Last March the Washington Post reported that climate change was raising flight turbulence risks. Earlier this month, the World Economic Forum repeated the story in a blog stating that “erratic” clear air turbulence is expected to increase by two or three times in the coming decades. Climate change is said to be making flights a lot bumpier. Not considered worthy of mention in either tale was a caveat pointing out that there has been no increase in accidents or injuries due to turbulence over the last 30 years. During this period, according to the International Civil Aviation Organisation, passenger numbers have quadrupled, meaning there has been a relative decline in harmful turbulence activity.
So where does all this deliberately alarmist guff come from? Both stories referenced the work of Professor Paul Williams of Reading University. He suggests that atmospheric dynamics have changed significantly since scientists first observed them via satellite data in the late 1970s. Using climate models and the RCP8.5 scenarios, he forecasts huge increase in clear air turbulence. Note the use of RCP8.5, the most extreme IPCC climate scenario along with the later variant SSP5-8.5. It assumes high greenhouse gas emissions causing 4-5C temperature rises within less than 80 years. Few scientists believe these climate pathways are remotely plausible, and even the IPCC refers to them as “low likelihood”. These reservations, however, are not shared with politicians, nor with the IPCC’s trusted messengers in the press.
Yet it seems these implausible scenarios are so addictive for climate alarmists that about half the impact mentions in both the IPCC reports and across the wider scientific community still incorporate them. This of course feeds through to most of the alarmist copy produced by mainstream media, who reproduce the ‘settled’ science messages necessary to hype alarm and promote the collectivist Net Zero political agenda.
In May 2021, Fiona Harvey reported in the Guardian that “a third of global food production will be at risk by the end of the century” due to climate change. A paper produced by Finnish researchers is referenced and this talks about the loss of 31% of the global food crop and 34% of livestock by 2081–2100. Unsurprisingly, this is all based on SSP5-8.5. Earlier this month, the BBC reported that climate change could curtail life in the ocean’s ‘twilight’ zone between 200–1,000 metres by “as much as 40% by the end of the century”. This is said to be due to new research from ocean modellers. The excited press release from Exeter University goes even further adding, “And in a high emissions future, life in the twilight zone could be severely depleted within 150 years, with no recovery for thousands of years.”
Fed on this rich 8.5 catastrophe diet, mainstream journalists pump out increasingly unhinged copy. Introducing the recent ‘synthesis’ compiled from the last six years work of the IPCC, the Guardian’s Fiona Harvey reported it was a “final warning” and only “swift and drastic action can avert irrevocable damage to the world”. Only marginally less hysterical, Matt McGrath of the BBC said the report was a “survival guide to avert climate disaster”.
There is increasing interest in the role these 8.5 scenarios are playing in climate science literature. Temperature increases up to 5C by 2100 are difficult to take seriously, given that global warming ran out of steam over two decades ago. Apart from small upticks in warmth due to powerful and natural El Nino events, the recent warming is barely measurable within any reasonable margin of error. The recent Clintel report investigating the work of the IPCC notes the corruption of almost half the literature by these extreme scenarios. The former economics professor and science writer Roger Pielke accepts that scenarios can be useful in academic work, but notes “the world imagined in RCP8.5 is one that… becomes increasingly implausible with every passing year”.
The use of scenarios is justified if climate models are simply scientific tools aimed at exploring a variety of conditions as a way to test various climate hypotheses, notes Pielke. But climate models are now seen as providing “predictive information about plausible futures”. Promoting RCP5-8.5, a scenario useful for scientific exploration, as an accurate predictor of the future is “highly misleading when applied to projecting the future to inform decision making”, he says.
Of course, there is support within academia for using extreme forecasts of climate catastrophe to trigger political action. In a paper published last year, lead author Luke Kemp from Cambridge University’s Centre for the Study of Existential Risk claimed that the world could enter a climate ‘endgame’ at even modest levels of warming. Knowing the worse cases can compel action, he observed: “Exploring severe risks and higher-temperature scenarios could cement a recommitment to the 1.5C to 2C guardrail as the ‘least unattractive’ option.”
This is precisely what is happening. Global populations are being subjected to constant improbable climate scare stories to promote Net Zero. For his part, Pielke replied to Kemp’s work by noting that exaggerating the likelihood of apocalyptic scenarios materialising can be used to support despotism and rashness. In addition, climate catastrophising may be contributing to the mental health crisis afflicting young people. According to a recent international survey, 45% of young people reported that thinking about climate change negatively affected their daily lives and 40% reported being reluctant to have children.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Stop Press: On the subject of climate alarmism, here’s a clip of John Kerry, then President Obama’s Climate Envoy, claiming that “scientists’ predict” the Arctic would have its first ice-free summer in 2014.
