THERE’S SNOW BUSINESS LIKE ECO BUSINESS…

One of the great things about Biased BBC is the tremendous expertise we have on the topic of AGW – with Robin Horbury in particular dissecting much of the nonsense spouted by the BBC on this issue. I was amused by this latest headline from our dear friend, Richard Black. 
Say what? 

The progressive shrinking of Arctic sea ice is bringing colder, snowier winters to the UK and other areas of Europe, North America and China, a study shows.As global temperatures have risen, the area of Arctic Ocean covered by ice in summer and autumn has been falling. Writing in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a US/China-based team show this affects the jet stream and brings cold, snowy weather.

And for those who can’t be bothered wading through the dross, there’s a nice picture of a Greek city swathed in snow.  Oh, and there’s a picture of a Walrus looking sad. Do you think Richard wants us to really really believe in AGW perchance? Right, let’s take this drivel from Black apart…

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to THERE’S SNOW BUSINESS LIKE ECO BUSINESS…

  1. tinks says:

    “a picture of a Walrus looking sad” <img style=”border-style: initial; border-color: initial;” src=”http://cdn.js-kit.com/extra/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/img/smiley-laughing.gif” title=”Laughing” border=”0″ alt=”Laughing”/>

    Expert textpert choking smokers don’t you think the joker laughs at you? Goo goo g joob

       0 likes

    • Natsman says:

      “…Sitting on an iceberg, waiting for the thaw to come
      Corporation tee-shirt, stupid bloody beeboid
      Black, you’ve been a naughty boy, you let the sceptics in
      I am the sceptic, they are the sceptics
      We are the sceptics, goo goo g’joob…”

         0 likes

  2. Span Ows says:

    I know it has been said before but there really is something of a fingers-in-ears tirade about all this now. 

       0 likes

  3. London Calling says:

    Relentless drip drip… like we won’t notice the narrative and the agenda, its just “journalism”, on cue,  news.  I am sick to death of this warmist bilge. I want an invite to a Cameron focus group.

       0 likes

  4. Martin says:

    Ha! Didn’t take long for Shuckman to get this story on to the BBC news did it? I bet he had a boner on like a 16 year old boy with his hands down the knickers of his first girlfriend when he read this latest pile of crap.

    What utter bollocks, MAY, MIGHT NOT CONCLUSIVE.

    This shite should not be given airtime, they really are full of shit, just go back 10 years and the very same wankers were saying we’d never see snow again and the ice at the north pole would be ALL gone by now.

       0 likes

    • John Horne Tooke says:

      Indeed:

      “The frightening models we didn’t even dare to talk about before are now proving to be true,” Fortier told CanWest News Service, referring to computer models that take into account the thinning of the sea ice and the warming from the albedo effect – the Earth is absorbing more energy as the sea ice melts.

      According to these models, there will be no sea ice left in the summer in the Arctic Ocean somewhere between 2010 and 2015.

      “And it’s probably going to happen even faster than that,” said Fortier, who leads an international team of researchers in the Arctic looking for clues to climate change.”

      http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/features/bestofcanwest/story.html?id=c76d05dd-2864-43b2-a2e3-82e0a8ca05d5&k=53683

         0 likes

  5. JS says:

    Black is out of his depth, utterly out of his depth.  His pieces will be shredded by schoolchildren in years to come, when they study, to their no doubt incredulous amusement, the Great CO2 Scare.

       0 likes

  6. Dogstar060763 says:

    Reading Richard Black’s story, one thing is very conspicuous by its absence. CO2. Specifically, the absence of any accusatory finger pointed in the direction of man-made CO2. Odd. This feels very strange. Of course, there is the ever-present background suggestion, here unspoken, that ‘we are all to blame’ for global temperature rises (however slight), but Mr Black pulls back from his usual hysterical proAGW evangelising.

    In fact, his story is liberally peppered with a host of vagaries, uncertainties and probabilities – much like any report from the ‘settled science’ of the IPCC – which might lead one to conclude that, if anything, it’s very difficult if not downright impossible, to extrapolate any actual scientific certainties from the news story Black delivers.

    Of course, emotive images are a speciality of BBC News Online, so a photo of a beach in Greece lightly brushed with snow and another of a solitary walrus go some way to delivering the message the BBC want to see promoted as a matter of policy, but still those pictures can’t quite negate a nagging feeling from the accompanying text that somehow there really isn’t much of anything – except an unusually cold spell of weather across certain parts of Europe – to get too worked up about, especially when Mr Black’s quoted sources all seem so very uncertain of what it is they are discussing.

    Ah yes, the ‘scientific consensus’ of climate alarmism. Lol.

