"Koala climbing tree" by Diliff - Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Commons.

BBC Believes a Conspiracy Drives Climate Conspiracy Theories

Guest “Illuminati Reveal” by Eric Worrall

Shadows everywhere: The possibility that people might want to reject climate lockdowns and Covid lockdowns of their own volition does not seem to occur to BBC conspiracy theorists.

Covid denial to climate denial: How conspiracists are shifting focus

By Marianna Spring
Specialist disinformation reporter, BBC News

Members of an online movement infected with pandemic conspiracies are shifting their focus – and are increasingly peddling falsehoods about climate change. 

Matthew is convinced that shadowy forces lie behind two of the biggest news stories of our time, and that he’s not being told the truth. 

“This whole campaign of fear and propaganda is an attempt to try and drive some agenda,” he says. “It doesn’t matter whether it’s climate change or a virus or something else.” 

And recently, groups like the ones he’s a part of have been sharing misleading claims not only about Covid, but about climate change. He sees “Covid and climate propaganda” as part of the same so-called plot. 

The White Rose network

It’s part of a larger pattern. Anti-lockdown and anti-vaccine Telegram groups, which once focused exclusively on the pandemic, are now injecting the climate change debate with the same conspiratorial narratives they use to explain the pandemic.

The posts go far beyond political criticism and debate – they’re full of incorrect information, fake stories and pseudoscience. 

According to researchers at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a think tank that researches global disinformation trends, some anti-lockdown groups have become polluted by misleading posts about climate change being overplayed, or even a so-called “hoax” designed to control people. 

“Increasingly, terminology around Covid-19 measures is being used to stoke fear and mobilise against climate action,” says the ISD’s Jennie King.

She says this isn’t really about climate as a policy issue.

“It’s the fact that these are really neat vectors to get themes like power, personal freedom, agency, citizen against state, loss of traditional lifestyles – to get all of those ideas to a much broader audience.” 

One group which has adopted such ideas is the White Rose – a network with locally-run subgroups around the world, from the UK to the US, Germany and New Zealand – where Matthew came across it. 

“It’s not run by any one or two people,” Matthew explains. “It’s kind of a decentralised community organisation, so you obtain stickers and then post them on lampposts and things like that.”

While we chat, he mentions “The Great Reset” – an unfounded conspiracy theory that a global elite is using the pandemic to establish a shadowy New World Order, a “super-government” that will control the lives of citizens around the world. 

Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-59255165

The Great Reset is a public programme promoted by the World Economic Forum, the group which holds a $50,000 / ticket event every year in Davos, Switzerland. A simple google search turns up the WEF page near the top of the list of searches. The page cites Covid and climate change as justifications for their programme.

https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/

In my opinion there is room to debate the true nature of the Great Reset programme, but calling it “unfounded”, as in non-existent, is at best plain ignorant, and well below the BBC journalistic standards we once thought we had a right to expect.

As for the White Rose network, never heard of it. I have no doubt White Rose and many similar groups exist, in our unsettled world there are plenty of concerned people seeking out like minded fellows. But some groups are run by people with their own agenda, who are not acting in their member’s best interests, and any significant group will be heavy monitored by the government, so I strongly urge caution for anyone who participates in large private social media groups.

In Britain there is a “malicious communication act”, which makes it an offence to distribute written material which causes offence or anxiety, which has been used to arrest people campaigning against British government Covid policy. I am not a lawyer, but in my opinion it is only a matter of time before this act is used against people who oppose other high priority government policies in Britain. Be careful what electronic footprints you leave, your words could be misinterpreted. Above all, stay within the law, wherever you live.

Correction (EW): The annual “Great Reset” WEF Davos event costs more than $50,000. According to Wikipedia, In 2011 an annual membership cost $52,000 for an individual member, $263,000 for “Industry Partner” and $527,000 for “Strategic Partner”. An admission fee cost $19,000 per person. In 2014, WEF raised annual fees by 20 percent, bringing the cost for “Strategic Partner” from CHF 500,000 ($523,000) to CHF 600,000 ($628,000)

4.7 27 votes
Article Rating
325 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Zig Zag Wanderer
November 16, 2021 10:24 pm

The posts go far beyond political criticism and debate – they’re full of incorrect information, fake stories and pseudoscience.

This. From the BBC?

😅😅😅

SxyxS
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 17, 2021 1:54 am

Well, she is right .
During her “research” she just made a mistake and clicked the BBC website.
All she found was pseudoscience,fake news,missinformation , conspiracy theories (Islam is the religion of peace,russian collusion ).

If she did some real research she may have found out that conspiracies among rich and powerful people are so common,epecially amongst rivals, that institutions were created to fight the price fixing anti trust agencies.
And not just price fixing
but also information fixing that is so extremely well coordinated that all the big tech banned alex jones on the very same day,as if Facebook,YouTube etc are one company – which they are.
Then all the conspiracies the bbc was involved in to push wars all around the world with shameless lies,
or the conspiracy that took place some years ago during the muslim new years rapefest where all over europe journalists and politicians successfully surpressed for several days.
That Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize though he achieved nothing and Al Gore got the same Prize and an Oscar for 118 minutes full of shit.

HotScot
Reply to  SxyxS
November 17, 2021 2:23 am

There was at least one positive outcome of Gore’s movie, it prompted me to look for the other side of the story, because there always is one, and so ended up here.

SxyxS
Reply to  HotScot
November 17, 2021 2:46 am

For every million he fooled he got one who challenged the narrative –
Bad deal for us.

PS
I have to add a brand new conspiracy (no theory) to the list.

The Rittenhouse thing seems to be another big propaganda tool for the billionaires MSM in the USA(he killed a pedophile so it is understandable that american Epstein island billionaires)and it seems that this propaganda is falling faster apart than the russian collusion.
The conspiracy that happened is the guy to blame Rittenhouse (Grosskreutz)
turned out to be a violent serial criminal but the charges against him were dropped just a few days before trial .
Amazing coincidence.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  SxyxS
November 17, 2021 4:24 am

This trial is really being hyped up. The News Media keep telling us there are going to be massive demonstrations nationwide if not guilty is the verdict.

Then I look at the scenes in front of the courthouse and I see maybe a couple of dozen people out there and half are supporters of Rittenhouse, and I wonder how this measures up to the hype.

Why would there be nationwide demonstrations over one white guy shooting three other white guys, whether it turns out guilty or not guilty?

The Leftwing Media is trying to make this out to be a racial thing, and a gun thing, stoking the violent rhetoric. The same kind of violent rhetoric that sparked the riots in Kenosha in the first place. It seems, the Leftwing Media wants more bloodshed.

Sara
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 5:16 am

The leftie media have nothing to chew on right now, because the pandemic is Old Hat stuff, so they’ve focused on this dumb-ass kid from Antioch, IL, who got himself into trouble – WAY over his head – and yes, the Lefterd media DOES want more bloodshed. Without that, they have no purpose.

N.B.: Rittenhouse was 17, a minor, when he screwed up, so the court decided to wait until he was 18 (legally an adult in IL) to try him. as an adult. He did some very stupid things, so I’m not defending him, just pointing out what seems to be missed by most people.

Last edited 2 months ago by Sara
MarkW
Reply to  Sara
November 17, 2021 6:13 am

MSNBC carried the prosecutions summation live on nationwide TV. When it came time for the defense to present it’s case, MSNBC had more important things to cover.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Sara
November 17, 2021 6:32 am

Here is something you won’t see in the marxstreammedia:

Rittenhouse Defense Files Late Motion for Mistrial with Prejudice — No Retrial if Granted

https://thelibertydaily.com/breaking-rittenhouse-defense-files-late-motion-for-mistrial-with-prejudice-no-retrial-if-granted/

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Sara
November 17, 2021 11:23 am

“very stupid things” is a interesting way of describing the act of deliberately going to a riot scene with an assault rifle and shooting three people.

MarkW
Reply to  Izaak Walton
November 17, 2021 12:11 pm

You knowledge of weaponry is as faulty as your knowledge of everything else. It wasn’t an asualt rifle.
Shooting three people who are trying to kill you isn’t a stupid thing to do.

whiten
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 2:21 pm

Ok, weaponry proper.. nuclear, who is in proper command and control of it these days… definitely not Joseph, or Putin, or the Chinese Emperor…

🙂

Richard Page
Reply to  whiten
November 17, 2021 4:28 pm

What? This makes absolutely no sense. Can you clarify and explain your point a little more please, it’s not very clear.

whiten
Reply to  Richard Page
November 17, 2021 11:57 pm

Ok, one way of explaining.

One reference.

Coala in the photo.

Nuclear… global weaponry… a troubling example.
A huge arsenal.
Not so good for self defense… by any player.

You think Joseph calls the shots in any thing!

As far as conspiracy, theoretical or not, goes, how do you think a response, in self defense supposedly, must be to a global fascist takeover!
(within an environment rich in nukes arsenals)

Last time it happened, it was not pretty.

A very unstable situation, globally these days… where at the very least nukes must be safe.

Maybe, me exaggerating here… but…what required by must, it must be.
And maybe I should not have tried this point as a reply to MarkW comment.

Coalas and weapons, not a good mix.

😶

cheers

Last edited 2 months ago by whiten
HotScot
Reply to  Izaak Walton
November 17, 2021 4:48 pm

A very sensible thing is going to a riot, with rioters destroying private property, with a rifle, to shoot rioters destroying that property.

When it’s your turn to have your home/business/outdoor toilet razed to the ground by these people, tell me I’m wrong.

Rittenhouse did the right thing in taking his rifle to a riot. He did the wrong thing in waiting so long to shoot the scum bags.

I was a lifelong resistant of routine gun carrying. I’m an ex UK Cop, the best we had was a wooden truncheon. Police officers are neither required, nor empowered to act on behalf of an individual in defence of their own life or property. That’s down to the individual.

Self defence is not black or white.You hit an assailant with a club, he doesn’t go down, you hit him again, and again, until he eventually goes down, and dies.

In the eyes of the law reasonable force would stop at the first hit. In real life, shooting the guy would have caused both parties far less trauma.

It would also send a message to anyone else that attempted to assail an individual that it’s really not a good idea.

I have always sent a message. Do not fvck with me! My policing patches were always peaceful following the first confrontation.

I have learned through bitter experience that ignoring that simple expedient leads to trouble. Appeasement NEVER works.

Enjoy your fantasy world.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Sara
November 17, 2021 11:44 am

“Justice delayed is justice denied.”

I wonder if a good lawyer could press the issue of the Constitution declaring every accused person has the right to a speedy trial?

John Larson
Reply to  Sara
November 17, 2021 12:12 pm

He did some very stupid things…”

Like what?