John Kerry (Special Presidential Envoy for Climate) in 2009: The Arctic would have its first ice-free summer in 2014
— Dr. Eli David (@DrEliDavid) May 27, 2023pic.twitter.com/xhkBCTUpgV
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.
Regarding the Telegraph’s paywalled story on their switch to digital currency, does it explain how they used to use actual cash online? It seems, CBDC may be a rather different beast than most of us might imagine?
The article makes it clear that Sweden does still have cash, the fraud seems to have come from their attempts to make digital payment as quick and easy as cash.
The fraud seems to particularly come with the use of mobile phones for payments, once you have someone’s mobile phone payment ‘app’ you can defraud that person.
For example I heard recently that some car-parks in the UK that require payment by ‘app’ put up QR codes which your mobile phone can scan in. Fraudsters have been putting scam QR codes up over the top so that when you scan in the QR code your mobile phone sends your payment details to a fraudster.
So, online payments rather than CBDC per se?
By using the Brave browser you are able to read paywalled stories in the DT and also read the Mail On-line without seeing all their rubbish advertising.
PS It also lets you watch Youtube videos without being interrupted by advertising.
That used to be the case. I use Brave but now get blocked by the Paywall. This didn’t used to happen.
To read the article, copy the web address for the DT article into the search box on:
https://archive.is
Thursday morning Forest Road & A330 Hatchett Lane Ascot
Even though there wasn’t much traffic,
every other car was beeping when
they saw our yellow boards.
If Biden does stand down, does Harris automatically take over and her name just replaces his for the November election as incumbent?
I think that from a legal, constitutional and financial perspective, the Presidency could move seamlessly to Harris and she could become the President and the candidate. The problem would come if they wanted someone else instead.
I think America might just survive a few months of her. She will surely not win an election.
The short answer is no.
I understand that it will be Vice President Trump that steps up.
That was the plan all along. Remember that Biden said, when he first chose the Ethnic Indian/African woman as his Vice-President, that he was “just a place-holder for disadvantaged ethnic minorities”.
The coming “Global Goddess Religion” which the Globalists intend to force upon the world means placing women in the leadership positions of all countries.
See “The Empress of the European Union”, for example:
Ursula von der Lyin’
“Conservative failure to address housing issues has alienated voters and will haunt them politically for decades, says Charles Moore in the Spectator.”
Buying property especially anywhere in the south east is a problem for many, especially anyone not on the property ladder, but the birth rate is below replacement and has been for decades. All of the pressure on housing is coming from immigration.
Not quite all – but certainly a lot. In 2022 nearly 40% of births in
the UKEngland and Wales were to parents where at least one was not born in the UK.However, over recent decades there has also been an increase in single ownership and single parent families.
Who would have thought that taking on the biggest purchase of a person’s life might require a team effort?
(Edited to correct the assertion in the first paragraph.)
Thanks and I agree but my point was that one of the main reasons we need more housing is an increase in population and if the birth rate is below replacement and has been for decades, the increase in population must be coming from immigration.
I think a significant (but probably not main, as you point out) problem is that a divorced (former) couple with children often needs two family homes. Where the kids can be at home with either parent from time to time. It seems reasonable that each will want to own their home – ask Angela Rayner.
I left the SE nearly 70 years ago and not only survived, but thrived, in the NW. I was able to afford a 4 bed detached in a quarter acre of garden for the price of an average flat in London.
My kids both bought their own places in the area in their early 30s and have easy access to big cities and splendid countryside in N Wales, the Lake District and the Pennines.
Yeah both me & the Mrs and both our adult kids have moved away from London – if you can find a decent job somewhere else it’s only worth staying if you really feel you need to be in/near a big metropolis.
After the attack on the “Okhmadit” children’s hospital in Kyiv on July 8, 2024, one of the pilots of the 22nd heavy bomber aviation division (military unit 06987, Engels airfield) contacted the GUR chatbot of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine – (22nd heavy bomber squadron) constantly attacks Ukrainian cities with Kh-101 missiles.
According to the intelligence sources of the “Information Resistance”, the Russian military wrote that he was shocked by the attack on the children’s hospital and, like several of his colleagues, did not understand why they were being forced to attack the civilian infrastructure of Ukraine.
