I remember reading, last year, an article by Mitchell Anderson of the Georgia Straight condemning the Canadian medias for being objective and reporting the pros and the cons of global warming. Mitchell called their actions “journalistic malpractice” because they were publishing what he called “unorthodox views about Global Warming.”
This post shows you through an email exchange between a british global warming activist and the BBC, how Mitchell was wrong and how any global warming activist with no science background can manipulate the press. It also shows that when it comes to global warming the press does not give a damn about scientific facts concerning global cooling when reporting the news. (yes I said global cooling)
This email exchange is about a BBC journalist who reported that the World Meteorological Organization had said the world is going to get cooler this year. He was going to say that the temperatures are going to fall this year and there hasn’t been any change in temperature since 1998. An activist decided to write to him and here’s the exchange of e-mails. It is amazing to see how environmentalists easily manipulate the press.
The first email comes from the environmental activist named Jo Abbess. She writes :
“Challenge anything that seems like it is subject to skepticism. Challenge it. Here’s my goal for the day. BBC actually changed an article that I requested a correction for.”
Jo writes to Roger who is the author of the article on the BBC.
“Dear Roger, would you please correct a piece published today entitled global temperatures to decrease. One, a minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked. That’s the quote from the article that she wants changed. A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked.”
Jo Abbess does not have any degree in climatology and does not have any scientific credentials giving her authority in climate change but yet she is able to do what a real Nazi like Joseph Goebbels never achieved - Persuade the BBC to change their story.
[Beginning of the full email exchange]
From Jo, April 4, 2008
Climate Changers,
Remember to challenge any piece of media that seems like it’s been subject to spin or scepticism.
Here’s my go for today. The BBC actually changed an article I requested a correction for, but I’m not really sure if the result is that much better.
Judge for yourselves…
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Jo Abbess
to Roger Harrabin
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:12 AM
subject Correction Demanded : “Global temperatures ‘to decrease’”
Dear Roger,
Please can you correct your piece published today entitled “Global
temperatures ‘to decrease’” :-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7329799.stm
1. “A minority of scientists question whether this means global
warming has peaked”
This is incorrect. Several networks exist that question whether global
warming has peaked, but they contain very few actual scientists, and
the scientists that they do contain are not climate scientists so have
no expertise in this area.
2. “Global temperatures this year will be lower than in 2007″
You should not mislead people into thinking that the sum total of the
Earth system is going to be cooler in 2008 than 2007. For example, the
ocean systems of temperature do not change in yearly timescales, and
are massive heat sinks that have shown gradual and continual warming.
It is only near-surface air temperatures that will be affected by La
Nina, plus a bit of the lower atmosphere.
Thank you for applying your attention to all the facts and figures available,
jo.
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Roger Harrabin
to Jo Abbess ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:23 AM
subject RE: Correction Demanded : “Global temperatures ‘to decrease’”
Dear Jo
No correction is needed
If the secy-gen of the WMO tells me that global temperatures will
decrease, that’s what we will report
There are scientists who question whether warming will continue as
projected by IPCC
Best wishes
RH
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Jo Abbess
to Roger Harrabin ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:37 AM
subject Re: Correction Demanded : “Global temperatures ‘to decrease’”
Hi Roger,
I will forward your comments (unless you object) to some people who
may wish to add to your knowledge.
Would you be willing to publish information that expands on your
original position, and which would give a better, clearer picture of
what is going on ?
Personally, I think it is highly irresponsible to play into the hands
of the sceptics/skeptics who continually promote the idea that “global
warming finished in 1998″, when that is so patently not true.
I have to spend a lot of my time countering their various myths and
non-arguments, saying, no, go look at the Hadley Centre data. Global
Warming is not over. There have been what look like troughs and
plateaus/x before. It didn’t stop then. It’s not stopping now.
It is true that people are debating Climate Sensitivity, how much
exactly the Earth will respond to radiative forcing, but nobody is
seriously refuting that increasing Greenhouse Gases cause increased
global temperatures.
I think it’s counterproductive to even hint that the Earth is cooling
down again, when the sum total of the data tells you the opposite.
Glaringly.
As time goes by, the infant science of climatology improves. The Earth
has never experienced the kind of chemical adjustment in the
atmosphere we see now, so it is hard to tell exactly what will happen
based on historical science.
However, the broad sweep is : added GHG means added warming.
Please do not do a disservice to your readership by leaving the door
open to doubt about that.
jo.
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Roger Harrabin
to Jo Abbess ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:57 AM
subject RE: Correction Demanded : “Global temperatures ‘to decrease’”
The article makes all these points quite clear
We can’t ignore the fact that sceptics have jumped on the lack of
increase since 1998. It is appearing reguarly now in general media
Best to tackle this - and explain it, which is what we have done
Or people feel like debate is being censored which makes them v
suspicious
Roger
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Jo Abbess
to Roger Harrabin ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:12 AM
subject Re: Correction Demanded : “Global temperatures ‘to decrease’”
Hi Roger,
When you are on the Tube in London, I expect that occasionally you
glance a headline as sometime turns the page, and you thinkg “Really
?” or “Wow !”
