Monday 2 March 2015

Mathematical BBC Presenters in Numbers

After last night's preachy pro-EU mockumentary, BBC Four's main feature tonight attempted to preach a sermon on another of the BBC's main themes.

The programme was called Climate Change in Numbers, and it's been trying very hard to teach all of you naughty, naughty, naughty sceptics that the world really is warming, that there's not actually been a pause, that the 'gaps' in the data aren't important, that humans really are responsible, etc, etc. 

Instead of talking about that sort of thing though, I'd like to shift the discussion onto the kind of subject matter that BBC types usually like hearing about...except when it concerns the BBC.

Three mathematicians presented the programme. Two were older men, the third was a young and attractive woman (with dyed orange hair). 

Now, with all the thousands of older women involved in the global warming project here in the UK you might have thought a women in, say, her fifties could have chosen, but this is the sexist/ageist BBC, so that would be a 'no' then. 

The numbers tell us with more than 97% accuracy, therefore, that the BBC is sexist/ageist. And the numbers never lie.

(Plus - and get the smelling salts out for the BBC's diversity executives - all the presenters were white too. Tut, tut). 


  1. I am a precautionist on climate i.e. I would try and keep to the historical atmospheric content that we evolved to live with. However, that was a pretty pathetic programme. I didn't watch it all but there seemed to be no voice of scepticism, so among the welter of assertions and equations, one was left with the feeling that we weren't hearing about the negative data.

    I have looked into the issue of sea level rise. As soon as you do, you find out how hard it is to establish the truth. Measuring sticks in ports are no good (they sink into the mud). And everywhere on the planet is either sinking or rising due to tectonic plate movements and the like. However, looking at our own shores, we can see that if there has been any rise it has been minimal and manageable.

  2. I deliberately did not watch it. I assume that none of the mathematicians who dispute the numbers were featured, there was no reference to the falsification and suppression of data by warmists and the debunking of the "hockey stick curve" was noticeable by its absence ? BBC bias ? Surely not !!


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.