This is a fairly inconsequential story, so I’ll just leave it up for one day. I’ll be back to more serious stuff at the weekend.
How I became an ‘expert’
Regular readers will know that my climate book has recently been published in South Korea:
Sales have been a bit slow, so I’ve started writing some articles based on the book that I hope the university professor who adapted my book for the Korean market can place in Korean media to help push sales.
One idea I had was to adapt a recent blog I wrote about how the move from petrol cars to electric vehicles is going to destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs throughout Western economies:
But to write this article, I needed to know how many cars the Korean auto industry produces each year and how many people work in the Korean auto industry.
My first thought was to get in touch with my Korean contact and ask him. But then I thought of Google. It took me less than three minutes on Google to get all the information I needed for my article.
Twenty or so years ago, a journalist would have had to have some knowledge of the area they were reporting on. But now with Google, anybody can write articles or even books without any knowledge at all. They just need a couple of ideas and Google will do the rest. Suddenly everyone can be an expert in everything.
I’m sure that somebody much more intelligent than myself has said that Google is the greatest revolution in the availability of knowledge since the invention of the printing press. However, as the West commits economic, cultural and societal suicide with its interminable and utterly trivial culture wars, its ludicrous obsession with trying to deny that there are only two sexes, its self-flagellation over the supposed sins of colonialism, its guilt for its supposed institutional racism and its futile efforts to fight a non-existent Climate Crisis, one could be forgiven for wondering whether getting immediate access to all the world’s knowledge has made us any more knowledgeable.
Would you trust this survey?
One fun ‘fact’ I found while Googling was a claim by Greenpeace that 82% of South Korean auto workers believe that petrol cars should be banned by 2035 and 64% believe a ban should be introduced by 2030. I wonder how the question in this marvellous survey was phrased. Here are two of many possibilities:
Petrol cars are polluting cities and increasing atmospheric CO2 which is causing a climate crisis. Do you think petrol cars should be banned?
If petrol cars are replaced by electric vehicles, over 150,000 of South Korea’s 331,000 car workers will be unemployed. You’re possibly one of those who will lose their job. Do you think petrol cars should be banned?
I rather suspect that the question Greenpeace asked in their survey was closer to the former of these two possibilities and awfully far away from the latter.
My ‘expert’ article
Anyway, here’s the article I wrote given that three minutes on Google have now made me an expert in South Korean motor manufacturing:
How to wreck your car industry and destroy jobs
by Seok Pak and David Craig
South Korea’s automobile industry produces around 3,160,000 passenger cars a year making the country the fourth largest producer of passenger cars in the world as of 2021, overtaking Germany in terms of vehicle output.1 South Korea exports around 1,960,000 passenger cars a year making automotive manufacturing a key industry for the country. More than 331,000 people are employed.
It’s one of the most critical industries for any country wishing to have a healthy economy.
Like other advanced economies, Korean politicians are planning to ban the sale of petrol cars and replace them with electric vehicles in order for the country to meet its obligations to reduce CO2 emissions. An electric vehicle requires about 30 percent less work than a petrol-driven car as there are fewer complex moving parts. So that’s almost 110,000 of South Korea’s 331,000 car workers who won’t be needed in the glorious greener future our rulers have planned for us. In Germany, which produces around 3,100,000 cars a year, IG Metall, the German union for most of that nation’s autoworkers, estimates that 75,000 German jobs building engines and transmissions will be eliminated by 2030.2
Moreover, due to the high cost and impracticality of electric vehicles, many governments expect that there will be a reduction in car ownership of somewhere between 20 percent and 30 percent. That will mean a further drastic cut in the number of car workers in most advanced economies.
According to a survey conducted by Greenpeace and the Korean Metal Workers’ Union, more than 82 percent of employees in the industry believe vehicles with internal combustion engines should not be sold after 2035, while nearly 64 percent say a ban should be introduced by 2030.3 One could wonder whether those surveyed were aware of how many of them would be made unemployed by the switch to electric vehicles.
Then there is one further problem for car manufacturers worldwide – China has a virtual monopoly of the rare earth metals needed for our rulers’ great green revolution:
Will the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) generously allow these rare earth metals to be exported so that other countries can make car batteries and all the other things needed to go green? Or will the CCP restrict exports of rare earth metals so that most of the manufacturing of car batteries and other key products required for the green revolution will be done in China?
