+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 9
FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 90

Thread: David Bellamy: BBC shunned me for denying climate change

  1. #51
    Uber Member youcanhandlethetruth is just starting out youcanhandlethetruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,740

    Quote Originally Posted by Clippo View Post
    The only point I'm trying to make is that David Bellamy himself seems to be confused about his own career.
    And you're basing that on what exactly ?

    A load of sites which are seeking to create an illusion of confusion over his motives for leaving ?

    The point is, by questioning his knowledge or motives, you're refusing to answer the question about why the BBC refused to return his calls or give him air time.

    What specifically is there to be confused about ?..........

    Did the BBC dump him or not ?
    If so was it because of climate change or not ?
    Only 1's that don't know, are the genuine people thinking it's about others sharing their own ideas.

  2. #52
    Trusted Member Baron von Lotsov is a jewel in the rough Baron von Lotsov is a jewel in the rough
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    5,092

    Quote Originally Posted by Clippo View Post
    Baron wrote:-


    What was Bellamy’s then ?


    Someone with a plan B of course. He does lots of talks around the world apparently. He obviously calculated he was strong enough to stand on his own two feet, and you could say he is doing quite alright being independent. For me though he was a good inspiration when growing up. He made science exciting for a generation of youngsters. There were a few others I would put in the same category. William Woollard was another, Patrick Moore maybe as well. Now you just get stupid wanabee media studies women jumping up and down, instead of science on the BBC.
    We're pilgrims in an unholy land

  3. #53
    Uber Member Clippo is just starting out
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    3,395

    g hall wrote:-
    Besoeker posted he could spot a difference I merely asked him what it was however if you know it you tell us
    No, YOU asked the question first and
    Yes - I did answer it.

    Now - YOU tell us whether YOU can see the difference.

  4. #54
    Uber Member Clippo is just starting out
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    3,395

    Mpkd, you wrote in post 34.

    Scientists who are paid to come to certain predefined conclusions, should bite their hands.
    On the basis of your previous emphatic denials of the documented truth of the Climate Coalition funding certain scientists thro’ ubiquitous US ‘Institutes’, I took this statement to mean the usual denialist paranoid conspiracy theory that government-funded scientists doctor their results to please the funders.

    I have shown that this is completely false in govt. funded research by two pieces of evidence :-

    a. In the USA the research published by govt. funding, far from supporting the Dubya line, actually supported a very Inconvenient Truth

    b. By publishing in respected peer-reviewed journals, these conclusions, if doctored, would have been quickly exposed (it is a fundamental basis of ? Popper’s scientific reasoning that results should be duplicated independently)

    I have always believed that work of the scientists funded indirectly by the likes of he ClimateCoalition is suspect and when they have published in a very few cases in reputable journals, their work hasn't been validated - probably because they they are corupting their conclusions to please their funders.
    Furthermore, I have alsways believed that govt. & independently funded scientists in the CC area haven't corrupted their conclusions because this would quickly be exposed and would be career death for them.
    So, I don't see that I have changed my mind.


    So that’s you shot down in flames.

    The rest of your post ~49 is wriggling & you know it.

  5. #55
    Senior Member Gregory Lauder-Frost has some supporters Gregory Lauder-Frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    1,395

    Bellamy (76) is essentially a botanist is he not?

  6. #56
    Uber Member Clippo is just starting out
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    3,395

    Gregory LF wrote:-
    Bellamy (76) is essentially a botanist is he not?
    I believe so - and well respected in Botany also.

    But his ignominious foray into a subject (GW) for which he had little experience is a salutary lesson to all.

  7. #57
    Uber Member Clippo is just starting out
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    3,395

    YCHTT,
    You wrote :-
    And you're basing that on what exactly ?

    A load of sites which are seeking to create an illusion of confusion over his motives for leaving ?
    You are misunderstanding the situation.

