| BBC reporting 08:11 - Jul 26 with 5777 views | Herbivore |
This snippet from this article really boiled my piss:
"Scientists differ on whether the current global rash of heatwaves is definitely caused by climate change."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-44956310
I'm sure they've been pulled up on this before, attempting to appear impartial by presenting both sides of the climate change debate despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that man made climate change exists. I was reading an article the other day about the erosion of truth and how this is partially as a result of news outlets like the Beeb giving an equal platform to views that are discredited or based on poor or no evidence. In so doing they give undue credibility to flimsy, fringe opinions for the sake of appearing to be balanced. What they are actually doing is creating imbalance by presenting a non-credible, minority viewpoint as being equally valid as one that there is broad expert consensus over. It's quite worrying. |  |
| |  |
| BBC reporting on 08:14 - Jul 26 with 4654 views | StokieBlue |
Science reporting in virtually all of the media is appalling. Probably stems from a basic lack of scientific knowledge and hidden agendas. Science teaching needs to improve globally, nothing is more important as we only are where we are as a civilisation due to the march of science.
Clearly man-made climate change is happening. It is good they dropped the term global warming as it's much more complicated than that.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| BBC reporting on 08:14 - Jul 26 with 4649 views | DanTheMan |
To be fair in most circumstances with weather at particular times, you can't point to one incident and say "this was definitely climate change". It's the long term trends they tend to point at. We just know that it's likely this sort of thing will happen more often.
So the reporting is slightly more fair in this circumstance. |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 08:14 - Jul 26 with 4648 views | itfcjoe |
I'd seen something about this with regards to giving air time to what were effectively Muslim hate preachers as alternate views which gives them credibility |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 08:14 - Jul 26 with 4648 views | m14_blue |
They do this all the time, so terrified of being labelled impartial that they give a completely false equivalence between 2 sides. |  | | |
| BBC reporting on 08:16 - Jul 26 with 4635 views | Guthrum |
Altho the following sentence is less controversial. |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 08:26 - Jul 26 with 4578 views | Herbivore |
| BBC reporting on 08:16 - Jul 26 by Guthrum |
Altho the following sentence is less controversial. |
Indeed it is, but the sentence I quoted jumped out as it jars and implies that there is legitimate debate about man made climate change rather than there being a broad consensus in the scientific community that man made climate change is happening. | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 08:36 - Jul 26 with 4543 views | Guthrum |
| BBC reporting on 08:26 - Jul 26 by Herbivore |
Indeed it is, but the sentence I quoted jumped out as it jars and implies that there is legitimate debate about man made climate change rather than there being a broad consensus in the scientific community that man made climate change is happening. |
I read it more as relating to this specific issue, rather than climate change in general.
For all the effects of human activity, there are natural processes and cycles going on as well (e.g. the mini cold spell of about 1450 to 1700). | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 08:39 - Jul 26 with 4525 views | DanTheMan |
| BBC reporting on 08:36 - Jul 26 by Guthrum |
I read it more as relating to this specific issue, rather than climate change in general.
For all the effects of human activity, there are natural processes and cycles going on as well (e.g. the mini cold spell of about 1450 to 1700). |
I know you don't mean it, but the "it's always changed!" is a pretty common tactic of trying to deny climate change, and especially that colder period. There's always something that has driven the longer term changes. In our current scenario, it's us. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| BBC reporting on 08:46 - Jul 26 with 4498 views | DanTheMan |
That looks like a reputable site, I'm sure it's not just a climate denier blog. | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 09:02 - Jul 26 with 4454 views | Guthrum |
| BBC reporting on 08:39 - Jul 26 by DanTheMan |
I know you don't mean it, but the "it's always changed!" is a pretty common tactic of trying to deny climate change, and especially that colder period. There's always something that has driven the longer term changes. In our current scenario, it's us. |
I'm going to come across as some sort of CC-denial sympathiser here (not the case), but a (typically modern polarised) rigid insistence on absolute orthodoxy first and above all - in a highly complex subject - is not going to promote progress in understanding or finding solutions (if there are any). It works against honesty in analysis of results when researchers face censure for not toeing the line. | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 09:12 - Jul 26 with 4430 views | DanTheMan |
| BBC reporting on 09:02 - Jul 26 by Guthrum |
I'm going to come across as some sort of CC-denial sympathiser here (not the case), but a (typically modern polarised) rigid insistence on absolute orthodoxy first and above all - in a highly complex subject - is not going to promote progress in understanding or finding solutions (if there are any). It works against honesty in analysis of results when researchers face censure for not toeing the line. |
I understand, but those tropes are incredibly damaging and have been for years. They get trotted out (we're already there in this thread) by people who don't understand the subject who will find any minor quibble and blow it out of proportion. | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 09:34 - Jul 26 with 4394 views | Withnail |
| BBC reporting on 09:12 - Jul 26 by DanTheMan |
I understand, but those tropes are incredibly damaging and have been for years. They get trotted out (we're already there in this thread) by people who don't understand the subject who will find any minor quibble and blow it out of proportion. |
The climate scientists have been caught out fudging research data. You can't blame anyone for be sceptical.
There is still no conclusive proof that humans can control the earth's climate. |  | | |
| BBC reporting on 09:37 - Jul 26 with 4389 views | FrowsyArmLarry |
Go cry to the Chinese government. See also - massive growing hole in the ozone layer |  | | |
| BBC reporting on 09:48 - Jul 26 with 4347 views | Oldsmoker |
Scientists pride themselves on being exact. Even if its 99% certain that something is true that annoying 1% means they won't commit themselves.
