October 12, 2017

Ombudsman: CBC won’t air dissenting views on climate change

Sheila Gunn ReidRebel Host | The Gunn Show

Did you know that it is CBC editorial policy to not provide both sides of the argument when discussing issues about climate change?

I have an email sent to me by a viewer to prove it.

This viewer was watching The National one night. He was struck by the lack of balance they provided in a story about Lennox Island, PEI. The island is shrinking and CBC blamed it on climate change and the rising ocean.

Rob thought there was more to it, so he wrote a letter to the Ombudsman, Esther Enkin, telling her so.

I'll read you Enkin’s reply. It was astounding. 

I've emailed Esther the Ombudsman asking her what the company wide mandate at the CBC is with regard to global warming, and why she thinks the opinions of many taxpayers just aren't relevant.

If she replies, I’ll let you know.

Science should have no ideology and should stand up to scrutiny and debate. That's how it works.

Instead CBC are the flat-earthers of our time, shutting out skeptics and protecting the government political agenda instead.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2017-10-17 16:09:15 -0400
Years ago I did an estimation of the erosion of PEI by wave action and water currents. Using a linear rate of erosion, based upon the rate of erosion of the day, I calculated that within 32,000 years PEI would be completely gone. In reality, the rate would increase the more the island eroded away, so figure less than 22,000 years. But of course, its “Climate Change”.

I wonder when climate experts, such as Al Gore, will explain continental drift as a result of climate change? I mean, just look at how accurate he has been regarding the Arctic ice cap vanishing a decade ago. Oh. He was dead wrong, just as with everything else.
commented 2017-10-15 23:55:41 -0400
Check out my blog. atokenconservative.com/wp Or, here’s the highlight: I see this as a good thing. It’s the kindling that will eventually become the bonfire that will be the CBC. Why didn’t Harper gut this fish when he had the chance, everyone asks? For a number of reasons. First, he’s not Trudeau. Which means he wasn’t in the habit of just assuming he had a mandate for massive change when he didn’t. He never campaigned the first time on gutting the CBC, and the opposition never really made an issue of it in any subsequent campaigns. When you’re fighting for re-election, don’t bring shit up! The best campaigns from the POV of the governing party are the quietest ones. It’s noisy campaigns that lead to change, always. As nobody from the LPC was banging the CBC drum very much thru any of the subsequent elections there was no reason for Harper to talk about it, so, no mandate. He knew it would be a hill that the Conservatives would die on; so he ignored it, to our anguish. But this changes things. Whenever whatever conservative party finally throws Trudeau in the garbage it’s things like this that can be pointed to as justification for more meaningful change. This issue is the rope that can be used to tie the bow on the hubris fuelled propoganda machine that is our national state broadcaster.
commented 2017-10-14 22:07:53 -0400
This is no surprise at all, but it certainly gets my hackles up. Climate change is a heavily politicized issue with true believers and alarmists falling on the left and far left side of the spectrum and skeptics mostly to the right. It’s no secret where the CBC’s politics lie. And the so-called “Ombudsman” is far from neutral on political issues. It is a reliable defender of leftist orthodoxy.
commented 2017-10-14 14:46:38 -0400
Communist Broadcast Corp. The communications arm of the Lieberals!
commented 2017-10-13 23:34:19 -0400
The CBC is nothing more than a parrot repeating what they hear from the Liberals.
Glenn, you made more sense in those few lines of your post than Climate Barbie in all her comments & interviews. When it comes to the truth the gov’t would do better just by speaking to “the folks” who tell it the way it is & not political BS.
commented 2017-10-13 14:15:57 -0400
Lloyd Nolan; That wouldn’t be the first time they plagiarized other people’s narative.
commented 2017-10-13 10:56:53 -0400
There is only one side of the debate. The side that can make skill full predictions. The CBC just happens to be on the wrong side of history on this one. According to the scientific method, when your prediction is wrong. Your hypothesis is wrong. Every single Co2 based model has over estimated warming by two or three times. The “97% Consensus” is based upon models that failed 100% of the time…

https://informativestats.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/hayden_ipcc_arrow.jpg Source. http://joannenova.com.au/2013/06/even-with-the-best-models-warmest-decades-most-co2-models-are-proven-failures/ Also, not a single peer reviewed paper has ruled out the null hypothesis. https://informthepundits.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/the-ipcc-and-the-null-hypothesis/

The IPCC is unable to list all climate forcing’s, nor can they quantify them. The “theory” rests upon unproven assumptions. No wonder the models all failed. Almost every single pro CAGW paper mentions using one of these failed models to produce their findings. Just a couple of the hundred plus recent Peer Reviewed Papers discussing the utter failure of cLIEmate Model Predictions.


