Apparently, Muslim scientists (and clerics, of course) want to make Mecca, rather than Greenwich, the timezone around which the others are calculated. Their reasoning: Mecca is the "true centre of the Earth", because it’s in perfect alignment with the Magnetic North Pole.
Now, unlike the person who brought up that last point, I’m not a geologist, but even I know that the Magnetic North Pole moves. It just happens to be in line with Mecca now.
Aside from that, GMT no longer exists—the international time reference has been UTC since 1972, which is based on TAI (which you can blame on the French). I would expect "scientists" throwing a hissy-fit about it to at least get the terminology right.
The most pertinent question, though, is why? The article says that "it’s about time that [the situation] changed"—but why? What good would it do, other than making your religion feel important? The prime meridian isn’t just a case of time, but of geographical measurements too, and without a good reason to move it it’s easily more trouble than it’s worth. "Our way would be better" is not a good argument when a) it’s only subjectively better, and b) the benefit is minimal and the detriment is vast.
Also, I object to the flagrant misuse of the terms "English" and "Britain", though I don’t know whether this is the article’s fault or the fault of the person being quoted. England was never a "big colonial power"; Britain was, and so was the United Kingdom; GMT dates from 1847, so UK would be correct (the article tries both England/English and Britain/British, both of which are wrong). However, if you must be wrong, be consistent: make up your mind whether you’re talking about England and the English, Britain and the British, or the UK and the UKians.