August 2022
« Jul    

Don’t believe the “Floods caused by Global Warming” bollox

That didn’t take long, did it?

Just a couple of days into the floods ministers announced a full review of Britain’s storm defences yesterday as they blamed global warming for the recent heavy rainfall.

Liz Truss, the environment secretary, told MPs that Storm Desmond and the floods in Cumbria were consistent with climate change and the government’s predictions for future flooding would now have to be updated. Moreover, some crappy ‘Oxford academic’ jumped on the Warmie bandwagon claiming “the government had been warned five years ago of the risk of higher rainfall in the area possibly created by climate change“.

Of course, this is all total bollox designed to give the Government and the ‘experts’ more control over us and more excuses to tax us to supposedly ‘save the planet’.

But how do I know? After all, I’m no climate scientist. Two reasons:

1. The Earth hasn’t warmed

Over the last 19 years, CO2 and other ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions have been higher than ever before in human history, yet the Earth hasn’t warmed at all. If there was a direct causal effect between CO2 emissions and temperature, this would be impossible:


(The dotted line is CO2 emissions and the purple arrow is temperature)

2. The Greenies have completely changed their story (as usual)

The picture below features Dame Julia Slingo. She’s quite an important lady in all our lives. She’s the chief scientist at the Met Office. So she has huge influence over government policies regarding Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever it is called this week. Everything from ever-increasing green taxes, windfarms, solar farms, prematurely closing down perfectly good coal-fired power stations, subsidies for “green energy” which are forcing up our power bills and leading to energy-intensive industries closing down in Britain losing thousands of jobs – all this can be traced back to people like the lovely and obviously highly-qualified Dame Julia.


I imagine Professor Slingo must hope we have rather short memories.

On 13th March 2012, Julia Slingo told MPs that the low winter rainfall this country was experiencing was caused by climate change. A newspaper reported: Slingo told the MPs that there is “increasing evidence in the last few months of that depletion of ice, in particular in the Bering and Kara seas, can plausibly impact on our winter weather and lead to colder winters over northern Europe”.

She added that more cold winters mean less water, and could exacerbate future droughts. “The replenishment of aquifers generally happens in winter and spring … a wet summer does not replenish aquifers. So we are concerned if we have a sequence of cold winters that could be much more damaging,” she told the committee.

Right. You all understand what Dame Julia is saying? Climate change is leading to drier winters.

Now spool forward two years. Here’s a newspaper report from 2014:

“Speaking ahead of the release of a government report on Britain’s unusually stormy winter weather, the Met Office’s chief scientist, Dame Julia Slingo said on Sunday that the U.K. had seen the “most exceptional period of rainfall in 248 years”and called the extreme weather “consistent with climate change”.

“All the evidence suggests there is a link to climate change,” she said. “There is no evidence to counter the basic premise that a warmer world will lead to more intense daily and hourly rain events.”

Right. Got that? Two years later Dame Julia is saying that Global Warming will lead to wetter winters. Yet in 2012 Dame Julia said the exact opposite. Hummph.

Changing the language

But the Greenies are very clever, When the weather does the opposite of what they have predicted, they just change their language. For years we were warned about ‘Global Warming’. When that didn’t happen, the Greenies changed the threat to ‘Climate Change’. And now, when the Greenies predicted drier winters, they’ve changed the language again from ‘drier winters’ to ‘extreme weather events’. So, whether it’s hot or cold, wet or dry, windy or calm, the Greenies can jump up and down screaming ‘Climate Change’ and ‘extreme weather events‘. And the mainstream media will probably take them seriously.

But as one newspaper reader wrote “It is increasingly clear that climate change scientist is an oxymoron.  No more scientific work gets done in the climate change department of a university than in the school of Druidic studies.”

9 comments to Don’t believe the “Floods caused by Global Warming” bollox

  • Simon

    The closing down of industry will not be restricted to this country alone &, is intentional. De-industrialisation of western economies was quoted by Kissinger. The climate change green movement nonsense is merely a vehicle to suit an agenda. Besides if they were that concerned about flooding why concrete over everything. Some distinguished professor or other, can’t recall his name, quite openly stated this on BBC radio yesterday. The solution of course is more immigration, more houses & more concrete. The same policy time after time -it’s tedious.

  • mike roberts

    Two people I do trust to be telling the truth about the so called Climate Change.Note they dont call it Global Warming anymore because there isnt any. Do you believe Politicians over these experts?

    1/ Obama ‘took the wrong side’ on climate change, says physicist Freeman Dyson.