Not hiding while his community was ravaged further by criminals? It seems to me that would be a stupid thing to do.

Not legally arming himself while defending his community against violent criminals? Seems rather stupid to me.

Defending himself from violent criminals who were attacking him? Clearly stupid not to.

I don’t see anything stupid about what he did.

Ruleo
Reply to  Sara
November 18, 2021 2:56 pm

“He did some very stupid things”

Like what?

Tom
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 5:42 am

Unfortunately, for a vast majority of those who only watch only a few minutes of national TV ‘news’ every day, they’re not aware that it was ” one white guy shooting three other white guys”. Instead, they believe that it was a White Racist who shot three Black Lives Matter peaceful demonstrators during a peaceful demonstration. The fact that these ‘peaceful demonstrators’ were white felons who helped burn down much of Kenosha has never been told to them.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom
November 17, 2021 6:14 am

And if you try to present that information, Twitter, YouTube, FaceBook will label it false information and ban it.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 6:22 am

The insane prosecutor should have been arrested for assault for his stunt of aiming an AR-15 at the jury.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 17, 2021 11:46 am

With his finger on the trigger. Maybe he was trying for the Alex Baldwin Hall of Fame.

MarkW
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 17, 2021 12:12 pm

According to Alec’s brother David, Alec is being set up by conservatives because of his political views.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 17, 2021 1:21 pm

He’s a real winner, isn’t he. I wonder how many other people he has railroaded?

He shouldn’t be prosecuting cases.

George Daddis
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 8:05 am

Be wary. The Mollie Ball TIME (Jan 2021) article about the cabal (her word) to defeat DJT (excuse me, “save Democracy”) mentioned that they (the cabal) had pre arranged 400 demonstrations in cites across the nation triggered by text messages in the event DJT won.

Any rational person understands that the cabal that Mollie reported does not limit its interest to just the 2020 election!

Their biggest error was to let Mollie brag about it.

It would be very easy to use that network to protest the outcome of the trial.

Last edited 2 months ago by George Daddis
MarkW
Reply to  SxyxS
November 17, 2021 6:12 am

I’m still trying to figure out how a white guy, shooting three other white guys, proves that Rittenhouse is a racist. Scratch that, a white supremacist. Seems there are no longer any racists in the US, they are all white supremacists now.

Graemethecat
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 7:11 am

Larry Elder (who is Black) was accused of being a White Supremacist when he ran against Gavin Newsom for Governorship of California.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Graemethecat
November 17, 2021 9:41 am

Using “Racist” as a pejorative to mean ‘white MAN’ is exactly the same as socialists using “capitalist” in place of free enterprise.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Graemethecat
November 17, 2021 11:48 am

Whatever works, whether it is logical or not.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 1:25 pm

Rittenhouse ought to be suing Joe Biden for calling him a White Supremacist. Character assasination, and biasing the jury by declaring Rittenhouse guilty before he is even tried.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 4:54 pm

The kid who was libeled by most the major media when his class was confronted by that fake Indian in DC a couple of years ago, and won a sizeable settlement, is encouraging Rittenhouse to sue.
When asked about suing for liable this past week, Rittenhouse’s mother replied “our lawyers are taking care of that”.

John Garrett
Reply to  HotScot
November 17, 2021 4:52 am

Bingo.

Gore’s work of fiction drove a lot of us here.

Rick C
Reply to  SxyxS
November 17, 2021 6:55 am

“By Marianna Spring
Specialist disinformation reporter, BBC News”

Maybe you’re misinterpreting her title. I think she’s doing a great job of creating and reporting disinformation.

CWinNY
Reply to  Rick C
November 17, 2021 9:51 am

The problem Marianna has is this: How do you tell the difference between a conspiracy and actions that aren’t part of a conspiracy but mirror what a conspiracy would do?

pigs_in_space
Reply to  SxyxS
November 18, 2021 3:05 am

“Specialist disinformation reporter”,
LOL!

Sure are competent in the disinformation domain!

Doc Chuck
November 16, 2021 10:37 pm

Hey, all you proles, just a warning to stay off our turf of incorrect information, fake stories, and pseudoscience! That’s what we get payed good money for to widely dispense at the BBC, where we can all feel that we’re among the cognoscenti who know best through our own deep immersion in the approved narrative.

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Doc Chuck
November 18, 2021 2:48 pm

I’d give you a +1 but you’re already at 42 and it doesn’t get any better than that!

David Guy-Johnson
November 16, 2021 10:45 pm

No one in the UK has been arrested for spreading different views on government covid policy.

PCman999
Reply to  David Guy-Johnson
November 16, 2021 11:05 pm
michel
Reply to  David Guy-Johnson
November 16, 2021 11:57 pm

Strictly speaking, you are right. That is not the offense for which the people in the linked story were arrested. They were arrested, or one of them, for malicious misinformation.

This offense consists in publishing information which is known to be false, with malicious intent. What they published, with the ridiculous comparison of the vaccination program to the Holocaust, is certainly false. Whether they published it maliciously is a different matter.

Eric’s point however is correct. The concept of misinformation is rather hazier than one would like the criminal law to be. How do we tell what is and is not misinformation?

Almost all objections to any government policy, indeed any policy, will rely on some assertions of fact for its arguments, so it will inevitably be subject to attack on the grounds that these assertions are misinformation.

Imagine, for instance, during the great Brexit arguments, if someone had made negative comments about the role of the European Commission and alleged that it was similar in powers and function and lack of accountability to the Politbureau of the former Soviet Union. Is this misinformation, because the comparison is without validity?

Imagine if during the public debates over HS2, people had made assertions which were arguable about the likely financial returns based on the view that traffic estimates and value of saved travel time were absurd over-estimates. Or indeed if they had argued that Government cost forecasts were too low by a factor or 3 or 4. Is this misinformation, because we know that Government cost and traffic and savings estimates and forecasts are made by reliable trustworthy experts?

Some wears a T-shirt with the slogan ‘Woman = Adult Human Female”. Is that misinformation? Or is it misinformation to wear a T-shirt with the slogan ‘Trans Women are Women”?

People are liable to wear either one in the course of demonstrating their opposition to or support of various different policies. Is one misinformation, if so which, why, and who judges?

The UK is tiptoeing down a path whose ultimate destination, now coming clearly into view, is the treatment of dissenting public speech as criminal. With or without legal grounds. The clearest case of this (without legal grounds) recently was the celebrated case of Harry Miller, though there have been many more:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-tweet-police-acted-unlawfully

And the trend is confirmed by the UK Online Safety Bill

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-online-safety-bill

The equivalent law in Scotland, which has I think actually been passed, criminalizes what is called ‘hate speech’ uttered in the privacy of one’s own home.

What we are seeing is a series of developments which will indeed make political opposition to government policy only possible to the extent which governments tolerate it. Its coming about through a patchwork of legislation and policy decisions by institutions and their reactions to activist pressure.

Generally what happens is that the activists put pressure on an institution, the institution cedes, dismisses the mis-speaking employee or cancels the speech, as Cambridge cancelled Jordan Peterson.

Police then, without any legal grounds, then start to take names and caution people who speak contrary to whatever the activists have established as the acceptable norm. The political establishment then moves to enshrine the new norms as ones which its a crime to speak against publicly. Or even privately, if you live in Scotland.

And if you doubt all this and think its exaggerated, consider the case of the Scottish lady who was arrested on the grounds that someone thought her posting of the suffragette ribbon was a hate crime. Google Marion Millar for details.

Natalie Bird was banned by the Liberal Party for standing for Parliament as Liberal for 10 years. Her offense was to wear one of the T-shirts referred to above.

Kathleen Stock was sufficiently harassed that she resigned from her post at the University of Sussex. Her offense was to write a fine and compassionate book, but one which crosses the party line.

Finally, read the Ofcom discussion paper here:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0027/211986/understanding-online-false-information-uk.pdf

This is real, and its leading to suppression of dissent and samizdat. The end destination, reached by different route, is the former Soviet Union. It is people talking quietly in private with those they trust, circulating dissident samizdat novels, poems, discussion papers with great discretion, and looking over their shoulders all the time when they are at work or in any public forum. Or indeed anywhere they can be overheard and later denounced.

In the present UK environment this last para and the present one, read it again, probably qualifies for being judged misinformation, and though arguably not actually illegal, could justify a call from the police, a caution, and a record.

There is no publication in the UK at the moment, and no prominent person, who is prepared to challenge the existence of a climate emergency. Even the Telegraph doesn’t dare challenge it any more. It does feebly protest that for Britain to wear a hair shirt while no-one else does is not going to be electorally palatable. But it doesn’t dare question the idea that hair shirts are vitally necessary for all.

Think about that.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 3:09 am

Looking at the history of Britain freedom of speech hasn’t really ever existed. Just one example The Riot Act 1714 which wasn’t repealed until 1967. It wasin fact “An Act for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual punishing the rioters” and applied to groups of 12 or more.

From the web:
According to the BBC The last reading of the Riot Act on mainland UK was in Glasgow on the 31 January 1919.

The term “Reading The Riot Act” comes from this legislation. According to the law, if a crowd of twelve or more people showed signs of becoming unruly, the local authority would ask them to disperse. If they refused, the authority would read the Riot Act out loud, giving the group one hour to disperse.

There are many more examples.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
November 17, 2021 4:18 am

generous numbers, cos in qld some yrs ago more than four? was considered a mob ie so a big family walking down the street could have been “talked to”
media spin AND Xi dan calling all the prostestors at present as dangerous and militant etc is getting heavy ABC promotion

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
November 17, 2021 4:54 am

“The term “Reading The Riot Act” comes from this legislation.”

That’s interesting. Thanks.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 6:17 am

Fascinating the odd tidbits of knowledge you can pick up around here.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
November 17, 2021 9:55 am

Given the Leftist riots of 2020 in the U.S., it appears anti-riot laws are only used against non-Leftists.

Richard S Courtney
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 3:09 am

Eric Worral,

I agree that “Britain is teetering on the brink of tyranny” and add that we ‘dodged a bullet’ when Boris Johnson prorogued Parliament in attempt to prevent any dissent from his intentions. We would now be a dictatorship ruled by Boris and his appointed Cabinet were it not for the Courts and the Crown removing the prorogation.

Boris still had over 30% public support in Britain after he had prorogued Parliament in attempt to obtain dictatorship. ‘Court and Crown’ corrected the power-grab.
AH retained over 30% public support in Germany after he had burned the Reichstag in attempt to obtain dictatorship, but there was no ‘Court and Crown’ to correct that coupe.

We live in dangerous times.

