Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

salon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 119 posts

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#61

Post by pling »

rbanffy wrote: post #55
pling wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't mean they're right or proposing different hypothesis' is suddenly forbidden. That's not science. Aristotelian physics was superseded by Newtonian Physics. That's science. I'm not suggesting that anyone will come up with a different conclusion but there's no excuse for this stupid dogma and religion getting in the way of rationality. Feynman is doing 500rpm in his grave...

> That doesn't mean they're right or proposing different hypothesis' is suddenly forbidden. That's not science. While I agree with you on principle, it would be awkward to give precisely 99.93% of the airtime to scientists who agree we have an impact in global climate change and dividing the rest among all the possible explanations (from the "it's a natural phenomenon" to "God is doing it" and even the "we are not su…

Ok I agree with the precision argument but through rounding that could be construed as 100%.

Perhaps a fair option would be:

1. Discuss the issue at hand.

2. Provide a 30 second to 1 minute summary of other hypothesises and how they have or haven't been tested.

3. Visit our web site (which contains a more rational summary of opinions, wikipedia style).

There is very rarely one true answer. Look at medicine. Superseded theories all over the place.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#62

Post by muuh-gnu »

skylan_q wrote: post #37
nav1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But science isn't about someone agreeing with a theory. If you can disprove a theory, great. Otherwise no one really cares about your flawed arguments.

But science isn't about someone agreeing with a theory. Those who advocate blocking dissent with theories in the name of science would disagree. Apparently, it's more important that people agree with a body of work that is largely impenetrable than it is to question it or disagree with it.

There is no time left to debate any more, we now have to act or we're all gonna die.

Suppressing dissent by a Soviet style thought police is a small price to pay if the future of the human species is at stake.

I for one, fully and sincerely and deeply believe in climate change, and I welcome our new bolsheviks in lab coats overlords.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#63

Post by tinkerrr »

TomGullen wrote: post #13

Misleading title, actual title: "BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers"

Wow, that's truly misleading. The 'equal' is hugely important. As they say, Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#64

Post by jonnathanson »

dragonwriter wrote: post #54
jonnathanson wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness, and quite unfortunately, I don't think we can call climate change deniers a "fringe." A substantial proportion of the American public denies climate change in one way or another, be it denial of anthropogenic climate change, denial of climate change altogether, or dismissal of the significance of climate change. I don't have the latest figures in front of me, but in the not-too-distant past, deniers poll…

> In fairness, and quite unfortunately, I don't think we can call climate change deniers a "fringe." In terms of science we can. In terms of politics or society we can not, but we can distinguish political reporting from science reporting, even on a scientific issue which has political implications.

Sure, but I was responding specifically to the idea that the denial camp (amongst laypeople / GenPop) is a "fringe." In some ways it's dangerous to think of it as such. It's a significant movement with some significant capital behind it, from energy companies and other lobbies.

By no means am I suggesting it's a legitimate movement or a non-fringe movement amongst scientists, or that it deserves equal airtime. The viewpoint is largely bunk. Its adherents, however, are legion.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#65

Post by stephencanon »

pling wrote: post #40
stephencanon wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone holds the opinion that onions are actually evil aliens sent from the planet Zorlax to colonize the earth, should we also given them equal airtime? You need to draw a line somewhere, otherwise the airwaves will be full of nothing but crazies and their pet theories.

What's Songs of Praise then? Worship thy sky daddy to prevent evil demons sent from hell to colonise the earth!

I’ve never actually seen Songs of Praise, but I would hope that it at least features some good music from time to time. At least that’s enjoyable to listen to.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#66

Post by dragonwriter »

jonnathanson wrote: post #64
dragonwriter wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fairness, and quite unfortunately, I don't think we can call climate change deniers a "fringe." In terms of science we can. In terms of politics or society we can not, but we can distinguish political reporting from science reporting, even on a scientific issue which has political implications.

Sure, but I was responding specifically to the idea that the denial camp (amongst laypeople / GenPop) is a "fringe." In some ways it's dangerous to think of it as such. It's a significant movement with some significant capital behind it, from energy companies and other lobbies. By no means am I suggesting it's a legitimate movement or a non-fringe movement amongst scientists, or that it deserves equal airtime. The vi…

As "fringe" was defined in the context used upthread in the phrase "fringe conspiracy theorists", it means specifically "ones that don't get [presumably, mainstream] media attention". So, the discussion here is largely about making climate change denial into a fringe by that definition.

There certainly are other senses of the word "fringe", some of which they fit, others of which they don't.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#67

Post by pling »

stephencanon wrote: post #65
pling wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's Songs of Praise then? Worship thy sky daddy to prevent evil demons sent from hell to colonise the earth!

I’ve never actually seen Songs of Praise, but I would hope that it at least features some good music from time to time. At least that’s enjoyable to listen to.

Oh it certainly does. You cannot beat a good choir. That doesn't necessarily mean you need to subscribe to the content.

The same can be said for hip hop :)

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#68

Post by OrwellianChild »

logfromblammo wrote: post #38

I think this is a dangerous precedent for media coverage of science. If there is any doubt in your mind, you never read what Feynman had to say about Millikan's experimental results for measurement of elementary charge. Some scientists cheat at science, so they can be more popular. And this is why we don't trust conclusions until after they are independently repeated. If someone were to produce real, verifiable exper…

I think there is a general misconception about what this shift in approach by the BBC means and why it is significant.

Scientific debate does not unfold in the same way as political debate, where it is plausible to have two, equally valid "sides" to compare with "benefits" and "disadvantages". Scientifically defensible conclusions drawn from repeated experimentation are complex to understand, difficult to explain to the layman, and require rigorous experiment design and adherence to statistical methods. These are not bite-size headlines, and that is why responsible news sources would do well to coach their proclamations very specifically.

Proper scientific dissent sounds more like "your results were not repeatable in my lab setting to the same degree of certainty" and not at all like "you scientists are liars with an agenda paid by the political establishment".

The BBC is not shying away from covering valid-but-unpopular research. It is simply choosing not to seek "opposing opinions" that are unsupported by statistically valid methods of research.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#69

Post by icebraining »

skylan_q wrote: post #37
nav1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But science isn't about someone agreeing with a theory. If you can disprove a theory, great. Otherwise no one really cares about your flawed arguments.

But science isn't about someone agreeing with a theory. Those who advocate blocking dissent with theories in the name of science would disagree. Apparently, it's more important that people agree with a body of work that is largely impenetrable than it is to question it or disagree with it.

But who is talking about blocking dissent? Not giving airtime on the BBC is blocking dissent, now? Should they also give airtime to the flat-earth society?

The BBC is not a scientific journal, it's a mass-media organization. It's not its job to promote every little scientific theory.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#70

Post by tonfa »

7952 wrote: post #47
jarrett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For any given fringe view that the media properly marginalizes, some people will go on believing it. But that doesn't mean the number of believers (or undecided people) will stay the same. It's quite possible, and in my view probable, that reducing airtime from fringe views will substantially reduce the number of people who hold or lean towards those views.

Climate change scepticism is not a fringe view, but moderately widely held. It is hard to believe that those people will suddenly support environmentally literate policy. They will just switch to a different set of trite anecdotes to prove why nothing should change.

> Climate change scepticism is not a fringe view, but moderately widely held.

Is it true for the US? That's definitely not my impression for Europe, it always looked to me that was a belief from a tiny minority.

Post reply on HN