Theresa May’s Government Is Still Lying About Wind Energy

One of the first things Theresa May did on entering Number 10 was to abolish the – entirely unnecessary – Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC); then she appeared to be considering nixing the overpriced and already outdated Hinkley Point C project; then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid made some very positive noises about fracking. All these offered encouraging auguries of even better things to come.

Sadly, it is not to be.

Theresa May is now showing every sign of being almost as deluded, cowardly, and dishonest as her thoroughly useless predecessor Dave “Husky Hugger” Cameron. One of her senior advisers Nick Timothy is known to be sceptical on green energy – he described the Climate Change Act as a “monstrous act of self harm”.

Consider this report on the levelised costs of UK electricity from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This is the department that absorbed DECC and – in the process, clearly – its army of green zealot civil servants.

If you believe the report, something truly amazing has happened to the bat-chomping, bird-slicing, taxpayer-indulged atrocity that is Britain’s onshore wind industry.

Apparently, it is now producing Britain’s cheapest electricity – cheaper, even than gas power.

image_thumb72

You have to read the small print – as Paul Homewood has done – to realise what a corrupt artefact this is.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Times Columnist Aaronovitch: Brexit Campaigners Kinda, Sorta Killed Jo Cox MP…

Mair has now been tried and sentenced to life imprisonment. We don’t know precisely what his motives were because he refused to speak – or even enter a plea – during the trial. What we do know is that he was a loner with OCD; he kept an extensive collection of Nazi literature in a shrine bookcase; he subscribed to neo-Nazi magazines and ordered books from the National Alliance, the US neo-Nazi group that inspired Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh; he kept extensive cuttings on Norwegian far-right mass murderer Anders Breivik; he compiled a dossier on Jo Cox, to whose pro-EU leanings he clearly objected; also we know that according to several reports at the time of the death – subsequently disputed – he is said to have shouted as he stabbed and shot Jo Cox “Britain First, this is for Britain.”

You might think, as I do, that here was the case of a bitter, angry, emotionally damaged loner with neo-Nazi sympathies doing what bitter, angry, emotionally damaged loners with neo-Nazi sympathies sometimes (perhaps once every four or five years) will.

But London Times columnist David Aaronovitch thinks he has a much better handle on this awful event. Apparently, deep down, it was the fault of all those ghastly people who voted Brexit. Oh, and by extension, the sort of people who voted for Donald Trump…

Here’s how I summarised his article in a Tweet this morning…

Read the rest at Breitbart.

No, Donald Trump Hasn’t Suddenly Gone Soft on ‘Global Warming’

“In shift, Donald Trump says humans may be causing global warming,” says PBS.

According to The Washington Post, meanwhile:

President-elect Donald Trump appears to be softening his tone on whether climate change is real and on his stated plans to scrap the recent multinational agreement to limit carbon emissions.

The name for this nonsense is “fake news” – as becomes clear when you read the transcripts of what President-Elect Trump actually said at his meeting with The New York Times.

THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, opinion columnist: But it’s really important to me, and I think to a lot of our readers, to know where you’re going to go with this. I don’t think anyone objects to, you know, doing all forms of energy. But are you going to take America out of the world’s lead of confronting climate change?

TRUMP: I’m looking at it very closely, Tom. I’ll tell you what. I have an open mind to it. We’re going to look very carefully. It’s one issue that’s interesting because there are few things where there’s more division than climate change. You don’t tend to hear this, but there are people on the other side of that issue who are, think, don’t even …

ARTHUR SULZBERGER Jr., publisher of The New York Times: We do hear it.

So at this point, Trump is gently introducing the NYT‘s liberals to the concept that not everyone thinks the same way on climate change as they do.

Let’s carry on, shall we?

FRIEDMAN: I was on ‘Squawk Box’ with Joe Kernen this morning, so I got an earful of it.

[laughter]

TRUMP: Joe is one of them. But a lot of smart people disagree with you. I have a very open mind. And I’m going to study a lot of the things that happened on it and we’re going to look at it very carefully. But I have an open mind.

SULZBERGER: Well, since we’re living on an island, sir, I want to thank you for having an open mind. We saw what these storms are now doing, right? We’ve seen it personally. Straight up.

FRIEDMAN: But you have an open mind on this?

TRUMP: I do have an open mind. And we’ve had storms always, Arthur.

SULZBERGER: Not like this.

TRUMP: You know the hottest day ever was in 1890-something, 98. You know, you can make lots of cases for different views. I have a totally open mind.

