Reposted from NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
AUGUST 20, 2021
By Paul Homewood
One of the strangest phenomena this year has been the sight of the Daily Express embracing far left climate policies, courtesy of their ex-Mirror, Remoaner, left wing editor Gary Jones.
The Express is famous for its Putinesque opinion polls, but has never put its ludicrous Green Britain agenda to such a vote. Now however their readers have stuck two fingers up:
Forking out for the future?
You recently took part in our Green Britain survey. More than 4,000 votes were cast and the results are now in.
A staggering 83% of respondents say they wouldn’t be happy to invest £10,000 into greener energy over the next 20 years, in order to give their grandchildren a better chance at climate survival.
It’s worth noting that some voters may not be able to afford to invest such a hefty sum.
When it came to personal choices, 73% of voters said they won’t buy an electric car instead of a petrol or diesel car, even after considering on average that they sell at the same price. 16% said they would purchase an electric car, while 2% of those who voted already own one.
A whopping 72% refused to cute down on their meat consumption per meat – while 20% of respondents said they will down by at least 25%. 7% of those who voted already have meat-free diets. Here, scientists say cutting out meat won’t solve climate change.
When it came to clothing, 69% of Express.co.uk readers said they do not purchase anyt fast fashion – while a fair 13% said they will reduce the amount they buy.
I don’t understand why they needed a poll to tell them that.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
the Daily Express embracing far left climate policies
Don’t be too surprised: Trinity Mirror buys Daily Express group for £127m
Reach plc (known as Trinity Mirror between 1999 and 2018) is a British newspaper, magazine and digital publisher. It is one of Britain’s biggest newspaper groups.
I’m not sure why they didn’t call it Preach.
For whatever reason this reminded me of ‘get woke go broke’. I did a web search to find out if that still prevails and one of the results was this. I’m not sure what lesson to take from an ignominious smack down of the woke. It does indicate that there’s some limit to how stupid things can get … I hope.
Certainly, if the Daily Express moves contrary to the opinions of its majority readers, it will lose circulation. We’ve never seen an example where a ‘woke’ organization gains more customers than it loses.
The Express was always ‘pro-Brexit’
It has more or less kept that stance, but everything else has shifted far leftwards
Globalism / localism* isn’t the same ideological fracture line as socialism / capitalism.
* Surely someone has coined the word already? Better than “nationalism,” IMHO – a “localist” is not necessarily a “nationalist.”
I’ve seen ‘localism’ used on Mercola.com and other global-sceptic sites.
Are all those grammatical errors and misspellings in the above article indicative of the depths to which British Churlinism has descended?
I was going to make the same sort of remark. Pretty terrible.
Yes, my thoughts exactly.
In Australia this seems commonplace now. Apparently it’s creeping. Must be Global Warming ™.
News media has long since been about “infotainment” rather than reporting of actual news. I don’t watch free to air or paid news TV here in Australia because it is heavily sanitised.
There is a difference in thinking between the MSM, the coastal elites and the “common man”. The “common man” is outside the airport perimeter in Afghanistan while the coastal elites are on vacation in Delaware or on Martha’s Vineyard.
For the UK substitute Crete for Martha’s Vineyard. While on holiday you’re normally too busy to make a phone call
You left out Camp David in Maryland.
Are you still allowed to call it that in this woke era?
Hopefully they’ll get drenched this weekend and maybe even O’bammy’s house will wash away.
Irony alert: People are already paying dearly for the Green Agenda, and will be paying even more, whether they realize it or not. But that’s the beauty of the Green Scam.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Beauty contests are never pretty.
First Green: “The peasants are revolting!”
Second Green: “The peasants have always been revolting”
Third Green: Let them eat cake!”
Fourth Green: let them drive Teslas
Fifth Green: They can put them on autopilot and they can eat their cake while it drives for them.
Utopia!
But only once a week as they MUST watch their dietary requirements to conform with the grand policy of dictating to the peeps what they should eat, drink, & how much of each they should indulge in, etc!!! They must also comply with the grand policy of how & what to think!!!
