Had to laugh at the BBC’s propaganda, sorry I mean news reports today flagging up the looming apocalypse that global warming will bring. Using the latest UN report that glaciers are melting at a greater rate in recent history (ie since 1980!) the BBC then hypes this up with the usual images of glaciers crashing into the sea whilst a deadly serious v/o intones just how awful it all is. Just one thing; the latest satellite data shows record ice. Not only record ice but a third more ice than average for this time of the year. The Arctic is also doing well!In fact the Arctic has greater ice concentration in January 2008 than it did in January 1980. Not that you’d guess any of this from the shills for chills at the BBC.

Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Hillhunt says:


    Im as confused as the next man about global warming and its possible causes.

    But the curse of Mr Orange – jumping the gun on unreliable sources – strikes once again.

    Read through the report and you’ll find that almost all the analysis was done by Fleet Street’s most idiotic tabloid – the Daily Express, home to Al-Fayed’s maddest Diana theories, and guilty of causing such offence with its nasty and frankly contradictory Maddy coverage that her wretched parents have sent the lawyers after them.

    By all means stab away at BBC incompetence. But find the sword of truth, not the dagger of dishonesty.


  2. archduke says:

    something overlooked by the BBC reports – glaciers have been in retreat since 1850.



  3. David Vance says:

    “Im as confused as the next man..”

    Only if the next man is a complete imbecile.


  4. archduke says:

    ” Hillhunt | 16.03.08 – 9:05 pm”

    daily express?

    odd that. it’s a UN report, reported on by hundreds of news organisatons worldwide…



  5. Andy says:

    There just seems a lack of courageous pragmatists ready and willing to expose AGW as the bandwagon-jumping quackery it really is. This is lacking on all television channels

    Preferably done in the same way as Delia Smith (on the BBC!), bless her, who recently debunked the whole crap about organic food. I love her statement:

    “I love fresh shelled peas in the winter from Kenya”

    “I’m sorry about the planet but I’m conscious there are people in Kenya getting employment and money to bring up their children.”

    Never underestimate the “Delia Effect”.


  6. archduke says:

    there was a samizdata blogpost on the Green Party that inferred that the Greens were by policy racist – because they preferred organic white farmer food, to that grown in Africa.

    not that the green’s are racist – it’s just that the result of their policies are the same as a full-on Nazi policy.

    read it all here:
    “vote green – go blackshirt”


  7. nrg says:

    Hillhunt, a distracting tacky personal slur that also insults the Unionist community in Northern Ireland and a reverse ferret rather than a reasoned rebuttal?

    …and you accuse David of a lack of journalistic rigor?

    Would you call a Muslim blogger you disagree with Mr. Towelhead. Why do you think it is OK to call David Mr. Orange?

    Really, I am interested as to why?


  8. meggoman says:


    I’m not offering one.
    I thought some of the pieces were very good TV, but the over-arching theme was misguided, missing its target by a long distance.

    Curiously, the guv’nor on this series was Richard Klein, who’s generally seen by media-watchers as the BBC’s one high-profile, ahem, Conservative.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/ …ymediasection19

    What does that tell us?

    That Tories can’t be trusted with the white working class?
    That political leanings are no guide to the quality of someone’s work?
    Or that stuff sometimes gets messed up, whoever’s in charge?
    Hillhunt | 16.03.08 – 12:26 pm | #

    You’re not offering one?

    “I thought some of the pieces were very good TV,”
    If you are white working class none of it was good TV. It was total and utter bollocks designed to promote the lofty arsehole view that you and more importantly the BBC have of the white working class.

    What does that tell us?

    Sweet fucking sweet. Blame the Tories.
    After 10 years of NuLab. Hilarious


  9. Martin says:

    Hillhunt does what any BBC leftie does when confrinted with the truth. He lies and attacks people, to try to remove the focus from the story.

    Funny that he attacks the Daily Express, yet I just wonder out of the BBC and the Express who prints the most lies or distorts the most facts.

    My vote doe sot the 3.5 billion a year gay fest lot.


  10. Hillhunt says:


    I’m afraid all the analysis in Mr Orange’s source material is dependent upon the Express, a paper so bad it makes its stable-mate the Daily Star appear rational. The UN don’t appear in it, although it’s the UN report which is the basis of the BBC report.

    Glad to have cleared that up.


    Hillhunt, a distracting tacky personal slur that also insults the Unionist community in Northern Ireland and a reverse ferret rather than a reasoned rebuttal?

    Not a reverse ferret, really. Anyone claiming bias on the part of a major news organisation like the BBC needs to be working from credible sources. The Express is not credible.

