Word is Millibrain will be dumped unceremoniously by the real author of this strategy, one Tony Blair, as he hates EM for some long past infraction, like footling around as leader of the opposition/creator of the Ed stone.
Then Net Zero will conveniently be shown to be a total crock, and subsequently The Establishment will try and drive us to distraction about something else.
Any guesses what that might be, apart from another (yawn) "I-slept-for-five-solid-years-in-a-chicken-coop-and-got-birdflu" type of pandemic?
Not shy about claiming credit for very expensive wind farms. Perhaps we should work out the average cost of the wind farms that he was responsible for.
I can't find the exact article but it's a Telegraph one relating to the sub station blackout. The theme, from multiple posters was 'control energy, control the country'.
The Left will never, ever permit net zero to be halted. It's a control system for them. After decades of trying various tools: war, politics (the EU), economics (enforced managed decline through crippling taxation) they've finally found one - the one everything else is based on: energy.
The Left are using the hoax of 'climate change' to force social change. They don't care about the environment - heck, they don't care about anything. For them this is a weapon to destroy what they hate and force their own bonkers ideology on everyone.
When decent folk like yourself present the evidence and the facts the Lefty laughs as he doesn't care. It's a pen to a battleship broadside (obviously not a UK battleship, mind). Until the hoax is exposed nothing will change.
"He replied, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”
Nah, they want a nice, docile, easily controlled poodle who'll agree with them. They've already selected from hordes of useless no hopers someone 'suitable'.
This is not a scientific post. It's a specialism in marketing, which is all 'climate change' is. A lie, forced on people to control them. Same as all such fascist propaganda.
This is a limited hangout. The 2050 Net Zero targets are not the issue. Having any Net Zero targets is the issue. Perpetuating the foundational lie of a manmade CO2 climate crisis is the issue.
We must repeal the Climate Change Act and we must fully acknowledge the lie that CO2 is a major driver of climate and that manmade CO2 is the cause of a non-existent climate crisis.
The lie must be exposed and all that sits on it must fall.
The Net Zero targets are the immediate issue: they are what are driving the economy to oblivion. The tasks are
1) to halt further net zero programmes by showing that the carbon budgets are not fit for purpose as government advice, grossly underestimating the cost and consequences and failing to note their infeasibility, replacing the target by one we have already surpassed by a wide margin, allowing flexibility in future energy policy - and getting on and implementing that
2) to emphasize that the UK contribution even if you assume IPCC official science would be an insignificant 0.003C by 2050 if it actually met its net zero aspirations - too small to measure.
3) to emphasize that the UK contribution is being completely swamped by the growing Asian economies in particular, making it irrelevant, and the idea of "leadership" has completely failed
4) to show, Bjorn Lomborg style, that again even if you assume IPCC science the superior strategy for handling any climate change is adaptation, not economic suicide
5) with those planks in place it becomes easier to question "the science" and finally show it is wrong.
Trying to tell people to abandon their religious belief first is not the way to persuade them.
Well, yes, but you're picking details from the intent: scrapping everything is the only rational option.
What frustrates me more than anything is that 'climate change' has nothing whatsoever to do with the environment. It's an economic of moving money from the earner to the state and from the state to rationing, through ever increasing cost. That's not a market. It's a control system.
You can't destroy one cell. You have to cut off the limb.
Rushing it won't achieve the desired outcome. As Charles Mackay observed
Every age has its peculiar folly; some scheme, project, or phantasy into which it plunges, spurred on either by the love of gain, the necessity of excitement, or the mere force of imitation. Failing in these, it has some madness, to which it is goaded by political or religious causes, or both combined.
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
The Co2 lie is what won't be collapsing any time soon, because it is crucial to the 'new normal' for Western societies. If net zero by 2050 is not grasped by the proletariat, not convinced because it is 3+ decades away, then the Co2 'issue' can be hammered away at said proles. Your cars! Your flights! Your small holdings/farms with livestock! putting ever increasing (alleged) harmful quantities of the gas in to the atmosphere causing the 'climate emergency', the super heated oceans, the melting glaciers! No historical context given.....Mediaeval Warming Period...because then the brainwashed citizenry might start to wake up, ask awkward questions of the so called elite.
