The Baby Boomers, born between 1946 and 1964, are arguably the luckiest generation in history. They grew up in a world reshaped by the end of World War II, decolonisation in Asia and Africa and a ‘rules-based international order’ under benign Pax Americana. The Bretton Woods institutions — the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank — were the backbone of this order.
By the mid-1990s, when the youngest Boomers hit middle age, Western Europe and Japan had risen from war’s ashes, while Asia’s ‘tiger economies’ (South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore), Southeast Asian nations (Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam), and population behemoths China (post-1978 Premier Deng Xiaoping’s reforms) and India (post-1991 Minister of Finance Manmohan Singh’s reforms) roared to life. The IMF and World Bank fuelled this growth with loans, infrastructure projects and economic discipline.
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.
As a fairly simple fellow it amazes me how much discussion there seems to be about measuring the temperature. For years we have put a thermometer behind a Stevenson screen and measured the temperature. As this article indicates viewing these sort of temperatures indicates that nothing too alarming is going on.
On Friday in North Devon we had a maximum temperature of 28.6 degs
Yesterday in North Devon we had 13.21 mm of rain and a maximum temperature of 19.1 degs.
I rather suspect that if you could go back in time and talk to a North Devon farmer 100 years ago he would not have found that sort of weather pattern unduly unusual.
Similarly when you talk to people who live near the coast in Devon they struggle to notice any change in sea level between the 1950s and today.
‘Farmers’ and ‘people who live near the coast’ are not experts, Steve. What do they know? They aren’t The Scientists and, as such, can’t be trusted with anything. You should ignore such people. They are conspiracy theorists.
🤣🤣
Its quite noticable that ‘extreme weather’ never seems to happen where I am. Yet here we are with #ukheatwave trending on Thursday and by Saturday its #timeforafleece. Why does everyone seem to limit themselves to a 48 hour horizon of experience.?
Great discussion about so-called Climate Change on Neil Oliver, GB News yesterday. Well worth looking out.
I’m old enough (just) to remember the severe winter of ’63 when deep snow covered the country from Boxing Day to April. I also remember the very long, hot summers of ’76 when we had searing temperatures (by British standards) and no rain in southern England for a couple of months.
I remember being told by “the scientists” in the ’70s that we were heading for another ice age. I remember when we were told by “the scientists” starting in the ’90s that we were suffering from global warming. Now we’re told by “the scientists” that we are suffering from man-made climate change ….. despite there being no real evidence whatsoever that the climate is changing significantly or that man is responsible.
My observations of the past 60 years and the conclusion I have reached is that “the Scientists” are in the pay of the Globalists who have an Agenda to advance which, if they were democrats, they knew they could not get democratic consent to implement. So they are imposing it through the time-honoured tactics of fear; facilitating mob-rule and force.
The BBC is the mouthpiece of these Globalists in the UK.
Thanks for that. Just how long can they keep the ball in the air if the global temperatures don’t comply?
Just keep shifting the axis so you can get a nice upward trend on your graph. If that fails, make it up…
Have a look at the Heatwave Plan for England. You’ll note that this doesn’t only come from the exact some people who brought us The Corona Pandemic
but also uses largely the same language. These people have a predetermined political agenda they’re trying to get implemented by constantly warning that some terminal catastrophe will otherwise certainly happen. Nobody can tell what they going to lie about twenty years from now. But they’ll certainly be lying about something.
Where I live I would say the weather has been exceptionally benign for at least 18 months, and this year alone so far has neither been too cold or too hot, not particularly stormy, a mild winter just gone – a little on the dry side, but apart from that, very pleasant indeed (West country). This is why I almost gasp at the audacity of the likes of the BBC crying wolf all the time – I mean, I look out of the window and see nothing unusual, yet I am continually being told it IS unusual. Have people become so removed from nature (with their heads stuck into phones and laptops) that they can’t actually sit up, look around them, and realise what they are being told doesn’t tally with what they see, and then make further investigations as to why this is so?
It was 21 degrees here on Thursday, 32 on Friday (a temperature only reached slowly by late pm, which then dropped back quickly) and a decidedly chilly 14 degrees and very wet yesterday. And for this, the media, mostly the BBC goes into panic mode about heatwaves etc. For just one bloomin’ hot day! It’s just barking, isn’t it?
Currently heavy cloud and 16 degrees – can we have our ‘heatwave’ back please?
In Reading, that was a warm day, which was warm and not hot. Since yesterday, it’s again overcast with sunny spells and rather cool. This year also came with an extreme weathe record, being the first year ever were I had to turn the heating on in June.
For the usual broken-record statement: Averaging a load of different temperature measurements taken by an ever-changing set of different temperature measurement stations in different locations whose output has additionally been politically corrected as it’s just not what it ought to be, still makes absolutely no sense.
From time to time, they make political adjustments to the definition of heatwave. See this met office page: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/learn-about/weather/types-of-weather/temperature/heatwave
This definition is a political adjustment of the weather in itself: A heatwave is said to be occurring when daily maximum temperature is at least the regional heatwave threshold for three days in a row. Daily maximum temperature is not a well-defined term, as it’s not said where this is measured. The maximum also communicates very little about the temperature throughout the day. Eg, for the so-called South-West three days of incessant thunderstorms with an average temperature below 20 degrees C but each with an 30 minute sunny spell during some time of the day where the temperature reaches 30 degrees C in the sun would qualify as heatwave.
You’re right. Incidentally, apart from the met office publications, I use this place: https://www.westweather.co.uk/ No affiliations with it – I just like the way it works. I think they use the American GFS as a source of forecasts; often differs from the met office.
I was brought up in the era of banning CFC’s to close the hole in the ozone layer. (It would be interesting to know if human activity plays any role in it’s fluctuation in size – Chris can you enlighten me?! I use to wince every time I sprayed lynx deodorant as I was told it would definitely give Australians skin Cancer.) I never for a second questioned the science on this. Equally with climate catastrophe taught in school it seemed obvious that we had to ‘solve’ global warming by any means possible. The lies about covid have done one good thing in that they have opened my eyes to the lies government and media tell to the populace and how compliant and ignorant they are. So much so that they swap in their perfectly good 500mile range petrol car for a 100 mile electric car that takes hours to charge and costs a fortune in electricity. Funny old World.
I’m of the opinion it won’t make a lot of difference whatever we do. What will be will be.
What I do wonder is what is the overall objective for preservationists. Do they want to turn the Earth into a climate controlled environment whereby we try to maintain the same ambient climate forever?
What happens if a natural cycle of heat or cold takes us out of what is judged to be acceptable? Do we turn the temperature up or find ways to block the sun?
The fact is that our very existence necessarily has an effect on our environment, how much of an effect is debateable. We can try to reduce our impact in some way but there will always be natural influences that are simply beyond our control. If we decide that we must combat all fluctuations caused by nature then we’ll become just like Sisyphus forever rolling the ball up the hill.
The nut jobs pushing the farce of global warming fall neatly in to two camps:
1. The eco loons who believe that human activities are heating up the planet but are too stupid to do any research and simply soak up MSM propoganda.
2. The Globocrap mob / Davos Deviants who push the global warming nonsense because it provides perfect cover for Agenda 2030, depopulation and a gateway to slavery for the rest.
I cannot count the number of so-called formally educated graduates that I know who fall into the first camp. Numpties.
“Formally educated” = “indoctrinated”.
Indeed but at least 50% of them are, shall we say, mature – post 55.