I had to check if the date was April 1st when I heard the BBC item that our Dear Leader was inviting the Iranians to combat climate change by expanding “peaceful” nuclear energy. Bet the Israelis will really love that! Naturally the paper tiger caveat from Prudence is that there will be (more) strict UN resolutions (the sort that we know don’t work) if the Mullahs do what they are doing anyway and develop nuclear weapons. Truly pathetic stuff from Brown, designed to ingratiate himself with Obama, and all without a second thought for the nation that Iran has clearly within its atomic cross-hairs. Not that the BBC like to talk about that aspect of things. Iran is just a friend we have to meet.

Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to LOVING THE MULLAHS.

  1. F Smith says:

    I wish I could remember my elementary logic, but I do recall once being able to demonstrate that from a false premise, you can prove any old nonsense. Such is the case with CO2 and the climate. How can it be that so many people apparently take it for granted that human generated CO2 has a major impact on climate? There is neither evidence for this, nor a credible mechanism. I find the occasional greenie I encounter gets quite dismayed when I explain that real greenhouses don’t get hot because of differentials in radiative transmittivity of glass. The dismay is not at their starting off a ‘scientific’ case on the wrong foot. No, the dismay is that anyone can presume to challenge the AGW Faith!


  2. ipreferred says:

    Wow, that is a fantastically ignorant comment F Smith, really, I think it’s hard to beat your scientific misunderstanding there.


  3. JohnA says:

    I suspect F Smith has forgotten more science than ipreferred ever knew


  4. Robert S. McNamara says:

    How can it be that so many people apparently take it for granted that human generated CO2 has a major impact on climate?

    Goebellian repitition. You have to hand it to them though; branding a gas that every living thing produces as a byproduct of respiration as evil is as audacious as it is insane.

    Luckily – due to a decade-long cooling trend and a recession – the wheels are starting to come off the Anthropological Global Warming bandwagon, but it remains to be seen how much irreparable damage the First Church of Environmentologists have done in the time people have been giving credence to their pseudo-scientifc hysteria.


  5. nrg says:

    Good post Robert – that is why the environ-mentalists are getting increasingly apocalyptic. I have lost count of the way that we have been told that we are all going to die in the next few years, but I think we will be variously drowned and parched, roasted and frozen.

    Got to keep those lucrative research grants coming somehow!


  6. ipreferred says:

    CO2 without a doubt is a greenhouse gas, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas .

    Greenhouses combine radiative differences and lack of convection to warm up. You can construct a modified greenhouse that radiates more than it allows in, and surprise, it doesn’t warm up.

    If you think that F Smith has forgotten more science than I know, then wow, you are pretty awesome too.


  7. Dave S says:

    I doubt if Iran has the slightest interest in the climate change debate.
    What Iran has an interest
    in, and is actively pursuing, is becoming the dominant power in the middle east.
    To do that Iran would like and feels it essential to have nuclear weapons.
    When this happens, and it will, all the Western handwringing and moaning will make not one scrap of difference.
    Sometimes I wonder if the whole climate change obsession is not a western way of refusing to face up to the fact that our history is one of the ebb and flow of empires and civilisations.


  8. Anonymous says:

    Here is some background on greenhouses:

    There is no doubt that CO2 radiates in the infra-red, and this can contribute to increased local surface heating in the absence of cloud cover. But it has a very minor role in the big picture, and certainly nothing to get alarmed about.


  9. La Cumparsita says:

    Meanwhile Prince Charles continues to lecture everyone else about “the planet” while going all the way to South America to prove his point. Actually I just returned from a trip to the Galapagos last week, and they didn’t get Lonesome George out from under his tree to meet us.
    Lovely article in The Sun today http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/royals/article2323195.ece


  10. JohnA says:

    No-one says CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.

    But many say it is insignificant compared with other greenhouse gases.

    And others say that IF the earth was getting warmer – which the FACTS say is not the case – the oceans as a natural effect would absorb more CO2.

    The point of all this is BBC bias. They trumpet the MMGW stuff, they refuse to report properly on the counter-arguments.

    And their reporters are bloody amateurs !


  11. JohnA says:

    and as it happens I have an MSc. But I would not dream of claiming to be any sort of expert, unlike all the non-experts the BBC parades before us.