    Theoretical physicist and Democrat voter Freeman Dyson has expressed his disappointment with President Obama’s stance on climate change.

    “It’s very sad that in this country, political opinion parted [people’s views on climate change],” he said, in an interview with The Register. “I’m 100 percent Democrat myself, and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this issue, and the Republicans took the right side.”

    Now retired, Dyson was a professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton between 1953 and 1994. Famed for his work in quantum electrodynamics and nuclear engineering, Dyson also worked on climate studies during his career.

    Climate change, according to Freeman, “is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?


    NASA has been fiddling the Stats, after all they are a branch of government in the US.Every other branch of Government lies why not NASA.

    2/ Dr. Friedrich-Karl Ewert.
    German Scientist Accused NASA of ‘Massive’ Temperature Alterations.

    A German scientist has accused the National Aeronautics and Space Agency’s (NASA) Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) of altering temperature records between 2010 and 2012 to produce the illusion that the Earth has been warming since 1950.

    Ewert also found that since 1881, four distinct cooling stages have alternated with three warming phases. He says the Earth is currently in a cooling phase.

    And since a stronger warming cycle occurred before carbon dioxide emissions began to rise, Ewert concluded that “an influence of our CO2 emissions [on] temperatures can not be seen.”


  • mike roberts

    We have been saying this(Sweden a failed state in 10 to 15 years) but it takes a Nobel Prize winner to say it before Bloomberg understands the obvious.

    Nobel Laureate Sees ‘Much Worse’ EU Economy From Refugee Crisis.

    Europe’s economic prospects are worsening as the region struggles to absorb the wave of asylum seekers coming from the Middle East, according to Angus Deaton, the winner of this year’s Nobel economics prize.
    Europe’s Refugee Crisis
    With the refugee crisis following so soon after Europe’s debt crisis, the development “could certainly make the economic situation very much worse,” Deaton said in an interview on Monday in Stockholm, where he’s officially being awarded his Nobel this week. “There is obviously a very severe danger” that the European Union will buckle under the pressure, he said.
    Though Europe’s debt and migrant crises are similar in scope, the demographic challenges posed by the sudden influx of people is potentially worse because “no one really has any idea how to solve” the situation, Deaton said. At least with the debt crisis, “people knew how to solve it,” they just “couldn’t agree with each other,” he said.
    The 70-year-old Princeton University professor, who won the Nobel for his analysis of consumption, poverty and welfare, says the demographic development combined with sluggish economic growth is a dangerous cocktail.

  • tony jones

    Farewell to the man who invented ‘climate change’
    To this day, global climate policy is still shaped by the agenda of Maurice Strong, a Canadian multimillionaire.

    A very odd thing happened last weekend. The death was announced of the man who, in the past 40 years, has arguably been more influential on global politics than any other single individual. Yet the world scarcely noticed.
    Had it not been for this man, we would not last week have seen 150 heads of government joining 40,000 delegates in Paris for that mammoth climate conference: the 21st such get-together since, in 1992, he masterminded the Rio “Earth Summit”, the largest political gathering in history. Yet few people even know his name.
    Some years back, when I was researching for a book called The Real Global Warming Disaster, charting how the late-20th-century panic over climate change came about, few things surprised me more than to discover the absolutely central role played in the whole story by a Canadian socialist multimillionaire, Maurice Strong.
    During the Second World War, having emerged from humble origins in the Great Depression, Strong became convinced that the new United Nations should become a world government, dedicated to ensuring that the wealth enjoyed by the richer countries of the West should be spread out around the world’s underprivileged majority.
    In the Sixties, having become very rich himself from Canada’s oil industry, Strong came to see that the key to his vision was “environmentalism”, the one cause the UN could harness to make itself a truly powerful world government.
    A superb political operator, in 1972 he set up a UN “Environment Conference” in Stockholm, to declare that the Earth’s resources were the common inheritance of all mankind. They should no longer be exploited for the benefit of only a few countries, at the expense of poorer countries across the globe.
    To pursue this, he became founding director of a new agency, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and in the Eighties he took up the cause of a tiny group of international meteorologists who had come to believe that the world faced catastrophic warming. In 1988, UNEP sponsored this little group into setting up the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
    In 1992, now allied with the IPCC, Strong pulled off his greatest coup when he set up another new body, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to stage that colossal “Earth Summit” over which he presided in Rio, arranging for it to be attended not only by 108 world leaders and 100,000 others but also by 20,000 UN-funded “green activists”.

