The favourite topic at the BBC is the BBC. The Beeboids just love publishing stories about themselves when they involve praise of the corporation, and they are at it again today with a puff piece about their science coverage.
At least they published it in the right part of their website, because the piece is certainly entertaining for a number of reasons, and it is so creative it is worthy of the label ‘art’.
For example, only the BBC could commission an ‘independent’ review that is carried out by a man so thoroughly compromised by his close links with the corporation he may as well be on the payroll. Consider these BBC appearances by Professor Steve Jones (There are others, I just got bored looking beyond Wikipedia):
‘In The Blood’ – six part television series on human biology on BBC TV
‘The House I Grew Up In’ – participant on talk show on BBC Radio 4
‘The Reith Lectures’ on BBC Radio in 1991
Interviews on BBC Radio 4 Today and BBC Five Live in 2008
Interview on ‘Sunday Sequence’ on BBC Radio Ulster in 2006
Interview on BBC Five Live in 2009
Appearance on BBC Radio 4 ‘In Our Time’ in 2007
Appearance on ‘The Forum’ on BBC World Service
Now ask yourself, would you consider a man whose career has benefited from that amount of BBC exposure and expenditure to be ‘independent’ and capable of scrutinising the corporation in a dispassionate and impartial manner? Going beyond that, would you consider in light of the information in the short video clip below that the BBC is anything other than hopelessly biased in its coverage of climate science, before Jones’ assault on any coverage at all of the concerns of the climate counter consensus?
If that is not enough, let us not forget that despite Jones’ concerted effort to play the ‘science is settled’ card so the BBC is giving too much coverage to anthropogenic global warming (AGW) sceptics (who he deliberately and wrongly misrepresents as ‘deniers’) how about these damning words from theBBC Trust’s own report ‘From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel’?
Despite the wholesale and intended lack of balance in the BBC’s coverage, in the BBC piece they report of Jones that:
He said the BBC “still gives space” to global warming sceptics “to make statements that are not supported by the facts”.
Given that the proponents of AGW are still unable to provide proof that mankind is responsible for the changes observed in climate, yet continue to state as fact that man is warming the planet, it is ludicrous he should state sceptics make statements unsupported by facts.
As a professor of science he should know there is a difference between causation and correlation. But the fact he describes sceptics as ‘deniers’ shows he is utterly partial and dismissive of anyone who does not share his beliefs. This man is a corrupter of science.
In addition to indulging his personal biases, accuracy is clearly not one of Prof Jones’ strong points. He uses his report to make an explicit attack on the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which he claims made a submission to his review. However, as the GPWF explain on their website, they did not make any submission to the review at all. If Jones can get something as basic as that incorrect then how can anyone have confidence in his assertions?
The public has been becoming increasingly sceptical of the AGW industry’s claims. As such many people suggested the AGW crowd would become increasingly desperate as their unsubstantiated claims fall apart and therefore would attempt to seize for themselves control of the coverage of the subject. Professor Steve Jones is the man the BBC turned to in order to advance that aim. He has served his purpose. And has done so at our expense. The BBC. It’s what they do.
This story is a tiny but timely reminder that with the Guardian and BBC still hard at it shoring up the BBC’s insipid dominance of the broadcast media and online news in this country, the only entity left to challenge the establishment’s state funded orthodoxy is the blogosphere. We are witnessing the most successful and far reaching attempt yet by the liberal left to censor the news and information delivered to the public and indoctrinate us with their selective worldview – and do it with our money.