Any actor knows that the time to leave the stage is when the audience starts to laugh at him. With the latest ‘World on Fire’ show collapsing under the weight of fake statistics, crystal ball attributions, scientific deceptions, made-up estimates and Justin Rowlatt airlifted into heat-torn Alicante, it is surely time to pull down the curtain on this increasingly ridiculous show. When the audience sides start to split as the weather maps turn ‘Cerberus’ black, and heat records soar halfway up the tailpipes of Typhoon jets, it is perhaps dawning on the eco-extremists that they need to lift their game. As last week’s U.K. by-election in Uxbridge showed, a few electoral shifts might be all that is needed to wipe out their vision of a collectivist, all-controlling Net Zero Hades.
Running through all the hysterical reporting has been the outrageous use of fake estimates and statistics. Mainstream media were full of reports last week that temperatures would hit 48°C in southern Europe, a steer that seems to have come from the European Space Agency (ESA). It said that many countries were facing a major heatwave including Germany and Poland, while air temperatures were expected to climb to 48°C in Sicily and Sardinia – “potentially the hottest temperature ever recorded in Europe”. The temperature in Sicily never went above 35°C, according to the Time and Date website that reports past weather from around the world.
But it turns out the ESA was pulling a fast one. It was not referring to the ‘air’ temperature, the standard measurement made two metres above the ground, but the actual temperature on the surface. This latter measurement of course is going to be many degrees higher. The climate science site No Tricks Zone noted: “By the time the ploy was exposed by careful readers, the news had already gone around the world.” Commenting on the affair, German’s Achtung Reichelt is reported to have called it “the most intense climate lie since temperature recording began”. Calling the ESA’s press release “sloppy and manipulative”, it charged that none of it was true.
The climate narrative is now all about individual ‘extreme’ weather, to the despair of many scientists who note climate change is a measurement of long-term trends. But long-term temperature trends do not tell the correct political story since little global warming has been evident for over two decades.
Meanwhile, Arctic surface sea ice waxes and wanes on a decadal basis, but the recent general recovery has been quietly dropped from the Net Zero-inspired narrative. While Europe and the United States explode with fire and brimstone heat, and the fish are sous-vide in the boiling oceans, sea ice in the Arctic continues with what appears to be a small cyclical recovery. According to the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC), the latest summer daily melt was similar to the 1981-2010 average. At July 17th, the ice extent was the 12th lowest in the 44-year satellite record.
The climate investigator Tony Heller recently lifted the lid on the deceptions surrounding Arctic sea ice. “They bury all the older data [pre-1979] and pretend they don’t notice sea ice is increasing again,” he charged. A linear decrease in the end-summer ice extent since 1979 is widely promoted, but Heller points out the minimum is actually higher now than 10 and 15 years ago. Plotting the trend as a moving average shows that the decline in summer sea ice stopped a decade ago.
The Australian climate journalist Jo Nova recently referred to lies that were told by omission, suggesting that the whole climate movement was built on this “active deception”. Last year’s big omission was coral reefs, that have shown spectacular growth on the Great Barrier Reef of late. This year’s missing scare story is the Greenland ice sheet, where a significant, unreported recovery is in progress.
Almost halfway through the short summer, the accumulation of surface ice on Greenland is more than the 1981-2010 average and a big improvement on a decade ago. But the current improvement could be seen in a much better light. Why are the Danish Polar Portal compilers of the below graph using a 1981-2010 average, when data can be included up to 2020? The NSIDC uses a similar average comparison in its Arctic ice graphs. The Greenland ice sheet lost 51 gigatonnes a year in the 1980s and 1990s and 166gts in the 2000s. In the 2010s the loss was around 244gts, a fivefold increase since the 1980s. Obviously if a 1990-2020 average was shown – with a 50gts loss replaced by one of 244gts – it would amplify the recent recovery by raising the baseline. Last year, the Greenland ice sheet was reported to have lost just 50gts, an amount well within a margin of error that could suggest a small actual increase in the overall size.
When dealing with any statistics regarding climate change these days, it is good advice to start counting the spoons. It has always been an irritation to extremists that up to 10 times more people die of the cold than the heat. Greenpeace founder Dr. Patrick Moore recently displayed how the Lancet medical journal tried to come to the rescue, with the graph pictured on the left below.
To even up the score, with blue for cold and red for heat, the Lancet used an unequal y-axis – a technique so obviously misleading it is hard to understand how anyone could even think of using it. The graph on the right was produced by the Danish economist Bjørn Lomborg, and it corrects the distorted Lancet image. Dr. Moore tweeted: “This is disgraceful for a supposedly scientific journal.”
It seems that the biggest risk of dying in the current British summer – 19°C and showery at time of writing – is to die laughing.
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.
No, they were NOT “well-intentioned”. They were egotistical, authoritarian, morons who conspired to commit some of the most totalitarian acts against the people in history. This includes knowingly harming children and have left a legacy of destruction, emotional damage and death that will never be repaired. Never. These people are all either evil or stupid beyond belief – either way, they deserve no place in a civilised society.
“Well-intentioned, my arse!”
