Tuesday, March 13, 2007

New home for the Great Global Warming Swindle

Many thanks to Joanie from Allegiance and Duty Betrayed http://allegianceanddutybetrayed.blogspot.com/ who pointed out that the original link to the Great Global Warming Swindle Programme no longer works.

I have no idea why this is- maybe there are copyright issues or maybe someone chose to remove it has it as generated a lot of controversy !

A slightly shorter version can now be found at :


For anyone interested, I recommend viewing as soon as possible in case this disappears too !


Calvin Jones said...

It appears that the recent Channel 4 and More4 documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" has left many viewers doubting that today's climate change is largely humanly caused. In this email, anyone so affected by the programme is urged to view the following information:

1. An introduction to the flaws of the programme. http://climatedenial.org/2007/03/09/the-great-channel-four-swindle/ (or Google "climate denial", go to 9 Mar post.)

2. How a similar docu on Channel 4 by the same director Martin Durkin in 1997 was rapped by the ITC, in particular for misleading four featured interviewees and distorting their views. See Parags. 8-11 of http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2001694,00.html

3. Prof. Carl Wunsch says: I was misled and misrepresented in the 'swindle' documentary http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2347526.ece

4. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=414 (or Google "Realclimate", go to 9 Mar post.) Climate scientists' view of some of the key flawed or discredited claims made by the programme (some of which you may have seen elsewhere). A site praised by Scientific American, with explanations for the medieval grapes, why Thames stopped freezing, and loads more.

5. http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3268874#post3268874 - with THAT graph clearly explained, plus a clear guide to the links of some of the interviewees.

6. Royal Society and science academies around the world joint statement on climate change: http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news.asp?id=3226 (or via Google "Royal Society").

7. A blog discussion on the programme, including details of apparent breaches of the Broadcasting Code, and how to complain. http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/1820 (or Google "Climate Campaign Portal".)

Luis said...

Thank you Calvin,

Alternative views are welcomed on this site !

For me the recent programme from Channel 4 raised a number of doubts about "conventional" man made global warming theory that have so far not been answered.

Most significantly the fact that the earth's temperature does not follow CO2 growth consistently while it bears a close relationship to solar activity.

A lot of comment and work (from the Independent and others) now seems to be going into discrediting the programme.

I am not a scientist so cannot express my own researched views on this. Like most people I can only assess the differing arguments put forward.

One theme that has come out in comments on this and other blogs is that global warming theory is now treated as an orthodoxy and anyone who doubts them is a "heretic".

Such a climate (no pun intended) does not lead to the priority being the discovery of truth but rather a witch hunt against perceived heretics.

Personally, I remain open minded on the subject but I am intrigued by the contradictions in a theory that is already taught in schools as fact.

I also see this as a huge area for hypocrisy. Al Gore's huge electricity use in his mansion was recently highlighted. The fact that he and other "gurus" jet around the world telling others to stop travelling seems a contradiction.

As a society we are in danger of a huge hypocrisy. With our houses crammed full of dish washers, computers, tvs and the like we seek to stop development in African countries where it is a luxury just to have electricity and running water.

Finally, if global warming theory really is as bad as the great and good now seem to suggest, then why are the measures so modest ? Surely a debate about how to tax flights in the face of continuing growth is akin to rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Even if there is no real manmade global warming there are still valid reasons for saving oil and gas. Mainly due to the fact there are limited reserves and these are situated in largely unstable or unfriendly parts of the world.

Personally, I do not yet see Channel 4 as a reactionary station broadcasting propaganda. I may be proved wrong but I think the programme raised valid questions. If the programme was flawed then Channel 4 should be bound to apologise. There is no sign of this yet.

On a personal level I take the train to work, recycle my paper, cans and glass and save gas and electricity wherever possible.

I'm not closed minded on this subject but I do want an open debate and resent anyone who raises legitimate doubts being classed as a "heretic".

Anonymous said...

Bravo, Luis! Not only have you opened up a dialogue because of the channel 4 program, but you're not backing down when confronted by so called "evidence" that the program was biased. Your points about the fact that all dissent to the "theory" (and it is, after all, still a theory) is being squashed, and this "theory" is being taught in schools as "fact," are two of the most pressing reasons that we have to wonder why are the normal rules of both dialogue and education being broken? Good work here.

Luis said...

Thanks you anonymous !