UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently asked wealthy nations to bring forward the Net Zero deadline from 2050 to 2040. In response, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a non-profit policy group that advocates for limited government, has published a memo urging GOP members of Congress to denounce the request as “alarmist”.
Fox News has the story.
The memo started by picking apart various claims from those who warn that global warming will lead to catastrophic changes to human and animal life. For example, it noted a short-term projection by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that suggests global temperatures peaked nearly a decade ago in 2015.
“Despite this reality, we are told every day that every emission warms the planet. That is clearly not the case. We should not mindlessly and recklessly proceed with dangerous and expensive emissions cuts until this paradox is resolved,” the memo stated.
It then pointed out that a recent report from the Energy Information Administration… said the Biden administration will already fall well short of its goal of achieving Net Zero emissions by 2050.
Worth reading in full.
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.
And so what..?
The approval process was a farce, if not fraudulent. It’s also hurting some people badly, and we’re not allowed to discuss that.
That’s why I’m here, not because some people may have benefited.
I think it’s critical that we’re exposed to interpretations of data that don’t always fit with our beliefs. Only by being aware of all data, from all sides of the argument, can we draw conclusions as to the magnitude of the crime.
Not if the analysis and data is junk.
1% IFR for the over 80s?
Where is the unstabbed control group and comparison?
No where.
The over 80s have excess deaths post stabs, explain that.
Jeez. I never said what I believed or didn’t believe, I just said it’s healthy to have beliefs challenged. Starting to wonder if the 77th have been playing the long game on here. Division is key to their aims.
Don’t know about others, but I don’t start out with beliefs, I just observe then develop an informed opinion which evolves with further observation.
I use my instinct first (everyone does), and then attempt to prove myself wrong. It’s called the scientific method, aka DOUBT, not FAITH.
Because if it was as deadly as they were telling us it was, then I would need to take action – probably very costly action – to protect myself, my wife, my children. So, my instinct told me I should perform some due diligence before embarking upon costly action.
My instinct told me it wasn’t a pandemic; streets empty of the dead and dying told me I could not be wrong.
My instinct told me the numbers of people dying every day were quite unremarkable; some primary school arithmetic performed for 30 seconds on mortality rates per 100K per year kept telling me I could not be wrong.
My instinct told me that the more contagious a virus, the less deadly it is; that’s just common sense, kids.
My instinct told me vaccines can’t be developed that quickly; some days of research about the linear, exhaustive nature of clinical trials told me I could not be wrong.
I was wrong about one thing, though. The panic (as my instinct told me it was) did not subside after a few weeks.
Why, oh why? Was it not panic? Was it something else…?
Oh, the questions. I have accepted I’ll never know the truth. Not enough of it, anyway.
Please, teach me not to dream. But I have a life to lead!
Good one Marcus
“I was wrong about one thing, though. The panic (as my instinct told me it was) did not subside after a few weeks.”
THIS. Panics, at least of the organic and crowdsourced variety, typically do tend to subside within a few weeks. Unless of course, the panic is engineered, especially when the engineers behind it deliberately keep stoking panic day and night via a 24/7 news cycle.
People go mad in crowds, but only recover one by one. It is FAR easier to lose one’s mind than it is to find it again.
Descartes would certainly agree, in his Discourse on Method.
Yes, that’s how you get to a belief. You start from the position of being open-minded/neutral, then form an opinion that is based on your understanding of the observations and data you have been exposed to. That’s how we all got here. I was merely saying that, once a belief has been formed, it’s healthy to have that belief challenged so your understanding can be adapted if that’s necessary.
Take a look at this if you haven’t already seen it.
https://youtu.be/WVrTb3turbI
Ourworldindata appears to work with the WHO. Early on, during the WHO declared pandemic, various UN aligned NGOs asserted the following “No one is safe until everyone is safe”. Ourworldindata also asserted this, which is strange for a site that specializes in data, as the assertion is not only emotive but also the kind of slogan you expect from behind the Iron Curtain. Another point to note is that ourworldindata has nice graphs showing vaccine uptake around the world as if every country was taking the same vaccine. There are nine different vaccines that have been used and this is not clear in the data what effect each type has, because there was/is no differentiation. Again, this is pretty poor for a site specializing in data. It didn’t help that in the middle of this Tony Blair said people should take different vaccines, without hearing anyone with knowledge telling him to shut up.
