David Craig, on July 6th, 2022Wednesday/Thursday blog
Australia – floods of lies, a drought of the truth
I guess you all know that there are massive floods in Sydney and more than 50,000 people have been advised to leave their homes.
I know I cover the issue of Australian floods in my book – THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS. So, apologies to readers who have read the book. But as the BBC and C4 News are so busy bleating and moaning about how Australia’s current floods are yet more proof of the supposed Climate Change Armageddon facing us all, I couldn’t resist the temptation to point out, yet again, what a load of unsubstantiated nonsense the climate catastrophists’ claims are.
In 2008, the Head of Climate Analysis at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology – reportedly “one of the nation’s most senior weather experts” – warned that drought might be the “new climate” for Australia due to supposed man-made Global Warming caused by burning fossil fuels:
This, of course, delighted the climate catastrophists as it was yet more evidence that burning fossil fuels would lead to disaster and turmoil and extinction and so on and so forth.
Unfortunately for the climate catastrophists, Australia’s great weather expert couldn’t have been more wrong as the Australian floods of their winter 2010/2011 were so severe that they reportedly caused the world’s sea level to drop:
No problem, the climate catastrophists just changed their story from ‘Global Warming will fry us all‘ to ‘Climate Change extreme weather events will kill us all’ as extreme weather becomes more frequent:
But the climate catastrophists’ dire predictions of Australia’s weather alternating between a Mad Max drought-blasted wasteland and Waterworld-style floods seems to ignore the inconvenient fact that a newspaper article from 1847 showed that during the period from 1789 to 1846 – Australia’s weather did exactly what the climate catastrophists predicted for the future – alternate between extreme droughts and extreme floods:
(left-click on images and then left-click again to see more clearly)
And this was long before anyone had thought of trying to terrify us all into cowering submission to draconian restrictions on our lives in the supposed “battle against Climate Change”.
From climate nonsense to vaccine nonsense
And while we’re on the subject of our rulers’ scare-stories, yet more evidence is emerging that for most age groups, the risks of the ‘miracle vaccines’ outweigh the benefits.
Here (in blue text) is a summary of the conclusions of a recent clinical study comparing Adverse Events from the vaccines:
- Covid-recovered people have natural immunity that is stronger than vaccine-induced immunity. So, the benefit of vaccination is – at best – minimal. If the risk of adverse reactions is the same as in the randomized trials, there is a negative risk-benefit difference. Why are we mandating people in this group to be vaccinated? It is both unethical and damaging to public health.
- While everyone can get infected, children have a minuscule risk of covid mortality. There is very limited safety data from the trials on children. If the risk of adverse reactions is the same as for adults, the harms outweigh the risks. Children should not receive these vaccines.
- Older people above 70 have a much higher risk of covid mortality than the population in the Fraiman study. If their risk of adverse reaction is the same, then the benefits outweigh the harms. Hence, older people who have never had covid and are not yet vaccinated may benefit from these vaccines. However, we do not know if they are better than the Johnson & Johnson and Astra-Zeneca vaccines.
- It is unclear from the clinical trial data whether the benefits outweigh the risks for working-age adults who have not been vaccinated and who have not already had covid. This is true both historically, for the original covid variants, and currently for the newer ones.
- The Fraiman study analyzes data after the first and second doses. Both risks and benefits may differ for booster shots, but no randomized trial has properly evaluated the trade-off.
Are US mainstream media starting to question vaccine theology?
Furthermore, here’s an article from one US mainstream media – Newsweek – pointing out that there is absolutely no data justifying the vaccination of younger age groups and suggesting, yet again, that vaccination is a political rather than a medical decision – having forced vaccines on us, our Big-Brother rulers are terrified that, if they suggest the under-5s shouldn’t be vaccinated, people might start questioning whether the 5-12-year-olds should have been vaccinated or the 12-18-year-olds, or even the 18-25-year-olds or the 26-35-year-olds and so on and so on:
https://www.newsweek.com/why-america-doesnt-trust-cdc-opinion-1713145
And our rulers can’t allow us ignorant, unwashed plebs to question their wisdom, motives and decisions.