    Of all topics – this is surely something that Panorama should cover – but with both sides being examined.

    Fat chance of that happening.


  12. Cheeta says:

    And also the outcome of the conference, which I should have pasted….(highly recommend reviewing the Powerpoint presentations). My only area of uncertainty is why the BBC were not reporting on this conference as it does for all of those where the outcome is negative. Oh well.



  13. F Smith says:

    Here is a very useful summary of a scientific position on global warming, by William Kininmonth. It is technical in parts, but does not require maths, only patience, to read:
    His conclusion: ‘A doubling of CO2 concentration by the end of the century from current levels will cause a modest global temperature rise not exceeding 1 degC,’


  14. F Smith says:

    And here, with additional links, is a glimpse at some of the thinking of the ‘climate crazies’ whose antics and views have so captured our media:



  15. RR says:


    I can’t imagine many B-BBC commenters watch BBC1 on a Saturday morning, but for reasons I’ll not go into I found myself last Saturday morning watching a cookery show presented by a young bloke from Yorkshire. His guest was the noted Lefty Thesp Pete Postlethwaite who’s in an acclaimed prodution of “Lear” at the moment. One coluld understand why he’s so well-regarded as an actor after he went into a hugely impressive rant about how AGW is killing the planet, all doomed, sky falling etc etc. He didn’t go in for any science, just gave it the old-style preacher number. Most impressive, however delusional.

    I think that, now the Beeb is plugging AGW on daytime TV, the warmists must be getting truly desperate. It’s not enough to have Toady and the 9 o’clock News – the new religion has to be observed on weekend telly too.


  16. martin says:

    I dismay when lefties spout the ‘I know as I read it on the internet’.

    It seems that the left can’t apply any logic to their own debate.

    The very idea that we can FREEZE the climate so it never changes is just idiotic. We can’t stop the tides and we can’t stop climate change.

    Even cutting all human produced CO2 (and that would mean killing every human being) the planet would still pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and the climate would still change.

    What caused climate change BEFORE humans appeared on the Earth? Dinosaur farts?


  17. AndrewSouthLondon says:

    Mullah Lite.


    MMGW – believe it? Well you must have a pair of testicles between the ears – because its complete bollox.

    Unfortunately so many people want to believe it, and so many other earn a good living out of it, and that great excuse to raise taxes, its bollox that clings on for grim death.

    100 months to save the planet? The planets doing just fine. Now just womble along reusing plastic bags and leave the real world to the rest of us.


  18. Feline says:

    About the climate change. In 1975 Newsweek was scaremongering us with “global cooling”.

    Click to access newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

    What’s changed?


  19. Cheeta says:

    Fascinating attachment Feline – reminded me of my Look & Learns! Many thanks.


  20. David Preiser (USA) says:

    But back to BBC bias.

    I thought Naughtie expressed an appropriate amount of skepticism over whether or not the Iranians would agree to the plan. He also allowed Hutton to say that Iran was a destabilizing force and a nuclear Iran would be a bad idea without bringing up Israel’s nasty nukes or how much trouble Israel causes in the region. Small miracles, anyway.

    Hutton sounded really nervous and weak, though, almost as if he was afraid of what he was saying. Weird.


  21. Idiotboy says:

    I have never been able to work out why the BBC pushes the anthropogenic global warming agenda with such enthusiasm. The whole idea collapses the moment any real scientific rigour is applied to it, but still the Beeboids shovel it with merry abandon.

    It is nearly as unfathomable to me as their unerring support for a certain middle eastern religio-political ideology which, if it ever elevated itself to a position of power, would put a fair proportion of those working in the organisation to the sword.

    There must be an answer somewhere, but it eludes me.

    Unless of course they are all just clueless arseholes.


  22. Preposteroso says:

    Preposteroso is a founder member of the organisation known as WOW (War on Warmers). On behalf of this organisation, Preposteroso has now completed a study that conclusively proves what many have suspected for quite some time: the climate of the planet is controlled by the sun. The study involved sitting outdoors for an hour on a warm day and looking upwards.

    Meanwhile, like the work of the recent Conference on Climate Change in New York, the work of WOW goes mostly unreported by the BBC that feeds all too well from the warming trough to ever pull out its snout.