In July 2020 Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus the director of the WHO warned “no return to the old normal for the foreseeable future’ and “The virus remains Public Enemy No.1” and goes on about governments going in the wrong direction. He ends by saying “If the basics aren’t followed there is only one way the pandemic is going to go. It’s going to get worse and worse and worse and worse”. It seems there was a general amnesia of all the knowledge already in existence concerning Coronavirus and the like. Hope-Simpson studied respiratory viruses for 50 years and produced data showing how these types of virus are seasonal with ebb and flow characteristics dependent on latitude. They all come and go and DO NOT keep getting worse and worse and worse… If a government times it right it can look as though a vaccine, or lockdown, or masking has worked. One other point – the National Geographic produced some graphs for the 1918 flu and how each US city was affected. Although there were mostly two waves, every graph was a different shape, showing that there are other influences that affect an outbreak and this is still not understood.
Hold on a moment, the Johns Hopkins Covid Map is showing a very different profile in that most South East Asian countries had massive ‘vaccine’ roll outs before the major spikes. Vietnam is an example. Also Hong Kong is controlled by China and we trust everything that the CCP says/writes?
Would be interested in seeing a breakdown of vaxxed vs unvaxxed all-cause mortality from the countries & periods mentioned, stratified by age bands.
And for the 9 different types of vaccines.
Excellent point
Pfizer
Moderna
AstraZeneca/Covishield
J&J (Janssen)
Sputnik V (Russia)
Sinovac (China)
Sinopharm (China)
Covaxin (India)
Novavax
Yep, that’s a total of nine. And Hungary I think used ALL of them, though not sure about Novavax.
Technically the first five are not even really vaccines, but rather gene therapies.
EDIT: Forgot about the Cuban homegrown vaccines Abdala and Soberana. Thus, 11.
Not including any other candidates that never made it to market anywhere in the world.
In which case there were no control groups or anything that could be used as reference data, at all. This must be an example of ‘getting the world to work together’ because before we were all sovereign and selfish individualists. Scientifically this has been anything but and a disaster.
Good points and it makes sense, because the risk of dying from/with COVID-19 was significantly higher in the over 80s. However, would be interesting to know of any other possible confounders, between the different populations, such as % of smokers in Singapore, Hong Kong etc. Also percentages are useful for relative comparison, but what are we talking about in actual numbers? What is excess mortality like in > 80s now?
In this article it was clear that the risk of suspected serious adverse reactions declined with age and the 80-90 YOs showed lower reported serious adverse events than the young. Vaccination benefit versus risk of serious adverse event was only neutral or slightly positive in the eldest group, and for men.
https://brownstone.org/articles/serious-side-effects-exceed-the-risk-of-hospitalization-with-covid-19-in-the-swedish-population/
‘… the 80-90 YOs showed lower reported serious adverse events than the young. ‘
Do you think that might be because nobody thinks to Yellow Card a death of an 80 to 90 year old because deaths in the elderly are not unusual?
Many just don’t live long enough anyway for an adverse reaction to become apparent.
IFR for the over 80s was 1% – same as the flu.
How could a Stab save more than were at risk?
Elderly people die… ’SOON of something. No vaccine ‘saves’ their lives. And as for well it extends their lives – data please, how long, how many, what circumstances?
So.
Observational study with no control group, correlating data between different social, economic, geographic, climate, demographic, political, areas with complete disregard for the multiple confounding factors that entails.
Give it up please. If there were any reputable, empirical, falsifiable data with respect to effectiveness of the CoVid not-vaccines, that should be available within a single Country such as UK or Germany. It isn’t, hence the scouting round to find some semblance of ‘proof’ elsewhere, somewhere, anywhere.
Agree 100%.
Very well put
I fail to see the point of articles such as this. It is now a matter of fact amongst the real science and wider sceptic communities that the injections are poisonous. Why mess about with statistics in order to provide the murderers with a get out of jail card?
The never ending barrage of lies and deceit will not disappear simply because a few older people survived the initial cull.
There are far more urgent matters to be considered not least Billy’s latest advertising campaign for his next ‘pandemic’ and the ongoing shenanigans at the WHO.
The reason no international comparisons are worth their salt is that every country had differing Covid data, including testing and death coding. It renders almost any international comparison moot and leaves us only with national comparisons, presumably by design: just looking at the PCR test, there are so many confounders from kits used to reagents, temps, genes tested, swabbing and this is before the famous cycle threshold, all of which were curiously kept a secret in many countries.
If one insists on using the ‘official’ data for an international comparison Noah, then without any doubt the champions are China’s Sinopharm and Sinovac, by country miles?
