I have a guest post over at Ellee Seymour‘s blog. Its an attempt at explaining TGGWS for more political type folks.
Meanwhile The Independent has an article on the faked graphs; sadly the online version hasn’t got the pix.
William, thank you for the post, and it’s helpful to see the graph too.
Well, I hope you’re thoroughly ashamed of yourself, because according to Ch4 it’s just not fair to point out when scientists are fudging their data.
Interesting to note that besides the U-tube copies, Russell Seitz is now hosting a copy of this broadcast personally. I don’t have the intestinal fortitude to go see which version he’s providing.
It’ll be interesting to see how this spreads. I’m afraid this is the future —- video’s most convincing to people who don’t read for information.
I suppose those distributing copies have decided to violate the copyright law in a higher cause — or was the program put into public domain?
Probably best to stick your fingers in your ears when Durkin hears about this – The Now Show 16/3/07 BBC Radio 4
“video’s most convincing to people who don’t read for information.”
It would be good to see a decent science programme do a “Fundamentals Of Climate Change” or even a version of Spencer Weart’s book (or David Archer’s or Houghton’s or a mix). I know there’s AIT, but something with climate scientist talking heads and proper graphs etc. would look very good. It might need to be a multi-parter which wouldn’t help. I don’t know if Horizon or Equinox (does that still exist?) would be up to the job.
I’ve watched maybe a dozen hours of TV in the past six months, so am not exactly up to speed, but I am sure that Equinox is gone, and there are few science based programs on TV. They’d rather do something about archeology.
Adam: Attenborough did an excellent two parter “Are we changing Planet Earth?” It was broadcasted on CBC Newsworld as “The Truth About Global Warming”. Small clips here:
I would suspect that BBC’s Horizon unit is already preparing a response. They always like to debunk any crap that C4 outputs.
The Indie graphs you mentioned:
It would be excellent to see a excellent scientific disciplines program do a “Fundamentals Of Environment Change” or even a edition of Spencer Weart’s publication (or Mark Archer’s or Houghton’s or a mix).
New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.
Most normal people would have been content to have produced one game-changing theory of climate…
Oh dear. Last summer, Peter Wadhams, in an interview with a reporter for The Times,…
Says some PR from the CDP (formerly, as they say, the Carbon Disclosure Project; I hate…
Per Moyhu it looks like the GWPF’s joke review is, errm, a joke. Who could…
Says the FT; and so did R4 this morning (update: and the Beeb now), which is…