Most Daily Sceptic readers will have heard of BBC Verify. This is a group of BBC journalists who check stories to ensure they are factually correct because, as we all know, the BBC is ‘impartial’. From its start, BBC Verify had a slight whiff of something unpleasant when it was reported that a key employee, Marianna Spring, had once lied on her CV to get a job. However, that minor indiscretion doesn’t seem to the BBC to disqualify her as a ‘fact-checker’. I wonder whether BBC Verify was involved when a BBC foreign affairs correspondent almost gleefully reported that the evil Israelis had bombed a hospital in Gaza killing around 500 innocents? Of course, the story turned out to be complete nonsense – propaganda pushed out by Hamas on the gullible, Israel-hating BBC. In fact, a Hamas rocket aimed at Israel had misfired and a piece had landed in a hospital car park, causing unverified injury and loss of life. But we’ll never know the truth – especially if the rather dubious BBC Verify is involved.
But readers may not be aware of our national broadcaster’s involvement in what is called the Trusted News Initiative. Here’s the Trusted News Initiative’s explanation of what it does:
The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) is a partnership, founded by the BBC, that includes organisations from around the globe including; AP, AFP, BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Financial Times, Information Futures Lab, Google/YouTube, the Hindu, The Nation Media Group, Meta, Microsoft, Thomson Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, the Washington Post, Kompas – Indonesia, Dawn – Pakistan, Indian Express, NDTV – India, ABC – Australia, SBS – Australia, NHK – Japan.
TNI members work together to build audience trust and to find solutions to tackle challenges of disinformation. By including media organisations and social media platforms, it is the only forum in the world of its kind designed to take on disinformation in real time.
As you’ll see, the Trusted News Initiative includes much of the mainstream media around the world, the largest media agencies as well as the main tech megacorporations. Let’s imagine just some of the supposed ‘disinformation’ the Trusted News Initiative has bravely tackled to bring us the mainstream media’s and tech mega-giants’ supposedly unbiased reporting:
- The origins of COVID-19 – From early on, numerous online voices have suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic which killed over seven million innocents originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They also argued that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, along with other labs around the world, was carrying out ‘gain of function’ research paid for by U.S. taxpayers as certain well-known figures in the U.S. healthcare establishment used foreign labs in order to circumvent a ban on ‘gain of function’ research in the U.S. This disinformation narrative was repeatedly attacked by members of the Trusted News Initiative who insisted that the COVID-19 virus evolved naturally and was mysteriously carried by a bat which travelled or was carried over 1,000 miles from its cave, without infecting anyone along the way, before it decided to land just around the corner from the Wuhan Institute of Virology which coincidentally was carrying out research, paid for by U.S. taxpayers, into bat viruses.
- The safe and effective vaccines – Most of the members of the Trusted News Initiative have continually pushed the story that the inadequately-tested mRNA vaccines were ‘safe’ and ‘effective’ both in preventing COVID-19 infections and in preventing hospitalisation from serious adverse effects. We now know, in spite of the members of the Trusted News Initiative trying to pretend otherwise, that the safety data on the mRNA vaccines were highly contestable and that the vaccines were never even tested to see if they prevented asymptomatic COVID-19 infections. Moreover, increasing studies from around the world – Israel, Thailand, Germany – have suggested that for many age groups having the vaccines may have been more dangerous to people’s health than a COVID-19 infection as repeated mRNA vaccination may wreck the body’s natural immune system and the mRNA vaccines have been linked to a rise in heart problems – myocarditis and pericarditis – and possibly an acceleration in the growth of many life-threatening cancers.
- Trashing Ivermectin – At the start of the pandemic many doctors were recommending an antiviral, ivermectin, produced by Merck. Ivermectin is out of patent and only costs around $1 to $2 for a course of treatment. However, Merck quickly developed an antiviral, Molnupiravir. Molnupiravir is supposedly a new drug and is therefore protected by patent and costs about $700 for a course of treatment. In June 2021 Merck signed a deal with the U.S. Government for $1.2bn for 1,700,000 courses of Molnupiravir. So Merck had quite a lot of cash riding on Molnupiravir’s success. Members of the Trusted News Initiative mostly ridiculed anyone proposing ivermectin by repeatedly referring to it as a ‘horse dewormer’. Yet prior to the pandemic over 3.7 billion doses of Ivermectin have been safely administered to humans over the last 40 or so years, something members of the Trusted News Initiative seem to have forgotten to mention while trying to discredit the cheap, out-of-patent ivermectin.
Perhaps the worst and most destructive misinformation spewed out at us by members of the Trusted News Initiative is its members relentless propagandising anthropogenic global warming (or climate change or global boiling or climate crisis or whatever it’s called this month) nonsense. There are several reliable individuals who have repeatedly exposed the utter tripe fuelling the global boiling cult. These include Tony Heller’s RealClimateScience, Paul Homewood’s Not a Lot of People Know That, Anthony Watts’s Watts Up With That?, the Daily Sceptic‘s Chris Morrison and my own modest contribution – the book There is No Climate Crisis.
