On Saturday, NewsBusters shared with readers a BBC.com report that astoundingly proclaimed "Global Temperatures 'To Decrease.'"
Some time after this was posted, the third paragraph of the original piece was changed in a fashion that radically altered the meaning of the entire article (picture courtesy AP).
In fact, what was once a realistic portrayal of new data released by the World Meteorological Organization suddenly became another hysterical report espousing doom and gloom at the hands of manmade global warming.
Here was how the piece began before Saturday's edits (emphasis added):
Global temperatures will drop slightly this year as a result of the cooling effect of the La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said.
The World Meteorological Organization's secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.
This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.
For the record, a website called Gribbit's Word cut and pasted those three opening paragraphs exactly the same way on Friday at 12:19 PM.
Yet, some time on Saturday after NewsBusters posted its piece at 12:22 PM, the third paragraph was mysteriously changed to this (emphasis added):
But this year's temperatures would still be way above the average - and we would soon exceed the record year of 1998 because of global warming induced by greenhouse gases.
Some difference, wouldn't you agree? Maybe more fascinating is that the time stamp at the top of the article doesn't reflect that any changes were made since Gribbit or I cut and pasted the version we shared with our readers: "Page last updated at 00:42 GMT, Friday, 4 April 2008 01:42 UK."
For those unfamiliar, 00:42 GMT on Friday would be 7:42 PM EST Thursday. So, according to BBC.com, this piece was last updated our Thursday evening.
Yet, Gribbit's cut and paste Friday afternoon, and mine on Saturday afternoon, are different than what one now sees if you click on the links we both posted for this piece. And, since mine was posted at 12:22 PM Saturday, it means this third paragraph was changed at least 40 hours after the last "official" update.
Why? Was someone at the BBC displeased with the tenor of this piece, but didn't want folks to know it was being altered so long after it had been posted?
*****Update: Jennifer Marohasy reports that the headline of this article was changed a couple of times as well --
Moving on to the strange happenings surrounding a subsequent 4th April article by the BBC's Roger Harrabin, blogged here, entitled, Global temperatures 'to decrease' , which was later changed to, Global warming 'dips this year, ' and then subsequently changed back to Global temperatures 'to decrease.' The changes in the text, however, did not revert back to the text in the original article.
Makes sense. After all, the alarmists certainly couldn't have an article out there titled "Global Warming 'Dips This Year.'"
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
News that does NOT make the News / BBC Bias at work
April 6, 2008 - 10:56 ET by JayTeeSomeone on the BBC saw the Light . . . then was over ruled by the Biased Believer in Charge.
To think, that Truth in Reporting survied 40 hrs. before it was Erased. That's a start.
Does one suspect that BBC is reading NB, so as to Audit their own Bias, when it is mistakenly omitted ?
BBC Bias continues
April 7, 2008 - 07:47 ET by PopularTechI take it they still have no acted on the confirmed left-bias in the BCC yet?
BBC report finds bias within corporation (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
I refuse to be surprised
April 6, 2008 - 10:57 ET by SnappyI refuse to be surprised anymore by the subterfuge and depths these people will go through to advance their agenda.
Ummmmm...
April 6, 2008 - 10:58 ET by jpatchNoel,
This is insane. What's next? Re-writing history books?
The disinformation age indeed.
Great job catching this.
Re-writing history books?
April 6, 2008 - 11:03 ET by SnappyRe-writing history books? .... have you looked at any of the current school history texts? Its already happening.
Re-writing history books?
April 6, 2008 - 11:21 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsRe-writing history books? .... have you looked at any of the current school history texts? Its already happening.
You mean Malcom X, John Kennedy and Rosa Parks aren't our founding fathers?
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
I was lucky...
April 6, 2008 - 11:44 ET by jpatchI had good teachers.
The books I read were at least mildy accurate. The rest I was able to figure out on my own, and that's where our current problem resides: too many people are not able to think for themselves.
