Thursday
Apr182019
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Attenborough does climate
Apr 18, 2019 BBC This is an open thread for discussion of tonight's David Attenborough does climate thingy.
Apr 18, 2019 BBC 
Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Dec 20 - julie
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing -
Dec 6 - sexdollpartner
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing
Links
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
-
Science blogs
-
Political blogs
-
Other blogs
Subscribe
Copyright © 2006-2013, Bishop Hill All rights reserved.
Reader Comments (168)
Thank you your Grace!
I can't bring myself to watch any BBC climate stuff any more. Nobody is really listening to either side's arguments any more. Until the UK has an epiphany on what cutting CO2 means to the individual, many will just tick the 'I believe' box, from PM to school kids. The Government is eagerly jumping to the front of any action queue, so that they can show off how green they are. Even the National Grid isn't sounding alarm bells over the energy shortfall we're facing. I bet even the gillet jaunes in France are saying 'sure we believe in climate change, we just want you to solve it without costing us anything'. Lefties are the worst for letting the magic money tree pay for everything but most people aren't far behind, thinking that business will invent something that won't cost a fortune or create a different environmental issue.
I'm loving the London protests. More power to them. Maybe if they're really irritating, the urbanites will stop supporting these jet setting loonies and start questioning the religion.
Talking of the protesters - isn't it time there was a WHAT'S YOUR NUMBER? campaign, where these twits demonstrate that they practice what they preach. The first question an interviewer should ask of activists and scientists should about their CO2 footprints.
The BBC have deliberately chosen the most political wing of climate science for the programme, all of whom have a track record of misleading the public. Mann, Hansen, Maslin, Stott, Catherine Mitchell, and even Oreskes.
I had planned to watch some paint dry tonight but this looks like a far more effective means of inducing narcolepsy.
Tommorows news Notra Dame finished burning .Trump gets of Muller (Quietly forget that one) and BBC in full damage control mode.Instead of headlines Attenborough whining about climate instead thousand of bank holiday passengers stranded at Heathrow.Anarchist crusties Auntie beeb has supported.A good FOI request the BBC how much Attenborough got payed for tonight compared to a female voice over narrator.Also it’s Gonna be the hottest day Tommorow I think the police are looking for some riot squad on protestor kettle action on the tarmac without a bottle of water .Poor Cressida and Sidique need it .when Extinction Rebellion are all back at uni or flying around on gap year ,we’re back to London Knife crime and gangland shootings.So the Heathrow cops will definitely find a few drones amongst the crusty protesters and that is a night in the cells a chat with special branch and three months suspended straight away
AfAIK in the prepublicity it was billed as a 90 min special
yet today it's listed as 60 mins long
Did they edit some catastrophe out ?
In solidarity with the enviro demonstrations I will curtailing my use of TV and electricity tonight.
Anyway Friday's are sorted from now on
\\ Tune in to ‘British Made with John Prescott’, Channel 5 @ 8pm Fridays from 19th April
where we’ll be going behind the scenes to reveal some of the secrets behind the UK’s favourite food factories //
I do however feel like doing something to get back at XR
I'll be eating more meat, not bothering with recycling and probably handing out some unnecessary flights.
Still I'll be 5 times as green as most of them.
Not surprisingly, this BBC puff piece is wall-to-wall propaganda:
"Climate change: Sir David Attenborough warns of 'catastrophe'
By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47976184
SO HOW MUCH ARE YOU BEING PAID SIR DAVE.Answers on a postcard please to FOI Request PR Department of embarrassing questions BBC .Obviously don’t mention the gender pay gap cough cough. Also don’t mention EXTINCTION REBELLION, THE SUPER GLUE CREW.LMAO.
Okay the Australian dead bats .Wheres the Autopsies result on them was it heat or a virus that killed them.
Okay the 2018 Californian forest fires.So U S forest records from the time of the American Civil War and Billy the Kid and the Gunfight from OK Coral.
Right we’re 40 mins I’m bored.Problem with Attenborough without lots of exotic animals in exotic locations he can’t hold your attention.Basically the format is a bunch of talking heads and 5 second library clips.Boring.
"An immense flight of bats driven before the wind, covered all the trees around the settlement, whence they every moment dropped dead or in a dying state, unable longer to endure the burning state of the atmosphere”
“immense numbers of the large fox bat were seen hanging at the boughs of trees, and dropping into the water…during the excessive heat many dropped dead while on the wing”
Tench (1793), Collins (1798) Sydney NSW Summer 1790-1791
MME (Mass Mortality Events) also from heat in 1905, 1913, 1926/7
They also die from cold and wet and just about every other twist of weather.
