Click to get your own widget

Thursday, November 27, 2008


Professor David Bellamy who people in Britain will remember used to be all over the TV talking through his bushy beard about nature, has an article in the Australian on how he became an unperson. I doubt more local MSM sources will be reporting it.

WHEN I first stuck my head above the parapet to say I didn't believe what we were being told about global warming, I had no idea what the consequences would be. I am a scientist and I have to follow the directions of science, but when I see that the truth is being covered up I have to voice my opinions.

According to official data, in every year since 1998, world temperatures have been getting colder, and in 2002 Arctic ice actually increased. Why, then, do we not hear about that? The sad fact is that since I said I didn't believe human beings caused global warming, I've not been allowed to make a television program.

My absence has been noticed, because wherever I go I meet people who say: "I grew up with you on the television, where are you now?"

It was in 1996 that I criticised wind farms while appearing on children's program Blue Peter, and I also had an article published in which I described global warming as poppycock. The truth is, I didn't think wind farms were an effective means of alternative energy, so I said so. Back then, at the BBC you had to toe the line, and I wasn't doing that.

At that point, I was still making loads of TV programs and I was enjoying it greatly. Then I suddenly found I was sending in ideas for TV shows and they weren't getting taken up. I've asked around about why I've been ignored, but I found that people didn't get back to me. At the beginning of this year there was a BBC show with four experts saying: "This is going to be the end of all the ice in the Arctic," and hypothesising that it was going to be the hottest summer ever. Was it hell! It was very cold and very wet and now we've seen evidence that the glaciers in Alaska have started growing rapidly, and they have not grown for a long time.

I've seen evidence, which I believe, that says there has not been a rise in global temperature since 1998, despite the increase in carbon dioxide being pumped into the atmosphere. This makes me think the global warmers are telling lies: CO2 is not the driver. The idiot fringe has accused me of being like a Holocaust denier, which is ludicrous. Climate change is all about cycles. It's a natural thing and has always happened. When the Romans lived in Britain they were growing very good red grapes and making wine on the borders of Scotland. It was evidently a lot warmer.

I remember being amused when Lesley Riddoch, BBC Scotland's tame "feisty" interviewer, said how much she liked windmills because they were "groovy" which still seems to me to be an unusual & dubious way of settling power policy. On the other hand while if I was seeking expertise on any scientific subject I would not go to Ms Riddoch, if I was seeking advice on how not to lose a lucerative BBC job by telling the truth I would not go to Professor Bellamy. Certainly saying windmills don't provide cost effective power is a much bigger no-no than saying they are groovy or indeed saying "he f----- your grandaughter now go & commit suicide" on air. Perhaps the BBC should produce a code of conduct to make it easier.

As an illustration the BBC recently reported as "News" that
The thickness of Arctic sea ice "plummeted" last winter, thinning by as much as one-fifth in some regions, satellite data has revealed.

while censoring the newer news that this year it has thickened & extended so much that it is now back to virtually the level it was before this eco-fascist scare was started.

Obviously any expert who says that will not be appearing on our state broadcaster.

In the same way nobody who fails to censor any mention of racial genocide can work there.

You have to be a wholly corrupt Nazi whore (of either sex) like Kate Adie willing to tell absolutely any lie in any government or Nazi (eco or otherwise) cause to work for them. Clearly no member of the BNP need apply.

David Bellamy appears to be talking through his bush hat. Through a Deltoid post

I found this article at

which indicates that Mr Bellamy has ascribed the failure of his television career to various causes at different times.

"In a Jun 7 2008 interview with the Liverpool Daily Post it was “my stance on having an anti -EU referendum was unpopular with TV bosses,” no mention of it at all in a Times interview a year ago, and in a 2002 Guardian interview it was because he stood against John Major for the anti-European Referendum party:

“In some ways it was probably the most stupid thing I ever did because I’m sure that if I have been banned from television, that’s why. I used to be on Blue Peter and all those things,regularly, and it all, pffffft, stopped.”''

Bellamy's career tanked in 1994 and at that time he was not even a climate change denier, as the article demonstrates. So take your pick. Martyr or moron.
Mous I have put this response on Deltoid's site.

"Well actually what he has said is that he first started being disappeared when he said in 1996 on Blue Peter that windmills wouldn't be enough to keep the lights on.

Of course Deltoid's position is that the BBC would never censor somebody for saying that windmills weren't "groovy" to quote a BBC commentator. Nor would they dream of extending the ban because he stood for us to be allowed a referendum on Europe. Nor for saying that the global warming scare was wrong.

The BBC, being an uncorrupt organisation, would only ban somebody for saying something patently ludicrous such as, for example, Attenborough's cuarantee that by 2026 sea level rise will have covered Norfolk.

That is why, quite properly, Attenborough has been retired & Bellamy hasn't. Oops wrong continuum there. In this one Bellamy, for reasons Deltoid canot explain HAS been banned & Attenborough's claims are endorsed without a trace of disquiet.

I must have been thinking of the continuum where Deltoid doesn't ban people for disputing their claims."

Let us see if they are as willing, this time round, to publish opposing views as I am.
Well, Ive checked and they don't seem to think you worthy of publishing. Is that because you think being stupid and rude is a point of principle?
Thanks for saving me having to check. The obvious answer is that the eco-fascist agenda depends on not entering into a debate on the facts & that where they do they routinely lose. It may not have occurred to you but if you wish to know why Deltoid censor they may be able to give a more definitive answer.

As you prove I do not refuse publication purely because of stupidity & rudeness.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.