The switch from petrol vehicles to electric vehicles is going to be catastrophic for the Korean car industry and will result in the loss of probably more than 150,000 jobs. Let us hope that Korean politicians have planned what all these soon-to-be-unemployed car workers will be doing to earn a living in the wonderful Net-Zero CO2 future that is being prepared for all of us.
Seok Pak and David Craig are authors of CLIMATE APOCALYPSE The Greatest Scam in Human History
Providing you were not one of the millions who were killed by the Chinese lab-leaked plague or by failure to get medical care due to the chaos caused by the lab-leaked plague or one of the millions more whose businesses and lives were ruined by the lockdowns or one of the millions more who had significant adverse reactions to the dangerous fake vaccines, perhaps you should be grateful for Covid?
Why? For two reasons.
Firstly, because Covid showed us how much the elites despise us and how far they are willing to go with their lies to increase their own wealth and power at our expense
Secondly, because we now know the playbook the elites will use when lying to us and wrecking our lives to ‘fight’ the supposed ‘Climate Crisis’. As one reader recently remarked, you can just replace ‘Covid’ with ‘Climate’ to see what the elites are up to
Let’s briefly remember the liars and their lies:
The scientists
When the world’s leading ‘scientists’ found out that the Chinese plague was most likely caused by a lab leak at a filthy, low-hygiene lab run by lazy, corrupt Chinese working on projects funded by US grants, their first reaction was to launch a concerted campaign to discredit the lab leak theory and to brand anyone suggesting a lab leak as a crazed conspiracy theorist. After all, they didn’t want the truth coming out as public outrage might threaten the billions the scientific community gets in grants and other funding every year. The scientists didn’t care how many people were killed by the lab-leaked plague and whether some of these deaths might have been avoided if the scientists had been honest from the start about the plague’s origin. Their only interest was in protecting their own lucrative lifestyles. If I understand correctly, one of the key people behind the campaign to protect the Chinese has just been made the Chief Scientist at the Chinese-controlled World Health Organisation. A cynic might see this as a reward for doing a deal with the devil.
The pharma companies
We now know that the supposedly ‘safe’ and ‘effective’ miracle vaccines were not safe as around one in every 800 people vaccinated had serious adverse reactions and the vaccines were not effective in that they didn’t stop the spread of the virus. We further know that the clinical trials didn’t even test whether the fake vaccines prevented the virus from spreading and were so corrupt that one of the vaccine manufacturers went to court to try to prevent the data from their fake trials from being released for the next 75 years. Furthermore, there was a massive campaign by the pharma companies to discredit cheap generic drugs like Ivermectin so that they could sell us much more expensive alternatives with almost exactly the same chemical structure as Ivermectin:
The politicians
I think this photo tells us all we need to know about the relationship between the pharma companies and our political elites:
The politicians lied and lied and lied. They claimed that we should submit to lockdowns and then get the miracle vaccines so we weren’t guilty of ‘killing granny’. Yet there was absolutely no evidence that the vaccines reduced the spread of the virus. They claimed that all age groups should get the vaccines. Yet they knew that the vaccines were only partially effective in reducing severe complications from Covid for a short period for just a limited number of vulnerable groups. Moreover, they never looked at comparing the effectiveness of the fake vaccines compared to the body’s natural protection. And now we know that the fake vaccines actually reduce our natural immunity so that those who are most vaccinated are more likely to keep catching Covid than those who have built up natural immunity. And all the time they crushed our freedoms. the politicians partied and mocked us for our gullibility. They were surprised at how easily they got away with their lies and deceit. Even worse, the only politician who dared express concerns about the fake vaccines was ignored by 646 of the 650 MPs when he gave a speech in Parliament and was thrown out of his party.
The media
Where were our supposed investigative journalists during this fiasco? Why weren’t they exposing the torrent of lies from the scientists the politicians and the media itself? Unfortunately our mainstream media showed themselves to be just a bunch of paid-for, spineless, self-serving prostitutes. After all, they probably had mortgages to pay and private-school fees for their children. So, better for their careers and their bank balances to write what they were told to write and to say what they were told to say. But perhaps most shameful of all was the fact that the one journalist who dared to question the official lies, Mark Steyn, was forced out of his job by the establishment.