Question: When will they be Dragon Hearted enough to be Revolting.
Dennis: Help! Help! I’m bein’ repressed!
Now you see the violence inherent in the system!
Actual newspaper paper has gotta go – not CO2 neutral – isn’t that correct griffter? And, those people are gonna get EVs whether they want them or not.
I doubt we will all get EVs. They will realise the world doesn’t have the resources for everyone to have an EV. Only elites will be permitted to own a vehicle. The rest of us will use transit or ride share of some sort
Rickshaw futures are UP!
Horribly funny!
And the UK government also gets hefty revenues from fuel taxes, at every point in the production cycle. If they try and recover that lost revenue through massively increased general electricity prices, then the wheels will come off pretty quickly.
They still haven’t thought this thing through, or are hiding some pretty dire warnings.
Back in the 80’s you could still see TV documentaries about how our whole civilisation was built on the back of the “black gold” of petroleum. Fast forward a couple of decades and apparently we can achieve the same results with a few windmills.
Soylent Green.
Is the Daily Express something like Mother Jones?
It is for working class OAPs over 80
Ah, now the mask slips.
A comfortably off middle class – hate the workers – twerp.
How very Grauniad.
Also someone who views itself as a hipster who hates the old people who keep telling it no.
And who paid for its education and health…
I’m a hipster… ?
Dang it, the avocado dripped all over my beard
You can’t be called very bright
Blight, maybe?
I didn’t say you were a hipster, I said you viewed yourself as one.
I see that your reading comprehension hasn’t improved one bit.
What a poser you are.
and yet that’s exactly who reads it.
From Hurst Media:
RETIREMENT
So you hate older people who paid for your education and health and you hate the working class
What do you do for an encore?
And Griff, look what happens at your “bible”-
Readers of The Guardian were more likely to be women, with nearly 15 million monthly female readers in the United Kingdom from April 2019 to March 2020. Readership of The Guardian proved to be more popular among older adults than younger ones.
All between the mean and 1 standard deviation below IQ.
Unfortunately I read it griff. Anf I am hardly uneducated working class, although unlike you, I do know what its like to work
Where’s the mention of working class?
Not that familiar with life in the UK. Does Griff live in his Mum’s basement?
OAP=Old Age Pensioner?
yes.
That was a new one to me, too.
Who have the wisdom to recognise global warming hysteria for the BS that it is.
In griff’s mind, those who live on pensions are a drag on society.
On the other hand, those who live on welfare are just getting what they are entitled to.
Your true self is creeping through, anti Human being except those you decide to not be anti towards, people you can manipulate & control & dictate to, now when did that last happen, wasn’t it somewhere in western Europe back in the 1930s & 1940s, & didn’t an awful lot of people lose their lives in trying to prevent such a deviant & destructive mentality??? You will be judged Griffy baby!!!
That just about sums up griff’s level of articulation and accuracy. The comment strikes me as somewhat snooty, too. Very much in line with the kind of metropolitan elite thinking that was so successful for the Labour Party on 12 December 2019.
Now that CAGW Reality has bit the Express owners in the a$$, will they have an introspective moment or press on? I’ll take “press on” for a billion dollars, Alex.
