At this point, we perhaps need to stop and ask ourselves the awkward, yet obvious question, ‘what else does the mainstream-media feverishly lie to us about, every day, every hour, every minute on ‘climate change’, specifically, in this case, The Great Barrier Reef? And, for what purpose, which agenda, whose ideology?’
A remarkable example of media and academic deceit unfolding before your very own eyes, in the case of Ridd Vs James Cook Universirty Vs Academic Freedom (Truth) Vs the survival of enquiry (the survival of human civilisation).
Peter Ridd: Great Barrier Reef ‘has completely recovered’ from 2016 bleaching event
Date: 22/06/21 Sky News Australia
Physicist and author Peter Ridd says just about every area of the Great Barrier Reef – according to the statistics – “has completely recovered” since the 2016 bleaching event and is in “no danger”.
“The area which was hit by the 2016 bleaching has completely recovered; every area except one has got above average coral cover, some at near-record levels… so actually the statistics make it look wonderful,” he said.
“Our untrustworthy science institutions have now given the Chinese the ammunition to beat us with. We need audits of our own scientists so we can’t be crucified with our own work.
“If climate change is going to affect the Great Barrier Reef, it’s going to affect all the reefs of the world, but they’re only picking on Australia because they don’t like our climate policy – it’s just a political stunt that has been fuelled by our own untrustworthy science institutions.”
“When will common sense and good science prevail, and what happens if does not do so fairly soon?” – Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
“You see gigantic wind turbines appearing all over the country, but there is very little about the practical value of these monstrosities.” – Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
•
THE great Rowan Dean of Sky News “Outsiders” fame, details an extraordinary letter sent from Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, to author and geologist Ian Plimer back in 2018.
Prince Philip was a climate change sceptic. In correspondence to Spectator Australia contributor and author Ian Plimer back in 2018, the Duke of Edinburgh not only compliments Professor Plimer on his most recent book, The Climate Change Delusion, but also praises his previous book ‘Heaven and Earth’, which similarly questioned the ‘missing science’ behind the global warming scam.
Furthermore, in the letter which Ian has kindly provided to The Spectator Australia, the late Prince — who was never one to mince his words — described the wind turbines now blotting the landscapes globally as ‘monstrosities’.
Here is the letter from Windsor castle, dated 29 April 2018:
What a great question. As we can see, Prince Philip, a Patron of the Royal Geographical Society admired the work and writing of geologist Ian Plimer. In fact, the Prince attempted to invite Professor Plimer to London to address the Royal Society of Artists (RSA) on the topic of climate change. That invitation was later rescinded by the mandarins at the Palace, as was documented by James Delingpole in the UK Telegraph at the time. As Delingpole wrote:
Here’s part of the embarrassed kiss-off Prof Plimer received from the RSA’s chief executive:
I am afraid I am writing to you with some disappointing news regarding the Prince Philip Annual Lecture on 5 May.
As you well know, the debate around climate change has recently become highly politically charged, both globally and especially in your home country. Equally, as I am sure you are aware, members of the Royal Family need to be scrupulous in avoiding any appearance of advocating or supporting a particular political stance. The RSA’s charitable status also requires us to maintain absolute political independence in our programme of events and research events.
After discussion with Buckingham Palace, it is therefore with great regret that we must withdraw your invitation to give this year’s PrincePhilip Lecture. The Duke of Edinburgh is personally disappointed as he read your book with great interest and was looking forward to hearing you speak, but I know that you will recognise that the now highly controversial debate surrounding this issue would make it inevitable that he was seen to be taking a particular position.
What is extraordinary about that letter is that as well as confirming the Prince’s admiration for the Professor, it points out that the Royal Family should have nothing to do with the politics of climate change. Yet today, a decade on, both future monarchs Prince Charles and Prince William, the former in particular in advocating the Great Reset and embracing Greta Thunberg, and the latter in his fondness for Sir David Attenborough, are in climate politics up to their eyeballs.