    As to Mr Orange’s moniker. It started with Reservoir Dogs, and its portrayal of trigger-happy desperados who trust no-one. For some reason, this rang a bell every time I read one of his foam-flecked posts. His obsession with minor issues of Northern Ireland symbolism and his refusal to acknowledge progress in Ulster does reek of the wilder shores of Orangery, I’m afraid, although I am aware that there are many people therein more fair and rational than Dave. I can see that they may not want to be associated with Dave, but the cap does truly fit in his case and I’m sure they’ll learn to live with it.

    Would you call a Muslim blogger you disagree with Mr. Towelhead.

    Probably not, though, unlike the Loyal Orange Lodge and its many variants, I have yet to come across a Muslim group happy to name itself Towelhead.


  11. David Vance says:


    Every blog has its pet troll and that is the role Hillhunt plays here. I have no interest in the drivel and bigotry he spews forth – and suggest that you don’t waste your time in dealing with him. Half-wits cheer-leading for a political process that rewards terrorists like Martin mcGuinness are the same sort of clowns who dismiss empirical satellite data which pops their warming, or is it chilling, eco-bubble as Daily Express inspired. Mind you, at least the Daily Express doesn’t have several of its ace journos behind bars in the Irish Republic as part of an investigation into Irish terrorism! Gotta trust the BBC to set the really high standards, you see.


  12. Hillhunt says:

    Mr Orange:

    Half-wits cheer-leading for a political process that rewards terrorists like Martin mcGuinness are the same sort of clowns who….


    It must have been hard losing so spectacularly in the 2007 Assembly elections. Doubtless it was very unfair that your UK Unionist party only managed 1.5%..

    But the enormous majority of voters who failed to support you instead endorsed a process which has led to the end of terrorism and sectarian violence in the North.

    They effectively agreed that putting McGuinness and Paisley in power was a price worth paying to end 30 years of savagery.

    You don’t. Who is the clown?


  13. Andy says:

    By replying to Hillhunt you let him wrap yourselves around his little finger.

    The most effective way to deal with him is to just ignore the berk.


  14. Matthew (UK) says:

    Someone here has the measure of the BBC…

    BBC News Frontpage, 8pm



  15. David Vance says:

    Oh, the troll keeps coming.

    I have not belonged to any political party since 2001, so not sure how “my party” can have stood for election in 2007?

    Putting murderers into government may excite the morally bankrupt, and enthuse the propagandist arm of government in the BBC but pul-lease, we’re not all clapping when a savage like the Bogside Butcher poses as a statesmen. Only clowns do that.

    So be a good troll, put on your red nose, and take a hike.


  16. nrg says:

    David, Andy, point taken, but it is fun baiting him.


  17. Peter says:

    Get back climate.


  18. Yo Yo says:

    I dissagree why is it seen as left wing propaganda to say global warming might be a fact. If the planet is desroyed it is hardly a right wing action.


  19. Andy says:


    That link reads like one cliche after another.

    Take this classic from Achim Steiner, Under-Secretary General of the UN:

    “… governments must agree on a decisive new emissions reduction and adaptation-focused regime. Otherwise, and like the glaciers, our room for manoeuvre and the opportunity to act may simply melt away.”

    I can only heartily endorse his second statement!


  20. Gordon BrownStuff says:

    Hillhunt (rhyming slang?) here is what the Al-Beeb won’t report…

    Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

    “Global warming” is not a global crisis

    We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change,

    Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method;

    Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

    Recognising that the causes and extent of recently observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’ among climate experts are false;

    Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change. Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing, human suffering;

    Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder:

    Hereby declare:

    That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity’s real and serious problems.

    That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change.

    That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate.

    That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples.

    That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis.

    Now, therefore, we recommend —

    That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as “An Inconvenient Truth.”

    That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.

    Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008




  21. archduke says:

    bbc 10 o clock news is doing the “glacier melting” UN report.

    but the timeframe is only from 1980.

    no mention that glaciers only make up 0.29% of total global ice cover.


  22. archduke says:

    “I dissagree why is it seen as left wing propaganda to say global warming might be a fact.”

    oh really? so why did the leftist IPPR say so in a report commissioned in 2006?


    report conclusion:

    Much of the noise in the climate change discourse comes from argument and counter-argument, and it is our recommendation that, at least for popular communications, interested agencies now need to treat the argument as having been won, This means simply behaving as if climate change exists and is real, and that individual actions are effective. This must be done by stepping away from the ‘advocates debate’ described earlier, rather than by stating and re-stating these things as fact.

    The ‘facts’ need to be treated as being so taken-for-granted that they need not be spoken.


