From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
Finally the Telegraph seems to be growing a pair of balls:
.
Keir Starmer’s abandonment of the pledge to spend £28 billion a year on green projects is a terrible idea which will deprive Britain of the massive wealth which Joe Biden has created with his Inflation Reduction Act. It will fry us and drown us.
I know it must be true because I heard it this morning on the Today programme. There were no fewer than five separate items on it, by my count. First we had Justin Rowlatt telling us we are all going to go to hell in a handcart because global temperature last year averaged 1.5 Celsius above 19th century levels.
Then we had Prof Sir Bob Watson, former chair of the IPCC, telling us that the Earth’s weather “far exceeds anything that is unacceptable” – as if it were somehow something that is decided by world leaders. That comment says much about the mentality of people who populate these international global non-government organisations: they really do see themselves as gods. Watson went on to claim that climate change is damaging agricultural productivity when data from the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation shows the direct opposite – that yields for most of the world’s most important crops are increasing.
Then there was Barry Gardiner, Labour’s former climate change spokesman, hauled on the show and invited by Nick Robinson to say that Starmer had got it utterly wrong, and allowed to spew out spurious guesstimates on how much climate change is costing the UK. “Storms are getting bigger,” he said, again directly contradicting the evidence – the State of the Climate report published annually by the Royal Meteorological Society shows a distinct downwards trend in average and extreme wind speeds in the UK in the past 30 years.
It has come to something when Dale Vince comes across as the – relative – voice of reason, suggesting that it might actually be bad thing for the Labour Party first to review public finances before it piles another £28 billion a year on the massive debts that face future generations. In vain did I wait for someone on the Today programme to make the point that previous attempts by UK governments to subsidise green industries – like the infamous Britishvolt factory in Northumberland – haven’t exactly created wealth or jobs. I waited, too, for someone to argue that actually Biden’s green bungs aren’t the only story behind the US having faster economic growth than Britain.
Another somewhat crucial matter is the much lower price of energy in the US, which has come about mainly because US administrations – Biden’s included – have unapologetically pursued a policy of energy security and self-sufficiency, built on huge expansion of shale oil and gas. Nor, by the way, did I hear anyone make the point that Britain’s carbon emissions are less than one per cent of the global total – and that Starmer will not have his fingers on the Earth’s thermostat even if he reaches Downing Street.
Global temperatures are clearly rising. It will be in everyone’s interest if the world reduces carbon emissions – even if it is far from obvious why the climate of the 19th century represented optimum conditions for human civilisation. Investment in green technology should be encouraged, but preferably not through government ministers trying to pick winners – lower taxes would be a good start, to encourage the market to separate the good from the bad. But no, Labour’s £28 billion a year pledge wasn’t going to save the world, and no, Starmer is not condemning us to a long, painful death by extreme weather by dropping it. That is just a little fantasy of the Today programme.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/08/the-bbcs-latest-climate-coverage-makes-xr-look-moderate/
Clark’s done three notices in the last week including one on heat pumps. But still he trots out we need to decrease “carbon”. The DT in general is going to war over Net Zero polices. Every day there’s a new article destroying the consensus. There was a good one on Orsted. Comments below the line are now pile ons against any true believer that’s silly enough to comment. It’s great to watch and participate in. The shoe, in the DT, at least, is finally on the right foot.
and the Labour Party have just backed down on their pledge to borrow £28bn every year for green “investment “. Even they, who gave us the climate change act and the lunatics in the CCC are starting to wake up to the madness.
Never believe anyone who doesn’t know the difference between carbon dioxide and carbon!
This is a ridiculous throwaway. It clearly lacks any understanding of how Earth’s energy balance is regulated and what is actually causing the northern hemisphere to warm and a good deal of the Southern Hemisphere to cool.
In my view its a sop to the ultra greens and nothing more.
It would be useful if a reason could be given as to why it will be in everyone’s interest for the world to reduce carbon emissions.
I think the author is assuming that CO2 and “Global rising temperatures” are connected.
There’s no evidence that is the case, but maybe this author doesn’t understand that.
AND if a reason could be given for the ridiculous notion that a cooler climate is better, since the reverse is true.
