Very many congratulations to Mauizio for finally breaking the logjam and making some progress at last on the ‘Great Climate Change Seminar Mystery’. But now the work really begins.
At the moment it is hardly possible to pick up a paper or listen to a news report without being told that trust in the BBC has been severely damaged. This is both true and particularly sad when the Corporation is just approaching its ninetieth anniversary. Impartiality and accuracy are the characteristics that established the BBC as the world leader in its field even in times of political turmoil, war and social unrest. As John Bridcut made clear in his ‘Wagon Wheel’ report, this reputation for integrity is the core of the BBC brand and if it is damaged that endangers the whole edifice.
We now know that someone within the BBC told Bridcut, when he was researching his report, that a seminar ‘with the best scientific experts’ informed a major editorial decision on how climate change was to be presented to the public at a crucial moment in the battle to persuade the public to take anthropogenic global warming seriously. And make no mistake, the BBC is not just a source of information, like Wikipedia or the reference section of a library, it is a major opinion former too. How the BBC decides to portray current affairs really matters and has an enormous effect.
The names on the list that Maurizio has published in no way justify the claim made in the ‘Wagon Wheel’ report. It is not enough for the BBC to merely make an apology and a correction at this late stage; much, much more is needed if the organisation’s reputation is to be restored.
What the Saville scandal has shown us is that there is a culture of deceit – and of turning a blind eye to unwelcome problems – at the BBC which extends back over decades. The BBC must be forced to institute a proper inquiry into why Bridcut was misinformed and then tens of thousands of pounds in legal costs were committed to keeping the affair under wraps, just like Saville’s appalling behaviour.
That is the next task.
As a first step I have asked the BBC’s Litigation Department to confirm or deny that the list Maurizio has found is the one that I requested at the hearing a fortnight ago.
Good work and thanks heaps. I would submit that one important lead is the inclusion of the BP representative at the “seminar”. It reveals the money trail, and I believe that profit motives are a big part of the panic-mongering at BBC and elsewhere. Many corporations are maneuvering to profit from the panic. BP is just one. See my comment at Climate Audit on the most recent posting (which concerns your efforts and Mauizio’s coup).
I think that this meeting was NOT a meeting to decide balance policy on Global Warming. It just does not have the right people – and there are far too many of them.
What I suspect happened is that the BBC were on the defensive when asked why they had dropped their commitment to balance opposing views, and simply said that they had formally discussed this, citing that meeting as proof. In fact, I suspect that the meeting originally was just an lobbying awareness seminar – which would explain why the attendees list was published on the web.
What we should be doing is asking, not for the list of attendees, but for the AGENDA. This will tell us what the meeting was planned to cover.
Can anyone think of a reason why the agenda would be a secret item?
Steve Richards, #22:
Link to Wagon Wheel report fixed and it is a remarkably good read after the first few pages. If only Steve Jones had applied the same rigour when dong his review of BBC science reporting.
If nothing else, do read the first four paras. of Section 11 and see if they ring a bell or two!
Tony
You know where I am. Do please contact me if I can offer any practical help whatsoever.
Like several others I cant help feeling an appeal might be worthwhile as that provides the opportunity for further high level publicity
tonyb
Well done Tony N for you persistence. If you’re going to take it further then Dodgy Geezer has got to be right about the AGENDA.
So sad that Auntie has got so many things wrong at the moment cos we used to love her for being trustworthy and lots of the stuff she puts out is still up there.
Best wishes to you and your wife and thank you for your persistance.
Tony
The list obtained by Mauricio Morabito and copied by Guido Falkes opens several new cans of worms for the BBC.
Firstly the BBC participants included Helen Boaden, George Entwistle, Peter Rippon and Steve Mitchell. all of whom have been cast aside this week because of their alleged editorial deficiencies.
Secondly out of 29 climate opinions convened for the 2006 BBC meeting only Lord May, Dorte Dahl-Jensen
Mike Hulme and Iain Wright had appreciable scientific background. The others can be discounted as environmental lobbyists and hangers-on.
Lastly the BBC statement is clearly misleading when they suggest that the best scientific experts supported the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus [on anthropogenic climate change]. Weight of what evidence?
Thus for the BBC the subject became not a see-saw, not a bandwagon but a crusade.
[…] experts” were and whom the BBC relied on to form it’s editorial policy and blogger Tony Newberry asked a Freedom Of Information Request to find out. The BBC resisted publication of the names, […]
Tony,
FYI
I have referenced you in this blog post http://solvebbcbias.com/2012/11/15/twenty-eight-gate-the-bbc-has-a-serious-case-to-answer/
TonyN,
So you aren’t too impresses with the list , I take it?
OK lets take them two at a time. Starting with:
Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_May,_Baron_May_of_Oxford
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hulme
Who would have topped your list of climate “experts”? James Dellingpole, Bishop Hill ? Your mate from the pub who reckons AGW is all a big scam?
Mike Haseler
I’ve registered, logged in and Capcha-ed like a maniac, but I can’t put a comment up at your excellent site, so Im putting it here at HS
Here’s a roundup of world press reaction so far:
Apart from Booker’s article in the Sunday Telegraph, and blogs at the Telegraph, Mail and Spectator, nothing more in the British mainstream press.