Big tech and social media
Meanwhile, the big tech and social media companies all conspired against us censoring anyone suggesting a Wuhan lab leak or anyone questioning the vaccines or anyone worrying that the lockdowns might be causing more harm than the virus.
The World Health Organisation
There’s not enough room here to list all the lies we were fed by the Chinese-controlled, ludicrously-misnamed World Health Organisation (WHO). The WHO assured us the the lab-leaked plague didn’t leak from a lab; that the plague wasn’t infectious when they knew it was; that there was no need for an international travel ban for weeks after the Chinese imposed a domestic travel ban. The WHO then organised a whitewashing campaign to cover up the fact that Covid leaked from a Chinese lab. Yet now our politicians are considering handing over control of our lives to the utterly corrupt, utterly incompetent spivs at the WHO when the next inevitable pandemic starts!
And now the elites – big business, scientists, politicians, international organisations and the media – are playing the same game trying to terrify us over a Climate Crisis which doesn’t even exist. As they ban everything which makes modern life so pleasant – cheap energy, cheap transport, the freedom to travel, the freedom to buy whatever food we want, the freedom to heat our homes the way we want – and try to lock us into small districts with their ’15-minute cities’ plans and their fines for anyone daring to leave their area, remember how we were lied to, manipulated, bullied and coerced during the Chinese lab-leaked plague, because the elites are doing exactly the same thing with their fake Climate Crisis.
Today’s blog may look fairly trivial. But it may be indicating something quite serious.
Fake journalists peddling fake news?
We saw how our supposed ‘journalists’ all fell into line during the Chinese lab-leaked plague. All of them obediently spouted the same government narrative about the need for lockdowns, our obligation to get the ‘safe’ and ‘effective’ fake miracle vaccines to ‘save granny’ and the importance of wearing completely ineffective masks. And all of them ignored the economic and social damage being caused by the policies they so enthusiastically advocated.
The way the Government and cowardly, compliant, self-serving media browbeat and manipulated us is perhaps best described in Laura Dodsworth’s 2021 book – A STATE OF FEAR:
The electric versus gas debate
Recently I’ve noticed a slew of articles telling us how wonderful supposedly ‘environmentally-friendly’ electric (induction) cookers are compared to horrible, planet-destroying, potentially family-poisoning gas cookers.
It could be that our brave, wonderfully independent-minded journalists are all just writing about a subject they feel is of interest to their readers. Or it could be that our rulers are up to their old tricks of using the media to manipulate public opinion to soften us up for when our rulers decide that they need to ban the sale of gas cookers in order for Britain to hit its ludicrously-stupid and economically-suicidal 2050 Net Zero targets to save the planet from the completely imaginary Climate Crisis.
The sale of efficient and affordable petrol cars has been banned so we’ll be forced to buy expensive and largely useless electric vehicles. The sale of efficient and affordable gas central heating has also been banned so we’ll all have to heat our homes with incredibly expensive and totally useless heat pumps.
Does anyone see a pattern here as our rulers have decided that Britain is to become a world leader in what they have called “the race to Net Zero”?
So we shouldn’t be surprised if, in their Greta-worshipping madness, our rulers decide that we plebs should also be prevented from buying efficient and affordable gas cookers and be forced to buy more expensive and less efficient electric ones.
As ‘snowmageddon’ once again hits the UK closing schools, blocking roads, disrupting airports and causing general chaos, it’s once again that time of year to remember the great prediction made by the climate-catastrophist Independent newspaper in 2000:
In the Independent article, a Dr David Viner senior research scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the ‘world famous’ University of East Anglia is quoted as saying within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event” and that “children just aren’t going to know what snow is”.
In my blog of 14 December 2022, I listed the disruption and chaos caused by snow in the UK every single year since the Independent made its bold prediction:
Thankfully the Independent, which was only read by social workers, teachers and BBC employees is no longer with us. The Independent was established in 1986 as a national morning printed paper. Nicknamed the Indy, it began as a broadsheet and changed to tabloid format in 2003. The last printed edition was published on Saturday 26 March 2016, leaving only the online edition.
