http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/03/has-the-bbc-has-broken-faith-with-the-general-public/

I interviewed James Delingpole...

And It includes the invitation from the BBC to be involved in the program. Clearly showing in my opinion bad faith on the BBC's part,

It is interesting to read first this news story from the BBC on how the droughts in the Amazon reduce the amount of CO2 absorbed:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12356835

and then read this report of a paper which describes how drought in the Amazon increases photosynthesis (using up CO2 in the process):

http://www.science20.com/news_account/global_warming_puzzle_amazon_rainforest_showed_better_growth_during_drought

Bish, is there any way you can put the Next 40 Comments bit etc at the top as well as at the bottom of the comments? It would save having to scroll down every time you went back to a topic and wanted to look at the latest comments (unless I am thick and there is some stupidly simple way of doing this that I don't know about).

Suggest that you take a look at Barry Woods post at WUWT titled" Has the BBC broken faith with the General Public?
Posted on February 3, 2011 by Barry Woods

Guest Post by Barry Woods"

It appears to be a good analysis of a situation in which James Delingpole was set up by the BBC Horizons producers.

How the BBC misrepresents. Get a load of this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12285230

Note the NASA picture: pink (dominant colour) is the thickening of the ice cap, blue (minor) the thinning, completely upsetting a casual representation.

Stop at nothing BBC.

Is this assertion correct?

"In drought years, the Amazon region changes from being a net absorber of carbon dioxide into a net emitter."

"Amazon drought 'severe' in 2010, raising warming fears"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12356835

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/02/02/mummy-dna-history-or.html

Nice to see scientists getting some very worked up about other scientists not releasing their data.

Obviously though, this is real science. Not post normal science.

More BBC weather lies

We've just been told twice by the BBC News tonight that the Brisbane floods were the 'worst in history'. This is blatantly untrue and by a long way, according to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology - as clearly explained by Roger Pielke Jr here (i.e. substantially lower than the early 1970s and about half of levels recorded previously).

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2011/01/brisbane-floods-in-historical-context.html

I used to have a substantial degree of faith in the BBC's standards, but recent propaganda filth has eroded this completely - I'm not sure there's any way back from here. Does anybody know who to complain to?

Say what? Colder climate for the next 20-30 years.

http://www.accuweather.com/blogs/news/story/45220/bastardi-three-of-next-five-wi.asp

http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2011/02/02/desperate-markets-carbon-trading/