Cut meat consumption by 40%. Data tells the truth and numbers do not lie. Total methane emissions from all sources including wetlands and fossil fuels are about 614,000,000 tons/year. Residual atmospheric methane is 0.00018%. 1.4 billion cows emit 86 million tons of methane annually which is 14% of total emissions. Therefore 14% of – residual CH4 – 0.00018% is 0.0000238% that is 2.38 trillionths of atmospheric CH4. Atmospheric methane needs to be at least 100 times more prolific to have even the slightest influence on climate. Insofar as UK cows are concerned which are 0.69% of the global total at 0.0000000229908% of 0.00018%. Methane The Irrelevant GHG. Methane The Irrelevant GHG. (CH4) has narrow absorption bands at 3.3 microns and 7.5 microns (the red lines). CH4 is 20 times more effective an absorber than CO2 – in those bands. However, CH4 is only 0.00018% (1.8 parts per billion) of the atmosphere. Moreover, both of its bands occur at wavelengths where H2O is already absorbing substantially. Hence, any radiation that CH4 might absorb has already been absorbed by H2O. The ratio of the percentages of water to methane is such that the effects of CH4 are completely masked by H2O. The amount of CH4 must increase 100-fold to make it comparable to H2O. Because of that, methane is irrelevant as a greenhouse gas. The high per-molecule absorption cross section of CH4 makes no difference at all in our real atmosphere. It cannot contribute to atmospheric warming or climate change. The UN and the climate cult use ground up emissions without mentioning what happens to Co2 and CH4 after emission.
Data is irrelevant to the leftist religion. The only thing that is relevant is that wealth is concentrated into the hands of a select group of elites — specifically those that keep the leftist politicians living the high life — and that the people that they despise are keep poor and under strict control of the leftist politicians and select elites.
Cows, like all animals, are carbon neutral, almost by definition. All animals are, or the Carbon Cycle wouldn’t work!
Don’t mess with our cows!
They ought to pay farmers to raise *more* cows.
We mammals are in the minority:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-the-biomass-of-earth-in-one-graphic/
Maybe the British are finally getting the message that government action taken through the belief in scientific certainty is a nonsense, as it is an easily corrupted reductive process that makes slaves of all but privileged top echelon groups.
No.
That’s a peculiar US Republican viewpoint.
So you are saying that only US Republicans are correct.
and libertarians…
No, its a fairly normal viewpoint of the silent majority of the uk voters
Griff,
Have you ever read the replies to your comments on so called climate change in the Science section of the UK Daily Mail? Unless there’s another Griff you get an awful lot of “peculiar US Republican viewpoint” replies.
Wrong again.
Handing out compliments today, Griffipoo?
It’s a popular Republican viewpoint.
It also happens to be the truth.
Saying something is a “peculiar US Republican viewpoint” is a peculiar European MSM viewpoint.
In the French blogosphere (or news websites comments sections), there is support for that MSM viewpoint but not that much, and there is huge support of US Republican-like views, UNLIKE what you see in polls.
Oh don’t worry Griffy baby, they will always need gullible naive fools like you to whip us plebs into submission, to heard us into large enclosures, next to incineration facilities to generate electricity to keep the elites in the comfort & style to which they are accustomed!!! ;-)) You’re a fool, & a potentially very dangerous one at that!!!
Bull shit. It’s a Liberterian view. Which you would get, if you descended from your throne and talked to actual Republicans.
Plenty of Republicans over here in the “do what you are told” camp, regardless of what the science actually says. The Republicans I have spoken to in this group are usually “too busy” (WORKING) to read actual science. Unlike you who are just too lazy.
Unless you get paid to Troll?
The Express? Green? The paper that thinks the late D of E killed Diana? The 50 anti EU a day article Express?
Yes
“Trinity Mirror buys Daily Express group for £127m”
Do your homework for a change.
Nanny will be cross if you don’t.
How does believing in conspiracy theories prevent one from being Green?
What Green isn’t convinced that “Exxon knew”?
I’m saying that if you think the Express is somehow green, you also believe in conspiracy theories
And if you think it is now ‘leftist’ you believe in fairies
So Reach (formerly Trinity Mirror) is right wing?
Evidence please…
Faeries are absolutely real, they even have their own flag.
That communists consider socialists to be right wing, is hardly new or surprising.
When I was a young man expressing absolute truths about how awful western societies were, I was told I was very green in my views, & back then it meant that I was very gullible & naive, to me that description was & still is IMHO true to date!!! Green = gullible & naive!!!
The problem is griff, you don’t think. As history has shown, nothing you believe to be true, has ever turned out to be true.
The Duke of Earl killed Diana? Better tell Gene Chandler.