The sick thing is, I have "friends" that are law students at Ohio State, and they love most of the stuff BathtubBoy says because of their own insane visceral hatred of President George W. Bush and anything connected to "conservatism", "Republicanism", "Christianity", "God" (but not Allah)...my "friend" Ryan actually told me that Barack Obama "is an atheist because he's too smart to believe in religion".
And yet these same people who condemn Christianity have bought into the religion of AGW. Hypocrisy knows no bounds...and obviously here the BBC has no scruples.
GMT conversion needs work
April 6, 2008 - 12:11 ET by WingletDriverNoel,
We're in Daylight Savings Time now. Your conversion of GMT to EST is technically correct, but it's really 8:42 EDT instead of 7:42 EST--unless you think Daylight Savings Time is a government conspiracy like adding flouride to water.
Idiocy, Not Conspiracy
April 6, 2008 - 15:05 ET by CGatton"...unless you think Daylight Savings Time is a government conspiracy..."
While it may not be a government conspiracy, it certainly is a government idiocy. When Ben Franklin first proposed DST, his concern was saving energy, though he was trying to save candles...er, tallow, actually. The recent expansion of DST, as well as the one before that, was specifically established to conserve energy. Fortunately for the proponents of such 'conservation measures,' there was no way to measure the effectiveness of their proposal. Unfortunately for them, Indiana recently switched to the entire state observing DST, rather than select portions, providing a unique opportunity to actually measure the savings generated by the switch. Alas, a funny thing happened on the way to the savings bank.
Switching to Daylight Savings Time actually cost energy! Oh, the horror of it! Well intentioned meddling with things to save energy actually ended up costing more energy. Who'd a thunk it! Anyone reminded of CFTs? :o)
So, while you're writing or otherwise appraising your congressman of your desire to eliminate the CFT mandate, you might want to throw in a word or two about ditching Daylight (not)Savings Time. Your pocketbook and body will thank you a minimum of twice a year.
V/R
Clyde
"...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - Aristotle, Politics, c350BC
Hi Clyde
April 6, 2008 - 15:11 ET by BlondeMust disagree.
Although I hate the "switch" on a bi-annual basis, I'd prefer to have DST year round.
I hate driving home in the dark, and I love having time to putter in the garden when I do get home.
I may be totally off base, but I understood that DST had to do with more daylight hours to harvest. Which, was, a nice thought. But in this day and age....more time to do anything while it is light out works for me.
P.S. Did you notice I don't care about energy savints?
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde, I'll go one step
April 6, 2008 - 15:20 ET by BlazerBlonde, I'll go one step further and suggest we should use our superior technology here in the States to devise a way to stop the earth's rotation so that we fat, lazy, ugly, selfish American's can recieve sunlight 24-7. : )
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Works for me, Blazer
April 6, 2008 - 15:23 ET by BlondeI'm a sun bunny.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
You and me both Blonde, when
April 6, 2008 - 15:26 ET by BlazerYou and me both Blonde, when it's warm I practically live on the water, I am not a land lubber.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Blazer
April 6, 2008 - 15:29 ET by BlondeIt's been rumored I have gills....and webbed feet.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Cool, I'll be looking out
April 6, 2008 - 15:31 ET by BlazerCool, I'll be looking out for a mermaid if I ever venture down Florida way. : )
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
It's Always Been About Energy
April 6, 2008 - 16:19 ET by CGattonThe daylight hour harvest was how it was explained, because Franklin actually described his idea as coming from watching farmers lay about and get up after the sun was up, while burning candles in the evening rather than going to bed. Frankly, all the farmers I have known have risen with the sun, regardless of the "time" it was, but hey, I'll not question Ben's memoirs, lol. So by shifting 'time' an hour, more daylight hours were spent while people were actually up. His (Ben's) concern was over the amount of tallow that was used in the candles at night, than anything else. Ben Franklin - our first conservationist!