Therefore, he decided to hand over to the Ukrainian side documents related to the activities of his military unit, as well as private photos of the command staff of the 22nd heavy bomber aviation division.
Among the mass of information – documents from the personal affairs of senior officers, personal data of Russian servicemen and members of their families, etc. But the most valuable are the stamped documents of the 22nd heavy bomber aviation division.
Oops!
Where did you copy that from. You are usually very good at adding references.
Tell the guy (as if he did not know) that destroying power generation facilities reduces the capability of the enemy to transport weapons and forces around the country.
Source?
Doesn’t ring true to me – the pilot would be condemning himself and potentially colleagues to death?
“U.K. ‘greenlights’ strikes against Putin’s forces in Russia as Kyiv on path to NATO”
We gave Ukraine security assurances regarding its territorial integrity in 1994.
In return, Ukraine gave up thousands of nuclear warheads.
Good to see that we are at least doing something to live up to those fine words.
Im not sure that this decision doesn’t fall squarely in the category “what could possibly go wrong”?
How prescient you are!
It already went wrong!
The UK MoD has since had to correct that statement!
Does anyone actually run the MoD or are they just like Brian pretending to be a prophet?
‘You’re making it up as you go along!’
I suppose, looking on the bright side, you could say, in this case, that the MoD is so bad it’s good! No-one now has any clue what the policy is! Plausible deniability.
Plus ça change…….
Yes, Keir Starmer announcing that Ukraine may use Storm Shadow missiles to attack targets inside Russia is, in my opinion, an act of war: UK against Russia. Let us hope that President Putin continues to show great restraint, as opposed to every modern UK PM.
In fact Starmer’s latest statement is that British Government policy ‘has not changed’. Ukraine may not use British munitions across the 1994 Ukrainian borders but the UK MoD said it was ‘nuanced’, then the Defence Secretary said Ukraine could use them over the border because that was the policy announced by Cameron…..following so far? Me neither…..
It is clear from the havoc wreaked against civilian targets in Belgorod and the shooting down of the Russian plane returning Ukrainian pows that Ukraine does pretty much what it wants with foreign weapons.
It is only restricted by the limited supply of said weapons, not by any conditions placed on them by the West.
They know they cannot win militarily and instead resort to terror attacks against Russian civilians, to which the West turns a blind eye.
Look on the bright side – the coal will still be there when a future generation wants it strongly enough.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=jnhwBoFxaDI&ab_channel=JordanBPeterson
“Why the Establishment Hates This Man | Tommy Robinson | EP 462”
Well worth watching wide-ranging discussion about the problem of islamic extremism in our towns and cities, the lack of courage and cover-ups by our police and judiciary, the vilification of people, including children, who expose the truth. Sounds familiar? The various NHS scandals, the Post Office Horizon scandal and grooming gangs all come to mind. I submitted this for the News round-up but it’s not appeared. I guess it’s too much of a hot potato.
Tommy Robinson and Donald Trump both fit into the category of not being people I would want to sit down and chat to but have a knack of saying things that many (non-elite) people like me agree with, and are pejoratively described as far right or populists.
I agree with you about Trump but after watching this interview I could imagine sitting down with Tommy Robinson in an effort to understand the truth and implications of what he’s experienced. He has not only been vilified but actively suppressed by the establishment. He seems to be a very brave man in contrast to the many who lack the courage to speak out.
Reform an establishment plant?
https://x.com/ThinkingSlow1/status/1811456454659834146
Alex gets some things wrong but also lots right, and I do think this is plausible; certainly worthy of consideration.
Enjoying the downvotes: cannot be considered. Reform good, all other parties bad. Eyes forward.
I’m not for a second saying I know what the truth is, but without an open mind what makes us any different to the vax-pushers, other than the choice we made?
Since DS has introduced a donors-only commenting regime, downvoting is inexcusable.
Perhaps DS management might consider naming downvoters as some other forums do so that members have a shorthand way of saying “I don’t agree”.
Much too subtle for the Establishment.
i support the Reform movement but also know we need to guard against jumping on bandwagons and hoping someone else will represent our interests. I don’t think Farage and Co are establishment puppets but we need to be aware of their weaknesses and keep fighting for change to restore real democracy.
“Ladies and gentlemen, President Putin”
I couldn’t bring myself to watch this. I was hoping it was clever cutting together of different clips or a deepfake type of thing. Then the news on Classic FM (LBC news, I think) broadcast the audio clip and the interview when Mr Biden repeatedly tried and failed to pronounce ‘Neurological’.