You are right, the big lie, must be shown for what it is. The term 'climate in context' should trip off everyone's lips, not climate in a destructive ideological bubble.
Even the recent BBC Interview with Milibrain didn't really respond to his lies with a few hard facts, which aren't rocket science and which David has supplied in abundance. (For which thanks David, please keep up the great work). At least this interviewer, despite being BBC, did at at least push back on some of his lies but not with hard compelling, and simple factual data. For instance, Milibrain (Who still hasn't worked out how to wear a safety hard hat properly - not that there's much to protect) was still unchallenged on his assertion that ALL of the increase in electricity bills was due to rising fossil fuel prices but soon the increased percentage of renewables would start to push costs down (The "Hockey stick is still with us). As we here all know, this is fallacious in every respect. Fossil fuel prices will likely soon fall (Drill baby drill), in any case account for less than half of the present increases and as the mix changes towards renewables new CfD contracts mathematically guarantee that prices will rise further, especially as gas prices fall.
Net Zero is going to bankrupt the nation and destroy its industrial base, which is kind of important, so is it too much to expect that Milibrain should be confronted by an interviewer somewhere fully apprised of these simple facts and not afraid to challenge him on the facts and not let him get away with his lies?
Al Beeb has sunk a huge investment into 'green' for it's pension fund. The last thing it's going to do is allow that money to lose value, so it keeps up the lie.
Remember 'The Science' is settled! Don't ever question it, ever again! When of course actual, real science is never, ever proved. It simply gathers data to support or disprove a hypothesis. The Left cannot permit that with 'climate change'. As soon as the hypothesis has equal weighting it evaporates. That's why Blair removed the legal requirement for balance.
The Tories need to understand that if they do not ditch Net Zero they will become irrelevant and unelectable. Reform will take the Tory vote, unless of course Reform manage to self-implode. David, thank you for keep pushing against Net Zero, I hope that your voice becomes increasingly heard out there on the MSM.
Gummer 'Lord Deben' is/was the CCC chair. You can see how the discussion goes:
Gummer: 'I hear there's some hoo hah about my not getting a bung I can cream off for another windmill'
Greedy Tory: 'Yes, ruddy Kemi is doing us in. I had a directorship for a mill a week at windtaxspongers ltd all lined up.'
Gummer: 'Oh my dear fellow, I'll get that sorted for you, and a nice bonus back hander. Just rally the troops, spread the word, offer a few 'partnerships' for, say; half a day a week, half a million a year - on the taxpayer, of course.'
Greedy Tory: 'Ah, Gumsy, consider it done. You're speaking my language. Best make it half a day a month. See you at the trough!!'
If anyone *doesn't* believe that's how it works, I've a bridge to sell you.
It's too late for them, most people have now twigged they are the tools of the globalists and want to flood the country with migrants and impoverish the nation.
Unless the country drops Net Zero it will be completely de-industrialized and bankrupt. So nice little political debates really will not matter.
Trump is firing back at the LBMA and BOE transferring enormous amounts of Gold and Silver across the Atlantic as part of a pushback against the old world (Rothschilds etc) Establishment, so don't think that "The City" will fill the gap - they are under large, existential, pressure also.
Is everyone aware of the very recent AI Meta-analysis which reviewed all existing data and publications on "Climate change" and concludes that the "crisis" is not justified by the evidence? Under the scientific method, it isn't possible to confirm that something does NOT exist, only that the evidence to support that it does exist is not solid. Here's a link to a review of the paper by Dr Malone with links to the entire paper:
I've commented previously on the crass stupidity of CCS. Pointing to the attempt to achieve equilibrium of trace gases in the atmosphere in accordance with Henry's Law. So whatever we do to remove CO2 will over time be negated by the application of Henry's Law. Remember 70+% of the Earth's surface is water. But let's look at it from a different perspective. CO2 = 1 Carbon atom + 2 Oxygen atoms, so we are trying to de-oxygenate the atmosphere, in the ratio of 2:1. How saleable would their stupid idea of de-carbonisation appear to the public if that were their rant? "We must reduce oxygen in the atmosphere", exclaimed the Energy Secretary, super dim Milliband!