  23. David Vance says:


    And being a first rate propagandist for AGW, the BBC follows form. “The debate is over” is their guiding maxim, even before it has begun.


  24. banjo says:

    Yo Yo:
    I dissagree why is it seen as left wing propaganda to say global warming might be a fact. If the planet is desroyed it is hardly a right wing action.

    It`s an authoritarian issue,far left and far right would use their mandates to construct command economies,and once the economy is command driven so is your life.


  25. John Reith spins in his grave says:

    Interesting climate post from Devils Kitchen, apparently the “positive feedback” algorithm used for the alarmist computer modelling is just plain wrong:-



  26. Yo Yo says:

    But surely it is not a authoritarian issue. If people die where is the right wing freedom then in death.


  27. John Reith spins in his grave says:

    But surely it is not a authoritarian issue. If people die where is the right wing freedom then in death.
    Yo Yo | Homepage | 17.03.08 – 12:13 am | #

    Do you go to school with Angry Young Alex Yo Yo?


  28. IntersetedParty says:

    The fact that climate change occurs isn’t in doubt it is the theory that CO2 is the prime driver of dangerous warming which is very much up for debate.

    I would say it is the tagging on of the assumption “… that individual actions are effective.” is the sneaky sophistry that I am worried about.

    Especially when they mean effecting climate by reducing man-made CO2 output. Since CO2 has still been rising and the worlds temperature has plateaued in the last 10 years together with the large global temperature drop over the last year I am not surprised the BBC and others are reporting this weekends news release about “new” data claiming glaciers as the new disaster “canary in a coalmine”. It used to be polar bears until Bjorn Lomborg (a warming believer) inconveniently pointed out their numbers have increased by thousands since the 60s.

    It has all the hallmarks of the UN’s political motivation to keep the ball rolling and feeding the ratchet effect, and the Beeb duly obliges

    I agree that pointing out any real trend in the climate up or down shouldn’t be dismissed as politically biased, but it is the underlying assumption that tweaking a small parameter such as CO2 (that just happens to be a direct measure of current human economy and endeavour) is the only thing stopping an imminent increase in death.

    How about all the old-folk who have survived because of our recent warm winters? What is it with the mentality that always points to the most doom-laden interpretations? Is it because it is assumed that fear generates a more pliant populous?


  29. archduke says:

    note how the bbc is not reporting on the deep freeze in china , which has killed 500,000 farm animals and has around 3 million close to starvation…

    hence the tibet revolt.

    but then again – that doesnt fit into the “global warming” narrative.


  30. Angry Young Alex says:

    David, if you are going to post on the Global Warming conspiracy, try to do a bit better than one piece of anecdotal evidence. A lot of posters do actually include some kind of scientific methods in their arguements, why can’t you? “There is a lot of ice, so the world can’t be getting warmer” isn’t scientifically sound. It also undermines the vaguely credible idea that the world is getting hotter but that people aren’t causing it.

    I’m not saying B-BBC shouldn’t tackle the climate change issue if it has serious grounds to doubt the impartiality of the BBC’s reporting, but David, I think you should stick to what you’re good at, which is furious rants at Muslims, and stay away from science.


  31. Martin says:

    Angry Young Alex: By your own argument, just because some ice melts doesn’t mean the Earth is getting warmer either.


  32. ukipwebmaster says:

    More than 50 per cent of people are fed up with climate change:


  33. Lurker in a Burqua says:

    Greenie watch is on top of all this



  34. banjo says:

    Yo Yo:
    But surely it is not a authoritarian issue.
    Yes it is,it`s governments taxing your money off you and telling you what to spend the remnants on.

    yo yo:
    If people die where is the right wing freedom then in death.

    I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that,read it again does it make sense?


  35. Atlas shrugged says:

    Angry Young Alex

    I hope you are very young. Because it is all that can possibly excuse you for your highly dangerous ignorance.

    The good news is that it is your future freedom and prosperity that is at stake for a whole lot longer then mine. So at least there is some justice in the world. Just shit luck if you live in parts of African or Asian and fancied living long enough to see any grandchildren. Not at all much better if you live in the rest of the world either


    A word of warning to those that know as sure as eggs is eggs that CO2=AGW is evil establishment promoted bullshit. As do I, along with a vast and ever increasing majority of climate scientists, not in the pay of big business.

    Technology already exists and has done for many years that can warm up specific large areas of the atmosphere. If the people that control this technology for whatever reason, wish to do so.

    Also bare in mind that the people that own this technology are also the people promoting CO2 = The ‘common people caused it all,’ global warming.

    Until their blue blood makes them go blue in the mouth.

