News Round-Up

A summary of the most interesting stories in the past 24 hours that challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about the ‘climate emergency’, public health ‘crises’ and the supposed moral defects of Western civilisation.

6 min read

If you have any tips for inclusion in the round-up, email us here.

Comments

This week across the site:

Email me alerts for this discussion
Notify of

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.

16 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
huxleypiggles
huxleypiggles
1 year ago

Another 👍👍👍 to Richard Eldred.

huxleypiggles
huxleypiggles
1 year ago

I love the Alan Jones compilation. 😀😀😀

Jon Garvey
Jon Garvey
1 year ago

“Brussels proposes softened 90% 2040 climate target”

Quick! We must push ours forward to 100% by 2028 to shame the EU into doing the right thing…

ELH
ELH
1 year ago
Reply to  Jon Garvey

And be a “world leader”…

Old Arellian
Old Arellian
1 year ago
Reply to  ELH

And don’t forget, also a “super power”

soundofreason
soundofreason
1 year ago
Reply to  Jon Garvey

Only 100%? Have you no ambition? We should be hoovering up their CO2 emissions to give a good example.

(and what ELH said)

pjar
pjar
1 year ago
Reply to  soundofreason

Umm…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr788kljlklo

Oddly, there’s also a project to remove CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it in the oceans.

And, just to add extra spice, the seas apparently become acidic when you remove CO2, by electrolysis… what could possibly go wrong? 🤷

Lockdown Sceptic
Lockdown Sceptic
1 year ago

Free Speech Constant Crackdown – latest leaflet to print at home, deliver to neighbours, forward to your bad MP & friends online. Start a local leaflet campaign. Deliver 100 leaflets a week (5200 a year). Over 300 leaflet ideas on the link on the leaflet.

01b-Free-Speech-Constant-Crackdown-MONOCHROME-copy
pjar
pjar
1 year ago

The 1%, of 3% of 0.04% raises the question about the remaining 97% of ‘natural’ CO2 which apparently has no effect on the climate… why is that?

ituex
ituex
1 year ago
Reply to  pjar

That, I’m sorry to say, is the first time anyone has asked that question as far as I can remember.

Solentviews
Solentviews
1 year ago
Reply to  pjar

“Itz natural innit, so it don’t do nuffing wrong!” (Ed Millibrain)

stewart
stewart
1 year ago
Reply to  pjar

The figures sound good but is it true?

As the sceptic that I am, I have tried to find out.

A Reuters article put out to debunk the 3% of 0.04% says the following.

neither the proportion of CO2 relative to other gases nor the proportion of CO2 that existed “naturally” in the pre-industrial era versus what human activities add are relevant to the climate impact of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere.

So they don’t deny the figures.

And their rebuttal is that experts say its not relevant.

That is the best effort of Reuters, THE establishment megaphone.

huxleypiggles
huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  stewart

Thank goodness for Reuters for putting the issue of CO2 to bed. What a relief.

pjar
pjar
1 year ago
Reply to  stewart

That’s a lot of money being spent on something that’s not relevant…

soundofreason
soundofreason
1 year ago
Reply to  pjar

Didn’t Fiona Bruce and Richard Tice disagree on the numbers fairly recently on Question Time?

https://dailysceptic.org/2025/05/09/bbc-quietly-edits-question-time-after-wrongly-correcting-richard-tice-on-key-net-zero-claim/

huxleypiggles
huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  soundofreason

Al-beeb not yet up to speed on climate and CO2 like what Reuters is. Innit?

Thank you for reading. Please help us keep the Daily Sceptic going by becoming a donor.