Complaint to Ofcom Regarding The Great Global Warming Swindle

2. Complete Transcript and Rebuttal

Page 61



In addition, it was not pointed out this study was partly funded by the fossil fuel-industry–funded lobby group the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation (, as well as by the American Petroleum Institute (see the entry on the API on page 145), and by ExxonMobil. This conflict of interest should have been disclosed to the public, especially as recent peer reviewed scientific studies have demonstrated that research funded by corporations with a financial interest in the outcome are much more likely to reach the desired conclusions than are studies which dont receive such funding (for more details see Appendix C.1.3, page 127).

Finally, it was not disclosed that Dr Soon is linked to numerous lobby groups that are funded by the fossil fuel industry (see the entry on Dr Soon on page 138), creating an additional conflict of interest.]

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


Greenhouse Effect Conspiracy Theory


But why, if this is so, are we bombarded day after day with news items about man-made global warming? Why do so many people, in the media and elsewhere, regard it as an undisputed fact?

[Comment 66: The narrators rhetorical question only makes sense in the context of the wholly misleading account the programme offers of climate change science. Certainly there has been a marked increase in news media coverage of climate change in Britain since early 2005. Most of this coverage has come to reflect the summary findings of the IPCC, the most ambitious scientific peer review process in history, and an allied increase in the political potency of the issue. In the severely constrained world of print and broadcast news media, climate change science and policy is no longer summarised as a pro versus con story concerning climate science, but is now reported in ways that much more accurately reflect the state of both scientific and political debate (see Andreadis and Smith, 2007,

Such statements by the narrator are intended to unsettle this development in climate change representations. This would be acceptable and part of normal public and academic debate if the conventions of public and academic debate were observed in the programmes representations of the science.]

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


To understand the power of global warming theory, we must tell the story of how it came about.

[Comment 67: The following narrative is actually a gross distortion of the history of global warming and climatology. A more accurate and scholarly introduction can be found at The Discovery of Global Warming by Spencer Weart, Director of the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics (]

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

[Bookmarks on this page: Click any of the following links 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:
Section 2.8 / Comment 66: Misleading claim about being bombarded by the media / Comment 67: Fabricated history of climatology and global warming theory]


Page 61 of 176

Final Revision

Last updated: 11 Jun 2007