The climate loons – and their amen corner in the liberal MSM – want you to panic about a new study claiming that sea level rise is accelerating.
‘Miami could be underwater in your kid’s lifetime,’ says USA Today.
‘Satellite observations show sea levels rising and climate change is accelerating it,’ says CNN.
‘Melting ice sheets are hastening sea level rise, satellite data confirms,’ says the Guardian.
At the current rate, the world’s oceans will be on average at least 60cm (2ft) higher by the end of the century, according to research published in Monday’s Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences.
Based on 25 years of satellite data, however, the research shows that the pace has quickened. It confirms scientists’ computer simulations and is in line with predictions from the UN, which releases regular climate change reports.
“It’s a big deal” because the projected sea level rise is a conservative estimate and it is likely to be higher, said the lead author, Steve Nerem of the University of Colorado.
Don’t believe a word of it.
Or, as Paul Homewood puts it:
To call it junk science is being too generous.
You can read his full scientific explanation here.
I’ll give you the short version which is that – yet again – the doomsday scenario is based on computer modelled projections which, in turn, are based on false assumptions.
Jordan Peterson has called bull on the left’s claims that SJW media maven Cathy Newman has been a victim of “threats” and“alt-right” bullying.
In his first video appearance since totally owning Newman in a must-watch Channel 4 studio discussion on feminism, free speech and social justice, Peterson expressed regret at having given any credence to the threat claims.
“Define threats,” Peterson says, when asked whether he believes if these “threats” ever actually existed.
Because there is no evidence that these “threats” were credible, Peterson now wishes he had never tacitly endorsed their existence when he asked his Twitter followers to “back off” from being rude to Newman.
His critics just exploited this by using it as proof that threats had indeed been made.
Jordan Peterson’s must-watch takedown of SJW media maven Cathy Newman has gone viral, with over 2 million views on YouTube.
If you haven’t read my previous piece on the interview, shame on you! At least watch at least a few minutes of the video to get a sense of the totality of Peterson’s triumph.
Now, predictably, the left-wing media is trying to reframe Newman’s abject humiliation as a case of misogynist bullying by the “alt-right.” The aim, of course, is to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by implying that anyone who takes the side of Newman’s critics is anti-women and pro-abuse.
Now my attempts to moderate the discussion surrounding the channel 4 interview with are being used as proof that she is a victim. Is this how you want this to go, Cathy @cathynewman ? Are you going to stand forth as a victim?
Channel 4 News has called in security specialists to analyse threats made to presenter Cathy Newman following her interview with a controversial Canadian psychologist who has attracted a following among the “alt-right.”
Ben de Pear, the editor of Channel 4 News, said Newman had been subjected to “vicious misogynistic abuse”. Having to call in security specialists was a “terrible indictment of the times we live in”, he said.
“Security specialists.” Really? Speaking as a Channel 4 shareholder — as I guess all British subjects are, being as the channel is publicly owned — I’d be interested to see how solid the evidence is to warrant these drastic and presumably costly measures.
Today is Earth Hour and as usual I shall be lighting a candle – several, actually; plus turning my Rayburn up to eleven; plus turning on all the house lights; plus lighting the patio heaters; plus starting my Landrover and leaving its diesel engine to idle outside in the drive; plus switching on the immersion heater; plus running several hot baths – in tribute to the world’s climate heroes.
I refer, of course, to the tiny, elite fellowship of scientists, economists, politicians, journalists and bloggers who have bravely taken the right side of the climate argument and spoken up for truth, integrity and the scientific method in defiance of the vast and terrifying propaganda behemoth they call the Green Blob.
Many of them were present at the annual Heartland Institute Climate Conference in Washington DC this week. I was sorry not to have been able to make it there myself this year because these people have become my friends. Shared adversity does that for you: everyone from our elder statesman Fred Singer downwards has been brutally vilified, traduced, mocked and monstered by the Servants of the Green Blob over the years – because when the evidence isn’t on your side (as it hasn’t been for a long time where the alarmist cause is concerned), blustering appeals to authority, affectedly high-minded ridicule and below-the-belt cheap shots are pretty much the only weapons left to you.
My sceptical filmmaking friends Phelim McAleer and Anne McElhinney once made a movie exposing the nonsense of the greenies. It was called Not Evil Just Wrong. In my view this was a misnomer. It should have been called: Wrong – And Totally Bloody Evil Too.
There many reasons why the alarmist establishment – the Climate Industrial Complex as Myron Ebell calls it – is so totally loathsomely evil. If I had to list them all this would be longer than War & Peace.
One is that they’re such hypocrites: if you really cared about the environment in the way these fascistic loons claim they do, then you’d be vigorously opposing renewable energy (such as the bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco-crucifixes defacing our landscape and slicing and dicing our avian fauna) and instead going all out for fossil fuels.
This was a point often made in the Heartland panel discussions – which you can catch up with here .
In the one on Sustainability – Panel 5A – independent scientist Indur Goklany pointed out that without fossil fuels we wouldn’t have the fertilizer we need to make our agricultural land so productive. This in turn would mean we wouldn’t be able to leave nearly so much space free as fallow land, as nature reserves or as wilderness.
You’d think the Greenies would get this fairly basic scientific point – given how much they’re always banging on about “the science” – but they never do because, as I argued in my book Watermelons, their commitment to environmentalism owes much more to quasi-religious ideology, to straightforward greed and to anti-free-market control-freakery than it does to a genuine love of nature.
Then there’s the hatred. Pretty much everyone speaking at the Heartland Institute will have suffered personally for speaking out against the Great Global Warming Scare. Willie Soon‘s travails are typical. It’s why only the brave – or the elderly, who have nothing to lose – who speak out.
The same applies, of course, to all the other professions which dare to confront the climate “consensus”. I wrote in my book, for example, about how popular British TV presenters David Bellamy and Johnny Ball both effectively had their careers destroyed when they took the “wrong side” on global warming.
Journalists get it in the neck too, of course.
Let me close by treating you to some examples of the kind of hate I got recently simply for pointing out that Australia’s Great Barrier Reef isn’t actually being wiped out by man-made global warming. Sure, it has experienced some serious bleaching in some parts – probably the result of the recent El Nino – but not nearly on the scale that has been claimed by politically- and financially-motivated climate alarmists. And it will recover, just like reefs always do and have done for millennia, sometimes in warming far more extreme than anything we have experienced today.
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.
This is the concert at the Royal Albert Hall when all the Union flags come out, when English composers like Elgar and Vaughan Williams are celebrated, when the patriotic revellers lustily bellow Land Of Hope and Glory without a trace of fashionable irony or politically correct embarrassment.
So, of course, it’s inevitable that the whiny losers who were outvoted 52 to 48 in the EU referendum are seeking to hijack it in order to vent their kill-joy Europhile spleen on the patriotic majority who love their country and are much happier now it has voted to quit being the vassal of a weird Euro superstate run by power-crazed, socialistic nonentities.
As Breitbart Londonreported, some rejected Europhiles are planning to try to overwhelm the Union flags with horrid blue-yellow-starred European ones.
Yes. That will be popular with the boisterous Last Night crowd, I’m sure. Short of getting Eddie Izzard on as the warm up man to explain in five different languages why Brexit was such a dreadful mistake, I can’t think of a move better guaranteed to test the revellers’ traditional good-natured tolerance.
For the Guardian’s reviewer, however, Kemp was engaged in some kind of macho death urge as he heroically laid his arse on the line in northern Syria.
Before I set about reviewing Ross Kemp: The Fight Against Isis (Sky 1), I thought I’d have a glance to see whether other critics had been as impressed as I was. Clearly the flip groovester from the Guardian — who opened, inevitably, with a jaunty quip about Grant from EastEnders — had seen a very different documentary from the one I saw. Otherwise, he could not have failed to be moved by Kemp’s heartbreaking interview with the Yazidi woman from Sinjar who’d recently escaped from Isis.
Her 10-year-old daughter squatted beside her — only survivor of the five children she had had when Isis captured her town. The eldest (11) had been immediately commandeered as a sex slave; the three youngest had been deliberately poisoned a few months later by Isis when the family had tried to escape. Pictures of their bodies were posted on social media as a warning to others.
What struck me — as it does time and again with footage like this from Iraq and Syria — is these people’s matter of fact tone as they recount atrocities more befitting the era of the Mongol horde than the age of safe spaces, transgender toilets and Pokémon Go. ‘They killed my mother in front of me,’ volunteers a middle-aged man with a moustache, almost as an afterthought. Horror has become so commonplace they have been brutalised into a numbness you might easily mistake for indifference.
You saw this most chillingly in the eyes of an IS fighter who’d been caught in a police sweep of a recently captured village. His face was hidden by a balaclava; all you could see were murky dead eyes which didn’t even have the decency to look haunted. He’d joined mainly for the $70-a-month regular income, he told Kemp, first al-Qaeda then IS. No, he hadn’t personally beheaded people — they had specialists to do that. And did he have any regrets? ‘When you get captured you look at it and ask: “What is all this for?”,’ said the man, flat and empty, like really all that murdering and crucifixion had been a bit of a fag which, yeah, come to think of it probably hadn’t been the best career move.
The morning after a senseless tragedy which has appalled the whole of Britain I’d like to ask you a simple question:
Is there any depth to which you will not stoop in order somehow to snatch victory in this EU referendum?
The answer I’m getting from some of you is: “Nope. None.”
Here’s Alex Massie in the Spectator. Having generously acknowledged that “Nigel Farage isn’t responsible for Jo Cox’s murder. And nor is the Leave campaign”, he then suggests that no, actually, they were.
But, still. Look. When you encourage rage you cannot then feign surprise when people become enraged. You cannot turn around and say, ‘Mate, you weren’t supposed to take it so seriously. It’s just a game, just a ploy, a strategy for winning votes.’
Let me precis for you, Alex, what you’re trying to say in your oh-so-subtle way: “Vote Leave. Vote Fascism. Vote Murder in the Streets.”
Here, is the Guardian’s Polly Toynbee playing a similar game.
First the disclaimer:
There are many decent people involved in the campaign to secure Britain’s withdrawal from the EU, many who respect the referendum as the exercise in democracy that it is.
Now the inevitable “but…”
But there are others whose recklessness has been open and shocking. I believe they bear responsibility, not for the attack itself, but for the current mood: for the inflammatory language, for the finger-jabbing, the dogwhistling and the overt racism.
Well, thanks to the music press, the Guardian and the organisers of at least two rock festivals in France we know that the correct answer, the only answer, goes something like this:
“Islam is a religion of peace. That’s why I know in my heart that this atrocity had nothing to do with Islam. The fact that the gunmen were shouting Allahu Akhbar as they machinegunned the audience – in those moments when they weren’t pausing to torture the poor guys in wheelchairs or finish off the wounded – was entirely coincidental. Also, I would like to pay especial tribute to those Muslim members of the security staff who, instead of joining in with the killers, acted with amazing generosity by opening the exit doors so that some of the audience could get away…”
Unfortunately, Jesse Hughes of Eagles Of Death Metal didn’t give the correct answer regarding his experiences at the Bataclan massacre in Paris in November last year.
He doesn’t want to prettify what happened; he does think it was caused by a clash between a kind of surrender-monkey Western liberalism and militant Islamic ideology.
Which is why he has had his shows cancelled by the organisers of two French rock festivals and why he is now the subject of an angry letter to the Guardian by a Muslim fan who attended the Bataclan gig accusing Hughes of “fucking dangerous” stupidity in his remarks about Islam.
a) dragging a mother-of-ten kicking and screaming from her home in front of her kids, brutally interrogating her, shooting her in the back of the head and then burying her in an unmarked grave?
b) using the “N” word in a tweet?
Well the answer if you’re an enlightened leftist is b) obviously. We know this from a cracking article in today’s Guardian by Gary Younge called Racism Is A System Of Oppression, Not A Series Of Bloopers. Younge, being black, has taken on himself to adjudicate on what he calls an “off-colour” tweet by the murderous ex-terrorist Gerry Adams, which made use of the “N” word.
Though he has consistently denied it, it is an open secret that Gerry Adams – now president of Sinn Fein – was a senior commander of the IRA during the Troubles in Ireland and according to several former IRA members has much blood on his hands. There are photographs of him acting as pallbearer at IRA funerals; he was described by former IRA commander Brendan Hughes as a “major, major player in the war”; and among his many alleged victims is Jean McConville, the mother murdered in 1972 – according to at least two witnesses on Adams’s orders – because she was mistakenly believed to be a collaborator.
You might think that, given a track record like that, the odd use of an offensive racial epithet on social media was the least of Adams’s image problems.