Then of course the whole thing is hypothecated on the notion that CO2 blocks outgoing long wave radiation... really! The best it can achieve is to delay some outgoing radiation. But I reckon the diurnal effect swamps that issue. Then there is the starting point of this charade CO2 == 280 ppmv (parts per million by volume) as a constant before industrialisation. Rubbish, there is loads of evidence of a wide range of readings above 280. But then who says that is the ideal level of CO2 in the atmosphere anyway... lots of plants thrive at much higher levels, so common sense suggests higher CO2 is better. Indeed geologists point to much higher levels of CO2 when plant life first originated. Then there is residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere, another variable, with a wide range of periods. Not the thousands of years hypothecated by the IPCC.
I could go on, but what we really need is proper opposition to these dangerous people trying, and succeeding thus far, to destroy our civilisation.
I hope this comment doesn't detract from the excellent technical analysis work of the likes of David, Kathryn Porter, John Sullivan and Andrew Montford, but we should not lose sight of the fact that for the globalist Deep State pushers of the 30+ year old climate change scare, its true purpose was never about climate. It was always a pretext for resource and populace control.
The few inklings of this "conspiracy theory" were suppressed by the bought and paid for MSM but in these early years few people realised how thoroughly the wool was being pulled over their eyes.
That formalised UK Uniparty "climate change" stitch-up in 2015 was a charade performed in treasonous, poddle-like obeyance to the global Deep State.
The globalists showed their true colours in 2020 through their Covid plandemic when they tried to digitally shackle the populace with their "vaccine passports", with a dose of domicide and reproductive sterilisation thown in for good measure via their "unsafe and ineffective" gene therapy jabs.
When Covid failed they then provoked the needless war in Ukraine. President Trump has now pulled the plug on that obscene game, leaving Starmer and his EU chums running around like headless chickens.
In fact the Trump administration, voted into office on an unprecedented popular vote majority, is setting about pulling the plug on all the globalist ploys: the climate change hoax, mRNA so-called vaccines and the unaccountable WHO and other politicised NGOs, suppression of free speech, out of control mass immigration, wokery, the war on farmers ... hopefully the WEF and UN as well. I for one wish them well.
To all "conspiracy theory" scoffers, I look forward to saying "I told you so".
Fundamentally the idea that CO2 causes heating in the atmosphere and that we have to be worried about “emissions” is the slippery slope. No real world evidence of this at all. Replace “emissions” with Devil’s Breath and you can a better perspective. All a misdirection simply to impose technocratic control. And all because many of these people are anti-human and don’t believe in development or betterment. Just zero sum thinking.
Thank you David. Perhaps given the geopolitical and economic situation, DESNZ will soon become DESnz and then DES. Decades ago the French focused on ES and although a long way off, got closer to nz than most countries ever have, without it even being an aim. Funny old world.
The real architect was Marcel Boiteux, who died recently aged 102. But I have been preparing my submission to the ESNZ select Committee for their nuclear enquiry advocating that we copy the French tactics.
Incidentally while researching I found that the French industry had produced some 11,000 TWh at a total cost including prior research etc.of €228bn, or just over €20/MWh.
Perhaps we could develop something like this idea https://open.substack.com/pub/scouch1/p/the-strategic-energy-transition-manifesto?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1p40z1 before we run out of natural gas. Its time to stop f×cking around or future generations are going to die in the ditch our politicians are digging
Word is Millibrain will be dumped unceremoniously by the real author of this strategy, one Tony Blair, as he hates EM for some long past infraction, like footling around as leader of the opposition/creator of the Ed stone.
Then Net Zero will conveniently be shown to be a total crock, and subsequently The Establishment will try and drive us to distraction about something else.
Any guesses what that might be, apart from another (yawn) "I-slept-for-five-solid-years-in-a-chicken-coop-and-got-birdflu" type of pandemic?
