Great Global Warming Swindle Ofcom Report

[StuartDH]

The Great Global Warming Swindle documentary and Channel 4 have just had their wrists slapped by Ofcom.

Probably won't make much difference as most people will never see the report and ten years from now there'll still be masses of people trying to justify their emissions and CC by quoting "I saw a documentary on Channel 4 that showed..."

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Climate documentary 'broke rules'

Of course, Inconvenient Truth got bits wrong and was over the top in some areas too.

It'd be great if Channel 4 could correct their error by doing more than just an apology and put together a really good documentary, with views from both sides of the debate. If burning fossil fuels are proven to be a big cause of global warming, channel 4 should take responsibility or be fined for their documentary's part in misleading the public and indirectly contributing to the problem of CO2 emissions.

[jhewitt15]

so do you think global warming is a swindle or its the truth that we are messing up the planet?

[StuartDH]

Personally, I wish it was a swindle...but I fear that it isn't.

[Earth Hart]

Ofcom should have come down heavy on Channel 4 & fined them. Wag TV, the company who made the programme, are likely to be taken to court in the US, for misrepresenting a number of US scientists. Most of the "experts" were from the "Climate Coalition" a right-wing lobby group in the US, and from what I can gather, money also came from them. Need I say more.

[forfi]

Originally Posted by Earth Hart

. Most of the "experts" were from the "Climate Coalition" a right-wing lobby group in the US, and from what I can gather, money also came from them. Need I say more.

Yes please ,sounds interesting.

[Hobjob]

I find the BBC link very interesting; things do not seem as clear from
that report as I would have imagined from the BBC Radio 4 new last night.

>>>
Ofcom's logic is that "the link between human activity and global warming... became settled before March 2007".
>>>

But the whole point of the documentary was to assert that the argument is still around. Yes, the consensus is heavily in favour of man-accelerated global warning, but there are still scientists who disagree. Offcom seem guilty of misleading the public too!! Or if the quote is corect, they are guilty of a technical inexactitude

Originally Posted by Earth Hart

Ofcom should have come down heavy on Channel 4 & fined them. Wag TV, the company who made the programme, are likely to be taken to court in the US, for misrepresenting a number of US scientists. Most of the "experts" were from the "Climate Coalition" a right-wing lobby group in the US, and from what I can gather, money also came from them. Need I say more.

Well yes you do need to say more

Wikipedia says that the Global Climate Coalition has been defunct since 2002 and I've found other references to the same. If this is so, then I don't see how your allegations are correct. Unless they are not defunct but now a secret group.

I am actually inclined to the man-accelerated global warming, but I do think the debate should be accurate and not be full of insinuation and spin (and possibly even libel ) (And Gore was also guilty of this !!!)

[The Black Rabbit]

All a load of hot air.
Ho ho.



And thats BOTH "sides".

TBR

[Earth Hart]

Originally Posted by Hobjob

Wikipedia says that the Global Climate Coalition has been defunct since 2002 and I've found other references to the same. If this is so, then I don't see how your allegations are correct. Unless they are not defunct but now a secret group.

If you believe everything you read on Wikipedia you must be a "Sun" reader.

[Hobjob]

Originally Posted by Earth Hart

If you believe everything you read on Wikipedia you must be a "Sun" reader.

I mention that I have found other references to back up Wiki, too !!!

I fully agree needs corroboration, but so do most things, even
peer-reviewed scientific journals, which is why research always
needs confirming.

I chose not to quote other sources as wiki is so quick and easy.

[JW]

Hi,

Having read a few of the other threads about climate change it is clear just how much damage has been done by this program.

I for one am really glad that they did get a slap on the wrists. My Sun reading parents (that was a difficult admission ) would quote the flawed evidence from the program. Just a shame that they didn't get a BIG fine just to bring the point home.

[heastwood]

Hello,

I work for a Channel 4 programme called 'The TV Show' which is a monthly pre-watershed debate show in which members of the public discuss what they have liked or disliked on television over the past month.