commented 2017-10-13 09:25:10 -0400
GLENN , like TERRY I’m concerned about the Muslims banning the book Ann of green gables , and takin Over the house and converting into a mosque of green gables
commented 2017-10-13 09:17:20 -0400
Good post GLENN
commented 2017-10-13 05:09:28 -0400
This trend of obfuscation may have “interesting” consequences in the coming years as fall temperatures on Vancouver Island are already tending to yet another nasty winter… Since this is the home of the eco-nuts, if that turns out to be so some months from now, there’s going to be some comic class tap-dancing going on.. Vis-a-vis the forecasts at the St.Petersburg climate observatory, that the very obvious decline in recent sun spot activity means a global cooling period coming based on past – and demonstrated – history… Any radio amateur in Canada can bore you with details as to what that means for “propagation” in the coming years…
commented 2017-10-13 00:38:22 -0400
Should have said spouses instead of wives. How unfeminist of me. My sincere apologies.
commented 2017-10-13 00:36:33 -0400
The only consensus that we know of for sure when it comes to climate change is that 97% of scientists who don’t go along with the correct narrative would lose their funding, livelihood, any other future job prospects, their reputations, their homes, wives and probably their kids and pet dog.
commented 2017-10-12 21:13:52 -0400
Glenn Craig; “fits with jigsaw puzzle precision with Fez…” So PEI belongs to Islam as well as Spain.
commented 2017-10-12 20:56:02 -0400
GEOFF MEEK commented, “Science is that which is practiced, by using the Scientific Method – a hypothesis followed by a successful experiment.” Indeed, science involves observable, repeatable experiments in the present to try to discover truth about our world. For example, if somebody claimed that water boiled at 110 C , that could be refuted by experiment.
Flawed computer models attempting to predict what our global climate temperature will be in the future is pretty close to what one would get from going to a fortune teller.
commented 2017-10-12 20:49:19 -0400
I live on PEI. Prince Edward Island is a river delta island. Cape Breton is actuall rock that serves as a breakwater to the Atlantic Ocean. Apparently it fits with jigsaw puzzle precision with Fez in Morrocco and is what this side of “Atlantis” ended up with when Pangea split up.

PEI imports gravel from the same quarried mountain that was the fill for the Canso Causway (Mount Tom) by the bargeload and by the ten ton 18 wheeler load each and every day that the ferry runs. We need to ….there is no rock in PEI….our highways are constantly destroyed by the fact that they have no solid foundation. Prince Edward Island is an aggregate of sandstone formed by the trapped silt of the Saint Lawrence River.

A couple of weeks ago I helped my brother in Nova Scotia cut down a granite boulder in his yard that had become an obstruction to where he wanted to position a storage shed. That involved diamond bladed saws and quarrying chisels to progress a matter of inches.

Some years back my brother was helping me install a galvanized basement window well beside my Selkirk settler salt box farm house in PEI. We encountered a “rock” the same size while digging the hole. He though we might have to dig a pit beside it and roll it in…I said “nah, it’s not a Nova Scotia rock”…it was the sedimentary sandstone that composes PEI….I got the splitting maul that I use for spliting firewood and with six strokes I had it smashed into pieces that were easily removed by hand….my brother still chuckles when he recounts that.

Sable Island (which is not really SAY BULL Island but the French sab-leu for “sand” is the archetype for what is happening to Lennox Island. Sand bars have a tendency over time to migrate towards the continental shelf. They erode on the western side and reaggregate on the eastern side. Sable Island was thought to be charted incorrectly in it’s original mapping…but it has in fact moved eastward by this process.

Lennox Island is erroding…it’s silt is reaggregating and cloging the mouths of the estuaries on my side of the island….global warming ain’t got nuthin to do with it and the CBC Ombudsman is an elephant calibur asshole.
commented 2017-10-12 20:39:02 -0400
A consensus on Climate change, is NOT Science. A consensus on anything, is NOT Science.
A consensus is a Political opinion.

Science is that which is practiced, by using the Scientific Method – a hypothesis followed by a successful experiment.
commented 2017-10-12 20:14:11 -0400
Of course the CBC supports AGW, because the governments use it to extort money through carbon taxes. The CBC expects to be a beneficiary of that extorted money. Current subsidy $1.6B, post carbon taxes subsididy $2.6B.
commented 2017-10-12 20:00:37 -0400
Sheila, considering what the CBC Ombudsman said in respnse to Rob’s Letter, I think you already have your answer as to what the company wide mandate at the CBC is with regard to global warming. Kudos to Rob for taking this initiative!
You are correct that “science should have no ideology and should stand up to scrutiny”. Hiwever, as SK MP Brad Trost, who has a background in geophysics, indicated, this is not a science issue, but, rather, a political issue. For years the scientific view was that life comes from non-life, abiogenesis, but Pasteur disproved that with some elegant experiments. Had the CBC been in place, we might still be believing that! Instead, with dissent and scepticism being allowed we have the law of biogenesis, life comes from life.
commented 2017-10-12 19:57:59 -0400
The CBC has been doing this on every story for ever.
commented 2017-10-12 19:48:00 -0400
Keep on them SHEILA , more and more people are using the REBEL for their news source
Looking forward to your report this weekend
commented 2017-10-12 19:25:16 -0400
Sheila, great report. I will be e-mailing the CBC Ombudsman & suggest Rebels do the same. Let’s flood her inbox with some reality & links to sites which gives Canadians plenty of reasons to be climate skeptics. Climate Barbie, her boss and globalists are not my source for information!
commented 2017-10-12 19:23:47 -0400
“it is CBC editorial policy to not provide both sides of the argument when discussing issues about climate change”

If you can prove this CBC has violated its own operational policy and its commissioning agreement.
commented 2017-10-12 19:22:14 -0400
No where will the corrupt left wing media allow the truth about the global warming scam be exposed. It’s like the communists and the iron curtain. It’s purpose was to keep truth from their populations.
commented 2017-10-12 19:05:04 -0400
More REAL JOURNALISM according to the lefties. LMAO!