Again and again. Do you have to take a stupid pill every day to be a reporter? Or are reporters like this one speaking down to their audience. Either way, it's shocking.
- Log in to post comments
Advertisment
Again and again. Do you have to take a stupid pill every day to be a reporter? Or are reporters like this one speaking down to their audience. Either way, it's shocking.
The effects of climate change on the weather are only going to get worse. Much worse. We've seen how much public opinion changed after Sandy and the wild fires in Texas. Imagine where that opinion will be after nearly every local gets hammered by some weather related disaster.
Whatever deniers are left will be fair game. In fact who ever was a well-known denier may be fair game. Fair game for what? I don't know. What ever crazies out there might it in for them. Glad I'm not one of them... The deniers that is.
Hmm. Shocked? I've seen worse.
Actually, I was pleasantly suprised to sse that Hansen is getting pretty good at communicating in that format, though some problems remain. Most people probably don't carry around a fluent understanding of 'sensitivity' for instance.
The journalist was struggling for a sound bite. Hansen was wandering dangerously close to the weeds. That format requires a meeting in the middle as far as concise language is concerned, IMO.
The "revised forecast" refers to a five year prediction from an experimental decadal model. The BBC journalist is trying to resurrect the crank claims about it that the Met Office debunked at the time, back in January: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2013/decadal-forecasts