New PM, Same Old ABC, by Tony Thomas. First the BBC:
The BBC has a track record on global-warming reporting that combines ignorance, fanaticism and outright villainy. Last week it issued instructions to its editorial team aimed at further suppressing the sceptic case. …
The BBC “villainy” I mention dates back to 2006, when the head of news Tony Hall (now BBC director-general and Baron Hall of Birkenhead) authorised a seminar to determine how global warming should be reported. The BBC described 28 outside advisers as “the best scientific experts”, and they briefed about 30 BBC officials. It was a major event. The BBC adopted the “science experts” case — ie., that the science was settled and dissenters were not entitled to equal treatment. …
A lone pensioner in rural West Wales called Tony Newbery asked for the names of the 28 “science experts”. The BBC refused. Then, to fight Newbery’s freedom-of-information filings, the BBC at enormous public cost deployed two barristers and four lawyers for years to stall and keep the names concealed. In 2012, a blogger discovered the list of names on an obscure internet file. Of the 28, only three were scientists, of whom only two were in climate. The rest were mainly green activists (including two from Greenpeace), plus vested business leaders, and miscellaneous odd bods, such as someone from the US Embassy, of all places. In one of a number of further scandals, the BBC was caught running films made and supplied by green groups.
[Has] the ABC’s climate-ignorant green reporters have ever robustly challenged a warmist? Here’s a contrary example. The ABC’s science guru Robyn Williams on August 16, 2014 had Yale climate fabulist Naomi Oreskes as his Science Show guest. She had written a futurist book from the year 2414 about climate dooms, including the total wiping out of the Australian population. She arranged the climate deaths of pet pups and kittens in 2023 as a wake-up call to today’s climate-apathetic families.
Williams didn’t just fawn over Oreskes and her idiotic propaganda. His “robust questioning” involved enthusiastically endorsing her dead kittens scenario: “Yes, not only because it’s an animal but it’s local. You see, one criticism of the scientists is they’re always talking about global things … And so if you are looking at your village, your animals, your fields, your park, your kids, and the scientists are talking about a small world that you know, than it makes a greater impact, doesn’t it?”
Oreskes responded: “Well, exactly. It was about bringing it literally home, literally into your home, your family, your pet, the dog or cat that you love who is your faithful and trusted companion.”
Believe it or not, all this reeking nonsense went to air on the so-called science Show, compered by a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science. …
On June 24 last year Williams gave his Science Show the faux heading “Has ‘denying’ won?” With the ABC’s Sharon Carleton, he interviewed five sceptics, including famed physicist Freeman Dyson, Judith Curry (nearly 200 climate papers), and Garth Paltridge (ex-CSIRO). Terrified that his guests might be persuasive, Williams pre-edited their voice clips and drowned them with contrary views from three warmists Andy Pitman, Steve Sherwood and Tom Griffiths. On my rough word count of the relative arguments, the sceptics got 3100 words and Williams’ team 4400.
Then there’s always this.