Conspiracy nuts have had a field day over the delayed release of work compiled by the British Intelligence Services warning of possible eco-collapse, mass extinctions, food shortages, conflicts and mass migration. In fact, the flimsy 14-page report is little more than a cutting job from the Guardian. Twenty-six mostly usual suspect sources are named, and highlights of the most extreme scenarios are cherry-picked in yet another Net Zero Blob effort to create population panic. Who knows how much taxpayer money was wasted on this compilation – AI could have done the job in under a minute. The obvious reason for the delay in publication was that someone intelligent in the Intelligence Services said something along the lines: ‘We can’t publish this BS, we will look complete idiots.’
The claim is that the original report was blocked at the top of the British government for being too negative. This is obvious nonsense. No claim of eco-system collapse and devastating climate change would ever be considered too extreme by almost the entire British political class, at least if past evidence is anything to go on. It appears that the report was compiled by the Joint Intelligence Committee, which coordinates the work of MI5 and MI6. It only saw the light of day with publication by the Government’s environment department following a Freedom of Information request from the Times newspaper. Green author and activist Rupert Read was suitably affronted by what was seen as a cover up.
The report is strewn with fake scares that have been widely debunked over the years. The surprise is to see some of them still being published by bodies with reputations to lose. It would be interesting hear Rupert Read debate some of these contentious matters, but, alas, along with Caroline Lucas, George Monbiot and Clive Lewis MP, he signed a 2018 letter to the Guardian stating that he would no longer lend his “credibility” by talking to those who question the opinions around human-caused climate change.
It is claimed in the report that the rate of extinction is tens to hundreds of times higher than the average over the past 10 million years, and this is said to “suggest a sixth mass extinction may be underway”. These types of claims require copious computer modelled estimates and assumptions, but they have a problem in connecting with observed reality. In a paper recently published by the Royal Society, it was found that extinction rates for animals and plants have “generally declined in the last 100 years”. Past extinctions are said to “strongly suggest” that climate change is not an important threat to biodiversity. The paper’s conclusions about extinctions are not new, and there is not a scintilla of scientific proof that the planet is in, or facing, a sixth mass extinction of animal and plant life.
All eco systems are said to be degrading around the world and population sizes of monitored vertebrate species are claimed to have fallen by an average of 68% since 1970. This is an old scare and arises from the bi-annual activist WWF ‘Living Planet’ report. Needless to say, this highly improbable figure has been effectively debunked. In 2020, a group of Canadian biologists examined a previous decline figure of 69% and showed that it was a statistical freak. They revealed that the estimate was driven by 2.4% of wildlife populations, adding, “if these extremely declining populations are excluded, the global trend switches to an increase”. Put simply, population of wildlife species often dramatically wax and wane – it’s called nature.
Collectors of laughable cherry-picking would have been delighted with a ‘case study’ that claimed falling coffee harvests are driving migration from central America to the USA. Not any more they are not, thanks, of course, to President Trump. Disease in 2012-2015 and what is characterised as “highly erratic weather” in 2018 led to particularly bad harvests. It happens, might be the realistic explanation. Although yields have recovered in recent years, production in this part of the world is hampered by primitive farming methods and small holdings. Central America is a world outlier. Elsewhere, coffee growing is booming with global production doubling over the last 30 years. Higher productivity farms in neighbouring Brazil and Columbia can often achieve double the hectare yields recorded in central America.
The report highlights biodiversity loss that it says will cause crop failures and intensify natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks. If only there was substantial evidence to back all this up. Nowhere in this silly report is it mentioned that crops yields are soaring almost everywhere you look due to the enormous boost recently supplied by hydrocarbon-produced fertiliser. If you want half the world to starve, stop drilling for oil and gas. As is common in activists’ agitprop, there is no mention either of the recent 14% ‘greening’ of the Earth caused by higher levels of carbon dioxide. A good case can be made that natural famine has been eliminated globally for the first time in human history.
A number of desert areas are reducing in size and some marginal areas sustaining a better quality of life. Trees around the world, including those in the Amazon, have been putting on bulk in CO2 party time. The millions, make that billions, of climate refugees on the move exist only in the fevered imaginations of Guardian readers. Meanwhile, natural disasters show no sign of intensifying, while the number of global human fatalities caused by them has dropped 99% over the last 100 years.
The report relies heavily on the computer modelled fantasy world of ‘tipping points’. By 2030 there is said to be a “realistic possibility” that the boreal forests will start to collapse. Of course the actual evidence suggests otherwise. In recent years, boreal forests in the northern hemisphere have become greener and more productive, helped by gentle climate warming and increased CO2 feeding levels. There has even been some measurable northwards expansion. The FOA Global Forest Resources Assessment indicates that boreal forests have shown relatively little net change in total area over recent decades.
This ridiculous scare alone gives us an idea about what is going on here. Humans affect the environment they live in, as do all species, but political extremists are given free rein to magnify to truly absurd levels the dangers of exploitation. Their solution is a neo-Malthusian command-and-control Net Zero takeover that would inevitably cause societal and economic collapse. When people are starving and destitute, biodiversity will be torn to shreds. Cobbling together 14 pages of reheated sandwich board-scares that have been doing the rounds for decades is an absurd waste of time for security professionals with presumably better things to do.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.