You can get the same benefit (extra daylight hours) by just getting up earlier - no need to make everyone change their clocks. But then you have to convince your employer to have Summer and Winter hours. Interestingly enough, my dentist already does that, on top of DST! So he has lots of time to spend in the garden. And while I disagree, at least that (extra daylight hours) is an honest reason for DST.
However, the recent expansions, starting earlier and ending later, in order to save more energy, are so much folderol. Frankly, DST has been an energy losing program since the advent of air-conditioning, since that's what drives the energy loss. I did notice, however, that saving energy was not one of your concerns, lol.
V/R
Clyde
"...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - Aristotle, Politics, c350BC
CGatton... I could not
April 6, 2008 - 15:16 ET by bigtimerCGatton... I could not agree more...when are people going to realize congress usually just messes up more for us in our daily lives, costs us more....and usually do not have a clue to what they are doing...the majority of them that is...which is all it takes.
Lobbyists special interest money is their bread and butter....unfortunately at times.
The less they are in session the better.
We will never be that lucky...self-important little critters.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Thanks Noel, This web
April 6, 2008 - 12:20 ET by contraryThanks Noel,
This web site is essential to expose blatant propaganda like this. I am indebted to you. It reinforces the notion the media giants can not be trusted to fulfill their responsibility, and a shining example why I personally do not watch the news, read the paper, or pay attention to talk shows.
"Republicans always get a huge pass on the racist issue. Huck is just another example. Provided they don't start up with the N word, they seem able to pander directly to the racist vote."
-- Chuck Davis, intellectual heavyweight, bigot
Caught Warm-Handed
April 6, 2008 - 12:35 ET by BayshoremanGreat catch Noel. Any chance you and the NB staff can get the brass at BBC to explain why they changed their article and especially why this edit was "at least 40 hours after the last "official" update."?
Story Morphing - Get Used To It.
April 6, 2008 - 12:57 ET by BacchusWho suspects this to be anthropogenic text change? Well, it was a natural phenomenon due to warmer web servers. Yes, that's it, the debate is over.
Significantly editing published text, without attribution, is the lowest form of journalism, in my opinion, also known as news you can't rely on.
Wow, just like 1984.
April 6, 2008 - 13:02 ET by gordonWow, just like 1984. Right down the memory hole.
"He who controls the past, controls the future"
and it looks like the BBC has taken Orwell to heart.
Well, it Looks Like...
April 6, 2008 - 13:16 ET by on-the-rocksthe Ministry of Truth didn't get to this article until after it was posted.
Someone must have been asleep. Heads will roll. Next time they will have to be more careful. Saint Al is not happy.
We can't allow that element of doubt to reach the public. Big Brother says the message must be consistent!
[Note to gordon, I wrote this before I read your comment.]
What did you expect?
April 6, 2008 - 14:22 ET by Rackie"Da Beeb" is the offical mouthpiece of a country whose national past time is getting "pissed". They are operating on half a brain.
Still can't change the facts
April 6, 2008 - 15:08 ET by 10ksnookerThe Earth has been cooling since the last big el Nino in 1998. The only way you can change that is if the data changes. Of course, that's what Stalin used to do when science didn't match what he wanted.
Not only that, but CO2 is still rising, so the notion that CO2 causes warming isn't born out by these inconvenient observations. That's called empirical evidence, not unproven hypothesis which is what the computer prediction climate change models are. Busted as mythbusters would say, really truly busted.
Another fact, all five of the world's temperature offices and the ARGO buoy system confirm what the BBC originally reported, the Earth is cooling for about the last decade. Hang on to your coats.
Liberals lie, liberalism is a lie. This just proves it. Liberals can't even tell the truth when the data is right before their noses.
BTW, there is an add on for you Firsfox users, it's called scrapbook -- It allows you to archive a page or pages on your computer. Available wherever firefox is sold :-).
The way the news changes these days, scrapbook comes in handy when trying to sort through the versions of truth in a story, before the final one is found by the drive bys that fits their desired template. Sad but true.