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

Originally Posted by Keyser Soze

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?

He is certainly more qualified than the vast majority of MPs on the subject. He is a scientist and understands the scientific method. All the cleverest scientists have been multi-discipline. You can gain so much by a broader approach, and even botany has wide ranging uses, for example, a lot of new chemicals and materials science has been copied from nature.

I'd say he has been spending his free time getting down to some research and that just requires a lot of diligence. Like noticing one of Al Gore’s climate changed lakes resulted from excessive consumption of water for the Russians to grow cotton. That does not take a genius to figure out, just someone with a bit of time and patience checking the so-called facts.

Originally Posted by Clippo

g hall wrote:-


No, YOU asked the question first and
Yes - I did answer it.

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

Yes one begins with a C and one with a W other then that NO

Originally Posted by Clippo

YCHTT,
You are misunderstanding the situation.

Ever thought of getting the attacks in first ?

Before you present your(ahem) evidence....

Originally Posted by Clippo

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.

Er - yes that's the topic of the discussion.
If he was dropped then he did leave but I don't want to play word games.....
(And P.S If you're quoting, at least quote somebody ?)

As far as I can see, Bellamy has never said "I left the BBC in 1994".

The Guardian article: The Monday interview: David Bellamy | Media | The Guardian
and that horrible excuse for an "expose": David Bellamy: victim! but of who? Greenfyre’s
are the ones inferring his TV career was "over" (despite the fact he appeared on Blue Peter 2 years later)

As The Guardian article most craftily says:
"Actually, he says, his TV career had stopped some time before that - he made his last BBC series eight years ago."

Is the simple truth that Bellamy admitted to The Guardian that he stopped making his own BBC TV programmes in 1994 ?

Wake up people - this is how newspapers can effectively lie and tell the truth at the same time !

Also that poor excuse for journalism: David Bellamy: victim! but of who? Greenfyre’s
gleefully tries to play on that same supposed "fact":

"Trouble is, he says that was 1996, two years after his BBC career was effectively over."

But the Daily Express article totally refutes the claim his TV career was over with Bellamy's statement:

"It was in 1996 that I criticised wind farms while appearing on Blue Peter and I also had an article published in which I described global warming as poppycock.
.........
At that point I was still making loads of television programmes and I was enjoying it greatly. Then I suddenly found I was sending in ideas for TV shows and they weren’t getting taken up. I’ve asked around about why I’ve been ignored but I found that people didn’t get back to me".

So either:

1) Bellamy was making TV programmes at that time but not for the BBC.
2) Bellamy was "making" BBC programmes that never saw the light of day in terms of being broadcast.
3) Bellamy is indeed mistaken and got the dates wrong. So obviously he is wrong about MMGW.
4) Bellamy is telling the truth and the people who accuse Bellamy of admitting his TV career was "over in 1994" are lying or simliarly "mistaken" who we equally shouldn't trust about MMGW either ?

If anyone has got some proper evidence concerning his TV activity around 94/96, then we might learn whether it is Bellamy or his critics who are mistaken.

So Clippo, I don't understand your point that he didn't "leave" - unless you can explain it or contradict it, then I'll accept it as being obviously wrong.

Originally Posted by Clippo

Secondly, I/we say the ‘confusion’ has been created by his own different suggestions as to why he was ‘dropped’.

To be fair, this is the only piece of evidence you have presented which shows Bellamy giving other possible reasons.

“In some ways it was probably the most stupid thing I ever did because I’m sure that if I have been banned from television, that’s why. I used to be on Blue Peter and all those things, regularly, and it all, pffffft, stopped.”

However, when you consider that Bellamy:
i./ (despite the BBC reference) only admitted to being banned from "television" and stated he was making "TV programmes" in 1996.
ii./ may believe there were many several factors at play. (i.e. easy to quote one reason in isolation only for the media to misrepresent him by implying he only ever had one reason when there may have many contributory factors)
iii./ cannot know himself 100% what really happened, is capable of guessing wrong at an earlier time, and may have changed his mind in light of the global warming media push, increased personal knowledge and probably has a better understanding of things now
iv./ may have been banned by mutliple TV networks for different reasons

then in light of the several mistakes/misquotations from yourself(keep reading) and that horribly misleading article, then it is probably irrelevant in terms of what we know and understand now in light of the proven facts.

As far as I can see, the only ones putting forward these theories about him leaving the BBC in 1994 or changing tack are by people like yourself with very limited supporting evidence about Bellamy contradicting himself.

Sure even Bellamy may not be 100% sure as to exactly why he stopped working in TV, but to suggest he has put forward several different "theories", when he has pointed to 2 possible reasons(which may both be true) is misleading and somewhat innacurate.

Also,.... his suggestions as to what happened or yours (including those media articles you posted) ?

It's yourself and the media who are creating the doubt based on deceitful theories that suggest his TV career was over in 1994, not Bellamy himself.

And you're saying that since he doesn't know why he was "dropped" for sure, then he must be somehow mad, whereas you admit that you(and everyone else) don't know (for sure) either.

So please explain how that means he is "losing his marbles" ?

Originally Posted by Clippo

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

Ok let's see.......

