Oh dear. I upset Richard Black…. again (UPDATE)

I was in a fun mood today on Twitter. So it comes as some surprise that I’ve upset the BBC’s Cleric of Climate Change Richard Black.

He was at BMA house his morning (at great expense to the tax payer) for the climate, health and security conference. He even posted it’s STARK WARNINGS here.

Trouble is, I don’t think I was being impressed enough with his tweets and perhaps a level of sarcasm and silliness may have ensued.

He tweeted

Alejandro Litovsky from Earth Security Inst – commodity prices will continue rising with climate change a driver

To which I replied

@BBCRBlack I think you missed a word off “prices will continue rising with climate change TAXATION..”.

Not a snigger from him on that one. Ah, well.

Then he posted

ZSL’s Paul Pearce-Kelly on climate apathy; if someone tells you your house will burn down in 100 yrs you will still watch Eastenders tonight

To which I felt obliged to write;

@BBCRBlack How about best predictions in 10 years being totally false. Would you say that their predictions had merit?

I was of course relating to the CRU predictions of 2001 that within ten years snow would be a thing of the past and that UK children would only see it in films or “virtually”. By 2009 the UK was to start it’s downward spiral of the worst winters in living memory. Oddly, as predicted by Joe Bastardi of Accuweather (at the time) some six months early.

Then Richard is clearly watching a military presentation and I figure he’s bothering to read the actual program. Because he starts with.

Why is military interested in climate change? ‘a high carbon footpint increases operational vulnerability’ with fuel convoys prime targets


How far does an aircraft carrier travel on a gallon of diesel? About twelve inches, apparently.

Which pretty much opened up the floodgates of comments, of which, mine is the minority.

My first sin, not taking it all very seriously.

They should run them on old ship timbers. I wonder how many miles you’d get per Galleon. Β© 1977 The Two Ronnies.

Boom! Boom! I love that old joke. Then I added a bit of reality.

Hang on… aircraft carrier!? It’s not a VW Polo Bluemotion. Do you have any idea how HUGE they are?

Then I hit something of a nerve here. Because something about this next tweet REALLY UPSET Richard.

What do you suggest? Solar powered drones? Actually, I suspect that’s what WILL replace them. Drones for all….

Now why, and my previous comments, would that upset him so much? We all know, from tenders put out from the MOD, that the UK is looking to increase it’s use on drone technology. Its certainly more cost effective to send a drone over to bomb some poor brown people than it is a jet, on an aircraft carrier.

It’s not as though the UK Government hasn’t tried to introduce drones into UK Policing. The only thing that put the kibosh on that was the FAA that said ONLY PILOTS CAN FLY THEM.

So, I was a little stunned to get (4 hours later) this reply.

@RobertLeather @bbcrblack robert I have no idea what you are on about if you keep messaging me with nonsense I will block you

Say what!? I’m not sure what I said to upset him. I mean that happens TO BE TRUE. Oh… I see….

Now being a nice sort of chap, I replied to him.

Richard, MOD is pumping millions into drone research because it’s more economic (and coincidentally environmentally) friendly

So my comment relates that info. with your comments regarding the fuel used by aircraft carriers. I assumed you’d know. Sorry 😦

So far, no reply. But phew, he didn’t “block” me. Dodged a bullet there 😐 ho ho.

To be honest, I’m not sure what he expects “blocking” is going to do. I can follow his tweets (though not “follow” him) and if I was really that upset at the loss, I’d just create a new account. I mean how had is that!?

So what is it about my suggestion that drones replacing aircraft that upset Richard so much….. I wa-wa-wonder πŸ™‚

Any ideas?

Update – Got a reply

So Richard Black decided to get back to me, as a sort of apology. He let the cat out of the bag somewhat.

@RobertLeather thanks. That was brought up at the meeting but excised from my article as already too long.

Which brings up two points. His comments are with regards my “drones to replace aircraft carrier” comment and it was excised from his article “because it was too long”. Not sure how skeptical I am on that front. I think breaking the story that the MOD is thinking of cutting costs by getting ride of major elements of it’s Naval fleet and staff would be best served being dropped into a small piece regarding environmental talks. But why hasn’t it appeared elsewhere… I wonder. Β πŸ˜‰

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s