Richard

DaveS
Reply to  Richard S Courtney
November 17, 2021 4:53 am

Oh give us a break. The Labour government prorogued Parliament in 1948 for political reasons, as did the Tory government in 1997. Whatever the ins and outs of those decisions, the country did not descend into dictatorship then, and it would not have done if the Supreme Court hadn’t stuck its oar in. I’d be more concerned about a court effectively giving itself law-making powers

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Richard S Courtney
November 17, 2021 4:57 am

“prorogation”

I was not familiar with that term and had to look it up.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Richard S Courtney
November 17, 2021 5:06 am

Long live the Queen!

Bil
Reply to  Richard S Courtney
November 17, 2021 5:49 am

Prorogation is a normal Parliamentary process used every year and in every election. I’ve no like of Johnson but he was not setting up tyranny, I believe he was trying to stop the tyranny of a Parliament refusing to enact the will of the people.

Richard S Courtney
Reply to  Bil
November 17, 2021 10:10 am

Dave S and Bil,

Your fallacious propaganda does not wash.

Yes, there is a normal and legal purpose for prorogation, and it does NOT include closing Parliament for an unspecified time to enable the PM to do whatever he wants without need for Parliament to scrutinise and/or approve it.

As the Supreme Court ruled, what Boris Johnson did was flagrantly unlawful so Her Majesty insisted that Parliament be recalled to enable a General Election to be held.

Richard

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 4:43 am

“IMO Britain is teetering on the brink of tyranny, because of such laws.”

I agree.

Don’t Australia and New Zealand have similar laws restricting free speech? And Canada, too, I think.

Is the U.S. the only place where Free Speech is still available?

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 6:18 am

Don’t look to the US, Biden is shredding the first amendment as fast as he can.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 6:38 am

And yet all over Europe and AuZe there are near-daily protests by thousands and thousands of people against the medical apartheid that are never allowed to appear on Approved TV.

MarkW
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 17, 2021 7:14 am

In the US, the Democrats have slipped a provision that government will start subsidizing reporters, but only at government approved media companies, into the latest big spending bill.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 9:51 am

We’ve had that in Canada for some time. Trudeau reminds all the media outliers during each election, rewarding all the approved networks with lavish “grants”.

buggs
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 10:22 am

Canada is not there, but it is well on its way. The initial bill allowing for what amounts to government censorship (it wasn’t phrased or characterized that way, but it was most assuredly the goal) was rejected thankfully. But bide your time, a worse one is in the planning and they may well get that one through. At that point we will very much be on the road to Chinese “democracy”.

TonyG
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 12:08 pm

Even the US is rapidly losing that freedom.

Richard Page
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 1:45 pm

I had to explain this before so here goes again: the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand all have similar laws, passed by their parliaments, upholding the rights and responsibilities of free speech. The USA has an amendment to the written constitution upholding the rights of free speech. Slightly different but all of the countries mentioned have laws protecting and upholding the right to free speech. Just because your country does it differently to others doesn’t mean that others don’t do it at all.

Sara
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 5:22 am

Eric, have you ever felt that you were watching a rerun of the witch trials at Salem?

pigs_in_space
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 18, 2021 3:09 am

Think of this, the British have always avoided becoming a dictatorship, by the sheer mind numbing incompetence of the bureaucracy.

It was a quote from my history teacher and never a truer word about the British was ever spoken!

Mike
Reply to  michel
November 17, 2021 12:29 am

There is no publication in the UK at the moment, and no prominent person, who is prepared to challenge the existence of a climate emergency”

It’s a new religion. LITERALLY. Someone said, you’ve gotten rid of God but not religion. The evidence for this is everywhere. Going against the climate narrative has become blasphemy. To oppose it has real risks now. Only the Earth in partnership with the Sol can help now. (and they will) I personally never thought it would become so systemic. Listening to the BBC for example, they talk about climate change as confidently as the sun rising in the east.

Tammly
Reply to  Mike
November 17, 2021 1:30 am

After nearly 60 years of having BBC Radio4 as my constant companion, I now can’t listen to it because of its woke intersectionality and one sided reporting over ‘climate change’ which they’re utterly obsessed with. I now feel just like a religious heretic and they would like to put me in prison, which is the origin of the term ‘Denier’.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike
November 17, 2021 4:59 am

“Listening to the BBC for example, they talk about climate change as confidently as the sun rising in the east. ”

This is definitely a sign of True Believers.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Mike
November 17, 2021 5:17 am

Mike

When one compares the garbage that journalists write and many prominent people spout with the clear and succinct Clintel’s World Climate Declaration, “There is no climate emergency,” two things should stand out:
1. This small group, of over 900 signatories from 38 countries, who are all scientists and professionals, are not “climate deniers.”
2. The failure of critics to civilly and briefly address the six points they made with similar cogent reasoning.

Last edited 2 months ago by Michael in Dublin
ozspeaksup
Reply to  michel
November 17, 2021 4:15 am

looking at Austrias segregation and banning ONLY non vaxxed citizens should be ringing alram bells
amazing how many support such moves ie here in Aus Vic XiDans proposed new laws

buggs
Reply to  ozspeaksup
November 17, 2021 10:25 am

Canada is way ahead apparently. Recent surveys indicate that ~70% of Canadians support segregation of non vaxxed citizens. No government will oppose that, true or not.

I still say just give the unvaxxed a six pointed gold star to sew on their overcoat. Then we’ll know who the unwashed are. (this is sarcasm).

MarkW
Reply to  buggs
November 17, 2021 12:16 pm

Over 80% of citizens are in favor of having to present an ID in order to vote. Yet the Democrats oppose that with no apparent political harm.

Raven
Reply to  michel
November 17, 2021 8:15 am

This offense consists in publishing information which is known to be false, with malicious intent. What they published, with the ridiculous comparison of the vaccination program to the Holocaust, is certainly false. 

Well, Michael E. Mann regularly compares Holocaust Den*ers to Climate Den*ers.

Does Dr. Mann moderate his language while in the UK so as to avoid arrest?

Last edited 2 months ago by Raven
Dave Fair
Reply to  michel
November 17, 2021 9:52 am

Just one U.S. example: A school board president of a large school district, through his father (disseminated to others), maintained dossiers on protesting parents, including legally protected privacy information. We’ll see what happens to the ideologues involved.

The Xiden Administration and Justice Department colluded with the National Association of School Boards to order the FBI to investigate protesting parents. It is good to note average Americans rose up in protest of this Gestapo-type intimidation.

Let’s Go Brandon!

Vincent Causey
Reply to  David Guy-Johnson
November 17, 2021 12:06 am

The online harms bill is not yet an act of parliament. In any case, it would make social media platforms liable to prosecution, not individuals posting. The obvious aim is to ensure social media platforms take down dissenting opinions or face massive fines.

michel
Reply to  Vincent Causey
November 17, 2021 1:35 am

You are right on both counts. But think about the implications for a moment. Someone posts a dissenting opinion, based on misinformation, about some government policy.

The hoster, be it Facebook, Twitter, his ISP, is ordered to take it down because its deemed to be misinformation. They do so. He looks for another hosting provider and discovers that there is a register of these takedowns maintained by an industry association, and that once your material has been taken down by any one member, that’s it, you are banned from publishing for several years. Its not government policy, this, its just the industry acting off its own initiative.

Meanwhile, the police call on him. They explain that he has committed no crime ‘as such’ but that they maintain a register of individuals whose posts have been taken down because they contain misinformation. Its not a good thing to do. He is now on that list and needs to be more thoughtful about what he publishes in future.

He is an obstinate fellow, a sort of Sakharov of the West, so he goes to a local print shop and gets leaflets made and starts passing them out outside a busy Underground station in London.

Now he gets arrested.

The problem is that the distinction between acting against the provider hosting something and acting against the individual doing the posting is not as clear as you would assume. After all, the effect is to take down someone’s post. But its also not clear because of a cascade of social effects which follow on from the acceptance of the first takedown order and the existence of the power to order takedowns generally.

Takedowns of material which has never been shown to be, in itself, unlawful.

I do strongly believe in some kinds of censorship. Historically up to now the UK has had a sensible and proportionate policy on these matters. Its recongnised a distinction between material which is illegal to possess and material which its illegal to disseminate. Its had tight definitions of what it makes illegal.

But its drifting bit by bit into a world in which the expression of views which are simply unpopular in some quarters will have damaging legal and social consequences for the one voicing them.

And if you want to see where this is going, look at Scotland. Where it really can be a criminal offence to indulge in what is broadly defined as ‘hate speech’ over a glass of wine in one’s own home.

History shows that however we start out, we will end up defining hate speech as anything we disagree with. Be careful who you invite, and watch your words. Privacy? No way, not for people who use it as a shield for expressing damaging hate.

Its a bit like anti-party speech, dangerous wreckers and saboteurs. Who society needs to be protected from.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  michel
November 17, 2021 6:41 am

The hoster, be it Facebook, Twitter, his ISP, is ordered to take it down because its deemed to be misinformation. They do so. He looks for another hosting provider and discovers that there is a register of these takedowns maintained by an industry association, and that once your material has been taken down by any one member, that’s it, you are banned from publishing for several years. Its not government policy, this, its just the industry acting off its own initiative.

This is the very definition of Fascism: the melding of government and corporations.

MarkW
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 17, 2021 7:15 am

And to think, the people pushing these plans, are going around calling everyone who disagrees with them, fascist.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 9:53 am

Pure projection.

TonyG
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 12:11 pm

They’ve redefined fascist so it no longer means what it used to mean.

Literally: I can’t find the old definition online anymore. Only in books, and even then not new ones.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  TonyG
November 17, 2021 3:18 pm

Wikipedia has one, that is partially correct in referring to “dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy,, except that it specifies “far right”, and relegates it to “early 20th century Europe”….

Ignoring, of course, that Nazi means National SOCIALIST. Mussolini was the editor of various Socialist newspapers, and was considered one of the foremost authorities on Marxism before deciding he could never gain power as a Socialist, and broke from his former Socialist and Communist comrades. So ironic to call this monster “far right”.

Craig from Oz
November 16, 2021 10:54 pm

The Conservative Advantage in action.

(the Conservative Advantage is an observation the if you ask a Conservative how a Left would answer a problem they are correct more often when when you ask the reverse.)

Here we see an angry and confused Left try and explain those nasty Alt-Right types and their co-ordinated campaign to spread their lies.

They believe there must be some sort of highly organised central group who work to a set agenda, because they is how they push their views.

Reality is there is no one in charge. There is no mega group. The Left love to think there is, but nearly all the ‘highly organised radical groups’ they cite usually turn out to be one person operating out of their home studio/spare room who just happen to occasionally chat to other one persons and like to share jokes with each other.

