A January 2020 Cabinet Office presentation that is said to have changed Boris Johnson’s mind over the causes of climate change and acted as a ‘road to Damascus’ has been ridiculed by a number of sceptical journalists after it came to light last week following a FOI request. U.S.-based Climate Depot run by Marc Morano said Johnson had been “duped” by U.K. activists, while Paul Homewood from Not A Lot of People Know That, preferred the word “conned”. Overall, Homewood described the event as a “childish attempt to scare the PM”.
It seems to have succeeded. After the meeting Johnson noted “an almost vertical kink upwards in the temperature graphs. He said: “This was a very important moment for me.” Of course, most of the kinks came from climate models, now commonly referred to in the green climate business as ‘evidence’. In fact they are nothing of a kind, having registered 40 straight years of wrong and usually ludicrously high forecasts.
Climate Depot suggested that a more relevant chart to show the Prime Minister was recently produced by the Smithsonian Institution and tracked global temperatures since life took off on Earth (see above). It is very clear, said Climate Depot, that the current temperature of the Earth does “not represent a ‘climate emergency”.
There appears to have been a concerted effort around this time by green advisers, official and unofficial, to bring Boris Johnson fully on board with the green Net Zero agenda. Shortly after becoming Prime Minister in 2019, his partner (now wife) Carrie Symonds said that politicians had a “gigantic responsibility to make the right decisions” about what she described as a climate crisis.
The climate presentation was run by Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser. Also attending were a number of special advisers, according to documents released under a recent Freedom of Information request, along with other interested individuals whose names were redacted. The purpose of the meeting was clearly set out in an email from Professor Stephen Belcher, the Chief Scientist at the Met Office. He prepared a slide show and said it demonstrated the goal was to “stabilise climate, which requires net zero emissions”.
At the beginning of 2020, Government scientists were working on stopping the climate warming, citing information from computer models. Within weeks another group of Government scientists, led again by Vallance, would use computer models to justify societal lockdowns, house detention, economic destruction and social distancing to try to stop a common global virus.
The Vallance climate team showed Johnson a graph displaying the warming seen since 1850, measured by surface instruments. Nobody denies the world has warmed about 1°C since then by rebounding out of the five-century long ‘little ice age’. The graph also discloses that temperatures actually fell from 1940 to 1980 despite CO2 levels rising in this period by nearly 9% from 311.3 parts per million in the atmosphere to 338.9. Little correlation between CO2 and temperature is seen in any current, historical and geological record.
Climate Depot quoted the Swedish meteorologist Lennart Bengtsson, who stated: “We are creating great anxiety without it being justified. … There are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic. … The warming we have had the last 100 years is so small that if we didn’t have meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn’t have noticed it at all”. The site also quoted the climatologist Patrick Michaels, who said so-called ‘hottest year’ claims – based on surface data dating only back to the 19th century – “are political statements designed to persuade the public that the Government needs to take action on man-made climate change”.
The FOI request was made by the green activist site Carbon Brief. Covering the story, the BBC took a ‘better late than never’ tone, with Leo Hickman, the Editor of Carbon Brief, noting that he was surprised how long it took Johnson to have his “personal epiphany on climate change”.
Paul Homewood was less impressed with the event and explained: “The slide show was organised by Sir Patrick Vallance, which hardly gives you much confidence! But worse still, it was presented by the Met Office’s Stephen Belcher. The Met Office long ago gave up any pretence of objectivity where global warming is concerned, always positioning itself at the extreme end of the debate. To ask them for advice is akin to asking Greenpeace.”
At one point, Belcher presented a slide showing rising sea levels. It started in 1993, noted Homewood, and thus suggested it was a modern phenomenon. Why didn’t Belcher show the PM a chart “confirming that sea levels have been rising since the mid 19th century, with no acceleration?”, he asked. At another point, Johnson was shown simulations of what the global temperature would have been without human influence. Models are not evidence, said Homewood, and further asked: “Where are the charts which illustrate how computer-modelled projections of warming are consistently greater than observed?”
Writing in the Daily Telegraph this week, Sherelle Jacobs says that fatalism has steadily sucked the life out of the Johnson premiership, “prompting him to cave in on everything from taxes and lockdowns to green radicalism”. In general, Ms Jacobs suggests, the Tory party believes in individual free will but has surrendered to the apocalyptic terrors of climate change. “It is repulsed by radicalism but champions Net Zero and draconian lockdown to stay in vogue with certain voters.”
Meanwhile, an intriguing email from Professor Belcher discusses the need for five “experts” to contribute to the Cabinet presentation team. All their names, except Baroness Brown, deputy chair at the time of the Government’s Climate Change Committee, are removed from view. One is described as having done a lot of media work and is “quite campaigning”. Another is thought an “excellent communicator on impacts”. A final one comes with the remark: “I appreciate Stuart you thought she might appear too close? She is excellent”.
Who could that be?
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, Carrie Antoinette did that, with help from Kim Jong Johnson himself.
His condemnation of the industrial revolution was evil.
We have exceeded the decadence and gross self-indulgence of the “Ancien Régime” and Rasputin’s Court!
Any guesses as to what happens next?
It’s largely brown, cold and desperate I think.
Kim Jong Johnson and Carrie Antoinette are sent into exile in Michael Moore’s underpants.
Zing! LOL
Many western idiots like Boris Johnson & Joe Biden are helping China & Russia.
China & Russia Profit From West’s Ludicrous Obsession With Unreliable Wind and Solar
https://stopthesethings.com/2022/02/07/china-russia-profit-from-wests-ludicrous-obsession-with-unreliable-wind-and-solar/
by stopthesethings
Let’s keep getting the message out
Thursday 10th February 5pm
Silent lighted walk behind one simple sign
“No More Lockdown & Covid Rules Are Barking”
Bring torches, candles and other lights
meet outside Town Hall, between Rose Inn & Costa
Wokingham RG40 1AP
Stand in the Park Sundays 10am make friends, ignore the madness & keep sane
Wokingham Howard Palmer Gardens Cockpit Path car park Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Henley Mills Meadows (at the bandstand) Henley-on-Thames RG9 1DS
Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Spam
During the Cretaceous – ended about 65 Million years ago – mammals were barely present on earth. In fact the largest mammals was a shrew, because mammals have difficulty shedding body heat.
If global average temperatures had not dropped there would be no mammals – and just in case you hadn’t noticed, human beings are mammals. And that blue line on the graph shows a sharp increase right at the end as we emerged from the last ice age.
Even with that being true, my understanding is that the human contribution to that change is inconsequential and it’s just hubris to think otherwise when so many other planetary factors are in play.
When I was born, CO2 was at 315 ppm – and it’s now about 100ppm higher than that. During the past three million years (with one exceptional interval), CO2 levels have fluctuated between 180ppm and 280ppm, so 415ppm is way of the charts.
Who was measuring CO2 levels 3 million years ago? How do we know the estimates of prehistoric levels are accurate and comparable with what we measure today? I suspect there is quite a large margin of error.
Undoubtedly there is. In which case any reference to historic proxy temperatures must be taken with a pinch of salt, including Michael Mann’s infamous hokey stick fraud and Al Gores fraudulent representation of a warming planet.
This is the calculation, using internationally recognised data, nothing fancy, no hidden agenda, just something we can all do by taking our socks and shoes off.
Assuming increasing atmospheric CO2 is causing the planet to warm:
Atmospheric CO2 levels in 1850 (beginning of the Industrial Revolution): ~280ppm (parts per million atmospheric content) (Vostok Ice Core).
Atmospheric CO2 level in 2021: ~410ppm. (Mauna Loa)
410ppm minus 280ppm = 130ppm ÷ 171 years (2021 minus 1850) = 0.76ppm of which man is responsible for ~3% = ~0.02ppm.
That’s every human on the planet and every industrial process adding ~0.02ppm CO2 to the atmosphere per year on average. At that rate mankind’s CO2 contribution would take ~25,000 years to double which, the IPCC states, would cause around 2°C of temperature rise. That’s ~0.0001°C increase per year for ~25,000 years.
One hundred (100) generations from now (assuming ~25 years per generation) would experience warming of ~0.25°C more than we have today. ‘The children’ are not threatened!
Furthermore, the Mauna Loa CO2 observatory (and others) can identify and illustrate Natures small seasonal variations in atmospheric CO2 but cannot distinguish between natural and manmade atmospheric CO2.
Hardly surprising. Mankind’s CO2 emissions are so inconsequential this ‘vital component’ of Global Warming can’t be illustrated on the regularly updated Mauna Loa graph.
Mankind’s emissions are independent of seasonal variation and would reveal itself as a straight line, so should be obvious.
Not even the global fall in manmade CO2 over the early Covid-19 pandemic, estimated at ~14% (14% of ~0.02ppm CO2 = 0.0028ppm), registers anywhere on the Mauna Loa data. Unsurprisingly.
In which case, the warming the planet has experienced is down to naturally occurring atmospheric CO2, all 97% of it.
That’s entirely ignoring the effect of the most powerful ‘greenhouse’ gas, water vapour which is ~96% of all greenhouse gases.
That’s still only 0.04%.
So what?! CO2 is only 0.04% of the atmosphere, and man’s contribution ~3% of that, ie 0.0012%. 0.0012% that’s an inert gas (that is vital for ALL life) isn’t capable of doing very much climatically, or anything at all. Conversely, it’s temperature that drives CO2, mainly via ocean absorption/outgasing, which is temperature controlled.
Exactly!
Volcanoes do far more, so the logical step for all the climate alarmist activists is to try to plug them. I (mischievously, I admit!) look forward to their ‘extinction rebellion’ people gluing themselves down to a smoking volcano to protest that more is not done by governments to stop the emissions!
An excellent suggestion.
All well and good but so what. Where is the proof that fluctuations in the very tiny amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere have any bearing on climate?
Er,
Plant respiration stops below 170 ppm.
Plants evolved for and grow best with levels>1000ppm.
Plants exhibit signs of distress >500 ppm.
Dutch& other greenhouses boost CO2 to 1000 ppm to assist with plant growth.
Ripening plants keep CO2 above 1000ppm.
Spoilage doesn’t occur until > 6000 ppm.
CO2 levels have been as high as 7000 ppm in earths past.
Therfore looking at the scale we are at the lower end with plenty head room for an increase and very little to decrease.
If plant respiration stops, life gets very difficult for everything on earth
So Co2 levels have increased by 100ppm in your lifetime, and the relevance of this ‘fact’ is?
Would you say that the increase in Co2 in your lifetime has affected your life in any way? Detrimentally that is.
Quite. Plant life stops at c250ppm. CO2 concentration now very low compared to geological history.
If CO2 drops below 180ppm all life on Earth is screwed. CO2 levels have been much higher in the past and are ‘off the scale’ in most buildings with no apparent ill effect on people. Plus of course, we have a number of deluded folk walking around in masks in an apparent attempt to magnify their intake of CO2 significantly. I find it ironic that generally the same group of people that run around waving their arms in the air screaming that we’re all going to die from excess CO2 are also running around waving their arms in the air screaming that we have to wear masks or we’re all going to die…
They’ll be remainers too. Definitely a mind-set.
Graph from Patrick Moore’s book Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom showing we are at one of the lowest ebbs of CO2 in the atmosphere. Also as he points out plants need CO2.
How insane is it that this bindingly obvious fact needs pointing out?
During the Cretaceous – ended about 65 Million years ago – mammals were barely present on earth. In fact the largest mammals was a shrew, because mammals have difficulty shedding body heat.
If global average temperatures had not dropped there would be no mammals
You’re getting close to breaking MTF’s self-contradiction record: If the drop in temperature was a necessary precondition for the existence of mammals, they can’t have existed before it. Yet, you state that they did exist in the first sentence.
Doh! Large mammals, of which I assume you are one. Smaller mammals can adjust to higher temperatures.
Planet’s been cooling for 7k years. Greenland and Antartica ice core show this clearly
‘The climate presentation was run by Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser.’
What a polymath!
Clearly on the payroll and has a lot to answer for.
He only answers to Pfizer!
Really? I thought that, when called in to advise, his owners whistled and shouted “Bonanza”; at which point he comes a-running, lugs flopping and tongue hanging out, pausing only to void an enormous t**d for us to step in.
And GSK.
He’s with the spook front eco health alliance?
The climate presentation was run by Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser.’
Immediate red flag. Utter Bollox if Vallance is involved.
Next thing we hear will be that Neil Ferguson produced the modelling.
The only show that convinced Bojo about global warming came from somewhere under Carrie’s skirt.
Blimey, Klaus Schwab get around a bit!
The same global elites behind so-called “Climate Change” are also behind the so-called “Covid Pandemic”.
Both are merely the means to achieve total world domination and the elimination of half the ‘useless eaters’!
I seems that they intend to make Eichmann and Pol Pot look like amateurs.
They have already killed millions with abortions on demand, for any reason.
In the US the mutli-billion dollar Woke organisation Planned Parenthood murders 1000 babies a day, even perfectly heathy live born ones and sell baby body parts to labs.
Bill Gates father ran Planned Parenthood, and Bill Gates has donated millions to killing babies.
One way of reducing humanities carbon footprint.
Hopefully, the transparent corporate swindle that was Global Pandemic© will help shine a light on Climate Emergency© , which may otherwise have gone unchallenged amongst more sceptical members of the public. Essentially the same racket, with similar ‘solutions’ like you say.
The same ideology, not the same elites.
Lockdown is green ideology put into practice.
Bill Gates is behind both.
There are two things absolutely guaranteed if Lord Bill of the Gates of Hell is involved:
1. Fake science
2. Depopulation
Green ideology long predates Bill Gates, lockdown long predates Bill Gates.
A man without principles and no discernment is easily fooled.
Johnson must go.
I want him to stay. The enemy of my enemy is my friend; clearly he’s become an enemy of the string pullers for whatever reason.
this?
Boris Johnson on boosters – YouTube
Johnson is now just pathetic beyond our imagination – we are in such a desperate mess!
I fear that despair is just around the corner.
I’d rather have a clown in charge of the circus than an illusionist. He’s holding on though, maybe he’ll need to ‘get covid’ again?
I agree, but who would we vote for in his place? I’m actually wishing that coco the clown and his momentum nutters had won in 2019, then maybe we’d have a credible tory party with a relatively sane leader ready to step in. As it is, we have absolutely no choice as no one is going to go against this green cobblers.
“People” actually get paid large sums of money to produce these claptrap pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey falsehoods. As they say, Johnson bears the imprint of the last person to sit on him, but it goes further than that.
The whole thing, from Covid to this nonsense, is a copper-bottomed disgrace, and it’s all the more worrying that strings of selfish, ignorant and stupid people i.e. most MPs, go along with it.
“stabilise climate” – are they deluded?
That’s like stabilising a herd of cats.
awesome
Although it is rather like politicians controlling the spread of a virus. Plenty of opportunities for heroism, lovingly recounted by our free press
Please stop calling it Boris. It’s not our friend.
It’s Kim Jong Johnson.
Adolf?
Known to his friends as Al. Boris is his stage name only.
Climate is such a disparate and infinite collection of variables, the idea of giving it a number and trying to control it through social micromanagement is a technocrat’s wet dream. A bit like the R number.
Precisely the point. Keep it simple for the dopes. Armageddon happens when we get to 11. That kind of thing.
What are we going to do when the graphs go the other way?
Dial up to Gas Mark 7 everybody.
Unbelievable.
A chart of temperatures over 10 of millions of years is obviously irrelevant. I am amazed Morrison included it. Fundamental parameters, such as the distance from the sun, which are effectively constant in timescales that interest us, change fundamentally over those timescales and life has millions of years to adapt to the changes.
Have a look at this, it’s kinda funny: https://youtu.be/A6SO0xkr_uI?t=24
It is David Attenborough’s speech at COP26 last year. In particular, it is the dramatic image of plotting the CO2 historical levels over recorded temperatures, and shows, as plain as can be, that CO2 causes global warming.
Except it doesn’t. As anyone who actually looks at what the plot is showing can see, first you get a rise in temperature, and only then do you get a rise in CO2. You can see a temperature peak at 260ky ago, with a subsequent rise in CO2 10ky later. You see another peak at 230ky ago, with another rise in CO2 10ky later. And the most obvious one of all: sharp, unrelenting increase in temperature 150ky ago, followed 10ky later by an increase in CO2.
Can you actually believe that this was shown at such a high profile event? What happened is they screwed up. Usually this plot is shown in reverse, with present day on the left. They do this so that people who don’t actually look at the graph see CO2 rises before temperature rises because they read from left to right. But here it is plain to see.
It s like CO2 dissolves in water better when water is cold…
Which is true.
This has been explained endlessly over the last decade or more e.g. here
Yet each time the temps went down again, followed by the Co2.
Proving Co2 is a bit player at best.
This is fairly basic stuff. Eventually other effects kick in and the carbon cycle reaches a new balance at a higher temperature. Then something happens to start a cooling movement which reduces CO2 and other feedbacks and you get global cooling. But we are talking millions of years. CO2 plays a big role.
“Then something” Not armwaving much here then LOL
That “something” has obviously much more effect than Co2, why couldn’t that “something” cause the warming in the first place too, as it did in the other climate optimas.
You’re contradicting your own source, obviously Co2 is not a cause.
Your link says the Co2 lags temp by 800 yrs +/- 200yrs, so which is it?
Let me draw your attention to this line right here:
The rise in CO2 is implied. It’s assumed. There is no explanation for it. How can you accept that as an explanation of anything?
And good luck trying to explain the 10 thousand year gap between the two.
The solubility of CO2 in water decreases as temperature rises. This is A level physics. So as the ocean temperature rises it must release CO2 into the atmosphere.
10,000 years is how long it took for the effect to be noticeable. These were slow changes by our standards which is the point.
Yes. Which is exactly what I am saying. And which perfectly explains why you first get a temperature rise and then a CO2 rise. And which perfectly proves that CO2 is NOT the cause of the warming.
It was not the initial cause in these cases but it caused the continuing increase and if introduced directly (as opposed to through initial warming) it will also cause an increase.
The contribution of CO2 to atmosphere warming is in the low single digits. And that is very likely an overestimation, as even in lower concentrations than today, CO2 absorbs about as much infrared radiation as it could possibly absorb. This is some more basic physics for you right here: https://nov79.com/gbwm/ntyg.html
Secondly, if it’s not the initial cause, then why are we being shown all these graphs indicating that it is the initial cause, and that the CO2 we emit is the cause of global warming?
It’s Boyles Law, CSE grade, not even O-level, let alone A-level.
Did you even go to secondary school?
I assume you are referring to me writing “The solubility of CO2 in water decreases as temperature rises. This is A level physics.”. Maybe it is taught at a lower level these days. I did my A levels in the late 60’s. Anyhow it is not Boyle’s law!
Do you think they believe it? The Attenboroughs and his fellow travellers.
I’m always curious. Can they believe it? It is so nonsensical.
I understand why conmen and hustlers push it. They seek to profit, but they are unlikely to believe it.
But some of them do seem caught in some kind of vortex of doom despite all the evidence to the contrary. So I’m always curious as to whether they buy into it.
I think a lot of them believe it, Attenborough amongst them. You have to remember that a lot of these people have implied trust in science. None of them conceive of any reason why scientists would be lying. They don’t bother looking into it any deeper.
You could be right.
LOL. Not in a million years……….
Having first bought a large estate on Martha’s Vineyard, approx. 3M above sea level, Obama is in the process of building a seafront villa in Hawaii.
Of course none of them believe this nonsense.
I’ve been trying to explain this to my nieces, all three of whom are terrified of CO2, with absolutely no success whatsoever. I keep pointing out that the facts are there- CO2 levels rise after temperature goes up, but they won’t even look at it. What hope is there when young people won’t even look at facts?
Judging by his decisions over the past two years regarding Covid it would appear that it doesn’t take very much to dupe Boris Johnson
Can we pilot ‘Spaceship Earth’ to a better future for all, as dungaree and tie-dye T-shirt wearing folk urged us to do in the 1970s?
Well, we can’t change human nature and abolish racism, crime, drug-use, poverty, sin, meaninglessness and death; so the much easier task of keeping Spaceship’s atmosphere permanently just-so according to the latest arbitrary ideological dictats of the environ-mentalists, seems like a non-starter.
But, since it’s the only useful ideology left at the moment, let’s give it a go anyway!
Maybe they could go first on an ARK b to save the planet?
We could already solve what colour the wheel should be, we should leave shape issues to them.
Careful with that “B Ark” reference. The idea that Douglas Adams conveys with it is that the rulers and the actual producers are OK, while the bureaucrats and tossers and bullsh**ters in the middle are a waste of space.
While I fully agree that the latter are a waste of space, nonetheless the rulers are the main enemy.
https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Golgafrinchan_Ark_Fleet_Ship_B
Here we go again, Cockuptheory Part 2.
They don’t tell us most of the warming is found at night, in Northern Canada and Siberia. My guess is that people in those parts are not complaining about warming!
Average global temp is less than 1 degree C higher than it was 50 years ago when they were telling us there would be an imminent Ice Age to worry about, surely that’s a good thing!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/02/07/february-5-2022-a-day-without-global-warming/
Good point. The way buzzphrases such as “global warming” function is to discourage critical thought or even a level of awareness in which a person can ask reasonable questions, one such reasonable question being “What’s wrong with a bit of global warming?”
I always like to point out that I have made a reasonable contribution to “global warming” and would appreciate a return on my investment. Sadly, British summers are no different now to what they were fifty years ago – invariably forgettable.
There have only been two outstanding summers in my lifetime, 1975 and 1976 and both caused chaos because of a lack of preparedness from central government.
“Global Warming” has always been a scam.
Global cooling should be a riot:
Turn it up to Gas Mark 9.
Lying bastards.
All this stuff is of course forecast by people who can’t even accurately predict what the weather will be like tomorrow.
If he believes that a bit of cloth on your face stops a virus then why wouldn’t he fall for this nonsense too? He probably thinks the moon is made of cheese.
Bit harsh calling her that!
As we learned from covidmania, one of their best tricks is to have us endlessly discussing minutae and not the big picture. Why is government policy based on computer modelling? Why is there not open discussion in a public forum with competing points of view from credible experts? Why are any of these things the business of government?
We need to challenge, ridicule and dismantle every aspect of the nanny state. From interfering in our private lives, condemning our diet or lifestyle (while ignoring dangerous lifestyles, such as those of homosexual men), and endless nonsense about minorities living in northern European countries where they have zero history, we have surely had enough.
Johnson: a man who believes in nothing, may believe in anything, at any time, for a length of time. The ultimate Machiavellian.
We’re post-truth write-large now: there are no longer any consequences to any ‘useful’ ideology anymore as far as the powers are concerned, since they more or less openly maintain a charade of legality while censoring, brainwashing, lying, and manipulating.
That harmful ideologies are destroying our society need not concern them since they have no concern for reality and truth, merely utility to themselves and their corrupt, insane, schemes.
Some of us have been railing against all that nonsense for 20 years+++++ but of course we were all just conspiracy theorists.
In the case of homosexuality actively encouraging it.
Perhaps as a non-scientist Johnson might be forgiven for being taken in by an eloquent presentation. But, as a politician, he cannot be forgiven for ignoring the reality that most major non-Western countries – the source of 75% of CO2 emissions and comprising 84% of the world’s population – are either unconcerned about climate change or don’t see it as a priority, focusing instead on economic growth, poverty eradication and (increasingly) energy security. Global emissions cannot be cut unless these countries change their climate policies urgently and radically. Current evidence – e.g. the outcome of COP26 in Glasgow – demonstrates that there’s no realistic prospect of that happening. Global net-zero is therefore unachievable and his climate policy, as well as economically damaging, is pointless. We need a wholly new policy – one that takes full account of international political reality.
You make the assumption that man made CO2 is a problem, even if it does cause warming.
I make no such assumption. I’m not a scientist and therefore don’t know whether or not CO2 is a problem: https://www.oxfordclimatealumni.com/post/opinion-why-i-m-agnostic-re-cc-science. What I do know however is that trying to persuade the alleged ‘authorities’ that CO2 is not a problem is a waste of time that will get you nowhere – except onto the receiving end of abuse and ‘denier’ insults. However it’s impossible for said ‘authorities’ to combat a clear demonstration that, even if CO2 is a serious problem, the UK’s net-zero policy, as well as being appallingly damaging, is completely pointless: https://ipccreport.files.wordpress.com/2021/11/britain-and-net-zero.pdf.
You should try it.
That’s the problem- start with a false premise and everything is wrong. Then the errors just gets magnified. Check your premises!
Will this Govt & advisor lying ever stop?
No. It’s what they do.
That massive 3.5% of CO2 that mankind in totality releases into the atmosphere must be super-charged CO2 or something…
Come on, Johnson is clearly not the brightest of ‘men’. Nor is ‘er indoors.
Why has it been UK government policy for nearly 25 years to rapidly increase our population through mass immigration of people from countries with lower, often very much lower, levels of emissions per capita?
As the UK is only responsible for around 1% of emissions and significant reductions in emissions couldn’t be achieved without many emitters relocating, how much lower would the average global temperature be if we got anywhere near acxhieving our target?
I watched a Portillo Railway Journeys today. I quite like trains. There he was. Outrageous clothes and of course a mask. Then he went to a power station burning ‘biofuel’ and celebrated the end of coal. The CEO of the power station expressed how pleased she was that industry had ended in the North East. She actually spoke about the need for ‘negative carbon’. I know Knut was not trying to stop the tide. He was trying to tell his sycophants that he couldn’t, but that lesson has been lost. These people believe they can unwind the unstoppable cycle of the Earth’s climate.
Did anyone ask her about the effect of transporting and burning biofuel?
to be honest I don’t think its hard to convince politicians of anything these days, whatever is shoved on their desk by some “official” they tend to go along with it
Was it the Green Blob or the Blond Green?
Johnson is just going along to get along with his globalist masters, who are using the universal “Build Back Better” theme to pivot from the pseudo pandemic to the phony climate change scare as the main pretext for a Great Reset.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter which political goon eventually replaces the odious fat boy. He or she will end up spouting the same “green” globalist mantra. Just look what happened to Donald Trump when he wandered off script.
Agree. However look at President Trump today. He has a second War Room at Mar-a-Lago with people briefing him ready for the fall of Biden. As Churchill did before WWII.
He has a big and ever growing MAGA movement changing the political climate. He has effectively opened the eyes of the World to the corruption. The 2020 election wasn’t just important for America. It was crucial for the future of the Western World.
Unless another election is stolen in November this year, the MAGA movement will sweep out the Democrat stronghold on Congress. Therefore stunting what the Globalists can do. Whatever happens then will shift the narrative permanently.
The amount of times I’ve read about Boris being duped or misled is the single biggest reason not to want him as PM. He’s easily led and seems to have no thought or back bone of his own.
The common theme is our Prime minister’s inability to appreciate the relevance of curves- well at least the mathematical ones.
There is a very simple answer to all our global problems. Get rid of the Rothschilds, then get rid of large bureaucratic governments and their advisers. Once this is done drop income tax to a flat rate of 3% to be paid by every single working individual. Education and health should then be completely overhauled to teach folk how to take responsibility for their lives and their health. The Academics and philosophers can pay for a University education if they want to.
many say this idea is now impossible in this world. However, if we had someone who was prepared to do good by the people of this country and not by the Rothschilds it is mire than feasible. No Government needs to be big and unwealdy. Some of the most effective governments have come from small and lean well chosen representatives who only meet when big decisions need to be taken. Most of us are innovative and entrepreneurial when left to our own decision making. Just look at the small businesses who discreetly carried on through lockdowns. Just look at us citizens who were strong and confident enough to be sceptical about this whole ‘plandemic’.
It can be done once fear and suppressed voices are taken away.
Patrick Vallance, chief “scientific” liar. Presented false graphs about covid, 3 times. Up before the slect committee over it. Overruled the JCVI to give the potion to kids therefore causing physical abuse.
He seems to get everywhere.
But why are we still listening to this man.
The only problem with getting rid of Boris is which self serving nose in the trough monkey we get as a replacement. At this stage I would have Nigel as PM, Toby in the Home Office, Gupta & Hennigan in Health, and Will & Co. in charge of Climate. Let’s face it, they can do no worse than the current shit show and will very likely do a hell of a lot better.
one thing that the covid circus has made perfectly clear: whenever there is money to be made, scientists are as reliable as the weather.
and there is a lot of money to be made in climate.
With apologies to Caroline Aherne: “Tell me Carrie Antoinette, what was it made you realise that the ideal father for your children would be the grossly overweight, amoral and considerably older Prime Minister?”
If Johnson doesn’t agree with his wife then it’s no nookey for him. Simples
All of this profound stupidity ignores that we are dropping into a Grand Solar Minimum, recognised by more and more (real) scientists, which may drop temps as as much as one degree C over then next 30 years. NetZero will of course make that far worse than it needs to be.
https://notrickszone.com/2022/02/07/5-nigerian-physicists-predict-global-cooling-in-the-next-80-years-2100-will-be-0-5c-colder-than-2018/
https://supergsminfo.com/
https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/11/scientists-climate-records-correlate-well-with-solar-modulation-a-grand-solar-minimum-expected-by-2030/
https://notrickszone.com/2017/11/22/signs-show-planet-entering-a-new-dalton-minimum-solar-cycle-24-continues-to-be-weakest-in-200-years/
Even NASA agree, tho’ they don’t suggest the possible consequences…
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming
And of course, until 2010/11 the NASA website was clear that it is the sun that is the main climate driver. Then they hid the page. But forgot to remove the link to it…
https://web.archive.org/web/20100416015231/https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/big-questions/what-are-the-primary-causes-of-the-earth-system-variability/
Wrap up warm. Bonus is that this is a real time real data experiment which will test sun v CO2