Remember Domestos and the "Kills all Germs" which was changed to "Kills all known Germs" which was then changed to "Kills 99% of all Germs".
Climate scientists acknowledge that there is room for doubt - they cannot be 100% sure - and the climate change deniers jump on this to say there is categorically no evidence. The climate change deniers by that very stance invalidate themselves because they do not accept that their own theories are not 100% and are therefore challengeable. [Post edited 26 Jul 2018 9:51]
|  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 09:48 - Jul 26 with 4347 views | GeoffSentence |
What's wrong with it? They are not denying climate change of even giving undue weight to those who do. They are talking about the current weather.
Is there actually scientific consensus that this heatwave is directly caused by climate change? I don't know, but it is difficult to attribute individual weather happenings to climate change so I would be surprised if there was.
The been would only be at fault here if there was scientific consensus that climate change is the cause. |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 09:55 - Jul 26 with 4325 views | StokieBlue |
| BBC reporting on 08:36 - Jul 26 by Guthrum |
I read it more as relating to this specific issue, rather than climate change in general.
For all the effects of human activity, there are natural processes and cycles going on as well (e.g. the mini cold spell of about 1450 to 1700). |
The Maunder Minimum did affect the climate but those cyclic events are outliers against the long-term trend (as you know of course).
The problem comes when reporting uses these events as "evidence" against the proven long-term trend.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| BBC reporting on 10:12 - Jul 26 with 4275 views | Steve_M |
This is a good piece on that subject:
http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/07/26/newsnight-s-bizarre-heatwa
"But there is a requirement, when specialist topics end up on the non-specialist news desk, for the general reporters and editors to arm themselves with the basic facts, or to hand it over to the specialists."
The BBC's desperation to use 'balance' is its biggest weakness at present. |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 10:19 - Jul 26 with 4268 views | DanTheMan |
| BBC reporting on 09:34 - Jul 26 by Withnail |
The climate scientists have been caught out fudging research data. You can't blame anyone for be sceptical.
There is still no conclusive proof that humans can control the earth's climate. |
I absolutely can blame people from ignoring the obvious issues. All other drives of climate change have bene ruled out.
Until someone comes up with a better hypothesis as to why the climate across the planet is changing rapidly, this is the consensus.
And yes, there is plenty of proof.
And this is exactly the point I'm making to Guthrum. It doesn't matter how polite you are, the levels of evidence. People will take one small thing and run with it even if it means ignoring mountains of evidence elsewhere. | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 10:25 - Jul 26 with 4244 views | Superfrans |
| BBC reporting on 08:14 - Jul 26 by m14_blue |
They do this all the time, so terrified of being labelled impartial that they give a completely false equivalence between 2 sides. |
This is understandable though. I have huge sympathy for the BBC in this regard. They really damned if they do and damned if they don't. Both the right and left kick out at them at every opportunity (hence their obsession with offering all views) and they are fighting for their very existence. A mis-step in their relationship with the Government and they could have the licence fee taken away. |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 10:27 - Jul 26 with 4236 views | Swansea_Blue |
| BBC reporting on 09:34 - Jul 26 by Withnail |
The climate scientists have been caught out fudging research data. You can't blame anyone for be sceptical.
There is still no conclusive proof that humans can control the earth's climate. |
You have to take a lot of the noise around UEA 'climate-gate' with a pinch of salt (I assume you're referring to the leaked emails from UEA) . Much of the commentary around it is wrong and what's actually in those emails has been distorted by those with a wish to discredit the climate change theory. The data were not being 'fudged' (by this I assume you mean manipulated or created or hidden dishonestly)
The evidence is overwhelming that the climate is changing and that humans have a role in at least accelerating it if not the sole cause of it (as yes, other 'natural' factors are in play). No it's not 'proof' (the scientific method doesn't prove things), but that doesn't mean that it isn't happening - there's an overwhelming amount of data from all sorts of different sources that very strongly suggests it is. |  |
| |
| BBC reporting on 11:15 - Jul 26 with 4176 views | Withnail |
| BBC reporting on 10:19 - Jul 26 by DanTheMan |
I absolutely can blame people from ignoring the obvious issues. All other drives of climate change have bene ruled out.
Until someone comes up with a better hypothesis as to why the climate across the planet is changing rapidly, this is the consensus.
And yes, there is plenty of proof.
And this is exactly the point I'm making to Guthrum. It doesn't matter how polite you are, the levels of evidence. People will take one small thing and run with it even if it means ignoring mountains of evidence elsewhere. |
If the issues are obvious, why did the climate scientists choose to fake their research data and then attempt to cover it up?
It's not a small thing when the people being funded to research climate change are found to be making stuff up. | | | |
| BBC reporting on 11:25 - Jul 26 with 4150 views | DanTheMan |
| BBC reporting on 11:15 - Jul 26 by Withnail |
If the issues are obvious, why did the climate scientists choose to fake their research data and then attempt to cover it up?
It's not a small thing when the people being funded to research climate change are found to be making stuff up. |
Did all of the climate scientists fake research data? Specifically, what are you talking about? | |
| |
| BBC reporting on 11:26 - Jul 26 with 4136 views | Swansea_Blue |
| BBC reporting on 11:15 - Jul 26 by Withnail |
If the issues are obvious, why did the climate scientists choose to fake their research data and then attempt to cover it up?
It's not a small thing when the people being funded to research climate change are found to be making stuff up. |
They didn't | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