J Royle.
Ditto!
Evil, definitely evil.
That insane head of the Northern Territories was a full blown Nazi.
Morriston? A complete dictator drunk on all the power he wielded.
The police that broke into people’s homes to arrest them violently for speaking out, speaking for gods sakes, against lockdowns? A bit too overzealous…
The crooked house has gone! Fire
Ah! The Crooked House, where you could believe you were drunk before you were actually drunk.
So true.
“Lockdown Zealots Were Well-Intentioned“
Sorry, I had to stop reading at that point
I don’t think that they were “well intentioned”, simply too gullible and stupid to be in positions of power.
Some were/are gullible and stupid, many knew and know exactly what they were doing and how wrong it was, but carried on anyway. Even Hancock, who does a good impression of Tim Nice But Dim, said “is it time to deploy the new variant?” – does that sound well intentioned? Whitty and Vallance knew Covid was not a serious threat -they bloody well said so, publicly and privately- mild for most, not dangerous enough to justify an emergency vaccine.
Those in positions to do so and had read the Rockefeller document Lockstep certainly weren’t “well intentioned”.. it was the plan..
2010: Rockefeller’s ‘Operation Lockstep’ Predicted 2020 ‘Lockdown’
https://principia-scientific.com/2010-rockefellers-operation-lockstep-predicted-2020-lockdown/
2010: Rockefeller’s ‘Operation Lockstep’ Predicted 2020 ‘Lockdown’
I found this very early on, certainly close to the start of the Scamdemic and it absolutely opened my eyes to the evil we were facing. Written in 2010 and yet we are expected to believe “Lockstep” was nothing more than coincidences. Worldwide coincidences, but coincidences nevertheless. That is how they view us – thick, stupid, disposable.
Plus, which so-called “free and democratic” civilised country looks to somewhere like authoritarian China, where not only human rights are not recognised but active abuse and killing of minorities and those who oppose the regime is carried out routinely ( forced organ harvesting, for example ) and thinks, “Yeah, locking millions down and depriving them of their civil liberties and inalienable human rights looks like a good idea and would definitely work”. No sane person would ever say such a thing and even if someone did, they’d be in a tiny minority because everyone else would sit them down and explain all the negative ways in which that’s a bad idea and to stop being an alarmist, Chicken Licken mentalist. But none of that happened because there appeared to be a consensus and everyone agreed to behave like they were a tyrannical communist regime in North Korea, but only *for a few weeks, to flatten the curve*. And the rest, as they say, is history.
”We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more, we had no awareness of the situation…We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”. A. Solzhenitsyn.
Surely to goodness people cannot be duped or bullied into submission by such tactics ever again, now they’ve lived through it…?
Thanks Mogs. A fine post.
As the behavioural scientists understood, politicians can be manipulated. I think this has been posted before but should not be forgotten as politicians are merely front-of-house (no less responsible).
https://www.bi.team/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/BIT-Behavioural-Government-Report-2018.pdf
A genuine question: would truly well-intentioned people respond in the same way?
Thank you Dr. Tomlinson for your thorough and well-articulated contribution.
If there was no conspiracy, kindly explain to us how Moderna was granted a US patent on a key part of SARS-COV-2 in 2016:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fviro.2022.834808/full
-3 already.. bullseye Castorp..
”Three is the magic number. Yes it is, that’s the magic number.”
”The road to hell is paved with good intentions”
However, I do feel what this thread’s lacking is a vegan horse-riding interlude. Down-vote if you agree. Oh OK then, hold your horses, here you go….
https://twitter.com/OliLondonTV/status/1688232251128258560
Personality changes as a result of the injections! FFS.
Are you accusing me of having a personality?
certainly not an injection! Well 1 out of 2 isn’t bad.
Actually I am prone to being a bit manic from time to time…and over-sharing..
Not you Mogs – the bloody “horse riders” in the video.
Apologies for not making myself clear.
Looks like the 77th are out in force with the red marker pen this Sunday.. must be a touchy subject..
Well people with good intentions don’t say:
“Mask don’t work but you will be fined heavily if you don’t wear one.
Well intentioned = saviour complex.
See Matt Hancock as a classic example of the complex.
Midazolam Mat is a psychopath – end of.
Indeed
After further reflection and a stiff ginger mojito I am disappointed to say this article is well intentioned but a bit of an insult to the intelligence of DS readers
About as ”well intentioned” as bloody Xi Jinping! It’s cutting the criminals some slack which is downright insulting because they were playing with peoples lives, health and futures. To my mind ‘well intentioned’ is how Sweden played it.
So true. Just like Neil “Professor Pantsdown” Ferguson.
Report 9 was wrong from start to finish.
In it the authors made the following predictions for GB:
+ That the peak would occur in late May. Wrong. The peak occurred on 8 April.
+ That the peak would reach about 22 deaths per day per 100,000 population. With a GB population in 2020 of about 65.86m people, that’s 14,340 deaths per day. Wrong. The peak was 1,450 deaths (Covid mentioned on the death certificate) on 8 April.
