Like the Christian missionaries of old, Justin Rowlatt journeys to the benighted ‘Dark’ Continent to bring glad tidings of green salvation to endemic problems of constant warfare and poverty. Climate change is “turbo-charging” problems in Somalia, but there is hope in harnessing the bountiful breezes and sun beams, the BBC’s High Priest of Climate Alarm reports. Somalia is not always an easy place in which to live, but as usual with the neo-missionaries of Gaia worship the state-funded saviour of souls confuses individual weather events with long-term climate changes. His message of a changing climate bringing woe and misfortune might collect more believers if the five-year average temperature in the country in 2022 was not almost the same as that recorded in 1922 – 26.98°C compared to 26.92°C. No change there to worry about – or in the amount of rainfall, since the 1991-2020 period was more or less the same as that recorded 100 years ago.
If rising temperatures are your thing, Somalia is probably the worst country you could pick to peddle an existential climate crisis, as the World Bank graph above shows. Along with static precipitation, a current average 277.8 mm per year compared to 271.1 mm between 1901-1930, the country can hardly be said to have a turbo-charged changing climate – stationary climate might be a better description.
To read the rest of this article, you need to donate at least £5/month or £50/year to the Daily Sceptic, then create an account on this website. The easiest way to create an account after you’ve made a donation is to click on the ‘Log In’ button on the main menu bar, click ‘Register’ underneath the sign-in box, then create an account, making sure you enter the same email address as the one you used when making a donation. Once you’re logged in, you can then read all our paywalled content, including this article. Being a donor will also entitle you to comment below the line, discuss articles with our contributors and editors in a members-only Discord forum and access the premium content in the Sceptic, our weekly podcast. A one-off donation of at least £5 will also entitle you to the same benefits for one month. You can donate here.
There are more details about how to create an account, and a number of things you can try if you’re already a donor – and have an account – but cannot access the above perks on our Premium page.
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.
Green Nazism is like any other fascism – anti-human, anti-reality, immoral, blood stained. Pace Rowlatt, the paid propagandist (think Attenborough), it is ‘climate change’ which has nothing to do with human activity. What happened to Globaloney Boiling? Or is the new colonialism which will enslave and kill millions of Africans by denying them abiotic renewable hydrocarbon energy, Globaloney-Boiling-Changing? Will GlobaloneyCooling make a comeback one day?
Recommended reading on the Fascist roots of the ecological movement.
https://journal.equinoxpub.com/POM/article/view/2701
“Fascist Ecology: The ‘Green Wing’ of the Nazi Party and its Historical Antecedents”
https://www.acton.org/publications/transatlantic/2018/01/08/book-review-green-tyranny-rupert-darwall
“Green Tyranny: Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex. Rupert Darwall.
Encounter Book, 2017. 334 pages.
The subtitle of Rupert Darwall’s book about “the totalitarian roots of the climate-industrial complex” seems designed to appeal to readers who are already skeptical about current climate change and environmentalist policies. While his book definitely proves the thesis implicit in its title, it is far more than a handbook for “skeptics.” Green Tyranny is a must-read for every person who cherishes freedom and who wants to know how environmentalism could become so powerful that, in some countries, it seems like a new state religion.”
The rise in Somali population from about 3 million in 1960 to about 18 million now might have something to do with shortages? I mean, if the UK population had risen from about 50 million in 1960 to 300 million now, we might be experiencing some problems?
In the UK no new reservoirs have been built for many years, yet the population continues to increase and little is spent on fixing leaks. When we have a dry spell/drought/hosepipe bans it is then so wrong to blame it all on ‘climate change’. Similarly, in Somalia, I am willing to bet no extra specific infrastructure has been built to capture rainfall. It is this sort of thing ‘poorer’ countries should be encouraged and helped to do, instead of being lectured about AGW, and how they mustn’t contribute to it.
All the companies that bought into the privatisation of water agreed that fixing leaks was a primary requirement.
Hmmm.
If population rose by 500% in the course of only 64 years, that’s surely a sign of vastly improved living conditions for humans and not of any ‘shortages’ making live difficult for them.
If it’s true that their agricultural output has benefited from higher CO2 levels, they’re doing the same sort of thing as farmers using greenhouses further north & south, but in open air with free power, in effect.
