Do you think that the constant catastrophising of weather and climate in the mainstream media, politics and science has just appeared by accident? Over the last few years, the BBC and the Guardian, as of one mind, decided to float improbable ‘tipping point’ scares under cover of ‘scientists say’, while UN officials concluded that we had two years to save a ‘boiling’ planet and the ubiquitous ‘Jim’ Dale has been given free rein to make it up as he goes along on Talk TV and GB News. Of course all this didn’t suddenly happen. Each of these examples is testament to an extraordinary corruption of the true scientific process – an “amazing tale” according to political science writer Roger Pielke Jnr., “a story of how wealth and power sought to shape climate science in pursuit of political goals”.
The main culprit in this amazing tale will not be unknown to regular readers of the Daily Sceptic and it is the improbable scenario of RCP8.5. This has been promoted as a ‘business as usual’ set of scientific, economic and societal assumptions and it suggests temperature rises up to 4°C in less than 80 years. Although downgraded by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of late as “low likelihood”, it is still estimated to be behind about 50% of the climate modelled ‘impacts’ highlighted over the entire scientific literature. Almost all the claims of climate Armageddon and economic disaster peddled by those identified in our first paragraph are based on RCP8.5 input. It is a tale of how three wealthy men bankrolled a project to promote an extreme scenario to guarantee that the economic impact of climate change they projected into the future would be “eye-poppingly large”.
It will also not be a surprise to learn that the billionaire green activist Michael Bloomberg has played a key role over the last decade in lifting this implausible pathway to underserved prominence. Notes Pielke: “It’s a story of privilege and conceit – the privilege in American democracy that accompanies being mindbogglingly wealthy, and the conceit that climate policies can best be pursued by corrupting the scientific literature on climate change.”
In 2012, three wealthy men, Bloomberg, hedge fund manager Tom Steyer and former CEO of Goldman Sachs Hank Paulson chipped in $500,000 each to fund a project “making the climate threat feel real, immediate and potentially devastating to the business world”. An early funded report was part-titled ‘Risky Business’ and it focused on RCP8.5 “as the pathway closest to a business-as-usual trajectory”. The pathway was said to be “closest to a future without concerted action to reduce future warming”.
In Pielke’s view, the authors of the ‘Risky Business’ report made two significant methodological mistakes. They characterised the extreme RCP8.5 scenario as ‘business as usual’ and suggested the world could move from one scenario to another. As Pielke notes, the four different scenarios are independent with, for instance, RCP2.5 assuming a world with three billion people fewer than RCP8.5. Both of the mistaken methodological choices were said to be contrary to the appropriate use set by the people who created them.
The “genius” of ‘Risky Business’ was it undertook a “sophisticated campaign” to introduce its methodological ideas into mainstream scientific literature, “where they would take on a life of their own”. In 2016, a paper from the ‘Risky Business’ project was published in the prestigious journal Science featuring the erroneous notion of moving from one RCP scenario to another. Despite the obvious methodological flaw, notes Pielke, the paper passed peer-review with little or no criticism, and to date has been cited more than 1,100 times. “Hundreds, maybe thousands of papers followed similarly in adopting the same assumption of moving between incommensurate scenarios”, observes Pielke.
A year later, Science published another study from ‘Risky Business’ with the bizarre suggestion that the United States would see a 10% hit to its economy under the most extreme version of RCP8.5, with an incredible 8°C rise in temperature by the end of the century. This prominent paper has been cited more than 1,100 times in other studies and, noted Piekle, the 10% GDP loss would become the top line conclusion of the U.S. National Climate Assessment the very next year.
“Publishing papers in the academic literature based on the flawed ‘Risky Business’ methods was a formula that would be repeated time and time again. Like the introduction of a virus, the misleading reinterpretation of climate scenarios expanded throughout climate science,” states Pielke.
The work begun by Bloomberg-Steyer-Paulson was subsequently taken up by a group called Climate Impact Lab, a collaboration of ‘Risky Business’ leaders and several universities. According to Pielke, Climate Impact Lab has thrived on using RCP8.5 to generate a steady series of media-friendly studies projecting extreme climate impacts. Among them are stories suggesting rising sea levels could swamp major cities and displace almost 200 million people, while a rise in climate related deaths will surpass all infectious disease. All backed, of course, by ‘scientists say’.
Pielke concludes that there is no hidden conspiracy – “all of this is taking place in plain sight”. The political advocacy was “absolute genius” – a well-funded effort to fundamentally change how climate science was reported in the media, and ultimately how political discussion and policy options are shaped.
“This effort has been phenomenally successful,” says Pielke – or as we might put it, complete Dale-ification of most climate and Net Zero debate has been achieved.
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.
And on and on the charade of the last 3 years goes. Wake me up when the show trials start.