They become popular because members of the general population stumble across them and enjoy being talked TO rather then AT and enjoy the jokes.

The Left get confused by this, and as mentioned, invent massive secret organisations to manipulate because that is how they would do it.

The Left still don’t get Let’s Go Brandon. Who organised this? Who controls it? Who tells people when and where to say it?

Doc Chuck
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 16, 2021 11:18 pm

They enviously observe those in any effective opposition who so surely must be operating the way they themselves do, revealing their own inclinations despite all the attempted distraction of finger pointing elsewhere.

lee
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 16, 2021 11:59 pm

They are probably chasing the data trail of my cheques from Big Oil right now. Don’t tell’em where I am. 😉

Tom Abbott
Reply to  lee
November 17, 2021 5:12 am

I think one of Biden’s Treasury Department nominees wants to put everyone’s bank account under the control of the Federal Government.

That way they can keep track of all that Big Oil money going to skeptics, or any other money anyone gets, from anywhere, for anything.

Big Brother wants to watch us.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 17, 2021 8:12 am

She’s pretty out of touch. Banks are already part of “the system”. Why would we want our money metered out by incompetent politicians instead of lent out by competent loan sharks.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 17, 2021 10:12 am

Xiden wants our currency controlled by a Communist.

griff
Reply to  lee
November 17, 2021 6:31 am

I hope your paymasters are more efficient than my communist masters 🙂

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:30 am

Yeah griff, that’s the origin of the word “idiot” in the term “useful idiot”. You don’t even know you’re doing it.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  philincalifornia
November 17, 2021 11:06 am

Griff is trying to be ironic but is so brainwashed by his own ideology he doesn’t realize it just sounds like he’s complaining, to us.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 4:22 am

did you happen to dig into WHO is funding that “thinktank” at all
usually do track back to gates soros and a few other rather well heeled donors
amazingly often in fact

ozspeaksup
Reply to  ozspeaksup
November 17, 2021 4:23 am

i suggest reading Flat Earth News the book OR their webpage for some useful details on how/what/whom “manages PR media etc etc

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 6:24 am

That’s because the majority of people on the left are not independent thinkers.
They think they way they do because that’s what the crowd they run in thinks, and the crowd they run in takes it’s cues from agreed upon national figures who tell them what to think.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 10:10 am

You mean like the Columbia School of Journalism organizing and working with large numbers of media outlets (and governmental entities?) to shape the Leftist climate narratives for universal distribution?

TonyG
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 12:14 pm

Eric – you are talking about a large group of people who are either incapable of independent thought or unwilling to engage in it. I’ve known several – as I’m sure you have. When asked for an opinion on something, they quote the opinion of some “authority” they’ve chosen to believe. They don’t have any of their own.

Given that, it’s no wonder they can’t conceive of people coming up with anything without being told to do so.

M Courtney
Reply to  Craig from Oz
November 17, 2021 12:19 am

(the Conservative Advantage is an observation the if you ask a Conservative how a Left would answer a problem they are correct more often when when you ask the reverse.)

I fail to see how logical inconsistency is an advantage.
Look at the chaos caused by the current UK PM, for example. A clear case of unpredictability. But no sign of any advantage to anybody.

Dennis
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 1:16 am

Similar applies to Australian politics and a gradual change from the centre-right Australian Liberal Party and National Party to infiltrators leaning further left on the political spectrum determined to drag their parties to the left including adopting “Greens” positions, and noting that the Australian Greens are left of international greenism. Maybe globalism is a better description and the natural climate based hoax and warming scare diversion to cover their real objectives?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dennis
November 17, 2021 5:28 am

I think the Left’s takeover of all the schools figures prominently in this.

More leftists are being produced now than in the past, because this is the focus of the schools, and that can only mean trouble for humanity.

Conservatives have been slumbering while the radical Left infiltrates all the institutions of Society.

I think the conservatives, at least in the United States, have had a rude awakening very recently, and are no longer slumbering.

Climate believer
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 1:22 am

The strangest thing of all is that people are naturally conservative and want them to be conservative, if only they’d listen to people, rather than trying to please the politically correct media twitterati crowd.

I hope it ends badly for them.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 2:37 am

Eric: What is a ‘right wing libertarian’?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gregory Woods
November 17, 2021 5:36 am

I suppose a Libertarian could come down on the side of an issue of the Left, and also come down on the side of an issue of the Right, such as supporting legalizing drugs, and also supporting free speech.

To me, that would just make them a Libertarian, as I see a Libertarian as wanting the most freedom for the most people, regardless of political outlook, or subject matter.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 6:30 am

The problem with the left right dichotomy, is that there are many subjects on which to base it. The Libertarian party used to advocate a two axis chart with which to rate politicians. One axis was economic policy and the other axis was social policy.

Last edited 2 months ago by MarkW
M Courtney
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 5:08 am

Seeing as the majority of Conservative party members voted him as their leader he is surely the most Conservative of all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:31 am

Belonging to the conservative party makes one a conservative?
It has nothing to do with what one believes?
Really?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 12:03 pm

Here in the US we call them “RINOs”

griff
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:32 am

and ‘net zero’ was right there in his manifesto too…

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:32 am

Kewl that’s going to stabilize the climate BIG TIME. Whoooo hoooo, bring on that stable climate for nitwits.

LdB
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:24 pm

The usual view in politics is he had the most dirt or was owed the most brownie points by fellow piglets but had a better public appeal … that is how you get to be the leader.

Last edited 2 months ago by LdB
MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 6:27 am

In the US, mainstream Republicans believed that the best route to power was to be slightly less liberal than the Democrats. Therefore the further to the left the Democrats swung, the mainstream Republicans dutifully followed.

buggs
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 10:45 am

This is the case in Canada.

Being a bit older now I’ve followed politics for a long while. In Canada we have five main parties:
Liberals: the natural ruling party of Canada (just ask them) who historically were slightly left of center (Canadian center which is left of U.S. center).
Conservatives: the second option and usual main opposition party. Slightly right of center, sometimes further but never so far as Republicans.
National Democratic Party (NDP) socialists, through and through. Fiscal responsibility was for other people. Perennial third place finishers in Canada
Bloc Quebecois – Quebec separatist party (oh that they had succeeded) that doesn’t give a damn about the rest of Canada
Green Party – name says it all, relatively fringe group that generally accumulates 1-2% of the vote.

Now we have the current Liberal minority government that leapt wholly over the NDP to the far left, functionally they are drunken sailors spending like they are no tomorrow with dreams of pixie dust and unicorn farts saving the planet. They will destroy Canada as we are to become Greece x10.

But the point of the post is that the Conservative party of Canada has now become a slightly tamer version of the former Liberal party. They shifted left dramatically. Still better than the Liberals IMO but barely so. So much as the mainstream Republicans followed suit, the Conservatives did so in Canada.

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:26 am

To a communist, everyone else is a conservative.

griff
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 10:12 am

to a conservative, everyone else is a leftist and marxist.

Doonman
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 11:58 am

And to an independent, both leftists and rightists blindly adhere to preconceived agenda espoused by liars.

MarkW
Reply to  Doonman
November 17, 2021 12:21 pm

In my experience, most independents want to be free to select whichever party offers them the most free stuff.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:20 pm

To a conservative, everyone else is a leftist. That’s pretty much a truism.
As to being a marxist, that’s a matter of perspective. However most of what is being pushed by most liberals these days is straight out of the communist manifesto.

Climate believer
Reply to  Craig from Oz
November 17, 2021 1:11 am

They believe there must be some sort of highly organised central group who work to a set agenda, because they is how they push their views.”

Yes, one of the reasons why they like to exaggerate the importance of the Alt-right and QAnon, even 4chan! as these central groups where we all get our orders from of what to say, it’s ridiculous and makes trolling the left so easy.

The left are the “Borg”, you will be assimilated!

Redge
November 16, 2021 11:18 pm

By Marianna Spring

Specialist disinformation reporter, BBC News

So the BBC admits they have a reporter who specialises in disinformation.

Only one!

🤣

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Redge
November 17, 2021 5:41 am

I missed that “disinformation reporter” tidbit on the first reading. Thanks for pointing that out.

The alarmists sure make it easy sometimes, don’t they. 🙂

Last edited 2 months ago by Tom Abbott
Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 16, 2021 11:23 pm
alastair gray
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 17, 2021 12:25 am

“Lets go Meldrew!” as in “I don’t believe it

Phillip Bratby
November 16, 2021 11:48 pm

The BBC is still putting out propaganda, with lies from King and other chosen climate “experts”.

Climate change: What did the scientists make of COP26? – BBC News

COP26: The truth behind the new climate change denial – BBC News

bonbon
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 17, 2021 1:24 am

And from the Man Who Would Be King.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  bonbon
November 17, 2021 5:48 am

I saw a headline yesterday claiming William might take the throne instead of Charles.

I suppose that would be an improvement, but I’m not so sure after hearing what William had to say about climate change. He seemed very clueless on that subject. Perhaps he does better on other subjects.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 6:48 am

Too much foie gras kills neurons.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 18, 2021 3:22 am

more like way too much bl..dy interbreeding!

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  pigs_in_space
November 18, 2021 12:34 pm

Hah!

philincalifornia
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 7:35 am

“Perhaps he does better on other subjects”.

Which feet his shoes go on? After his valet tells him.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 17, 2021 10:29 am

Phillip, thank you for the two examples of the Left’s blatant lies meant to influence public opinion.

Vincent Causey
November 17, 2021 12:03 am

This, in my opinion, is a propaganda exercise to soften the public up for the “online harms bill” currently being laid before parliament. Like most totalitarian legislation, it has cuddly sounding name, but within it contains legislation that will outlaw “dis/misinformation”. It will mean that social media platforms will commit and offense if they allow dis/misinformation that could cause “harm or distress”. This, of course is not defined, but it is worth noting that
“accredited” journalists would be exempt. So the BBC is enlisted to paint an imaginary picture in which dis/misinformation is causing harm, and the public clamour for the government to protect them. In fact, they would be “protected” against the exchange of ideas that go against government narratives.

MarkW
Reply to  Vincent Causey
November 17, 2021 6:34 am

 “harm or distress”

If this follows the usual pattern, you will only be prosecuted if the “harm or distress” that you cause is to a politically favored groups.
Causing “harm or distress” to a conservative will not only not be prosecuted, but will probably be subsidized.

