The climate ghouls were out in force recently following the severe clear air turbulence incident on board a Singapore Airlines Boeing 777 that led to a passenger suffering a fatal heart attack. The Guardian asked if the “climate crisis” was making turbulence worse, and both the newspaper and the BBC pointed to one model-based report stating that it was. Needless to say, actual data were ignored in the rush to feed the politicised climate emergency, Net Zero-inspired narrative. Figures published by two safety bodies show there has been no increase in turbulence accidents or rise in injuries per passenger mile over the last 30 years. This in the context of at least a quadrupling of global air passengers over the same period.
The figures above from the International Civil Aviation Organisation confirm the continued low level of turbulence incidents across the United States, the largest air market in the world. There has been no statistically significant increase since 1989.
The second graph above was produced in a 2021 report from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. It showed no increase in passenger and aircraft accidents, allowing for the enormous growth in traffic during these decades. The NTSB concluded: “There was no obvious trend in turbulence-related accidents during this period.”
Whatever the actual data show, you can’t beat a good climate predicting model when there is Green Blob-inspired work to be done in mainstream media. Both the BBC and the Guardian cited the work of Professor Paul Williams of Reading University. He suggested 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 scenario, he forecast huge increases in clear air turbulence.
Of course he is using the RCP8.5 pathway that assumes soaring temperatures of up to 4°C in less than 80 years. This pathway is little more than a climate model plaything, and an increasing number of scientists believe it is not remotely plausible. Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states it is of “low likelihood”. Nevertheless, the clickbait addiction to this scenario is still high, with an estimated 40% of IPCC climate impact statements still based on its modelled use. In addition the pathway is said to be behind an astonishing 50% of impact findings produced across the wider scientific community, and these provide a convenient ‘scientists say’ tag for the latest climate scare du jour. The science writer Roger Pielke Jnr. notes that the world imagined in RCP8.5 is one that “becomes increasingly implausible with every passing year”.
The investigative climate journalist Paul Homewood has been debunking nonsense climate and weather stories over many years. He was disgusted with the latest effort from the BBC. Can the wretched BBC sink any lower, he asked, adding: “You are utter scum, BBC – how can any organisation try to play politics with a tragic death like this one?”
Homewood’s bitter comments are understandable as the BBC and most legacy media seek to catastrophise almost every bad event and human tragedy that can be related to the weather. This despite the fact that many authorities state that there has been no increase in most extreme weather events over the last 100 years, human caused or otherwise. In this latest case around atmospheric turbulence, it is surely grossly irresponsible to scare people, young and old, about air travel using the unverifiable findings of computer models fed with highly contentious data. Unless, of course, the mostly undeclared aim is to stop people flying altogether. As regular readers will know, many journalists attend courses to learn how to insert climate scares into almost any story. In addition, they sign up to ready-made copy outfits, all funded by green billionaires seeking to radically reorganise the social and economic lifestyles of global populations.
At this moment, BBC Verify’s climate ‘disinformation’ specialist Marco Silva is coming to the end of his six-month sabbatical at the Oxford Climate Journalism Network (OCJN). This operation is run out of the Reuters Institute and has attracted past funding from a number of green foundations including the European Climate Foundation, an operation heavily supported by Extinction Rebellion paymaster Sir Christopher Hohn. Over 400 journalists from around the world have been re-educated at the OCJN, which aims to move climate specialists “beyond their siloed past” into a strategic position within newsrooms, “combining expertise with collaboration”.
Take a mango, or indeed any fruit, and write about how it is less tasty than before due to climate change, is one suggestion for the delegates. Past speaker and BBC regular Dr. Friederike Otto uses climate models to attribute individual weather events to long-term changes in the climate through her billionaire-funded World Weather Attribution operation. Following her OCJN presentation, attendees were reported to have shown a “massive jump in self-confidence” when attributing individual weather to climate change. The more curious might wonder how this can be so, given the computer-modelled pseudoscientific claims are, to coin a phrase, unfalsifiable and unverifiable.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
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.
Yesterday on the DS we had an article asking “Can Politicians change the weather”. ————-No they can’t. But it isn’t the weather (climate) that they are attempting to change. It is the capitalist system. The climate is simply the very plausible excuse given to the populace. Energy is by far the most important commodity for all of us. The price and availability of energy is what determines prosperity. But the UN and its Sustainable Development Politics think our standard of living in the western world is too high, and that prosperity has come from the use of fossil fuels. So we are to STOP using them. It really is a simple as that. It has NOTHING to do with the climate. The disturbing thing about all of this is that our own Political Class are fully onboard with this eco socialism and have passed laws (NET ZERO) to make sure we get rid of the fossil fuels faster and harder than virtually every other country. The only western leader likely to not comply with the phony planet saving agenda is Trump should he be re-elected.
They want to change the Capitalist system for us, not themselves.
Yes and then they will all go and live in some nice tropical paradise while we are stuck here in the cold and damp with a 15 thousand quid heat pump
How long will it be until the following announcement is made as you take your seat on the plane. “Ladies and gentlemen. In accordance with government guidelines on climate change and consequent atmospheric disruption, you are now required by law to keep your seat belts fastened at all times.”
I agree
Naturally, there will be exemptions, such as if you are flying to an IPCC, WHO or WEF meeting. The Science tells us that delegates and private jets are immune to turbulence and extreme weather events. /s
And no shortage of the best Steak on offer at the Davos Restaurant!
After the News of that disaster I would probably keep my seatbelt on, I never have discomfort wearing it, and if it stops me from smashing my head, I’m fine with that. Telling me to wear a pointless mask with all the pseudoscience tied up with that is another matter. I’m all for repealing the car seatbelt act from the 1970s. If Seatbelts work them most will use them without the state dictating you do so. Old school Libertarian. Not a fake like Boris!
Except flight taxes will have reached such a prohibitive rate because of Net Zero by then that we will all have to buy one of those large tricycles to get to Spain.
I wonder what these legacy media institutions actually want the result of all this hysteria and fear mongering to be? Do they want to have themselves and their families locked up in their homes again but this time indefinitely?, do they want to be fully tracked and traced? do they want to be denied independent means of travel? do they want to be instructed and told what to eat, drink, when they can turn their heating on, how much water they are allowed. Is this their desire? Or do they believe they will be immune from these diktats and they will be the ones to decide how we should live, whilst they continue to enjoy special priviliges.
The BBC and the likes of the Guardian are a menace and a danger to civilisation.
I think they want a malleable and cowed population, frightened to speak up about the things they are truly worried about in case they are deemed some sort of extremist, or find themselves arrested for saying the wrong thing.
And with mass Muslim immigration, do they want their daughters to be the property of the local Warlord!
Why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
Lembit Opek did an article in The Light Newspaper on the climate scam, he mentions how you don’t need to agree with everything in that paper but believes in free speech etc. Have not seen him on GB News for a while and he is generally a good egg!
Socialists don’t like free speech because your speech might not agree with them. The BBC is the classic eco socialist broadcaster that point blank refuses to discuss any aspect of the climate change narrative or the absurd energy policies and crippling costs that Net Zero is imposing on us to fight the manufactured crisis. —-Why won’t they discuss or debate? Incase climate change is exposed for what it is. A power grab and anti capitalist scam
And oFcom are never interested in enforcing the BBC to bring a sceptic to the table.
The climate change clown world devotee’s are just another attacking force. We are being hit from all directions.