- “Counter-terror police investigate fire at Keir Starmer’s home” – Counter-terror police are leading an investigation into a suspected “firebomb” attack at Sir Keir Starmer’s North London home, according to Sky News.
- “Police investigate fires at properties and car linked to Keir Starmer” – The Times reports that three fires on or near the Prime Minister’s properties could be linked to a terror plot.
- “Can Labour really get immigration under control?” – Keir Starmer has pledged to end the “betrayal” of Britain’s reliance on cheap foreign labour, says the Mail.
- “Coachload of migrants humiliate Starmer on day he vowed to stop them” – More Channel boat arrivals were transported inland just as Sir Keir Starmer launched his latest bid to “take back control” of Britain’s borders, reports the Mail.
- “Three key flaws in Starmer’s immigration crackdown” – In the Spectator, John Power argues that beneath Sir Keir’s tough talk on immigration lies a white paper laced with liberal concessions that risk incentivising more illegal migration.
- “Another round of political promises on migration is pointless” – Labour’s white paper won’t tell voters anything they haven’t heard before, says Kamal Ahmed in the Telegraph. Only action will restore trust.
- “Can Britian end its dependence on foreign workers?” –“Significantly” reducing immigration can now be added to “smashing the gangs” and “restoring growth” as clear priorities on which Labour will be judged, writes Danny Shaw in the Spectator.
- “The leaders who promised to cut immigration but failed” – Successive prime ministers have pledged to reduce net migration and failed to do so – yet it remains one of the most serious concerns among voters, notes Amy Gibbons in the Telegraph.
- “‘I am reading Douglas Murray. Should I expect the police to come knocking?’” – The treatment of retired special constable Julian Foulkes makes Britain look like an Orwellian dystopia, says Tom Harris in the Telegraph.
- “Number of entrepreneurs closing UK businesses hits highest level since pandemic” – The number of UK entrepreneurs voluntarily shutting down viable businesses has hit the highest rate since the pandemic, with advisers blaming rises to tax rates for the jump in liquidations, reports the FT.
- “CIPD links Employment Rights Bill with low business confidence” – A new CIPD report suggests that rising costs, forthcoming legislation and global uncertainty has pushed employer confidence to a record low, according to Personnel Today.
- “Starmer’s trade deals will do nothing to fix Britain’s broken economy” – Major growth won’t materialise through easy decisions – a radical change of direction is needed, argues Roger Bootle in the Telegraph.
- “Politicians to be banned from presenting news after Farage row” – Politicians will be banned from working as news presenters under a crackdown from Ofcom, as the regulator seeks to tighten rules following a High Court row with GB News, reports the Telegraph.
- “Out with the old…” – Predictions that Nigel Farage will become Britain’s next prime minister now attract expressions of anxious concern instead of mockery from the liberal commentariat, notes John Lloyd in Quillette.
- “‘The country is f****d and it needs reforming’” – The rise of Reform UK as the main challenger to the political establishment is driven not just by policy but a visceral desire for change, says Dr David McGrogan on his Substack.
- “The dismantling of our country through self-hatred is no accident – it is policy” – On GB News, Alex Story argues that the manufactured shame of young Britons towards their country is a deliberate result of state-sponsored ideologies.
- “The hidden mechanisms of unfreedom: part two” – On Substack, Alex Klaushofer slams the growing use of “deliberative democracy” techniques to manufacture consent.
- “Protect Northern Ireland Veterans from Prosecutions” – Sign this petition if you think that the Government should not make any changes to legislation that would allow Northern Ireland Veterans to be prosecuted for doing their duty in combating terrorism as part of ‘Operation Banner’ (1969-2007).
- “Ed Miliband’s wife embroiled in Nimby housing row” – Angela Rayner’s housebuilding blitz has found an unlikely opponent in Ed Miliband’s wife, who has opposed plans for a new development in her neighbourhood in North London, reports the Times.
- “King hails climate activists he hopes will change the world” – GB News reports on King Charles’s foundation celebrating its 35th anniversary by praising 35 young “changemakers”, including a former Extinction Rebellion activist.
- “The London residents who fought back against LTNs – and won” – A recent High Court victory by the West Dulwich Action Group could force the Labour-run council to scrap its Low Traffic Neighbourhood scheme, reports Southwark News.
- “Nissan to axe 20,000 jobs worldwide” – Japanese car giant Nissan is in crisis mode as the shift to electric cars leaves it playing catch-up, reports GB News.