True, but to be fair, this particular comparison used excess all-cause deaths, not Covid specific deaths. And that data should be fairly bias-free, except perhaps for differences in the relative timeliness of counting and reporting deaths in general.
I believe that thalidomide was actually effective for treating morning sickness. Strange how, despite the catastrophic effects of the drug, we do not hear anybody plugging the one small positive thing about it.
Even if the jabs did help certain people, does that justify the harm it did to so many? Surely it is a matter of balancing benefits and harms and it is clear that in the case of the covid jabs the evidence is overwhelmingly they are harmful. Crossing the road without looking both ways is overwhelmingly harmful which is why no smart person does it even though they might well arrive safely on the other side. More and more doctors and scientists are calling for these jabs to be withdrawn for people of all ages, not just the young.
Can we expect an article from Will in the next 24hrs stating how the jabs are killing everyone?
You two are funny with your polar opposite viewpoints.
But what I’d like to know from Noah, if you’re reading, you don’t tend to delve into the mechanisms at play as to why you think the jabs are saving elderly people when we know they’re killing younger people. Why would the exact same formula work in completely opposite ways just due to age?
This is something that never seems to get discussed and I think it’d go a long way toward supporting your hypothesis if you could explain. The problem with data is that it can be interpreted in different ways. But what I’m failing to understand is the “why” part of your hypothesis, and there must be a physiological element to support this in order to provide rationale. Certainly I’ve never heard anyone explain why the shots are helping protect elderly folk ( it just gets stated as a fact we’re meant to accept ) whilst simultaneously causing harm to working age people. Now that really is a “novel technology” with an effect that I’ve never heard of before.
I don’t necessarily believe this, but it’s conceivable that it still “saves” more people than it kills among the old, but not among the young because covid doesn’t kill younger people.
The problem with that idea is the known heart damage due to the spike proteins. What I’ve never heard explained from anyone is, if elderly people generally are more prone to dicky tickers and heart attacks/failure is way more prevalent and even expected in that age group, how then could the jabs be having any sort of protective effect on an aged cardiovascular system but have the opposite, damaging effect on younger, more robust hearts, in the very age group that are not known to have high rates of cardiac issues? We could say the same about strokes. Two disorders that have always been accepted to happen in old age are now far more common in jabbed younger people. If anyone should be dropping like flies, due to them being frailer all-round, it should be the elderly. I’m just waiting on an expert to explain to me why that isn’t the case. Unless it is and age is masking these causes of death because there’s nothing untoward about it in the elderly cohort.
Specifically with reference to Noah Carl’s post, if covid kills a high % of the elderly, and the vaccine stops them dying from covid, then even a vaccine that kills people through side effects on the heart will still “save lives” if the % it kills is < those killed by covid
The old don’t live long enough to establish an equivalent endpoint with young people for comparison.
I see people still don’t understand the old and vulnerable ‘saved’ by vaccines, are end of life with about 12 months or less left on the clock.
So if an old-fart shuffles off from cardiovascular disease, they probably already had it, or it wouldn’t seem unusual, but not so in the young.
.
Two upvotes for the full stop!
Does it represent a call for a full stop to Covid vaccinations?!
Shouldn’t we be asking which ‘vaccines’ these were? I presume that territories in the Chinese sphere of influence wouldn’t have been given mRNA? Whereas I’d expect that South Koreans were..?
Precisely, CG.
How’s Vietnam?
Well that article took an unexpected turn. What I see is a country and two city states that experienced excess mortality after the injections. I am also aware there appear to be successive waves of increasing death from COVID in Japan following the injections.
It may well be true that “Elderly Vaccination Saved Lives in East Asia” but many of those lives would have been saved in a different way – and many more lives that weren’t saved would have been saved – if there had been no mass vaccination, if Professor Geert Vanden Bossche is correct:
As Professor Vanden Bossche explains, herd immunity diminishes the infection rate, but mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic prevents herd immunity and instead increases the infection rate, and makes the vaccinated susceptible to re-infection. Instead of generating herd immunity, Covid-19 mass vaccination triggers a chain reaction of increasing infections.
The more Covid infections there are, the more Covid deaths there are.
And this is what has happened in South Korea. After mass vaccination there was a MASSIVE increase in Covid cases and a MASSIVE increase in Covid deaths.
Noah Carl claims that elderly vaccination saved lives, and that may be true, but many of the lives which the vaccines saved – and didn’t save – were lives which were put at risk because of the massive increase in infections after mass vaccination – a massive increase in infections which, Geert Vanden Bosche argues (and predicted), was caused by mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic. The more Covid infections, the more Covid deaths.