As the X poster said in the headline: Holy Crap.
He’s not only got to abandon his run for a second term, he really needs to stand down before he causes a serious diplomatic incident. The trouble is that would put Kamala Harris in the hot seat and well out of her depth.
Even the Beeb has carried this news – where’s Marianna when he needs her?
It is interesting (toe curling) to see his excuse at the subsequent press conference – my source was Sky News Australia.
Mrs SoR reminded me about this Not the Nine O’clock News sketch…
Thank Mrs sor for that, please.
“Biden aides working on plan to convince President to stand down”
And who prey tell is going to replace him?
Kamala? that giggling kindergarten teacher is even less popular than him!
She’s the vice president, how can they side step her?
they will just be swapping out one dunce for a bigger one!
Oh the infighting if they try
One of the problems with people with his condition is that they are unaware that they have a problem. They have a completely different awareness of the world which diverges increasingly from reality.
Oh, let’s hope so, then Trump will win!
“Reform infighting begins as Nigel Farage effectively sacks deputy”
If Reform meant anything to Habib, he would withdraw, magnanimously and generously wish his successor well, and then go and seeth on his sofa with a large whiskey. The fact he wants to spit the dummy, and hint at deeper indiscretions frankly shows him up to be not worth his salt. Good riddance…
Could it possibly be the Tory Party supporting DSaily Mail has an agenda?
Well said! Nobody “sacked” him. Nigel very sensibly chose the newly elected Member of Parliament, Richard Tice, to be his new Deputy Leader, and not-so-sensibly chose the new Muslim Pakistani Millionaire donor as the new Party Chairman, leaving the Jewish Pakistani Millionaire Habib without a top leadership post. So he went to the press in a hissy fit.
The Third World doesn’t do “magnanimous”.
I must admit I was impressed at Richard Tice standing aside to allow Farage to take over! it does show he his more loyal to the betterment of his country than his own career
Maybe Habib should have considered the personal gain of showing the same humility for the reform cause?
That is an excellent point. I was also impressed at Richard Tice withdrawing so gracefully, especially after he had worked so hard to keep the Reform Party going almost single-handedly, while Nigel kept changing his mind. I was so glad when Tice was elected as one of The Five Musketeers, and now as a most worthy Deputy Leader. He and Nigel have brought a real sense of fun to the proceedings, unlike the vast majority of MPs in Parliament.
nonetheless the “infighting” keeps Reform in the news and there’s no such thing as bad news I’m told. I’ve always liked Ben Habib’s contributions to the debate but he does seem to be out of favour maybe because he did so badly in Wellingborough.
It appears that Daily Sceptic has decided only subscribers may approve or disapprove comments, i.e. hit the thumbs up or down buttons.
There are so many interesting sources of information on the internet that it is not really likely for everyone to want to subscribe to everything, never mind the resulting costs.
Even as a subscriber to DS, I think it is more beneficial to having a wide readership to allow anyone to tick the thumbs up or down buttons. I believe restricting that option to subscribers only will end up with less people reading DS.
What does everyone else think?
Possibly. I do uptick comments I think are particularly good but I’m not sure it’s very important either way. The comments are the interesting bit. A downvote without a comment seems especially pointless.
Did you not read Ian Rons’ reasoning for the change? We were getting hit by lots of bots and 77th Hamster Penis Brigade, basement-dwelling saddos. Personally I think it might encourage more people to subscribe. To be honest, I’m in favour of doing away with the whole function, period. It’s unnecessary, can hamper dialogue and we’re not characters in some virtual reality video game, here for others’ entertainment and to be manipulated by a load of little red/green numbers.
I don’t read all comments anyway but I certainly don’t like/dislike my way through every individual comment I do read. It’s all a bit petty and inconsequential, to my mind. I’m sure some people do require and crave that positive feedback they might get from a lot of green numbers under their posts but that’s seriously lame and should hardly be a driver for if you choose to engage with the site’s commenters or offer up your opinion on something, whether it be popular or not. I think anyone in favour of the thumbs is someone who enjoys/is at ease with being manipulated, which is all a bit ironic considering the whole ethos of this site and what we bang on about a lot of the time.
agree. the whole like/dislike activity is mindless and meaningless for free-thinking people.
“The Government denies Ed Miliband overruled officials in his own department”
We know such claims must be untrue because the Tories have told us their failure to act on conservative issues and their undue enthusiasm for woke, globalist and left wing policies was because the officials insisted and would not accept Minisers’ instructions. And we do trust them not to tell fibs, don’t we children.