So instead of me repeating here all the reasons why global boiling is Brobdingnagian-sized baloney, I’ll quote the Trusted News Initiative’s warning on why people like Tony Heller, Paul Homewood, Anthony Watts, Chris Morrison and myself are a danger to the future of the human race:
Whether it’s politicians, companies, or states, many actors have an interest in hindering the fight against climate change. And their power cannot be underestimated: some are going to great lengths to muddy the waters of public debate.
Maybe it’s a fossil fuel company pretending to be much greener than it actually is. Or perhaps it’s a petrostate, whose state media promote climate scepticism to their viewers.
Climate mis- and dis-information can take many shapes and forms – but what brings them all together is a fundamental distortion of facts.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, those of us who cover climate change for the BBC often find ourselves being accused of failing to abide by the very same principles our employer stands for: impartiality, neutrality, objectivity.
Why not hear from the other side, they ask, from those who don’t believe in climate change?
The answer is simple. Because the overwhelming majority of scientists (99.9% of them, according to this paper) are in agreement about the key facts of climate change: that it is real, that it is already happening, and that it is being driven by mankind.
What the world does to tackle climate change is a political choice, a debate for our audiences to engage in. Our role is to provide them with the facts they need to have informed conversations about the biggest challenge of our time.
This can involve reporting on or debunking falsehoods that emerge on any given day, but also producing content that audiences may find useful at any given time – like practical guides to convince climate deniers, or fact-checks of common climate myths.
So do you trust the Trusted News Initiative?
David Craig is the author of There is No Climate Crisis, available as an e-book or paperback from Amazon.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
My son was telling me that a lot of terraced houses near him in London would need planning permission for a heat pump as they are too close together to be allowed a heat pump under current permitted developments, this article explains the situation;
https://www.homebuilding.co.uk/news/why-terraced-homeowners-may-need-planning-permission-for-heat-pumps
In addition where heat pumps have been installed in terraced housing it has lead to environmental noise complaints.
There may be some electrical people on here who know more about this than I do? but I gather that installing a heat pump requires the electrician to get permission from the electric supplier? As heat pumps use a compressor motor, even though they may not have a very high consumption once in use, they have a high start up current draw such that some planned heat pump installations have been refused because the local electric supply infrastructure cannot handle the demands of heat pumps.
I can only say Steve, that the above tale reminds me of Spike Milligan’s superb book: ‘Adolf Hitler. My Part in His Downfall.’ In the prelude to his Army call up, he speaks to an uncle who fought in WW1, asking him, “What was it like?” His uncle replies, “Like? Like son? It was like one big fuck up.”
It might depend on the rating of the proposed pump, but if it’s around 10Kw (some seem to be), it could fall foul of the same issue with home charge EV battery chargers. That is, because they are more or less constant loads at around 43A, the BS 7671 won’t allow them to be counted as a “diverse load” (like other domestic heaters, cookers etc). The matter under discussion could be as to whether air source pumps behave like storage heaters, or more like EV chargers. I’d have thought that if air pumps tend to run continuously over several hours, they would refuse to treat them as diverse loads. I’m guessing, so we’ll see.
So they have to tot them all together, and for many groups of houses, it would exceed the rating of the distribution cable, local transformer etc. That would certainly be the case in my street – I know the cable’s rating, as it was only installed a couple of years ago to replace some older kit that had failed.
Thus its possible that the District Network Operator (DNO) would say no, unless they are prepared to upgrade their system (digging up the roads, installing larger cables, then higher capacity transformers etc). Someone has to pay for that, of course.
Now imagine the headache for the DNO if each of those terraces also want to run a 7.5kw ev charge point as well.
The focus has been on electricity generation and none of the idiots in charge have considered the huge grid upgrade and upgrade to power distribution in homes and buildings.
Worst case scenario is everyone’s heat pump starting at the same time after one of the power cuts that a recent electricity supplier leaflet told me to expect because of adverse weather events.
Now imagine they all have an EV charging point on the go as well.
Won’t they be powering the grid via their smart meters?
Managing it via “smart” meter equipment, maybe. Read the official bumf here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/regulations-electric-vehicle-smart-charge-points They’re not advertising it, but it could be that customers might notice that they can’t actually charge their car when they want to, because someone else wants to (perhaps at a higher price) so as limit the total load. Regulations like that could be exploited to minimise installing upgraded distribution kit, e.g.
She’s made the fundamental error of not being friends with MTF.