Net Zero is as easy as can be. Just by indulgencies (carbon credits) from The Gabon and - poof UK is carbon neutral.
I found the reaction of Ed Davey interesting, doubling down on net zero support. He's certainly trying to appeal to the CEN types among the Tories.
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/liberal-democrats-leader-ed-davey-kemi-badenoch-net-zero-video
Not shy about claiming credit for very expensive wind farms. Perhaps we should work out the average cost of the wind farms that he was responsible for.
I can't find the exact article but it's a Telegraph one relating to the sub station blackout. The theme, from multiple posters was 'control energy, control the country'.
The Left will never, ever permit net zero to be halted. It's a control system for them. After decades of trying various tools: war, politics (the EU), economics (enforced managed decline through crippling taxation) they've finally found one - the one everything else is based on: energy.
The Left are using the hoax of 'climate change' to force social change. They don't care about the environment - heck, they don't care about anything. For them this is a weapon to destroy what they hate and force their own bonkers ideology on everyone.
When decent folk like yourself present the evidence and the facts the Lefty laughs as he doesn't care. It's a pen to a battleship broadside (obviously not a UK battleship, mind). Until the hoax is exposed nothing will change.
"He replied, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”
Matthew 15:13-14
This is a very interesting opening. I think we should put forward some nominations.
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/664/energy-security-and-net-zero-committee/news/205855/esnz-committee-seeking-applications-for-specialist-adviser/
They are obviously floundering.
Nah, they want a nice, docile, easily controlled poodle who'll agree with them. They've already selected from hordes of useless no hopers someone 'suitable'.
This is not a scientific post. It's a specialism in marketing, which is all 'climate change' is. A lie, forced on people to control them. Same as all such fascist propaganda.
This is a limited hangout. The 2050 Net Zero targets are not the issue. Having any Net Zero targets is the issue. Perpetuating the foundational lie of a manmade CO2 climate crisis is the issue.
We must repeal the Climate Change Act and we must fully acknowledge the lie that CO2 is a major driver of climate and that manmade CO2 is the cause of a non-existent climate crisis.
The lie must be exposed and all that sits on it must fall.
The Net Zero targets are the immediate issue: they are what are driving the economy to oblivion. The tasks are
1) to halt further net zero programmes by showing that the carbon budgets are not fit for purpose as government advice, grossly underestimating the cost and consequences and failing to note their infeasibility, replacing the target by one we have already surpassed by a wide margin, allowing flexibility in future energy policy - and getting on and implementing that
2) to emphasize that the UK contribution even if you assume IPCC official science would be an insignificant 0.003C by 2050 if it actually met its net zero aspirations - too small to measure.
3) to emphasize that the UK contribution is being completely swamped by the growing Asian economies in particular, making it irrelevant, and the idea of "leadership" has completely failed
4) to show, Bjorn Lomborg style, that again even if you assume IPCC science the superior strategy for handling any climate change is adaptation, not economic suicide
5) with those planks in place it becomes easier to question "the science" and finally show it is wrong.
Trying to tell people to abandon their religious belief first is not the way to persuade them.
Well, yes, but you're picking details from the intent: scrapping everything is the only rational option.
What frustrates me more than anything is that 'climate change' has nothing whatsoever to do with the environment. It's an economic of moving money from the earner to the state and from the state to rationing, through ever increasing cost. That's not a market. It's a control system.
You can't destroy one cell. You have to cut off the limb.
Take some advice from the Lord High Executioner:
My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time
To make the punishment fit the crime
Rushing it won't achieve the desired outcome. As Charles Mackay observed
Every age has its peculiar folly; some scheme, project, or phantasy into which it plunges, spurred on either by the love of gain, the necessity of excitement, or the mere force of imitation. Failing in these, it has some madness, to which it is goaded by political or religious causes, or both combined.
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
The Co2 lie is what won't be collapsing any time soon, because it is crucial to the 'new normal' for Western societies. If net zero by 2050 is not grasped by the proletariat, not convinced because it is 3+ decades away, then the Co2 'issue' can be hammered away at said proles. Your cars! Your flights! Your small holdings/farms with livestock! putting ever increasing (alleged) harmful quantities of the gas in to the atmosphere causing the 'climate emergency', the super heated oceans, the melting glaciers! No historical context given.....Mediaeval Warming Period...because then the brainwashed citizenry might start to wake up, ask awkward questions of the so called elite.