So the vaccine parade rolls on with all over-50s in the UK to be offered yet another booster in order to yet again “save the NHS”.
Silence isn’t always golden
Meanwhile, none of our politicians nor any mainstream media seem to be showing the slightest interest in how the Chinese plague, which has killed 5 to 10 million people and impoverished a few hundred million, started.
It’s all very odd, isn’t it?
Category: 
I’m reading Hannah Arendt’s book on Totalitarianism and she discusses the lies and says everybody really knows they are lies. If the leaders change the lie the masses will claim they knew it was a lie and go on to accept the next one. The lies about the cause of droughts and floods in Australia seem to prove the point. It is the ideology that fossil fuels are bad that keeps everything going and the fake science or the truth doesn’t matter.
What does it take to change this? Australia has had blackouts and energy costs are rising everywhere but the connection with the green policies isn’t being made. Tony Heller has just released a video that I haven’t watched called Great University of Unlearning. The universities and the schools are major promoters of climate change.
The points in blue about the vaccines draw attention to the lack of accurate information at the start of the pandemic. The data was created from models, not real life, just like the climate data. Ferguson was the main player and he has always been wrong. This wrongly brought on the lockdowns which the government had rejected in the earlier study of pandemic scenarios. With the vaccines we did not know anything about the long term risks for the obvious reason they hadn’t been studied for long enough. This isn’t science, it is common sense, and we have all seen what can happen when risks of medical interventions are not adequately studied. Yet people fell for it, just like the climate scam.
I do not agree with promoting vaccines for the over 70s. It is obvious that when covid appeared, that the elderly were dying, but it wasn’t just from covid. Looking at the excess UK deaths there was a peak in 2020 but over the year the excess deaths were as expected. All that covid did was bring forward the deaths so the vaccines would have changed little.
The vaccines are not preventing covid and now we have the lie that the infection is not as bad for the vaccinated. Where is the proof of that? We being told that hospitalisation is higher for the vaccinated. Do we know that the millions of deaths were just from the virus and there was no contribution from other factors? There are claims of around 750,000 deaths in the USA from the vaccines, but is that true?
The above issues are just a part of the full picture of problems, all created by governments and their institutions, and all getting worse, not better.
I have just received an email with a link to this article
https://www.globalresearch.ca/former-pfizer-exec-believes-leaky-vaccine-was-intentional-dr-michael-yeadon/5785385
There a lengthy video which doesn’t get going until after about 40 minutes. It is interesting but it is impossible to know whether he is right about the detail without having related knowledge. People like Fauci and Sarah Gilbert will of course say he is wrong. Who do we believe?
Yeadon claims that the vaccine manufacturers were colluding because they all did the wrong thing. I saw a video about peer review yesterday that was saying it was just the same – the reviewers are from the same background and they can all be wrong. It is like the politicians – they all looked at other countries and introduced the same pandemic measures because it is easy to belong to a crowd than stand out and do something different, which if it turns out to be wrong would be the end of their political career. So they get support from doing the wrong thing.
No comments about all those resignations from the people at the very top of the Tory Party.
If I may make a humble suggestion to Boris who will want to see his new cabinet once again swamped by people of colour so that he wins all the votes from people who like the TV adverts , there is a nice young lad that works down the chip shop who might be worth considering. He is excessivly polite and knows his plaice and he is not bald like that freak who should be sleeping in the Tardis.
He reminds me a lot of the bloke who played Philip in Rising Damp with a very posh accent and an obvious distain for folk like me who keep him in a job by scoffing chips and deep fried Mars bars. The point is that like Philip, who had to deal with Rigsby, he is used to dealing with sleazy, opinionated lying scum and so would get on well with Boris, should he ever be appointed to a position of great power.
It’s not so far fetched when one remembers that Caligua promoted his horse to the senate and Boris actually married one.
That other lad from Rising Damp did not turn out so well did he ? I turned the telly on the other night and there he was looking like Shirley Temple, sharing a cell with Ronnie Barker. 53 years without bail and counting. And for what ? Failure to pay his TV licence which enables the BBC to provide us with top notch, up to date entertainment for less than £3.00 a week. What’s not to like ?