Largest cause of MME globally since c.2000 are wind turbines.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5942905/ see appendix S3 for above heat deaths.
They used to be considered a pest and killed deliberately!
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/VLVA9YX48HTY8KV7FCXDU6KSSM1YQ-FLYING-FOXES-IN-AUSTRALIA
The only useful bit was about deforestation and the need to plant millions of trees. The rest of it was mostly film footage which was obviously meant to scare us but really was just film of stuff that happens. The programme was called 'Climate Change, the facts' but there were little or no facts just lots of maybes and coulds. It was just a propaganda film really.
I agree with that Alan. If the figure quoted is correct then one third of CO2 is caused by de-forestation, but given some of the other dodgy statistics shown about cost of wind and solar, that might be wrong too.
Just propaganda.
Absolutely Terrific.
The only Money Shot they had .The Dead Aussie Bats.Another Suicidal Walrus story coming on.Better googling into it Ben.Previous Mass Extinction Events
Possible the bats were hit by a crop dusting plane at the site or in flight or from a previous site .Simple deduction What species of bat the temperature at which they suffer Breathing and heart failure.The ambient temperature the day they were found dead and similar scenes at other locations with other forms of wildlife.
I saw that it impressed Paul Waugh and John McDonnell. At least, that was what they said on twitter.
It would be amusing if it turns out there are connections between the BBC and the XR mob. Is it just a coincidence of timing, or has planning been going on for some months?
The dead Australian Bats had Lyssavirus which is form of Rabies.According to the Independent the local residents were warned to stay from dead and dying bats and go the doctors if they were bitten or scratched.So a Rabies outbreak combined with normal high summer temperatures weakened and killed the bats not Climate Change.So now I phone it into the BBC Trust.
Climate Change – The Facts; what an ironic title. They start with a lie, then just pile on lie after lie. Nothing but propaganda; sad, really.
Jamspid (Apr 18, 2019 at 7:38 PM): actually, anarchy is about less state control, so the BBC cannot really be called “anarchist”, seeings how they are determined to grind us under ever more state control.
He is a ultra-typical British Malthusian .
Nothing really individual about him really in that regard.
A cardboard cutout of a man.
What striking about the Dawkins / Attenborough set is how bloody boring and one dimensional they truly are .
A standard university educated scientific philosopher or even theologian from maybe 50 years ago would have taken them apart before lunch.
“Take a
washing machinewind turbine – this is made from metal, and this has to be mined….” Oh, and don’t forget that the huge, one-use-only blades are made from fossil fuels; sort of throws your narrative off kilter a bit, now, doesn’t it? Somehow, I suspect your cognitive dissonance will never be able to detect this anomaly.I didn't see the program but bat deaths from heat is nothing new - see my post above. From another Newspaper:-
"...the district was being ravaged with terrible bush fires. On the 11th and 12th February, 1791, the thermometer in the shade exceeded 107. Flying foxes and birds fell in myriads from the trees into the Rosehill fresh water stream and created great stenches besides rendering the water un-wholesome."
Radical I was always told if I visit Australia watch out for poisonous snakes and spiders sneaking up on me .Now I have to add Rabid Rats and Bats to the list. Poor old BBC Sir David is 92 so when he goes they’re left with Eastenders and Strictly to justify the licence fee.With that show I switched over to scan the other channels and when I switched back there was some 14 year old Swedish Climate activist schoolgirl called Greta Thunberg.Wow talk about “Village of the Dammed” she looked like that creepy little girl Wednesday from The Addams Family.LOL
Google
Philosophy of Globalism - Julian Huxley, UNESCO & The Final ...
YouTube · Jay Dyer
Dyer is on top form with this one but is a tad pissed off at the start
Fast forward to 10minutes and begin...
Great as a work of satire.
What is a fact?
A) An observation that cannot be reasonably questioned (within the limits of Occam's razer).
B) An explanation off an observation that survives all logical challenges (without further observations contradicting it).
What is an axiom?
A) An idea that cannot be questioned as it is definitively true by faith.
B) A premise on which a paradigm of thought is based.
Was the programme correctly named?
Apr 19, 2019 at 12:05 AM | Jamspid
Do not be rude about Greta Thunberg,
She is young. She is being used.
She has no real control over her public appearance.
It's unfair.
idau
I feel we can be fairly confident that there has been considerable liaison going on away from prying eyes. The extended and ultimately futile resistance of the BBC about 28gate taught them a lesson.