But unfortunately, the climate expert quoted by the now largely-defunct Independent, still seems to be very active. According to his LinkedIn profile: David Viner has “over 30 years experience working globally in all aspects of climate change, resilience and sustainability.
Currently a Co-ordinating Lead Author for the IPCC and been involved with the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) since 1992. Lead Author on the IPCC’s Special Report on Climate Change and Land. TCFD and TNFD experience, I understand the benefits of these task forces to help mobilise the corporate sector to help deliver on the key global climate and biodiversity metrics.
His specialities are: “All aspects of the Climate Change and Development, working at the highest international level in global roles since 1991”
So it would appear to an ignoramus like myself that Mr David ‘no snow’ Viner is one of the people writing the IPCC reports on which our useless government is basing its Net Zero crusade which will destroy jobs, wreck our economy and impoverish all but the globe-trotting, jet-setting, climate-conference attending, preachy political, media and climate elites.
A history of absurd predictions
But the Independent has a bit of a history of making ludicrous climate porn predictions. Here’s what the Indy warned in May 2004:
The gentleman quoted, Sir David King is an even more distinguished scientist than David ‘no snow’ Viner. King is a former government chief scientist and the person who set up the so-called ‘Independent Sage’ which kept demanding more, faster and heavier lockdowns. Now, apparently this eminent scientist is recommending Antarctica as the best place to buy real estate over the next century.
And given that global CO2 emissions keep rising:
It seems that by the end of this century – in just 77 years, we’re all doomed,
Unless, of course, you’re lucky enough to live in the hospitably warm Antarctica where the current temperature, due to the wind, is appraised at a life-threatening -30°C.
Why oh why does anyone bother listening to (IMHO) climate-catastrophist numbskulls like these two?
Issue 1: The Amazon review of my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS
In my Monday/Tuesday blog I published a review of my book which claimed it was all a load of ‘dangerous misinformation’. I have looked again at the review and see a couple of things:
This is not what Amazon calls a ‘verified purchase’. So, as my book is only available through Amazon, either the reviewer has borrowed a copy from someone who has bought the book, or much more likely, the reviewer hasn’t either bought or read it
Half of the ‘review’ focuses on just the cover picture for the book and the other half is a rant about how catastrophic global warming is real. This once again suggests that the reviewer hasn’t read the book and is only using his/her supposed ‘review’ to try to discourage other people from buying the book
One thing our hideously-misnamed ‘social media’ has taught us is that there are millions of people out there leading such sad, pathetic and empty lives that they spend much of their time looking for things to be offended by because that makes them feel important.
Issue 2: Challenging ‘Net Zero’ with science
Three US academics have recently published a 47-page report slamming the whole ‘Net Zero’ nonsense. Most of the material in the report will be familiar to readers of this and similar blogs. While I agree with everything in this new report, personally, I find the style of the report slightly over-academic and insufficiently easily digestible for my taste. I’m not quite sure why, but I find this report badly-written, badly-organised and badly thought-through. I think it would have been better with 15 to 20 pages of hard-hitting facts demolishing the climate-catastrophist narrative rather than the rather meandering approach it takes in my humble opinion. But so often that’s a problem with real experts, they’re brilliant in their subject, but not always brilliant communicators.
Anyway, here’s a link to the report so you can judge for yourselves:
Governments around the world are taking actions to implement fossil fuel-free or “Net Zero” energy systems without a thorough examination of the scientific basis for doing so. This paper undertakes that examination by reviewing the scientific support (or lack thereof) that has been used to justify this transition to Net Zero. No attempt is made to address the significant economic, societal or environmental consequences of a near-total reliance on renewable energy and the required battery-backup that is necessary to transition to a fossil fuel free future.
Two of the paper’s authors – Drs. William Happer and Richard Lindzen, professors emeritus at Princeton University and Massachusets Institute of Technology, respectively – have spent decades studying and writing about the physics of Earth’s atmosphere. The third, Gregory Wrightstone, a geologist of more than 40 years, has spent much of the last decade writing and speaking about the interplay of geology, history and climate.