My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject. It’s a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know. I know we have, they say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the scientists. Where was that, in Geneva or wherever five years ago? Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about. I absolutely have an open mind. I will tell you this: Clean air is vitally important. Clean water, crystal clean water is vitally important. Safety is vitally important.

And you know, you mentioned a lot of the courses. I have some great, great, very successful golf courses. I’ve received so many environmental awards for the way I’ve done, you know. I’ve done a tremendous amount of work where I’ve received tremendous numbers. Sometimes I’ll say I’m actually an environmentalist and people will smile in some cases and other people that know me understand that’s true. Open mind.

Trump, it is obvious to anyone with half a brain, is taking the piss.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Trump at NASA: Hasta la Vista Climate Fraud and Muslim Outreach…

NASA’s top climate scientist Gavin Schmidt has warned President-Elect Donald Trump that the planet just won’t stand for having a fully-fledged climate denier in the White House.

Good luck with that one, Gavin. Or “Toast” as we’ll shortly be calling you…

Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), told the Independent:

“The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”

Unfortunately, Schmidt doesn’t feel so strongly on the issue that he is prepared to offer his resignation:

Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial, Dr Schmidt said this was “an interesting question”. It would not cause him to quit “in and of itself”, he said.

“Government science and things generally go on regardless of the political views of the people at the top,” Dr Schmidt said. “The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way or asked not to talk about your results. Those would be much more serious issues.”

Schmidt’s principled position on skewing results is somewhat ironic given that skewing results is what he does best.

Last year a German professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert – a retired geologist and data computation expert – accused NASA GISS of having tampered with the raw data so extensively that it had effectively “invented” global warming.

As I reported at Breitbart:

He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

Ewert listed some of the trickery employed by Schmidt and his egregious predecessor James “Death Trains” Hansen to exaggerate the appearance of “global warming”.

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

This chart, comparing the satellite temperature records with Schmidt’s adjusted version, gives you an idea of the scale of the climate fraud being committed by NASA GISS.

Screen-Shot-2016-11-16-at-10.17.48-PM-768x577

Among Schmidt’s many outrageous adjustments are the ones he made to Iceland’s temperature data sets.

You can see – courtesy of Paul Homewood – what he did to the one at Reykjavik:

station-6

So long and slippery are Gavin’s tentacles that, it would appear, he has somehow persuaded the Iceland Met Office to accept these adjustments, where previously it had rebutted them. You can read the full story at Real Climate Science.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Milo: Well, Would YOU Let This Dangerous Radical Near Your Vulnerable Schoolchildren?

Milo Yiannopoulos has been banned from speaking at his old school, Simon Langton grammar in Kent.

Not by the teachers –  who were naturally eager to hear his views on Donald Trump, free speech and the alt right (quite topical at the moment…). Not by the children, more than 200 of whom had already signed up to hear his talk. But by a hitherto unknown section of Britain’s Department of Education called the “counter-extremism task force.”

So secretive is this “counter-extremism task force” that it is now denying responsibility for the ban which it effected.

Here’s the weaselly statement issued by the Department of Education:

When concerns are raised by members of the public following media coverage in advance of an event, the department would contact the school as a matter of routine to check they had considered any potential issues. The decision to cancel the event was a matter for the school.

Hmm. That isn’t what the teachers are saying. They wanted Milo to come, apparently, but were overruled by this mystery section of a government ministry which presumably – to judge by its name – was established mainly to protect children from dangerous terrorists.

It’s true that Milo does advertise himself as “dangerous”. But he is using the term ironically in order to mock the hypocrisy and hysteria of the regressive left – and its ludicrous belief that anyone who doesn’t share its political outlook must therefore be a fascist and a menace to society.

The real problem the liberal-left has with Milo – and I entirely understand this fear – is that he is so eloquent, charming, well-informed and articulate. They cannot rebut his arguments so instead they demonise him.

His recent encounter with Channel 4 newsreader Cathy Newman is a case in point. For the last few days, Cathy – an ardent feminist – has been crowing about all the tweets she has been sent congratulating her on having performed so well against this terrible person.

Here are some examples:

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Britain’s Stupid Climate Policy Needs the Donald Trump Treatment

The good news is that this will make no difference to anyone or anything because the agreement is toothless and non-binding. The bad news – as you can tell from some of the ministerial comments – is that it serves to remind us that Britain’s climate and energy policy is still in thrall to the environmentalist lunacy which wiser heads like Donald Trump are trying to write out of history.

Wiser heads? Donald Trump?? Yes, I can almost hear the sneering and the jeering from the usual suspects.