John J. A. Cullen
November 17, 2021 1:09 am

Eric, I recently came across a small (approx. 10cm x 15cm) white poster hanging from a display board in a local nature reserve here in the Midlands of the UK. The poster was from White Rose, which I had never heard of previously. I do not fully remember the short message but I think it was something like, “The only thing that is growing is the lies.” However, no context was given and so I do not know which “lies” were being referred to. The small poster hung there for about a month, but now there is no sign of it.

I have not heard of White Rose again, until reading your post.

Regards,
John.

M Courtney
Reply to  John J. A. Cullen
November 17, 2021 2:49 am

It’s obviously Yorkists inspired by finding the true King’s grave in a Leicester car park.

Dennis
November 17, 2021 1:10 am

All of the activism most of us oppose in our home countries was described on Sky News Australia this evening as if modelled on the Communist China, Chairman Mao Zedong Cultural Revolution.

The “Great Reset” (Build Back Better, New Green Deal) is another indicator that people ignore at their peril.

TonyG
Reply to  Dennis
November 17, 2021 12:33 pm

Ai WeiWei (Chinese artist and political prisoner) had something to say about that: https://twitter.com/FiringLineShow/status/1459209079830765574?

commieBob
November 17, 2021 1:12 am

Blame the internet.

Marshal McLuhan studied media. It is argued that he predicted the internet. The thing about the internet is that it allows mass two-way communication. Contrast that, for instance, with television where the communication is entirely in one direction.

Misinformation is easily spread on the internet. On the other hand, the corrections to that misinformation are also easily spread. That means we actually have some kind of marketplace where ideas can compete. (On the other other hand, China is doing its best to prove that Orwell was right.)

Similar themes are echoed by Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore.

In light of the above, anyone who posits a conspiracy theory to explain anti-vaxers or CAGW skeptics or Facebook censorship, is poorly educated and hasn’t been properly paying attention.

MarkW
Reply to  commieBob
November 17, 2021 6:35 am

The thing about the internet is that it allows mass two-way communication.

Not when they turn off comments.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 12:09 pm

Yahoo News is STILL ‘temporarily’ suspending comments. They loosened up for awhile, allowing comments on fashion, entertainment, and similar gossip. However, I suspect that others, like myself, took advantage of the opportunity to complain about how shallow they are.

TonyG
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 12:34 pm

Not when they turn off comments.

As most media outlets have done,

climanrecon(@climanrecon)
November 17, 2021 1:19 am

This is classic lefty thinking, whenever they lose an election there simply has to be some skulduggery involved, a great attitude as it helps to keep them losing elections.

MarkW
Reply to  climanrecon
November 17, 2021 6:36 am

That and new legislation to make it easier for their side to control the results of the next election.

bonbon
November 17, 2021 1:20 am

The original White Rose network was the Family Scholl and many others who handed out anti Nazi leaflets at Munich Uni, and were promptly executed in 1943 .
As one enters LMU today, one sees this :
https://munichmag.de/auf-den-spuren-der-weissen-rose-in-muenchen
English :
https://www.weisse-rose-stiftung.de/white-rose-memorial-exhibition/

In case anyone thinks they can hijack that for another agenda, well, look at the website.

The Great Reset of NetZero to be pushed by UN Climate Finance Advisor Marc Carney ruthlessly, relentlessly focused (his own words) certainly does not sound like the State that the White Rose advocated.

philincalifornia
Reply to  bonbon
November 17, 2021 3:42 am

Thanks for the history lesson bonbon – depressing though it was to read. More here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose

Coming from Yorkshire and having lots of coincidental white rose motifs and memorabilia, I’m all set. Has it started yet? ….. as they used to say in Ceaușescu’s Romania.

Leo Smith
November 17, 2021 1:22 am

People who are employed by conspirators naturally think that so is everyone else.

iggi
November 17, 2021 1:22 am

Of course ‘The Great Reset’ is a powergrab, interleaving Governments and corporations, notably BigTech, into decision making within anonymous ‘platforms’ outside public scrutiny and democratic influence. Communications/Data, Food and Health/Vaccines are explicit focus groups. And of course the climate breakdown narrative contains a bunch of misinformation, just think of ‘sinking islands’ and is equally used as ‘vector’ for all sorts of messages and agendas (vegetarianism, insurance, renewable industries etc).
How many journalists are really qualified for fact checking and judgement on conspiracies ?

griff
Reply to  iggi
November 17, 2021 1:34 am

Labelling the Great Reset and/or the UN as a powergrab is to me and many others conspiracy theory.

bonbon
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 1:54 am

It is H.G. Wells’ Open Conspiracy – see link above.

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 3:51 am

Yes, you never do let a lack of any data stop you from saying idiotic things do you griff?

As Leo Smith pointed out above

People who are employed by conspirators naturally think that so is everyone else.”

The conspiracies at the BBC and within the climate fake-scientist community were well exposed (with names) in many places that your cognitive dissonance won’t allow you read..

griff
Reply to  philincalifornia
November 17, 2021 5:48 am

what, so called ‘climategate’?

I’ve looked hard at that and see only cherry picked extrapolation beyond the evidence.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:40 am

So emails showing how the so called climate scientists were cherry picking the data and working to exclude any science that refuted their work, was just cherry picking?

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:40 am

Which, of course, sums up what your looking hard is worth.

Redge
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 4:31 am

Griff mate,

The great Reset was announced in January 2021 at the 51st World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting, which suggested, and I quote direct from that most trusted of sources, Wiki

The World Economic Forum generally suggests that a globalised world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of multinational corporations, governments and civil society organizations (CSOs).

I also quote direct from the paper “The Role of Public and Private Actors and Means in Implementing the SDGs: Reclaiming the Public Policy Space for Sustainable Development and Human Rights”:

..it is high time to counter these trends, reclaim public policy space and take bold measures to strengthen public finance, rethink PPPs and weaken the grip of corporate power on people’s lives.

If that isn’t a power grab, what is?

griff
Reply to  Redge
November 17, 2021 5:50 am

Is that any different from the people who have run the world over the last 150 years and more?

what I do not see is our rulers inventing a pandemic and inventing a climate crisis to allegedly assert a control they already have had for decades

Redge
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:02 am

Mate,

I responded to your of the power grab being a conspiracy theory asking if that isn’t a power grab, what is

Your response doesn’t acknowledge that maybe it is a power grab and not a conspiracy theory as shown by the links provided

We all make mistakes

At least have the decency to accept you are wrong

griff
Reply to  Redge
November 17, 2021 6:30 am

It isn’t a power grab if you have the power already, is it?

Redge
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:08 am

I may be misunderstanding here, Griff, but above you said

Is that any different from the people who have run the world over the last 150 years and more?

And now your saying

It isn’t a power grab if you have the power already, is it?

Do the people who have “run the world over the last 150 years” have the power of not?

If not, that must mean the people in power are not the same as the ones who have been in power for 150 years or more i.e. socialists.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:12 pm

Yes, if the goal is to get even more power!

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:41 am

Who are these people who have run the world for the last “150 years and more”?

And griff whines about conspiracy theories.

griff
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 10:10 am

The rich industrialists, landed gentry and national govts…

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:24 pm

You really have no connection with reality, do you.

LdB
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:42 pm

Griff >> The rich industrialists, landed gentry and national govts…

Please explain how they run the world?
Do they buy politicians?
In democracies do they buy votes?
Do they buy police and Justice?

This is like an episode of “Pinky and the Brain” how does one control the world?

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 3:25 am

WTF?

Redge
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:14 am

what I do not see is our rulers inventing a pandemic

Me neither.

I think the pandemic is one of two things:

i) Natural
ii) A Chinese experiment that went wrong.

Either way, I think closing down the economy was the wrong thing to do, but isolating the vulnerable should have happened

I don’t mind wearing a mask because it’s not about protecting me, it’s about protecting people who are vulnerable to this sort of virus

The “climate crises”, however, is invented – there is no crises in the climate.

Climate is just fine.

(I’ll probably get lots of down marks for this comment, but I don’t care)

buggs
Reply to  Redge
November 17, 2021 11:32 am

I’m not going to down vote you but I will question your mask faith.

If a medical mask only constrains to 6 microns and the contagion in question is 3 microns (i.e. smaller than the limit of containment by the mask) how is said protection happening?

Further, most masks being worn are non-medical, aren’t regularly washed and don’t even constrain to 6 microns, what exactly are they helping with?

I have an acquaintance that wants to wear a mask going forward as he is convinced that the mask has kept him from having even a mild cold over the last year (he didn’t clarify the first six months of the pandemic which had mask mandates as well). I asked him if he felt any of the following might have contributed more:

Radical change in behavior:

  • not going to work in a crowded workplace
  • not going to social events either small (family gathering) or large (concert, sporting event)
  • ordering groceries for pick up or delivery rather than going shopping himself
  • no longer touching railings or other structures out of fear of picking something up
  • altering behavior so that no longer randomly touching nose/mouth/eyes
  • regular use of hand sanitizer(I guess our concerns over anti-bacterial resistance are done with for the time being)
  • regular washing of hands, which apparently was a novel concept for 50% of Canadians

The answer was no, it was the mask.

Perhaps someone can verify with data, but I am seeing that Florida now has a much lower case load than California. The former being the wild west, so to speak, the latter being full on restrictions. Does that provide evidence that masks and lockdowns work or the contrary? No question Florida had significant caseload and mortality but California has always been comparable. An unintentional experiment but it may be informative.

For the record, I also agree that the pandemic was likely natural or probably accidental release (premature?) and that it is very real. I also believe we have grossly over-represented the mortality due to Covid-19. I believe the mortality is more significant than common flu but I believe that has been exaggerated dramatically.

Redge
Reply to  buggs
November 17, 2021 11:42 am

I can agree with most of what you say.

My view of this part is a little different from yours:

If a medical mask only constrains to 6 microns and the contagion in question is 3 microns (i.e. smaller than the limit of containment by the mask) how is said protection happening?

The virus itself can easily pass through the type of mask you can buy in your local shop. The virus, however, needs a carrier to transfer from person to person.

That carrier, phlegm or spittal, will not pass through a mask unless the mask isn’t being worn properly.

I really don’t have a problem wearing a mask in public if it makes people feel at ease, and it allows us to get out and about.

JMHO

TonyG
Reply to  buggs
November 17, 2021 1:48 pm

“I have an acquaintance that wants to wear a mask going forward as he is convinced that the mask has kept him from having even a mild cold over the last year”

I still haven’t seen any real-world study (as opposed to lab studies or models) that show surgical or cloth masks help anything, and I have seen several that show they don’t help. But that subject has already been beaten to de@th around here, so I’ll leave it at that.

I can’t help but wonder what’s going to happen to your acquaintance when something like a nasty flu finally DOES slip past his (non-immune) defenses?