The authors find that Net Zero – the global movement to eliminate fossil fuels and its emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases – to be scientifically invalid and a threat to the lives of billions of people. Among the paper’s findings are:
Net Zero proponents regularly report that extreme weather is more severe and frequent because of climate change while the evidence shows no increase – and, in some cases, a decrease – in such events.
Computer models supporting every government Net Zero regulation and the trillions of dollars subsidizing renewables and electric cars, trucks, home heating, appliances and many other products do not work.
Scientific research and studies that do not support the “consensus” narrative of harmful man-made global warming are routinely censored and excluded from government reports such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Climate Assessment.
Conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that contradict the narrative of catastrophic global warming from fossil fuels are rewritten by government bureaucrats for public reports to support the false narrative of Net Zero.
The many benefits of modest warming and increasing carbon dioxide are routinely either eliminated or minimized in governmental reports.
Eliminating fossil fuels and implementing Net Zero policies and actions mean the elimination of fossil fuel-derived nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides that will result in about half the world’s population not having enough food to eat. Many would starve.
The adoption of Net Zero is the rejection of overwhelming scientific evidence that there is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO2.
Net Zero, then, violates the tenets of the scientific method that for more than 300 years has underpinned the advancement of western civilization.
Here’s a recent review of my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS from a reader on Amazon. The readers titles his/her review ‘Dangerous misinformation’ and gives me the lowest possible rating – one star.
This is what the reader wrote:
The cover of this book depicts a ‘doomsdayer’ and his sandwich board full of failed doomsday dates. But guess what? Climate scientists have never stood on street corners claiming the end is nigh – this is typically the behaviour of Christian evangelists in North America. And the rapture cometh not. Interesting how such an image has been wildly misappropriated to sell the entirely false idea that climate change isn’t happening, or that the scientists studying these changes are ‘doomsdayers.’
Anthropogenic climate change is available for all to see and its existence and progress has been verified by the world’s leading scientists and research bodies. It’s also verifiable by anyone with eyes. Amazon’s willingness to sell amateurish tomes packed with conjecture and misinformation is something of a stark contrast with Jeff Bezos’ insistence that the company cares about the climate.
In short: this is a tome of misinformation, authored by an individual with no accreditation or qualification to comment. Save your time.
I’d like to just spend a few moments examining this person’s criticisms.
Issue 1: ‘Climate scientists have never stood on street corners claiming the end is nigh’
Well here are a few quotes from leading climate catastrophists:
‘A senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000,’Mercury News 30 June 1989
‘Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will spread across the world …. deaths from war and famine run into the millions, until the planet’s population is reduced by such an extent the Earth can cope,’Observer 11 November 2004
‘Climate change study predicts refugees fleeing into Antarctica,’Daily Telegraph 13 October 2008
‘Barack Obama has only four years to save the world. That is the stark assessment of NASA scientist and leading climate expert Jim Hansen,’Guardian 18 January 2009
‘The best scientific projections indicate that we have very little time left – indeed less than 100 months – in which to alter our behaviour drastically,’ The UK Prince of Wales 26 May 2009
‘Four years to save the Earth: 2020 is the deadline to avert climate catastrophe, experts claim,’Daily Mail 29 June 2017
‘The planet is getting warmer in catastrophic ways. And fear may be the only thing that saves us,’New York Times February 2019
‘Climate change is the number one issue facing humanity. And it’s the number one issue for me. Unchecked it’s actually going to bake this planet,’President Joe Biden 21 March 2021
Issue 2: ‘Anthropogenic climate change has been verified by the world’s leading scientists’
In Chapter 9 of my book, I explain why the “97% of scientists” agree man-made climate change is happening claim is completely fraudulent and that the real figure may be somewhere around 8%.
Issue 3: ‘This is a tome of misinformation’
The whole point of my book is that it’s not a ‘he said – she said’ diatribe giving my opinions. What my book does is use historical documentation – newspaper articles, official statistics and real-life data – to show that every claim made by the climate catastrophists is nonsense. Here’s just one of many examples:
In the most recent US National Climate Assessment, the experts claim that the area burnt by wildfires is increasing due to supposed Global Warming:
And, of course, the mainstream media enthusiastically pushes the Global Warming narrative:
This National Climate Assessment chart conveniently starts in the 1980s. In the 1960s and 1970s, the Earth cooled so much that leading climatologists thought a new ice age was coming:
So the National Climate Assessment writers deliberately started their chart at a point where the Earth was the coolest it had been and thus wildfires would have been at their lowest level.
