Complaint to Ofcom Regarding The Great Global Warming Swindle

2. Complete Transcript and Rebuttal

Page 19



Not only was the excerpt used to make false associations with all other media coverage of the issue; it was also an inaccurate representation of the programme that it edited the sequence from.

Lord Lawsons reference to intolerance of dissenting voices is at odds with the fact that he contributed to a House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee enquiry that published a sceptical report on climate change timed to coincide with preparations for the 2005 G8 conference. The Report won an enormous body of media coverage (see Google News: The suggestion that media reporting of climate change has been fantastically apocalyptic is at odds with the fact that, just considering print news media, the range of journalists considering how people might adapt to, or even profit from, climate change have ranged from gardening and food correspondents to economics and business. In other words, the media are beginning to find ways of exploring the more incremental business of learning to live with climate change.

Moreover, many climate scientists, including IPCC authors, see the IPCC process as producing excessively conservative summaries (see for example the International Herald Tribune: and the BBC:; and yet media coverage of climate science has concentrated almost exclusively on IPCC estimates.

In addition, by showing footage of an anti-capitalist activist in amongst these claims about the press, the film is attempting to associate in the viewers mind anti-capitalism, climate change science and media decision-making in a profoundly misleading manner.]

(In breach of the 2003 Communications Act Section 265, Ofcom 5.4, 5.5, 5.7, 5.11, 5.12)

[Dr Nir Shaviv]

There were periods for example in the earths history when we had 3 times as much CO2 as we have today; or periods when we had 10 times as much CO2 as we have today. And if CO2 has a large effect on climate then you should see it in the temperature reconstruction.

[Prof Ian Clark]

If we look at climate with a geological timeframe we would never suspect CO2 as a major climate driver.

[Piers Corbyn, Weather Action”]

None of the major climate changes in the last 1000 years can be explained by CO2.

[Comment 14: With regard to the narrators statement that Shaviv, Clark and Corbyn are senior climate scientists”, see Comment 4, page 14, Comment 7, page 15 and Comment 15, below.

Shaviv and Clarks comments neglect the strong positive correlation between CO2 and temperature in the palaeoclimate record over multi-millennial time periods.

Continued …

[Bookmarks on this page: Click the following link to go to that bookmark. You can then copy and paste the bookmarks url from your address bar, and send it to someone as a link straight to that bookmark:
Comment 14: Misrepresentation of correlation between greenhouse gas levels and climate]


Page 19 of 176

Final Revision

Last updated: 11 Jun 2007