the proposed tidal lagoon power schemes for the UK
“Resurrecting the dead”
Yup, You’d have to resurrect the Dead El Nino to gat the planet to start heating again.
It’s -15C in middle latitude areas of asia as I write this and lots of -25C readings to the north. We haven’t even seen the jet stream complete its seasonal changeover yet.
The BBC are past their sell by date.
Some of us have pulled out, stopped paying the licence fee, and bought an Amazon FireStick! Loving it.
Hallelujah brother, spread the word!
(RIP Leonard Cohen of course)
BBC is part of the Northern hemisphere equivalent of the “ship of fools” except unlike the Southern ship of fools that got trapped in ice, this Northern one sunk as the idiots boarded.
Auntie, as the BBC was once affectionately known, has become an embarrassment
It’s once well earned reputation is in the gutter
We will be staring next year on channel 5 wild weather UK where we have all been flooded out by severe storms this winter which have not happened. The interview will be “The weather is going crazy we have to cut our co2 emissions”. We will hear some propaganda like this.
@don penman
The IPCC figures will be fiddled, GW will ‘stop’ and a proclamation of success declared for all the wind farms and solar arrays they encouraged.
Just wait…..It’s coming.
That fake photo reminds me of an account my uncle told me who lived in Rhodesia – now Zimbabwe – at the time of the civil war. The BBC who supported Mugabe’s rebels photographed workers lying on the grass in a park in the capital Harare during their lunch breaks – as they did every day – and reported it as a massacre by the government.
That’s nothing new. The BBC had a reporting team in Northern Ireland during the troubles. They paid children to ‘riot’ to make a news item. Happily, the CO of the unit in the area concerned arrested the team and put them ‘in clink’ for several hours.
Griff, isn’t it about time for you to change your username and troll as someone else?
Why?
I don’t think people should change ids/use multiple ids on the net.
The BBC, and other big-media, regularly lie to the voters.
And now the voters have started to lie to the media, until they reach the voting booth.
At some point the media might start to connect the dots.
Here is another anal-shattering enema for science. According to this new study in Science Magazine, climate change is catastrophic because (gasp!) nearly every single biome (82%) is adapting to it. I kid you not — adaptation is bad — and, like a strong man twisting your arm behind your back, climate change is forcing to happen. Apparently, nothing else could have caused this tragedy to occur.
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6313/aaf7671
“Most ecological processes now show responses to anthropogenic climate change. In terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, species are changing genetically, physiologically, morphologically, and phenologically and are shifting their distributions, which affects food webs and results in new interactions.”
(Oh, the horrors!)
Adapting to what? Human-caused climate change? How can you tell they are adapting, when what they are supposedly adapting to, has so little influence on the climate that it cannot be measured? You can’t measure the cause, but you can measure the adaption to this cause? You don’t even know if there is a cause, yet you claim it is being adapted to?
The fundamental problem is the climate alarmists cannot prove their basic theory: That humans are causing the climate to do things it would not normally do because of human activity. There is no proof of this theory. There are a lot of indications this theory is not true. And yet these guys see adaptions to the theory in nature.
Human beings certainly have the ability to see what they want to see, and I think this is what we have here, based on no evidence that there is human-caused climate change.
It’s like many “climate change” studies. Not the ones based on thermodynamics, but the ones based on “cause and effect”. They start with the conclusion and then rework the problem statement until the conclusion is confirmed.
Adaptation is a good thing. We adapted to the elements by building homes. So did beavers — before humans were a figment of their imaginations.
“They start with the conclusion and then rework the problem statement until the conclusion is confirmed.”
Exactly. About 95 percent of what passes for climate science today starts with the conclusion, the unproven conclusion, that the Earth’s climate is behaving abnormally, and human activity is the cause.
For me, the presumption is even more careless. All warming is man-made and anything man-made is bad. They can literally study that carbon emissions cause malaria because there is still malaria in the tropics. Yet, malaria is down considerably over the past 100 years, particularly in the developed nations, because of access to medicines and insecticides spread by trucks and planes.
In other words, there is a total disconnect between cause & effect.
I read one study that concluded that deaths due to heat will rise in New York City by hundreds over the next century. One of the assumptions in the study is that air conditioning saved lives, but 87% of residents already have air conditioning so that figure is effectively maxed out for the city. I asked — couldn’t they just turn up their air conditioning (and doesn’t that mean we should ship air conditioners to the tropics?) “But, that would increase carbon emissions!”
Help needed here folks.
I understand the Marrakesh express has 25,000 people attending (did I get that right?).
It’s a two-week conference?
So even in modest terms, the whole shooting match, per person, with flights, food, hotel bills (decent hotels one would assume, not some sleazy flea pit.) should cost around £5,000 each.
So 2,500 x £5,000 = £12, 500,000………….Nahhhhh!!!! I’ll check my calculator again.
£5,000 x 2,500 = £12,500,000
FFS!………Whose paying for all this? And WTF happened to the new fangled video conferencing we were all promised 20 years ago?
I must have read it wrong, sorry folks. No one in their right minds would ship in 2,500 delegates for a meeting on climate change. They don’t have a big enough conference centre, other than a football stadium.
Let me guess. Conferences were restricted to 1 hour a day (let me see…..counts digits) 2,500/8 hours is around 350 people, for each conference. That’s doable. Meanwhile, the rest are in the pool/on the beach/shopping (expense accounts)/or in the pub.
Any jobs going? I’ll even wear sandals.
“Any jobs going? I’ll even wear sandals.”
A word of warning: Saving the world is awfully hard work. Especially now that Trump has been elected. 🙂
The BBC was taken over as an accountable arm of the British government following the David Kelly scandal. It was the excuse the government had been seeking for years to draw their teeth, and it worked.
Sadly it was nothing more than a cost-cutting exercise to save money the government has since poured into bogus, biased, AGW research. The BBC has now been instructed to toe the party line and report to Stasi HQ where they will receive their daily propaganda briefings.
One of the questions being asked of the Trump administration is where do press standards stand? We ought to be asking the UK government the same question.
I think we would all like the BBC back that was happy to investigate and criticise our government for their despicable tactics. Instead, they have been beaten into submission with the Savile stick.
I’m sure there are a number of ‘Savile’ politicians, inconveniently still alive, who deserve scrutiny. We of course note, that the politicians ‘guilty’ of unutterable crimes are now dead. Indeed, much like Savile, they are unable to mount a defence. The mistake was made to target Cliff Richard, only a mistake because they forgot he was still alive.
The collusion amongst the BBC and the government is palpable and disgusting.
The BBC (Better Back Clinton ) and the CNN (Clinton News Nerds ) are so out of touch they should have their licences revoked . They have gone from journalists to promoters . At least with CNN you can chose to not buy their product .
Living in Melbourne Australia may I observe that since June it has been cold and wet. We are now well into Spring and it is still cold . In the forecast period we have 2 warmish days coming up. Western Australia has had the coldest Spring for years and years.
I am sorry but weather goes in cycles always does especially in Australia.We had droughts in the 19th Century and the early 20th century. But the trajectory is not a straight line up in temperature. Far from it. At present I am more concerned about prolonged cold.