This coming Saturday one of our discussions is about 'The Great Global Warming Swindle', in light of the recent Ofcom ruling. If you are interested in participating in our debate and being in our audience, we would love to hear from you.

Please email hannah.eastwood@princesstv.com or call 0207 985 1719.

[Paul mabbott]

Worse than we think? Or are told .....
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | UK in 'delusion' over emissions

[Adam Cheeseman]

Apparently, emission levels don't incluide those from aircraft, because no-one can agree who is responsible for their emission; the country from where the airline comes, the country from which the plane takes off in, or the country where the planes lands.

Cheers,

Adam

[excoriate]

George Monbiot published a pretty good response to the verdict in his weekly column.

Monbiot.com » An Ongoing Swindle

[annmaria]

Originally Posted by StuartDH

Personally, I wish it was a swindle...but I fear that it isn't.

Followed the thread again. Why is it that even though THE ARGUMENT EITHER WAY HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN , laws are being passed as though its a fact that Global warming is man made.
What if THE EXPERTS ( Scientist who dont agree and who constantly change their minds ) got it wrong and a whole generation of people have been made to pay in various ways.

Stu ,my old china , you start a debate ,often your point of view is to sit on the fence, everyone gets worked up and either someone gets frozen or the thread is locked.........makes folk worried about joining a ' debate '
Annmaria

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by annmaria

Followed the thread again. Why is it that even though THE ARGUMENT EITHER WAY HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN , laws are being passed as though its a fact that Global warming is man made.

probably because if we wait until the argument in favour of anthropogenic global warming is proven beyond doubt, it will be too late to avert a positive feedback loop as methane is released from the permafrost and much of the planet becomes unihabitably hot.

In the unlikely event that global warming turns out not to have anthropogenic influences then it wont matter as oil is definitely running out so decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels can only be a good thing

given the balance of probabilities and weighing all the evidence , which is what the ipcc is for- it is only prudent to act now especially as there is no major downside to the action.

[annmaria]

OK Eeyore

[StuartDH]

Originally Posted by annmaria

Stu ,my old china , you start a debate ,often your point of view is to sit on the fence, everyone gets worked up and either someone gets frozen or the thread is locked.........makes folk worried about joining a ' debate '
Annmaria

We only close threads or ban people based on their behaviour, not their ideas or views. Everyone is free to to add good debate on any side of any argument, but if they trash a thread or abuse the members or moderators then they can expect their posts to be deleted, the thread closed, or have their account frozen

As for sitting on the fence...I don't see how that's possible given that I'm usually standing in the middle of the road

Stu

[Ukwildlifeo]

Channel 4 just broadcast one of those ofcom enforced apologies, just after the dawkins programme

[vole-woman]

What's really disturbing, as far as I understand it, is that the Ofcom ruling means tv science programmes don't have to be accurate. As long as 'no harm is done' and 'no one's offended', they can broadcast whatever fake graphics, misleadingly-spliced interviews and totally made up figures they like. The implications of that are dreadful. It means we can never watch a science documentary and be sure it's remotely accurate.

It seems to be obvious C4 were just chasing ratings for TGGWS, since every show they'd commissioned from this Durkin bloke, from 'deadly breast implants' onwards, had got them into trouble for containing fake or wildly skewed info.

Whatever side of the Climate Change debate you're on, you should be worried by this Ofcom ruling.

[annmaria]

I agree vole woman , the ofcom ruling does worry me ..........actually the global warming debate does not worry me as much as the disappearing honey bees. I think those sneaky chinese are up to their old tricks , I think they have exported a deadly virus . I have been to Bejing and its a real twilight zone.

Now I need my beauty sleep , so Stu could you please stop playing in the road so I have one less thing to worry about, thankyou
Annmaria

[ron1863]

As for sitting on the fence...I don't see how that's possible given that I'm usually standing in the middle of the road

Stu


Not when I'm driving mate

[Coley]

Originally Posted by Hobjob

Wikipedia says that the Global Climate Coalition has been defunct since 2002

I wouldn't take Wikipedia's word for it as anyone can contribute to that site and it is not peer reviewed. What it says on there is not necessarily factual.