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 10:39 am

Griff, respectfully, please identify “… the people who have run the world over the last 150 years and more.”

MarkW
Reply to  Dave Fair
November 17, 2021 12:25 pm

In griff’s mind, as well as the “minds” of most leftists, the fact that they aren’t in charge of everything is all the proof they need of the claim that there evil people who run the world behind the scenes.

iggi
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 4:35 am

Fine, the “Great Reset” favors influence of Big Corporations outside public scrutiny etc. etc.
based on proposed transition to ‘multistakeholder consultations’ on global matters. A web search for [More than 170 Civil Society Groups Worldwide Oppose Plans for a Big Tech Dominated Body for Global Digital Governance] might provide some more insights from a source an open mind would trust, in my estimation.

griff
Reply to  iggi
November 17, 2021 5:50 am

The same people who run the USA via funding the Republican party?

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:43 am

The Republican party runs the USA????

Griff, have you ever been in contact with any form of reality known to science?

philincalifornia
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 7:44 am

He just got the party wrong. A simple mistake if you don’t live in the USA, especially if you also don’t have any comprehension skills.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:26 pm

BTW, almost all of the billionaires who contribute, contribute exclusively to the Democrat party.

Dave Fair
Reply to  iggi
November 17, 2021 10:43 am

The “self-selected” rulers might be a tipoff to the true nature of the planned result of such a power grab.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:38 am

And there he goes again.
Griff is famous for declaring that anything he’s told not to believe is just a conspiracy theory.

griff
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 10:11 am

and yet many climate skeptics believe in conspiracy theories.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:27 pm

Once again, griff doesn’t know the difference between reality and whatever it is he is being told to believe today.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 3:29 am

WTF? (again)
This time for Griff’s even more breathtaking stupidity?
Does he do it deliberately?
Apparently not, he simply can’t help it!

griff
November 17, 2021 1:32 am

Well how many times have I read in these comments people warning about ‘marxists’ and ‘leftists’ and agenda 21/30 and the communists switching to green issues post end of soviet Union and I don’t know what else?

There is a strong stream of conspiracy theory among climate skeptics – and as I’ve said here before, it undermines the argument which should be based on science alone.

lee
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 1:46 am

You mean the science that you don’t post?

M Courtney
Reply to  lee
November 17, 2021 3:03 am

He’s right though.
If there was a lefty plot dominating the world we would do better in elections.
There are a lot of crazies here.

Lrp
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 3:19 am

There doesn’t have to be a lefty plot aimed at world domination, but there’s a big national and international institutional consensus on what’s causing climate change and how to stop it.

M Courtney
Reply to  Lrp
November 17, 2021 4:35 am

Now that’s true. But that’s not an organised planning group with ulterior motives.
That’s just that AGW is very useful to many institutions.

An obvious example is every Earth Sciences academic department in the world. Their funding increased dramatically with AGW becoming politically useful. They all lose their jobs (or at least the post-grads they are responsible for lose their jobs) if the scare goes away.

No organisation of departments – just mutual interest.

This idea is correct. It is not what makes WUWT look ridiculous.

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:45 am

That’s true, there is a large group of people comited to maintaining the flow of free stuff, and they don’t care how many of people have to be enslaved to protect it.

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 5:02 pm

When a leftist runs against a far leftist, and the leftist wins. This is proof that the right controls everything.

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:44 am

It’s not the elections that you are failing at. It’s the collapsing economies that keep undermining your goals.

LdB
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 6:51 pm

That and people see the lefty solutions as worse than the problem 🙂

LdB
Reply to  M Courtney
November 17, 2021 6:50 pm

It’s the Media the left seems to have an huge number disparity. It seems like journalism uni studies is like a lefty boot camp. There are some ultra right journos but they are very few and usually subject to hate from mainstream journo’s.

In Climate Science you have almost 100% lefties because the pushed solution requires that. The funny part about Climate Scientist is they never stop to think are the best people to provide the solution. If you take STEM science they do all the hard research but it is generally other fields Engineering, Computer Science, Economics etc which provides the solutions.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  lee
November 18, 2021 3:32 am

You mean by science the kind of stuff published by the trio of morons at the BBC and your favourite Grauniad?

It’s all you ever quote when you keep claiming floods in 2021 in Germany were unprecendented!

Gregory Woods
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 2:46 am

Griffy: AGW is a political (and religious?) movement, and not science-based…

griff
Reply to  Gregory Woods
November 17, 2021 5:41 am

I don’t think so: it springs from science papers detailed climate changes and impacts

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:46 am

If a science paper has no science in it, does it make any sound?

I’m still waiting for you to point to any impact. And no, things that have happened dozens of times in the last few hundred years, are not evidence.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 12:17 pm

If a science paper has no science in it, does it have an impact when it falls flat?

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 10:54 am

Detailed empirical evidence based on observations show that nothing is changing (frequency, rate-of-change or magnitude) in the various climate metrics that has not happened many times in the past, motivated “studies” notwithstanding. The output of UN IPCC CliSciFi models (shown to be wildly inaccurate) have been exaggerated by activists into predictions of doom – it is not science.

lee
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:35 pm

You mean like the IPCC?
Floods – In summary there is low confidence in the human influence on the changes in high river flows on the global scale. Confidence is in general low in attributing changes in the probability or magnitude of flood events to human influence because of a limited number of studies and differences in the results of these studies, and large modelling uncertainties.

IPCC AR6 WG1 11.5.4

Droughts – There is medium confidence in the ability of ESMs to simulate trends and anomalies in precipitation deficits and AED, and also medium confidence in the ability of ESMs and hydrological models to simulate trends and anomalies in soil moisture and streamflow deficits, on global and regional scales

IPCC AR6 WG1 11.6.3.6

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 3:36 am

Which you keep quoting from the fake news factory…

Your claim “I don’t think so” is an oxymoron.

You have proved time and again you can neither think,

nor have any idea what constitutes “science”, except on this occasion your forgot to use your favourite “the science” term.
Have you got dementia or ordinary amnesia?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gregory Woods
November 17, 2021 6:11 am

Definitely not science-based as far as the global temperature profile is concerned.

The “hotter and hotter” Hockey Stick global chart distorts the temperature record, hides the warmth of the recent and ancient past and proclaims that humans are now living in an era of unprecedented warming.

The only problem with this is none of it has ever been proven.

The official temperature record is not fit for purpose, and that’s the only “proof” the alarmists have for their claims.

The only temperature charts based in reality are the instrument-era, written, historical, regional temperature charts and all these charts refute the computer-generated global Hockey Stick charts. These charts show it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today.

We are not living in unprecedented warmth today, it was just as warm 90 years ago, going by the actual temperature readings written down by weather observers/recorders.

It was even warmer in the more ancient past than it is today, also, evidenced by things growing then, that can’t be grown now because the temperatures are too cold today to grow them.

There is no unprecedented warming today. There is no reason to worry about CO2.

CO2 is a minor actor in the Earth’s atmosphere. It doesn’t have the ability to push our temperatures higher than they were in the past, demonstrated by the fact that we are pumping more CO2 into the air today, yet the temperatures are cooling, and never got as warm as in the recent past. More CO2 and yet we are currently cooling off. Just the opposite of what the alarmists claim.

LdB
Reply to  Gregory Woods
November 17, 2021 6:59 pm

The problem with Climate Science is they want to not just study they want to control the outcomes and play into fields they aren’t remotely qualified like Power Generation, Engineering, Economics.

Lets take the point in case the goto answer from climate science … Prohibition.
Prohibition has never worked on a single thing it has been tried Drugs, Alcohol, Nuclear Weapons and Weapons in general. So only a climate scientist and fellow religious zealots would think it is going to work on fossil fuels.

If you think there is going to be and end to fossil fuels you might as well support anti-war, ant-nuke and dozens of other lost causes which involve prohibition.

Lrp
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 2:48 am

The greens agenda cannot be implemented in free market societies, but only in authoritarian ones, and only through full state control over economic and social life. It also needs to be implemented worldwide, for the same reasons as Marx envisaged for the communist revolution.

griff
Reply to  Lrp
November 17, 2021 5:42 am

what ‘greens agenda’?

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:46 am

Socialism for the most part.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 11:00 am

Read anything produced by the green mob, especially that stated by the UN (especially IPCC) leaders. They uniformly decry capitalism and propose socialism as the solution to our problems, climate or otherwise. Especially read Agenda 21 and Agenda 30.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:29 pm

My greens agenda is to have a salad with dinner.

Redge
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 4:34 am

You’ll need to wait a little until his paymasters hand down Griff’s “own words” 😉

griff
Reply to  Redge
November 17, 2021 5:43 am

and there you go: I put forward a divergent opinion and it must be because I am paid for it.

Redge
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 5:57 am

It was a joke, Griff, mate, hence the wink

And, Gosh! You replied to a comment – still no data though

griff
Reply to  Redge
November 17, 2021 6:27 am

My apologies -missed the emoji…

You don’t know how many people here actually do think I’m paid to comment…

There’s enough data out there on the web for you to look at and argue against

Redge
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:03 am

No worries, mate, these things happen

There’s enough data out there on the web for you to look at and argue against

Yes, I agree, so why not post the data when you make a claim?

Posting links to data would bolster your claims and make us look at things from your point of view

Most of us have an open mind, ready for new information, that’s why we’re called “climate sceptics”.

When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?

~ Paul Samuelson

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:49 am

Well, for the record, I don’t think you get paid for your drivel. Hence the post above suggesting the origin of the word “idiot” in the descriptor “useful idiot”.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:20 pm

Once again, you have ignored directly answering Eric’s question. The question was basically how you interpret the “Great Reset,” not what others on the web consider it to be.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:47 am

It’s not that you put forth a divergent opinion, it’s that you do it over and over and over again, totally ignoring all evidence that refutes what you wish to believe.

griff
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 10:05 am

Or perhaps that’s you? you really never do post any link to any evidence in your frequent objections to my posts…

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:30 pm

So I have to post links every time I’m refuting your lies?
No matter how many hundreds of times you’ve posted the same lies?

Lrp
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 1:06 pm

It’s not just divergent opinions; it’s denial of facts and wilful disinformation disguised as infantile idiocy

griff
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 17, 2021 5:43 am

a clumsy attempt to recognise that if recovery from the economic impact of covid is needed, perhaps there is scope for improving things as well as just going back to what was there before?

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:48 am

There was no economic impact of covid.
There was however a huge impact coming from the large and totally ineffectual government reactions to covid.

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:59 am

griff, normal people, i.e. non-libtardians are not going to be told what to do by people like you and your phony-elitist kleptocrat heroes.