And 90% of those who went along with the green ideas in the poll would never actually do the “green thing”. They just said what they did so as not to seem “uncaring”.
“in order to give their grandchildren a better chance at climate survival”
Seriously?
If that’s how the question was worded, then the reality is they have even less support than this “survey” indicates.
Here’s the link to the 6 questions asked. You have to scroll down about halfway.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1478179/green-Britain-green-energy-IPCC-climate-change-report-poll-electric-cars?utm_source=daily_express_newsletter&utm_campaign=welcome_express_green_britain&utm_medium=email&pure360.trackingid=
Here’s the actual question (underlining is mine):
Are you happy to invest £10,000 into greener energy over the next 20 years, in order to give your grandchildren a better chance at climate survival?
I would have utterly failed my Survey Research class if I had submitted this kind of leading question garbage. They don’t even try and hide it.
Here’s my second favorite
And somebody got paid for this!
“If you go green, will that help you stop beating your wife?”
,,, have you stopped beating your wife? Answer yes or no! 😉
At least they did ask about spending. A bit more real world than simply asking about supporting the party propaganda that climate change is real, bad.
IIRC there was a survey published by Pew Research a few months ago that demonstrated only about 1% of Americans were prepared to pay larger sums towards (failing to) change the climate, and around 50% would not pay anything. Against that 83% not being prepared to spend £10,000 looks like being on the low side.
This may just be the baseline to compare future surveys with. So after pumping out climate alarmist content they can see how much it “re-educates” the readers. Well, the fewer readers it will have remaining.
Doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. Although the Daily Express is very much to the right it represents a typical UK household. The only people in the UK who believe man-made global warming is a threat are Guardian readers, the elitist Liberal left and socialist workers. So the numbers in the poll sound about right.
I’d give the UK Government less than 5% chance of achieving net zero for the very simple reason that Joe Public will not be prepared to pay the eyewatering sums required to do so, especially when combined with the changes in lifestyle that will also be required.
Politicians have made stupid promises without looking at the real costs of net zero and are only just starting to realise the political suicide it represents.
Although the Daily Express is very much to the right
and average age of readership 69.
My ‘on the ground’ survey – currently ongoing at a little music festy, near Steveange
Mindless electronic dance. Here‘s one of the DJs
(There was, =English Summer, a mini cloudburst on Thurs nite. Me and my stuff got wetter than I thought so been home to freshen up going back now)
One of our regular, highly regarded, contributors will know what I’m on about here.
The Kids, old and young, that attend those events are a particular breed and for me certainly, inspire hope.
Because they are:
So, what gives. How is it possible for these people to be so obviously happy and capable of enjoying themselves without drugs. How on Earth do they strike up fascinating, interesting conversations with Perfect Strangers.
How do they survive without putting everybody else is a villain and always assuming ‘they’re up to something’?
How does that little mini-society spring up from nowhere and what powers it?
There are 5 food stalls/outlets on site. (This in not One Huuuuge Festy)
Each outlet has just one speciality:
They all seem equally busy through the day, closing at midnight except the vegetarian which closes at 10
Put all that lot together – do you get Climate Change Concern.
Do you even visualise these people coming up with Climate Change, Saturated Fat and or Socialism?
PS I saw one electric car in the car-park – a white Tesla, with a number plate that would have cost probably half of what the car itself cost
“I don’t understand why they needed a poll to tell them that.”
They live in “the bubble,” where they only read each others’ toxic notions and breathe each others’ toxic effluent.
What a loaded question that was in the Poll.
“A staggering 83% of respondents say they wouldn’t be happy to invest £10,000 into greener energy over the next 20 years, in order to give their grandchildren a better chance at climate survival.”
Might as well just respond to that with “So you don’t want your kids to have a future?” lol. Oh for shame Daily Express. How the once mighty have fallen.
I like the way they worded the question – “…in order to give grandchildren a better chance of climate survival.” Could a question be any more loaded than that? And they still didn’t persuade.
When you see descriptors like “staggering”, it’s the opinion of the editor coming through