– a summary of quotes in the Canadian free Press, which looks as if it’s lifted from GWPF
– article and blog post in the Italian Daily il Foglio (“apocalypse at the BBC” and “BBC falls to bits”)
http://www.ilfoglio.it/soloqui/15753
http://www.ilfoglio.it/cambidistagione/961
– article in Italian weekly Tempi
http://www.tempi.it/sapete-perche-i-nomi-degli-esperti-scientifici-della-bbc-sul-global-warming-erano-segreti-perche-non-erano-esperti#.UKTO2K46L3A
– A good summary on the French “liberal” (= libertarian?) blog here
http://www.contrepoints.org/2012/11/15/104449-la-bbc-entre-pedophilie-et-rechauffement-climatique
French and Italian journalists who pick the story up will naturally turn to the BBC and find – nothing.
TonyN
Very many thanks for all your efforts. Born & Bred in North Wales and now retired. To show where I am coming from I have repeated a note I sent to Anthony Watts in 2008.
“Very many thanks to Anthony and all the contributors to WUWT. I am not a scientist, my formal education stopped at school senior level Maths, Physics and Chemistry therefore a lot of the technical arguments are beyond my learning. I have however travelled extensively and being an offshore sailor and traveller I have experienced a great number of nature’s excesses up front and personal. These range from volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, artic cold, desert heat, water spouts and Atlantic storms. The power of nature has fascinated me, but I have also seen its more gentle side in the calm after the storm, flowers growing on volcanic rims and a desert scene sprouting in bloom after spring rains. Also as a sailor I make use of sea current, wind and solar energy to run my offshore sailing boat.
These experiences always led me to doubt that man is ever powerful enough to greatly influence earth’s natural elements. In the early days I felt that I stood out rather against the tide, being insulted, mocked and general dismissed as some sort of crank with a hidden agenda. The excessive and alarmist predictions using doctored photographs and mass political in-doctrine just reinforced my opinion. Thanks to sites such as WUWT the groundswell of opinion has slowly changed and we are seeing knowledgeable challenges to the data on which the predictions are based.
I am passionate about looking after our habitat and our natural resources but recognise that our efforts in that direction are small compared with natures capability to adjust and manage itself.
In the UK it is taking some time for our mainline institutions(Government, BBC, Met Office and many newspapers) to get off Climate Change bandwagon. Once they do we will be able to get sensible discussion and debate around this subject. That time cannot come soon enough.
Grateful to you all.” Perhaps the time is coming!!
Once again, many thanks for all the good wishes and helpful comments. I’m sorry that there has been no time for individual responses even to old friends of this blog. The story is still evolving and that must be a priority for now, but I can assure you that every word of every comment has been read.
Les Ellson
As a mountaineer, a lifelong countryman, an ex-inhabitant of some fairly wild places, and a one time inshore fisherman, I really, really appreciate what you are saying. Unfortunately in an increasingly urbanised world, and with improved working conditions, there are fewer and fewer people who have the opportunity to see, and understand, the natural world from our point of view.
GK Chesterton is supposed to have said, ‘If people cease to believe in God they do not believe in nothing, they will believe anything’, One might also say that if experiencing the natural world becomes a matter of recreational choice for most people, then it is very difficult for them to make informed judgements about such things as climate research.
Congratulations Maurizio!
Max
PS Anybody know why Judith Curry’s Climate Etc. blog has been taken down?
It’s supposedly for a “terms of service violation”.
Is there something else behind this?
(I hope not.)
Tony N
Forgot to congratulate you.
Perseverance paid off.
Cheers!
Max
Max, Thanks and good to hear from you, but I’ve moved you comment about BP to the New Statesman thread as I want to keep things very focused on other threads at the moment.
Tony,
I want to tell my readers about this, but need to clear up one thing for now: Who is Bob Willis, the person to whom BBC Trust Head of Accountability, Stephanie Harris, addresses her letter of June 2010?
Thanks for your help,
Rod Sweet
BBC impartial? Leader in its field? Come on-the BBC is the most corrupt, liberally biased and partial news organization on the planet. They actually rival our MSNBC for being most full of crap! They are never close to the truth-and maintain a bias that furthers the left’s agenda world-wide. I’m sorry, but to praise the BBC for being impartial is like praising our President Obama for being honest. You can’t, because it isn’t true!
Good leg-work none the less. Wish we had more than 5 real journalists in the US willing to expose the fraud of “climate change” and the true goal behind it-wealth transfer to those who don’t work, don’t take personal responsibility, and those who are tyrants. My country has handed out 10’s of billions of USD to tyrants around the globe in the name of “climate change”, which is nothing more than tribute paid to puppet governments who climb on the climate train to fleece the masses out of their hard earned livings, and to grow the global governance movement, whereby we will all be relegated to the collective misery that used to be the USSR, PRC, and more. Stop these morons now, and you just may keep yours, and I just may keep my freedoms. They persist and propagate further their scam, and we are all answering to tyrants like Obama. And trust me [ snip – see blog rules]
[…] [1] From 2012, Harmless Sky http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=607 […]