It is so quiet around here with the rule change. I am not sure I like it.
I think what you’re referring to is the peace and quiet due to lack of distraction, because this place should be utilized by people who want to share opinions and enter into discourse only. Not the constant background noise and interference of petty little shitheads that sit trolling at home, too tight to put their hands in their pockets, too cowardly to offer up a counter-argument and actually join in an exchange. Now that lot have to get a hobby. What a bummer for them! LOL
Sounds like these same saddos had more of an influence, albeit subconsciously, than maybe you realised before. I should come back later when I’ve more time and do one of my ‘Andrew Tate’ posts, and see how many little red numbers I can accrue compared to before. That would be a good litmus test. Failing that there’s still GlassHalfFull’s love affair with terrorists and Monro’s usual offerings, so other litmus tests are available..
I was really referring to the paucity of upvoters, It is good to have people show their appreciation of your view and it is also helpful to see how other comments are judged. I am not so arrogant as to assume mine is always the right view and a decent upvote count flags up the better ones.
I don’t criticise people who don’t donate. There must be many who have a brain and an interest but don’t have the spare cash to commit or the spare time to spend following this forum regularly.
I view downvoters entirely differently because someone can disagree for any number of reasons. If they said what they disagreed with, it might be because I have expressed myself poorly, for example, and it gives me the opportunity to clarify, which is why I am replying to you at length, because you seem to have misinterpreted my meaning.
This is also why I take the time to address Munro’s comments on Ukraine in more detail. This is a topic I follow quite closely, and not, I hasten to add because I support Putin, which I don’t, but because this is an area where Western powers are destroying our standard of living and risking annihilation of us all in the pursuit of American hegemony. It is not in the best interests of the majority of the world, and it is becoming increasingly clear that it is not in the interests of Europe; it is solely for the benefit of the USA.
Well I will hazard a guess that the drastic drop in voting since the recent DS changes were implemented is surely evidence that the vast majority of people using this function were those without accounts, therefore the majority of people who pay to comment aren’t big users of this redundant and pointless function ( in my opinion ) anyway, hence why I think DS should just ditch it entirely. It effects nothing and it changes nothing. I would disagree about needing that positive feedback or some sort of validation just because you post a comment, however, I can only speak for myself because getting virtual pats on the back or praise is not what motivates me, but we’re all different. If anyone wishes to show appreciation, likewise to disagree with a post, then they can respond with a comment, which is normal behaviour.
People should share their views and opinions ( as long as this is done respectfully, as one would do in a real life situation ) without fear and to pot with anyone else and how they wish to receive our posts. But I’m not inherently a people-pleaser and maybe some posters are.
The ridiculous amount of downvotes people would get on some posts was just silly, that’s why I view the people responsible as a nuisance and rather pathetic, and this annoyance has been pointed out by several commenters on here now. People who can’t afford to donate can still read most articles and all of the comments, so I’m not sure what meaningful difference being able to vote or not makes, so this change is neither here nor there, really. As I said, I don’t enjoy feeling manipulated, like a character in a video game, there for somebody else’s entertainment. After 3 years of posting on here now I got used to ignoring them and became desensitized and totally used to their constant presence, but I’m not sorry to see the back of them.
I just thought I would let you know that I used to be an upvoter as even though I subscribe I was always about a day late reading the comments as I read the DS via the email each day, so commenting seemed pointless. I have never been one of your trolls and have always enjoyed the way you deal with them. I had quite a job signing in again today so I thought I had better make use of it and comment for the first time.
“Braverman vs Badenoch: the battle to lead the Tories”
The Battle to lead the Tories in India.
Oh wait, no, the Battle to lead the Tories in Africa.
Oh wait, no, The Tories in Great Britain are given the choice of an Indian woman or an African woman as leader.
Indigenous British White Men need not apply.
Who decided this, I wonder?
“Reform U.K. is ready to make electoral history” – “Zia Yusuf, the youthful and highly successful new star of the Reform party…”
I wonder how many millionaire donors to other political parties, the LibLabCons and others, for example, expect to be handed leadership positions in those parties, in exchange for their donations?
Perhaps this is a common and well-known practice in the West that I’d never heard of before. If so, pardon my ignorance.
“What Labour could learn from Australia and New Zealand”
It was good to read what our fearless leader’s been up to Down Under, and how we can learn from their own experience of battling for Freedom of Speech. Together we are stronger.