If we look back at burnt acreage before the official National Climate Assessment chart, we see that burnt acreage was much higher in the scorching 1920s and 1930s when atmospheric CO2 levels were much lower than they are today:
What the supposed scientists writing the National Climate Assessment report have done is hidden the data which debunks their man-made Global Warming cult in order to fool us into believing catastrophic man-made Global Warming is happening:
But even more laughably, if the New York Times ‘journalists’ who wrote the 2016 article had even read back copies of their own newspaper, they’d know that burnt acreage was much higher in the past than it is now:
After all, the 2016 New York Times article claims that the 10.3 million acres burnt were ‘the most on record’. Yet this 1937 article from the same newspaper tells us that 21,980,500 acres burnt. So how can 2016’s 10.3 million acres be the ‘most on record’?
This is just one example of how I have written my book – I have used facts and official figures to show how the climate catastrophists are continually lying to us to push their quasi-religious, end-of-days cult.
What I have done in my book is provide accurate information to debunk the alarmist and dangerous misinformation being peddled by the climate catastrophists who are trying to use the supposed ‘Climate Crisis’ as an excuse to impoverish us and control every aspect of our lives.
Issue 4: Amazon should not be selling‘amateurish tomes packed with conjecture and misinformation’
This is perhaps the most interesting comment made by the reader. Apparently this reader feels that the only books which should be allowed to be published are those which reflect this readers’ own views. That tells us all we need to know about the mentality of the woke, supposedly ‘liberal’ progressives who constantly preach at us from their positions of self-anointed moral superiority but who cannot tolerate any form of dissent to their one-sided, often unscientific opinions.
My book – THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS – has recently been published in South Korea:
It has been translated and adapted for the Korean market by a Korean professor at a technical university and has been titled CLIMATE APOCALYPSE The Greatest scam in human history
But sales of the book in South Korea have been slow. I guess there could be many reasons for this. They could include:
my book is a load of nonsense that only an imbecile would buy
South Koreans are so stupid that they don’t realise we are facing a climate apocalypse caused by human CO2 emissions
South Koreans are so smart that they know the climate catastrophists’ claims are a load of nonsense and have no intention of committing economic suicide because of some ludicrous Armageddon fantasy
Let’s look at a few charts to try to see what’s going on.
The world
First up is world CO2 emissions:
They seem to be going up and up and up as if most countries are blissfully unaware of the warnings from today’s greatest climate scientists – Greta Thunberg, Prince Harry, a bunch of private-jet-owning Hollywood luvvies and Al Gore.
European Union
Now let’s look at the EU’s CO2 emissions:
And the EU’s share of world GDP:
Oh dear, I wonder if the EU’s falling CO2 emissions and falling share of world GDP could be in any way related?
United Kingdom
What about the UK? Here are our CO2 emissions:
And here is our share of world GDP:
Could these two charts be in any way related?
South Korea
How about South Korea? Here are South Korea’s CO2 emissions:
And here is South Korea’s share of global GDP:
It’s the same the whole world over
I could go on showing charts for the USA, Canada, China and India and Vietnam and anywhere else. But they all show a similar picture – countries with rising CO2 emissions have a rising share of world GDP and countries cutting CO2 emissions have a falling share of global GDP.
I think this is telling us something.
Many western countries claim they are successfully cutting CO2 emissions in the supposed ‘race to net zero’. But they’re not cutting emissions, they’re just exporting them making developing countries richer whilst impoverishing themselves
As for why South Koreans aren’t buying my book – maybe it’s because they’re too smart to buy the climate catastrophists’ doomsday predictions and have no wish to follow the West’s example by impoverishing themselves to fight a demon – anthropogenic climate change – that doesn’t even exist?