“Improving things” = putting money in the bank accounts of nitwits who can’t get real jobs.

griff
Reply to  philincalifornia
November 17, 2021 10:06 am

I’m not telling you what to do.

I’m merely pointing out some facts and other opinions.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:31 pm

Things you believe to be facts, almost never are.
As to your opinions, since they aren’t based on any facts known to science, it’s hardly surprising that nobody pays any attention to them.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 11:03 am

Griff, please explain how you would “improve things” that the wonderful free-market capitalism has given us.

LdB
Reply to  Dave Fair
November 17, 2021 7:02 pm

That is the issue most have “build back better” is a great slogan now define the “better” please.

Dave Fair
Reply to  LdB
November 18, 2021 2:38 pm

“Better” as in a Five-Year-Plan.

Richard Page
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 4:45 am

“It undermines the argument which should be based on science alone.” – I agree Griffy, but you and others like you have completely ignored the scientific process and legitimate scientific studies which run counter to your ideology. What are the rest of us to do when you and people like you share a common ideology? Sharing a common ideology is not a conspiracy theory, nor is it collusion but when that ideology seems to encompass fringe points such as pushing the UN as a world government, the great reset, climate change alarmism and lockdowns as a healthy beneficial process; whilst appearing to be dominated by left-wing activists, then what the hell are the rest of us supposed to think? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, are you seriously going to insist that it’s just a banana?

griff
Reply to  Richard Page
November 17, 2021 5:45 am

I do not see any ideology in climate science: that’s coming entirely from your political viewpoint.

When I see some science not tainted by fossil fuel funded think tanks or driven by a political view from the outset, I’ll be happy to acknowledge it.

Only Judith Curry (mostly) seems to me to produce anything like science to support the skeptic argument.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:49 am

Who cares what your leaders say about their motives.
It’s like the Democrats who proclaim that bi-partisan means Republicans have to stop opposing them.

Richard Page
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 8:52 am

“I do not see any ideology in climate science.” This is the point I am trying to make, Griffy – we both look at the exact same thing; it quacks, waddles and looks like a duck. I call it a duck and you seem to call it a banana. If that isn’t an ideological perspective at odds with reality then I simply don’t know what else to call it? Delusions? Mental illness?

griff
Reply to  Richard Page
November 17, 2021 10:09 am

I see govts across the political spectrum in multiple nations accepting climate science … it does not look to me from that there is some underlying marxist/maoist/socialist agenda or shared ideology pushing something not true for some nebulous advantage.

Richard Page
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 2:02 pm

Do you not? Then I suggest you take off those blinkers and take another real hard look. Firstly those government’s are not from across the political spectrum – they all seem to be clustering around a single position; those outside of that position do not seem to be exhibiting the same enthusiasm as the others for climate change activism. Contrast the IPCC scientific paper with the summary for policymakers – the first was written by activist scientists, the second by politicians advancing a common activist agenda – they are completely different documents with huge discrepancies between the two. Open your eyes, smell the coffee, take the red pill, whatever it takes; we are being lied to by a minority pushing a fringe minority viewpoint.

LdB
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:08 pm

What I see is a lot of politicians whacking climate science around the ears because the junk they want as “a solution” is unattainable and unacceptable. Usually when you get to that point the normal thing is to create “Plan B”. You currently have some very important emission players on the edge of walking and actually digging in and saying not going to happen.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:24 pm

… not tainted by fossil fuel funded think tanks …

You deny being paid, yet think that others are paid by FFF organizations!

LdB
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 17, 2021 7:11 pm

It is like the whole BBC article the conspiracy is about the conspiracy of the other side 🙂

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 2:41 pm

Your “I do not see any ideology in climate science …” might be tempered if you read information relating to Climategate.

fretslider
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 4:57 am

“Well how many times have I read in these comments people warning about ‘marxists’ “

You’re dead right griff, Marxists they ain’t.

They are Maoists – complete with woke cultural revolution. Tear that statue down….

Last edited 2 months ago by fretslider
griff
Reply to  fretslider
November 17, 2021 5:46 am

Oh, my mistake.

so no lizard people involved then?

Alan the Brit
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 5:12 am

For the record, there are no “climate skeptics”, just those sceptical about the supposed causes of changes in climate!!! Many years ago just before the irrational mania of manmade climate changes got into its groove, you global warming promoters openly accepted that previous changes in climate was as a result of changes in the Sun, but mysteriously overnight such causes were dismissed as it all had to be caused by mankind, evil free-enterprise capitalism to be precise. As said, nature cannot pay taxation, only Human beings can pay, & the wealthy “democratic” West must pay so called developing countries for mysterious “damages” they are allegedly suffering to their environment!!! Just be open & honest Griff about what the whole scam is all about!!!

griff
Reply to  Alan the Brit
November 17, 2021 5:47 am

Well of course the sun is a major climate driver and science acknowledges that.

It also says that with the sun in a period of low activity over the last 38 years and rising temperatures, given the other evidence it is most likely human CO2 is now the current major driver of climate.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:52 am

I’m still waiting for some real world evidence that shows CO2 drives the climate.
Despite CO2 increasing by more than 50%, the world still hasn’t gotten back to the temperatures that were enjoyed during the Medieval Warm Period. Much less the Roman, Minoan and Egyptian Warm Periods or the Holocene Optimum.

Richard Page
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 8:59 am

“It is most likely human CO2 is now the current major driver of climate.”
How? Link to a serious scientific study that explicitly uncovers the direct link between anthropogenic CO2 and the climate, please? As an alternative, please link to a serious scientific study that explicitly identifies the precise amount of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (not estimated, modelled or based on estimated emissions) at this point in time, please?

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 11:23 am

Griff, the UN IPCC models assume your “…human CO2 is now the current major driver of climate.” and have been shown to over-estimate global warming by at least a factor of 2. What are rational people to think?

The summaries of UN IPCC reports and (especially) UN politicians’ statements do not reflect the actual science as presented in those reports. What are rational people to think?

Proposed government “investments” are not presented with detailed cost/benefit analyses. What are rational people to think?

Governments, scientist-activists, NGOs and the like are advocating fundamental changes to societies, economies and energy systems without detailed studies of the possible consequences. What are rational people to think?

Redge
Reply to  Alan the Brit
November 17, 2021 5:55 am

there are no “climate skeptics”

Not sure about that, Alan, I’m pretty sure the alarmists are climate skeptics – they seem to think climate never changes 😉

Sara
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:12 am

Griffy is missing the point, which is “herd mentality”, the Guiding Light (if you will) of climate change philosophy – or whatever you want to call it .

Anything is useful if it can act as a drawing card to call large groups of Hoomans together because it involves herd mentality, whether it’s a Beatles concert in Chicago in 1965 (that was FUN!!!) or a propaganda-like use of a branch of science that can be dummied down to draw in large groups of the gullible and uninformed (and unwilling to look stuff up).

This is especially true when mythos/religion/spirituality has taken a nose dive and people are looking for something to cling to, something ‘TO BELIEVE IN!!!!’, something that is actually tangible, which happens now to be C-L-I-M-A-T-E. Despite the sheer stupidity of referring to seasonal weather changes as climate, the uninformed, gullible and naive are clinging to the Climate Change thingy as if it were found somewhere in the one book that none of them read: the Bible.

Don’t misunderstand what I’ve said: there is no real difference between the near lunacy of Climate Change as a religion and Christianity (or any or belief system of any kind) because they are all belief systems. I’m simply waiting for the witch hunts and witch trials to start up.

If you think I”m exaggerating, read up on the history of how accusations of witchcraft were used as an excuse to exterminate people who dissented with their governments in the Middle Ages, never mind how the Roman government saw Jesus as a political threat and had him executed by suffocating on a cross.

I am NOT pounding religion here, just pointing out the obvious: climate change is rapidly becoming a New Religion. I keep wondering if the Followers of Climate Change will start genuflecting in front of trees and imbibe some fermented tree sap on weekends, and if they’ll have potluck suppers to discuss their beliefs in Climate Change and how to convert nonbelievers to it. Will they go door-to-door with canned hams, like the Mormons used to do?

Eventually, Climate Change becomes Climate Worship, and while you may think this is all ridiculous, well – it has happened before and is happening again. It’s just a new venue, that’s all.

griff
Reply to  Sara
November 17, 2021 6:29 am

Climate science is not a belief system.

Posting data about, say, arctic sea ice or climate patterns in the UK is not done for religious reasons, nor is there a belief system influencing those accepting the science and acting on it.

philincalifornia
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 8:10 am

“Posting data  ….”

This is how they dupe you griff. It’s not the data which, of course, is what it is, it’s the phony baloney interpretation of the data that you believe. You know, like the Arctic Sea ice decline is taking a respite this year, as you posted. YOU, with your infantile wide-eyed following of it, while pretending that you even know what science means, is the religious part of it.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:33 pm

griff really does like to do the irony.

There is not and never has been any data to support his belief system, but that will never stop him from repeating his many times refuted lies.

LdB
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:14 pm

FYI arctic sea ice and the UK are not the whole world.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 6:43 am

That’s funny, coming from griff who has never had any interest in science.
BTW, your own leaders have admitted to what they are really after.

griff
Reply to  MarkW
November 17, 2021 10:09 am

who? Dear old Boris and his right wing govt?

Kevin McNeill
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 11:33 am

There you are, proof positive of idiocy, Griff believes the UK Conservative party is right-wing. They aren’t and haven’t been for at least a generation or more.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 12:34 pm

It’s fascinating how socialists are so often called right wing, by those even further to the left.

LdB
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:24 pm

It’s okay we dub the UK the new crash test dummies. Lets look at the funny part about the UK positioning and the problems it faces in next few years.

The sewage and chemical treatment system is in shambles and they regularly discharge raw sewage into rivers and the ocean. They have had to relax the discharge of chemicals via those same pathways.

They have become reliant on power from Europe and as the french have shown with the fishing rights dispute they are quite prepared to use it as leverage.

They have set a date for mandate to EV only cars with the background they have no idea how they will generate the power to charge them all.

bonbon
November 17, 2021 1:53 am

Some have not read H. G. Wells : The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Conspiracy

Noting this author was Britain’s MI6 chief, have a look at the carry on since. ”This will ultimately “be a world religion.” Did he actually mean the climate religion, or the finance religion?

Andrew Dykes
November 17, 2021 1:56 am

I see the author describes herself as a “specialist disinformation reporter, BBC News”. Sounds about right, really.

fretslider
November 17, 2021 2:49 am

Marianna Spring
Specialist disinformation reporter, BBC News

Aka BBC climate reporter

Nial
November 17, 2021 2:52 am

“By Marianna Spring, Specialist disinformation reporter, BBC News”

The irony of it.