I’m with you…which is precisely why I’m interested in the new chess rules which go into effect in 2030. In particular rule no.4 looks intriguing…
https://newworldhumor.substack.com/p/changes-to-chess-in-the-new-world
Thanks, that’s bloody hilarious.
Excellent, many thanks
I would propose an addition to rule 5 – “whose numbers shall increase exponentially in reverse proportion to declining numbers of players”.
Andre Bridgen MP could raise this in the HOC , oh Hang on,
Andrew ! Butter fingers
“one could reasonably expect these [unvaccinated] individuals to have been more likely to have exhibited higher risk-taking behavior [than the vaccinated].”
Or just possibly, less risk-taking :O
Typical normy view of us. Anyone not following establishment expert advice must be cavalier irresponsible speeding risk takers, probably like guns, Trump/Brexit, hate black people, gays the environment and ‘Science’ (TM).
(Ok Guns, Trump & Brexit is a high correlation probs).
Anyway, Just get the jab.
“We still have a lot to learn about protection from COVID-19 vaccination…..” It says. I suggest that a robust “no thanks” approach is an effective tactic, then you are protected from it.
Behold, the pandemic of the boosted.
This is literally the definition of iatrogenic!
FFS. The original none mRNA spike is bad enough (although it seems even it was engineered/had additions at Wuhan) – but the mRNA jabs are far worse.
In simple terms it trashes your immune system.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9318917/
And
https://dpbh.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/dpbhnvgov/content/Boards/BOH/Meetings/2021/SENEFF~1.PDF
Why do those in charge don’t/won’t see it?
Even I’m starting to think that there just might be something sinister going on
Eventually Sforzesca you will join the likes of myself, Mogwai, Aethelred and a few others.
I have the utmost faith in the honesty, wisdom and integrity of both bigpharma and those who govern us.
Do four people (so far) not recognise blatant irony?
Poe’s Law?
Well, what a shock! Real world observation has been showing this for months. The only people I know who have had covid more than once are multiple “vaccinated”. And I have lost count of the number of people getting covid immediately after the jab…
Once again, a study defines COVID as positive PCR test result and once again, it finds that the immune system of the body is no antiviral AA artillery capable of taking down approaching viruses before they ever enter the body but only works against pathogens which have already infected it. How many more repetitions of this lame running gag do we need, Mr Jones? This is no study and the authors are no scientists. They could as well have studied statistical correlations between gun crimes and the birth rate of polar bears. There are bound to be some.
‘… no antiviral AA artillery capable of taking down approaching viruses before they ever enter the body…’
Agreed. But are you saying the pseudo- vaccines have?
’… studied statistical correlations between gun crimes and the birth rate of polar bears.’
You are quoting the wrong study there, it was… ‘ between SUVs driven by Soccer Moms and the birth rate of polar bears.’ Yikes! Climate change.
My opinion on COVID quacksination is that it’s exceedingly unlikely that anybody who got it hadn’t already been exposed to Sars-CoV2 before and thus, became infected and eventually recovered (or died). Sars-CoV2 is an airborne virus, hence, in order to control its movements, one would have needed to control the movement of air and not people. A positive effect of COVID quacksination, if it has any, cannot be determined because by the time it became available, everybody already had naturally acquired immunity.
The people who developed this medicine certainly knew this and hence, the whole point of the charade (in the so-called west) was to keep the illusion of a dangerous pandemic alive until Big Pharma had a supposed remedy for sale. Some of the people who had already helped to halt the swine flu hoax also came out against Covimania but this time, the would-be peddlers of miracle cures for imaginary ailments were prepared for them. Eg, one of them openly condemned the useless medical experiments the government of Israel (composers of the international 2021 number one hit Keep on boosting!) was conducting on the population of Israel. He was quickly smeared as an antisemite and thus, effectively silenced.
Who would have thought that repeatedly challenging our immune systems with an injected antigen stimulant would actually reduce our immunity!
Oh wait, that’s what happens with sensitisation injections!
The study defines COVID as positive NAAT (Nucleic Acid Amplification Test), ie, a positive PCR test for presence of Sars-CoV2 RNA (fragments). That’s already meaningless nonsense as a diagnosis (heavily employed during the bullshit epidemic of healthy pupils testing positive in summer 2021). It’s completely ludicrous when trying to gauge effectiveness of the immune response to an infection with a pathogen as the infection must always have happened before the immune response could commence.
Fair overall point on the potential misuse of PCR tests in defining infection.
But doesn’t the validity of a PCR test depend in part on the cycle threshold? At a low cycle threshold isn’t this indeed indicative (not definitive) of actual infection? I haven’t got time to read the original papers, but does anyone know if the threshold for defining infections here is quoted?