  23. Preposteroso says:


    Clueless arseholes it is!


  24. martin says:

    “…Unless of course they are all just clueless arseholes…”

    That is a perfect description of Roger harrabin.


  25. hippiepooter says:

    Hi, obviously you dont like the position of PM Brown (neither do I – to say the least) but where was the specific bias in the piece?


  26. hippiepooter says:

    “I thought Naughtie expressed an appropriate amount of skepticism [….]”

    David Preiser (USA) | 17.03.09 – 6:05 pm |

    Wow! Naughtie in ‘doing his job’ shock!


  27. Jon says:

    ipreferred | 17.03.09 – 12:33 pm |

    I would’t quote Wikipedia on anything to do with “AGW” or the BBC to back up your argument.


  28. Tony says:

    Idiotboy have you seen the article ” Inside the Enemy’s Mind” on FrontPage Magazine ? It tries to explain the lefts love with the rop & other such insanity.


  29. David Preiser (USA) says:

    hippiepooter | 17.03.09 – 7:04 pm |

    I did say “small miracles”. Usually he doesn’t miss an opportunity to scowl at Israel.


  30. AndrewSouthLondon says:

    Jon: thats an eye-opening piece, wow, great reference! Ecofacists really manipulate the “independent” information sphere” as much as the official “Bigoted Broadcasting Corporation”.Just how the hell do you stop Wiki sources being abused like this? Its like they poison the very air you breathe.If evil was a colour it would be green.


  31. kev H says:

    I used to come on to this site to see how the war for the abolition of the BBC was progressing. Although there are many people who are very aware of the impact that the BBC has on the conscience of the nation – there will be no uprising of the masses to rid us freedom lovers of its grasp with peaceful methods.

    If anyone had a basic grasp of the techniques used in mind control on an NLP level alone – they would decide to deregulate the media.

    Trillions of pounds have been spent over decades to influence people to purchase goods.

    Why do reasonable people believe that the BBC is a benign entity that serves our interests?

    Atlas Shrugged is right.

    The BBC can never be reformed.

    cutting it back and installing a conservative alternative is pointless.


  32. Jon says:

    Talking of “climate change” – here is another piece of propoganda by jetsetting Chris Morris.

    “Maldives rises to climate challenge ”

    But isn’t it strange that he doesn’t mention the most important studies carried out by Dr Nils-Axel Mörner leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project.


  33. Idiotboy says:

    Tony, thanks for the link. A good, but chilling read.


  34. Bobzilla says:


    ‘The very idea that we can FREEZE the climate so it never changes is just idiotic. We can’t stop the tides and we can’t stop climate change.’

    That is about BEST comment I’ve ever heard on GW.

    Straight forward common sense.


  35. ipreferred says:

    Just out of interest, what’s your MSc in JohnA?

    Everyone else, if you like conspiracy theories, then which is more fun, pro-MMGW or anti? Both seem to have their wacky misconceptions.


  36. Jon says:

    ipreferred | 17.03.09 – 11:58 pm |

    So give me an example of “whacky” pro-science.

    Here is some “whacky” things caused by “global warming”



  37. Asif says:

    Friggin’ Climate change! Every morning for the last decade or so I rise from my bed and look out my bedroom window. Am I ever greeted by the sights and sounds of tropical havens, as seen on numerous travel shows? Or that bloke David whatsisface crawling through the undergrowth hoping to film some exotic tropical creature? Am i heck. All I see is the same dark, dank, cold friggin’ climate i’ve been brought up with. Maybe I’m thinking of that bandwaggon those acronym named organisations used to spout of about, oh yeah global warming, and before that it was global cooling, and before that I don’t think anybody really gave a toss, if they wanted to know the weather conditions where they where they simply looked outside.
    As for inviting Iran, Why not, surely having them contemplate climate change is preferable to their contemplating inflicting genocide on the Israelies. By the way my frind Chicken-Licken just ‘phoned, and she reckons the only thing to do in respect of climate change and our children is that we teach the little buggers to swim………


  38. JohnA says:


    That list is glorious !

    Does global warming also cause piles ? I think I missed that among the hundreds of items there.

    Also – plagues of locusts and frogs ?


  39. ady says:

    …inviting the Iranians to combat climate change by expanding peaceful nuclear energy…

    lol, they must have had a bit of a giggle when they were writing about that one.

    Anyone got any idea how Israels nucular program is doing?
    The Israeli hating BBC continually avoids ever talking about that particular subject in any detail.


  40. David Preiser (USA) says:

    ady | 18.03.09 – 8:52 am |

    The Israeli hating BBC continually avoids ever talking about that particular subject in any detail.

    Israel will not eat your babies. Calm down.


  41. Preposteroso says:

    Has this been mentioned on this site yet:

    Click to access 0707.1161v4.pdf

    As for Iran (Persia really), climate change is not much dwelt on in the Quran, I believe, so one presumes the mullahs wouldn’t touch the subject with a bargepole. Does that in some way put them on the same side as us? Buggar!


  42. Anonymous says:

    The Israeli hating BBC continually avoids ever talking about that particular subject in any detail.
    ady | 18.03.09 – 8:52 am

    I can hope you are being sarcastic or that you watch or listen to so little BBC that much of the discussion on this blog goes right over your head.

    Vanunu and the Bomb Be careful with this information it descends to the BBC basement for inference, bias and credibility.

    Given that Israel refuses to either confirm or deny it has nukes and has never threatened anyone with the use of them information is speculative but a quick google finds 219 references to Israel’s nukes on the BBC site. One of them may help you.


  43. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The BBC is hardly silent on Israel’s potentially “vast” nuclear arsenal:

    Israel ‘has 150 nuclear weapons’

    Paul Reynolds mentions Carter’s claim when discussing Iran’s nuclear weapons potential.

    In December the BBC reported on the grandstanding but toothless “Global Zero” conference, and ended the entire piece reminding everyone of Israel’s nasty secrecy on their own nuclear capability.

    A simple search will prove one-note wonders like ady wrong every time. The thing is, people like him don’t just want the BBC to tell everyone about what Israel gets up to; they’ll continue to think the BBC is blatantly pro-Israel unless Mark Thompson issues a memo calling for every BBC News anchor to condemn Israel on air, and give priority to those calling for its dissolution. Only then will the BBC be able to cleanse itself and prove that it isn’t pro-Israel.


  44. Sue says:

    “they’ll continue to think the BBC is blatantly pro-Israel unless Mark Thompson issues a memo calling for every BBC News anchor to condemn Israel on air, and give priority to those calling for its dissolution. Only then will the BBC be able to cleanse itself and prove that it isn’t pro-Israel.”
    David Preiser (USA) | 19.03.09 – 4:47 pm |

    I’ve often wanted to put that to the chanting chorus that ‘can’t see the bias.’
    When the unimaginative are indoctrinated they can’t let themselves be challenged.

    “Just what would it take to make you see?” I want to know.

    Strangely, they seem to disappear when things get challenging. They just snipe and run.


  45. mullah vance says:

    I love mullahs


  46. ady says:

    The moolahs are definitely at least looking for the potential to make nukes.
    They’ve already been offered light water nuke reactors for free, which were refused in favour of the heavy water units currently being built which create the stuff for a nuke bomb as a by-product.

    Iran spurns European reactor deal

    The problem is that Iran won’t feel truly safe from attack until it has its own nukes.


  47. ady says:

    A couple of IDF dudes get zapped on the Lebanon border…so Israel turns the entire country of Lebanon into a free fire zone, obliterating all its major infrastructure and destroying decades of improvement…

    So Iran MIGHT be looking for a few big assed nukes to protect itself with…lol


  48. piggy kosher says:

    Get real matey! West Persia aka Lebanon is an active front against the Islamic Reich so it is in all senses a free fire zone, and quite rightly so.
    Dont fire your new Persian toyz into Israels north, and you wont get trashed.
    Hows that for a HYS topic? LOL


  49. piggy kosher says:

    Couple of Israeli dudes?? No that was an actual armed invasion under international law, albeit brief. They committed murder – again that would be the legal term – against Israeli nationals then pissed off quick.
    You should be a Beeboid. (maybe you are?) That was a great demo of a “fully balanced” assertion, Beeboid style.