Lord Stern, a self-appointed expert on ‘climate change’ who in reality is nothing but a jumped-up economist wrote, back in 2006, a deeply flawed report that contained a tissue of extremist political untruths – dressed up as scientific ‘truth’ – about what he claimed were the threats facing mankind. His work was comprehensively debunked at the time by the doughty economist Ruth Lea, who rightly observed that like all the outpourings of greenies, this was in reality yet another call for higher taxes and more central government oppression.

For the BBC, though, his lordship is still a figure of worship. So when he makes the loony suggestion that we all become vegetarians because farm animals fart too much ‘dangerous’ methane, he’s invited on the Today programme and treated with fawning reverence by John Humphrys. To be fair, Mr Humphrys did acknowledge there were “deniers” out there who disbelieved his scare-mongering, and also suggested that his climate change beliefs were only based on computer models, but when Lord Stern persisted that the science was proven, simple and definitely settled, the supposed Torquemada of the BBC rolled over and purred in agreement. Not only that, Mr Humphrys just sat back and listened as Lord Stern spouted nonsense about moves to “zero carbon electricity”. And he concluded by suggesting that Lord Stern was not being tough enough in pursuing his loony agenda.

Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Grant says:

    Stern is just as ignorant of science as most politicians and journalists, especially the BBC.  It is a crime that we should be led to the gallows by these buffoons.


  2. Ian says:

    31 000 Scientists, 9000 of which are Phd’s signed an online petition refuting the claims of Stern and his cohorts that MMGW is caused by CO2 or that CO2 was actually itself causing AGW.

    This agenda appears to be being pushed as a form of global control. It is nothing less than a tax on breathing.


  3. Umbongo says:

    Stern asserted (unchallenged) that “fewer and fewer” people are AGW sceptics and that (as the noted climatologist and scientist he isn’t) 200 years of science, “ice-core data going back 800,000 years” and basic physics are irrefutable proofs of AGW.  Stern and Humphrys again proved incapable of distinguishing between the insignificant number who deny climate change and the many who deny that, even if it occurs, anthropomorphic climate change is not significant and, in any case, there’s not much we can do about it.  Funnily enough Humphrys failed to ask Stern about the dodgy scientific evidence (explained on Bishop Hill’s site ) underlying the “hockey stick”.  Less surprisingly Today failed to invite a far more distinguished peer – Lord Monckton – or anybody else to refute or even disagree with Stern’s convenient untruths.


    • Umbongo says:

      “many who deny that, even if it occurs, anthropomorphic climate change is not significant”

      Of course, that should read “many who deny that, even if it occurs, anthropomorphic climate change is significant . .”


      • Marky says:

        I’m not that big on conspiracy theories but I do think we are moving towards a tyrannical world government where sovereignty, culture, truth, freedom and democracy* etc have to be destroyed for the greater or common purpose. Anthropomorphic climate change is a very handy thumbscrew.

        *Almost gone now.


  4. Grant says:

    Ian 11:44

    Spot on !  It is about taxation, global government and the death of democracy, simple as that. Except China and India will ignore it or use it to blackmail the West. 


  5. Grant says:

    Apparently Stern has said we should all stop eating meat to combat “Global Warming”.   Where do Labour find idiots like Stern ?   He is comparing giving up meat to giving up drink driving.  Time for the men in white coats, I think ! 


    • Ian says:

      Grant – wheres the joined up thinking??

      I thought it was cows that were responsible for producing too much methane.

      Therefore, the more rib-eye and sirloin we munch, the less methane is being produced. Ergo, in our own small way we help reduce Global Warming.

      Eat more cows – save the planet!!


  6. Asuka Langley Soryu says:

    I know Environmentalists tend not to concern themselves with, well, reality, but getting everyone to stop eating meat? Madness.

    Anyway, good luck with that Lord Stern. Let us know how you’re getting on. (Moron.)


  7. Teddy Bear says:

    One is witnessing the conscious wilful pursuing of brainwashing technique against the ignorant, that the BBC has become so adept at. Following yesterday’s article in the Telegraph; The Real Climate Change Catastrophe the BBC ignore it, and carry on their and the government’s agenda without blinking. Don’t worry about this being the end of democracy,the government’s immigration policies have already put paid to this.

    Where exactly do those in the BBC and those in government plan to live with their families in the future?Are they all going to do a Blair? – I don’t think they’re ultimately exempt from the effects of their unethical and immoral policies wherever they go – unless it’s to another planet.


  8. thespecialone says:

    I do sense though gradually that SOME in the mainstream media are beginning to finally realise that it is all a con.  However, I cannot imagine the BBC ever realising it.  Unless of course is if Cameron gets in and continues to be an eco-nutter…then maybe the BBC will call him a liar just because he isn’t Labour.  But then again…..I may be wrong.


  9. Martin says:

    Shouldn’t baked beans be banned on the basis they also contribute to climate change?


  10. Marky says:

    “So what, then, is the most eco-friendly of God’s creatures? Well, it’s all down to size, and food consumption.” 
    EUgenics coming to a town near you… How do you cut Co2 by 80%? Cut humans.