Originally Posted by Clippo

1967 – when he first says he campaigned against ‘cutting down the rainforests’. (From Guardian interview 2002 & Express interview)

Irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Clippo

1989 – In his book The Greenhouse Effect[3] Bellamy wrote:

Quote:
"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)

"SO CALLED" greenhouse effect ?!!
"MAY" melt the glaciers ?!!!

Hardly a firm endorsement of the existence of MAN MADE global warming ?

Merely an observation about changes in climate(OMG climate change sympathizer !?! ), not anything that clearly shows he endorsed any possible reasons that possibly causes it.

Even if he did believe it at the time (and there's no evidence that I can see to back up that claim), it was back in 1989.
Possibly enough time to reconsider any view he may have had in light of further information and by examining his own knowledge.

However the bottom line is that your claim is simply unsubstantiated full stop.

Originally Posted by Clippo

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.

I don't see that at all ! Does anybody else ?!

Let's read the articles again.....

"It was in 1996 that I criticised wind farms while appearing on Blue Peter and I also had an article published in which I described global warming as poppycock."

So he had his OWN BBC show in 94 and then appeared ON Blue Peter in 96.

Unless you suggesting that he is lying or "confused" about the date when he had his last TV show(which I guess you are), then how specifically are they "inconsistent" ?

For someone who is supposed to be scientific you're playing fast and loose with the facts.

By saying "on Blue Peter" and not "appearing on Blue Peter" you are obviously trying to manipulate the issue by attempting to create a contridiction where none obviously exists.

Are you treating the people on the forum as a bunch of idiots who can't discern the difference between having a TV show and making a TV appearance on a show ?

Originally Posted by Clippo

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

See above comments.

Originally Posted by Clippo

2004 – In a letter to the Mail, he declares AGW ‘poppycock’ and puts forward the hypothesis that glaciers are retreating Worldwide. (Wiki)

Irrelevant ?

Originally Posted by Clippo

2004 – George Monbiot clearly shows Bellamy’s data sources unreliable, (Wiki)

Evidence ? Link ?
And Is wiki a reliable source on political matters or essentially a government-censored "knowledge base" for political thinking ?

Originally Posted by Clippo

2005 – Bellamy declares he is stepping back from the AGW debate in a letter to the times ….

Because........ ?

Originally Posted by Clippo

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.

I'd rather determine the actual facts and learn what he actually said than to believe a bunch of unsubstantiated, illogical and misleading rubbish that always claims to be "fundamental fact".

Originally Posted by Clippo

Was he dropped by the BBC – probably, but not in 1994

Oh so you admit there probably was a conspiracy against him, but you say he is losing his marbles and imply anyone who believes he may have been dropped are unreliable conspiracy theorists ?

But yes but probably not in 1994, more likely in 1996, or maybe 1997.

Originally Posted by Clippo

Why was he dropped – who knows.

Well correct me if I am wrong but you are the one who is suggesting that Bellamy should know, else he is either unreliable or "losing his marbles" ?

Originally Posted by Clippo

The logic is against his supposed Anti- AGWviews since it was only in 2004 he clearly says that.

But according to The Express:

"It was in 1996 that I criticised wind farms while appearing on Blue Peter and I also had an article published in which I described global warming as poppycock."

Similar to the David Bellamy: victim! but of who? Greenfyre’s article which (most incredibly !)

says:

"In fact this(the 2004 article) would appear to be the “poppycock” article that he now thinks he wrote in 1996, 2 years after the BBC started shunning him."

Now notice the use of the words "would appear to be" and the repeated and unproven assertion (from the author) that the BBC shunned him in 1994.

Also notice how Bellamy has never said anything other than 1996 but by saying "now" the author(and you too Clippo) imply he has stated something "contradictory".

In fact the above statement can be boiled down to the following logic:

"In fact this article [unfounded assertion] that he [misleading fact], [unproven/misleading statement]".

How is that for a pack of lies, spin and media manipulation ?

Yet you Clippo state:

Originally Posted by Clippo

"The analysis in my second link David Bellamy: victim! but of who? Greenfyre’s post#29 convinces me more than ever that he was not ‘dismissed’ by the BBC for anti-AGW statements."

Obvious deceit and attempted manipulation.

Originally Posted by Clippo

Of course, if you want to conflate anti-wind farms with anti-AGW then that’s your prerogative but probably not shared by others.

Don't worry Clippo, until I know better I will accept those comments in The Express as true until proven otherwise......

And even if Bellamy is proven to be wrong about his dates, I still believe he is right about MMGW.

Originally Posted by Clippo

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

Bottom line for me is that you're digging yourself a bigger hole by attemting to justify the unjustifyable.

Originally Posted by Clippo

I’ve only tried to make the point that David Bellamy is not consistent in his own statements

Refuted notwithstanding some actual real evidence of what is actually "inconsistent".

Originally Posted by Clippo

and it is therefore risky to build some sort of BBC conspiracy against him.

Even though you admit yourself he was probably "dropped" by the BBC.

Originally Posted by British-Conservatism

If the state does nothing for people then they will turn to the Left.

Explain please.