Met Office forecasts are seemingly becoming ever more sensationalist. Observed weather conditions too often show that predicted extreme weather either fails to materialise, or turns out to be nowhere near as extreme as forecast.
Yesterday was another case in point. The media was saturated with worry-inducing forecasts of high levels of atmospheric pollution at concentrations never before seen in this country. The Met Office were at pains to spread the warnings around. And they are at it again today.
Yet in the event, the ‘high or very high levels of air pollution across southern England and the Midlands’ came nowhere close to the predictions. It turns out the pollution levels three weeks ago were worse than yesterday’s ‘7’, but that hardly got any coverage and hardly anyone except those with severe respiratory conditions actually noticed any difference.
There’s method in the Met Office’s hype madness, from all these ‘weather warnings’ and triangles on TV maps that now appear in seemingly every other forecast for conditions that are almost always perfectly normal for the time of year, to the Met Office’s new overblown pollution predictions. They know that people will only remember the overblown warnings and the media’s fealty in reporting them with due prominence. It is all intended to embed a sense that our weather is becoming ever more extreme, to fit their narrative on human induced climate change – and justify ever more millions for ‘research’ and ever more lavish computer systems.
The Met Office’s typically quiet concession after the fact that things actually didn’t get as bad (£) – or even close to as bad – as they believed, for some reason or other, never gets the same prominence of course. They are able to say they corrected the record if challenged, but they quietly make the correction in the same manner in which a newspaper will bury an inconvenient correction on page 31, in a single column inch of tightly spaced lettering near the foot of the page.
Then everything is fine again. Until the next time. Meanwhile the bonuses continue to flow from our pockets into theirs as reward for alarmism rather than accuracy, and the propaganda continues to gush out of their site in Exeter, and the sites of their alarmist University allies in Reading, Leeds and East Anglia. Also, to ensure these fearmongers are never challenged on their hype, the BBC commissions ever more ludicrous reports to criticise giving airtime to people who seek to counter the ‘consensus’ and point out flaws in the science, thereby justifying the naked bias in editorial decison making and coverage of the subject.
It seems the greatest warming that is happening is that of our hearts as we joyfully fork over ever larger sums to fund this nonsense without complaint or revolt.
Autonomous Mind 
I agree entirely about their determination to dominate the headlines with stories about atmospheric pollution.
Inevitably, they BBC are now reporting on the effects of their propaganda (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26863228). Being of a sceptical persuasion, I can’t help feeling that if you fill the news with stories about poor air quality, you’re bound to see an impact in the number of people who report breathing difficulties.
In the wider context, this year sees the introduction of even tighter limits on emissions from vehicle exhausts under the EUR 6 regulations?
Perish the thought that the BBC is being used to push these air-quality realted stories as part of a wider campaign to help justify the new regulations.
Exactly right, Steve. I bet if we got hospital admission numbers from three weeks ago and yesterday, we would find fewer people presenting themselves with breathing problems three weeks ago when the pollution was worse, than yesterday when the media was in hype mode.
As for the BBC, no doubt their mission to ‘educate’ us on behalf of the EU plays a part in their editorial line.
The rogues are increasingly finding there are fewer places to run, so it’s ever more desperate stuff.
Their basic problem is that it’s nearly impossible to warm up a dead scare. It would be rather like getting people interested in buying shares after the South Sea Bubble popped.
However, so much has been invested in it; money, jobs, credibility, that they can’t just drop it.
The Met Office is in a particularly difficult position as it’s expanded so greatly on the back of the scare and allowed itself to be turned into a propaganda outfit.
UN Agenda 21 – “Provides options for combating the deterioration of land, AIR and water, whilst conserving habitats and their diversity.” and…
UN Agenda 21 – “also encourages nations to consider the costs of environmental degradation. In addition, to reduce the risk of damage, environmental assessments should be carried out and where degradation does occur, those responsible should bear the costs.”
Straight off the bat then, someone is being lined up to be made to PAY for the polluted air which will, naturally, feed back to US to pay.
We’ve already seen Agenda 21 action in the form of ‘man made global warming’ fearmongering, they have recently shown their hand with their messing with out water schemes to preserve habitats (flooding of Somerset Levels) and now we have the ‘air’ being promoted as a problem……
All going to plan – all exactly as they say they were going to do – all totally below the MSM radar.
All too true. As for the UN, who voted for them? We it would seem pay for this nest of thieves, all unknown and foreign,,,,and totally corrupt as well. Remember the great Oil Scam where millions of dollars were made by UN members including Koffe Anan or some such. When will our politicaisn realise that in large parts of the world, corruption is the normal state.
It’s not as if this “sand from the Sahara” is even a new thing.
I first heard about it over 40 years ago.
DaveE.