Archives

February 2024
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829  

Which side is lying about the “Climate Crisis”?

Monday/Tuesday blog

Who do you trust about the supposed “Climate Crisis”?

Ignorant nobodies like myself?

Or reliable experts like the BBC?

And all the mainstream media?

Perhaps Neil Oliver can help you decide?

Though personally I’m a little annoyed with Mr Oliver. I sent him a copy of my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS when it was first published in June 2021 and in the almost two years since then he has not thought to interview me about the book. But I guess he hasn’t even looked at it – if he had, he would be much more knowledgeable about the climate scam than he appears to be.

2 comments to Which side is lying about the “Climate Crisis”?

  • A Thorpe

    Based on Oliver’s discussion he hasn’t read or understood your book either. I assume GBNews has researchers and they are not providing him with the evidence he needs to debate with climate alarmists. There is no point in getting Tom Burke or other alarmists on the show if they don’t get a genuine climate scientist to argue with them. The presenters seem to be against net zero but they are doing more harm than good by interviewing alarmists when they don’t have experts to stand up to them.

    This morning I have received emails from Principia-Scientific with articles related to this. The message will not get through until the MSM changes its policy.

    I have just read the first book in a series about the Roman Empire and it suggests that Christianity took over when the Empire was in chaos and the reason was it promised salvation which traditionally religions did not do. Some say the decline in belief today results in people believing anything. Perhaps the chaos of today results in people seeing climate action as the new saviour. They are in for a shock.

  • A Thorpe

    I’ve just watched Nigel Farage discussing the development of a hydrogen economy. This is based on the assumption that we need to reduce CO2 emissions. This was never questioned in the discussion.

    We will be expected to pay the cost. What is missing is an assessment of the risks and benefits. All new developments have risks and somebody must be responsible for the risks. If it goes ahead private companies will receive money and do very well out of it. If it fails we will pay for the risks, and if it succeeds we our investment money will not be returned. This is not the way to fund new developments.

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>