Explaining ‘mutually exclusive’ to a stupid politician
Britannica Dictionary definition of MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE: related in such a way that each thing makes the other thing impossible: not able to be true at the same time or to exist together. A clear example is the set of outcomes of a single coin toss, which can result in either heads or tails, but not both.
(yes I do know that someone has worked out that there is a 1 in 6,000 chance a coin could land on its side but I rather doubt this figure)
Our next PM – Sir Keir ‘kneeler’ Starmer’s five pledges
Apparently our next useless prime minister has set out five missions for his government:
Securing the “highest sustained growth” in the G7 group of rich nations, made up of the UK, US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan, by the end of Labour’s first term
Making Britain a ‘”clean energy superpower”, removing fossil fuels from all of Britain’s electricity generation by 2030
Improving the NHS
Reforming the justice system
Raising education standards
Let’s just look at the first two – “highest sustained growth” in the G7 group and Making Britain a ‘”clean energy superpower”
Growth versus green
I’ll take the car industry as an example. There are about 182,000 people employed directly in car manufacturing in the UK and another 650,000 in the overall motor industry. It’s one of the most critical industries for any country wishing to have a healthy economy. As our useless politicians phase out petrol-driven cars and replace them with electric vehicles, we won’t need many of the 182,000 people involved in manufacturing. An electric vehicle requires about 30% less work than a petrol-driven car as there are fewer complex moving parts. So that’s 54,600 car workers who won’t be needed.
Then there’s the Government’s plan to reduce the number of cars on Britain’s roads by 30%. This will largely happen because many people won’t be able to afford electric vehicles. So, altogether we can expect another 54,600 manufacturing jobs to go and another 195,000 in the wider motor industry. Well done Westminster politicians, you’ve just signed the death warrant for around 304,200 motor industry jobs.
That’s NOT what most people would call the ‘economic growth’ which Starmer has promised.
IG Metall, the German union for most of that nation’s autoworkers, estimates that 75,000 German jobs building engines and transmissions will be eliminated by 2030. And just as in the UK, many more will go in the wider automotive industry.
And it’s not just the motor industry which will be destroyed by the supposed ‘green revolution’. Britain has already lost most of its heavy industry and try buying anything on Amazon that isn’t made in China. There isn’t much.
But what about the ‘green jobs’?
Of course, our politicians tell us that going green will create millions of new, high-skilled jobs. And that’s true. But where will those jobs be created? In countries with expensive power like Britain and Germany due to their move to inefficient, unreliable supposedly renewable energy?
Or will the ‘green jobs’ be in countries like China and India with reliable, cheap energy because they use lots of energy-rich coal?
China has us by the testicles
In addition, you have to consider that China has a virtual monopoly of the rare earth metals needed for our rulers’ great green revolution:
Dear Mr Starmer, do you think the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is going to allow these rare earth metals to be exported so that other countries can make solar panels and car batteries and all the other things needed to go green? Or will the CCP restrict exports of rare earth metals so that most of the manufacturing of solar panels and car batteries and other stuff will be done in China?
Going green and economic growth are incompatible. They are mutually exclusive.
This blog is a follow-on from my weekend blog about how Sunak is going to allow up to 150,000 mostly uneducated, mostly unemployable. mostly violent, many deeply-criminal illegal migrants to stay in Britain. Then Sunak will claim that he has solved the problem of paying £7m+ a day for hotels for the migrants.
Apologies if you read the comments to my blog and have already seen the comment about how the (IMHO) lying, reptilian Sunak and his bunch of incompetent cronies intend to trick us into believing that they’re ‘solving the migrant £7m-a-day hotels cost problem’. A reader got there before I did..
Getting screwed by slimy lying Sunak?
Here’s an appeal to landlords from services company Serco:
Serco is looking for tens of thousands of rentals to house Sunak’s invading army of 150,000+ slightly dubious Third-Worlders. And Serco are offering landlords a great deal – contracts of 5 years or more, guaranteed on-time rental payments, property checks and maintenance, all council and utility bills paid. No wonder tax-paying Brits can’t find properties to rent or buy when they’re being used to house tens of thousands of illegal migrants.
Oh, and if you’re wondering which stupid mug is going to pay for this – just look in the mirror
Here’s Simon Webb from History Debunked explaining how we’re being lied to.