But even if you disagree with Trump’s environmental and energy policy – which I don’t – it remains an unarguable fact that the world’s most powerful nation is heading in a very clear direction for at least the next four years: pro-fossil-fuels, anti-renewables. This is going to have a massive, largely positive impact on the U.S. economy because by bringing down the cost of energy, it will give consumers more disposable income and enable businesses – especially in energy-intensive heavy industry – to increase their profit margins or cut costs to the benefit of their bottom line.

At this point, America’s global economic competitors have one of two options: either they wake up and smell the coffee and move in America’s direction; or they bury their heads in the sand, pretend we’re still living in the status quo ante and sit, helpless, while America’s new higher-carbon economy steals half of their business.

Judging by the comments of the Minister for Climate Change and Industry – about as fatuous a title as being Minister for Veganism and Meat – Britain has already made up her mind:

“The UK is ratifying the historic Paris Agreement so that we can help to accelerate global action on climate change and deliver on our commitments to create a safer, more prosperous future for us all,” Nick Hurd, Minister of State for Climate Change and Industry, said.

“We are going to use this positive momentum to grow the UK low-carbon sector, which is already worth over 46 billion pounds, as we continue to provide secure, affordable and clean energy to our families and businesses,” he said.

Nick Hurd, it should be noted, had the best education money can buy at Eton. Clearly, it was utterly wasted if this is the sort of bilge he comes up with.

What can government-imposed limits on carbon dioxide emissions (which inevitably lead malinvestment, cronyism, tariffs and subsidies) possibly have to do with prosperity? Or indeed safety?

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Brexit: The Remainers Are Making an Ass of the Law; This Cannot End Well

For decades these EU fellow travellers have acquiesced in the erosion of British democracy to the point where the government in Westminster has become little more than a rubber-stamping operation for directives issued by unelected commissars at the European Commission, while English common law has been superseded by edicts invented by tinpot activist judges of dubious provenance at the European Court of Justice.

But now that Britain’s “independent judiciary” has done the right thing by ruling against the democratic will of the British people and for the interests of the entrenched Europhile elite, suddenly the Remainers are all in favour. Some have even gone so far as to demand the Prime Minister rebuke newspapers which have criticised the High Court judges’ decision, with one left-wing bishop comparing the media response to the sort of thing that went on in Nazi Germany. (Er, no, Bishop. What you seem to be criticising here is the very thing they didn’t have in Nazi Germany: a robust, free press).

Anyone expecting that the Supreme Court will override the High Court’s decision really needs to have a look at the kind of people who’ve infiltrated the higher levels of the judiciary these days. Lord Denning they most definitely ain’t.

Take Lord Carnwath. On joining Britain’s Supreme Court in 2012, he swore an oath to “do right by all manner of people” without “favour, affection or ill will”. But how does this square with the comments he made while addressing a climate conference he helped organise last year?

President Obama has said that we are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last generation that can do something about it. On that basis, the forthcoming Paris negotiations, under the UN climate change convention, are a crucial test of our ability as a global community to address those challenges.

As Donna Laframboise notes, this is not a neutral party sifting evidence but an activist judge playing politics.

These are overtly political remarks. Mentioning December’s UN Paris climate summit twice in less than a minute. Characterizing such negotiations as a crucial test for the global community. Parroting clichéd nonsense from the US president. (Eco-activists have been telling us we’re the last generation “with a chance to do anything” since at least 1970.)

Furthermore, for a judge supposedly charged with defending British interests, Lord Carnwarth seems unhealthily keen on supranational legislation created over the heads of sovereign democracies by international bodies such as the UN (or, one might well surmise, the European Union).

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Brexit: Shakespeare Was Dead Right About Lawyers…

Dan Kitwood/Getty
“Kill all the lawyers.”

This has got to be my favourite line from Shakespeare – especially after the British High Court’s decision on the EU Referendum whereby a trio of left-leaning activist judges were able to overturn the democratic will of 17.4 million people by ruling: “No. That thing you all voted for. You can’t have it because obscure technical detail…”

Some cynics saw this coming a mile off, among them the redoubtable Peter Hitchens.

Before the referendum he correctly predicted what he now calls “the greatest constitutional crisis since the Abdication of Edward VIII.”

If – as I think we will – we vote to leave the EU on June 23, a democratically elected Parliament, which wants to stay, will confront a force as great as itself – a national vote, equally democratic, which wants to quit. Are we about to find out what actually happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?’

I’m not as pessimistic as Peter Hitchens, partly because no one ever could be, and partly because I don’t want to give succour to the enemy.

