Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Trump aides have raised concerns that Prince Charles, the crown prince who thinks Mad King George was “misunderstood”, will use an upcoming state visit to try to humiliate President Trump in front of international media.
Trump’s team fears climate change differences with Prince Charles could flare up in state visit
Ben Riley-Smith, assistant political editor
28 JANUARY 2017 • 10:00PM
Donald Trump’s aides have raised concerns that a likely meeting with Prince Charles during his state visit could backfire because of the pair’s differences on climate change.
The US President’s team is understood to have worries that the American press could jump on any difference in comments on the environment.
There are also concerns that copycat protests based on those in Washington DC on the day of his inauguration could be seen when he comes to Britain later this year.
Mrs May presented an invitation from the Queen for a state visit during her trip to the White House, which Mr Trump accepted – though dates are yet to be announced.
…
Prince Charles this week called for action on climate change to avoid “potentially devastating consequences” while Mr Trump is a known sceptic.
Sources close Mr Trump and UK Government figures told this newspaper there were concerns that any joint appearance could see the pair questioned about climate change.
…
Prince Charles bizarre climate antics include taking a five day $80,000 trip on the Royal Train around Britain, to lecture people about climate change – right in the middle of a government austerity programme, which included extensive public sector job losses.
In February 2010, Prince Charles called into the working class city of Manchester to tell everyone that climate skeptics are liars – after arriving on a coal powered replica of a 1948 steam locomotive.
Prince Charles is a strong supporter of organic farming – according to Wikipedia his 900 acre organic royal farm uses lunar crop planting cycles and the application of homeopathic potions to plant leaves, to improve yields.
Prince Charles recently wrote a Ladybird book on Climate Change – the book is aimed at adults, but apparently uses a children’s book format to present its content.
But who knows, perhaps Trump’s aides are wrong, Prince Charles has other priorities. The royal fascination with the Mad King seems to run very deep.
Back in 2005, the Palace issued a denial that Charles planned to change his name to George when he ascends to the British throne.
Perhaps Prince Charles’ real intention, when he meets President Trump, is to discuss an unfortunate misunderstanding with the colonies which occurred during the Mad King’s reign, on July 4th, 1776.
If I were Trump I would come prepared. Are Lindzen, Christie, Spencer, Happer, etc doing anything that day? Why not see HRH, with any of his chosen advisors present, and then discuss it.
Evidence passed on, verbally, from plants will not be allowed. (HRH talks to his plants!)
+ many!!!!! Get on it, Donald! Take The Team! The media platform wd be *brilliant* — a show-down with Bat-Ears and his sycophantic, sinecure-seeking, Court cabal.
Mister King!! (smiling, but a bit frustrated — and out of breath from racing down this thread after you! lol)
Why: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/31/climate-clown-prince-charles-might-lecture-president-trump/comment-page-1/#comment-2413598
“(HRH talks to his plants!)”
And while talking to them he breathes out 40,000 ppm CO2.
He’s not talking to them .. He’s feeding them.
I wonder if he is aware of that?
“Prince Charles bizarre climate antics include taking a five day $80,000 trip on the Royal Train around Britain, to lecture people about climate change – right in the middle of a government austerity programme, which included extensive public sector job losses.
In February 2010, Prince Charles called into the working class city of Manchester to tell everyone that climate skeptics are liars – after arriving on a coal powered replica of a 1948 steam locomotive.”
What a hypocrite! And for us mere mortals we sit at home with a special light bulb and one shopping bag for life.
I am surprised that you didn’t mention how corrupt the old fool is. Under the Duchys land in Cornwall lies £50BILLION of Lithium, required for electric car batteries. So perhaps he can help out his mum with her large bill for renovating Buck Palace. But most of that £50B will come indirectly from subsidies paid to buyers of Telsa and Leaf electric cars. And he thinks fossil fuel producers are corrupt.
BNN News, Canada, Jan., 2017
‘Strongbow Exploration’s U.K. partner reaches lithium exploration agreement in Cornwall’
Canada’s Strongbow Exploration (SBW-V) for stock price information.
Read at:
http://www.bnn.ca/strongbow-exploration-s-u-k-partner-reaches-lithium-exploration-agreement-in-cornwall-1.653526
More information on this topic is online.