    It is the UNFCCC which in effect has dictated the global climate change agenda ever since. Almost yearly it has staged huge conferences, notably those at Kyoto (1997), Copenhagen (2009) and the present one in Paris. And all along it has been Strong’s ideology, enshrined at Rio in “Agenda 21”, which has continued to shape the entire process, centred on the principle that the richer developed countries must pay for a problem they created, to the financial benefit of all those “developing countries” that have been its main victims.
    In 2005, Strong was caught having been illicitly paid $1 million from the UN’s Oil for Food programme, supposedly set up to allow Saddam Hussein to pay in oil to feed starving Iraqis. He retired to a flat in Beijing, where he had been close to China’s Communist leaders back to Mao. It was from there that he returned home to Canada to die,on November 27.
    “Strong’s dream is more than ever falling apart”
    To this day, global climate policy is still shaped by Strong’s Agenda 21, as was highlighted last February when Christiana Figueres, the Costa Rican Marxist now head of the UNFCCC and organiser of the Paris conference, urged that the West should give “$1 trillion a year” to the “developing” world.
    But the wonderful irony is that the reason why Paris will fail, like Copenhagen before it, is that those “developing countries”, led by China and India – now the world’s first and third largest “CO2 emitters” – have not the slightest intention of curbing their emissions. It is for the West to do that, for creating “the problem”. Thus, just as he died, Strong’s dream is more than ever falling apart – thanks to those very countries his socialist vision was intended to help.

  • Fred the shred

    Yes Tony, ironic the damage do gooders have done , I think George Soros has done far more damage that is irrepairable with the ‘none integratable refugee masses’ though his political puppet leaders in the West.

    Also ironic is how the so called Rich Nations of the West are now swapping places with the Poor nations of the East. Now that our industries have left, collapsed or been gutted our children will have to scratch around to try and survive, poorer and poorer saddled with the debt heaped upon them accrued by unscrupulous governments of the last 20 years that we have no capacity to repay.

    Here Marc Faber explains.

  • Truth Ferret

    Wind farms ‘will never keep the lights on’: Study claims turbines are ‘expensive and deeply inefficient’
    Wind farms produce 90% of potential power output for only 17 hours a year
    Families and businesses have paid billions to subsidise building of turbines
    Tories have pledged to end subsidies as Britain is set to meet EU targets .

  • MGJ

    While I rule out almost everything I hear from the Warmists as it tends to be contradictory, unsubstantiated, speculative or just plain nonsense I am nevertheless prepared to accept the possibility of Climate Change. So somebody make the case. I’m listening.

    The more you look at the case for Climate Change, the more bizarre it gets. We are told the evidence is so overwhelming that it is no longer considered an open question in science. There must be hundreds of thousands of people making a living studying this stuff so we cannot be talking about science which is so fabulously complex that only an Einstein could grasp it; nor a volume of data so huge that only a super-computer could ever process it to get ‘the answer’.

    In the absence of a convincing case, it is interesting to consider both the class of people who believe in Warming and also to assess their proposed solutions. The Pro- lobby is populated by leftists, statists and academics whose careers are entirely dependent on government grants. And their proposed solutions? This is even more informative. Every last one of them wants more state power to force the silly plebs to do what’s best for them.

    If it does all turn out to be true then I can think of some solutions, and not one of them involves more government!

  • Chris

    History is repeating itself. What’s happening with the theory of global warming is similar to the religious opposition to Copernicus’ theory of heliocentrism.

    Of course we now know he was correct and simply reporting observed facts. However, his writings contradicted the elites’ religious orthodoxy and teachings. Religion and belief then held sway over the facts. The elites in power used religion/faith as a trump over common sense, logic and facts.

    Galileo promoted Copernicus’ idea but was instructed by Pope Paul V that he should not so speak of the theory and I believe was ex-communicated from the catholic church as a punishment. This was serious to believers then. I see him as a ‘denier’ in the same way many sensible people are labeled today.

    There are now the same kind of hierarchical organisations (as the catholic church) promulgating pure belief and their ‘superior’? computer programmes which (like the bible) can predict the future and have superior knowledge beyond our human capabilities.

    We see a vast ‘civil service’ in the UN and universities. A retinue of followers who all speak the same language and cannot allow nay-sayers because these followers are paid to promote the AGW religion and preserve their income and importance.

    I am convinced that this another man made religion serving the interests of those who can gain power riches etc in much the same way as most religions have been used throughout human history.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>