Last year the BBC said that humans are the only major cause of climate change
Ex-sceptic says climate change is down to humans
I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause”
A formerly sceptical climate scientist says human activity is causing the Earth to warm, as a new study confirms earlier results on rising temperatures.
A now they are saying the exact opposite.
Researchers have found evidence to suggest that climate change, rather than humans, was the main factor that drove the woolly mammoth to extinction.
BBC News – DNA study suggests hunting did not kill off mammoth
Must be a typo Steven. Or maybe they are correcting their previous mistakes. Lol
“BBC values:
1. Trust is the foundation of the BBC: We are independent, impartial and honest.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/whoweare/mission_and_values/
They are not talking about the same event though, hence no contradiction. One is talking about modern day warming, one historical. Of course you can argue modern day warming is not down to man alone, and a lot of people do.
Andy
So dramatic climate change used to happen naturally, but now that there are billions of research dollars at stake, it is all man made.
It was probably the aborigines wot done it – then they went to Australia to kill off all the meagfauna.
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/aborigines-blamed-big-mammal-extinction/
The fact of the matter is that there is not enough evidence to decide the issue one way or the other. Wouldn’t it be great if scientists these days admitted they didn’t have the evidence and were merely speculating?
What sort of grant money does “merely speculating” attract, I wonder?
Had to check the article to verify the “ex-sceptic” was indeed the confused Dr Muller, who didn’t know he was for AGW before he was against it.
Prof Richard Muller was never a sceptic. Read one of his earliest quotes. So tell me exactly when he became a convert? Yes he has in the past slammed some of the most dire predictions but when did Muller convert???
[My bolding].
The choir always enjoys a good sermon. 😉
2 points:
1. I’m a huge fan of Dr. Richard A Muller. His critics here have obviously never heard of nor seen his videos on climate change. For example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BQpciw8suk In his webcast lecture series “Physics for Future Presidents” he debunks many hysterical environmental myths.
2. Dear Richard, if you were ever a skeptic then I’m a male model.
I am well aware of that video. But his lies about being a skeptic destroyed his credibility.
I used to refer Manncrush victims to that video, but then after seeing Dr Muller lust after the IPCC gold mine, I stopped using it. It became apparent that Muller threw Mann under the bus to gain notoriety and trust, and a permanent place at the grant trough. There is no honor among thrives.
The BBC warm-mongers fight back! “Esa’s Cryosat mission observes continuing Arctic winter ice decline.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372
They are referring to PAST last winters (2012) in fact it was 2012 summer. Me thinks the alarmists are pulling plugs at The BBC to hide the current massive build up in NH ice which is the last icon to be debunked. It is quite possible that this winter NH ice will remain within the average or exceed it
A little OT, but still regarding media reporting, it is annoying to continue to see headlines like the one from the Houston Chron linked on Drudge this morning; “Lack of Hurricanes Helps ‘Climate Change’ Skeptics”.
The article is actually quite well written and supportive of a skeptical view as long as the skeptic is dubious about linking CAGW to hurricanes…..not climate change. One would have a better chance of spotting Big Foot than finding a “climate change skeptic”. Nobody is skeptical that the climate changes, just opposed to the concept that human CO2 emissions are the principle driver of climate change.
Even in articles supportive of the skeptical view such as this most recent one by The Chron, the media does no service to truth by continuing to label those that are skeptical of CAGW as skeptics of climate change.
It’s far past time that the media stop utilizing the incorrect term “climate change skeptics”, a definition developed by the same alarmist frauds engaged in duping society about climate change causation. By promoting this inaccurate term, the media only perpetuates/supports the alarmist’s ludicrous claim that those holding opposing views are “climate change skeptics/deniers” rather than the more factual ‘CAGW skeptics’.
I like “Climate Realists” instead of “skeptic” in any sense, and the media will never use that one.