We don’t have a housing crisis in Britain, we have an immigration crisis whereby illegal migrants are being allowed into open-borders Britain and prioritised above tax-paying Brits by getting housing and benefits few Brits could ever dream of.
It’s worth reading some of the comments to Simon Webb’s YouTube video.
On 19 December 2022, I wrote a blog in which I explained how the (IMHO) reptilian liar Blair managed to make magically disappear over 100,000 asylum seekers.
When Blair was criticised for the large number of asylum applications over the five years from 1997 (when New Labour were first elected) to 2002. He promised to cut the number of asylum applications. By 2005, honest Tony Blair was able to boast: “Asylum applications have fallen from over 8,000 a month to just over 2,000. The next set of statistics will show that monthly applications are back to their lowest level since March 1997”.
The chart below shows how trustworthy Tony was able to deliver this tremendous achievement. The dotted line is the number of asylum applications. The solid line is the number of UK citizenships granted:
What seems to have happened is that potential asylum-seekers were told that if they didn’t apply for asylum but instead sought UK citizenship, they would be granted citizenship no questions asked. British passports were being showered on illegals like confetti.
I produced this chart for my 2008 book Squandered: How Gordon Brown is wasting over one trillion pounds of our money:
At the time this complete fraud on the British people, like many other New Labour frauds I exposed in my book, was not mentioned by any of the mainstream media. But you have to remember, this was a time when Blair’s press people had almost complete control over the media. Any political journalist writing critical stories would be excluded from supposed ‘scoops’ and so would be out of a job. Whereas those writing positive stories on the Blair/Brown government would be given exclusive stories making it look like they had deep inside knowledge of what was going on in government. As I’m sure you know, the TV comedy series ‘The Thick of It’ was based on the Blair/Campbell government.
In my 19 December blog I warned that the (IMHO) spineless, lying, UK-loathing coward, Rishi Sunak, would ‘do a Blair’.
Sunak ‘does a Blair’
Now, 20 years later, our latest globalist leader Sunak is faced with a similar problem to Blair. There are anywhere between 150,000 and 166,000 asylum seekers currently in the UK waiting decisions on their claims. But Rishi has a solution – just like Blair he’ll let them all stay in the UK.
Asylum seekers will be given the right to live in the UK without having face-to-face interviews to check their claims under government plans to reduce the backlog of cases. More than 12,000 migrants from five countries with the highest asylum success rates will have their applications processed on paper, with the “vast majority” given the green light to stay in the UK without an interview.
On Thursday, Home Office officials will start contacting the asylum seekers, from Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Eritrea and Yemen, and give them a 20-day deadline to fill in and return fast-track claims forms.
Am I the only person who can see the problem? Most of these economic migrants pretending to be asylum seekers will have destroyed their identification documents before coming to Britain. So we’re going to get tens of thousands of Pakistanis and Nigerians and Congolese and Bangladeshis and many many others all suddenly claiming to be from one of these blighted, violent, excrement-covered hell-holes – Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Eritrea and Yemen. And as none of these good people will be interviewed to see if they are lying or not, they will automatically be given leave to remain in Britain.
Moreover, what the Government doesn’t mention is that anyone coming to Britain from these five countries or anywhere else will actually have come from safe France after crossing several other equally safe European countries. So, none of them should be allowed to stay in the UK. After all, according to the Dublin Convention an asylum seeker can only have his or her application considered in one of the Dublin countries. The main rule is that an application will be processed by the first Dublin country the asylum seeker comes to. Countries signed up to the Dublin Convention which include all the countries in the EU, plus Iceland, Switzerland, Norway and Liechtenstein.
Laughably, the Daily Express announced Sunak great plan with the headline: “PM to unleash massive crackdown on asylum backlog as UK hit with staggering £7m-a-day bill”
This is not a crackdown. It’s a free-for-all amnesty which will encourage millions more pieces of uneducated, unemployable, deeply criminal, West-hating, benefits-scrounging Third-world garbage to head for Benefits Britain.
The sooner we get rid of this useless, UK-hating Tory government of frauds, liars, cowards, knaves and traitors, the better.
David Craig, on March 17th, 2023