You are right, the big lie, must be shown for what it is. The term 'climate in context' should trip off everyone's lips, not climate in a destructive ideological bubble.
Excellent, sober analysis. Thanks David!
Even the recent BBC Interview with Milibrain didn't really respond to his lies with a few hard facts, which aren't rocket science and which David has supplied in abundance. (For which thanks David, please keep up the great work). At least this interviewer, despite being BBC, did at at least push back on some of his lies but not with hard compelling, and simple factual data. For instance, Milibrain (Who still hasn't worked out how to wear a safety hard hat properly - not that there's much to protect) was still unchallenged on his assertion that ALL of the increase in electricity bills was due to rising fossil fuel prices but soon the increased percentage of renewables would start to push costs down (The "Hockey stick is still with us). As we here all know, this is fallacious in every respect. Fossil fuel prices will likely soon fall (Drill baby drill), in any case account for less than half of the present increases and as the mix changes towards renewables new CfD contracts mathematically guarantee that prices will rise further, especially as gas prices fall.
Net Zero is going to bankrupt the nation and destroy its industrial base, which is kind of important, so is it too much to expect that Milibrain should be confronted by an interviewer somewhere fully apprised of these simple facts and not afraid to challenge him on the facts and not let him get away with his lies?
Al Beeb has sunk a huge investment into 'green' for it's pension fund. The last thing it's going to do is allow that money to lose value, so it keeps up the lie.
Remember 'The Science' is settled! Don't ever question it, ever again! When of course actual, real science is never, ever proved. It simply gathers data to support or disprove a hypothesis. The Left cannot permit that with 'climate change'. As soon as the hypothesis has equal weighting it evaporates. That's why Blair removed the legal requirement for balance.
The Tories need to understand that if they do not ditch Net Zero they will become irrelevant and unelectable. Reform will take the Tory vote, unless of course Reform manage to self-implode. David, thank you for keep pushing against Net Zero, I hope that your voice becomes increasingly heard out there on the MSM.
Gummer 'Lord Deben' is/was the CCC chair. You can see how the discussion goes:
Gummer: 'I hear there's some hoo hah about my not getting a bung I can cream off for another windmill'
Greedy Tory: 'Yes, ruddy Kemi is doing us in. I had a directorship for a mill a week at windtaxspongers ltd all lined up.'
Gummer: 'Oh my dear fellow, I'll get that sorted for you, and a nice bonus back hander. Just rally the troops, spread the word, offer a few 'partnerships' for, say; half a day a week, half a million a year - on the taxpayer, of course.'
Greedy Tory: 'Ah, Gumsy, consider it done. You're speaking my language. Best make it half a day a month. See you at the trough!!'
If anyone *doesn't* believe that's how it works, I've a bridge to sell you.
It's too late for them, most people have now twigged they are the tools of the globalists and want to flood the country with migrants and impoverish the nation.
You're probably correct. What a mess!
Unless the country drops Net Zero it will be completely de-industrialized and bankrupt. So nice little political debates really will not matter.
Trump is firing back at the LBMA and BOE transferring enormous amounts of Gold and Silver across the Atlantic as part of a pushback against the old world (Rothschilds etc) Establishment, so don't think that "The City" will fill the gap - they are under large, existential, pressure also.
Illuminating...
Is everyone aware of the very recent AI Meta-analysis which reviewed all existing data and publications on "Climate change" and concludes that the "crisis" is not justified by the evidence? Under the scientific method, it isn't possible to confirm that something does NOT exist, only that the evidence to support that it does exist is not solid. Here's a link to a review of the paper by Dr Malone with links to the entire paper:
https://www.malone.news/p/the-climate-scam-is-over
I've commented previously on the crass stupidity of CCS. Pointing to the attempt to achieve equilibrium of trace gases in the atmosphere in accordance with Henry's Law. So whatever we do to remove CO2 will over time be negated by the application of Henry's Law. Remember 70+% of the Earth's surface is water. But let's look at it from a different perspective. CO2 = 1 Carbon atom + 2 Oxygen atoms, so we are trying to de-oxygenate the atmosphere, in the ratio of 2:1. How saleable would their stupid idea of de-carbonisation appear to the public if that were their rant? "We must reduce oxygen in the atmosphere", exclaimed the Energy Secretary, super dim Milliband!