    I, and others, including those ‘loads of sites’ aren’t creating an :-
    illusion of confusion over his motives for leaving ? (my addition -the BBC)
    We, at least I, am saying firstly that he didn’t ‘leave’ the BBC – by his own admission he thought he had been ‘dropped’ by the BBC.
    Secondly, I/we say the ‘confusion’ has been created by his own different suggestions as to why he was ‘dropped’.

    It may help if you re-visit the timelines again:-

    1967 – when he first says he campaigned against ‘cutting down the rainforests’. (From Guardian interview 2002 & Express interview)
    1989 – In his book The Greenhouse Effect[3] Bellamy wrote:
    "The profligate demands of humankind are causing far reaching changes to the atmosphere of planet Earth, of this there is no doubt. Earth's temperature is showing an upward swing, the so-called greenhouse effect, now a subject of international concern. The greenhouse effect may melt the glaciers and ice caps of the world causing the sea to rise and flood many of our great cities and much of our best farmland." (Wiki)
    1994 - was the last time he said he did a TV series for the BBC. (From the Guardian interview in 2002).

    1996 – He criticised wind farms on Blue Peter & published anti-GW ( from the Express interview interview).

    So you see his dates are now inconsistent.

    1997 – he stood against John Major . (His other ‘reason’ for being dropped by the BBC (from Guardian 2002)).

    2004 – In a letter to the Mail, he declares AGW ‘poppycock’ and puts forward the hypothesis that glaciers are retreating Worldwide. (Wiki)
    2004 – George Monbiot clearly shows Bellamy’s data sources unreliable, (Wiki)
    2005 – Bellamy declares he is stepping back from the AGW debate in a letter to the times ….

    Now you can continue to take apart all of his interviews and letters but the fundamental fact is that he is muddled in his thinking.

    Was he dropped by the BBC – probably, but not in 1994
    Why was he dropped – who knows. The logic is against his supposed Anti- AGWviews since it was only in 2004 he clearly says that. Of course, if you want to conflate anti-wind farms with anti-AGW then that’s your prerogative but probably not shared by others.

    Bottom line for me is that the BBC change presenters for many reasons, most not openly stated.

    I’ve only tried to make the point that David Bellamy is not consistent in his own statements and it is therefore risky to build some sort of BBC conspiracy against him.

  8. #58
    Senior Member Keyser Soze is doing well Keyser Soze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,358

    Quote Originally Posted by Clippo View Post
    Gregory LF wrote:-


    I believe so - and well respected in Botany also.

    But his ignominious foray into a subject (GW) for which he had little experience is a salutary lesson to all.

    Most would say that being a world reknowned Botanist would give him more than enough entitlement to state how he sees your corrupt mmgw,cc game wouldn't it?
    Besides,aren't the plants of the Earth the first to show changes around and within them?

  9. #59
    Senior Member Keyser Soze is doing well Keyser Soze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,358

    Quote Originally Posted by Clippo View Post
    Keyser Soze wrote:-


    You seem to have a problem reading & understanding information that is clearly in the public domain.
    All I have done is pointed out some discrepancies in his story - that Dr Bellamy has given 2 different reasons for his apparent dismissal from the BBC.
    (Actually, from my link he gives 2 possible reasons so that's 3 so far). Such inconsistencies don't engender confidence in any other of his utterances - perhaps they get garbled leaking out of his beard.

    What will the reasons be for the BBC spat in his next interview ?

    PS nice to see you back Besoeker - your commonsense has been sorely missed.
    Care to say how many reasons we would all be allowed if kept under your facist styled Dictatorship?

    Anyone should be allowed to have as many reasons as they wish to have when making a decision,(this is not allowed in the facist society).

  10. #60
    Trusted Member mkpdavies is just really nice mkpdavies is just really nice mkpdavies is just really nice mkpdavies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    38,605

    Lord Clippo

    So that’s you shot down in flames.
    You're awesome. The way you can read peoples minds and jumped straight to a conclusion is brilliant.

    It explains a lot.
    mkpdavies no longer posts on this forum

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 9
FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts