This is the latest piece by freelance journalist Chris Morrison, who we’ve just appointed our Environment Editor. Chris started in financial journalism in the late 1970s and for nearly 20 years ran a company – Evandale Publishing – that he set up himself and eventually sold.
An 1871 dataset of sea temperatures across the Great Barrier Reef in Australia has been compared to recent measurements logged at the same reef areas. No differences in temperature were found by Dr. Bill Johnson, leading him to conclude: “Alarming claims that the East Australian Current has warmed due to global warming are therefore without foundation.”
The 1871 temperatures were taken by the SS Governor Blackall steamship on a voyage around the Australian east coast to observe a total eclipse of the sun in the north of the continent. Hourly measurements were made between 6am and 6pm every day in the voyage from Port Stanley, north of Sydney, to Cape York and repeated on the journey back. Dr. Johnson, a former research scientist at the New South Wales Department of Natural Resources, allowed for the considerable seasonal variations in temperature across the reef but concluded that nothing much had changed. He said there was no evidence that the system regulating temperature had broken down “or is likely to break down in the future”.
Needless to say, such stories do not tend to appear in the media, most of which is firmly wedded to the notion that human-caused global warming is destroying the coral reefs around the world. In October 2020, the BBC reported that the Great Barrier Reef had lost half of its coral since 1995, citing a report that said it was due to “warmer seas driven by climate change”. But Professor Peter Ridd, who has spent 40 years observing the reef, noted recently that it was in robust good health. Coral growth rates have if anything “increased over the last 100 years”. The graph below, compiled by Ridd from Australian Institute of Marine Science records, illustrates recent growth.
Agence France-Presse‘s award-winning reporter Marlow Hood recently quoted a University of Leeds paper that said coral reefs anchoring a quarter of marine wildlife will “most likely” be wiped out, even if the rise in global warming from pre-industrial times is capped at 1.5°C – which amounts to future warming of just 0.4°C, as 1.1°C has already occurred since 1820. Mr. Hood describes himself on his twitter feed as the “Herald of the Anthropocene” and was recently given €100,000 by the Spanish bank BBVA , which is heavily involved in Net Zero finance. In his commendation, Mr Hood was praised for his ability to “synthesize complex scientific models and studies and explain them in simple terms”. Certainly, Mr Hood went to the heart of the Leeds paper by further reporting that with an increase of 2°C, reef mortality “would be 100%”. This finding is said to have come from a “new generation of climate models”.
Corals have long occupied an exalted place in the climate tablets of doom. Their demise is commonly projected from the natural bleaching that occurs when they expel symbiotic algae, suggested to occur in reaction to sudden changes in water temperature. However, most bleaching – which also appears to have an important evolutionary function – occurs around weather oscillations, such as the El Niño event. These happen on a regular basis and once localised conditions have been stabilised, the coral usually recovers. Tropical coral thrives in temperatures between about 24°C and 32°C and sometimes grows quicker in warmer waters. Any change in long term global temperatures is unlikely to be a threat and certainly not one as small as 0.4°C. In any case, according to Dr. Johnson’s discoveries, there hasn’t been any change in such conditions on the Great Barrier Reef for at least 150 years.
A more practical threat to coral reefs is the less discussed practice of blowing them up and using them for building materials, jewellery, calcium health supplements and marine aquarium decorations. According to Big Blue Ocean Cleanup, an environmental non-profit organisation, this trade is worth $375 billion a year. This is an astonishing sum. Across the Pacific, Blue Ocean identifies two techniques of destruction. The first is small-scale mining using crowbars and sledgehammers to break off the coral branches. The second involves the use of dynamite.
Needless to say, this has an enormous impact on the surrounding eco-system, killing marine life and leaving a barren ocean behind. Indiscriminate destruction also causes sand erosion and removes coastal protection. Ironically, much of the coral has been used to build airports and resorts in places like the Maldives to house tourists who come to marvel at the reefs.
Coral reefs need protecting. It is not a good idea to drench them in untreated sewage, douse them with toxic chemicals, smash up their habitat with reckless fishing or rearrange the ocean floor with high explosives. But this is relatively mundane environmental housekeeping work. It is a world away from using unproven science statements and climate models to spout ‘save the planet’ rhetoric and push for an unrealistic control-and-distribute Net Zero project.
In the run up to COP26, one of Prince William’s £1 million “Earthshot” gifts was handed to a small Bahamian company called Coral Vita that says it grows coral to replant in the ocean. Writing in the Spectator Australia, the biologist Jennifer Marohasy noted that the Australian government permitted the mining every year of 200 tonnes of coral from the Great Barrier Reef. At the same time, $1 billion Australian dollars was provided to save the ‘dying’ reef. Some of this money, she noted, will be used to replant corals.
She added: “[T]here will be jobs for scuba divers, and it will be filmed by underwater videographers, marine scientists will collect data around the programme and boats will be chartered. There will be money for almost everyone who wants to participate – if they are vaccinated, believe in human-caused climate change and believe the Great Barrier Reef is dying.”
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Is Dom onboard?
I think he is a bit too busy patenting his novel eyesight test.
Yes – he wants to take all green subsidies, multiply by 50, and fund a lunar base.
Good on Nigel for giving it a go to stimulate a debate. I can see the battle-lines being drawn already Remainers on Yes, Leavers on No. I’m not hopeful that this will do anything much but further solidify entrenched views, but its a discussion we have to have…
And I am sure it will have much support from the BBC, Sky and ITV!
Forget them, they no longer belong to us – they work for Globalist Corporations.
As usual their personnel are so far up their own asses they will be surprised and perplexed when they lose this debate, by the numbers against them.
Try as I might I have repeatedly scanned BBC news for this and NOT. A. SINGLE. MENTION. OF. IT. – such an important topic for our country – on what is supposed to be the state broadcaster and they don’t cover it
However, they do cover the bleat of a Ukrainian scientist [see what they did there?] that if we ‘unite’ we can save the world from dreadful climate change.
Virtue signalling AND fake science all in one news story. Breathtaking.
It is bit more than a “discussion”we need if this country is to survive in any recognisable form.
People do not seem to realise just how high the stakes now are. We need to stop the Reset ( Zero Carbon is all part of if it – see Gates’ plans) or face the obliteration of our national life and all our basic rights and freedoms as we have known them since Magna Carta.
This is not an exaggeration either.
Everything that is being thrown at us is due to the Globalists last stand to control The West. They need us to be compliant. Most now are due to mental exhaustion and fear. Even those of us who have managed to hold the line are now so shattered and tired by seeing their fellow countrymen fall and fade away as more gaslighting and lies are flooding the zone. We have to search out truth or alternative opinion due to censorship that those who have fallen do not understand.
Even sights like this are not really telling the truth. They are only publishing what is allowed in the printing domain.
It is not just our basic rights and freedoms that will be lost. Many will lose their lives to satisfy the population reduction intent of those globalists.
I agree 100% – I doubt a referendum would be allowed, but anything that stimulates debate on the real costs and benefits would be welcome. It’s the sort of debate that should be happening in parliament of course, but isn’t.
The problem we have is the constant propaganda and gaslighting from the Globalists. Of course this is another move to destabilise us all. The cause of the problems we have is bureaucratic government controlled by Globalists (Bankers). Get rid of the cause and we can gradually get back to normal.
We do indeed. And not just about the target year for nut zero but for the need to reach it at all!
As long as 52% live in the real world…
Laudable aim though this is, Farage’s involvement will only serve to encourage the net zero zealots to dig in their heels.
I can envisage that his campaign will be smeared by insinuations of Russian collusion and those of us who are also sceptical of climate alarmism but don’t share all of Farage’s politics will be called far right through association.
Considering how brainwashed the public is about “climate change”, I don’t see this ending well. Especially in light of the US 2020 elections.
Given how the 2022 mid-terms are going to see an absolute catastrophe for the Democrats, I wouldn’t worry too much about what happened in 2020.
I am not talking about the result, I am talking about the fraud, especially in a country where you aren’t asked to show much ID to vote and the vote is written in pencil.
It’s the 2020 election that has brought us to where we are. If that election hadn’t been so ruthlessly stolen and the media hadn’t denied it by lying about the Bidens and Dominion we could have broken the control the Globalists now have over weakened minds. We must never forget the crimes against us over the last two years. Even Russia is being used against us for energy costs and mist will fall for the next lot of propaganda.
When we forget history and the facts in that history, we forget how to discern, question or even stand against evil. When good men do nothing p, evil happens could not be truer today.
Forget the 2020 – the result was a fraud – watch out for the 2024!
Donald…is that you??
Pathetic – do you ever read any “real “US news or just your brief?
Lovely video clip of your sad man Biden saying that Putin had invaded Russia – one week after he said it was Iran ….priceless jibberish from the “Leader of the ‘Free’ World”
(sic)
Yes. That is my point. What makes you think 2024 or this planned referendum will be fair?
Personally, I can’t see the net zero zealots being any less dug in than they are already. This is a failure of government, and not just this one, and, as with Covid, driven by distorted “science”, manipulated data and downright lies.
There will, of course, be the usual mud-slinging, MSM and BBC misrepresentations, and Farage is a sitting duck for that; but, then again, recent history shows that any one group is more than happy to smear and denigrate another which differs from its views, and another convenient Aunt Sally will be found, if Farage is not in the forefront.
There is no doubt that some sort of proactive movement is need to restore sense and proportion to this, and inaction will, as usual, be seen by government and the rest, as a tacit acceptance of these impractical and destructive “policies”, although that word hardly describes the switchback muddle we’re in.
The pollsters will ask their loaded questions, and the world and his wife will tell them that of course they want a greener, cleaner world. I suspect that if the annual fuel bills amount to the £3,000, or even the £4,200 recently suggested, there’ll be songs from a different hymn sheet. Other shortages and additional costs(food, consumer goods, clothing, council tax) will just be piling Pelion on Ossa, and hopefully people will be even less inclined to this. It would be a pretty stupid government that ploughs on in the face of that, but nothing surprises any more.
If he is serious, Farage will look at how Alex Salmond engaged with the Scottish People over about 2 years leading up to the Indyref. OK, they still lost, but they got far, far closer than the UK Establishment dreamed would be possible.
The campaigning tenet of treating the electorate like adults, seeking to honestly engage, inform, clarify and educate, is what Britain needs to learn.
All this turning politics into a 1970s rugby punch up really doesn’t do anyone any good.
I agree, but the arguments then, even if heated, were conducted far more along the lines you mention. Since 2016, those things seem to have dwindled away, and turned into punch-ups.
Indyref and Brexit had been simmering in the background for years, and the stages had been set in some form or another. This Net Zero thing has come into prominence, almost from nowhere, and has no history or provenance, as far as many people are concerned. It’s therefore a question of revving it up from start, and time isn’t on a campaign’s side.
It would be a dead duck under Labour (or the unholy trinity that may happen), so it really needs to get traction well before 2024. I think it needs two main things. Firstly, a real switch in public opinion to actively hating the idea and its effects, mostly financial; and secondly, a change in PM to someone far more pragmatic, with some sensible ministers (unlike Kwarteng) who can see the ramifications of this lunatic “policy”.
It would die a death were our fuel bills not to quadruple over the coming months.
Politics and science are always defeated by consumers wallets.
If you assume that Johnson is working to an agenda provided by Billionaire Globalists like Schwab, Gates and Soros, which he is, then it is not a ‘failure’ – he is doing exactly what he was told to do!
I don’t know – with the escalation of gas and fuel prices there could be a lot of people out there who might switch from their ‘entrenched’ positions when the debated makes them realise the extent to which they have been had over the whole “net zero” lie. And you can be sure of that – it is a lie.
When it starts to hit you in your wallet and you can no longer afford to heat your home you will be surprised what an eye opener it can be. Good on Nigel.
Hear, hear.
Once again Nigel frustrates the WEF Reset Gang dressed up as the British government.
Let us pray that he does! No-one else is on the side of the British people!
And if anyone can handle the flak Nigel can.
This is the kind of campaign which someone like him can do very well on and the mainstream politicians will flounder badly. Just like they did over Brexit.
And Nigel Farage is far too astute to be had over this time.
What a stupid move. Why would you launch a campaign when the public is so brainwashed? It needs to be a damn good campaign, led by some very knowledgeable people. They need to stress the fact that introducing renewables has only been driving costs up and emissions up. They need to make people understand that either they get renewables or they don’t freeze during the winter, they can’t have both. The minute they make this about “man made climate change isn’t real”, they lost the vote. People are conditioned to stop listening when they hear certain phrases. For all their talk of “far right dog whistle”, the left has a heck of a lot of dog whistles.
Judging by how bad the Brexit campaign was, I doubt this referendum will have a good outcome.
You may be right but my impression is that large enough sections of the public are not that bothered about net zero/climate change and that such a campaign stands a chance of gaining traction especially if they manage to associate net zero with higher energy bills and bring in a “Britain first” element to the debate. They’re obviously not going to convince the zealots, but I don’t think that’s their target audience.
The (brain washed) zealots are easy to spot…..they all wear face nappies and are fully juiced.
Remains to be seen. I still think the public needs more education on the matter until such a referendum can be won.
But, without a referendum, from where would such education come?
From people using their platforms to drive the point home. Maajid Nawaz has been doing a lot of good on that front, as have others.
Yep they need to read some more “sceptical” propaganda
“Judging by how bad the Brexit campaign was………”
And yet brexit won
Brexit won because the public hadn’t been under a decades long intense propaganda campaign. It’s really not the same.
i think the government were extremely complacent and believed that people couldnt think for themselves. All the polls were wrong
Absolute rubbish. The establishment were all in.
Brexit was won, because there were enough stupid people to believe the campaign lies, which fed their prejudices.
Similar to the climate change deniers’ principles….self inflicted harm…
They were ‘stupid’ yes….. to believe their lying politicians – especially Johnson- and the sold-out Globalist Mass Media.
Leek, you’re back and still writing the same old, poorly thought out nonsense.
With reference to your phrase “climate change deniers”:
1. Nobody is denying that the climate changes over time, but many of us disagree that there is evidence of a man-made effect on average global temperatures, or to put it in the language of your average climate modeller, we argue that there is no detectable anthropogenic signature. I challenge you to prove I’m wrong. 2. When you use the word “deniers” you reveal yourself as being part of a cult. Scientific theories are always there to be challenged, that is the nature of science. If a theory can’t be challenged it is dogma, a statement of faith.
So it is your claim, then, that energy prices have been going down as Britain has been investing into renewables?
No one denies climate change, the Earth’s climate is not static.
No such people as ‘climate deniers’. We all know that the climate constantly changes and it goes through cycles, as it always has, whether it’s the Roman legions around Hadrians wall growing grapes in the – then – warmer climate to make wine, or the Thames freezing over during the cold period.
Fortunately, there are enough of we older folk around to remember the vagiaries of our climate throughout the decades, and also what British life was like before the EU. That’s why the young are targeted, because their lack of hstorical knowledge makes them susceptible to other – implanted – ‘knowledge’. Thankfully, we are still here to counter the lies and propaganda.
Oh do shut up
Oh look. 32 people gave you a down-thumb, even though you are talking against renewables.
Have they changed their tiny minds or are they confused??
The post was confused…and defeatist ….OK?
Did you miss that?
The point is people are easily confused or led.. they see a direction of travel and follow…”they disapprove, so I disapprove”… It’s how mobs behave.. This is a mob…
You’d know, you’ve been a member of the establishment mob ever since you started commenting here.
Have you any more of your ‘great intellect’ to share with us?
Or is that it?
Just ignore the troll.
Confused? What exactly was confused in it? Care to elaborate? And if you think that it is defeatist to strengthen one’s position and fight against the mass indoctrination into climate change, then you are delusional. The people that think such a referendum can be easily won are living in an echo chamber. If you think that the British public, today, when faced with the question “Should the United Kingdom continue with its efforts in reducing emissions and saving the planet?” will answer a definite “NO!”, you need to get out more.
Your post is confusing. And don’t bother asking me to explain why.
It’s not my fault that you’re confused and you aren’t even capable of explaining why.
So 46 people think your post is wrong in its message. I was being generous.
Why not have the guts to apologise for a badly written piece and try again? We all put rubbish up occasionally but having the decency to admit it does no harm. It’s called humility.
Do you even realize what website you’re on? This whole website is built on the idea that facts are not a popularity contest. And you think that I should apologise because 46 people either can’t understand what they’re reading or a too full of hubris to see what’s going on around them? Apologise for what? For offending your sensibilities? How about you actually tell me what I said that’s wrong with an actual argument, rather than demand I bow down to the masses on a website built on refusal to bow down to the masses?
Your post was confusing. End of.
That’s a you problem, not a me problem. There is nothing I need to apologize for with regards to that.
It’s called hubris.
So just chuck in the towel then!
What an ignorant, hypocritical comment. Only person here chucking in the towel is you. You’re just going to give up, throw the question out to the indoctrinated, brainwashed masses, and then roll over and accept the result. Some of us want to have a civilization still standing by the end of this.
I was much of of the same opinion as you when the concept of a NetZero referendum was first proposed. A referendum is, by its nature, both a big risk and binding. No going back if you lose.
However, circumstances have dramatically changed in an astonishingly short space of time.
Government fraud over the cost of NetZero is now being expressed in the MSM. We are talking £3Tn – £5Tn by 2050, and we know government projects never come in on budget. Being that we are dealing with a complete unknown, we have no idea of the cost ceiling.
More importantly, we are about to get hit with energy bills quadruple what they were this time last year. There is nothing like a severe financial shock to shake people out their complacent and passive acceptance of something sold to them as cheap.
And it’s important people understand the difference between energy and electricity. We are variously and dishonestly told that wind power provides 30% of the country’s energy, it doesn’t it might, on occasions, provide 30% of our electricity but that’s not all the energy we use.
Coal still provides a small amount of our energy (converted to electricity) and gas provides the greatest bulk of our energy (converted to electricity but also used for domestic and industrial heating).
The fact is wind and solar provide single digit percentages of our entire energy needs. Indeed, 85% of the worlds energy is provided by fossil fuels.
Globally, renewables make up around 3%.
The point being is the public is routinely conned by politicians whenever they open their mouth about NetZero, and what will make the difference is where it hurts most, in the public’s wallet.
Hopefully you are right. But I am not convinced that this is widespread public knowledge. If there is a referendum, then the anti-netzero campaign needs to make all of these points headlines in every paper.
Yes, I also have reservations, it could be too soon, timing is crucial, an anti net zero campaign has to overcome decades of pseudo education and relentless green msm propaganda and all the shades of grey in between. Defining the actual objective may be difficult and ultimately based on a compromise to appease those still hooked on the Jones town co2 kool- aid.
It really is about getting your foot in the door. But in order to do that you first need to make sure that the door is not the kind that will simply take your foot off.
Money! If he sticks to money it stands a chance. There are enough well founded studies now that give very good support for how much this is going to cost. And its enormous sums. Just as the bills go skywards even before these costs are added.
Aim at people’s wallets, it usually works better than anything else.
This is one battle that Farage can win. When the bills start to come in and people can’t pay there could be real trouble.
Fuel rationing could happen by year end; some people might be self-rationing already.
If the war in the Ukraine goes on for months then food shortages are likely and China has stockpiled enormous quantities particularly of grains. Food rationing is a distinct possibility.
Of course Bozo, led by his handlers might attempt to buy off the public with fuel subsidies but long term this is not sustainable.
Fuel costs to industry could be decisive, if businesses close and people are out of work we are in real doo doo.
Net Zero really does have the potential for civil unrest.
Farage can win this and TPTB will know it. For now Farage has lobbed a grenade but this could escalate quickly if he keeps the pressure on.
Of the political class Farage is head and shoulders above anybody else although if he could convince Lord Frost to join that would help.
Get stuck in Sir Nigel!
Seconded
I lost faith in Nigel after he left UKIP after winning the EU referendum.
UKIP was on a high and there was a real prospect that UKIP could have killed the Tory beast.
Instead he left UKIP whilst supporting the utter [ock Henry Bolton to be his replacement, Bolton was clearly controlled opposition and did a great job of wrecking the party from within.
Then when Nigel decided to start the Brexit Party he began giving interviews stating the UKIP were now racist when absolutely no policy pertaining to matters of race had changed since his time as leader.
Nigel then stabbed the Brexit Party supporters in the back by standing down all candidates in any area where they posed even a slight threat to the Boris led Tories.
So dear leader Nigel is a major reason we are in the poo we are in with the evil Tory corporatist party in charge.
Granted he’s made some poor decisions but a ‘major reason’ we’re where we are? I don’t think so.
Of course he is.
If he hadn’t knifed the Brexit Party in the back by standing down the vast majority of his candidates would Boris the liar have his 80 seat majority?
Maybe not- maybe we’d have that nice Mr Corbyn as PM and a rabid, hard-left government.
I have sympathy for this view – Farage made a catastrophic error of judgement in standing down a whole committed team of candidates to support Johnson.
It was hard to accept at the time in spite of the “Corbyn Horror Scare” run by the Tory press – but now it is clear he was totally fooled and intimidated by Johnson and simply backed down and caved in when the crunch came – not a good omen.
Had Johnson a majority of say 30, we would not be in the current ” Globalist Emergency” tyranny now .
Not sure why you think a majority of only 30 would have made such a difference. Surely it would depend which Tories had won their seats? If those who have opposed some of the covid restrictions were not in Parliament, I imagine Johnson would have been able to do exactly what he has done and probably worse. Or do you think Labour policy on lockdowns etc would have been different if the Tories had had a smaller majority?
Maybe the last 2 years in particular of the Johnson govt have helped him to learn the folly of that wisdom and he wants to try to put it right. Either way, a lot of people will get their eyes opened in the process and it will be sooooo much harder for the government to continue to pull the wool over people’s eyes on this vital issue.
Plus his alliance with GB News which you can be sure will push his case can only help the cause.
At last and well done for fronting it.The public deserve a real debate on the farce and I think that Nigel will do a great job in confronting the Blob and its lies.
It will also scare the sXXX out of the supposed Tories to change tack for the next election.
I hope the symbol of this campaign will be Princess Nut Nuts head on a stick…..just for encouragement .
And of course Charlie Windsor – traitor.
It’s a debate that needs to be had, I’d just rather it wasn’t beining lead by theat odious, self serving, little man.
Blimey I didn’t realise Farage has so much support amongst sceptics!
What’s so special about him?
“. . . What’s so special about him?
Well, like him or loathe him – and I accept there are large numbers of people in the latter category, there’s surely no denying that he has some remarkable talents. He’s a brilliant orator, he speaks clearly and succinctly – few are in his class in this regard. His biggest achievement, which ought to provide inspiration to everyone, everywhere – is that just one wo/man on their own can make a big difference. Massive. In an age when many of us (me included) feel overwhelmed by the bollox surrounding Covid, vaccines and now Ukraine, Farage is testimony to us all having a voice. If one man can achieve what he has – (for better or worse – that’s not relevant here), then just think what a group of well organised and like minded people could achieve. I don’t always agree with him (e.g. his views on NATO and Ukraine), but I wish him the best of luck with this project and he’ll get my full support.
It’s a fair point/s, I just hope he doesn’t scupper sensible debates (as he did with Flexit) stab people in the back like he did with Alan Sked, and then turncoat as he did with Ukip.
To me he’s self serving first, and too populist, jumping onto whatever bandwaggon he can raise his immage with, before jumping ship when it comes to doing some real work on it.
Personally, I will never trust the man ever again.
Yes, you too make fair points, ImpObs.
It’s a sad fact of life that anyone who climbs the greasy political pole is likely to be described as famous by some and infamous by others. To my mind, although Farage is far from perfect, he’s a great deal better than most other politicians out there – most of whom I wouldn’t cross the road to piss on if they were on fire.
If we were going to have a referendum campaign, I’d much rather it was lead by someone like Lord Lawson & the GWPF, someone with some credibility in the field and an experienced politician.
Maybe a populist type stands more chance, I dunno, but Farage seem too marmite, more likely to divide than bring people together, but then, maybe that why it him doing it.
Nigel Farage has one major asset which Bozo is going to gift him – fuel prices.
When people cannot afford to heat their homes, or put fuel in their vehicles, net Zero is finished.
Yes, he’s late to this party, not much doubt Paul Homewood the indefatigable green scam blogger will be pleased, he’s been hoping for a big name specifically Nigel Farage to raise awareness, Farage is an opportunist and a gambling man, he must think the odds are becoming more favorable.
According to the Express online this move has upset Hugh Grant ,who he?
In my book that means its a goer if the luvvies are agin him and us>>
Great news.
I take it all back, that alone was worth the press release LOL
One easy move would be for anyone buying Green energy to pay the unsubsidised price. This would help to create a market assuming anyone was willing to wear a hair shirt rather than just virtue signal. It would also reduce the burden on everyone else.
even better, “would you like to buy coal power for 10p/kwh available 24x7x365 or wind power for 60p/kwh and you only get power when the wind blows. ”
It’s a tough choice.
Have to say, love him or hate him, this man has done more to deserve a knighthood than gw, witless, unbalanced and all the rest of them put together.
You don’t get a knighthood for deserving reasons, you get one because you kept your mouth shut, you took the bungs and let everyone else take theirs.
Looking at those given Knighthoods ( latest …Gavin Wiliamson!) who would want one?
You would hardly be described as joining a top club.
Knighthoods are losing their value faster than fiat currencies.
Exactly. Farage wants to abolish the HoL (not sure I agree 100% – they have managed to scrutinise some stupid Bills to the benefit of us all) and has said he would refuse a knighthood. Certainly, given the calibre of those thus elevated recently, a gong has lost its prestige.
Absolutely. The outstanding British politician of our time. Sorely needed.
Even though i voted for brexit, after the past 2 years i dont think referendums are necessarily the right thing. Imagine if 51% voted for permanent lockdowns, we’d be f’d
Agree. Any future referendum would only be granted if TPTB were sure of the result.
As a pupil pointed out on Grange Hill in the 1980s: “they’ll only call a referendum when they’re certain they’ll get the result they want”.
the debate must be made, but I think a referendum is a very bad idea. The last two years have been the perfect demonstration of how to brainwash the public, and make them believe exactly what you want them to believe.
I think that’s true if you submit to BBC/Sky style campaigning.
If instead you pack village halls, town buildings and just talk direct to human beings, without the TV having any control whatsoever, then you can genuinely reach hearts and minds, get to the real nub of what matters to people and as a result, built a critical mass of support.
TV ‘debates’ choreographed by Fiona Bruce et al are a complete waste of time and space.
We need return to conversation and contact with human beings – we need to block the evil plans for the Digitalisation of Human Life to serve and benefit the Hyper Rich!!
We can no longer trust the mass media and we need to build alternatives.
The evil propaganda offensive launched against the startled, gullible people under the cloak of the “Covid Terror” must never be allowed to happen again!
you are forgetting about GB News
He makes those who thought they had a home run sit up and take notice, bring the debate on.
The government would probably lower to voting age to 12 to capture all the little Gretas.
I cant understand why some people say this is a stupid idea. Do we just do nothing?. At least it will stimulate debate and put pressure on some politicians. A bit like TDS,middle class people cant believe that Farage has huge support in the country outside london and oxbridge, yes he’s never done well in a general election because most people realize a vote for a third party is a waste of vote in a two party system. They will never allow another referendum of any sort, but mark my words, by autumn when the energy bills hit home, MP’S will be begging for change.
And quite right too. The thing is: the referendum should be shaped in terms of ‘Abolishing the climate change Act’, rather than just rejecting Net Zero.
You need to be clear about how far away from net zero you want to be, otherwise it’s just a waste of time.
have a feeling if people get to vote it will be stacked in a way so when the vote goes to the climate change lot the state will say “look, look, this is what people want, see, we can do what we want”
Johnson has done exactly what he wanted anyway – citing the (fake)
“science” and his stooge “experts” for his decisions – only a couple of dozen MPs challenge the lies – so he will do it again when they invent their next ’emergency.’to fool the sheep.
Look out for food and energy ‘rationing’, planed energy “outages” and restrictions on private car travel – the blame of course this time will be put on Putin!
Al this is part of the bogus “Climate Agenda “element of Schwab’s “Great Reset” anyway.
In reality it is about shutting down people’s lives and withdrawing their Human Rights.
Where do I sign?
Good news!
Perhaps Nigel Farage, having been totally fooled by Johnson over Brexit, will have this major retributive contribution to make to British politics to save is from the destructive and impoverishing Globalist Nightmare being planned for us on every front – from Human Rights and freedoms, to health, to food supply and energy – if so he will be a NatIonal Hero, to be remembered for a very long time.
If he fails, we face a very grim future indeed when Johnson and his Cabal, together with his Globalist multi-billionaire chums – “Borg Reset” Darth Schwab , Vax Man Gates and the Trafficker General, Soros, supporter of all Nation destroying causes, run this country and its much abused and betrayed people into the ground.
Interesting that there is such a strong correlation between anti-vaxx campaigning and climate change denial campaigning.
Sceptical principles…
Object
Suspend thinking
Make up misinformation
Repeat misinformation
Never question what you say
Abuse MSM as much as possible
Abuse Blair, Biden, Gates etc
Repeat
You are silly.
I’m never impressed by people who systematically assume the established narrative is correct.
But what really gives a way a small, feeble mind is one that first assumes the established narrative is correct and then becomes very defensive when the established narrative is questioned.
It is clearly a mind that thinks: believe what you are told and don’t question it.
I think “mind” is a very flattering description of what we are dealing with.
But do don’t question it do you???
Objecting to a statement isn’t questioning it.
When you see something you disagree with, it’s fine to ask a question.
Just make the question meaningful.
Read the scientific paper yourself if you have the skills to do so and ask specific questions or challenge the detail. If you don’t have these skills, then choosing to quote some opposing “paper”, which you also don’t understand is fooling yourself into thinking you know something, when you don’t.
Really you just have an opinion, based on what….??????
May I assume, from your comments, that you read and understand scientific papers? [NB One simple question mark is all that’s required when asking a question, not four full stops followed by six erotemes.]
Of course I read scientific papers.
Glad your skills enable counting as high as 6. Well done.
I notice there are no reasoned arguments put forward.
someone who has outsourced their ability to think for themselves to the BBC who will be happy to do it for them and reach the wrong conclusions
I miss Concrete: unlike you, he has a 3 figure IQ and could engage in rational debate.
I suspect he was a Lieutenant.
You’ll never make it to Lance Corporal.
I’m giving you my “post of the day” award.
It is very prestigious – but sadly won’t fit onto a mantelpiece or do much for your CV.
Interestingly I have never done an IQ test, so how do you know the result?
I am pleased to get 100 % disapproval rating. Proof I am right.
You really should get out more.
Farage is a very very clever politician, probably the most consummate British politician of the last 20 year’s! He’s never been elected to parliament….well we can put that down to our wholly unrepresentative first past the post electoral system, it maintains a corrupt duopoly that services the needs of a global elite, not the greater British public.
“Net Zero” is a peg he can hang his coat on, an avenue into the “GREAT RESET” of the British political system and potentially the evisceration of the rancid illiberal, undemocratic filth that compose and populate Westminster and the estaishment! If there’s one country in the world that needs to show the rest of the planet the route too the sunlit uplands of small government and direct democracy, it’s this one, coz make no mistake, the English “deep state” in particular, has been the belly of the beast for the last 150 year’s!
Domestic politics are way too boring for Westminster now, the global stage is where they long to be, welcoming in anyone from anywhere without any thought of the infrastructure, now the VOICE in this latest conflict.
Unfortunately not the VOICE of reason.
It’s surprising how little a lot of people know about this and the costs involved. If it even serves just to raise awareness and debate it will be doing a good job.
A lot of people also seem to think swapping a gas boiler for an air source heat pump is like for like (in terms of heating efficiency) and similar in cost, lies happily spread by the BBC. When will people realise we can’t run an efficient productive country on a bit of wind and a bit of sun?
People know full well that heat pumps are expensive and the BBC has never said otherwise.
We know it is standard practice to abuse the BBC in sceptical circles, but really it is pathetic.
You probably need to shout TROLL now.
Not enough people know what Net Zero is about to have any meaningful debate.
I think they are about to find out
Coming through letter boxes shortly.
Please supply a concise explanation.
“Green subsidies are shovelled straight into the bank accounts of [the rich]“.
Seriously, who doesn’t know that’s true? I am struggling to think of a “type”. Perhaps a very naive Green voter might believe otherwise – maybe someone who was in the top decile for naivety inside the 1.6% voteshare the party won in the 2019 election. Turnout was 68%, so that’s about 1 in 900 people. The other 899 know damned well where “green subsidies” go…
The other 899 people may know damned well where “green subsidies” go, but to them it’s a small price to pay for “saving the planet “. Such has been the intensity of the unremitting propaganda it will be very difficult to recondition the minds of the mask wearing net zero zombies. The heroic Tony Heller has been trying for years, although mainly preaching to the converted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i4V37FRXTo
It looks like you are creating a hybrid super enemy for the sceptics to conveniently attack.
You need a snappier name.for them
Is it only green party voters that understand climate change?
I suspect you don’t know who you are fighting.
”…. understand climate change…”?
You mean understand that the climate has ALWAYS changed? Because there are an awful lot of dimwits out there who don’t even know that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere never has had any any effect on so-called ‘global warming’.
I do seriously doubt that most British citizens have thoroughly understood the full implications of NetZero.
For whatever reason, people seem to think that achieving zero CO2 emissions is something that can be achieved magically, with little to no cost, and in a manner that will supply energy reliably and safely. Sorry to say, but science says otherwise.
In simplest terms, the sun doesn’t always shine. The wind doesn’t always blow. It is very expensive, and sometimes physically impossible, to store the sort of energy produced by solar and wind generation systems. It is incredibly expensive, bordering on physically impossible, to transmit electricity over very long distances.
These are not opinions. These are cold, scientific facts.
Millions of British people have been made aware of some of the costs implied by NetZero with the announcement of massive increases in the costs of electricity they’ve received in the past couple of weeks. Our reliance on natural gas produced in Europe and Russia is also becoming painfully apparent.
Now seems like a very good time to have a clear-eyed national debate over our national energy policy.
i’m hoping utility bill increases wake a lot of people up, as after two yrs of compliance all they have to show for it is higher bills, fewer jobs and a further degradation of the NHS.
What do you suggest is to be done?
The debate should have started when Labour and Maggie shut the pits.
Just like the lack of a food policy. That is equally criminal.
A sensible energy policy to reduce emissions will be expensive. Not having one will be more expensive and paid by future generations.
Well, OK. But the British people need to understand that climate change is a truly Global phenomenon.
Banning petrol and diesel carts in the UK might, arguably, make a tiny reduction in the amount of CO2 produced here. But in the big scheme of things, that’s not going to make the tiniest difference if China and India continue to burn billions of tons of coal. And if charging the electric vehicles that have, presumably, replaced the petrol-powered ones taxes our electricity grid beyond what it can reliably and safely produce, the result will be a local catastrophe. Needless and self induced.
Consider the British government’s current plans to eliminate gas boilers for home heating. I will note that modern natural gas boilers are extremely energy efficient. They produce trifling amounts of CO2. We have in place a well-functioning, safe, and extremely reliable distribution infrastructure. And, most importantly, natural gas can be stored and transported, safely and cheaply, in massive quantities.
Again, what is to replace them? So-called heat-pump systems are frankly unsuited to a very high percentage of Britain’s housing stock. They require a noisy external compressor and fan system. They also require a level of insulation that simply isn’t present, nor is really practical for, a significant fraction of existing British residential properties.
All of these initiatives are implemented by a Government and Parliament that likes to score cheap “green” points with a public that simply doesn’t understand the ramifications.
In the middle of a calm, cold winter night, the demands on Britain’s electricity grid for heating, other household and industrial use – including, presumably, the charging of millions of electric cars – will be immense. And yet Britain’s acres of solar panels and forests of wind turbines will be producing not a single Kilowatt of power.
We really should have addressed that fact before we started banning products and systems that have worked extremely well for a century or more.
Zero CO2 will take care of all the trees/plants that depend on it to survive
This is a big problem we have right now … there is no actual political opposition to most of the major issues in this country – they are all singing from the same hymn sheet whether its climate, covid, immigration … they all say exactly the same thing – groupthink has run amok. We saw this weakness in our political system when during covid everything this government did whether it was further lockdowns, mask mandates or jabbing children – it was simply nodded through without a single question being asked and almost no challenge from the opposition -perhaps if the opposition parties had did what they were supposed to do and actually oppose occassionally then just maybe we would never have found ourselves in the mess we find ourselves today.
Whether you agree with him or not – whether you like him or not – its good that Farage is providing some much needed useful opposition to finally debate this governments zero carbon policies – its good that we have an opposition once again.
I think it is the best news I have heard for a long time. I wish him a lot of luck in his campaign
Despite the inevitable campaign of half-truths from the usual greenistas, crippling fuel bills will make this issue more immediate and real than the Brexit referendum. Bring it on.
Indeed – here’s hoping it will be 2 for 2
I don’t believe referendums are appropriate for this sort of issue.
What they’re perfect for is matters of taste, where there can’t be a wrong or right answer, such as Brexit.
Brexit was certainly left a bad taste.
They are entirely appropriate, even if non-binding because we have been lied to, are being lied to and will be lied to forever more. The dogs need to feel their chokers.
Hugh Grant has come out against Farage, Nigel must be doing something right. The virtue signalling greens know they are in for a hiding when the votes get counted.
Farage is an odious individual who cares about no-one but himself. In the unlikely event there was a referendum it would not go the way he would like.
And you know the result of the referendum, how? Will it be rigged?
A plebiscite could be a double-edged sword, depending on its wording, for example, “Do you support the green agenda or do you want your granny to die from heat”.
It will be your grandchildren who are impacted.
Reality bites in Germany – Robert Habeck the (Green) Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Climate Action wonders whether it might be worth extending the life of Germany’s remaining nuclear power stations – without Russian enegy imports next winter could be ‘a challenge’:
https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/robert-habeck-gruene-naechster-winter-waere-bei-stopp-von-energieimporten-eine-herausforderung-a-8a5251cb-6cbf-4ea1-9c52-fb9525e125cb
In this video at the 41 minute, 43 second mark is Nigel Farage advocating that NATO needs to do a lot more on behalf of Ukraine.
He suggests NATO air forces should attack Russian ground troops in Ukraine, but then slyly suggests they should not because it might trigger a nuclear war due to Putin (as Farage implies) being mentally deranged.
Farage is just another Globalist controlled influencer throwing around childish accusations that Putin is insane, and talking out of both sides of his mouth that NATO should attack Russia on behalf of Ukraine, but yet should not because Putin is a lunatic who might start launching nuclear missiles.
The West and NATO played a major role in provoking this war in Ukraine, and Farage knows this, but yet this “man of the common people” hasn’t the guts to use his position of influence to highlight this. Instead, he floats along with the legacy media line.
I think Farage may have exited his home in recent days, licked his finger and put it up to see which way the wind was blowing, and then decided: ah yes, a referendum is a brilliant way to get media attention.
A petition already exists (closing date 27 April) for a referendum on ‘Net Zero’.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/599602
I’ve not had much time for Farage after he was pushing for warmonger Blair to take charge of the vaccine roll out. Big mistake.
Indeed. I was subscribed to his YouTube channel but when he came out with this appalling statement I was both shocked and offended. I unsubscribed immediately. However, and from bits seen on GB News, he appears to have rowed back on support for the injections. I believe he is double perforated but has rejected the boosta. If he knows as much as we on here about the juices I suspect he might be a tad concerned.
For now I forgive that appalling promotion of Bliar and hope he has seen the light.
At the moment he is the best and only man we’ve got.
Didn’t we must know that Russia would be blamed for energy prices when the Green Machine was already rolling and in place during last year. The Globalists know exactly how to work the minds of European citizens now.
It would be in Russia’s interests for them to fund our ecoloons in order to end exploitation of our own oil and gas and increase our dependence on Russian gas.
This ths prima facie cause of our time and whatever anyone thinks of Nigel at least he’s out in public talking about it. We need everybody doing ths same thing because the eco loons will fight day and night for their cause. They have lots of funding and at the moment we don’t.
The only reason that there is an opening for Farage is that after Brexit and Covid, Net Zero is yet another issue where voters are faced with all the major parties saying the same thing, and cannot voice their scepticism. Why is this groupthink happening in politics?
Given that there is no evidence of the world’s temperature increasing in the last ten years (IPCC 6th Report), the alarmists can only point to an unsurprising one degree increase since the ending of the Little Ice Age in about 1850, and that temperatures are currently less than during the Medieval Warm Period, there will be no global warming to fear and the Climate Change Agenda is a complete self-harming scam.
Good news. Get the North Sea working again, get fracking and get Rolls Royce constructing its modular nuclear reactors. We MUST have energy independence.
Removing the VAT on fuel would be a small victory; we need to end all green taxes and subsidies for ‘unreliables’.
So the Observer sees a crisis and says “carry on chaps” as if it’s hurting no one. They see a crisis caused by net-zero energy policy, and want it to continue, loading the energy-user with extra hundreds of billions of pounds of levies, subsidy and unnecessarily rising costs, all to prevent 0.04% (total) * 3% (man’s) * 1% (UK’s) of CO2 in the atmosphere, i.e. 0.000012% of an inert gas that has no effect on temperature or climate, but feeds our crops, i.e. food production.
They are really nice, kind, caring people in the Observer, aren’t they?
“They are really nice, kind, caring people in the Observer, aren’t they?”
And very, very clever.
“experts claim could cost £1.3 trillion” – can someone please post a link to a professionally produced set of accounts that show the cost of transitioning to renewables over the next 30 years?
These will, of course take into account the new price of gas.
The only accounts I’ve seen are back-of-a-fag-packet scribblings that add up all the costs but do not subtract any of the savings and do not account for the fact that that a large portion of energy infrastructure will come to the end of its life in this period and need to be replaced anyway.
This applies to the supporters of fossil fuels and supporters of renewables. Let’s have a decent set of accounts to work from, with all assumptions listed.
As they say “arguments are rife when facts are scarce”.
You are asking for a forecast. They are always wrong.
You cannot run a business successfully unless you project your expenses and income.
The alternative is to guess, which is not what I want from government.
Indeed. I have some experience of that. It’s like laying war plans; they never survive the first engagement with the enemy. I’ll remain sceptical of all forecasts.
I say. Asking a bit much there aren’t we?
Don’t we run the country on back of a fag packet scribblings?
This ought to be interesting. It’ll be a battle of every single political party and all corporate and social meedja against a tiny fringe minority of millions of normal, sane people.
I`m sure Farage is due a “sudden” heart attack soon, would suit the WEF down to the ground.
Good; it is well past time that the Green Nonsense is challenged. NF needs to get some real scientists on board to challenge the puppets/muppets supporting it.
You have to be a cupid stunt to pretend that a referendum settles anything requiring judgment and knowledge.