And for those stupid enough to fall for the heat pump con what next? Oh, your exterior walls must be double insulated with all-weather treated kingspan to a depth of three foot and foam backed exterior doors. And while we are at it triple glazed windows.
On and on it will go until we are broke and broken.
Windows? Certainly not! Viewscreens showing a rural idyll (no cows, obvs) with government approved information channels.
Some older houses insulation in the walls causes more damp. Walls need to breathe.
I know. My first house was solid walls. British Gas called to offer advice on extra insulation. The young girl’s face was a picture when I explained that cavity wall insulation was not an option.
I had the same when I was called up by my energy company to say that “my smart meter was ready for me”. ——-They were rather bemused when I told them that it isn’t my smart meter, it is theirs.
Your heat pump will keep you warm ————Except as usual the small print says “”It will keep you warm if you wear 5 pullovers and stuff every crevice in your house with foam”
“So you must also spend a fortune on sealing your house from all possible draughts. “
That is only useful for half the year. The other half a house needs to get rid of heat.
I am passing by two old houses every day which have been modernised and thoroughly insulated during the last 2 years.
They have mold all over their facades now. Inside, it’s even worse.
The advise of a friend who is in the profession is: a) don’t (over)insulate your old house b) do nothing if you can on the heating system side, just wait. Because if one must eventually go for a heat pump in a few years, the pumps then will be able to achieve 70-80 degrees and a moderately sensible and affordable heating can be achieved by just creating more heating surfaces in the house in conjunction with them.
Of course, nothing beats the current setup with efficient gas boilers.
The laws of thermodynamics says that there is a hard limit to how much heat you can efficiently extract with an air source heat pump. No technological improvement will ever change that.
“… the pumps then will be able to achieve 70-80 degrees…”
So the laws of physics will be changed?
Is there no-one in government who is literate in science, engineering or even plumbing?
Even if they were, they don’t care
No, the number of MPs from STEM backgrounds is tiny. Most are humanities graduates. And it shows!
The state has no business dictating how people heat their homes
The state has no business, full stop!!
Or if they smoke a fag!
If we had proper health insurance, a smoker could simply pay higher premiums. That way, the state keeps out of it!
Everything within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State. Sig B Mussolini.
That is absolutely the way we are going and have already gone. It has been done gradually so most people have not noticed. We need a “great reset” – just not the one the WEF want…
Rather than muckraking about renewables, electric cars and heat pumps, how about some constructive stories about potential new sites for fracking, coal mines and North Sea oil and natural gas?
SHHHHHHH —-Or you will be dragged off to the climate change gulag, and you will never be heard off again. ——-If you think this is me making a little joke then think again. Reducing emissions of CO2 is enshrined in law. Breaking the can and will lead to imprisonment and fines. ——Green=Tyranny on a massive scale.
You would think that the Energy Security and Net Zero Minister would know something about heat pumps. After all him and his government want to coerce everyone into getting one and be rid of the 21 million gas boilers in this country. But alas he KNOWS NOTHING about them at all. The now former Minister Grant Schapps was asked on GB News “Are heat pumps any good” ——-He replied “I don’t know, but I am having one fitted in my house so I will soon find out”——-How totally absurd. He wants to force a heat pump on everyone without knowing or even caring if they are any good. It turns out they are heap of .s..t, but all that matters to these imbeciles is implementing pretend to save the planet mandates from the One World Government people at the UN.
Hydrogen? Why does this keep coming up as planet-saviour.
The atmospheric gas… about 2%, but variable across the globe… is the ‘greenhouse gas’ which keeps the Earth warm, unlike Mars with 93% C02 and no water vapour.
The Climatrons in fact say it is the indirect effect of CO2 attenuation of outgoing long wavelength I/R, which causes an increase in heat content of this water vapour, which in turn causes more water to evaporate and atmospheric content to increase. It is this feed back, or climate sensitivity/radiative forcing, that will lead to run away global warming and boiling planet.
Now. Hydrogen burnt in air ‘only’ produces… water vapour the very gas which mostly directly regulates the heat budget.
So to replace a gas that doesn’t actually directly regulate the heat budget, they favour one that does.
The madness of the climate change hoax.
£7,500 in grant money. 25 years from now, ten times that much in compensation money for people who fitted crap machinery to their homes.
The illustration at the top of this article apparently shows an air source heat pump, but it could just as well show an air conditioning unit. As I understand it an air source heat pump makes the inside of a house hotter. Meanwhile an air conditioning unit makes the inside of a house cooler. Thus air conditioning units are causing exterior warming, if the Second Law of Thermodynamics is still true. So vast numbers of such units as one finds in large glass faced office blocks, and more widely in hot countries on every house, must be contributing to urban warming. So to help achieve net zero they should be banned. This would have course reduce the electricity grid load, allowing people to use electricity to charge their explosive cars. Would someone please put me out of my misery and explain why I am wrong?