       0 likes

  7. John Anderson says:

    It looks as though Black’s latest nonsense piece is not allowing comments.   Science is settled,  I suppose.   A decent journalist would be still smarting from the sharp criticisms of his pieces on the Heartland FakeGate story – but Black’s endless fearmongering scorns reasoned criticism – and scorns the intelligence of the BBC audience.

    He continues to “blacken” his own reputation.

       0 likes

    • My Site (click to edit) says:

      I would love to discover WHY no comments are enabled.

      Something like this cries out for debate and, yes, challenge if necessary.

      I can actually get my head around the notion that a melting in one place can work its way through ‘the system’ to reducing temperatures elsewhere, but everything about this screams of trying to get things to fit retroactively, from the ignoring of past ‘claims’ to bring in a new, more convenient set, the liberal peppering of, as well described above, a host of vagaries, uncertainties and probabilities, and of course the propagandistic imagery which would make Goebbels blush.

         0 likes

  8. John Horne Tooke says:

    “Writing in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)” has this study actually been released? Or is it a pre-relaese for Black and his activists?

    “PNAS has received occasional criticism for its practice (sometimes known as news embargo) of releasing papers to science journalists as much as a week before making them available to the general public—according to critics, this allows mainstream news outlets to misrepresent or exaggerate the implications of experimental findings before the scientific community is able to respond. Science writer Ed Yong, on the other hand, has claimed that the real problem is not embargoes themselves, but the press releases issued by research institutes and universities.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proceedings_of_the_National_Academy_of_Sciences_of_the_United_States_of_America

    I cannot see any link in the article on the report only a link to the PNAS website. Maybe Dr Gregory can give the link to the study.

    Or maybe not:

    “For the past four winters, for much of the northern US, east Asia and Europe, we had this persistent above-normal snow cover,” Dr Liu told BBC News.”

       0 likes

  9. Alfie Pacino says:

    A telling piece from Black that illustrates his frustrations:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17160660

    A piece that begins with his real problem ‘Climate Scientists often bemoan the imperfect data with which they have to work…’. but he has no compunction in reporting this as some form of truth.

    I don’t know why he’s still taking the money… oh yes I do

       0 likes

    • cjhartnett says:

      Comedy Gold isn`t it Alfie?
      Reckon you`ve got your weatherman for the local paper anyway!
      My next trip to London will involve me counting how many umbrellas are to be found on the Rosetta Stone…and then I`ll deduce from it whatever Black thinks needs to be said.
      Great comments for him again-”more data needed”…as if they`re throwing the thickest dog in the park a rubber bone, and as far away as possible!
      Back to my hieroglyphics anyway to see what ear muffs and cancelled camels might look like!

         0 likes

  10. cjhartnett says:

    Who amongst us would be prepared to get Blacks “Greatest Hits” and put them together in a narrative stream that shows his arc of experiential curiosities from cretin to cabbage?
    The next generation of kids in class could surely see how an already-mouldy peach of a notion turns into a bladder on a stick as waved about his head, by dear old Black Bobbins.
    If we we to hold hands and summon up the spirit of Magnus Pyke…or even a Fortune cookie he may have lived near…we could not do any worse that Black or ShucksMan…luckily I`ve got Professor Nod here…he says the answer to everything is Paris…which is likely to prove to be more truthful that Black would ever say!

       0 likes

  11. Paddy says:

    Yet again

    Black is white

    Up is really down

    Cold is warm

    Fewer and fewer people a falling for this shit.

    Do they seriously believe anyone will be taken in by this garbage

    Deluded

       0 likes

  12. Louis Robinson says:

    re “deluded”: reminds me of the Peter Sellars sketch “Political Speech” in which he says “I do not consider existing circumstances likely”. Richard Black please note.

       0 likes

  13. Cassandra King says:

    Its well known by 97% of scientists that everything means anything and can be caused by everything and anything and CO2 is to blame, the debate is over. Science now operates on the principle that everything can be explained by anything that happens, its called post normal science and serves the new world order.

    Hot or cold or wet or dry, more snow or less snow and everything in between. Its shameless Lysenkoism, the subversion of science to serve political goals. It does not matter if its a pack of lies, in fact the bigger the lie the better, just another brick in the wall and it keeps the narrative fed, it doesnt matter if the current scare is debunked because by that time another scare is in the works and being propagated.

    In the new world order lies become the truth and truth becomes a lie, everything can be explained by anything and it doesnt even have to make sense, in fact the more senseless the better, the more confusing and counter intuitive the better. It is 1984 and animal farm come to life, its the culmination of years of effort to deliberately blur the lines between reality and fantasy, to so confuse and disorientate the publics grasp of reality that just when the public are most tied up in confusion the new world order steps in and offers simplicity and order and meaning and a way out of the maze.