- “COVID-19 mRNA shots destroy over 60% of women’s non-renewable egg supply” – On the Focal Points Substack, Nicolas Hulschee reports that a new rat study shows Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vax destroys over 60% of the ovaries’ non-renewable egg supply – a potentially irreversible blow to female fertility.
- “GOFather and his Egyptian fruit bats” – On Substack, Jim Haslam ties together Egyptian fruit bats, transmissible vaccines and a tangled web of US biolab activity to argue that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered through gain-of-function research and quietly shipped to Wuhan.
- “Macron accused of ‘hiding bag of cocaine’” – France has responded to a claim that President Emmanuel Macron hid a bag of cocaine while posing for a photo with Keir Starmer and Germany’s Friedrich Merz over the weekend, reports the Mail. It was a tissue, apparently.
- “German researcher calls out Science Magazine for refusing to consider study pointing to a Wuhan lab accident” – Censorship remains a serious problem in medical and science journals, says Paul D. Thacker on his Substack.
- “The campaign to ban Alternative für Deutschland is not going well” – On Substack, Eugyppius takes aim at the failing attempts to outlaw the AfD, highlighting the lack of public support and legal missteps that are undermining the push for a ban.
- “Trump’s crackdown on Chinese ‘junk’ is long overdue” – We have chosen to binge on quantity, not quality while our own industrial base withers away, says Andrew Orlowski in the Telegraph.
- “China has won the trade war with Trump” – The US needs China more than China needs the US, writes Matthew Lynn in the Spectator.
- “Taliban bans chess” – The Taliban has banned Afghans from playing chess until it works out whether the game is compatible with Islamic law, reports France24.
- “Graham Linehan says ‘resolve won’t waver’ ahead of trial for harassing trans woman” – Father Ted co-creator Graham Linehan has pleaded not guilty to harassing a biologically male trans woman and damaging his phone, says the Mail.
- “Teaching union says trans women must be allowed to use ladies’ toilets” – The Left-wing National Education Union has resolved to campaign for trans teachers to continue to choose toilets according to ‘gender identity’, according to the Mail, even though admitting biological males to women’s toilets is against the law, according to the Supreme Court.
- “Outrage culture in offices has reached new heights of absurdity” – The reign of the workplace snowflakes is only going to get worse under Labour’s Workers’ Rights Bill, says Lucy Burton in the Telegraph.
- “Britain’s ‘wokeist’ university has finally seen sense” – Oxford University’s backtracking on the removal of some gendered language is an extraordinary U-turn, writes Celia Walden in the Telegraph. But what has prompted it?
- “‘You become something unique’: the A-list offspring coming out as trans ” – Robert De Niro joins a long line of Hollywood stars whose children now identify as trans or non-binary, reports Nicole Lampert in the Telegraph.
- “Monetising malaise: the corporate exploitation of urban black youth” – On UNN, Dr Niall McCrae argues that the music industry has exploited urban black youth by promoting gangster rap, which fuels criminality and profits both the record and prison industries.
- “Football club’s vindictive red card for a gender critic” – In the Conservative Woman, Dr Fredderick Attenborough highlights the case of Linzi Smith, the Newcastle fan who’s been given a three-season ban for challenging gender ideology on social media. You can donate to Linzi’s crowdfunder here.
- “The state’s Southport narrative is crumbling” – In the Spectator, Laurie Wastell exposes how the Southport riots weren’t a far-Right plot, but a local eruption fuelled by silence, spin and state scapegoating.
- “‘The people guilty of spreading harmful misinformation were the authorities!’” – On GB News, Toby weighs in on a new report which says the riots after the Southport murders have no link to the “far-Right”.
If you have any tips for inclusion in the round-up, email us here.
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.
I presume the author is another one who really believes the nonsense of AGW.
The question gives it away ‘given that Britain is responsible for less than 1% of the planet’s annual greenhouse gas emissions, how much difference do you think it would make to global temperatures even if this country somehow achieved Net Zero tomorrow?’
FFS
“Global temperatures?”
What a load of carp.
Indeed. I was thinking about this the other day. Our house is by no means huge, and it’s pretty open plan, internal doors always open. The heating comes on in every room, but there is only one thermostat. It’s definitely not the same temperature in every room, especially when the sun is shining.
They should ask: Do you want the entire British countryside smothered with solar panels and wind turbines entirely funded by your taxes?