You don’t read the whole article, you just get the headline.
A lot of people will read the first few paragraphs of what you say,
and not read the rest, and (a) Dismiss your writing as it seems you
have been manipulated by the sceptics or (b) Jump on it with glee and
e-mail their mates and say “See ! Global Warming has stopped !”
They only got the headline, which is why it is so utterly essentialy
to give the full picture, or as full as you can in the first few
paragraphs.
The near-Earth surface temperatures may be cooler in 2008 that they
were in 2007, but there is no way that Global Warming has stopped, or
has even gone into reverse. The oceans have been warming consistently,
for example, and we’re not seeing temperatures go into reverse, in
general, anywhere.
Your word “debate”. This is not an issue of “debate”. This is an issue
of emerging truth. I don’t think you should worry about whether people
feel they are countering some kind of conspiracy, or suspicious that
the full extent of the truth is being withheld from them.
Every day more information is added to the stack showing the desperate
plight of the planet.
It would be better if you did not quote the sceptics. Their voice is
heard everywhere, on every channel. They are deliberately obstructing
the emergence of the truth.
I would ask : please reserve the main BBC Online channel for emerging truth.
Otherwise, I would have to conclude that you are insufficiently
educated to be able to know when you have been psychologically
manipulated. And that would make you an unreliable reporter.
I am about to send your comments to others for their contribution,
unless you request I do not. They are likely to want to post your
comments on forums/fora, so please indicate if you do not want this to
happen. You may appear in an unfavourable light because it could be
said that you have had your head turned by the sceptics.
Respectfully,
jo.
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
from Roger Harrabin
to Jo Abbess ,
date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:28 AM
subject RE: Correction Demanded : “Global temperatures ‘to decrease’”
Have a look in 10 minutes and tell me you are happier
We have changed headline and more
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
ORIGINAL
================
Page last updated at 00:42 GMT, Friday, 4 April 2008 01:42 UK
Global temperatures ‘to decrease’
By Roger Harrabin
BBC News environment analyst
Global temperatures this year will be lower than in 2007 due to the cooling effect of the La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said.
The World Meteorological Organization’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.
This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.
But experts have also forecast a record high temperature within five years.
Rises ’stalled’
La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.
El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.
It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China.
Mr Jarraud told the BBC that the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree.
This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.
Watching trends
A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.
But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 1998 temperatures would still be well above average for the century.
“When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year,” he said. “You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.
“La Nina is part of what we call ‘variability’. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up; the climate on average is warming even if there is a temporary cooling because of La Nina.”
Adam Scaife, lead scientist for Modelling Climate Variability at the Hadley Centre in Exeter, UK, said their best estimate for 2008 was about 0.4C above the 1961-1990 average, and higher than this if you compared it with further back in the 20th Century.
Mr Scaife told the BBC: “What’s happened now is that La Nina has come along and depressed temperatures slightly but these changes are very small compared to the long-term climate change signal, and in a few years time we are confident that the current record temperature of 1998 will be beaten when the La Nina has ended.”
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
UPDATED VERSION (note : the page date and time has not changed)
==============================================
Page last updated at 00:42 GMT, Friday, 4 April 2008 01:42 UK
Global temperatures ‘to decrease’
By Roger Harrabin
BBC News environment analyst
Global temperatures will drop slightly this year as a result of the cooling effect of the La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said.
The World Meteorological Organization’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.
This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.
But experts say we are still clearly in a long-term warming trend - and they forecast a new record high temperature within five years.
The WMO points out that the decade from 1998 to 2007 was the warmest on record. Since the beginning of the 20th Century, the global average surface temperature has risen by 0.74C.
While Nasa, the US space agency, cites 2005 as the warmest year, the UK’s Hadley Centre lists it as second to 1998.
Researchers say the uncertainty in the observed value for any particular year is larger than these small temperature differences. What matters, they say, is the long-term upward trend.
Rises ’stalled’
La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.
El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.
It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China.
Mr Jarraud told the BBC that the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree.
This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.
Watching trends
A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.
Animation of El Nino and La Nina effects
But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the century.
“When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year,” he said. “You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.
“La Nina is part of what we call ‘variability’. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up; the climate on average is warming even if there is a temporary cooling because of La Nina.”
China suffered from heavy snow in January
Adam Scaife, lead scientist for Modelling Climate Variability at the Hadley Centre in Exeter, UK, said their best estimate for 2008 was about 0.4C above the 1961-1990 average, and higher than this if you compared it with further back in the 20th Century.
Mr Scaife told the BBC: “What’s happened now is that La Nina has come along and depressed temperatures slightly but these changes are very small compared to the long-term climate change signal, and in a few years time we are confident that the current record temperature of 1998 will be beaten when the La Nina has ended.”
[End of email reporting on Jo’s activities]
source link
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this article:
