Big, hot, shiny orb in sky caused by ‘climate change’ says UK Met Office | James Delingpole

August 15th, 2010

Is “climate change” to blame for the smog in Moscow and the peat fires which have swept across Russia and devastated 30 per cent of its wheat harvest?

But of course, says a man from the Met Office, as reported in a BBC bulletin so predictably skewed towards AGW alarmism it might just as well have been taken from a press release by the World Worldlife Fund

, who – quel surprise! – sees the fires as a clear sign that greenhouse gases must urgently be reduced).

For a more balanced perspective, try this interview with Pat Michaels on RT.

Or this interview with Piers Corbyn.

Michaels believes the Russian heat wave has more to do with a “jet stream anomaly”, while Corbyn – whose WeatherAction long range forecast predicted the heat wave – says it is caused by “circulation patterns caused by a combination of solar activity and the phase of the moon.” Similar climatic patterns – a heat wave in Russia, flooding on the Indian subcontinent and wet English summers – were experienced 132 years ago. We have been here before, in other words. Nihil novi sub sole.

Yeah but Corbyn and Michaels are both sceptics so of course they’re bound to play down the Climate Change problem. Well maybe but the stubborn fact remains that there has been no net global warming since 1998. It may feel hot right now if you’re in Moscow or parts of the USA, but there are other parts of the world which are experiencing abnormally cold conditions, as C3headlines reports here. The Pacific is experiencing unpredecented cooling, Argentina is colder than Antarctica, Santiago in Chile has had its coldest July since 1908.

But don’t expect to hear much about this inconvenient cold from the Met Office or the BBC. It doesn’t fit their narrative.

(to read more, click here)

Share

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

‘Der Krieg ist verloren!’ declares confused, angry, trembly-handed Al Gore in bunker conference call | James Delingpole

August 15, 2010

Angry butterball: Al Gore

Angry butterball: Al Gore

“This battle has not been successful and is pretty much over for this year,” a shaken Al Gore has told his supporters, conceding that there is now next to no chance of US Congress passing a Climate Bill in 2010. (H/T Julian Morris).

As recorded by Steve Milloy at the Green Hell Blog, the bloated sex poodle was on magnificently paranoid form, lashing out in all directions at the enemies responsible for his mission’s failure, up to and including the US President:

Gore bitterly denounced the Senate and federal government stating several times, “The U.S. Senate has failed us” and “The federal government has failed us.” Gore even seemed to blame President Obama by emphasizing that “the government as a whole has failed us… although the House did its job. [emphasis added]”

Gore’s deadliest venom, however, was reserved for the kind of scumbags who read this blog – and of course for the Big Oil companies who fund our lavish lifestyles:

Gore said “the government was not working “as our founders intended it to” and laid more blame at the feet of fossil fuel interests who conducted a “cynical coordinated campaign” with “unprecedented funding” and “who have spent hundreds of millions of dollars just on lobbying.” He criticized “polluters” for “dumping global warming pollution into the atmosphere like it was an open sewer.”

Gore blamed the skeptics for “attacking science and scientists.” “They [the skeptics] did damage and cast doubt,” Gore said.

He also quite rightly recognised how hideously biased the MSM is on the global warming issue.

Asked why the alarmists were ineffective in addressing Climategate, Gore bitterly blamed a “biased right-wing media… bolstered by professional deniers.” Gore claimed the Wall Street Journal published 30 editorial and news articles about Climategate and “not a single one presented [his] side of the science.”

Yeah, that’ll be it, Al. Very powerful newspaper the Wall Street Journal. Nobody reads anything else.

Oh, and in the bit before Gore spoke, his warm up man Larry Schweiger of the National Wildlife Federation came on and described sceptics as “bastards” whom he hoped that True Believers in ManBearPig would outlive.

Which was nice.

Related posts:

  1. Greenies: the Red, the Dumb and the Angry
  2. My moment of rock-star glory at a climate change sceptics’ conference in America
  3. ‘Global warming’: time to get angry
  4. The BBC: Al Gore’s UK propaganda mouthpiece

 

How the BBC censored my monstrous, hideously offensive ‘Irish joke’ | James Delingpole

August 15, 2010

On Any Questions I apparently told a joke so offensive that it had to be censored by the BBC.

I say “apparently” because I wasn’t even aware I’d told a joke, let alone one worthy of censorship, till I discovered that the BBC had cut it out of the Saturday lunchtime repeat of the programme.

Typical Irishmen, yesterday

Typical Irishmen, yesterday

The “offensive joke” was something I’d said while prefacing some remarks about our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I referred to the Irishman who, when asked for directions says: “If you want to get there you don’t want to start from here.”

I suppose if I’d considered it a joke, I might have essayed an Irish accent, or prefaced it with “Sure” or “Begorrah” or “Bejaysus, shor” or some such, and maybe done a little jig with my hands stapled to my sides while drinking a pint of Guinness and wearing a St Patrick’s Day comedy shamrock hat and then left a little gap afterwards so that the audience could express their delight in gales of laughter. But as far as I understand it – as, indeed, I believe most sane people understand it – is that it’s one of those old sayings, more often than not told by the Irish themselves, to illustrate a kind of perverse, quirky, counterintuitive streak that makes the Irish way of thinking so comically, lovably Irish.

This isn’t to say that I’m in any way against the telling of Irish jokes nor that I would have refrained from telling one if I could have thought of an appropriate one on Any Questions. All I’m saying that on this particular occasion I wasn’t telling an Irish joke, let alone an offensive one. The fact that the BBC is so foolish enough to believe otherwise speaks volumes about the culture of political correctness, hypersensitivity and gratuitous offence-taking in which we now live.

My friend Douglas Murray writes of even worse experiences – again at the hands of chippy Irish grievance mongers – in the Spectator this week.

If this is where we’re going, truly I fear for our country even more than I was doing already when I woke up this morning to read in my paper that David Cameron has pronounced himself happier to be governing in a Brokeback Coalition with a bunch of bizarre, Lib Dem ecofreaks and crypto Communists than he would have been had he won a Conservative majority.

Related posts:

  1. Britain: still stuffed under joke Tories
  2. Nick Clegg’s riot inquiry panel is beyond a joke
  3. Giles Coren says: ‘Climate Change. It’s SNOW joke!!!’
  4. Just what is it that greens like George Monbiot find so offensive about prosperity, abundance, happiness?

3 thoughts on “How the BBC censored my monstrous, hideously offensive ‘Irish joke’”

  1. Peter Walsh says:15th August 2010 at 1:46 pmThe BBC should grow a sense of humour, and while they are at that, maybe they should also grow an ability to present a balanced view on one of your favourite subjects, AGW. That Irish joke is as old as the hills. It is still funny. I am Irish and have absolutely no problem with your passing it on. Do you think they need a humour implant over there?
  2. bigkenny says:16th August 2010 at 5:59 amI can understand why you are enraged, Mr Delingpole, but its hardly surprising. This country is well on the way to the dogs. The BBC is barely worth listening to anymore. You will soon not be able to joke, or look at anyone in the street, or anywhere else. We are all to be Zombies. Mr Murrays piece in the Spectator, was downright frightening.
  3. forthurst says:22nd August 2010 at 2:12 pmDelingpole is far worse than a xenophobe; he is the mangler of a good joke. The Irishman said, “If I were you, I wouldn’t start from here.”

I know exactly what I want to read this summer — if only I could find it | James Delingpole

I know exactly what I want to read this summer — if only I could find it

What I thought I’d do this summer holidays is catch up with all those classics I’ve been meaning to read for ages: A la recherche du temps perdu, Moby-Dick, David Copperfield, Crime and Punishment, Madame Bovary, Vanity Fair, everything by the Brontës, anything German, Metamorphosis, the Odyssey, the Iliad, most Balzac, anything by P.G. Wodehouse, Our Mutual Friend, Anna Karenina…

But where to start?

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. The best article on wind farms you will ever read
  2. Meet The Sceptics: another BBC stitch-up
  3. Never mind the global economic collapse: what about plastic bags???
  4. Most gay men have realised that the Oppressed Victimhood party is totally over

One thought on “I know exactly what I want to read this summer — if only I could find it”

  1. Kevin says:21st August 2010 at 2:30 amGerman- anything by W.G.Sebald

What the Chinese Really Think of ‘Man Made Global Warming’

Another BRIC in the wall

Low-income coal miners rest before starting their shift in a privately run coal mine close to You Fang Liang, Ningxia Province, north eastern China (Photo: EPA)

Low-income coal miners rest before starting their shift in a privately run coal mine close to You Fang Liang, Ningxia Province, north eastern China (Photo: EPA)

One of the great lies told us by our political leaders in order to persuade us to accept their swingeing and pointless green taxes and their economically suicidal, environmentally vandalistic wind-farm building programmes is that if we don’t do it, China will. Apparently, just waiting to be grabbed out there are these glittering, golden prizes marked “Green jobs” and “Green technologies” – and if only we can get there before those scary, mysterious Chinese do, well, maybe the West will enjoy just a few more years of economic hegemony before the BRICs nations thwack us into the long grass.

This is, of course, utter nonsense. The Chinese do not remotely believe in the myth of Man-Made Global Warming nor in the efficacy of “alternative energy”. Why should they? It’s not as if there is any evidence for it. The only reason the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming myth has penetrated so deeply into Western culture is… No. I’m going to save that stuff for my fairly imminent (Nov?) book on the subject which I hope you’re all going to buy.

What do the Chinese think about CAGW? Well, until now it was largely a question of educated guesswork, based on inferences like the fact that it was the Chinese who derailed the Copenhagen negotiations. But thanks to a new book called Low Carbon Plot by Gou Hongyang we know exactly what the official view is.

Ozboy – one of the finest commenters in this parish as well as proprietor of the Liberty Gibbet website – sets the scene nicely:

The argument [that China leads the world in renewable energy technology investment] rings a little hollow when you consider Beijing plans to build coal-fired power stations at the equivalent rate of one Australia, per year, for the next twenty-five years. The reputed Chinese fascination with renewable energy looks at best, a very long-term fallback position; at worst, a façade.

That’s what makes what you’re about to read even more startling. It’s a book called Low Carbon Plot, by Gou Hongyang and, as it’s freely available in China’s government-controlled bookstores, carries Beijing’s nihil obstat. No English translation is currently available, but our own China correspondent, Locusts, has translated the introduction from the original Mandarin, and (not entirely without risk to himself) has asked me to make it publicly available on this forum. At four thousand words, it’s a little long to insert onto a blog page, but you can navigate to it from the Rare Scribblings menu option at the top, or just click here.

It’s not so much an eye-opener as it is a bombshell. If true, it shows the Chinese government as rejecting CAGW in its entirety, believing it a conspiracy between Western governments and business to protect their own way of life, at the expense of the entire developing world—in other words, 80% of the world’s population.

Ozboy does not exaggerate.

Here, for example, is the author’s damning verdict on the Climate Change industry. Noting the irony of the spate of freezing cold weather that greeted the Copenhagen summit, the author wrily notes:

It was as if the freezing cold winter was having a laugh at all of these “Global Warming” theories. If the world was warming at an ever quickening pace, as all of these environmentalists say, then whence from such extreme cold? Whenever there are any doubts about Global Warming, it is almost as though environmentalists turn everything around and claim that this is too, a result of Global Warming. The Greenhouse Effect has turned in to a big basket, no matter what bad thing it is, just chuck it in.

He is even more damning about solar power in which, let it not be forgotten, China is supposed to be the world’s most shining example of just how well it can work.

First, he neatly captures the wishy-washy, John-Clare-esque pastoral utopianism which drives greenies to throw commonsense out of the window and pursue “renewable energy” regardless of all the facts:

Isn’t this the most beautiful thought possible, no pollution, everywhere is just greenery mountains and rivers, people won’t need to worry about coal mines collapsing, no need to worry about forests being chopped down, no need to worry about rising sea levels submerging island nations. It is as if, if only humanity could adopt clean energy, then all of our problems would be resolved with one sweep of the knife. But is the result really thus?

There is a very real problem staring everybody in the face. Solar power, wind power, can they be implemented on a large scale? Can they provide large scale industries with enough electricity? Can they supply trains with the power to fly along the tracks?

It is obvious, that the answer is in the negative.

He then – rather daringly, I think – weighs into the environmental unsoundness of this supposedly clean energy source:

Is solar power really clean? Investigations show that the base silicon that solar panels rely on is extracted via a energy intensive, heavily polluting industry. And where is this industry based? China.

China has already become the world’s biggest photovoltaic industrial market. The most important ingredient in solar power is polycrystalline silicon. The efficiency of manufacturing the panels is rather low, and a lot of pollution is generated as a by-product. When local industries started producing polycrystalline silicon, they were mostly reliant on outdated technology. Apart from high energy consumption, for every ton of pure polycrystalline silicon created, there were also more than 8 tons of ammonium chlorid[adized] silcon as by-product, as well as [other shit that a cursory look at google translate doesn’t answer].

The prosperity of China’s solar power industry, at the price of the environment of those rather weak distant regions, in order to attract commerce and investment, in order to collect tax revenue, very many environmental appraisal programmes have not yet been strictly implemented.

Here is the author eloquently demolishing the Carbon = Poison meme:

Will the increase in Carbon Dioxide definitely lead to the planet warming? Although there have been many many reports published by research institutes that verify this, but from the viewpoint of the history of man, and scientific method, the theories have not yet achieved scientific proof.

But, after many years of repeated indoctrination from every kind of propaganda machine, and the mixing together of environmental pollution and the exhaustion of natural resources, people have already formed a conditioned reflex, when the wind blows, the grass bends with it, and quickly hang these things on the hook of “carbon”, and attempted to get rid of carbon at a faster rate. We need to start peeling, and get back to the real world, and cannot stick labels everywhere. “Carbon” is the same “carbon” it was before, we must not get in to too much of a fluster. It is with polluted water/effluent, acid rain, destructive logging and waste with which we must struggle over the long term.

And here he is concluding that it is a fiendish plot – a new Cold War to all intents and purposes – by the West to suppress the economic growth of the BRICS nations.

Behind the back of the demonizing of “carbon”, we must recognize that it is the sinister intention of the Developed Countries to attempt to use “carbon” to block the living space of the Developing Countries.

There is only one Earth, natural resources are limited. If according to current technological conditions, and Developing Countries had the same living standard as Developed Countries, then we’d need at least 3 to 5 Earth’s to satisfy our appetites. This is what Developed Countries are most afraid of, the development of the Developing Countries poses an enormous threat to their way of lives.

In 2008, the price of foodstuffs substantially increased, a certain President actually said that the primary reason was because suddenly, one day, 300 million Indians started to eat two bowls of rice, and one billion Chinese started to drink milk.

In the eyes of some Westerners, the many developing countries have absolutely no right to enjoy the same standard of life as them.

If we really are equal, are of one mind, and together protect the Earth – our garden, we really can see a beautiful utopia in the future. But the Developed countries do not in the slightest wish to take any responsibility, they have set up double standards over “carbon emissions”, everywhere  reflecting their arrogance and selfishness.

Behind “the Carbon Plot” is national interest, it is the bitter struggle for the right to existance for every country.

At this time, we again see the struggle between two camps, Europe, the USA and other developed countries, and China, India, Brazil, and Russia as the representatives of the Developing Countries, owing to their common interest, now walking closely together.

Personally, I think his conclusion says more about BRICs chippiness and paranioa than it does socio-political actualite. The CAGW scam owes much more to an attempted power grab by the left in order to achieve “environmentally” in the 21st century what it couldn’t achieve economically in the 20th Century, viz: total state control of the means of production, in the guise of ecological correctness.

But it doesn’t really matter whether the author is right or wrong in what he thinks. What matters is simply that this IS how the Chinese think, which, whether you love China or loathe it is fantastically good news for those of us in the realist/sceptics camp. China, after all, is the world’s future dominant economic power and, this being so, it makes an absolute nonsense of attempts by the EU and the US to hamper our industrial growth by imposing on our economies eco-taxes and eco-regulations which the Chinese intend to ignore completely.

This truth hasn’t hit home yet: not in the EU; not in the Cleggeron Coalition; not in Obama’s USA. Here’s my bet. The first to see sense on this will be whichever Republican administration takes over from Obama’s one-term presidency in 2012. From that point on – by which time we’ll have had two more exceptionally cold winters to concentrate our minds – British and European environmental policy will look increasingly foolish and irrelevant.

Related posts:

  1. How come we now have to go to the Chinese for the truth about global warming?
  2. Why we can all stop worrying about ‘Global Warming’ for a bit
  3. Green jobs? Wot green jobs? (pt 242)
  4. The real cost of ‘global warming’

One thought on “What the Chinese really think of ‘Man Made Global Warming’.”

  1. Locusts says:17th August 2010 at 4:24 amJames,

    Thanks for picking up the story. Feel free to contact me if you wish.

Comments are closed.

Anyone up for a Spot of Red Kite Shooting?

August 7th, 2010

Though I’m aware that taking pot shots at birds of prey is generally considered unsporting, there are so many in the part of mid-Wales I’m staying right now that I think they almost qualify as a pest. Plus, of course, it would really, really, REALLY annoy the RSPB. And annoying the RSPB, to my mind, is such a noble and worthwhile task it’s kind of the modern equivalent of being a medieval peasant and doing the pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostella or dying of dysentry on the Crusades: it earns you a top tier seat in the kingdom of heaven because, you know what? Even GOD hates the RSPB, that’s how awful it is.

Why does God hate the RSPB so much? Well, obviously I can’t presume to enter the brain of the Almighty, but I suspect that in general terms He loathes the organisation’s cant and hypocrisy and weaselly leftishness (God, of course, being a true Tory) and that what really got His goat specifically this week was the story about the declining kestrel population.

The RSPB, with wearisome inevitability, blamed it on “intensive farming.” Does the kestrel’s decline really have anything to do with intensive farming? Of course not. As the Country Landowners Association pointed out in response some 70 per cent of all farmland in England is now covered by agri-environment schemes: there has certainly been no increase in intensive farming in the last five years.

No, there are two far more likely culprits – as several sensible letters in the Telegraph pointed out his week – and both, funnily enough, are heartily endorsed by the RSPB. The first is wind farms, which have been implicated in any number of raptor deaths, yet to which the RSPB remains ideologically committed.

And the second is other, larger, birds of prey – such as the once rare but now absurdly overabundant red kite and the sea eagle, another voracious predator species which the raptor-obsessed RSPB is so keen to re-establish in Britain regardless of the environmental consequences.

“We speak out for birds and wildlife, tackling the problems that threaten our environment. Nature is amazing – help us keep it that way,” declares the RSPB on its website’s home page

But in fact this is at best partially true. For one thing, if the RSPB really cared about the “environment” and keeping nature “amazing”, the last thing it would be doing would be lending its considerable muscle to supporting the wholesale destruction of the British countryside with wind farms. For another, the RSPB seems to have an exceedingly feeble understanding of what it is that makes our natural world amazing.

A survey a few years ago showed that biodiversity on an RSPB managed sanctuary in Wales wasn’t nearly as great on that of private, gamekeeper-run grouse estates. How so? Well, because proper country people – as opposed to the right-on eco types who tend to be attracted to a heavily politicised activist body like the RSPB – understand that the apparent naturalness of the British countryside is in fact the result of generations of management by humans. Predator species are kept in check (usually by the destruction of their eggs; or in the case of foxes, by hunting or shooting) so that as many species as possible are able to live together in balance. Hunting, shooting and fishing folk are generally far better conservationists than bien-pensant RSPB/RSPCA/WWF bunny huggers, because they don’t sentimentalise nature.

Some of you may be disappointed to find me blogging about kestrels and the RSPB instead of “global warming.” You shouldn’t be, though, because it all connects. If you want to understand why it all connects, I heartily recommend Melanie Phillips’s superb new book The World Upside Down: The Global Battle Over Truth, God and Power, which she summarises in this Standpoint article.

Mel rightly sees a connection between the death of Judaeo-Christian values and the growth such modern secular religions as environmentalism. These new secular religions claim to revere reason and evidence and “science” but they are in fact every bit as dogmatic and averse to contradiction as any of those old religions they have displaced.

Just like their medieval forbears, these modern millennarians persecute dissenters from the faith. Academics teaching evidentiary problems with evolutionary theory are fired. Scientists expressing scepticism of man-made global warming theory find they cannot get grant funding. Scientific research journals are closed to them and they are subjected to vicious ad hominem attacks, with some Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientists bullied into telling lies about the science.

Defenders of national identity and traditional morality are vilified as racists, homophobes, Islamophobes or xenophobes. Jews expressing outrage at the lies and libels being used to delegitimise Israel are denounced for “dual loyalty”, demonised as part of a global conspiracy to harm the world and ostracised socially and professionally.

How does this apply to the RSPB and kestrels? Well, like so many environmental NGOs, the RSPB is prey to certain over-riding religious tenets which trump all reason. For example, it believes that man is the problem not the solution (ergo it cannot bring itself to support proper, intelligent, old-school country estate management, never mind how effective it is); and it is ideologically committed to the concept of Anthropogenic Global Warming (ergo it feels it has to campaign for “renewable energy” such as wind farms, even though these are proven to destroy the very creatures the RSPB is supposed to be saving).

(to read more, click here)

Share

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

15 Responses to “Anyone up for a spot of red kite shooting?”

  1. Alan Tilmouth says:August 7, 2010 at 10:08 amThis post/story is littered with factual inaccuracies, if you can’t even be bothered to get your facts correct how can you possibly begin to offer any sensible comment.1. Wind Turbines, There are 2908 operational wind turbines in the UK, scientific surveys have shown that they kill 0.19 Common Kestrels each per annum. That represents c550 individuals from a population of c37,000 breeding pairs.

    2. Larger Raptors, Red Kite do not prey on smaller raptors they feed on Carrion, nor do Common Buzzards and to cite White-tailed Sea Eagle that have a population size of of c40-50 pairs almost all on the West coast of Scotland is beyond laughable. They could not eat that amount of Kestrels if you caught them, cooked them and served them up on a silver platter.

    What you completely fail to mention is that the most likely cause of the Kestrel population decline is the indiscriminate use of poisons including the banned substance Carbofuran to kill rodents. These poisons are present in around 70% of the livers of Kestrels tested by the independent Predatory Bird Monitoring Scheme and build up as Kestrels repeatedly catch rodents that have been poisoned.
    Either your research (assuming you did any) was sloppy or you deliberately ignored it as most poisons are put out by farmers and landowners, your mates at the CLA will probably be able to tell you all about it.

    For the record I am not an RSPB member.

  2. John of Kent says:August 7, 2010 at 1:34 pmBirds of prey have been protected far too much and for far to long to the extent that their huge numbers are now having a detrimental effect on their prey. Garden birds, such as the Robin and Sparrow are falling prey to the large numbers of birds of prey and the RSPB then wonders why the sparrow numbers are diminishing????It is because their predators are not being controlled. Now we have a healthy breeding populaton of birds of prey, it is time they were controlled to give the smaller birds a chance. Another example of environmentalists meddling with things they don’t understand (nature) and getting it badly wrong again- just like with CO2 and global warming!
  3. Jerry Jolly says:August 8, 2010 at 9:54 amSuch ignorance is remarkable. Red kites feed on carrion, they do not take live robins or sparrows but what can you expect from an idiot who idolises the vacuous Mealanie Phillips and can’t even spell dysentery.
  4. Mark Skevington says:August 8, 2010 at 10:29 amIs this a satirical blog? Or are you being outrageously controversial for some comedic reason? Or could it be that you simply have absolutely no clue about British bird populations, conservation, the food chain etcIt’s a long while since I encountered such a load of twaddle.
  5. Mal Taylor says:August 8, 2010 at 9:59 pmI am truly amazed at the incredible level of ignorance achieved by the writer of this article. If I knew as little about a subject as Mr Delingpole does on this particular topic, then I would simply not write about it. My 9 year old son has a better grasp on predator / prey relationships than the author of this twaddle!Mal Taylor (a proud member of the RSPB along with one million others!)
  6. EyeSee says:August 10, 2010 at 8:27 amOops a daisy. It does look like an off-day posting, James. Totally agree that institutions like the RSPB rarely put much thought into their reason for existing, but rather more into political and ideological projects. I do like the selective nature of the people upbraiding you for remarks of the eating habits of Red Kites. They eat carrion our experts shout. Well they do, but why not mention that they are quite happy to take small mammals and the like? How much of a sin is that lack of accuracy?I have to say, driving from Aylesbury to High Wycombe the sky seems full of Red Kites and a majestic sight it is too.

    Is 550 raptors killed per year acceptable? Our helpful correspondent doesn’t say. Would it be OK for just anyone to kill 550 birds a year? Randomly. I thought people shooting birds was a heinous crime in the left-liberal book of sanctimony, because it was pointless. But killing them with a pointless machine is satisfactory. This lack of consistency, logic and reliance on an ability to ignore hypocrisy when it is your own, is why I can never get into the ranks of the especially-good-hearted left-liberal.

  7. George says:August 11, 2010 at 8:37 amI think what’s most shocking about all of this, is the surprise which some commentators are expressing in relation to James’ lack of research. This is James Delingpole. THE James Delingpole. Renowned for utterly failing to present anything approaching the truth, nor substantiated by anything approaching a fact.Thanks to Alan Tilmouth, for his informative and corrective post, and thanks to John of Kent, for his ignorance, which quite frankly made my morning.
  8. tiggy says:August 11, 2010 at 11:50 amWhy not Scotland(avoiding its raging burns of course) this year?
  9. Frank Tavos says:August 11, 2010 at 1:40 pmClearly, George, you haven’t read any of Delingpole’s novels. They are extremely well researched. He does not have a reputation for untruthfulness, such as you have alleged in your post, except perhaps in your own closed mind.I don’t know why I bother responding to people like you who have already drunk the liberal-left Kool-aid. Total waste of time.
  10. George says:August 11, 2010 at 3:27 pmQuiet right Frank. Reading Delingpole’s novels would involve spending money, which would inevitably filter down into Delingpole’s faux-aristocratic mitts, to be spent on private education for his mini-mes. Judging by the standard of his articles, actually buying his books would represent a colossal waste of money akin to the financial blackhole that was the Labour Government’s new NHS IT system.Personally I’d rather stick it in the charity jar.
  11. Pete says:August 12, 2010 at 10:53 amIf the RSPB really wanted to effect numbers of garden birds positively, they would instigate a cull on Magpies.One pair of Magpies has taken over 18 chicks, and dozens of eggs, from my small 1/3 acre plot this year alone.
  12. John of Kent says:August 13, 2010 at 9:02 am“Pete says:
    August 12, 2010 at 10:53 amIf the RSPB really wanted to effect numbers of garden birds positively, they would instigate a cull on Magpies.

    One pair of Magpies has taken over 18 chicks, and dozens of eggs, from my small 1/3 acre plot this year alone.”

    Well said Pete, but it is not just Magpies. My personal experience of this problem- My folks in Scotland kept 120+ (approx) garden song birds alive for years on their small holding by feeding them though the harsh Scottish winter- including sparrows, blackbirds, robins etc. Last year when I visited the folks, their garden bird population has been decimated by Sparrowhawks- yes birds of prey- which farmers are sadly no longer allowed to shoot.
    These birds have absolutely no fear of humans anymore as we are no longer their predator. The final straw for my Dad was when one of these hawks killed some of his budgies- one of then had a death grip on the poor budgie through the chicken wire that surrounded the budgie enclosure- and would not let go- despite being hit with a stick- these birds of prey are now a pest and a menace as James D correctly blogs about- and they need to be controlled.

    Shame on the RSPB and shame on most the posters above for posting misinformation and slandering James good name!

  13. John of Kent says:August 13, 2010 at 9:05 am“#
    George says:
    August 11, 2010 at 8:37 amI think what’s most shocking about all of this, is the surprise which some commentators are expressing in relation to James’ lack of research. This is James Delingpole. THE James Delingpole. Renowned for utterly failing to present anything approaching the truth, nor substantiated by anything approaching a fact.

    Thanks to Alan Tilmouth, for his informative and corrective post, and thanks to John of Kent, for his ignorance, which quite frankly made my morning.
    #

    George, you are the one showing your ignorance – please take back what you said as you do not know what you are talking about! Shame on you….

  14. George says:August 13, 2010 at 4:38 pmJohn of Kent,Did you flunk O-level biology? You know how animal populations and prey/predator ratios work right? If there are, in fact, “too many” birds of prey, they will rapidly decimate their own food chain, and their numbers will subsequently decline.

    It is human intervention – which you propose – which causes all the problems. Left to their own devices, birds of prey will find their niche in the British eco-system and enrich all of our lives.

    You make lots of mistakes in your posts, not least when you insinuate that we were once ‘predators’ to sparrowhawks. Shooting something and then not eating it does not match any definition of predatory I’ve ever heard.

    Back to school for you. Preferably not JD’s school of half-truth and bluster.

  15. Norman of Dorset says:August 26, 2010 at 10:16 pmWell Done JDI will forgive a few minor inaccuracies – the general tone of your piece was spot on. The RSPB have had it their own way for far too long, infiltrating Whitehall with their vested interest in countryside legislation.

    The RSPB need to check their facts a little more closely too – did I see a retraction and apology in a recent publication for false reporting again about raptor poisoning. Its always been a good money spinner for them when Joe Public thinks that wicked gamekeepers are out to get every buzzard, kite and harrier that ever takes to the wing.

    The most recent fraud is their complaint that the Herring Gull is now a species in decline and needs special protection! I don’t see many twitchers camped out on out local landfill site hoping to get a rare sight of Larus argentatus.

    Well on a recent visit to Dorset, I see that they have reached far into their coffers to spend thousands on enormous bill boards all over the county appealing to Oliver Letwin to leave them out of the next round of funding cuts! The warden was bleating on the local radio about what impact cuts might (hopefully) have on them.

    I’m not a natural conservative voter but if Oliver and his friends can put the RSPB mafia onto the endangered species list then he will get my vote every time.

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

I’m Learning to Fight My Demons: One Man’s Struggle with Depression

Some years ago, I went to see an acupuncturist. I told him my woes, of which, as usual, there were many, and he was quite aghast at what he heard.

‘It’s not acupuncture you need,’ he said with impressive honesty. ‘It’s therapy. You strike me as someone who has everything going for him. You have a nice home, a happy marriage, you love your children, you enjoy your work, yet all you seem to want to do is wallow in a swamp of misery and imagine you’re a failure.’

‘OK, I’ll try therapy,’ I said. But I had no intention of doing so. I had tried therapy once before when I was in my 20s and found it to be the most tremendous waste of time and money. Sure, it was pleasant sitting with a sympathetic woman and talking about nothing but myself for a whole glorious hour. What I loathed, though, was the notion that the solution might involve changing my personality in some way.

However, what I did learn from those therapy sessions is that I am a depressive – a manic depressive, actually, because I go way, way up as well as way, way down. Not that I hadn’t guessed as much already, for it runs in the family. My paternal grandfather was perpetually miserable, and my father used to get depression so badly that he had to take lithium to control it.

As a child you scarcely notice these things. I certainly don’t remember, for example, the family holiday during which my maternal grandfather sat outside my father’s bedroom just to make sure he didn’t commit suicide. But now that I’ve reached the age my father was when his depression was at its worst, the odd detail has started to come back, such as the funny little sucking noises my father made when he was lost in thought. I now realise that these meant his mind was in a dark place and he was wrestling with demons. I know it because I sometimes make similar noises when I’m battling mine.

True happiness, I’d always imagined, was something for other people, not me. But I’m told that it is a simple question of practice

Though I’ve never been quite so down that I’ve seriously contemplated suicide – let alone attempted it – there have been plenty of moments when the thought of a quick, easeful death has seemed an attractive prospect. The most recent of these was last year, when I experienced my longest bout of depression ever. It started after I’d suffered a viral infection – for some reason most of my downers do – and went on for about nine months. I began to fear it would never end.

Then, just when I thought it was beginning to lift, something worse happened. I became convinced – to the point of near paralysis – that I had fallen victim to some terrible wasting disease, perhaps early-onset Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis. This bout of extreme hypochondria terrified my family, cost me hundreds of pounds in medical bills and rendered me incapable of work for a month. Clearly this wasn’t a healthy state of affairs for a self-employed father of three. If I didn’t get myself sorted out soon, my wife said, she feared for the future of our marriage.

But how do you deal with depression when you don’t believe in therapy or medication? I have depressive friends who swear by Prozac, or the new generation of serotonin reuptake inhibitor drugs. ‘Life has become so much easier since I realised it’s just a question of chemistry,’ says one. But my worry about medication is not dissimilar to my worry about therapy: what if it transforms me, however subtly, into a person I don’t want to be?

You’ll find this quite a lot with manic depressives. Our condition may be ghastly, sometimes to the point of complete life ruination, but on another level we consider it a gift. We recognise how fantastically creative and powerful our minds become when we are on an up.  Against those benefits, though, you have to set the damage it does to you and your loved ones. I’ve never come close to topping myself, but Jesus, the misery when you’re on a downer! It’s worse than sadness. It’s a complete absence of feeling. Besides becoming generally listless, uncommunicative and reluctant to socialise, I find it impossible to see any part of my life in a positive light. Often, I’ll swear out loud as each new image of despair comes into my head – every other minute, say – and my children will say, ‘Daddy, why did you use the f-word?’ And if sounding like a Tourette syndrome victim isn’t bad enough, I’ve also got an obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) which compels me to touch walls when I’m walking down corridors (using the exact same pressure with each hand), and to arrange cups and cutlery on gingham tablecloths so that they’re exactly symmetrical.

It drives my wife mad. ‘Doctor Johnson had OCD too!’ I protest. She’s not convinced. She thinks I need help. And now I’ve decided to seek it.

*  *  *  *  *

It’s the most beautiful summer day there has ever been – blue sky, little fluffy clouds, cooling breeze – and the hills above Builth Wells in the glorious Wye Valley have never looked more green and lush. My wife and children are happy, healthy and smiling. They adore me and I adore them. Life’s good, really good. Back at the farmhouse I’ve got the car I always wanted – black Range Rover Sport with tinted windows; the kids are at private school and I can easily afford the fees because I’ve so much more money now; more than I know what to do with…

Welcome to my dream. Only a tiny part of it has come true so far, but just so long as I can keep my mind fixed firmly on the prize, the rest will surely follow. How do I know this? Because my therapist Steve Wichett tells me so. Steve is a specialist in neuro-linguistic programming (NLP). He likes nothing better than curing depressives of their mental illness. But can he really cure a basket case like me?

James Delingpole feature

The imagining-your-perfect-future game is one of the first tricks he teaches me. First you create the mental picture – sights, sounds, smells, the more detail the better; then when you’re happy with this biographical movie you’ve created, you insert yourself into the body of this brighter, happier, more successful, future alter ego of yours, and bathe in contentment, fulfilment and security. Keep practising and, hey presto, fantasy will become reality.

All that’s stopping you is that your brain has not yet been correctly programmed. Once that has been done – and it’s easy enough to arrange once someone like Steve has given you the right software – you’re ready to go. Your potential is limitless.

You won’t be surprised to hear that NLP – a technique developed in the 1970s by ex-Hell’s Angel Richard Bandler and linguistics expert John Grinder – has had a massive influence on management training, life-coaching and the self-help industry. Psychiatrists are less convinced. They are understandably resentful at NLP’s claims to be able to cure in a matter of weeks – or sometimes even in one session – phobias, traumas and other mental problems which conventional therapy would take months or years to alleviate.

Steve Wichett claims to have resolved cases far tougher than mine: multiple-rape victims, soldiers with post-traumatic stress, even a gangland torture victim. Client confidentiality means I’ve no way of checking up on this. But something in his manner – warm on the outside, firm-but-fair toughness within – tells me Steve is not a man to bullshit.

My wife, a far better judge of character than me, feels the same way. At Steve’s invitation she comes to our sessions because, after all, my depression is as much her problem as it is mine. Her presence is useful because she understands things that come as news to me, starting with the idea that the purpose of my life on this earth might be to learn how to be happy.

‘What?’ I go in absolute astonishment when she – with Steve’s help – formulates this bizarre proposition. I can honestly say the thought had never occurred to me. True happiness, I’d always imagined, was something for other people, not me.

When I find my thoughts drifting into dark places, I now possess the mental tools to go, ‘Wait a second. What do you think you’re up to?’

This is what NLP does: it helps shut down all those negative thought patterns in our brains that have been reinforced by years of bad habit. Think of these patterns as neural pathways. Each time we re-tread them they get worn into an ever-deeper groove, which is why we so often find ourselves getting stuck in the same old rut. In this way unhappiness becomes an addiction. To kick it, we need to forge new neural pathways, this time leading to positive thoughts instead of negative ones. Happiness, in other words, is a simple question of practice.

Naturally I have my doubts about this. What use is it telling the mind to be happy when the outside world is so abundant with misery and woe? Steve has answers for this, as he has answers for everything. He hands me a list of the top 30 objections most commonly advanced by his clients as to why NLP isn’t going to work for them, together with a persuasive rationale as to why it will. The bottom line is: it’s your choice. If you decide that NLP isn’t going to work for you, then it most likely won’t.

It sounds harsh, this idea that if the treatment doesn’t work it’s all your fault. But then the essence of NLP is taking personal responsibility for your life. NLP has nothing to do with blaming your parents or trying to unearth the experience that lies at the heart of all your troubles. If anything, it’s about the exact opposite: not dwelling on the past but escaping it altogether.

‘What I find with my depressive clients is that they’re brilliant at describing the hole they’re in,’ says Steve. ‘They can tell me how dark it is and how grim. But what I want them to tell me is what it’s like outside the hole, where it’s open and warm and the sun’s shining.’

This is why, in every one of our sessions, Steve encourages me to play mental games which will help me get out of that hole. We do hypnosis-induced meditation sessions where I imagine my body filling with the colours of the rainbow; we practise tricks to deal with the siren voices in my head whenever they try luring me to the dark side; we revisit the happy future-me on the Welsh hillside, knowing that one day we will merge.

You’ll be dying to know whether NLP has cured my depression. My honest answer is: how can I possibly say at this stage? What I can tell you is that the effects so far have been near miraculous. I’ve experienced more moments of prolonged happiness (which I enjoy and notice much more when I’m having them); I’ve stopped having sleep problems; I’m no longer shackled by the obsessive-compulsive urge to touch walls in order to ward off the attentions of malign gods, and when I find my thoughts drifting into dark places, I now possess the mental tools to go, ‘Now wait just a second. What do you think you’re up to?’

Sometimes I find it risibly easy; sometimes I find it so hard – it really is tough taking responsibility for your own mind – I feel like giving up. But I’ve had enough positive experiences now to know NLP really does work for me. It has made me better; it has made me happier. Perfection may have to wait.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Why we fight
  2. “I gladly fell prey to a cougar”
  3. Men fight for their ‘mates’ — it is the secret of why they so love war
  4. Sorry, but wind farms are useless even against vampires

14 thoughts on “I’m learning to fight my demons: One man’s struggle with depression”

  1. brian says:29th July 2010 at 4:20 pmIf you’re not depressed you don’t understand what’s going on.
  2. John of Kent says:30th July 2010 at 8:52 amYou do realise that Warmists are going to sieze on this and proclaim:- “aha, only the mentally ill are sceptical about man- made climate change” and give one James Dellingpole as an example! Where the truth is, when presented with the true facts about climate, one has to be mad, deluded or making money out of it to believe in CAGW.But seriously, self help is the way forward here. I have known some friends benefit from CBT, look it up, try it! Better than medication.
  3. John of Kent says:30th July 2010 at 9:31 amAha, having read the rest, I see you have discovered NLP. Good one.
  4. Simulated Torso says:30th July 2010 at 3:05 pmThere’s something quite hokey about NLP which leads me to believe the whole ‘movement’ is a load of trendy pop-psychology nollocks. I read a book back in 1980 called, Psycho-Cybernetics, which, essentially say the same things as NLP. Good luck.
  5. JLK says:30th July 2010 at 7:08 pmFirst of all thank you for having the courage to discuss your “personal hell” I have suffered from what’s called “Double Depression” a fairly rare disorder, most of my life. It consists of a constant “flat line” depression along with periodic major Depressive Episodes.My disorder came from a near fatal encounter with Hospital Staph infection (of the flesh eating variety) in 1958, when I was 11. Unfortunately in those days there were no effective antibiotics so I spent 3 months hovering between life and death.
    The damage done to my Amygdalae and Hypothalmus brain centers by an out-of-control immune system gave me a life sentence of the periodic “Black Dog” as your most famous PM used to call it.

    I do wonder about your avoidance of medications. If you do have Bi Polar disorder it is very difficult to control the mood swings without them. Of course the problem for sufferers, as you have already stated, is that standard meds “flatline” your mood so you miss those great “up” periods. But I really can’t see how you can use the method you are touting when a Major Depressive Episode kicks in. In my experience fluffy clouds and great plans for the future would be crushed under the weight of the black cloud that descends over your mind.

    I am a firm believer in meds, at least for my problem, which is actually physical. The many Freud- following Psychiatrists I have seen over the years did absolutely NOTHING for me with the exception of lightening my pocketbook. Recently I found a physician who specializes in brain chemistry and medical treatment of these disorders. He was a literal life saver as I could be a suicide candidate at some point.

    Lastly I don’t understand why you would even consider SSRI’s such as Prozac ( a real stone age version of the medication group) anyway. Here in the States they would rarely if ever be used for Bi Polar disorder. Possibly for OCD (Obssesive Compulsive Disorder) in some cases. Your OCD is probably an offshoot of BPD anyway. I have some of it myself. I actually own 7 vacuums! But I don’t worry about that, I just sweat out the next depressive “episode”.
    JLK

  6. Michael St George says:31st July 2010 at 2:44 pmJamesFirstly, can I echo the praise rightly given by previous commenters for your courage and integrity in discussing this openly.

    Can I recommend you get hold of a book called “Overcoming Depression” by Paul Gilbert. It was recommended to me about 12 years ago by a psychiatrist (but as a friend, not as a medical practioner) when I was going through a prolonged period of anxiety & low self-esteem probably verging on clinical depression, following the rather brutal break-up of a relationship in which I’d invested a lot of emotional capital. I found it a great guide to the self-application of the basic techniques of cognitive behavioural therapy, and it was a huge help at the time.

    It may be out of print, but if you would like to read it but can’t get hold of a copy, please, please e-mail me and I’d be delighted to pass mine on to you. It’s the very least I could do as a contribution towards ensuring that the multiple and manifest inanities of ManBearPig continue to get the excoriation they so thoroughly deserve.

  7. Mike Paterson says:1st August 2010 at 10:34 amJames, it’s hard for us “normal” people to get their heads round this condition, but the litany of successful, popular and talented people who suffer from it demonstrate that it’s a real and nasty problem. Can’t help, I’m afraid, and at a loss as to what to suggest, except maybe listen to Bob Marley’s Three Little Birds, which always gives me a lift. With Bobby McFerrin’s Don’t Worry, Be Happy as backup!In the knowledge that you and your work are highly appreciated by thousands of perfect strangers, good luck.

    Mike

  8. Pete Mc says:2nd August 2010 at 6:36 amGood on ya James. Get well soon.
  9. John of Kent says:4th August 2010 at 2:13 pm“Simulated Torso says:
    July 30, 2010 at 3:05 pmThere’s something quite hokey about NLP which leads me to believe the whole ‘movement’ is a load of trendy pop-psychology nollocks. -snip- ”

    Yes, it might seem like that to you and me and others who are mentally healthy- because we don’t need NLP or CBT etc. But to someone that needs help with “matters upstairs” it can be a huge help- gives them the tools they need to regain control of their own thoughts.

  10. James W says:5th August 2010 at 2:17 pmJames – take heart, your prolonged depression should be lifting soon…………after all, 13yrs of Labour tyranny ended 3 months ago.Be patient, life will be infinitely better without the likes of Brown, Smith, Harman, Balls, Straw and others in it.
  11. crownarmourer says:6th August 2010 at 4:21 amHaving been a long time sufferer of depression and OCD you have my sympathy, I have tried medication and it sucks even Lithium which makes you lethargic and gives you I don’t give a sh*t attitude, tried another which had the effect of turning me into a raging maniac. I decided enough was enough and quit cold turkey. I tried therapy and some therapists have some weird belief systems and generally don’t work.
    Eventually with some thought I changed my diet more fresh food prepared from scratch and I feel a lot better these days and one thing that brings me great peace is going for a walk in the countryside with a dog, being further south latitude wise helps as the sunshine levels are better and so no winter blues.
    As for the OCD that took great effort on my part to stop but by force of will I have stopped most of the worst effects.
  12. Don Stuart says:6th August 2010 at 9:06 amOn the theme of diet in the posting above, I seem to remember a few years back seeing on TV a programme where a woman depressive (herself a doctor I think) tried fish oil, or possibly just oily fish, and her depression disappeared.Just tried googling it and several things come up. Here’s an example:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/features/article1006477.ece

  13. Amanda B says:7th August 2010 at 12:36 amJames:Perfection *always* has to wait.

    I’m touched by your predicament. Any medical aspect, of course I can’t and wouldn’t comment on. But otherwise: would you mind if I gave my advice as a ‘friend’ (it’s a sympathy/empathy/mind thing, I don’t have to be someone you dine with)? Forgive me if it is surplus to requirements and/or what you already know.

    My immediate thought was: Try to think about yourself as someone interested in the truth of things. And be that person — as of course you really are. That does not mean confronting all evils. In fact, the truth may well be that an evil would be bad for you to look straight into — like a sensitive person seeing a film about torture, for instance. So it’s not just ‘confronting reality’ — whose reality? what reality? for what purpose? — it’s about being truthful with yourself about what you can know, who you are, what is the best step to take, and so on. Sometimes the answer is contrary to ‘the obvious’. The important thing is to retain your confidence even when you have discovered something contrary to ‘the obvious’, the conventional, the commonly accepted, etc.

    I hope this doesn’t sound like awful waffle — it’s not meant to be — I’m completely sincere and I’m describing how I orient myself; it means accepting some limitations you may have, right now or always, as truth rather than as something merely bad. Because the love of wisdom — self-understanding and the capacity to understand others as well — that is the greatest virtue. And I think that virtue — the striving after and grasping of real virtue — is important to happiness. It’s essential, in fact. It is the foundation of any philosophy — philosophia, you know what that means — worth the name. (There is much ‘philosophy’ not worth the name.)

    Anyway it sounds as if I’m getting abstract but there is nothing abstract about this. To have integrity regarding the truth — which might *involve* a kind of courage but is not the same as courage, and might *involve* justice but is not identical with being just as most people think of it — this is what I would think about and aim for. In fact the virtue most closely allied with the truth-seeking I’m speaking of is prudence. But it’s not a cold, merely calculating, unerotic prudence. It’s a prudent truth-seeking that wants the best for everyone, including yourself. It’s a yearning for the good and even the beautiful in truth, a reaching-out for truth that you can use. I wish you well, truly. Amanda [Bernsen — surname confidential please]

  14. tiggy says:11th August 2010 at 11:42 amA sure sign you are very intelligent, those way ups and downs.

Comments are closed.

We Need to Talk about Wind Farms…

“Energy prices may rise by a third”

A wind farm near the village of Bothel, Cumbria (Photo: Alamy)

A wind farm near the village of Bothel, Cumbria (Photo: Alamy)

“Energy prices may rise by a third,” says our disastrous secretary of state of energy and climate change Chris Huhne. Rubbish. They’re going to rise by a hell of a lot more than that before he is finished. Alternative energy, let us never forget, is just that: an alternative to energy. Wind power and solar power are so risibly inefficient that the only way they can ever be economically viable is with lashings and lashings of taxpayer subsidy. Nuclear power would be much more effective but Huhne has effectively ruled it out. Why? Because in Huhne’s bizarre Weltanschauung, it’s OK for the taxpayer to subsidise low-carbon energy that doesn’t work (wind, solar) but not low-carbon energy that does work (nuclear).

But it’s not Huhne’s breathtaking hypocrisy, ignorance and eco-fanaticism I want to talk about today. Rather I want to focus on just one aspect of it: his plan to carpet Britain in wind farms. What I should like to know is how many of you are with me on this one. It seems to me that at the moment we are sleepwalking towards the greatest environmental disaster of our lifetimes: in the name of alleviating something distant and imaginary – “Climate Change” – our government is now committed to the destruction of the British landscape. And what I’m not sensing, yet, is any kind of serious, concerted resistance.

We need a figurehead. (Not me, unfortunately. I ain’t got the time or the fame or the diplomatic skills.) We need somebody who can galvanise ordinary British people into saving their countryside before it’s too late. Ideally that figurehead would have been the Prince of Wales. But as I explained in last week’s Spectator the Prince has rather ruled himself out of that one. Alan Titchmarsh? He’s the only name that immediately springs to mind, but perhaps you can suggest others.

Next we need money to counter all the propaganda which is spewed out, much of it at taxpayer’s expense of course, by quangos like the Carbon Trust, by schools, by organisations like Renewable UK (formerly the British Wind Energy Association) – each of them repeating the same fundamental lies: that CO2 is a pollutant (not a plant food); that Man-Made Climate Change is a serious, pressing threat; that wind farms are the solution.

Above all, though, we need to stop kidding ourselves that if only we concentrate on how thoroughly marvellous Michael Gove is or what a splendid idea elected police chiefs are, this nasty, scary energy policy our Coalition has decided to foist on us will somehow magically evaporate. At the moment, we seem to be allowing their spokesmen to get away with all manner of nonsense, such as:

1. Britain needs to set an example on CO2 reduction.

No it doesn’t. At least not unless you believe in futile, suicidal gestures. China’s burgeoning CO2 output alone is more than enough to wipe out any paltry emissions Britain makes by going “low carbon”.

2. It will create green jobs.

Only in places like China, where the wind turbines are manufactured. There will be no benefits to the British economy, just a disastrous replay of the Spanish experience where for every “green job” created by government subsidy, 2.2 jobs were lost in the real economy.

3. It will provide “energy security”.

No it won’t. Because wind power is so unreliable, it has to be backed up by conventional power such as coal or gas. If energy security is really what we want we should go for more coal-fired power. We are, after all, sitting on an island of coal.

4. It doesn’t destroy property values, ruin views, chop birds to pieces, or create a low subsonic hum which drives anyone unfortunate to live by a wind farm mad.

Yep. Sounds like you’ve been taking your daily dose of propaganda from the likes of Renewable UK and Polly Toynbee, who thinks wind farms are rather attractive.

5. The future is low carbon.

Says who? What we need, now more than ever, is cheap power to generate the economic growth the world needs to lift itself out of the looming double-dip recession. Low carbon energy is, by definition, not cheap.

6. But what about “climate change”?

What about it? If it’s “global warming” you’re worried about, it stopped in 1998. Global cooling is a much more imminent and serious problem. Recent changes in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation mean that we’re now set for a 30 year cooling period guaranteed to make a mockery of all our fears about “global warming.” Yet here we are, embarked on a policy guaranteed to raise our energy bills to unaffordable levels, as we enter a period of colder winters.

This nonsense has got to stop. People, are you with me?

Related posts:

  1. I’d rather my wife made land mines than worked in the wind farm industry
  2. Wind Farms: the death of Britain
  3. ‘Wind farms cure cancer, save kittens, create world peace’ says new wind industry report
  4. The best article on wind farms you will ever read

Posted on 29th July 2010Author jamesCategories Blog

One thought on “We need to talk about wind farms…”

  1. Caroline says:7th August 2010 at 10:33 pmTOTALLY 100% with you about wind farms. We shall look back at some future date and think, ‘What on earth possessed us?!’

Comments are closed.

Religious conversion

The other week Simon Hoggart had a go at Rev — the new comedy about an inner city vicar played by Tom Hollander (BBC2, Monday) — and I don’t blame him. We had a similar reaction in our household when we watched about ten minutes of the first episode before deciding it wasn’t for us and switching off.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Is he a genius?
  2. The curious double standards of Simon Singh
  3. Back to Basics
  4. Liberty: it’s an easier sell than you’d think

One thought on “Religious conversion”

  1. yaosxx says:30th July 2010 at 2:01 pmHa Ha Ha! Though I did think the fur coat bit stood in their favour – at least it meant they were less likely to be lentil-munching vegan nutters!

Comments are closed.

Is Prince Charles ill-advised, or merely idiotic? | James Delingpole

July 29, 2010

I do wish the Prince of Wales weren’t such a terrible prat because then I wouldn’t have to say it in print and quite ruin my chances of a knighthood. But he is a prat. A dangerous prat at that — as he reminded us yet again just the other day in a speech he gave to ‘business leaders’ at St James’s Palace about what he thinks is happening with ‘climate change’.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Memo to Prince Charles: CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is plant food.
  2. Wales is in danger: why isn’t the Prince of Wales saving it?
  3. Why the Prince of Wales’s letters shouldn’t be kept secret
  4. WTF? Prince of Wales tells disgraced CRU: ‘Well done, all of you!’

2 thoughts on “Is Prince Charles ill-advised, or merely idiotic?”

  1. yaosxx says:30th July 2010 at 1:54 pmI’d say both! Thought this was amusing and very well written James!
  2. david w t milanes says:1st August 2010 at 3:19 pmIt is rude ill mannered of you and vile to attack Prince Charles in this way. He is earnestly trying to do good and trying to send a message to humanity or those that will listen to respect the planet to cherish nature.He wants us to pass on a world that is worth your children living in, a world where nature flourishes where man is not so dominant that he destroys everything. Just imagine how beautiful this country was in the time of John Clare. Not everthing was right but try to imagine what has been lost and then you might in a small way understand why Prince Charles cares as much as he does. Please tell what good you have done in this world that bears comparison with what he has done?

Comments are closed.