I think a bit of effort into investigating stewgreen's claim that 30mins was snipped when the piece went to air might tease out some interesting morsels.
The BBC simply doesn't do spontaneity
M Courtney
I think you are wrong about little Greta.
The mobilisation of youth has been (and still is) a very unpleasant facet of many totalitarian regimes and nut job religious manias.
If Greta's feelings are hurt by being criticised / mocked - then that is collateral damage - she is being placed where she is by people who are banking that her youth and vulnerability will innoculate them from engaging in discussion about the garbage she's presenting.
I guess that she's quite an entourage - scripted by a team and apparently a bevy of folk advising on hair and clothes.... it's utterly bonkers.
Sad to witness the intellectual decline of the gifted naturalist and story teller. Ad Hominem comments are very rarely warranted, but we can make an exception in this case and reflect on the evident ravages of dementia. He needs a good home, a comfy armchair, and a fine brandy on his shuffle towards the end. But in the meantime he should spare us all the strain from listening to his support for the nutcase climate change racket.
I think they got the hyphen in the wrong place. It's
Climate - Change the Facts
isn't it?
Being mean about little Greta. BS She’s from the melenial Socal media X factor Savie generation .She knows exactly what she wants to be that’s an Eco Celebrity Version Maryl Streep Beyoncé Chloe Kim Kardazian
"Attenborough’s “Climate Change–The Facts"
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2019/04/19/attenboroughs-climate-change-the-facts/#more-38989
cliscep are also on it:
https://cliscep.com/2019/04/18/climate-change-the-lies-propaganda-misinformation-disinformation-and-emotional-blackmail-part-i-of-many/
There has been much critical comment about Attenborough here and at other climate change sceptical sites. He is lambasted as being affected by dementia or only in it for the money or "past it" ('what a shame, he was so excellent in the past"). This view is actually an attempt to defuse just how powerful a figure he is. He shows no indications of dementia whatsoever - rather the reverse. I have no idea how much he's paid, but isn't he worth it? He's fronting programmes that get top billing. I suspect he's worth every penny to the BBC and Netflix and other organizations would queue up to employ him. Talk to the general public, watch reactions to his programmes by people on Gogglebox. He is considered a national treasure. He is still a formidable force and much loved presenter. As for being "past it", I suggest you watch his current series of half hour programmes on BBC and revise your opinion. My opinion is that he can be as good as he has ever been - so long as he sticks to being a presenter of natural wonders.
I believe he is a formidable supporter of of climate change advocacy. There has to be a reason for this. I also believe there is a potentially more devastating programme that could be in the wings - one where he documents what exactly caused him to fear climate change .
The reaction to the great Walrus lie on Gogglebox is not an example of DA's great authority, but the demise of a sad old has-been who has flushed his reputation down the toilet.
What are these people going to think of him when the deception and manipulation of their emotions is revealed?
As for DA 'believing' in climate change, he's a fully paid up member of the 'cull the carbon unit infestation of the earth' mob, so of course he will promote it.
Just because he is a naturalist, does not mean that he is not also a political extremist.
Was there something specific that people thought they got wrong in the programme, or was it just the overall message that most people here didn't like?
Some 'specifics' have already been given.
Nothing unprecedented has occurred natural disaster wise - in fact it is all very much earth as usual. There is absolutely no empirical evidence of climate breakdown currently, quite the reverse, it's more benign if anything.
The predictions of future doom are pie in the sky. One minute Dr Stephen Schneider thinks an ice age is coming, the next disastrous warming, at least in the old days he was honest about the doubt and stupidity of trying to engineer a solution.
https://youtu.be/DsdWTBNyvX0
The problem we have is that the climate change religion is interfering with real ecological and conservation issues - like forest destruction.
McGrimNasty. You mistake my intent. I am not arguing that Attenborough is not a fully paid up activist. My intent was to counter comments that his views could be dismissed because he is demented, in it for the money or can be dismissed because his best work is in the past. To dismiss him in this fashion is IMHO a huge mistake.
In any case I'm more interested in 1) what caused him to turn to believing in CAGW ?- after all he is a highly educated man with a Cambridge degree in the Natural Sciences, a lifetime's and global experience of viewing and thinking about nature, and mixes in the highest of scientific circles, and 2) why has he so recently come out so strongly as an advocate of extreme catastrophism?
I find it so difficult to believe that a man of such a background, such knowledge and culture, can be so mislead. Surely it must puzzle you that he has not come across in his 90odd years some convincing evidence that gives him pause. To me he is a great puzzlement.