Prince Philip, now that he’s finally in his grave, will surely spend a great deal of the years ahead spinning in it.
“It’s like the boy who repeatedly cried wolf. If I observe many successive forecast failures, I may be unwilling to take future forecasts seriously.
“The ‘problem’ is not only that all of the expired forecasts were wrong, but also that so many of them never admitted to any uncertainty about the date.”
Every once in a while, ‘a few brave scientists’, driven by verifiable science, empirical data, and an endless supply of failed predictions, feel obliged to tell you a few home truths about ‘climate change’ and the failure of manufactured hysteria, all designed to scare you into submission.
This bothers them, naturally.
Article, via the ‘International Journal of Global Warming’ …
For decades, climate change researchers and activists have used dramatic forecasts to attempt to influence public perception of the problem and as a call to action on climate change. These forecasts have frequently been for events that might be called “apocalyptic,” because they predict cataclysmic events resulting from climate change.
In a new paper published in the International Journal of Global Warming, Carnegie Mellon University’s David Rode and Paul Fischbeck argue that making such forecasts can be counterproductive. “Truly apocalyptic forecasts can only ever be observed in their failure—that is the world did not end as predicted,” says Rode, adjunct research faculty with the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, “and observing a string of repeated apocalyptic forecast failures can undermine the public’s trust in the underlying science.”
Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.
Fischbeck noted, “from a forecasting perspective, the ‘problem’ is not only that all of the expired forecasts were wrong, but also that so many of them never admitted to any uncertainty about the date. About 43% of the forecasts in our dataset made no mention of uncertainty.”
More information: David C. Rode et al, Apocalypse now Communicating extreme forecasts, International Journal of Global Warming (2021). DOI: 10.1504/IJGW.2021.112896
SOME might argue that the latest global temperature, as measured by x15 NASA/NOAA AMSU (advanced microwave sounding unit) satellites, measuring literally every square inch of the lower troposphere (the exact place where ‘man-made global warming’ is supposed to occur) might be an anomaly caused by the de-industrialisation experiment carried out during draconian COVID-19 lockdowns.
Not so, according to the UN’s own meteorological agency, the WMO.
They concluded that despite the draconian COVID-19 lockdowns that initiated the greatest de-industrialisation science experiment ever carried out in human history, CO₂ levels failed to drop…
Ergo, if CO₂ concentrations didn’t budge, at all, during the most comprehensive global science experiment ever undertaken in mankind’s history, then how do we know that they are even ‘ours’ to ‘bring down’?
NOAA current data reveals that global CO₂ levels are higher now, not lower, than at the same period in 2020.
So, if CO₂ levels are naturally increasing, then why is the global atmospheric temperature, according to NASA’s own MSU satellites, now below the 40 year average?
LATEST NASA/NOAA SATELLITE, GLOBAL TEMPERATURE ANOMALY
UAH Global Temperature Update for March 2021: -0.01 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD
April 2nd, 2021 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for March, 2021 was -0.01 deg. C, down substantially from the February, 2021 value of +0.20 deg. C.
REMINDER: We have changed the 30-year averaging period from which we compute anomalies to 1991-2020, from the old period 1981-2010. This change does not affect the temperature trends.
Right on time, the maximum impact from the current La Nina is finally being felt on global tropospheric temperatures. The global average oceanic tropospheric temperature anomaly is -0.07 deg. C, the lowest since November 2013. The tropical (20N-20S) departure from average (-0.29 deg. C) is the coolest since June of 2012. Australia is the coolest (-0.79 deg. C) since August 2014. The linear warming trend since January, 1979 remains at +0.14 C/decade (+0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land). UAH Global Temperature Update for March 2021: -0.01 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD
After decades of alarmism about global warming frying the planet, the latest UAH satellite measures show warming of 0.01 [below] the average at the end of last century. No warming at all. And nothing that could cause all the catastrophes that have been claimed. You’ve heard this news on the ABC, right? No?