+ An epidemic curve can be tall and narrow or wide and flat or something in between. By defining the peak daily deaths of 14,340 (height) and overall number of deaths at 510,000 (area) and the date of the peak on 22 May 2020 they’ve defined the shape of the modelled epidemic curve – the yellow curve in the chart below. This model predicts the first day with multiple deaths on 18 April 2020. Wrong. The first day with multiple deaths was 5 March 2020.
+ That the death rates would not follow a classic epidemic curve. Their figures suggest a logistic curve. Wrong. The Covid mentioned on the death certificate rates could hardly have been a better match to a classic epidemic curve.
If we slide the Report 9 model curve to the left (earlier) so that the first day with multiple deaths matches reality (5 March) and then compare the first few days of the GB epidemic with the model we see just how wrong Report 9 is. By the end of day on the date of publication of Report 9 (16 March) their model predicted a cumulative death toll of 5,938. Wrong. The cumulative death toll by the end of 16 March was actually 153. Report 9 was demonstrably wildly wrong on the day it was published. By the time UK lockdown was announced on 23 March their model was predicting over 7,000 deaths per day but reality was 202 deaths.
If our lockdown zealous politicians had good intentions their incompetence is breathtaking. School-level maths should have shown them that Report 9 should have been flushed down the toilet.
But there were all those people repeating ad nauseam that it was growing exponentially never mind the laws of Maths (realizability, aka common sense) or the prior art (models dating back to 1927).
I agree. It was never exponential. Saying or implying it could be or was exponential was foolish fear-mongering. The chart below shows what exponential means.
Indeed. It was always sub-exponential, except for an extremely brief time.
Please do all this in a submission to the Hallett Inquiry- Every Story Matters to support responses of Hart Group, who so far have got limited rights to file evidence, and my own attempts to say that there never was a pandemic as shown by the Diamond Princess and a whole lot against lockdowns, the jab roll out and trashing of civil liberties. I was unsure about doing anything, as many think the report has already been written, but experts on our side have confirmed if it would be helpful if as many of us as can do a submission to oppose the official narrative
I’ll look into it today.
For a comparison of a well mixed population to a social network of voles the latter takes 4 times as long to finish and results in 89% never infected whereas the former leaves only 32% never infected. So fairly basic qualitative modelling doesn’t need all these Professors.
“Well-intentioned”
The foot soldiers maybe, they usually are oblivious to what’s actually going on, they’re too busy at the coal face. But their managers and everyone above? Not a chance in hell. They were not “well-intentioned”. At best, they were going along to get along. At worst, evil.
So all things considered, the least-worst realistic scenario in the long run was probably within the envelope of “do nothing”, or more accurately, “adopt the flu strategy”. Or as the now disgraced BoJo originally said, “let it wash over us” before he panicked. As for ICUs being overwhelmed, which turned out to be a gross exaggeration in any case, the best way to look at the curves is to ask, if you were working as an ICU nurse, would you rather have a few really bad *weeks* and then it’s over, or a few slightly less bad *months* followed by the risk of it happening all over again later? Ergo, the idea of “flatten the curve” falls flat on its face.
Bojo panicked alright.. when someone had a quiet word in his ear and mentioned a state funeral for the sitting PM..
We all know what the road to hell is paved with.
A few observation:
Extraordinary measures require extraordinary evidence.
Scientific debate should never be stifled.
Even if you think the first lockdown was panic and trying to do the best, there is no way the subsequent measures were anything but negligent.
it is important the truth will out as without the two principles as stated above we will rinse and repeat. And not only on infectious diseases, also on climate.
“Indeed, perhaps if we want a population to get to herd immunity as quickly as possible, we should herd them all together, not keep them apart!”
Indeed, indeed ever heard of “Chicken Pox parties”?!
I know, right? Hindsight is indeed 2020, quite literally in this case.
Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua actually encouraged mass gatherings. Or to paraphrase the Wu-Tang Clan, we should have had a gathering of the masses that came to pay respects to the Wuhan Flu.
” My working hypothesis is that everyone concerned thought they were doing the right thing. ”
If that really was the case, they would not have suppressed the opinions of high-profile, eminent experts, who were presenting evidence that what they were doing was dangerous and would be counter-productive.
People who “thought they were doing the right thing” with no evidence to support their actions would be extremely grateful to receive advice that their actions were in fact the wrong thing to be doing.
How many times. There was no pandemic.
There is nothing well intention about zealots – they are entirely self-absorbed, self-righteous, uncompromising and dangerous.
Of course they thought they were doing the ‘right thing’, every tyrant and terrorist down history has believed so. The worst of all evil is that done in the name of good by those who think they are doing the right thing.
We need to put them on trial for their numerous crimes against Humanity along with the misanthropic climate change lunatics.
Here’s where the term originated: Zealot – a member of a radical, warlike, ardently patriotic group of Jews in Judea, advocating the violent overthrow of Roman rule.
And both jealousy and zealotry come from the same Latin root word, interestingly enough. Because they tend to go together, it seems.
To all the lockdown zealots, how does it feel to be on the wrong side of history? Because we wouldn’t know anything about that.