Inspired by: Colossal' Pakistan flood disaster worsens
see also "ICE-DAM COLLAPSE"
Before the ABC: an occasional snapshot of news in the days BABC
An eye on ABC NEWS: Keeping the bastards who keep the bastards honest - honest.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Missing News: Spencer and Braswell
Roy Spencer and William Braswell have a new paper in the Journal of Geophysical Research. Entitled “On the Diagnosis of Feedback in the Presence of Unknown Radiative Forcing“, this paper puts meat on the central claim of Roy Spencer's most recent book: that climate researchers have mixed up cause and effect when observing cloud and temperature changes. As a result, the climate system has given the illusion of positive cloud feedback.Roy Spencer discusses the paper HERE (extract below). We wonder if ABC science will break out of their climate alarmist mould and provide any coverage.
Feedback in the Real World
As we show in the new paper, the only clear signal of feedback we ever find in the global average satellite data is strongly negative, around 6 Watts per sq. meter per degree C. If this was the feedback operating on the long-term warming from increasing CO2, it would result in only 0.6 deg. C of warming from 2XCO2. (Since we have already experienced this level of warming, it raises the issue of whether some portion — maybe even a majority — of past warming is from natural, rather than anthropogenic, causes.)
Unfortunately, there is no way I have found to demonstrate that this strongly negative feedback is actually occurring on the long time scales involved in anthropogenic global warming. At this point, I think that belief in the high climate sensitivity (positive feedbacks) in the current crop of climate models is a matter of faith, not unbiased science. The models are infinitely adjustable, and modelers stop adjusting when they get model behavior that reinforces their pre-conceived notions.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Last word on ABC's Climate Time-lie: "Ordovian"
ABC's final word on its Climate Timeline
“incompetence has become the chief characteristic of journalism, displacing laziness”
after Kingsley Amis
ABC of bias
ABC unleashed have a piece by part time journalist, blogger and apparent climate non-sceptic Margaret Simons looking at ABC Bias. The article, titled "Bias allegation rumblings still a constant at your ABC", makes light of our complaint about ABC's "A journey through climate history". We posted a reply on the site but just in case it fails to get up here's a copy...
Thanks for noticing Margaret. Readers might be interested in the full correspondence behind the complaint about ABC's climate time "lie" available at the blog ABC News Watch (http://abcnewswatch.blogspot.com/).
(See list below) The simple aim of ABC NEWS WATCH is to publicise the errors, omissions, and substandard reports produced by the News service of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). In doing so we hope to provide an independent check or audit on ABC news articles and in doing so improve the standard of ABC news reporting. Readers will find a rich collection of posts that demonstrate ABC bias or simple lack of competence in its climate change and other news coverage. What ABC has chosen not to report on in regard to climate science is particularly damning.
(See list below) The simple aim of ABC NEWS WATCH is to publicise the errors, omissions, and substandard reports produced by the News service of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). In doing so we hope to provide an independent check or audit on ABC news articles and in doing so improve the standard of ABC news reporting. Readers will find a rich collection of posts that demonstrate ABC bias or simple lack of competence in its climate change and other news coverage. What ABC has chosen not to report on in regard to climate science is particularly damning.
Our investigation into ABC’s climate time line "A journey through climate history" included an FOI request, turned down by the ABC (ABC is exempt from FOI for program content), for correspondence, relating to the production of ABC's defective time line. If ABC want to demonstrate there was no bias in the production of its online presentation why not release the emails? On this we encourage ABC employees interested in truthful journalism to leak the documents to the press. Its no climategate but I’m sure it would be revealing of ABC’s internal workings.
Margaret neglected to mention that the ABC’s Independent Complaints Review Panel did in fact find that parts of "A Journey through climate history" were biased. Quoting the panel’s report: “In the Panel’s view, the Complainant’s specific assertions of bias in relation to links to the topics: the Medieval Warm Period, the Great Global Swindle and An Inconvenient Truth, do not require each item of portal information, or its links, to be balanced or impartial. As Section 18.6 (of the Editorial Policies) indicates it is the platform content overall (ABC Online) which must demonstrate that no bias has occurred in its presentation of information and viewpoints. Therefore, individual material and its links can lack impartiality in its presentation.”
Margaret regarded the process as pythonesque and downplayed the implications. Having intimate knowledge of ABC’s complaints process we can truthfully attest it is much more like “Yes Minister”, with ABC Audience and Consumer affairs playing the role of the crafty Sir Humphrey Appleby, hell bent on denying errors, bias or lack of balance through artful use of ABC’s editorial policies.
The implications of ABC Groupthink on the publics knowledge of Climate science are devastating. In taking a premature position on climate science while the debate continues ABC have shut the door to the contest, thereby denying its audience a full view of the field of play, one in which it is becoming increasingly obvious that organisations like the IPCC have over exaggerated the role CO2 plays in dangerous man made climate change.
ABC have made it easy to lodge a complaint through its contact page. We invite readers here to take the plunge, afterall they say its your ABC. Let us know how you go.
Posts on ABC's "A journey through climate history"
Posts on ABC's "A journey through climate history"
Productivity Survey Update: taking the source into account
Stories per staff member per day versus day in June
We recently completed a productivity survey of ABC News. This used ABC’s news archive to determine the output of ABC News for the month of June in each year of the archive (2003-2010). Staff figures were obtained from ABC annual reports.
The survey found the following:
- Total stories posted in ABC News Archives for June 2010 was 6666. This is the lowest on record.
- Staff levels for June 2010 were estimated to be approximately 942.33 based on previous growth trends - the highest on record.
- Match high staff numbers and low output and its no surprise that ABC news productivity for June 2010 was at a record low of just 7.07 stories per staff member for the month.