Since 1850 we are told that the level of CO2 has increased from 280 ppm to 420, a difference of 140 ppm. In terms more readily understood, that is 14 thousandths of 1%, or less than 1 thousandth of 1% per decade. I seriously doubt that a measurement of that accuracy is even possible, let alone plausible when comparing the amount of a trace gas atop an active volcano in the tropics today with historic ice cores in the coldest part of the planet. I am yet to be convinced that there has even been an increase when there are records of CO2 levels similar to today going back to the early 1800’s:
https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/180CO2_summary.pdf
Mr. Will, Your friendsofscience CO2 chart shows a huge bump in airborne CO2 during WWII and a rapid decline thereafter. I have always thought that there should be an up-bump during the war due the furious pace of industrial production and fighting (all using lots of fossil fuel) especially compared to the meger pace of our economies during the great depression. As to the decline afterwards, that to is a puzzlement. Modern arguments insist that CO2 added to our air will last for hundreds of years and will not decline quickly once the additions are stopped. Yet your chart shows a rapid decline during the economic difficulties post war as suggested by the Carbon 14 data following the ending of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. None of the other CO2 charts I have seen show any bump at all during WWII and no rapid decline at any time other than seasonal declines. Where did the bump chart come from? Do you have any information which would verify its correctness?
Oops, Right-Handed Shark, not Mr. Will.
Try these links:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hermann-Harde/publication/373256379_Science_of_Climate_Change_About_Historical_CO2-Data_since_1826_Explanation_of_the_Peak_around_1940/links/64e381640453074fbda51bc0/Science-of-Climate-Change-About-Historical-CO2-Data-since-1826-Explanation-of-the-Peak-around-1940.pdf?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicHJldmlvdXNQYWdlIjoicHVibGljYXRpb24ifX0
https://friendsofscience.org/library-climate-science/?categories=CO%E2%82%82+History+
Just above the flat earthers, are the two points make a climate trend alarmists.
It is self-evident the BBC should no longer be allowed to comment on climate. One of its more ridiculas camments two days ago was of ‘A stunning image of a young polar bear drifting to sleep on an iceberg.’ Supposedtly, the photo is real, as it won an award, but it sure looks fake to me.
The BBC’s vomit inducing comment was, “His thought-provoking image is a stark reminder of the integral bond between an animal and its habitat and serves as a visual representation of the detrimental impacts of climate warming and habitat loss.
It’s so bad that there were roughly 6000 polar bears in the early 60’s and now only more than 30,000 survive.
I just saw a headline…
Famed climate scientist wins million-dollar verdict against right-wing bloggers
Can they appeal?
Possibly, if Steyn’s health allows it.
Frankly, I was gobsmacked by the verdict.
I was disappointed but not surprised that Mann’s lawyer played his Trump card and that wins hands down in DC. Where else would you get 95% of the voting citizenry favouring a senile career politician over a sitting President with an impressive economic record.
“Finally the Telegraph seems to be growing a pair of balls”
No they haven’t, they’ve just shoved a pair of socks down their pants, instant fake balls.
How do you know? Have you looked?
This today, from Christy Cooney, tucked away at the bottom of very cold and multiple flood warnings in weather reports provided by Met Office and BBC Weather:
“The UK’s cold weather comes as the EU’s climate service says global warming has for the first time hexceeded [sic] the 1.5C warning limit across an entire year. World leaders promised in 2015 to try to limit the long-term temperature rise to 1.5C, a target seen as crucial to help avoid the most damaging impacts of climate change. Urgent action to cut carbon emissions can still slow warming, scientists say.”
The BBC staff don’t check their output, cannot write reasonable quality English, and do not tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Their website is littered with poor quality writing and inappropriate rubbish which has nothing to do with their role as a national broadcaster with no competition through the monies paid for TV licenses. They need to be turned loose as a subscription service only and then maybe they will pay attention to their users and stop being an echo chamber for the left by virtue of the guaranteed income they have.
Whilst they try to be all embracing they fail to double down on quality reporting and, instead, keep banging on with their agendas. It was obvious during COVID-19, which they got hopelessly wrong. It is the same with climate change. The BBC’s agenda is unhealthy and discriminates against much of its audience especially those disenfranchised by the UK’s poor electoral system. The BBC does not seem to understand that when you big up one thing you effectively discriminate against other things. To my mind it has too much money and zero responsibility for getting stuff absolutely right.
This is not the BBC of the golden era of broadcasting which now seems to have been a long, long time ago. This is now a cheap and nasty imitation of that, almost a parody of itself, and an echo of the present time Guardian. Nothing more than left wing rags with little desire to put all sides to readers, listeners and watchers.
The BBC has forgotten how to be popular.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68248437
The BBC is entirely elitist…
Yes.
“Their website is littered with poor quality writing”
Exactly, and as another example, they don’t understand the difference between the two words, bring & take.
And when a highly paid new reader cannot pronounce a foreigner’s name properly (Jean Charles Menez).