Then of course the whole thing is hypothecated on the notion that CO2 blocks outgoing long wave radiation... really! The best it can achieve is to delay some outgoing radiation. But I reckon the diurnal effect swamps that issue. Then there is the starting point of this charade CO2 == 280 ppmv (parts per million by volume) as a constant before industrialisation. Rubbish, there is loads of evidence of a wide range of readings above 280. But then who says that is the ideal level of CO2 in the atmosphere anyway... lots of plants thrive at much higher levels, so common sense suggests higher CO2 is better. Indeed geologists point to much higher levels of CO2 when plant life first originated. Then there is residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere, another variable, with a wide range of periods. Not the thousands of years hypothecated by the IPCC.
I could go on, but what we really need is proper opposition to these dangerous people trying, and succeeding thus far, to destroy our civilisation.
I hope this comment doesn't detract from the excellent technical analysis work of the likes of David, Kathryn Porter, John Sullivan and Andrew Montford, but we should not lose sight of the fact that for the globalist Deep State pushers of the 30+ year old climate change scare, its true purpose was never about climate. It was always a pretext for resource and populace control.
The few inklings of this "conspiracy theory" were suppressed by the bought and paid for MSM but in these early years few people realised how thoroughly the wool was being pulled over their eyes.
That formalised UK Uniparty "climate change" stitch-up in 2015 was a charade performed in treasonous, poddle-like obeyance to the global Deep State.
The globalists showed their true colours in 2020 through their Covid plandemic when they tried to digitally shackle the populace with their "vaccine passports", with a dose of domicide and reproductive sterilisation thown in for good measure via their "unsafe and ineffective" gene therapy jabs.
When Covid failed they then provoked the needless war in Ukraine. President Trump has now pulled the plug on that obscene game, leaving Starmer and his EU chums running around like headless chickens.
In fact the Trump administration, voted into office on an unprecedented popular vote majority, is setting about pulling the plug on all the globalist ploys: the climate change hoax, mRNA so-called vaccines and the unaccountable WHO and other politicised NGOs, suppression of free speech, out of control mass immigration, wokery, the war on farmers ... hopefully the WEF and UN as well. I for one wish them well.
To all "conspiracy theory" scoffers, I look forward to saying "I told you so".
More Mackay:
During seasons of great pestilence, men have often believed the prophecies of crazed fanatics, that the end of the world was come.
Fundamentally the idea that CO2 causes heating in the atmosphere and that we have to be worried about “emissions” is the slippery slope. No real world evidence of this at all. Replace “emissions” with Devil’s Breath and you can a better perspective. All a misdirection simply to impose technocratic control. And all because many of these people are anti-human and don’t believe in development or betterment. Just zero sum thinking.
Thank you David. Perhaps given the geopolitical and economic situation, DESNZ will soon become DESnz and then DES. Decades ago the French focused on ES and although a long way off, got closer to nz than most countries ever have, without it even being an aim. Funny old world.
Yes, need our own Messmer plan to mirror the French push for nuclear in the 70's & 80's.
The real architect was Marcel Boiteux, who died recently aged 102. But I have been preparing my submission to the ESNZ select Committee for their nuclear enquiry advocating that we copy the French tactics.
https://committees.parliament.uk/work/8942/revisiting-the-nuclear-roadmap/
Incidentally while researching I found that the French industry had produced some 11,000 TWh at a total cost including prior research etc.of €228bn, or just over €20/MWh.
Where was the backbone of all the institutions that clearly knew net zero was a crock, but never spoke up to challenge it and mad Ed Millibrain?
Totally agree, the IET for one, should have challenged Net Zero.