This is getting very tedious, but I simply can’t let this go. I think Richard Black has been hit by that nice Cancun sun because yesterday afternoon, he filed a report detailing at length that “scientists believe” that, because we haven’t stamped down hard enough on CO2 emissions, we are facing almost inevitable temperature rises of four degrees centigrade and we had better get used to it. Such baloney does not deserve any effort of rebuttal, though I would mention this dose of inconvenient realism. His real agenda is not hard to find – he and his greenie chums in the Royal Society (who have been having orgasms over the prospect of those four degrees centigrade as their collective cash balances swell from climate change grants) want deliberate, systematic rationing of the kind imposed in the Second World War, with all the misery that it would entail. This ecofascist nonsense is beneath contempt.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to TIPPING POINT

  1. Backwoodsman says:

    The new bbc orthodoxy, heard several times over the last few days , “All mainstream scientists” , “all serious comentators” !


  2. Lloyd says:

    Beneath contempt indeed. Call me selfish, but I hope we do get their wish, with a 4 degree rise in global temperature – it certainly wouldn’t do us any harm.


  3. canon alberic says:

    It is a well documented psychological phenomenom that when people know they are either talking crap because thats their function; or lieing because its their only option they find it difficult to do so in ordinary language and employ various feints to hide what they are doing from the voice of conscience within.

    Harrabin yesterday filed his alarmist propaganda on Today disguised as an embarassing teenagers bedroom “parody” of Dragons Den in which two scarily humourless apparachtiks of the new global warming order dismissed all suggestions for dealing with the forthcoming (but much post-poned) catastrophe short of de-industrialisation on too little too late grounds.

    Blacks article is expressed in an analogy with Alice In Wonderland that is so long and laboured as to be unreadable – but not exactly without a certain irony….

    Alas, I suspect the real explanation is that these unpardonable careerists have been pursuaded by the crypo-terrorists to whom they have sold their souls that the rest of us are not getting the message because the indefeasible pseudo-science is too dry and we need it spoonfed a la horrible histories.


  4. Pounce says:

    Any chance of a new open thread?


  5. Cassandra King says:

    Think its cold in Blighty now?

    This winter is going to a bitterly cold one as predicted and its a sign of the return of cold snowy winters.

    Around new years tere is going to be a massive storm and record cold and snowfall so stock up on tinned foods/salt/water/gas bottles and plenty of warm blankets and clothes.

    All of this has been predicted but ignored by those with a duty to protect our interests, the vulnerable will suffer as never before. Why is the BBC so determined to smash its own credibility for the short term propaganda of CAGW? At the close of this winter I do know that the CAGW theory will be despised and hated and those who are seen to support it will in turn be hated and despised.

    Best of luck to all of us, we are in for a rough few months.


  6. John Anderson says:

    The BBC are going to town on AGW this week – World Service is running a 5-parter,  each part being run 3 times a day.

    Insidious ignorant trash from Black,  Harrabin – the damn lot of them.


  7. Natsman says:

    Got a foot of lying snow (not the same “lying” as Harrabin & Black – who sound like a firm of dodgy solicitors) here in France, too.  I’m marooned on my forested, rural hill.  Lovely – the two woodburners are going strong, and its snowing again.  I feel unashamedly globally warmed.


  8. Umbongo says:

    I’m old enough to remember rationing and (just) old enough to remember the winter of 1947.  As a child you tend to accept what’s going on as “normal” so rationing was, I’m sure, tedious for my parents but for me it was life as normal.  The winter of 1947 was appalling but, as a child, all I remember was the fun bit – the snowman in the garden and the snowball fights with my friends (and others!). 

    However, my parents (along with everybody else) understood why rationing had been imposed although – as I gathered later – they (again, along with most others) were becoming increasingly irritated that rationing continued – in fact became more stringent – after the war.  My father was particularly annoyed since he, unlike most people in post-war Britain, travelled extensively in Europe in the 1940s and 1950s (mostly on his own dime, not “officially” or as a part of the armed services) and had a basis of comparison.   He brought back food luxuries from France and Italy (you know, the defeated of WW2) which were completely unobtainable in the UK (unless you used the black market or “knew somebody”).  He also went to Germany and, although I can imagine he lived relatively well on those trips, by 1950 he said that the Germans in general were eating better than we were.  Had Labour not been slung out of power in 1951, widespread rationing would doubtless have continued, as did the useless mechanism of exchange control which was only abolished in 1979.

