Category Archives: Science

BBC accused of institutional alarmism

A new report reveals long list of climate misinformation

Writes Net Zero Watch:

London, 9 June – The BBC has been accused of institutional alarmism as a new report reveals the BBC’s persistent exaggeration and false information when it comes to climate and weather-related news.

The report, compiled by climate researcher Paul Homewood, reveals that the BBC has been forced to correct a dozen false claims and other items of fake news in climate-related coverage after receiving public complaints in recent years.


The report, which has been submitted to the Government’s upcoming Mid-Term Review of the BBC, shows that it has become common practice for BBC reporters to publicise exaggerated and often misleading weather-and climate-related stories in order to hype up the potential risks from global warming.

Net Zero director Benny Peiser said:

Persistent misrepresentation by BBC journalists in climate news coverage is fuelling the corporation’s institutional alarmism.

Institutional alarmism is a form of hyped and exaggerated news reporting that is deeply embedded in the BBC. It manifests itself as unbalanced, one-sided coverage of climate risks that are habitually exaggerated and that go uncorrected by the BBC’s in-house fact checkers.”

In 2020, the BBC’s director general warned that the problem posed by disinformation online was increasingly serious and that the BBC would need to work harder than ever to expose fake news and separate fact from fiction.

Since then the corporation has set up a team of fact checkers, a BBC-wide ‘Anti-Disinformation Unit’ and a ‘Climate Misinformation’ team. Yet none of these teams of fact checkers noticed or addressed the long list of false news stories that were only corrected by the BBC after lengthy and protracted complaint procedures.


Paul Homewood said:

There can be little doubt that the cases documented in this report are just the tip of the iceberg. Many other such inaccurate news or false information are broadcast by the BBC without being noticed or complained about.

It is also true that the BBC regularly try to fob off complainants with spurious replies, leading many to give in. This is even the case when their inaccurate claims are obvious, easily proven and manifest.”

Here’s the full report. (PDF)

C.S. Lewis predicted medical tyranny

in this exquisite sci-fi trilogy

Writes Kennedy Hall:

Lewis – perhaps best known for his Christian apologetics and Chronicles of Narnia series – wrote a science fiction trilogy that was aptly named The Space Trilogy. The three books that make up the series are called Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength. Each book can be read independently; however, read as a whole they are more exquisite and meaningful.

The third installation presents a scenario most analogous to today’s world. In it we find a global conspiracy largely led by academics and scientists, who are hell-bent (literally) on ushering in a world that is overtly sanitary and free of any intellectual or biological germs.

I believe that it was Lewis’s Christian sense that allowed him to be more accurate than Orwell. Orwell wrote of the government as an immovable and impenetrable force, whereas Lewis portrayed governments as a bit weak and thus controlled by nongovernmental organizations.

Since Lewis was not an atheist like Orwell, and therefore not a materialist, he understood that the most important thing was not force, but mentality and belief.

Another pandemic? So soon?

"Fool me twice, shame on me!"

Writes Mike Whitney. He adds:

So, here’s your Pandemic Quiz for the Day: What do you think the chances are that an oddball affliction, like Monkeypox, could spontaneously break out in 10 different locations around the world (where it had never appeared before) at the exact same time?

[. . .]

So, it’s everywhere already? Then, what do we do?

The obvious answer is lock-down, mask up and get vaccinated as soon as possible. Otherwise, most of the world’s population could face an agonizing death… just like Covid, remember?. Of course, some people might conclude that we are being deliberately misled again, and that 2 pandemics in 2 years is a statistical impossibility. But why be reasonable when mass-hysteria is the order of the day?

[. . .]

So, what’s going on here? Why does the Pentagon have over 300 bio-labs spread around the world conducting secret gain-of-function research on pathogens that pose a clear threat to all of humanity? And why has the Pentagon partnered with notorious elites whose links to the eugenics, depopulation and climate movements suggest the research may be shaped to a particular strategic agenda that could involve significant casualties?

And what if Monkeypox is not, in fact, a natural occurring virus but merely the next phase of a relentless war on Constitutional government, individual freedom and the basic institutions of modern civilization? Perhaps, we are being prepared for a different civilization altogether, a civilization in which all of our decisions will be made for us by enlightened elders, corporate stakeholders and well-meaning philanthropists. Is that possible?

Covid Mess

An open letter to a GP and devastating accounts from vaccine widows

James Rogers is a pseudonym of someone who, according to the TCW website, is a “well-travelled, polymathic dilettante who voted for Johnson but feels we’ve ended up with Blair on steroids”.

Rogers has written an open letter to his GP, published on 18th May 2022. He writes:

You may recall saying to me, ‘These drug companies would not run the risk of being sued for supplying dodgy drug products.’ I replied that the drug companies had been given immunity from civil action and criminal prosecution. You seemed not to know this. In this regard, I am writing to describe what has happened in the interim.

[. . .]

It is important to note that as C-19 jabs were authorised in an emergency situation, the ‘trial’ is still in progress, and the effects the jabs have on people must be fully recorded. So, this matter has two spheres to consider: firstly, the trials that were run in 2020 that persuaded the FDA (and our own MHRA, CHM and JCVI) to approve the jabs; and secondly, the trials run in 2021 – and ongoing – that are necessary to allow those drug authorisations to remain valid.

