Friday, 7 November 2008

Whatever happened to David Bellamy?

... ah, the BBC declared him persona non grata about ten years ago for being a bit sceptical about MMGW.

Via Christina Speight.

My latest blogpost: Whatever happened to David Bellamy?Tweet this! Posted by Mark Wadsworth at 12:04

Labels: , , , , ,

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Global Warming conveniently started soon after the Cold War ended. There's nothing quite as useful to a government as an external threat.

7 November 2008 at 13:13
sanbikinoraion said...

I remember seeing Bellamy on C4 news with George Monbiot. Bellamy insisted that most glaciers worldwide were getting larger, and Monbiot bless him had brought a letter with the data from 250 glacier study teams saying "no, really, they're not". Bellamy had no response and was basically laughed out of the studio.

7 November 2008 at 15:12
Mark Wadsworth said...

Oh, bandwagon jumper and moron journalist Moonbat had a letter did he?

As opposed to proper Greenie, nature lover and scientist Bellamy who stated in the article to which I linked that "we’ve seen evidence that the glaciers in Alaska have started growing rapidly – and they’ve not grown for a long time" which is a bold statement of fact and either true or untrue*.

In any event, it appears that Antarctic Ice is increasing in volume as Arctic Ice is getting thinner. And that link is from a Greenie website.

*Which begs the question, which glaciers? All? Some?

7 November 2008 at 15:19
Pogo said...

ISTR reading somewhere that there are tens of thousands of glaciers world-wide of which only a tiny fraction are observed in any meaningful way. On that basis it's probably reasonable to say that we haven't the faintest clue whether there is a net build-up or reduction of "the world's glaciers".

But since when are proper, observed and measured facts allowed to sway the preachings of the Great Church of AGW?

7 November 2008 at 15:28
Anonymous said...

So that's where he went! I like him. Whether he's right or not, he always seemed likeable and I can imagine that is the sort of opinion that'll get you out on your ear.

7 November 2008 at 23:27
Anonymous said...

Nice to hear someone finally stating the obvious truth that investing in conserving habitats under immediate threat, such as rainforests, should take precedence over worrying about a potential environmental shift that will likely take centuries to manifest (or not at all according to the sceptics).

7 November 2008 at 23:36

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)