•
Background on AMSU (UAH/RSS data) satellites:
NASA/NOAA AMSU ATMOSPHERIC SATELLITES
NASA’s 15 MSU and AMSU satellites generate the RSS and UAH datasets, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower troposphere, the exact place where global warming climate change theory is meant to occur.
UAH (University Alabama Huntsville) satellite data set run byDr. John R. Christy – Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, and Roy Spencer Ph.D. – Principal Research Scientist at UAH.
IN today’s chaotic world of 24/7 news, views and grievances, the tendency to invoke highly emotive issues, such as “climate change”, or “race”, is all too often used to ensure that a message is heard.
Unfortunately, for such messengers, the internet of today (for now) is all-pervasive, meaning that even those with the most basic internet search capabilities can discover for themselves how duplicitous, unauthentic, insincere and contradictory some of these messages can be.
No “science”, no reasonable explanation other than appealing to readers’ ingrained climate ‘fears’, and an arbitrary date of 2050 – extended out far enough so that no one has to take responsibility if the prediction fails.
ON the other end of the scale, the ClimateChange™️ grifters are shamelessly blaming Eastern Australia’s current flood crisis on you and your ‘lavish’ existence :
The “Climate Council” is a privately funded, activist organisation founded by Tim Flannery, who famously stated this about Australia’s natural water future, in 2007 :
A Must Watch for all ‘elected’ representatives who aren’t yet familiar with the malevolent intentions, sinister mechanisms, and poverty-stricken outcomes of a Carbon Tax.
We’ve been hearing a lot about the virtues of a carbon tax. Some even have the gall to call it a “dividend”. Don’t be fooled by the fluffy talk. A tax on carbon is a bad idea—a combination of lots of big bad stuff—big government, big corporate influence, big deception, big job losses and big taxes on all of us.
“Action must be powerful and wide-ranging. After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it. We need to dismantle them all.” – GretaThunberg™️
“Play silly games, expect silly prizes!” – Dan Bongino
CONTRARY to popular (mainstream media) belief, CO₂ is an odourless, *invisible* trace gas and, thankfully, there are still many brave climate scientists who prioritise the scientific method, real-world observation and empirical evidence over U.N. climate models, fame, career advancement, politics, ideology and activism.
Recent warming in Europe/Poland is explained by a 2 W/m²/decade increase in incoming solar radiation (sunshine duration) due to the declining cloud cover since 1980.
CO₂ isn’t mentioned as a factor affecting climate …
“Watch for the moment when you’re told ‘science’ means not asking questions, defying dogma, or challenging ‘consensus’. That is the literal definition of faith, not science.” – John Hayward
•
AN epic Twitter thread by journalist John Hayward that has been circulating the internet for good reason. It is a thoughtful, timely and magnificent piece of writing and cultural insight unpacked here for you to ponder.
Enjoy…
•
One factor in that transformation is the Beautiful Theory phenomenon: the power elite insists its remedies are logical and politically correct so they MUST work, even if the actual evidence shows they obviously don’t.
When Beautiful Theories crash into hard, cold reality and shatter, faith is the glue used by the elites to put their precious ideas back together. They need MILITANT faith to get the job done: true believers eager to crush doubt and compel obedience by making war on the infidels.
Some are swept into the faith because they desperately crave a sense of control over the crisis. They need to believe Something Can Be Done, and they’d rather invest their faith in debunked Beautiful Theories than have no faith at all. Faith is a coin that demands to be spent.
Some crave social approval, and the purveyors of Beautiful Theories have immense political, economic, and cultural power to make their faith seem fashionable. Virtue signalling is such a plague in modern society because the signals are pre-packaged and made very easy to send.
Some aren’t even hoping they can assert control over a crisis by converting to its religion. They’ll settle for just having some MEANING, some simplicity, a sense that the righteous will fare better than the unbelievers, that virtue will be rewarded while sin is punished.
That’s a very common impulse with the Church of Covid, since the Beautiful Theories were so very obviously wrong. There isn’t much left of the faith except the visceral communal satisfaction of hoping unbelievers will be punished for their blasphemies with sickness and death.