    Which does beg the following questions.

    As it is becoming clear this long term plan to impoverish the poorest people in the world to premature death or well back into the stone age. While doing almost as much harm to the western worlds populations and economy. Seems to be slowly falling apart at the seams.

    Due in no small part to the internet, and not much else. Certainly as we know, not the BBC or the MSM, which is also controlled by the same small bunch of criminals.

    Could it be possible that they have a plan B up there sleeve to make global warming happen anyway, as a back up?

    After all the people that promote this absolute nonsense, by the spending of countless billions over many years, for example the Red Shields. Are exactly the same people who finance world wars, nuclear bombs. But more to the point, have no problem causing all the real pollution and environmental damage to this planet, every second of every single day, for a fast buck, and continual world domination.

    Can we trust them not to use this tried and tested almost old technology?

    What could we possibly do about it if they did heat up the atmosphere over the Poles on purpose, just to make a point, and we found out?

    The answer to these questions are respectively. Although I admit that the below is my personal well researched speculation, and opinion, no more.

    1 They always have a plan B. They are very clever people indeed, but they do sometimes make big mistakes.

    2 No; we cant trust them at all. Especially judging by their past well documented, but never mentioned on the BBC, history.

    3 Very possibly nothing at all. As people like Angry Young Alex have been so completely brainwashed that what small amount remains of their own free thinking mind. Will never allow them to admit they have been a victim of a confidence trick of simply massive proportions, since their fathers were in short trousers. What makes it worse for these people. Is that the very people they claim they are trying to resist. That is Big Business, multi-national oil corporations and all the rest of the lefts, pet hates. Are indeed the people who have conned them out of a future for them and their families forever.

    The BBC will stick to the same old line. Or one by one, they will be found floating face down in the river. Until they shut the fuck up.

    Anyone found telling the truth on the internet, if it is still operating by then. Will be quickly located and dealt with or transfered to some of those New Prisons they are currently building for ‘re-education’.

    The building of which, as we should know, is also going to be financed by indirectly by the Red Shields.

    So you see its a win win situation for them, whatever happens. As it is always a lose lose situation for us.


    Angry Young idiot fool named Alex

    The above is not conspiracy theory it is conspiracy FACT. I cant be bothered to show you all masses evidence for what I state. If you cant be bothered YOURSELF to find the enormous amount out there. Then quite frankly, you and the rest of your generation, fully deserve what, you most certainly will receive.


  36. Atlas shrugged says:

    At the risk of sounding certifiably paranoid, which I can assure you I am not any more then is healthy.

    People like Hillcunt JR and AYA. Are just as likely to be working for the promoters of this scam as the BBC. All they seem to be doing is causing discourse so that somebody somewhere else can make a list.

    A list that will never be used in a court of law. If you know what I mean?

    Still sod it I say; this place is fast becoming a planet not worth living on anyway, never mind holding up 24 hours a day. One day I might just shrug the bloody useless place into another solar system. Then you will have a problem.


  37. Jack Hughes says:

    Its only a small mistake – but it shows spectacular ignorance of science from the BBC writers, editors, web designers and anyone else who has touched it.

    Its on the Mark Mardell Euroblog…

    What the summit achieved on C02

    Look closely and the gas is see-zero-two. Sorry, dudes, but there is no such thing. The gas is see-owe-two as in “Carbon Oxygen number two”.

    Anyone who got to O-level or CSE or GCSE should be au fait with the correct answer.

    No-one at the BBC seems to know.



  38. Cassandra says:

    I note with great interest the post by Hillhunt, not for the content but the tone!
    The “Mr orange” tag is a nasty and spiteful insult and is typical of the Leftist mindset.
    I have to say that the AGW disater theories and propaganda is not restricted to the BBC. The MSM have fallen for the CO2 induced global warming scam hook line and sinker! CNN is running a truly pathetic and desperate report about the recent climate conference at the Heartlands Institute AND its sponsored by VESTAS(a flogger of useless windmills)no conflict of interest there then eh?. The pro AGW ‘reports’ are getting more ludicrous and stupid by the day and at last some scientists are starting to find their voices, soon this will become a flood as the real truth about natural cyclic climate variation comes to light. What we see is the final days of the failing ‘CONsensus’ on global warming and the saying, ‘you can fool some of the people etc’ keeps running through my mind!
    Be on the lookout for some furious backtracking by the MSM within the year(it will be very funny to see and read).
    David Gregory used to level the accusation of “cherry picking” at sceptics BUT that is exactly what the AGW believers are doing more and more as new evidence comes to light.
    I look forward to the collapse of the insane AGW bandwaggon BUT will those who pushed it hardest admit their stupidity? Will those crooks and flimflam scammers like Al Gore who have made millions out of the AGW scam be made to return their ill gotten gains? Will the ‘rent a mob’ pressure groups lose their lavish grants? Will the MSM be forced to issue retractions of the smears and lies they levelled against the brave scientists who tried to tell the truth? Will all the money that has been extorted from the hard pressed taxpayer be returned? Will the deluded and crooked and ignorant polititians be called to account?