Illustrates the IQ level of their staff is in decline.
“even if it is far from obvious why the climate of the 19th century represented optimum conditions for human civilisation”
That is the only question that matters: is there such an ‘optimum’ atmospheric CO2 content and if so, what is it?
There is not a single scientist/researcher/self-appointed-pundit who can answer those two simple questions. And therefore: They know nothing, are clueless about what they are talking about.
I agree and would have written that if you hadn’t
It’s bigger than a breadbox but smaller than an elephant.
Apologies – accidentally down voted you whilst trying to reply humorously which I will now forget about !
Boy
Buggering
Communists
Formerly Savile & Co.
Buggering
Boys and
Communists
Hamas (freedom fighters)designated a terrorist organization by the UK government but obviously not by we at the BBC comes the message from the today program. The BBC with its extreme left wing views is like a foreign country with its own policies and maniacal stance on global warming and climate change; it has clear mission to sweep the Conservative government from power.
The endless propaganda and mindless support for any crazy scheme purporting to achieve net zero is given airtime and in true socialist style paid for by a tax levied – on all citizens – long the revolution and keep the red flag flying
Correction … all citizens – long live the revolution and keep the red flag flying.
Glad I stopped paying them over 10 years ago.
Saw this tripe within some news piece I was reading yesterday:
(From John Simpson on X):
“British politicians know perfectly well why the BBC avoids the word ‘terrorist’, and over the years plenty of them have privately agreed with it. Calling someone a terrorist means you’re taking sides and ceasing to treat the situation with due impartiality. The BBC’s job is to place the facts before its audience and let them decide what they think, honestly and without ranting. That’s why, in Britain and throughout the world, nearly half a billion people watch, listen to and read us. There’s always someone who would like us to rant. Sorry, it’s not what we do.”
I don’t know who this John Simpson is, but it’s a good thing I didn’t have food or drink in my mouth when I read it, else I would have sprayed it all over the monitors and keyboard at my office!
Talk about being COMPLETELY BLIND to your own shit. News flash, Mr. Simpson. THE BBC ISN’T DOING IT’S “JOB” AS YOU DESCRIBE IT. Not even close!!
Try applying that touted “impartiality” to the “climate change” bullshit!
Exactly, the BBC are fully paid up members and will happily spread biased climate change bullshit till the cows come home using the levied license fee. John Simpson liberated Kabul back in the day on behalf of the BBC
Just another leftie paid by the BBC.
To be fair John Simpson is what I would call an ‘old school reporter’ who has reported from many trouble spots around the world in his career and seems to understand the need to get his facts reasonably correct. He is a world away from the Justin Rowlatt’s and the talking heads on the Today programme.
“the massive wealth which Joe Biden has created with his Inflation Reduction Act”
Wow, somebody flunked economics 101.
Yes, they are clueless.
The Inflation Reduction Act is actually the Net Zero/Green New Deal. How much wealth has the Green New Deal/Net Zero added to the UK’s wealth? Answer: The Green New Deal/Net Zero is making UK citizens poorer.
Uh, Joke Biden is physically mentally and morally unfit for any job.
I believe a recent investigation about him having retained some top secret stuff- implied that he wasn’t too sharp. It’s in the news.
I think he’s arranging a summit with Napolean next week to discuss climate change. 😆😅🤣😂
Then we had Prof Sir Bob Watson, former chair of the IPCC, telling us that the Earth’s weather “far exceeds anything that is unacceptable”
WTF? That doesn’t even make any sense.
That is because it is not true. Bob Watson is seeing what he wants/expects to see, not what is really there. This is a common failing of climate change alarmists. It’s akin to a religious belief that is never questioned.
Even if it was true- that’s a stupid way to say it- my high school English teacher would have wasted him.
Interesting that in the current IPCC report, they can’t find any evidence that any of the everything-you-can-dream-of varieties of “bad weather” (for lack of a better overarching term) are getting EITHER more frequent OR more severe.
Does he not read the scientific reports??
And this is the UN body formed SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE of selling the “climate” propaganda to the world. And THEY can’t find any evidence that the weather is getting worse.
but… but… the alarmists want to end ALL floods, droughts, hurricanes, forest fires, melting glaciers, rising seas, etc. So even if they don’t get worse- that’s not good enough- we must make the world better than evva! /sarc
The moderation of comments on the BBC news site wrt climate has gone up a notch.
I had about 6 comments deleted as they ‘broke the house rules’!
Suggesting people check the original data apparently is too upsetting!!