Peta of Newark
November 17, 2021 2:52 am

Quote:”The possibility that people might want to reject climate lockdowns and Covid lockdowns of their own volition does not seem to occur to BBC conspiracy theorists”

OK
How do you ‘reject‘:
a faceless nameless nobody switching your electricity off, remotely via a Smart Meter?
how do you reject a Police Patrol disabling your electric car as you drive along
how do you reject your car number plate being read every 5 miles, currently and on average, as you drive around and every time it is read, *everything* is logged- concerning time location tax insurance road-worthiness
how do reject everything you say and do online, into your phone and watch on TV being recorded
how do you reject having your face recognised if you go on a protest march, visit any all shops, pubs restaurants and now even the rest-rooms in such places
how do you reject a £10,000 fine being imposed upon you for attending said protest
how do you reject a police-person’ accusation that you are ‘making an anti-social noise’, while on your own, in any/all Public Places when it’s only your word vs theirs
how do reject police and bailiffs breaking into your home house wherever to collect said fines
how do reject being arrested and jailed for protesting the bailiffs
how do you reject being ‘picked off’ individually
how do you reject being under video surveillance, (iow: Suspicion) as soon as you step outside your home
how do you reject the argument that “If you’re not doing anything wrong, you’ve nothing to worry about”
how do you reject a Statute Book that would sink the Titanic and is growing daily

Because most of those things are in place and operating now while the rest are being forced upon us

Very simple, as far as UK goes anyway
You follow the lead of the truckers, nurses, hospitality staff, care home workers, food processors/packers, vegetable pickers & farm labourers, ambulance & bus drivers..
You go home to Eastern Europe

What about everybody else?

Simple again, you do drugs. You escape ‘In Your Head’
As in fact encouraged by Government, soon to be: Government Decree
You are told that it is ‘good’ to eat sugar, drink alcohol, do cannabis and watch TV – while The Wars on all other ‘drugs’ were/are abject failures. iow Tacitly given the AOK

Nice picture innit. My dash-cam shot a video as I drove past this place recently, (it’s even more hideous in real life than this photo) but the resolution was/is crap.
Why doesn’t it ever feature in Horror Photos of global climate warming change ‘in action’ such as power stations do?
Because it is The Root Cause of this entire ongoing and worsening, train-wreck

maxresdefault - Copy.jpg
pigs_in_space
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 18, 2021 3:48 am

I left decades ago cos I saw it all coming!
Oddly enough a lot of Eastern Europe is becoming a lot freer than the UK………. I meet expats regularly in my part of the EU today and always ask them why they left.

The (weary) look in their eyes and their intention never to return sums it all up!
The UK the seat of the industrial revolution…now with no industry left.
How did they manage to do all that damage in 30yrs?

Mike Edwards
November 17, 2021 3:10 am

well below the BBC journalistic standards”

No, this material is spot on current BBC “journalistic” standards.

The BBC is now a mouthpiece for environmentalism and is fully bought in to Climate Delusion®. No other viewpoints are allowed and they must be denigrated at all costs. Truth and freedom of speech have no place here – this is propaganda “to save the world”.

I’m tempted to say “welcome to Big Brother”, but of course that would never do – “welcome to Big Auntie” is the right phrase (with apologies to George Orwell).

Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 3:56 am

From the article: “According to researchers at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a think tank that researches global disinformation trends”

Who will watch the Watchers?

Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 4:03 am

From the article: “In my opinion there is room to debate the true nature of the Great Reset programme, but calling it “unfounded”, as in non-existent, is at best plain ignorant”

I’m not sure how globally organized the “Great Reset” is, but there doesn’t have to be a central control in a situation like this. Instead, individual nation’s Elites can impose authoritarian rule on their populations without coordinating with all the other Authoritarians around the world.

Either way, world-wide conspiracy, or local authoritarianism, the people lose.

Therefore, the people should reject those who would Lord it over them.

That’s what we are in the process of doing here in the United States. Wish us success.

buggs
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 11:52 am

The U.S. remains the last hope.

As for how organized is the Great Reset?

Our esteemed sock prince used the phrase initially about 12 months prior to Biden using it. The U.S. has never given a damn about what Canada thinks. The notion that the administration to the south of the border and Canada came to use the same catch phrase, also picked up after Australia and Great Britain have been using it, is simply too much of a coincidence for coordination to not be happening.

I truly hope that those that are jeopardizing their jobs in the U.S. over vaccination mandates and subsequent votes against far left policies will have great success and the Biden puppet will lose midterms and in 2024. I do not wish for Trump to return as he is far too polarizing.

Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 4:13 am

From the article: “In Britain there is a “malicious communication act”, which makes it an offence to distribute written material which causes offence or anxiety, which has been used to arrest people campaigning against British government Covid policy. I am not a lawyer, but in my opinion it is only a matter of time before this act is used against people who oppose other high priority government policies in Britain. Be careful what electronic footprints you leave, your words could be misinterpreted. Above all, stay within the law, wherever you live.”

The first thing the Authoritarians do is take away Free Speech.

The law referred to above is a threat to your freedom. Who gets to decide what is malicious? If you have Free Speech, noone gets to decide. That’s the way it should be, because everyone has an opinion, and sometimes those opinions don’t agree, and people with opinions should not be making decisions about who can and who can’t speak..

The remedy for malicious speech is MORE Speech. If someone gets malicious, someone else can call them out on it. That’s Free Speech. Everybody gets a say, even the morons. If there is Free Speech, the Morons will not prevail. Let ’em talk. Then smack them down with your Free Speech.

We still have Free Speech in the United States, but the radical Democrats are trying to change that. We won’t let them change it.

Redge
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 4:38 am

an offence to distribute written material which causes offence or anxiety

I’m offended and anxious about all the “we’re all gonna die because of climate change nonsense”

Who do I sue?

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 17, 2021 11:33 pm

The real problem with censorship is ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 17, 2021 4:19 am

“Specialist disinformation reporter”.

Priceless!

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 17, 2021 4:27 am

The fool doesn’t have a clue. The ‘White Rose’ is named after ‘Die Weisse Rose’, which was a similarly organised anti-fascist resistance group in Nazi Germany, the only one in fact. All its members have been executed on discovery.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
November 17, 2021 4:30 am

I mean Marianna Spring, of course.

Redge
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
November 17, 2021 4:39 am

Who else could you have meant? 😉

Michael in Dublin
November 17, 2021 4:48 am

An intelligent and perceptive person can explain why someone who refuses to answer the hard questions and resorts to denigrating the questioner has the weakest of cases but cannot afford to admit this. This applies equally to climate alarmists and covid alarmists.

I would ask the BBC and climate alarmists a single question: Why do billionaires, who push governments to squeeze billions from the masses for climate policies, not lead by using their vast fortunes to show us this can work? If climate change is going to lead to the demise of mankind and they really cared, they would not hesitate giving up their wealth.

Amac
November 17, 2021 4:52 am

What a job title: specialist disinformation reporter. Shows the BBC is taking positions and no longer objective.

max
November 17, 2021 4:57 am

There is one, it sells the idea that a trace atmospheric gas, of which less than 4% is “manmade”, is going to cause a catastrophic change in the environment of the world, if it can manage to raise the “global average temperature” by more than 1.5 degrees C.

Joseph Zorzin
November 17, 2021 5:01 am

“BBC journalistic standards we once thought we had a right to expect”

Reminds me, as a small child, in the mid ’50s, visiting my grandparents here in Massachusetts- I loved listening to their ancient 4′ tall wood radio, probably made in the ’30s. I’d always tune into the BBC. I was so impressed by the speakers- as they sounded God like.

Sara
November 17, 2021 5:09 am

Shadows everywhere: The possibility that people might want to reject climate lockdowns and Covid lockdowns of their own volition does not seem to occur to BBC conspiracy theorists. – article

This is all kind of turning into something out of an Alfred Hitchcock movie. I’m not waiting for Norman Bates to leer at his dried-up old husk of a dead momma, nor am I on tenterhooks waiting for a flock of hysterical sparrows to come flying out of the chimney. But this whole thing — all the hysterics and non-factual info [stuff with no backup, just hysterics] is moving more and more in the direction of a cross between Monty Python (Bring our yer dead!), “The Birds”, and a Lon Cheney movie.

Seriously, the whole thing has become thoroughly obnoxious but without being kept aware of it by site like WUWT, the majority of us might be much worse off. Skepticism is rampant in me right now – skepticism about LOTS of things, mostly due to the hysterics in the entire Greenbeaner shtick about climate/pandemics/CO2 loads, etc., etc., etc.

Can’t afford to look away from this train wreck, and I do sometimes wonder just how much more crazy pants stuff is coming down the pike. This has all snowballed into money grubbing ego feeding frenzies by CAGWer political specimens.

However, there is some hope: most of it seems to be hot air. It’s probably the only thing keeping us out of the next ice sheet growths and advances.

Ted
November 17, 2021 5:52 am

If it weren’t for projection, the left would have no accusations to levy against their opponents.

MarkW
Reply to  Ted
November 17, 2021 12:36 pm

If you ever want to know what a leftist is doing, just look at what they are accusing their opponents of doing. And double it.

Rhs
November 17, 2021 6:02 am

I wonder if it is easy to get into an event like this for free? Here in the US, large events typically need a ton of support staff, most of the work can suck such as being a caterer or the equivalent of an usher.
However, it’s a cheap legal way to be the proverbial fly on the wall.

Jeffery P
November 17, 2021 6:04 am

The Sars-Cov-2 virus is real and so is the Covid-19 disease. However, the disease is fatal to a small and well-known subset of the population. The risk factors are non-controversial. Deaths of healthy people under 50 are few and far between. Younger people have a near-zero statistical chance of death from Covid. So how did it become the plague of the 21st century?

griff
Reply to  Jeffery P
November 17, 2021 6:25 am

But very many survivors have only survived thanks to weeks in hospital/ICUs.

and the death rate is far worse than flu.

Jeffery P
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 7:39 am

For what age griff? For what age?

Judging by your response, I’m not sure you understand. Most of the people who get Covid don’t know they have it. They are either asympomatic or the symptoms are so mild they believe they have a cold.

Let me repeat, the disease is fatal to a small and well-known subset of the population. The flu however, strikes young and old alike. Children are at a higher risk of the death from the flu than from Covid. Adults are very unlikely to catch Covid from children.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
November 17, 2021 11:48 am

So, Griff, what is society to do? The ChiCom virus gave me WuFlu three times, the latest bout months after the two jabs.

My personal belief is that the ChiCom virus will be with us forever and society cannot maintain hysteria forever. Normal people will carry on wit