BBC Science Balance and Climate Change

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Apology: can not find the earlier thread but this report in the Graun is highly relevant

[Serial_Apologist]

I think the BBC is terrified of being accused of influencing any issue one way or the other, and so plumps for the short termist business objectives expressed by right-wing anti-human influence exertion on global warming arguments, in just the same way Andrew Marr positively fed the flagging PM right wing arguments on his Sunday show as if to say, come on me old mate, you can do better than that on your own political terms. Anyone still thinking the BBC is unbiassed is either dishonest or in serious denial: the abovementioned happens too often nowadays to be read as devil's advocacy.

[teamsaint]

Balance is a strange concept. The IPCC report might have been better reported (or balanced), if the process by which the report came to produced and presented was made a lot clearer, especially the process of approval of the contents of the Summary.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

... and not to mention the rather strong dissent arguing that it is too watered down and that the risks are far higher! did any one cover that?

[teamsaint]

... and not to mention the rather strong dissent arguing that it is too watered down and that the risks are far higher! did any one cover that?

Well,i think i agree. What concerns me is that if governments are investing in and responding to reports like this, they really do need to be whiter than white, and the public need to be confident about that.
I don't think that is the case.

These are complicated areas, and we do have to trust expert opinion.
But when, for instance was the last time anybody read in the media about the effects of Sulphur Dioxide, which AFAIK is reducing greenhouse effects, but of course in a rather undesirable way?

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Bob Geldorf in apocalyptic mood

such an outcome is not improbable ...........