Sunny Hundal: Good for a Laugh

Sunny Hundal spouting crazed nonsense over at CiF. Not only does Hundal fail to understand the principle of scepticism, which underpins the scientific process, he simply engages in a series of absurd ad hominems scattered across the field as he rants uncontrollably at anyone who dares to point out that actually, the science isn’t settled, and actually, scepticism is a healthy approach – oh, and actually, people who lie and dissemble when asked for their raw data cannot be trusted henceforth.

Some gems:

Let me start by saying I believe that man-made activity is the prime driver behind global warming.

You can believe whatever you want to believe – it is, more or less, a free country. The evidence, though, tells us that climate change is as old as the earth itself. Any effect that we may have is not proven by the quack science and “peer reviewing” that we have seen so far. Rather, what we have seen is a self-interested lobby looking after its own.

I don’t have time for tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy nuts who think it is one big plot by scientists across the world. I do believe CC deniers are no different to 9/11 Truthers. But that point is moot while we focus on the country’s biggest culprit.

Bwhahahahahahahahahaha! Dear, oh dear. And who said satire is dead? Sunny Hundal dons his tinfoil hat and promptly accuses others of his own failings. Still, it’s good for a laugh. If ever there was any danger of me taking this man vaguely seriously before (not really), there is none now. The man is a buffoon. And, given the hysteria from such commenters, is it any wonder the whole global-warming-we’re-all-gonna-die scam is falling apart at the seams? And it’s about bloody time, too.

The hook for last night’s Newsnight report was today’s Guardian reporting that the IPCC head Dr Rajendra Pachauri rightly refusing to apologise for a mistake that wasn’t made under his watch.

He admitted the mistake and accepted that other recent scandals such as the illegal hacking of UEA emails had boosted the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) deniers.

That would be the compromised Pachauri, would it (the one making a mint out of carbon trading, the one who doesn’t seem to grasp the principle of “conflict of interest”)? He is the head of the organisation, he should apologise on its behalf. A simple enough concept. Also, given the cause of the lie – yes, let’s call a spade a shovel – no, we should not blindly accept the report. The scientific process has been badly damaged by these charlatans and it will be a long time before scientists are trusted again because of it.

As for whether the emails were hacked or leaked who gives a hoot? it doesn’t matter how they got into the public domain as that does not alter the explosive content; the facts remain that they exposed a conspiracy to hide and manipulate raw data, to deliberately undermine the freedom of information act. The scientific process relies on the ability of people to replicate results – that’s why honest scientists publish their data and processes.

But presenter Kirsty Wark’s agenda was to try and rubbish the IPCC’s entire report — the biggest piece of scientific work undertaken on the topic. The IPCC contains hundreds if not thousands of graphs and claims — and yet one or two slips were used as an excuse to rubbish the whole thing.

It contains lots of graphs. It must be true, then. FFS!

This sort of crap isn’t the only example from the BBC. Last week the BBC’s so-called “ethical man” Justin Rowlatt presented an absurd programme that argued the green movement was bad for the environment. That’s right, the likes of Nigel Lawson and Exxon Mobil will save the environment instead.

Er, that’s because it is. Quite apart form the greenie rush to bio fuels, only to realise that actually, they weren’t such a spiffing idea; we have poisonous light bulbs, that are – to put it mildly – crap, and wind farms that kill birds. All of this and the obsession with CO₂ to the exclusion of such things as deforestation and habitat loss.

The current green crusade has nothing to do with genuine environmental concern and everything to do with a hatred of western civilisation. So, yes, it is bad for the environment.

Oh and then there’s Andrew Neil. The avowed right-winger not only presents the Daily Politics show, but also writes blogs on the BBC site claiming that the “dam is cracking” on the science behind AGW. And yet you won’t find any other senior presenters allowed to publish such blantantly partisan propaganda, nor have any of their journalists question it.

Oh, he’s a “right winger” he must be eeeevil, then. Clearly Hundal hasn’t managed to move beyond student union politics – much like the Labour front bench. And this arse dribble is published in a mainstream publication ferfucksake. And, given that the BBC has for some years maintained a policy of not airing sceptical voices, it’s a refreshing change to see them following the curve finally.

The BBC is continually painted as some liberal-left dominated haven, but it remains deeply institutional and rightwing. The subject of climate change is the latest instance where this is becoming increasingly obvious.

No, it isn’t, see above. They remained very quiet in the wake of the email leaks and have only recently started to allow dissenting voices to be heard. They have, perhaps, realised that they were on the wrong side of the argument and that maybe, just maybe, the argument isn’t settled after all.

If its journalists are so intent on providing balance on every issue, why doesn’t it invite 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers to every discussion of those terrorist attacks?

If in doubt, wheel out a straw man.

A sceptic is someone who waits until the evidence is in. The evidence is most certainly not in. Those who challenge AGW claims – some that amount to downright fraud – are doing so because the evidence is not in, is flawed or in some cases blatantly manufactured.

Still, it’s amusing to read the hysterical screeching of the true believer. It passes a few moments while stuck in hotel room.