Thus the vaccines have simultaneously saved many lives and caused many deaths – both Covid deaths and other deaths. It reminds me of Groucho Marx’s character in A Night At The Opera praising the father of another character for being “the first man to stuff spaghetti with bicarbonate of soda, thus causing and curing indigestion at the same time.”
Agent provocateur!
but no mention of early treatment that would have saved[probably all] lives [ from dying of the virus ]and no mention of early treatment that worked [ ivermectin etc ] would have stopped the e a act for the poison injections
have to admit i only skimmed the article
According to Wikipedia, South Korea began vaccinating on 26 February 2021, with AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines (same as the UK) and in addition in June 2021 with the Jansen and Moderna vaccines.
According to the New York Times’ ‘Tracking Coronavirus Vaccinations Around The World’ website, 86% of the population of South Korea have been fully vaccinated, one of the most highly vaccinated countries in the world.
From 1st March 2020 to 1st March 2021 – when nobody was vaccinated – there were 90,028 Covid cases in South Korea.
From 1st March 2021 to 1st March 2022 – as most of the population got vaccinated – there were more than 3 million Covid cases.
From 1st March 2022 to 30 January 2023 – with 86% of the population ‘fully vaccinated’ – there have been more than 27 million Covid cases.
That’s:
90,000 Covid cases in a year when nobody was vaccinated,
3 million Covid cases in a year when most people got vaccinated
27 million Covid cases in 11 months when 86% of the population were ‘fully vaccinated’.
Does that look like vaccine effectiveness?!!!
And more importantly, deaths:
From 1st March 2020 to 1st March 2021 – when nobody was vaccinated – there were 1,603 Covid deaths in South Korea.
From 1st March 2021 to 1st March 2022 – as most of the population got vaccinated – there were 6,567 Covid deaths.
From 1st March 2022 to 30 January 2023 – with 86% of the population ‘fully vaccinated’ – there have been 25,250 Covid deaths.
That’s:
1,603 Covid deaths in a year when nobody was vaccinated,
6,567 Covid deaths in a year when most people got vaccinated,
25,250 Covid deaths in 11 months when 86% of the population were ‘fully vaccinated’.
Does that look like vaccine effectiveness?!!!
Yet Noah Carl has calculated that “elderly vaccination saved lives” in South Korea.
Sure!
And ‘2022 Was a Normal Year for Mortality in England and Wales’ – according to Noah, no matter what everybody else says!
Brilliant..totally agree….
it’s smoke and mirrors…..‘cases’ and ‘hospitalisations’ have always seemed totally iffy to me….easily manipulated and managed mostly by modelling….
I had intended to put something similar on……just like New Zealand and Australia….early on very few deaths from Covid..even though it’s the Alpha variant and the supposed actual pandemic year….and no vaccinations…
The deaths don’t go stratospheric until the jabbing starts…and when the variants are supposed to be getting weaker…if Noah has got an explanation, I’m happy to hear it…..something is definitely up!!
Quite.
Seroprevalence data from Italy and elsewhere proves what we’re calling SARS-COV-2 satisfied ‘positive tests’ from September 2019, so we can safely assume it was spreading prior to this.
Wherever patient zero was it was certainly also in China, and it seemed everywhere else, with Australia recording its worst Flu season on record by the same time in 2019 and the UK having a bad 2019 season, months before any lockdowns, banning of treatments, shuttering of healthcare facilities, palliative medications etc.
Like Climate Change, were we witnessing something novel, or simply using novel measuring techniques for unremarkable phenomena, or both?
I had Covid in 2020 as did all my family. Even though I’ve had worse hangovers I’m satisfied it was a novel virus. That a novel virus existed is the extent of the truth in the regime narrative.
Lest us forget seroprevalence data misses up to 100% of ‘infections’, according to Oxford Uni human Challenge study that gave 36 people SARS-COV-2 but only 18 became seropositive, potentially halving observed IFRs.
All told the 2020 Covid figures should have been peak Covid hospitalisation and death, with less lethal variants spreading ever since?
Can ANYONE tell me what the LONG TERM EFFECTS of these gene therapy treatments are?
The US created SARS-CoV-2 in a lab as an economic bioweapon against China and it was designed to be more virulent against the DNA of the Chinese population.
That is why the elderly in Hong Kong suffered more than the elderly in Singapore and it had nothing to do with the experimental jabs.
A highly plausible scenario.