It would be wise to add ‘and by a trebling of your electricity bills.’
It’s when people are hit where it hurts, their wallet/purse, that opinions can rapidly change. I often get labelled as a conspiracy theorist (a badge I wear proudly) but I was asked openly at the weekend why electricity prices are so high. Fortunate that the Daily Sceptic had recently published an article on this very subject.
I said global energy prices rose due to unnecessary lockdowns and massive borrowing causing inflation. I said the UK is one of the highest because of our perfect storm of mad Net Zero plans with a little bit of Brexit thrown in.
For the first time since 2019, I got more nods of agreement than derision. It was helped that we were sat in a pub where the licensee overheard our conversation and brought her current energy bills which are crippling the hospitality industry.
And, “How do you feel about all our agriculture being demolished, all our food imported and our manufacturing base taken over by China?”
The rug needs pulling from under climate claptrap first. Needs Mr Farage to call it out for the con-trick it’s been for decades. All dependent on repealing the 2008 Climate Claptrap Act.
Then mount a campaign to Take Back Control of energy bills.
I tend to agree that a lot of political capital could be made out of this, if the issue were to be presented in the right way.
If you brainwash the population for decades with bogus claims of a climate emergency it is no surprise they want something done to tackle it.
Just give them both sides of the argument and the public will soon see sense that there is no emergency and their taxes are being wasted.
That’s a good point. They want something done… by someone else.
Ask them what they’re prepared to do themselves to achieve it. Turn off their heating and lights? Buy less new clothing? Eat less meat or more insects?
Show them items out of the UK FIRES reports like telling them to give up dairy foods and beef, lamb or pork or pushing the price of hydrocarbon fuel to extreme highs or building their houses out of rammed earth or that new steel should not be made.
One of my most left-leaning narrative consuming friend/couple was appalled by the FIRES report (right?) that air travel is to be curtailed to maybe one flight a year. They love their foreign holidays…
Well in every poll that has raised the issue of money and what personal contribution people would be willing to make – as opposed to the extortion through taxes and increased costs – the answer is extremely little. Probably just due to incompetence which is about the only thing government and the snivel service excel at, the way that taxpayers cash is channelled to the unreliable suppliers of expensive energy is a maze of confusing methods that make it hard to easily explain to the masses how it really is not 9 times cheaper than gas generation and is many times more expensive.
…and why do you think those methods are confusing? They are deliberately so, even to those of us familiar with the industry. And of course they were written by civil servants and their lawyers, both of whom are paid by the yard
Now is the time for Reform to lay out exactly what makes up an energy bill, how it’s changed over the years and the truth around subsidy ‘farming’ by renewables companies, supported by the Uniparty. Lay this out, as accurately as possible, and challenge the main parties directly to explain it / justify it or deny it… get on the front foot
The recent DS article would be a good starting point but like COVID debates, the article is far too heavy on facts and needs to be pitched emotionally.
Exactly – I’d go with a side by side graphic showing the % breakdown in 2008 vs now or similar – something pictorial… get it right any you don’t even need to have too much detail. You just want people to look at it, and think ‘hang on a minute, how f****** much?!?’…. They can then join the rest of the dots themselves
I’ll just throw this question out there: Who here believes that if “global average temperatures” started to drop on their own starting next week and continued to show a downward trend for a couple of years, would Net Zero be abandoned since obviously the world is cooling and it’s no longer necessary?
There is no such thing as “global average temperatures.” It’s an impossible.
It’s not really impossible because global average temperature can be easily calculated. But the result is a meaningless piece of mathematical fiction. Or rather, it’s just as meaningful for any particular place as a global average shoe size¹ would be meaningful for an individual person.
¹ Someone urgently needs to research if there’s a trend in global average shoe size and whether or not it correlates with trends in global average temperatures. Maybe, we really need to shrink feet instead of CO₂ emissions! [Sarcasm]
Addition: The area of this planet which is not covered by temperature measurment stations is so much larger than area covered by temperature measurement statements that the latter can sensibly regarded as non-existant. We don’t know anything about the temperature of the overwhelming number of places this planet. This implies that an average calculated from the preciously few locations on this planet where temperature is actually measured really doesn’t even include most of the relevant information.
It’s not only that the calculation is nonsense¹, we don’t even have the data for it to begin with.
¹ Also, canonical CO₂ levels of the atmosphere are measured in a single location of this planet, next to a giant volcano in Haway (Mauna Loa).