I didn’t read enough of it to know this because there’s no point in wasting one’s time with junk. A PCR test result is completely valid to detect an infection. But that’s an entirely pointless exercise because we all keep getting infected and reinfected with endemic pathogens all the time. The usual case is that this causes mild or no symptoms for a fairly short period of time and which again vanish when the immune system has again cleared it up. The PCR test misuse happens when infection is redefined as something else, ie, a (serious) COVID case warranting …
In the context of the question implied in this article, positive NAAT is just pointless nonsense: The immune system cannot act on pathogens which haven’t infected the body first. It’s really just as meaningful as correlating gun crimes and the birth rate of polar bears, except that there hasn’t been a multi-year, $$$ propaganda campaign teaching everyone that there’s surely a mysterious (and thus – per xenophobia – dangerous) cause-and-effect relation between both.
Yes, I see your points and I think you raise legitimate concerns.
It’s difficult for me to comment directly as I haven’t read the original paper, so I don’t know how they defined an ‘infection’. By my understanding, symptoms plus a suitably low-cycle PCR +ve should do it, but I stand to be corrected.
I think you raise very good point about getting infected continually at a low level – if I understand it correctly, breathing in viral particles which don’t really get anywhere and thus don’t cause symptoms. I’ve long wondered whether that sort of very-low level infection does actually help build up immunity. I suspect it does.
Compared to a virus or even a few millions viruses, the human is insanely huge (its estimated to contain about 30 trillion cells). These viral particles do get somewhere but for the normal case, this doesn’t cause noticable symptoms before the immune system has again cleared them out, or it just causes the everyday symptoms of a mild cold everybody routinely ignores: Runny or blocked nose, slightly swollen and minimally hurting tonsils, passing muscle aches, short bouts of diarrhoea and stuff like that. Everytime this occurs and goes away again, the body has gone through another phase of sickness induced by a virus and again healed itself. This is happening to all of us all of the time.
Infection (with something or half a dozen different somethings causing different slight troubles in different parts of the body) is the normal state of affairs and the claim that this would be otherwise is one of the most devious COVID lies, especially as it was made knowingly. A recent example of that would be (paraphrase from memory) Two years of COVID and still haven’t gotten seriously sick? Are you a super-dodger?
suggesting to healthy people who presumably went through at least 5 – 6 rounds of COVID without ever noticing this and who are thus perfectly (as perfectly as possible) immune to it that – by some miracle – they must have evaded it all the time and that it still lies in waiting to get them and then, all bets will be off. Time to get vaccinated once again, you wouldn’t want that to happen after having been so incredibly lucky for such a long time!
These people are lying whenever they open their mouths. They wouldn’t tell anyone the correct time of day out of principle.
Yes, this is pretty well how I’ve understood it. In particular, you can’t avoid breathing in various viral particles, some of these will take root, and in almost all cases will be swiftly dealt with by the immune system, with or without symptoms.
Part of the reason for the mess we’re in is the refusal of the vast majority of people to think clearly.
As a society at large, we’re still not clear on what an ‘infection’ actually means.
And has a name: Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome.
Or V-AIDS for short.
“Covid Infection Risk Increases With Number of Vaccine Doses…”
I knew that. I’ve known that since the summer of 2021, long before Omicron, when the medical, political and mainstream media establishment were telling us the opposite. It’s good to have it confirmed by studies like this, which people will take seriously, but it has been very obvious for more than a year, simply by looking at the stats and the graphs for each country on a website such as worldometer:
In every highly vaccinated country in the world, cases have massively soared after mass vaccination, but have not soared in countries where vaccination is very low.
And not just cases, in many of these highly vaccinated countries – such as Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, and many many more – Covid deaths have soared after mass vaccination, compared with before.
Excuses were made for each country, different excuses for different countries – to try to deny the obvious – but they can’t all be explained away, it’s not plausible.
Correlation is not causation, but when Covid cases massively soar in every highly vaccinated country, and Covid deaths soar in most highly vaccinated countries, AFTER mass vaccination, and it doesn’t happen in countries with low vaccination, then it doesn’t take much common sense to add 2 and 2 together.
And it is what Geert Vanden Bossche, at the beginning of 2021, predicted would happen, though not quite as lethally as he feared, thanks to Omicron apparently.
If Covid has been causing people to die (rather than people dying with Covid, not of Covid) and the vaccines are greatly increasing the number of Covid infections, as this study has found, then the vaccines are causing people to die in this way, in addition to deaths caused by adverse reactions to the vaccines.
‘Correlation is not causation…’. It is when supported by external data. That data being what happens in the control group – the unvaccinated – and what happens between the different dose regimes.
I look forward to seeing this as the main news item on the BBC or the main headline in the Telegraph (… 10 years later ….) .
If anyone needs someone to talk to we meet every Sunday.
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am
Make friends & keep sane
From 1st January 2023
Elms Field (near Everyman Cinema and play area)
Wokingham RG40 2FE
Just like the numerous previous studies.