Black Exploitation ? Hope Not.

To: Richard Black, BBC

Dear Richard,

It is with relief (but not triumph) that I can announce to you the end of Climate Change “scepticism”.

The new Canadian publication “Climate Cover-Up”, by James Hoggan, points the finger fairly and squarely at vested corporate interests in the continuing saga of Global Warming denial and delaying tactics, both in North America and in the United Kingdom.

He has collated evidence showing that the contrarians have an agenda to confuse and disinform the public, and that the Media have just gone along with this. Probably because editors don’t know any better. Possibly because journalists are too lazy or busy to learn the science.

The Science of Climate Change couldn’t be clearer, the agreement between specialists and experts in the field couldn’t be closer; Michael Mann’s “Hockey Stick” couldn’t be more accurate, and has been vindicated by numerous proxies.

It is time that the BBC dropped its unjustified claim of seeking to portray “balance” on this issue. There is no “debate” regarding Climate Change science, and if you think there is you are unaware that you are citing the unfounded and baseless claims from a group of outliers with quite possibly unhealthy agendas.

Reporting the claims of the Climate Change “sceptics” is as bad as inviting Nick Griffin of the BNP to speak on Question Time : it appears to be a shameless attempt at stirring controversy for the sake of ratings and could well bring the BBC into distrust and disrepute.

This really has to stop. The BBC should not be quoting people who claim to have valid positions on Climate Change but who have no comprehension of the science.

I am in strong disagreement with the way the BBC has mishandled the subject of Global Warming in the last couple of years. By even quoting the voices of the the Climate Change sceptics the BBC has acted as a mouthpiece for the Fossil Fuel industries and the right-wing think tanks who have been funding them.

I would like to hear from you who I should address my formal demands to, and I should like to hear from you personally about where you stand.

Do you understand Climate Change science ? Do you have a relevant degree or training ? Are you able to tell the difference between spin and science ?

I am not seeking to exploit you, harrass you or make your life difficult. I genuinely want to know if you know what you’re writing about.

If I can be sure you know what you are writing about, then I can be confident in promoting your work. If you do not understand how the Climate Change deniers are wrong, then I need to make sure that the BBC knows how they are failing to correctly inform the public.

There should no longer be any piece from the BBC that shows confusion about Climate Change science, or quotes denialist arguments, or sympathises with those wishing to delay/minimise Global Warming mitigation.

It’s not right to pacify people. Climate Change is a very serious, life-threatening, economy-damaging problem, and we should all show the appropriate level of concern. Which is high.

I’m not being falsely alarmist in demanding that all articles from the BBC on the envionment in general and Climate Change in particular should include a warning to the readers that the issue poses significant risk.

I would like your express permission to publish any reply you might choose to give to me.

I am willing to purchase a copy of James Hoggan’s book for you and each of your Science/Technology/Environment colleagues if you promise to read it and get your heads around what has been going on in “denial” land.

After reading this book you should be in a better position to be able to work out which people are promoting something other than the science, and consequently not afford their views the same ranking as the true experts.

If your hands have been tied by your editors, and you have been forced to sit on the fence, then I will approach your editors and challenge them to take a short training course in the science of Climate Change, which should convince them that the “sceptics” are not holding a balancing position, but an irrelevant one.

Yours sincerely,

Ms J. Abbess

14 thoughts on “Black Exploitation ? Hope Not.”

  1. Dear Jo,

    Do you ever learn?, attacking people because they do not agree with your view does not help the enviromental lobby.

    You yourself are guilty of Bad Science and an outrageous sense of self importance.

    As for your infantile claim that “sceptics” hold an irrelevant position, I have only one thing to say….Grow up!.

    Your latest missive is being passed around the blogsphere as a piece of ‘Comedy Gold’, do you actually think that people will listen and agree to the ramblings of an self-important egotistical person like you?.

    P.s. what is the carbon footprint of yor website?, I hate to think of the amount of methane you and your site produce.

  2. I wonder if Mr Hoggan’s scientific qualifications are on a par with those of a certain Mr L Decaprio who stars on the book’s cover

  3. Hahahahahahahahahaha.

    “Michael Mann’s “Hockey Stick” couldn’t be more accurate, and has been vindicated by numerous proxies” Proved to be conmpletely made up is the phrase you are looking for dear.

    “This really has to stop. The BBC should not be quoting people who claim to have valid positions on Climate Change but who have no comprehension of the science” I completely agree I have not heard or seen a warmist on the BBC who had any comprehension of climate science

    You really are a silly person.

  4. Not a good article. Abuse does not sway the undecided and puts off those you hav an issue with. Placing everything as a good/bad issue is poor arguement development. Lack of clarity will never win the day. Find and refer to scientific reports – pro and con – then try again.

  5. I think the only part of this letter that bears any relationship to reality is the paragraph that says;

    “It’s not right to pacify people. Climate Change is a very serious, life-threatening, economy-damaging problem, and we should all show the appropriate level of concern. Which is high.”

    The knock on effects of climate change legislation will have dramatic negative consequences for the vast majority of the worlds population, through increased costs of near everything ensuring that the worlds poor either stay poor or become poorer (or in extreme cases possibley even dead). All for a hypothesis that lacks the empirical evidence to back it up, but will make some corporations and individuals very very rich.

  6. Has it ever occurred to you that the BBC is funded by everyone and that it is supposed to be impartial – that means people on every side of the argument are entitled to a view.

    Or is your view that everyone who disagrees with you should be sent to the Gulag pronto?

  7. I note throughout you constantly refer to climate change without further qualification.

    I am with you 100% there, but only on the principle that I have no doubt that since the earth’s “creation” its climate would have appeared to have constantly “changed”. North Africa the bread basket of Rome. Grape growing in the U.K. in Roman times etc.

    If you, and the fellow travelling eco-loons, are saying this time it’s all down to man there I have to part company with you.

  8. Jo,

    I sincerely hope you remain single because no man deserves to have you inflicted upon him. I may be gaining an unfair opinion of you from what you’ve written but even if it’s half-way accurate you are one obnoxious warmer whose regular rants are playing right into the hands of people who oppose your views. I really don’t think you appreciate just how much of a fillip the nonsense you write is giving those who refuse to accept climate change propoganda. You’re doing the job of ten AGW sceptics. Keep up the good work!

  9. Is this a joke,if it isn’t she needs to see a doctor or better still a psychiatrist,soon.

  10. Lie, lie, and when that does not work, lie again. Well done, Ms Abbess. The myth of climate change is losing ground, and all you can do is lie about it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.