How many people will ever check what the historical climate data is for Somalia? How many even check it for the UK? This is how Climate Change activist Politicians and Media are able to spin their climate yarn and get away with it. Because hardly anyone checks anything. People switch on their 6 O’Cloock News and swallow it all down. They see every bit of extreme weather from every corner of the globe beamed to their living rooms and this gives the perception that everything is getting worse. But that is all it is—a “perception”——-If we were ever able to get on air a TV Channel or even a TV programme that presented some of the stuff that Chris Morrison and other people sceptical of the current climate narrative that presented facts and data, with maybe interviews from knowledgeable people who have not sold out to climate alarmism, and who still believe in actual science, rather than “official science” that funds all of their “science” then it would pretty soon become Public Enemy Number ONE. It would closed down by the OFCOMMUINISTS. But if something is supposed to be about science aren’t you supposed to question everything? —–What are eco fascists so scared of? Science is not decided by a show of hands from government funded data adjusters, but POLITICS most certainly is.
–PS We have always had “extreme weather”. It is not a recent phenomenon, but crucially there is no evidence it is getting more intense or more frequent.
A good example of BBC misinformation was just this morning on the Today programme. Justin Webb interviewed a British scientist who’s been camping in Antarctica for 6 summers studying a glacier that’s doing what glaciers do, flow. He said the good news was that while the glacier was the size of the UK & upto 2,000m thick it wouldn’t much affect sea level. Then the headline read out on the hour was the opposite; ‘melting glacier to contribute to rising sea levels!’
There is a history of this kind of thing even within the IPCC. The Summary for Policy Makers is compiled even before that scientists have finished their actual reports. They already knew what they were going to be saying in their Summary. Importantly it is this Summary that most politicians will read.
“There is a history of this kind of thing even within the IPCC.”
Um, that’s where it STEMS from!
Actually it goes further back than the 1988 set up of the IPCC—-The Socialist Think Tank Club of Rome was “in search of a new enemy to unite us” back in 1972.
What I still don’t understand is if you research the sea it is both rising due to melting salt free water and yet getting more salty due to rising temperatures causing evaporation. Googling sea salinity climate change will give you reports that the sea across the world is less salty due to melt and saltier due to evaporation. I accept that there can be regional differences but currents will overtime mix water as has happened since the beginning of time. So which is it?
It is blatantly evident that disciples of the climate hysteria will say anything they want.
Missionaries, as always, driven by the desire to impose their beliefs on what they regard as uneducated savages, who know a darn sight more about life and their country than such bigoted individuals.
The usual poorly researched Daily Sceptic article, for example, re
“His message of a changing climate bringing woe and misfortune might collect more believers if the five-year average temperature in the country in 2022 was not almost the same as that recorded in 1922 – 26.98°C compared to 26.92°C. No change there to worry about”
This difference of 0.06°C is sufficient for several local food crops to spontaneously combust, and herds of giraffe (was tempted to say wildebeest but sadly they don’t exist in Sudan) go galloping into Lake Nasser only to be drowned by their poor swimming ability…
More seriously excellent work as usual from Mr Morrison.
It’s basically like talking about the weather. To be honest, I prefer ‘a bit hot today innit’ to ‘my lawn is a bit dry due to climate change and we’re all going to die’ as small talk.
Manmade climate change is the ultimate infalsifiable claim. Its promised calamities are always coming but never arrive: if not by the end of this decade, then the next or if not, certainly the one after.
Somalia 120 years No Climate Change
Chris, Not doubting the accuracy of your graphs and illustrations, but can you provide references to indicate where they’re taken from?
The late great Lord Lawson’s climate scepticism was completely air brushed out of existence by the Daily Telegraph and 2 of its muppets, Alison Pearson and Liam Halligan on their podcast.
Isn’t trying to impose a green energy policy on third world countries and denying them a fossil fuel economy another form of colonialism and a patronising we know what is best for you attitude?
I am a big fan of Chris Morrison and would love to hear more of him, maybe he could be invited on to GBNews to destroy the bed wetting Jim Dale. I am nervous though of snap shot averages of rainfall and temperature which can be countered without fuller data. An average temperature of 27 could be a high of 30 and low of 24, so no biggy, or a highs of 50 and a lows below freezing, both of which could destroy agriculture and lives. In the same way that averages of rainfall may hide longer periods of drought with periods of crop destroying floods at other times. Personally, I don’t believe this, but it’s too easy for the idiots like Dale to make this kind of argument, if we don’t come at them with all the details.