Soon they’ll be demanding we who don’t believe to wear some kind of symbol on our clothing to identify us as non-believers.
Story tip
If anyone hasn’t gotten over Brexit it’s Sadiq Khan. Always campaigning for a return to the single market.
””Mayor urged to apologise to ‘hundreds of thousands’ of EU citizens wrongly slapped with Ulez fines
Last month Transport for London was accused of illegally obtaining the names and addresses of citizens on the Continent to issue fines.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/mayor-sadiq-khan-ulez-transport-for-london-tfl-b1138010.html
Not exactly helping his cause….
global temperature last year averaged 1.5 Celsius above 19th century levels.
No one really knows if that’s true and, if it is, if it’s indicative of some existential calamity. It’s an unverifiable and arbitrary figure like a 30mph speed limit on a residential street, constantly ignored with rare consequences.
Biden’s green bungs aren’t the only story behind the US having faster economic growth than Britain.
If true, so what? Is global growth a sporting event and are dubious figures a score that makes one country a winner over others?
Global temperatures are clearly rising. It will be in everyone’s interest if the world reduces carbon emissions
No one knows if global temperatures will continue to rise and no one knows for sure if carbon emissions are a cause of temperature rise or its result. Spending trillions on a transition away from hydrocarbon energy is only in the interest of a select few. The standard of living of everyone else will plummet. The readers of WUWT already know all this. As almost all of the important information disseminated on earth is done so by gossip and casual conversation, WUWT readers should devote their energy to spreading it among their friends, relatives, acquaintances and fellow workers. This effort can’t involve hysterical political diatribes but rather reasoned, sober arguments about aspects of the actual science and the negative prospects for the economy. A statement should be tied to a current situation or event related to the subject at hand. Climate realists must be the sober voices in the room.
On the positive side, once we have reached 1.5 degrees and are not all dead, we can ignore it and carry on living.
I get the sense that there is a tiny subset of politicians that realize the general population does not prefer unreliable unaffordable energy over reliable affordable energy.
Not sure why anyone would expect sense from the BBC, sense counters narrative control.
“Global temperatures are clearly rising.”
Yes, if one wants to believe the adjusted data. But if one wants to instead believe the world’s largest, unadjusted temperature record, the Climate Reference Network managed by the USNOAA which covers all of the lower 48 US States with around 110 or more weather stations positioned distant from any human structures, no. It has shown no change in the lower 48 record since the system was first placed in service in January of 2005, 19 years ago. If the globe is warming, just why this large chunk of land is not, about 6% of the whole world’s land area, is a bit of a puzzlement.
And January 2023, the hottest ever? Not in the US where January 2023 came in about 7F cooler than December 2023 which is below the zero line in NOAA’s chart. I suppose the alarmists will claim that the US southern border is clogged with millions trying to get in is because they are all climate refugees?
You can see the CRN data here: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/national-temperature-index/time-series/anom-tavg/1/0 Sorry, but my computer skills are inadequate to get the chart to copy and paste.
If we really want to know what is happening to the world’s temperature, why not expand the CRN all over the world? A few hundred more stations in Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia, costing likely a small fraction of what the US alone spends on climate modeling, should do it nicely.
“Keir Starmer’s abandonment of the pledge to spend £28 billion a year on green projects is a terrible idea which will deprive Britain of the massive wealth which Joe Biden has created with his Inflation Reduction Act. It will fry us and drown us.”
Chicken little couldn’t have said it better. Ross Clark deserves some form of award for his efforts in science fiction and fear mongering. This is what happens when a true artist of propaganda doesn’t allow his output to be inhibited by facts and observations. Oh and yes Biden
createddirected massive wealth with the misnamed IRA but that wealth went to all his friends in the trough-feeding club and was stollen from honest working citizens. The BBC like the majority of publicly funded broadcasters in the Western world deserves an early retirement from what they erroneously call journalism and what the average citizen would call professional fabrication.I am not convinced CO2 emissions have to be reduced. All of our efforts to reduce CO2 have achieved nothing, rather than decreasing CO2 levels have increased. It has cost us a fortune to accomplish exactly nothing. We are poorer, our power is more expensive and less reliable and our cost of manufacturing is rising to the point where it is shifted to other countries who don’t give a damn about CO2 emissions or any other emissions. It is a lose lose no matter how you look at it. This madness must stop now.
Global temperatures have risen over the last 300 years.
Whether those temperatures are still rising is anyone’s guess. We will only be able to determine that after the fact.
Whether CO2 is the cause of any of that warming has yet to be determined. Cleary the warming started long before CO2 levels started rising.