Charles I was rightfully executed as a traitor. His son Charles II also would have been, had his secret pact with Britain’s enemy French King Louis XIV been known at the time. His brother James II was deposed in the Glorious Revolution, which gave Britain its now practically dead letter Bill of Rights.
The jug-eared, dim-witted, pompous Teutonic twit Charles would be well advised to take the regnal name of George, in keeping with his mainly German ancestry. ERII at least is half Scottish, unlike her almost totally German and Danish father and other paternal forbears and 3/4 Continental spawn.
Hilarious … Hopefully someone will capture one of Trump’s classic facial expressions.
Images of Prince Chucky always remind me of what some of my neighbours would say when he got off the train at Builth Road Station:
“You’re not Prince of Wales – pi$$ off back to England.”
Not said VERY loud of course, as the usual compliment of spooks were present.
It looks like the royal imbred is beginning to show it’s face.
I would have thought that anyone associated with the British Monarchy would be a little bit silent on WW11.
They did have some dubious relationships with Adolf et al before the fun started.
That was the king that abdicated. ERII’s father was pretty staunch.
It wasn’t just the Duke of Windsor. Prince Philip’s family also included N@zis.
“The jug-eared, dim-witted, pompous Teutonic twit Charles”
Hang on, he’s our jug-eared, dim-witted, pompous Teutonic twit Charles.
BUT…. we are willing to trade him for Homer Simpson or Bart or…
Tell you what, just take him & don’t brig him back.
just tell him the manbearpig is lurking in the cellars at Sandringham and leave him to get on with the search.
You have my sympathy.
How about ridding yourselves of that dysfunctional family and letting the House of Lords chose someone of real accomplishment as head of state, calling him or her king or queen if you want, whether for life or a fixed term?
Prince Charles doesn’t have a chance trash talking with New Yorker Donald Trump.
A man who commits adultery is a cad (worse, but, that word will do for now).
A man who commits adultery against a woman like Princess Diana
and (that alone would be enough, but, this clinches the verdict)
with a woman like MRS. Camilla B.
is insane.
Who takes him seriously?
With respect Janice, you know not whereof you speak.
A man who commits adultery against a woman like Princess Diana, deserves sympathy and respect.
(Hint: Public image is not the reality, as any climate change denier will tell you).
Why did Diana die in a Mercedes?
She wouldn’t be seen dead in a Porsche…
Camilla’s husband didn’t care about her affair with Charles.
Diana promptly started having her own affairs. Charles might not be Harry’s dad.
May she rest in peace
Whenever this Clown Prince makes an utterance, I am reminded of Christopher Hitchens insightful description of this Royal buffoon:
“This is what you get when you found a political system on the family values of Henry VIII. At a point in the not-too-remote future, the stout heart of Queen Elizabeth II will cease to beat. At that precise moment, her firstborn son will become head of state, head of the armed forces, and head of the Church of England. In strict constitutional terms, this ought not to matter much. The English monarchy, as has been said, reigns but does not rule. From the aesthetic point of view it will matter a bit, because the prospect of a morose bat-eared and chinless man, prematurely aged, and with the most abysmal taste in royal consorts, is a distinctly lowering one.”
Of course Trump could just subtly remind him of what happened the last time England tried to push the issue with the USA?
On July 4, 1776, King George III made this diary entry: “Nothing of importance happened today”
Never was a diary entry more incorrect.
This is the monarch whose reputation Cheesy Chuck wants to revive. The only good thing you can say about the misrule of George III is that it hastened the advent of monarchs who reign but don’t rule, ie the modern constitutional monarchy. Any ruler so incompetent as to have lost the most valuable colonial possession any nation ever possessed is beyond redemption. And this display of world class incompetence came before he went nuts from porphyria or what ever inherited malady afflicted the loser.
India might have been more valuable to Britain in 1776, but I doubt it. However, the 13 English-speaking American colonies were at that time poised to break out in a burst of economic development almost without parallel in history. Already valuable for rum, tobacco, rice, timber and fish, the new US was set to become a cotton and corn farming, canal and RR building, forestry, fisheries, fur, factories, iron and coal colossus. This was largely thanks to breaking out of the constraints on expansion and trade set up by HM’s regimes. The Revolution unleashed the energy and inventiveness of her previously subject peoples and new arrivals.
His bad. No wonder the Clown Prince so admires his incompetent ancestor (his mom’s playboy great granddad’s deranged great grandad).
German British monarchs reviewed:
EII: Raised a generation of dissolute playboys and girls plus a defective, jug-eared pompous twit-goon.
GVI: Chain-smoking stutterer.
GV: Stuffed shirt who let the Commies kill his cousins, then tried to blame the PM for his own cruelty.
EVII: Dissolute playboy.
V: Reclusive hemophilia carrier.
WIII: Dissolute playboy.
GIV: Fat dissolute playboy.
GIII: Mad incompetent.
GII: Given to mistresses, short temper and boorishness, at odds with both his father and son.
GI: Dissolute playboy who spoke no English, married to despised first cousin.
I thought Charles was on the “No-fly” list? No matter… The President is 884 days older than HRH, but years ahead of him in getting things done AND understanding the REAL world. I seriously doubt HRH could bring up anything that would be a sticky wicket for the President. Oh, and DJT was born on a Friday, while HRH was born on a Sunday…
Friday’s child is loving and giving,
But the child who is born on the Sabbath day
Is bonnie and blithe and good and gay. Kind of says it all, doesn’t it?
Charles may not be the sharpest monarch…. but he knows a whole lot more than Trump about climate change. If you disagree, tell me one sensible thing Trump has ever said on the topic that shows he has even a basic understanding.
He said it’s a hoax and that’s more than Prince Charles knows.
He didn’t think it was a hoax when he used it to justify an application to build a seawall on his gold course. Just highlights what a hypocrite the man is.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-climate-change-golf-course-223436
Trump does a history in Britain of bully-boy tactics & hypocrisy to try & get his way for his golf courses, it didn’t go down well.
He does it here as well. For his businesses he’s a businessman.
Huh?
I think the courtiers have scooped up al those inconvenient film clips of Charles stand in a dustbin on a stage at university pretending to be a Goon.
No, he doesn’t. Chucky is an ignoramus.
You want just one comment from Trump? How about, “When I hear Obama saying that climate change is the No. 1 problem, it is just madness.”
Funny how many, including the US military agree with Obama.
Have you ever served in the armed forces?
If you’re a general officer, you say what you’re ordered to say or resign. And no flag officer has resigned in decades.
No one in the military actually believes that climate change is our No. 1 problem. They’re just following orders to repeat the party line.
“They’re just following orders to repeat the party line.”
when ‘climate scientists’ do that… WE jump all over them.
When guards in extermination camps say “just following orders” we prosecute them,
wheres the moral difference ?
The three and four stars now parroting the party line will retire and be replaced by Trump/Mattis appointees who recognize real rather than imaginary problems.
Simon (re: 4:24pm) —
Really.
Obama purged all three and four stars who weren’t yes generals.
Perhaps, Simon, HRH Charles knows a whole lot more than Trump about climate change. Nevertheless, because Charles does not know, among other significant facts, that the IPCC’s climate models have been falsified and the conjecture about human CO2 emissions is “not-proven” (at best — no mid-troposphere hot spot did it in long ago), it is clear that he does not know enough.
Janice
“IPCC’s climate models have been falsified” Really? Show me the research that says it has been falsified?
Simon (re: 4:24pm) —
Really.
Janice
…. Really what?
Really … you think I am right?
Really … you can’t provide any research?
Simon. Seriously?
Above:
You — “Really?”
Below:
Me — “Really.”
Janice
Ok I “really”ied you first….. so I win.
Grow up, Simon.
If you don’t have the brains to compare reality with climate model predictions, you shouldn’t be acting like a twit.
Oh, wait–you ARE acting like a twit.
An uneducated, falsifiable twit.
Now, take your nasty behavior and go join Soros’ dull-tool horde.
Thanks and have a good day!
RockyRoad January 31, 2017 at 11:54 pm
“Grow up, Simon.
If you don’t have the brains to compare reality with climate model predictions, you shouldn’t be acting like a twit.
Oh, wait–you ARE acting like a twit.
An uneducated, falsifiable twit.
Now, take your nasty behavior and go join Soros’ dull-tool horde.
Thanks and have a good day!”
Actually I thought my comments to Janice were rather polite given we obviously disagree (as were hers). Yours on the other hand were those of a play ground bully…. Perhaps you need to take your own advice offered in the first line of your comment…..
Sure, Charles probably knows more about “climate change” – all of it wrong unfortunately.
Simon says – a load pf crap
Prince Charles wants environmentalists to “Follow the Islamic way to save the world.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285332/Follow-Islamic-way-save-world-Charles-urges-environmentalists.html
That sounds a lot like Obama’s desire to make Muslim outreach a major NASA objective.
Odds are he doesn’t even know his true ancestry. Take a look at a previous “Bonnie Prnce Charlie”:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9211247/DNA-reveals-the-truth-about-Bonnie-Prince-Charlie.html
Trump and the Queen both had Scottish mothers and German fathers.
It is worth reading the Ladybird book on Climate Change. It is a good summary of how empty is the case for climate alarmism.
However, Prince Charles did not write the book, just promoted the writing and wrote an hysterical forward.
I gave a flavor at my blog last week.
https://manicbeancounter.com/2017/01/27/ladybird-book-on-climate-change/
One good thing that may come out of the book. It repeated something in an UNIPCC presentation to summarize the UNIPCC AR5 summary of the Synthesis report (which is a summary of the 3 WG reports). Only the Ladybird Book has a nice egg-timer picture.
?w=900
Slide 33 of 35 was this:-
It makes policy fairly simple. Assuming that a doubling of CO2 leads to 3C of warming, and 17 GtCO2 raises CO2 levels by 1ppm, then 1000 GtCO2 emissions after 2011 does indeed give 2C of warming.
But (1) there are other GHGs, so we should have 2C of warming without any more emissions (2) By the same measure, increase of CO2 from 280 to 400ppm alone should generate >1.5C of warming, so talk of constraining warming to 1.5C only makes sense if climate sensitivity is much lower.
More details
https://manicbeancounter.com/2017/01/31/ipcc-ar5-synthesis-report-presentation-miscalculated-the-emissions-for-2c-of-warming/
Common man. There is no CAGW problem. Observations and analysis do not even support AGW.
1) The 20th century warming is not statistically significant (i.e. there has been other periods of warming and cooling in the recent human history post 1850 that is similar to the 20th century. There has been 19 years of no significant warming.
2) The latitudinal pattern of warming does not match that predicted by the AGW theory. (There is too much observed warming in the Northern Hemisphere ex-tropics. There is hardly any warming in the tropics.) See paper link to below to back up that claim.) That fact indicates a significant portion of the 20th century warming has caused by something else than CO2. Hint solar modulation of clouds. No one is even discussing this observation.
3) Even if 100% of the warming was caused by CO2, the amount of observed warming is significantly less than what is predicted by the IPCC used general circulation models (See link below). The most recent warmist response is the heat is hiding in the deep ocean. (No one has noticed that if there is mixing of surface water with deep water that will significant reduce/cap the rate of rise of atmospheric CO2. Is there no end to the problems for the warmists?)
4) There is no tropical tropospheric warming. The IPCC general circulation models predict that the most warming on the planet should be at around 8km above the surface of the planet in the tropics. This predicted warming amplifies the CO2 forcing and is due to additional water vapor in the atmosphere. The 20 years of measurement by satellites and over a 100,000 weather balloons supports the assertion that there is no tropical tropospheric warming. Lindzen and Choi’s analysis (2009 and 2011 papers) shows that planetary clouds in the tropics increase or decrease to resist forcing changes by reflecting more or less sunlight off into space. That result explains why there is no tropical tropospheric warming and explains why there is almost no long term warming of the tropics.
5) A 1000 years ago it was as warm or warmer than current temperatures. Atmospheric CO2 did not cause that warming. There are cycles of warming and cooling in the paleo record. The cycles of warming and cooling are not caused by changes in atmospheric CO2. There is no explanation for past cyclic warming and cooling that matches the pattern of the 20th century warming.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/ipcc-ar5draft-fig-1-4.gif
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.0581.pdf
Poor Charles was raised in a slightly disfuncional household. His father once said:
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
His mum is a good woman though. If only she’d pass the crown directly to William, leaving Charles to his eco-madness
‘Aye’ to that suggestion hands-down …. but constitutionally this likely wd be impossible (comments pls?!) The Succession is just that.
One might hope that Bat-Ears will forego in favour of Wills, but don’t forget that he has a vast army of Courtly sycophants who want *their* Day in the Sun … headed by Camilla? Forget the fact that the new Emperor will have vestigial clothing (at best) … he will be surrounded and protected as a figure-head anyway.
Parliament can do whatever it wants. They beheaded Charles I, gave the crown back to his older son Charles II, overthrew his other son James II in favor of his daughters, then skipped over a bunch of Catholics with a better claim on the throne to chose George I, who didn’t speak English.
I sand corrected …. thanx for the historical perspective (thanx to lousy teacher, I *HATED* History!)
This raises the very interesting q. as to *how* Parliament wd contrive to by-pass Charles and move to King William? Moral suasion is one thing, but …..!
Wd love to hear further comments.
“Parliament can do whatever it wants. They beheaded Charles I, gave the crown back to his older son Charles II, overthrew his other son James II in favor of his daughters, then skipped over a bunch of Catholics with a better claim on the throne to chose George I, who didn’t speak English.”
British history is a bit like a Whitehall farce
Ross,
Beheading Charles I of course came after many years of civil war between Parliament and royalists. And the Glorious Revolution of 1688 required an invasion by William of Orange AND an Act of Parliament, then James’ defeat at the Battle of the Boyne by William (married to his cousin, James’ giant Protestant daughter Mary). However Parliament all by itself selected George I as king.
It’s unlikely that Parliament would pass an act disinheriting Charles, despite his unpopularity. But nothing could stop them, except maybe the new Supreme Court, which recently replaced the House of Lords as Britain’s top legal authority.
Save,
Complete with Department of Funny Walks.
‘dysfunctional’…
Billy boy will be king,as big ears is a divorce man, thus can not be head of the church of England.
The world dodged a bullet with Brexit. And another won with Donald J. Trump. The third bullet dodges was recently when teh queen overcame an illness with the potential to be fatal. If this deluded old fool chuck ever ascends to the throne, that will be the end of the monarchy.
No bad thing
Agreed!
Yes, roll on the Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
“Martin A February 1, 2017 at 1:17 am”
Sever all ties to NI. Get on with it, on your own.
Elizabeth has done really well in difficult circs.
The future looks like Holly-scripted scenarios (get on it!) Charles ascends w/Camilla. Unrest; pressure; historical precedents galore; Charles abdicates/doesn’t; Camilla as force-behind-the-throne along with Charles’ court & courtesans; Wills’ Court & Kate ‘in-play’ … a script-writer’s paradise!
Anyway, I stand accused of my own call to culling UK Succession issues from a sober, Science-only Blog.
P.S. Side-bar is that we ignore the supposedly non-objective stuff at our peril. Does Bat-Ears have an influential “Halo-Effect” along with twits like Bono, diCaprio, Fonda, and the rest of the H’wood glitterati (glitterfarti?) joining the band-wagon to hubristically maximize their future box-office takes in the evenings of their productive years?
You aren’t understanding what Royalty means, Charles doesn’t have to care what you think. He lives a life of incredible privilege, he owns most of Cornwall so he’s worth more than Trump, he doesn’t face re-election in 4 years time and he gets to hand it all on to his kids 🙂
In my opinion that is the craziest of all…..the royals, based purely on the blood their veins, live on the dole with free food, free transportation, free lodging, free walking around money….what a charmed life.
They have the greatest government pension in the world.
Too bad Chuck doesn’t smoke. His grandad Bertie, aka George VI, died aged 56 from the evil weed, putting his mom on the throne before she was ready.
Chucky died years ago. He just hasn’t fallen down yet.
Rawhide Camilla is holding the remains up?
I never think of Charles and Camilla without recalling JJ Cales ‘Closer to you’
If “Chuck” doesn’t get it then neither does Prince William. Not going to happen. Kate will be Queen.
Eh?
Okay, I got the name wrong, it is called getting old. My point was that Charles may be unpopular but his offspring are not. The monarchy is secure.
Robin Hewitt, Have you never read/seen Shakespeare’s “Richard III?” He killed those little boys for a reason… .
Janice,
first thought was ‘what reason’
– then ‘uh, same reason with’
Charles, Prince William.
According to known dynastic thinking.
v’
Richard III killed not only his two young nephews, but previously, along with his older brother King Edward IV, their middle brother. He might also well have murdered Edward too. And he accused his mom of being a slut.
The so-called Windsors aren’t quite as bad as the Yorks, but probably only because the stakes aren’t as high.
ATTENTION!!!! We’ve wandered-off into non-Scientific speculation about Brit. Succession.
To the marginal extent that Charles’ accession *might* impact UK’s future GW policy, that’s fine .. but it is speculation.
Enough… enough?
He’s the result of generations of inbreeding. I find it funny that Ladybird books are now *EXPERT* books! Really?
Sadly that’s the level education has sunk to, but I expect Charles’s nanny helped him with the big words
The big words in Ladybird Books.
Beware people who need to find a purpose in life. Or something to do between movies.
Charles will have far more to contend with than bees and homeopathy onced once Mummy is gone. His mother has been a brilliant queen holding together a monarchy in many countries by sheer will and example despite the British press and her oddball son’s shenanigans. She, and everyone else, knows that Charles isn’t up to the task. Countries such as Canada will finally leave the ‘constitutional monarchy’ behind and transition to a monarchy-free structure.
It really isn’t his fault he’s a dimwit but it can’t be fixed. I sometimes wonder if Her Majesty is hanging on ’til the end in the off chance that Charles goes first.
I believe that it is not a good idea for Mankind to be burning up the Earth’s very finite supply of fossil fuels just as quickly as possible. I would like to add AGW as another reason to conserve. The AGW conjecture sounds plausable at first and should be easy to sell to children but there are some very serious problems that everyone should be aware of including Prince Charles. The IPCC, in part to provide evidence to support the AGW conjecture, sponsored the generation of a plethora of climate models. The fact that there are so many different models is evidence that a lot of guess work has been involved. If they really know how the climate system worked then there would be just one model. The Plethora of models has generated a Plethora of predictions as what the global average temperature should now be. They do have one thing in common however. They have all been wrong. So if the models provide evidence of any kind it is that there is something seriously wrong with the AGW conjecture. On the other hand, others have produced models that do not include any CO2 warming that better track climate for the past 200 years and do adequately predict today’s global temperature. Based on the modeling results and the paleoclimate record it seems best to assume that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. We cannot force Mother Nature to supply the ideal climate for everyone but we must adapt to what ever Mother Nature dishes out. After more than two decades of effort, the IPCC has been unable to measure the climate sensivity of CO2 and has not been able to narrow the range of there gesses as to the climate sensivity one iota. All of what the IPCC has is accomplished is consistant with the idea that the climate sensivity of CO2 is really zero. I would like to see Prince Charles include these IPCC based results in a Ladybird book.
From first principlas one can derive the Lapse rate that has been observed in the tropoaphere and the insulation effect of the atmosphere due to the heat content of the atmosphere, the pressure gradient as providef for by gravity and the depth of the troposphere. Such a derivation is of a convective greenhouse effect which keeps the surface of the Earth 33 degrees C warmer than it would be without an atmosphere. 33 degrees is the derived amount and 33 degrees C is what has been observed. A radiant greenhouse effect upon which the AGW conjecture is based has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere or on any planet in the solar system with a thick atmosphere. Without a radiant greenhouse effect the AGW conjecture is nothing but science fiction. Charles needs to include this information in one of his Ladybird books,
” So if the models provide evidence of any kind it is that there is something seriously wrong with the AGW conjecture. On the other hand, others have produced models that do not include any CO2 warming that better track climate for the past 200 years and do adequately predict today’s global temperature. Based on the modeling results and the paleoclimate record it seems best to assume that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. We cannot force Mother Nature to supply the ideal climate for everyone but we must adapt to what ever Mother Nature dishes out.”
Really long for ongoing bordom – i.e. long live without hearing about ‘climate change’.