Sunday, July 09, 2006
BBC: Climate Change "Severe," but Scientists Do Not Agree About It
The BBC, one of the triad of journalistic evil, puts out the following story in which it claims that scientists have found "climate change" to be "real and severe."
Then, the story goes on to quote these scientists as not seeing the problem severe at all. In fact, many do not agree on just what is happening.
Climate change 'real and severe'
Wow! Dangerous stuff, eh?
But, if you just pan down into the meat of the article, you get the following:
The headline and story tells us that short of shutting down human existence, we are all doomed.
But the science and evidence tells us the opposite: that no one knows the truth, and those who claim they do are full of shit.
The BBC: bringing daily lies and Marxist propaganda to you, all at taxpayer expense.
The BBC, one of the triad of journalistic evil, puts out the following story in which it claims that scientists have found "climate change" to be "real and severe."
Then, the story goes on to quote these scientists as not seeing the problem severe at all. In fact, many do not agree on just what is happening.
Climate change 'real and severe'
An expert panel convened by BBC News has concluded that climate change is "real and dangerous".
Temperatures are likely to rise by 3C to 5C by the end of the century, with impacts likely to be "severe" but not "catastrophic", the panel said.
It also concluded that politicians are unlikely to cut emissions sufficiently to prevent dangerous global heating.
The panel's discussions were based on themes set by Professor James Lovelock in his latest book The Revenge of Gaia.
Wow! Dangerous stuff, eh?
But, if you just pan down into the meat of the article, you get the following:
For perspectives on these issues, BBC environment affairs analyst Roger Harrabin brought together a panel of seven eminent academics with expertise including climate modelling, the Antarctic, and social aspects of environment policy.
[...]
There was general agreement that Professor Lovelock had used rather severe projections of future climate change.
[...]
There was acknowledgement that some areas of climate-related science remain substantially uncertain. The behaviour of forests and the impacts of rising greenhouse emissions on oceans were two fields picked out as needing further study.
[...]
Hans von Storch from the Institute for Coastal Research in Geesthacht, Germany, cautioned against making public statements on the basis of science that is not fully mature.
Early computer models of climate, he said, had predicted increases in storminess, which had not shown up in later, more sophisticated models.
"So as long as we simply play around with these models as toys and enjoy ourselves and develop our knowledge, that's fine," he said.
"But if we at the same time go out and speak to journalists and say 'therefore we will have this and that disastrous event', I think we are doing a disservice to the public."
The headline and story tells us that short of shutting down human existence, we are all doomed.
But the science and evidence tells us the opposite: that no one knows the truth, and those who claim they do are full of shit.
The BBC: bringing daily lies and Marxist propaganda to you, all at taxpayer expense.