Face it, we Brexiteers have enjoyed more than four deliriously happy months bathing in bitter Remainer tears, feeding on their sorrow like misery-sucking vampires, relishing every moment of their denials, their tantrums, their toys-cast-from-prams. So it’s only natural that with the roles temporarily reversed, the Remaintards should seize their brief moment in the sun and begin crowing as if somehow those three lefty ponces in ermine (or whatever it is that left-wing High Court Judges wear: thongs? Gimp suits?) were now going to stop us exiting the EU.

What’s very important, though, in these circumstances is for us not to show we’re upset, like the Remaintards have been doing since June 24. As I delicately put it on Twitter yesterday, they’re already beating themselves off pretty frenziedly as it is – and the very last thing we should do is give them any more masturbatory material.

Anyway, I interrupted myself: the real purpose of this piece was to use a topical news item about Brexit as an excuse to reiterate how much I loathe and detest lawyers.

Some of them, it’s true, are my best friends – but that’s pretty inevitable if you’re university educated: of course lots of your contemporaries will inevitably have gone to the dark side. But doesn’t mean that I don’t view their profession in much the way I view the giant orange slugs that destroy my vegetable patch or the evil squirrels which insinuate their way into my fruit cage and eat my strawberries or the fungal infections I sometimes get between my toes or the swollen mite with a mauve body and purple legs I once found clinging to my left testicle in a bucket shower in the Western Sudan in 1984. And at least with a bit of soap and gentle easing I got rid of the mite; at least I can squash the slugs and decapitate the squirrels in my squirrel trap. Lawyers on the other hand just won’t go away…

Which is as good a way as any of introducing my latest Breitbart podcast with this week’s guest Gary Bell.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

‘All the Wild Animals Are Going Extinct’ Says WWF. Yeah, Right. And I’m a Giant Panda

The analysis, the most comprehensive to date, indicates that animal populations plummeted by 58% between 1970 and 2012, with losses on track to reach 67% by 2020.

The report analysed the changing abundance of more than 14,000 monitored populations of the 3,700 vertebrate species for which good data is available. This produced a measure akin to a stock market index that indicates the state of the world’s 64,000 animal species and is used by scientists to measure the progress of conservation efforts.

The biggest cause of tumbling animal numbers is the destruction of wild areas for farming and logging: the majority of the Earth’s land area has now been impacted by humans, with just 15% protected for nature. Poaching and exploitation for food is another major factor, due to unsustainable fishing and hunting: more than 300 mammal species are being eaten into extinction, according to recent research.

Pollution is also a significant problem with, for example, killer whales and dolphins in European seas being seriously harmed by long-lived industrial pollutants. Vultures in south-east Asia have been decimated over the last 20 years, dying after eating the carcasses of cattle dosed with an anti-inflammatory drug. Amphibians have suffered one of the greatest declines of all animals due to a fungal disease thought to be spread around the world by the trade in frogs and newts.

Rivers and lakes are the hardest hit habitats, with animals populations down by 81% since 1970, due to excessive water extraction, pollution and dams. All the pressures are magnified by global warming, which shifts the ranges in which animals are able to live, said WWF’s director of science, Mike Barrett.

What can we do to prevent this happening?

Well I can think two immediate steps we can all take.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Britain’s Virtue-Signalling Wankerati Welcome Syria’s Refugee Men-Children

Using your skill and judgement, see if you can guess which aspect of this scandal is most troubling the British celebrity chattering classes, aka the Wankerati.

Is it:

a) Potentially dangerous illegal migrants are burning their passports and lying about their age in order to take advantage of the gullibility, inefficiency and political correctness of Britain’s immigration officers and gain citizenship to which they are in no way entitled, at the expense of more deserving candidates and without the consent of the British people, who are going to be stuck forever with these cheating scumbags;

b) The French. It’s the bloody French’s fault. They’ve been desperate to get rid of the violent, sexually predatory, criminal mob of migrants making life hell for everyone in the Calais Jungle and this “Zut alors! But we thought all Syrian children had crow’s feet, walking sticks and white beards!” buck-passing is their devious French way of getting rid of a few of them, knowing the English will be too polite to complain:

c) Britain’s hard-pressed social services are being overwhelmed. As Harriet Sergeant reports in this must-read article in the Daily Mail, workers in residential care homes are now wearily used to having to house refugees in their 20s and 30s masquerading as children. Naturally, this has a disastrous effect on both the local schools forced to take these patently unsuitable adults into their classrooms, and also on the care homes where these dodgy young men corrupt the real children with drugs, alcohol, and sex.

Yes, you guessed correctly: it’s none of the above.

Read the rest at Breitbart.