Someone got it dead right in suggesting a slight change to the title of the programme to Climate - Change the Facts. Someone else asked "Was there something specific that people thought they got wrong in the programme....? Well the answer to this is yes, yes,........yes! You can find these on Paul Homewood's site NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT at: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/
You can find these on Paul Homewood's site NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT at: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/
That would be a first. Anyone going to actually highlight some specific problem?
Like I said, being a naturalist does not exclude someone from holding extremist views based more in ideology than fact.
But I think DA, like a lot of people makes the mistake of seeing all change as bad. The world is not fixed, there is no perfect temperature, there is no perfect distribution of weather, landscape types, species.........
The earth is constantly changing dramatically and violently naturally, in cycles, in cycles withing cycles, in step-changes.
After 90 years very little will be unchanged, but it is still too short a time to get real perspective. It's very easy for even an intelligent person to fall into the trap of seeing all change as bad, someone's fault, and think it must be stopped.
I'm sure DA has seen the demise of many animals in his lifetime, some were on the way out without man's influence, some died out entirely because of man.
But none of this is proof of dangerous man-made climate change. It's just a series of anecdotes, events, weather. We need to get back to proper conservation work, not a one-track obsession.
It sounds as if ....and Then There's Physics is someone that visits Bishop Hill for interesting reasons. There are of course many problems with then programme that others have highlighted. Maybe it is against your principles for visit Paul's site but if you do you will find them in abundance. For me the main ones concern the wrong interpretation of the effects of back radiation from atmospheric molecules like carbon dioxide and the basic reasons for the increases in that gas in recent times. Remember that although AGW has been renamed as (human induced) climate change it remains a set of hypotheses (exaggerated and faulted in my view). Translation for the man in the street: speculations that the programme hoped people would believe as facts.
Peter,
That's still not very specific. Also, it sounds like you're disputing the basics of the greenhouse effect. However, that would seem unlikely given that I keep being told that no such people exist.
FAO: ...and Then There's Physics
I don't hide my name when on the Internet. Let's have your name and I will debate the various subjects with you here or elsewhere. In the meanwhile try to force yourself to look at some of the comments on Paul's site about the programme - it will perhaps save me having to go over some of the ground. And yes the Trenberth diagram needs serious revision in my view.
AK has a point. Attenborough is a fully paid up member of the hysteria club and a 'national treasure'. He may have dementia but it doesn't affect his persona, which is what people buy into. It doesn't affect his ability to emote other people's words from the autoqueue.
As with many climate change programs, this apparently mixes real environmental problems (deforestation, orangutans etc) with the dubious climate ones. People can SEE that real problems and allow the programme makers to fudge the rest. What few warmists will admit however is that the solution part isn't going well. Many pretend that renewables are making a big difference and that if only enough children whine at Western governments, CO2 will fall. Some warmists admit that a lot of our (UK) CO2 reduction is due to exporting heavy industry abroad and then importing the goods as if we have no connect to the CO2. I wonder how many people who watched the programme last night had tucked into something with palm oil in? How many were not doing the things that they could easily do to 'save' the planet? It's standard practice for warmists to demand that government does something. There is little thought about WHAT. Whatever it is, the warmists are right along there with the rest of us, moaning about energy bills and congestion charging. All the XR protestors seem to be well heeled. 4 of the ring leaders met in a vegan cafe in the Cotswolds - nuff said. Emma Thompson flew in specially to tell the rest of us how to live because for some reason we aren't prepared to stop aiming for the nice cushy life she and Attenborough enjoy. What naughty people we are.
Ultimately neither side is winning. The government's plans for all new electric vehicles by 2030 will fail. There wouldn't even be enough electricity generation by then to support it, let alone the electric heating as well. Our chances of new nuclear are getting further away, because of exactly the same sort of middle/upper class eco loon as XR features. They can commission as many progs as they like, protest as much as they can and still the government can't do what they demand. We can only hope that eventually they nag their way into decline. So keep cheering on XR's targeting of London.
Peter,
My name's not hidden. I write this blog and you can find out who I am by following the link. As far as I'm aware, Paul doesn't let me comment on his blog, so I tend to not bother reading it.
ATTP is one of those warmists who doesn't do what he says. He wants the government magic money tree to wish for the CO2 fairy to make it all better but if we don't believe in the CO2 fairy, she'll die and the planet will follow. The only new audience for this story telling are the young - a generation that are more indulged with CO2 rich goodies than any age before it.