Like other news agencies ABC supplements its news with material from third party agencies. The ABC obtains its additional news material from Agence France-Presse (AFP), APTN, Reuters, AAP, CNN and the BBC World Service. As our survey looked at the total number of stories in the ABC archive and did not take the source of the news article into account it appears we have over-estimated ABC’s productivity. To see by how much we looked at every story in the last full week of June 2010 and found the following:
Total Stories 1477
ABC 1073
BBC 5
AFP 94
AAP 134
Reuters 128
Combined 43
On average about 20% of ABC’s weekday material is sourced externally. This jumps to an astonishing 60% on weekends (might as well broadcast Reuters directly rather than keep the weekend staff on). This averages out to about 30% of stories being provided by external agencies.
Based on these figures it appears we have overestimated ABC’s productivity by about 30%. The number of stories directly produced by ABC News for June 2010 would be about 4840. This also means ABC’s productivity further plummets to just 5 stories per staff member per month, or about 1 per week! Poor value for money by any account.
ABC’s new marketing campaign is now inviting its audience to “join the conversation” or enter something new. We think a more truthful slogan may be “ABC News: now doing much much less, with much much more.”
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Where to put Chris Uhlmann?
4.4 Conflict of interest
4.4.1 There should be no conflict between the private interests of ABC staff and their official duties. The outside activities of staff, including financial, personal and political relationships, must not compromise the editorial integrity of ABC programs. Staff are expected to arrange their affairs in a manner that will prevent conflict of interest.
it seems that ABC will have to find Mr Uhlmann a new position. Given Chris has stated “It’s a perfectly reasonable thing to raise and I have no problems with people raising it at all."; we are interested in readers suggestions of where ABC can fit Mr Uhlmann to minimise the risk of a conflict of interest arising. Here are some suggestions:
Gardening Australia
Host of ABC3's Prank Patrol
ABC Sports commentator
Play school presenter
Sunday Arts
Collectors
If you can find a spot for Chris let us know.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
ABC's biased timeline
ABC sent us a copy of the "Independent" complaints review panel (ICRP) report into our complaints about ABC online feature "A journey through climate history". Remarkably the report found the presentation was indeed biased "Therefore, individual material and its links can lack impartiality in its presentation."
Sarc on - Yes our climate timeline is as biased and unbalanced as a Kerry O'Brien interview, but what are you going to do about it? Send a complaint to the "I"CRP? Sarc off
Due to FOI legislation we can't even request information used to produce the presentation. Remember this was put together using tax payers dollars.
Unbelievably ABC "I"CRP did not uphold the complaint as it claimed that the rest of ABC's climate coverage is balanced (even ABC's Chairman Maurice Newman disputes this). ABC somehow even believes that its audience members will take the time to read and understand the implications of the presentation's fine print: "Whilst the ABC cannot guarentee the accuracy of information external to the timeline, we have endeavoured to provide accurate and relevant links wherever possible". With 7 errors already noted ABC can't even get its timeline right, let alone the links, none of which are critical of the IPCC's position.
We argued that the links for the feature page on the medieval warm period, that ABC initially placed in the wrong year, were biased. We did not request that the ABC remove these links, simply that they add one that provides an alternate viewpoint inline with ABC's commitment to impartiality. This was CO2 science's Medieval Warm Period Project that has collated over 500 studies that demonstrate world wide effects of the MWP. However Groupthinking ABC public servants have left its audience with three highly biased references-Real Climate, Wikipedia and a blog piece that features the debunked hockey stick graph. None of these now even support ABC's text that had to be amended following errors identified in our initial complaint.
We now invite readers to take a closer look at ABC's presentation and if they find further errors, please take the time to inform the ABC about them.
Update: ABC claimed its timeline didn't count as news so could not be assessed under section 5 of its editorial policies. If our complaint had been assessed under section 5 ABC would have been upheld the complaint as the ICRP agrees the timeline is biased. Here are a few more non news timelines recently posted by the ABC as news:
Women in power: Gillard joins burgeoning club
Sarc on - Yes our climate timeline is as biased and unbalanced as a Kerry O'Brien interview, but what are you going to do about it? Send a complaint to the "I"CRP? Sarc off
Due to FOI legislation we can't even request information used to produce the presentation. Remember this was put together using tax payers dollars.
Unbelievably ABC "I"CRP did not uphold the complaint as it claimed that the rest of ABC's climate coverage is balanced (even ABC's Chairman Maurice Newman disputes this). ABC somehow even believes that its audience members will take the time to read and understand the implications of the presentation's fine print: "Whilst the ABC cannot guarentee the accuracy of information external to the timeline, we have endeavoured to provide accurate and relevant links wherever possible". With 7 errors already noted ABC can't even get its timeline right, let alone the links, none of which are critical of the IPCC's position.
We argued that the links for the feature page on the medieval warm period, that ABC initially placed in the wrong year, were biased. We did not request that the ABC remove these links, simply that they add one that provides an alternate viewpoint inline with ABC's commitment to impartiality. This was CO2 science's Medieval Warm Period Project that has collated over 500 studies that demonstrate world wide effects of the MWP. However Groupthinking ABC public servants have left its audience with three highly biased references-Real Climate, Wikipedia and a blog piece that features the debunked hockey stick graph. None of these now even support ABC's text that had to be amended following errors identified in our initial complaint.
We now invite readers to take a closer look at ABC's presentation and if they find further errors, please take the time to inform the ABC about them.
Update: ABC claimed its timeline didn't count as news so could not be assessed under section 5 of its editorial policies. If our complaint had been assessed under section 5 ABC would have been upheld the complaint as the ICRP agrees the timeline is biased. Here are a few more non news timelines recently posted by the ABC as news:
Women in power: Gillard joins burgeoning club
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)