That sort of thing happens with all of the crisis religions, although not usually as quickly and obviously as with the Church of Covid. Look at the endless stream of movies about how the world became an apocalyptic hellscape because people didn’t believe in global warming.
The last resort of every crisis religion, the last thing that puts asses in the pews, is that addiction to misery porn, the collective hope that unbelievers will suffer someday, and everyone will admit the True Faith was right all along as Judgement Day crashes down upon them.
The elite will never have the humility to admit they were wrong, and they’ll never give up on politically or financially profitable “solutions” even when they obviously don’t solve the problem. Founding a crisis religion means they never have to say they’re sorry.
That applies to some very longstanding crises, like the War on Poverty, whose nostrums long ago transformed into fantastically expensive articles of religious faith even as mountains of data accumulated that proved they were utter failures, and often made the problems WORSE.
You can look for some telltale signs of a crisis transforming into a religion. The most obvious one is when the high priests tell you the “war” you’ve been drafted into will never end. They become very angry when asked to define success or failure, or lay out exit strategies.
Watch for the moment when you’re told “science” means not asking questions, defying dogma, or challenging “consensus.” That is the literal definition of faith, not science.
Always keep an eye out for Moving Goalposts, which are the signature miracle of crisis religions, their version of parting the waters or loaves and fishes. Crisis religions work very hard to make their faith unfalsifiable by constantly changing the standards of evidence.
Check to see if certain people are accumulating huge amounts of money and power from a crisis. That’s a pretty good sign it’s turning into a religion. A crisis should be solved as quickly and efficiently as possible. Don’t let it fester long enough to become a special interest.
Above all, look for the whiff of ARROGANCE to develop around a crisis. Wise religions and effective crisis managers have something in common: a sense of humility. Crisis religions are militant faiths that quickly become arrogant, smug, and totalitarian.
Dedicated people who truly want to solve a problem will look for evidence their analysis is wrong, or their policies aren’t working, and make adjustments as quickly as possible, no matter the cost or embarrassment to themselves. This is humility.
Crisis religions are arrogant. They reject criticism, insist their Beautiful Theories MUST be right because they’re ideologically pure – they fit snugly into a worldview that must not be challenged. Their plans only fail because their commands were disobeyed or sabotaged.
The high priests of a crisis religion see devils everywhere, leering at them from the rubble of every failure. Only sin can explain why their Beautiful Theories are tarnished. Failure never THEIR fault, so it must be YOURS. They find your lack of faith disturbing.
And you know what? A LOT of people want to see the world that way, including a great many self-described atheists. They hunger for the comfort of faith and the vibrant energy of militancy. They want to be right, and they want the wrong to suffer for their folly.
Conservatives think religious faith in the State is terrifying and wonder why so many embrace it. It’s because uncertainty is much more frightening. A simple false story is better than a complex true one, and with enough faith, maybe we can force the simple story to be true.
THE short video at the end of this post – “GASLIGHTING, UNENDING LOCKDOWNS AND CLIMATE CHANGE” – is what our children should actually be watching during their endless, state-enforced COVID19 lockdowns.
Maybe then, their year(s) of lost education may not be so lost.
You should also teach them how the unelected globalist bureaucrats at the WHO (funded by the global taxpayer) leave no stone unturned in their quest to rewrite history and science to further their malevolent ambitions :
And, then ask them if they would like to “own nothing” when they grow up, as stated by that other UN affiliate, the globalist WEF.
Snapshot taken from an actual @WEF tweet in 2016, now since deleted :
Here’s another tweet recently deleted by the WEF following similar public backlash :
Quote by Steven Cooper - 'These pulsation waves of air occur at a very low rate and activate the brain's sensory receptors. It has been suggested that the brain becomes confused, the brain thinks it receives noise, but there is no noise - just the pulsations".
GREAT Barrier Reef Recovery – Climatism 
Global warming has changed the Great Barrier Reef ‘forever,’ scientists say | The Washington…
Recent Comments