    Control and power and the most effective methods to attain and retain that power and control. The public becomes utterly confused, they become unable to sort the lies from the truth, can no longer see what is fact and what is fantasy. The truth is whatever they say it is, whatever they decide it should be. You have to admit that it is a cunning strategy.

    Black becomes white? Just another lie in the series of lies that make up the CAGW fraud and when this lie is found out there are always more lies ready and waiting. The CAGW fraud is founded on the concept of the great big lie, the fraudsters read a book by a clever little crippled German propagandist and took it to heart. For the new world order to succeed it must be ruled and governed and sustained by lies, a million lies, all lies, only through lies can the new world order succeed.

       0 likes

  14. Cassandra King says:

    I want to take you on a short journey into the near future.

    We learn from the BBC that its well known and beyond any doubt that CO2 emissions cause global cooling, the science is clear and the debate is over and the consensus among lets say 97% of climate scientists including the Nobel prize winning Gleick, winner of numerous awards for his unfailing fight to bring ethical wonderfulness to science is that CO2 is causing global temperatures to plummet into a new ice age and only by drastically curbing this anti greenhouse gas can humanity survive.

    The BBC has long been at the forefront of bringing the new consensus to the ever grateful public and policy makers and stakeholders, unless we stop thinking and start acting on the solid consensus that CO2 causes dangerous man made global cooling the consequences could be utterly…insert word here…. and only strict global governance and oversight and regulation can save humanity from CO2 induced global cooling caused undoubtedly by CO2.

    AND RIGHT ON TIME =-O Mr Black appears on the BBC toady show to explain the new consensus to us, the melting poles will cause long term cooling, the mechanics are completely counter intuitive and crazy, but since when did that stop Black? But the poles that were supposed to be ice free in summer in a few years now becomes ice free in summer in a few decades according to Black. But the poles are nromal within natural variable limits are they not? Here is a couple of graphs below that contradicts Blacks lies. One look at the ice levels shows us what? It shows us that Black is a lying cheating scumbag.

       0 likes

    • Cassandra King says:

      Look closely at the graphs, the southern pole is doing fine, the slope is upward, the northern pole is doing fine within normal cyclic variations seen in ice cores going back over half a million years and proxies going back as far. The evidence is clear isnt it? The BBC are engaged in a long term plan to spread lies and disinformation to the public, the BBC have gone from dubious claims to outright blatant lies.

      Now remember that Black peddled claims only last year that the poles would be ice free within a few years and how he has shamelessly altered this claim to become a few decades. How many decades? Obviously Black does not say, but a few decades could mean a century or more. But this lie has a primary mission, to delay the day of reckoning where claims have to stand up before the unforgiving judge of observed reality, the most dangerous enemy of the CAGW fraud.

         0 likes

      • cjhartnett says:

        Good posts Cassandra.
        Still, I note that Black has not had the conversation stone or megaphone taken away from him-for there he is, trying to make sense of it all for himself at the tail end of the 8am news bulletins.
        Don`t you wish he`d get a version that he can understand…pass it by a scientist or someone who actually DID science up to GCSE up in “editing”…practice it a couple of times in front of a mirror(things you take your lines from Roger!)….and then “present it to the lower orders”?
        Hopeless…a mixture of Neil from the young ones and Norman Wisdom…maybe a change of surname for Roger might bring him up to some level of expected competence…

           0 likes

  15. joseph sanderson says:

    On the Guardians website this afternoon they are holding a Q&A session with one of Richards friends Mike Mann. Watch out for Black taking his lead for his next article from whatever rubbish Mann spouts in his talk with the faithful. 

       0 likes

    • Dogstar060763 says:

      Thanks for the tip-off. Of course, cronyism amongst proAGW climate scientists (and their friends in media and NGOs) is a long-established tradition; it’s how the narrative is evangelised to the proles, how the myth is perpetuated. This fraudulent ‘scientific consensus’ we hear so much about, that band of self-promoting poseurs and snake-oil salesmen, is most concerned with enriching itself and bringing all it’s state-sponsored power to bear on silencing its brave, disadvantaged critics. It’s climate totalitarianism at work.

      Have no doubt about it: these climate alarmists, zealots all, do not wish to engage in any dialogue with their critics: they wish to silence them. In their own words, they wish to try sceptics for ‘crimes against humanity’, presumably by kicking in our doors in the wee small hours, hauling us all off in police vans and putting us before the ‘World Climate Court’ (an idea which, in all seriousness, found its way onto the agenda of the last ‘Conference of the Parties’ in Durban (COP-17), along with the expressed desire for the UN to create a ‘Global Climate Taskforce’. You couldn’t make it up.

      I say again: Beware the Rio Earth Summit, fast approaching in June of this year. Agenda 21 is back on the table.

