That's the conclusion of research from Lancaster University reported by the Beeb today.
Now this was a key piece of evidence (based on Svensmark's theory) used in the Great Global Warming Swindle indicating that the warming of the earth was not caused by human activity.
Seems now to be pretty much debunked as a factor as to why the planet is warming. So we probably really do need to carry on trying to reduce carbon emissions, otherwise we could start to see other unwanted visitors arriving in the UK.
Maybe soon we will need to teleport to a new planet?
Thursday, April 03, 2008
BAA, humbug!
Golly, I am having to tread the April Fool plank carefully today. They're everywhere!
But sorry, no, this is not another, late dig at the T5 debacle.
It's about your mates and mine: For we like sheep*
I actually posed the question a few days ago to the BBC:**
Kevin Spacey opines that the BBC is not a commercial organisation and seems to be a tad selective with who or what it 'supports' with its 'advertising'. Bless.
Tricky one I know, especially with the arts. When does getting informed turn into undue promotion?
However, having just watched some fluff slot on dating... again... might I ask if the BBC retains a commercial interest in the company of the ex-BBC employee wheeled out every week to 'comment', but also promote his dating website?
And I got an answer! You won't believe it. But I can't print it in public so please email info [at-darnspammers] junkk.com to find out what.
*I just realised how that reads. Maybe it's for the Welsh/NZ audiences.
**By the by, check out the HYS postings and see how many in agreement with KS there are... and where the one putting the BBC's POV across that was highlighted came from. Just saying's all..
Addendum - Newsnight
'Yesterday it was Kevin Spacey... today it's Ben Elton's turn to attack the BBC.'
Of course the biggest joke is the system that decides which comments to 502 er... moderate out.
What's with the martyr attempt?
The BBC is a multi-billion organisation of tens of thousands. Through personal experience I think that a lot it produces is excellent entertainment, and are there are many dedicated to, for instance, objective, informative journalism.
However some, mainly at the top, are not.
Yet when a critique, excuse me, attack, of certain aspects comes in, from any quarter, the corporate knee jerks are to close ranks and try and turn it into a polarised issue that embraces all.
It is a technique that would do your good mate Dubya proud.. 'if you are not with me, you must be against us'.
It's hard enough not to think of BBC as a single, collective group think entity at the best of times, but when those who write the editorial cannot separate out individuals and their actions from the consequences how are the rest of us meant to?
But sorry, no, this is not another, late dig at the T5 debacle.
It's about your mates and mine: For we like sheep*
I actually posed the question a few days ago to the BBC:**
Kevin Spacey opines that the BBC is not a commercial organisation and seems to be a tad selective with who or what it 'supports' with its 'advertising'. Bless.
Tricky one I know, especially with the arts. When does getting informed turn into undue promotion?
However, having just watched some fluff slot on dating... again... might I ask if the BBC retains a commercial interest in the company of the ex-BBC employee wheeled out every week to 'comment', but also promote his dating website?
And I got an answer! You won't believe it. But I can't print it in public so please email info [at-darnspammers] junkk.com to find out what.
*I just realised how that reads. Maybe it's for the Welsh/NZ audiences.
**By the by, check out the HYS postings and see how many in agreement with KS there are... and where the one putting the BBC's POV across that was highlighted came from. Just saying's all..
Addendum - Newsnight
'Yesterday it was Kevin Spacey... today it's Ben Elton's turn to attack the BBC.'
Of course the biggest joke is the system that decides which comments to 502 er... moderate out.
What's with the martyr attempt?
The BBC is a multi-billion organisation of tens of thousands. Through personal experience I think that a lot it produces is excellent entertainment, and are there are many dedicated to, for instance, objective, informative journalism.
However some, mainly at the top, are not.
Yet when a critique, excuse me, attack, of certain aspects comes in, from any quarter, the corporate knee jerks are to close ranks and try and turn it into a polarised issue that embraces all.
It is a technique that would do your good mate Dubya proud.. 'if you are not with me, you must be against us'.
It's hard enough not to think of BBC as a single, collective group think entity at the best of times, but when those who write the editorial cannot separate out individuals and their actions from the consequences how are the rest of us meant to?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)