    Now I wouldn’t be so crass as to blame the post-war Labour government for all our then woes (although Corelli Barnett gives it a well-deserved bashing) but socialism and rationing are opposite sides of the same coin.  The Royal Society (or Oxfam) – approvingly reported by the BBC (and Louise Gray in the Telegraph) – will soon be proposing the appointment of blockwardens on every street to monitor energy consumption when the lights start to flicker in 4 or 5 years’ time.  This is not a joke: that’s what comes next in the litany of control.  I can already name which of my neighbours will probably volunteer for this role thereby enabling them to enforce their authoritarian notions of “greenness” and “sustainability” and so, I expect, can many readers of this blog in respect of their own neighbourhoods.


  9. English Pensioner says:

    If temperatures rise four degrees, just think of the energy we will save heating our homes and the resultant reductions in carbon emissions! This could of course cause temperatures to fall, making the whole sutuation stable. Well, it’s as good a theory as any others!


  10. Phil says:

    We shouldn’t blame Richard Black for what he says. The country is full of employees toeing the corporate line in order to make a living.

    He’s like someone selling cars or wrinkle cream – full of ludicrous, life changing claims he probably doesn’t believe himself, and even if he does it is still a case of buyer beware.  

    For the money they are paying Mr Black the BBC will always be able to find someone to spout eco-apocalyptic rubbish so it might as well be him.


    • David Jones says:

      I wouldn’t let him off so lightly. He is preaching disaster. We are all suffering for his and the bBC’s blinkered stupidity.


  11. Natsman says:

    The EDF ads for their consumption “meters” earnestly tell us that by using them we’re “saving carbon”.  “Saving” it?  How?  For what? To what end?  What a bloody con, but I suppose the everage British tv viewer would believe black was white (or harrabin) if that’s what they were told…


    • Asuka Langley Soryu says:

      Saving it from itself perhaps. The humble carbon-12 atom is its own worst enemy. Especially when it’s with a group of its peers.


  12. The Beebinator says:

    compared to last year, this years moonbat eco festival has received minimal coverage from Al Beeb.

    compared to 4 or 5 years ago its non existent. back then every day began with a new report that global warming was happening faster than previously thought

    we should thank Dick Black and Harrabin, every time they waffle their crap about AGW, people look out of their window, think about the previous bad winters and say global warming, what a load of bollox


  13. jazznick says:

    Is that the same Royal Society as funded by Big Oil ?



  14. David Preiser (USA) says:

    It would funny except for how it’s so damned sickening that this is exactly what many of us here predicted would happen back when BBC correspondent David Gregory used to debate with us about it here.


  15. John Horne Tooke says:

    So if this is the hottest year since the flood, how can this be true?

    Are they cherry picking which weather stations data they are putting into thier models? Or could it be that to us mere mortals whose year begins on Jan 1 and ends  Dec 31 and not August 1 to August 31?


  16. Mailman says:

    You know guys, as I sit here looking out in to my back yard at the several inches of Mann Made Global Warming ™ sitting on the ground Im kinda wishing for a 4 degree temp increase! 🙂

    But seriously though, Im at the point where I hope the earth plunges in to a new ice age if for no other reason than to shut the bastards up on the BBC!



  17. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Meanwhile, at the Warmist convention in Cancun…..


    • john says:

      Excellent David !
      I wonder how much it cost to fly in the “never to be seen again ice” to warm up the proceedings for the thousands of dignitaries demanding another free shot of liquor at the bar ?


    • Umbongo says:

      Look at it this way, Mexico – yet another country mired deep in corruption – needs some aid.  What better way to help than transferring BBC licence money – via Richard Black – to the impoverished millions.  Of course, for his efforts Richard takes a bit of commission in specie (first class travel, first class hotel, the usual conference freebies) and all he has to do is turn up and issue (I’m sure he’s already written) some reports to the “little people” who fund his wages.


    • John Horne Tooke says:

      If there is one thing I hate more than corruption it is hypocrisy.


    • John Anderson says:

      sorry David,  I had not seen you had posted this.  Glorious demonstration of “rationing”.  

      I remember food rationing in the UK,  never saw a banana until I was 12,  all the basic rations were miserly eg very little meat or even cheese,  let alone sugar.  Enough to scrape by on, no more.   I remember we used to eat horsemeat occasionally – even with ration card points,  the butchers seldom had much meat.

      Still hard to believe it took 8 years to finally scrap food rationing here.