         0 likes

      • Geyza says:

        Agenda 21 has never been off the table since it was first created.  It is the embodiment of the global government.  The USA, EU, China etc etc all have signed up to it, which is why no matter what any labour, liberal or tory MP says, when in government they will all DO whatever is necessary to implement Agenda 21 via the various climate conference agreements. 

        We are already all signed up to a global plutocracy in this country.  We just have not been made formerly aware of it by the mainstream media.  It is far easier for them to keep pretending that there is a difference between labour and tory and keep the “ignorant masses” tricked into continuing to play the democracy game by voting for whichever new world order puppet the mainstream media endorses as “serious” parties, every 5 years.

           0 likes

  16. JohnofEnfield says:

    Does anyone in the BBC believe that anyone believes ANYTHING that they broadcast?

    For example I find it difficult to believe that they believe that anyone from the Socialist Workers Party is worth listening as the prime source of information about “slave labour” in our retail industry.

    You can plot the path of the long drawn out collapse of an institution prior to final implosion.

    Meanwhile all we should do is laugh in their faces.

       0 likes

  17. John Portwood says:

    What I don’t understand is that we have had in the UK, so far, the mildest winter for years. According to BBC logic this winter should have been colder than last – assuming the ice sheets are melting. The only alternative is that they are not melting – thus again confounding BBC predictions.

    (It probably has something to do with a cycle : 1947, 1963, 1979, 1995 and 2011 were pretty bad winters – every 16 years)

       0 likes

  18. My Site (click to edit) says:

    P NAS  . . . . Very apt!

       0 likes

  19. jbg says:

    I’d be more concerned over the clumsy way Black has editied his own question/statement over the interview with Dr Shaffrey who admits the research is, well, er dodgy…

       0 likes

  20. LJ says:

    I noticed, again, that no comments are allowed on Black’s articles, so I wrote to his twatter page. Really annoying how the BBC doesn’t allow comments unless it is an article criticising a Tory MP etc. Another form of propaganda / censorship

       0 likes

  21. John Horne Tooke says:

    What can one say? AGW makes people mad.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/28/best-warming-headline-evah/

       0 likes

  22. Alfie Pacino says:

    Paul Nurse delivering the Richard Dimbleby Lecture back-peddles a touch on last year’s AGW furore

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100073116/oh-no-not-another-unbiased-bbc-documentary-about-climate-change/

    But still pushing the ‘consensus’ idea for rubbishing opposition to Global Warming. Apparently we are political beings with vested interests. I’m not I have a scientific background and want to see a scientific method and not a flood of dodgy dossiers on Climate change

       0 likes

  23. Richard Pinder says:

    As for the Science. The problems the morons have are (1) Temperatures have fallen slightly in the last 14 years. (2) The Sun does not shine on the Arctic in the Winter, so heat is not produced by the Greenhouse Effect in this region in the Winter. (3) Heat input in the Arctic Winter comes from the South, and then escapes into space. (4) An increase in Cloud Albedo causes a cooling by reflecting solar radiation, but also traps heat, causing milder night temperatures. (5) Therefore the Arctic will have milder Winter long nights with an increase in Cloudiness. (6) The effect of the Suns magnetic influence on the Cosmic Ray effect on clouds is greatest at the poles.
    So you can see why these morons are looking for greenhouse warming in a place that does not have it for half the year. The coldest places at the poles are the places in the world that get the most relative warming with more cloudiness. This is how it is possible to understand how their myopically biased inferior minds are able to assume evidence that a warming causes a cooling.

       0 likes

  24. Cassandra King says:

    If the poles are melting then why are sea levels FALLING? The data from envisat is clear.

    If the icecaps are melting, how come the sea-level is FALLING?

    <img src=”http://www.real-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ScreenHunter_41-Feb.-27-06.18.gif”/>

    Sea level has been plummeting for four years, and is lower than it was in 2003 when EU’s Envisat satellite was launched. This is solid proof that Greenland and Antarctica are melting down at unprecedented rates and flooding the oceans with negative water [/sarcasm]

    SOURCE (See the original for links)

       0 likes

    • Cassandra King says:

      Look and listen to the BBC lies and then look at the reality.

      If the poles and ice and glaciers were melting away the result would be a rise in sea levels right?

      Where is the water then Black you lying turd? Is it hiding or something, lurking in the depths of the ocean like a sea monster just waiting until we least expect it before jumping out and raping our children?

      Just one graph blows Blacks lies out of the water, where is David Gregory now? Come on David tell us where this water is hiding, maybe its hiding in the sky?

         0 likes

    • Richard Pinder says:

      Obviously the data for the retreating Arctic ice cap is more than four years old, while the data for falling sea levels is more up to date.

         0 likes