A very good point. A very over-generalized statistic like overall global average temperature is like trying to gauge room temperature by sticking a thermometer directly on top of a radiator (or in the fridge).
The international media does this nicely pertaining to weather events. It either ramps up or down the level of coverage of storms, droughts, wildfires and all the rest of it, depending on the level of Net Zero urgency they want to convey.
If and when (hopefully never, but hypothetically) Net Zero ever comes about, all they need to do is focus the public’s attention elsewhere and ease off on the climate scare stories… and then they can say “you see, Net Zero worked!”
You only have to remove a few weather stations with highish temperatures, and close down a few with lower temperatures and, hey presto, using inadequate statistical methods, global temperatures are raised.
Well no of course there is, but it is a totally meaningless figure, being subject to a trillion variables.
Starting with the word average – is that the mean, medium or the mode? arithmetic or geometric? using data from ground stations or satellite data? comparing data series staring from when?
And given that most databases have been corrupted by senseless adjustments over the years what steps do you take to ensure the data is actually valid? UK data includes readings from weather stations that don’t actually exist. ANd quality of data, when putting the data together some is from high quality weather stations many in the UK at least are classified as junk. Therefore your average needs to include let’s say the 90% condfidence limits otherwise it is a meaningless exercise. A fiar amount of computing power required to do that for however many datasets you’re planning to use.
And that’s just the start I am not a statistician and this took me two minutes to write. There will be a thousand other things to take into account. Allowing for major volcanic erruptions for one thing.
So yes there may indeed theoretically be some sort of arithmetic average but like everyhting else in this voodoo science it is complete and utter garbage.
You simply cannot justify destroying our economy and indeed our entire way of life on the basis of it.
It is beyond insane, psycopathic even to suggest you can let alone the damage already wrought supposedly trying to do so.
Or is it simply a massive programme to rip off the plebs and enrich the favoured ones? Which is what it looks like more than anything else.
I think we should be told.
Averaging temperatures from different location is meaningless nonsense. The contrived example I keep using for this is: Let’s say a thermometer in the Sahara records 45⁰C and another in Antartica -50⁰C. This makes for an average of -2.5⁰C. But neither temperature in the Sahara nor temperature in Antartica is “on average, -2.5⁰C.”
Yes of course it is absolute nonsense.
Interesting your point about the measurement of CO2, I’d not heard that before, and your point about the vast areas of the globe whose temperatures go unmeasured at least by ground based stations is very valid.
So are you saying that the average global temperature is not lower in a full ice age, than when the earth is a hot house, because it’s somehow impossible? Both full ice ages and hot houses have happened in the past without any help from human activity, and must represent different overall average temperatures.
Instead of global average temperatures, you could ask about the evidence for unusually cold weather events happening all over the planet, as recorded by the Electroverse website. Even though it’s paywalled, we can learn a lot just by scrolling down the main page of brief headlines and photos on that site, which are never featured in the mainstream media:
Electroverse – Documenting Earth Changes During The Next Grand Solar Minimum
Net Zero, woke, EU rapprochement, immigration – legal and illegal, getting involved in foreign conflicts not our concern.
That’ll do for a start.
Which isn’t far off much of the Reform manifesto at the election.
At least highlighting the futility and ‘wealth destruction’ of the NET Zero policies will allow Reform to distract voters’ interests away from the recent Lowe pressure, and the accompanying political storm.
There is no leader within this nonsense. It would take a particularly compassionate leader to deal with such misguided souls.
‘And, given that Britain is responsible for less than 1% of the planet’s annual greenhouse gas emissions, how much difference do you think it would make to global temperatures even if this country somehow achieved Net Zero tomorrow?’
The 1% figure here is badly misleading. 1% is perhaps true as the UK’s percentage of human emissions. But human emissions are barely 20% of total emissions. So, the UK’s percentage of total emissions is 0.2%.
Here’s the real question:
How much poorer are you willing to be to achieve net zero, given that China and India, with their rampant programs of coal-fired power station building, are both putting out more new CO2 every year than the UK’s entire annual output, and China and India are not bound by the Paris accords to even begin reductions till 2050?
Where are the measurements for judging success, like plotting a graph of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide concentrations against Time?
I wonder what keeps these politicians so out of touch with reality. They are well behind where the general public are.
Maybe a case for participatory democracy….
Money the green scam is very lucrative.
Party whips? You are cast out if you don’t take the whip.