After some 150,000 pages of Pfizer’s documents, some very fishy and worrying facts have emerged – here is one assessment. It turns out that ‘these drug companies’ did indeed ‘run the risk of supplying dodgy drug products’. 

What happens now? Doubtless, the likes of Dame June Raine, Sir Chris Whitty, Sir Patrick Vallance, Sir Jonathan Van-Tam, Wei Shen Lim and many others anxiously scan the internet for news of what the FDA papers reveal. I mean ‘the internet’ specifically, because none of this is being reported on television or in newspapers.

Read the rest here.

The same “non-reporting” by the legacy media can be observed in the many cases of vaccine-induced deaths and severe injuries AND the fact that, in the case of deaths, NONE of the bereaved family members have yet received any of the promised compensation. And when a marginalised outlet such as GB News does report this, some of the viewers heap the bereaved with scorn and ridicule. What a sick world we live in.

I wonder what the current Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin “taking the vaccine is a moral issue” Welby has to say about this development, if he’s even aware of if, which I doubt.

The BBC’s climate fake news

Time and again it has put the narrative ahead of the facts

Article by Fraser Myers on spiked-online.com.

Excerpts:

The BBC is very worried about ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ – especially when it comes to climate change, a cause close to Auntie’s heart. So much so that in 2020, it hired its first-ever specialist ‘disinformation’ reporter, who last year fronted an eight-part series for the World Service all about ‘climate disinformation’. The main theme of the show was that fake news about the climate could lead us to ‘catastrophe’.

Perhaps the BBC’s misinformation specialists should have been looking closer to home. Recently, the corporation’s very own climate editor, Justin Rowlatt, was found by the Beeb’s own editorial-complaints unit (ECU) to have made two ‘misleading’ statements in a Panorama documentary about climate change and extreme weather, broadcast last year.

The vast global reduction in natural-disaster deaths – tragically misreported by the BBC – tells an alternative, humanistic story. This is the story of human progress – of global economic development, industrialisation and innovation. This has allowed humanity to liberate itself from the vagaries and cruelties of nature. It is the simple reason why worsening weather does not translate into greater death and destruction. And it is this very progress and liberation that climate alarmists threaten to undo.

There is no climate emergency

Consider Signing the World Climate Declaration

From the “Climate Intelligence” website:

>>>>>

A global network of 900 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted

The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models

Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.

Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and re-adapt. The aim of global policy should be ‘prosperity for all’ by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times. In a prosperous society men and women are well educated, birthrates are low and people care about their environment.

Epilogue

The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world*. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change.

From now onward the group is going to function as “Global Climate Intelligence Group”. The CLINTEL Group will give solicited and unsolicited advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.

* It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts

World Climate Declaration plus all signatories in pdf

<<<<<<<

Following the Science is Impossible and Stupid

Institutional science follows politics; it will always endorse central regime policies

An article by “eugyppius”, who concludes:

Science isn’t some objective reasonable force outside of politics. Scientists spend most of their careers chasing government grant funding, and fighting for appointments and promotions in government-funded university systems. Science follows politics, and nobody knows this as much as the disingenuous politicians who claim that their policies are subordinate to scientific findings.

From Darwin to Hitler

The revolutionary impact Darwinism had on ethics and morality

Writes Charles Burris:

In his book, From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany (2004), Richard Weikart explains the revolutionary impact Darwinism had on ethics and morality. Darwinism played a key role in the rise not only of eugenics (a movement wanting to control human reproduction to improve the human species), but also on euthanasia, infanticide, abortion, and racial extermination. This was especially important in Germany, since Hitler built his view of ethics on Darwinian principles.

Here is Weikart’s talk on the subject.

“We Are Human, We Are Free”

“The Great Reset” Must Be Defeated

Article by Anita McKone. Excerpts:

These elitists have become masters at co-opting all movements of self-respect, self-care and solidarity – their use of double speak means they claim to be supportive of community, fair wealth distribution, truth in the media, ecological sustainability, diversity, racial equality, women’s equality, freedom and nonviolence (for example) while working to implement an agenda that supports none of these things. And their increasing use over the past 70 years of NGOs that sound ‘friendly’ and ‘independent’, but which in fact pursue corporate, imperialist and other elitist agendas, has led to enormous numbers of ordinary ‘concerned’ people putting their money and energy into organisations and movements that dissipate their capacity to genuinely act in their own interests and the interests of life on the planet as a whole.

To take just a few examples – the environment movement has become dominated by the demand for a massive ‘green’ tech revolution that requires further rape and pillage of the peoples and natural environment of Africa and anywhere else rare minerals are found, union movements around the world have become utterly neutered and no longer act in the interests of their working members, medical ‘science’ is most likely to be a profit-making anti-scientific enterprise rather than one designed to further people’s health through use of genuine scientific methodology, and (particularly close to my heart) campaigns using nonviolent tactics have been used to simply achieve ‘regime change’ in centralised states, furthering the interests of transnational corporations, even though this was never the intention of the majority of activists involved.