    • deegee says:

      I don’t want to be a hypocrite. Having worked both business and academic conventions I can say with confidence that most of the genuine business is conducted between formal sessions over coffee and at dinner over a glass of wine.


  18. John Anderson says:

    I must have missed the BBC reporting on party-time in Cancun :


    or this sort of bloody nonsense that Black et al ignore :


    or this – (actually, Hats off to Canada for showing enough sense to get itself vilified by the eco-loons) :


    It appears the UN is denying press credentials to journalists who may be critical of the Warmist cult :


    Thank God for a bit of journalistic sanity – here is Andrew Neil making mincemeat today of John Prescott and the hypocrisy of Cancun :


    Watch Prescott go ballistic at about 6 minutes in !


    (I hope to grab some relief from Britain’s hot winter by flying off on Friday for a few days to the Canary Islands.  But I have 2 fears – the tarmac at Luton Airport may be a bubbling mess of asphalt,  or the island of Fuerteventura may have disappeared beneath the waves owing to sea-levels rising)


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Prescott was practically incoherent during the last couple of minutes.  What sort of crap is it to sum up his reason for “poisoning the earth” (his words about emitting greenhouse gases, not mine) by jetting off to the hot tubs and table spreads of Cancun by claiming that poverty in third-world countries “fires him up”?  It makes no sense whatsoever, but it was pretty obvious that Neil doesn’t take him seriously and knows better than to try too hard.

      I assume his defense for Huhne’s jacuzzi works for Richard Black’s ginormous carbon footprint as well.  Why is it that Andrew Neil is the only Beeboid who will even bring this up?  Why wasn’t this kind of behavior an obsession for Justin Rowlett when he was doing his Farcical…sorry…Ethical Man series?  Why isn’t this a running topic for the BBC’s Science-cum-Environmental page?


      • John Anderson says:

        The difference is,  David,  that Andrew Neil is a serious journalist of the old school.

        Not a proseltyser being paid by us to preach at us.


    • Guest Who says:

      ‘The Prescott Plan’?

      This Prescott…?


      What power or influence does this incoherent, hypocritical oaf have save to undermine any rational view on climate? 

      At least he is functioning well still as a laughing stock and liability.


    • John Horne Tooke says:

      He gave the game away at the end. It is nothing to do with climate, but wealth redistribution.


  19. Millie Tant says:

    I saw that encounter on The Daily Politics today. Not only has the useless and oafish Prescott got himself a peerage but even more risibly, he now turns up in the guise of rapporteur for The Council of Europe, of all things. Talk about a gravy-trainer!  Junket John is set for life.
    No sooner does Andrew Neil point out to him how sceptically he and his ilk will be viewed by the public for their junketing, than he flies into the rage of a two-year-old toddler challenged for his dummy.   What a nutter.

    I have never been desperate for the abolition of the Lords on account of the heredity of people in it but the more I see of the chancers and charlatans that get appointed to it, the more appealing does abolition become. (Not that the hereditaries don’t have their share of charlatans and useless twits of course, but who in their right mind would confer a peerage on a twit like Junketer-in-Chief Prescott or slithery Mandelson? And who were all those people who were outraged about duck houses and moats? Where’s their outrage at the likes of the above-mentioned useless junketing twits? )


    • John Anderson says:

      Be fair now.  I doubt if Prescott’s jolly to Cancun plus entourage costs us any more than a couple of hundred thousand Euros !

      Plus all the preparatory “work”.   It is a sign of Prescott’s arrogance that he allowed Andrew Neil to interview him.  Didn’t he know he would be skewered ?


      • Buggy says:

        Couldn’t Prezza have been sent to Zurich instead ? Much shorter flight – which wouldn’t cost as much- and the spectacle of Jolly John disporting himself en fete would surely ensure the rapid death of this country’s lunatic bid to send billions of pounds a) up in smoke and b) tax-free into the pockets of FIFA and its appartchiks.

        Short of that, could Mexico be persuaded to keep Lord Lard-Arse Of T’ Chippy and/or maybe send him on a nice break to Ciudad Juarez ?


  20. John Horne Tooke says:

    Just remembered how the Met Office fiddle the figures.  
    “This will be the warmest winter in living memory, the data has already been recorded. For your information, we take the highest 15 readings between November and March and then produce an average. As November was a very seasonally warm month, then all the data will come from those readings.”  
    This was from the last exceptionally hot winter.