Dellers on his last but one post kindly put up a generic link to this blog, so I pointed readers to the specific post to which he was referring. However, events have overtaken me, and he has now put up a further post, which does link directly to my original piece. The circle is now complete. The latest effort by Dellers is to draw attention to another BBC stitch-up, which purportedly has filmmaker Rupert Murray "taking us on a journey into the heart of climate scepticism to examine the key arguments against man-made global warming" where he tries "to understand the people who are making them".

View full article here

The lady doth protest too much, methinks. [Though calling the evil auntie a lady is rather generous!]

"Do they have to falsify the evidence that we are heating up the atmosphere or are they taking a grave risk with our pension funds by interfering in highly complicated politics they don't fully understand? Where does the money lie and how can we, the BBC, support it?"

There - fixed it for them!

And of course there are the Beeb pensions, which are linked to warm-mongering:

http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/02/ ... -pies.html

Fortunately....this is on BBC 4. If on BBC 1, it might be a problem.
The TV masses will following East Enders be glued to 'Silent Witness' episode 9 and then the 10 O Clock News dominated by Egypt.
Many will be watching Alan Carr: Chatty Man on Channel 4. Channel 5 movie with Wesley Snipes will also garner a much bigger audience.
I think it will get around 100 000 with best case 200 000 viewers on BBC 4 and probably 50:50 split between the warmists and the people of The North persuasion.
The point is that when they started to make this propoganda, they wanted to show it to the masses...which is the point of propoganda. The fact it gets a D list slot will dismay the warmists.
ITV 2, 3 and ITV 4 will get ten times its tiny audience.
The various Sky Channels will squeeze it hard. Indeed even the 16 or so Christian Channels on Sky will outdo its audience.
It is also up against the BBC 3 re-run of East Enders. Ouch !!
Blink and you miss it. Not what they hoped for at all.
If it had been on BBC 1 at 9pm, different story. As it is, the propoganda has been very badly managed and will damage their morale.

Scheduling this against 3 major news bulletins (BBC, ITV, SKY) and then Newsnight says it all. The people interested in TV 'news' and current affairs will not be watching it.
Staggering own goal for the warmists. They must have expected 8-10pm on BBC 1 or 2 when they made this.
Is The BBC scheduling going neutral on global warming ?

Many programmes are shown first on BBC3 and 4 and later repeated on the two main channels. Although currently in a graveyard slot, this zombie may yet rise.

I think the high concern about this programme is entirely justified.

A phrase like ....

... is a pre-judgment intended to liken sceptics to some strange forgotten jungle tribe, or the Raelians; at any rate, people firmly locked in the wacko box.

It's a clever intro -- the writer is one of the few not to forget the 'man-made' bit of the story.

The worse the science looks, the shriller the rhetoric will continue to become.

The number of BBC 3 and BBC4 programmes transfering to main channels is falling steadily. Could happen but much more likely if we give this the publicity it does not deserve. Our outrage at the controversial programme -especially complaints - can give it a life it does not deserve.
I counsel ignoring it AND going very big on another subject on blogs. Why not Egypt ? Maybe Guardian about to sack another 90 staff in next few months ? Even BBC and agesism with Julia Somerville back on BBC News. Made frontpages today. Congratulate msm and reinforce their game for once.Even Alan Carr on Channel 4 ? Do not get sucked into warmist fight.
We need to set the agenda, the strategy and not follow the warmists.
If already on BBC 1 at 9pm...different story but we can just ignore this, blank it out. The msm do this on some topics.
I wonder if some people in the blogs have become addicted to fighting the warmists and will miss it when we win.
Fear not, there will be many other battles and wars.
In winning battles and wars, it is important not to fall in love with the task of fighting as opposed to the objective: total victory.

It'll only add a few more hundred ... there is a balance between ignoring it, and having to keep informed.

We need podcasts.

I think we've found the new Reaganism

The 14 most scary words in the English Language:

"I'm from the BBC and I am here to make a documentary about you"

Yes, they really have got a nerve, haven't they?
They pretend that, with the science settled, all that's left to do is analyse the mental sickness of those who obdurately persist in thinking for themselves. It's just another poncey ad hominem. What a pity all that ingenuity could not be devoted to something useful.

I know we Brits are famed for our conversational prowess on the subject of the weather, but lately this has got completely out of hand.

Incidentally, I switched on Radio 4 last Saturday for the first time in over a year, thinking to hear some innocuous stuff on Money Box about the ongoing subversion by our elites of our personal solvencies. Imagine my surprise to find Mr Monbiot being interviewed about solar panels. (I hadn't encountered him since that time he explained geology to Professor Ian Plimer -- a tempestuous subject, judging by Mr Monbiot's firmly didactic demeanour during that particular exchange.) Somewhat later in this fascinating item, somebody remarked that there was concern that only middle-class people would be able to afford the capital outlay which is a prerequisite for the rich pickings which supposedly accrue. There was also concern that people who lived in flats wouldn't be able to participate because they didn't own a rooftop. Happily, someone else explained that poor people would still be benefitting because local councils are installing such apparatus with great enthusiasm.

And there was I thinking I was paying all that money just to get my bin emptied.

I had to switch the radio off after a few minutes. I couldn't stand it any longer.

I can't help feeling that programs such as these are only being made to address the 'balance' between programs for and programs against AGW. The BBC can now claim that they are addressing the 'sceptic' claims of lack of equal coverage..... after all, it IS about the sceptic cause.... isn't it?

As others have written, these TV programs are intended to be part of a fight-back against the "deniers" and to allow their side to regain the initiative.The BBC & Guardian are clinging onto the belief that CAGW is real and the priests..., I mean scientists, know what they're doing. They must think that all they need to do is undermine the deniers a bit and raise the moral of their own side and suddenly everything will start going their way. What they appear not to understand is that the climate blogosphere has absolutely annihilated the idea that the science is settled and that 20 years of research has failed to show that the climate is doing anything out of the ordinary. They're losing this battle because the internet has loosened their grip on the public debate and, more importantly, the evidence is simply not on their side. At some point in the future these shows are going to end up being used as evidence that the BBC was involved in propaganda and supported a lie long after the scientific argument had been won. I suspect they may come to regret making them.