  39. Cassandra says:

    Hillhunt tells us…

    “Im as confused as the next man about global warming” Er, excuse me?

    There has always been a truly massive amount of evidence out there Hillhunt, so why the hell are you still confused? Anyone with half a brain can see a ‘hard sell’ technique! You have at your fingertips a wnderful treasure of scientific evidence, something our forebears could only dream of! So why are you still confused? All the accumulated knowledge of the scientific world is a mouse click away and you are still confused? Never before in human history has so much information been freely availible to us all and you are still confused?


    I say this with the best intentions…


    PS keep a large supply of redbull(or generic alternative) handy because you will need it!!!!!!!


  40. Angry Young Alex says:

    Angry Young Alex: By your own argument, just because some ice melts doesn’t mean the Earth is getting warmer either.

    I know. That’s why we use science. A lot of people here do science stuff all over the place. But David “The Fury” Vance seems to consider that sort of thing beneath him.

    The above is not conspiracy theory it is conspiracy FACT. I cant be bothered to show you all masses evidence for what I state.

    That’s brilliant. Could you put that on a t-shirt for me?


  41. David Vance says:


    I was wondering which part of the satellite record you took issue with? I mean you SAY you are interested in the science, so….


  42. Angry Young Alex says:

    One swallow doesn’t make a summer. You’ve posted evidence of ice. That’s not the same of evidence against global warming. This is almost on a par with “How can the world be getting warmer when it was so cold this morning?”


  43. Anonymous says:

    alex, if global warming was real and happning now, one would presume the weather would be get just a little bit warmer now as well, rather than colder, wouldnt you agree? or do you believe we can have a rise in global temps and not feel the efects?


  44. Cassandra says:

    Angey young Alex says…”one swallow a summer does not make” What about ten(years)? The AGW alarmists have been guilty of that for quite some time now ALA! Or is it OK if its done by the AGW crowd?
    When you hear tag lines like “glaciers melting at record rates” BUT the data sets are ‘missing’ and the time frames are ‘missing’ and the type and positions are ‘missing’ and the glaciers that are expanding are ‘missing’ does it ring a bell in your mind?
    Alex, at some point you are going to have to look at the facts, even if they are not to your liking! Even the ‘red guards’ during the cultural revolution had to come face to face with reality at some point didnt they?
    But carry on spouting the party line and spouting the same old second hand slogans!
    The later you leave it, the bigger the shock will be when you are confronted with the reality that you have been misled and lied to by the AGW lobby!
    I can assure you that when that day comes, you really will be “angry”.


  45. Tim says:

    yep. there was some twat talking about flooding – then water shortages – what is it? you cant have both


  46. David Vance says:


    The satellite evidence shows the earth has been cooling. I was wondering how this is linked to global warming?


  47. Anonymous says:

    Hillcnut got his knickers in a twist because the Daily Diana was cited.

    Trouble for Hilly is that they are just reporting; the Antarctic sea ice area over the last winter season was indeed a record:


    Don’t hold your breath waiting for Harrabin or Shukman to report this.

    Just think how bad things would be if we didn’t have all this global warming!


  48. Cockney says:

    Is the point not that given the wide range of scientific opinion, climate change is a risk – no more / no less? If you’re sensible you act to mitigate risk but on the basis of some sort of cost benefit analysis?? So some action to reduce the presumed man made causes of climate change seems sensible but not to the extent of annhilating the economy??? Seems like fairly basic risk management to me.

    And yet the whole thing has degenerated into a bunfight between anti-cap soap dodgers trying to use it as a trojan horse for socialism and die-hard market fundamentalists seeing commie plots everywhere.


  49. David Vance says:


    You have a point but the reality is that the Gore cultists claim the debate is over. If you deny the argument, risk cannot be assessed. I have tried to debate this with the likes of Friends of the Earth and they just stare incomprehensibly when facts are announced that counter the mantra. It’s a pity since what you say has merit – if dealing with sensible people. AGW devotees are far from reason.


  50. will says:

    “How can the world be getting warmer when it was so cold this morning?”

    A variation of the charge of confusing weather & climate, but the BBC brings up MMCC with every dramatic weather event.