View Article & Comments
view the latest news articles
Tuesday, June 26th 2012, 7:52 AM EDT
WHAT HAS THE BBC GOT TO HIDE - Why was Piers Corbyn's posting (no 66) on Paul Hudson's blog removed by BBC?
It was post number 66 - the number of The beast! - and about peer review and the 'coming soon but not really' BBC Weather Test, in response to a question in post No 64 UKpahonta:
64 At 22:43 22nd Jun 2012, ukpahonta wrote:
Piers,
Good to hear from you even in slightly confrontational circumstances.
Did that study organised by Harrabin on forecasts from independents and the MET office ever get off the ground or was it all bluster and blowing in the wind?
You should call in more frequently and perhaps register in our annual forecast. I'm sure that Neil Hamp could update us on the figures, it's only for fun but it might inspire those of us that don't depend upon forecasting for our living.
Article continues below this advert:
(66) Piers Corbyn wrote: (NB Piers' other posts on this string were 31, 57, 61 and 65)
EXTRA NOTE. We advertised (04.45am BST 26 June) this WeatherAction posting of the deleted No 66; as post no119, and put on two more 120, and 121 on Hudson's site:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2012/06/blame-the-jet-stream-for-retur.shtml
"On testing and reviewing I find it disgraceful that those (+associates) who refuse or evade being independently forecast-tested (and NEVER have been in decades of existence) in terms of any competition with us demand our company property process (rather than skill) be peer-reviewed by the corrupt peer-review system which their cronies control.
Note Phil Jones of the fiddled data of CRU of UEA stated in emails that he and his associates would do their utmost to ensure Sceptics (such as me who was deemed his 'main enemy this side of the Atlantic') would NEVER get anything published in any 'respectable' journals.
EVERYTHING they do about assessment and 'peer-ha-ha-review' is treacherous. However we WILL publish loads when and where we choose and then many things might change.
I also note that they NEVER NEVER NEVER turn up to any public events we organize even when they are specifically invited* to discuss matters to advance forecasting science *(eg Imperial College Oct 2009)
* (added later): Video of Piers Corbyn's Opening Remarks at WeatherAction Climate Fools Day Conference Oct 28th 2009 Imperial College London showing the empty Chair not occupied by warmists / standard Met to put their case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYnLbz8ZoTE&feature=plcp
Other vids from that conference:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SuperClimate
On 'The weather Test' I have heard nothing for a while and am not sure if there is anything I should do or indeed if anything will ever happen. I have made it very clear we will be happy to enter a long range forecast competition (in terms of notional 'bets') and in Jan I understood (from Radio 4, although I didn't know the piece was coming up) that then we were the only ones willing; which makes it a race of one. Of course various churls would deem in a race of one we came last rather than admit we were first and last!
I get the impression the Met Office don't want any competition to take place, and if it must then only for short range, and are playing a waiting game to justify robbing £43Million from the public for a new computer to get wrong answers quicker.
"It also helps the MetO and BBC to talk about it - 'The Weather Test' - because rather than admit WeatherAction has proven skill whereas they have none in long range they can just waffle 'tests are awaited'. We are increasingly putting forecasts in public 'betting format' but there are limits to this because we may want to talk about part of a month available only to subscribers whereas the public interest is in public statements which need to be most effectively about whole months.
Our most recent (March 2011) comprehensive comment on 'The Weather Test':-
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews11No6.pdf
Thanks, Piers Corbyn
**************************
So What's the BBC's problem?
Are not the points made here (in response to a question) valid debate?
If there are counter points let them be heard too! This suppression of debate by BBC is sadly reminiscent of their decade of totally biased 'reportage' of climate matters. Three specific reasons for their suppression of debate here are worth considering:
1. Was the mention of the other side refusing to debate (Imperial College Oct 2009) in front of the BBC (who didn’t report the 'empty chair' reserved for CO2-warmists who refused to come - Video link above) too much?
2. Is Piers Corbyn's view of the BBC's 'weather Test' too close to reality?
3. Piers Corbyn is black-listed from all BBC TV appearances, and although on many occasions since the eve of the Copenhagen failed 'Climate Summit' (Dec 2009) footage of Piers has been taken or researchers have booked Piers to appear; BBC bosses pulled the plug every time.
Is this black-listing to be extended to censorship of what Piers says on BBC blogs?
NOW more than ever shouldn't the public hear from Piers? They pulled him from speaking about the supercold Dec 2010 which he predicted. They ignored him when he got the Royal wedding right in 2011 and the Met Office failed. They ignored him in discussion of the long exceptionally cold period in May which he predicted and the floods this June which he predicted. Instead they put on inane empty heads who whine oh it's cold because of er..er cold air and the floods are because of rain.
The last thing they want to hear is these extremes are due to predictable solar-driven jet stream shifts which indicate we are heading into the next 'Little Ice Age'.
Not only is the BBC scared of debate on Climate 'Science', they are scared of anyone knowing they are scared of debate and they are scared of anyone who knows WHY we are having the weather extremes we are.
What to do?
WRITE TO YOUR MP and demand
1. BBC must re-instate Piers Corbyn's deleted posting in fair reply to a fair question on Paul Hudson's site.
2. The black-listing of Piers Corbyn on BBC TV be lifted.
3. The Met Office Application for £43Million for a new super-computer be refused and instead 1% of that be spent in 'out-sourcing' long-range forecasts beyond the Met Office.
Click source for more
Comments section below this advert:
Comments
Have Your Say
11 comments found
showing page 1 of 1
« previous 1 next »
Tweet Article
Post to Facebook
Print Article
Quite simple Mr Paranoid, see
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/moderation.shtml
Something in post 66 was deemed to break one or more 'house rules'. There you go. Superbly confirmed.