Over the last week, more articles critical of mainstream climate science alarmism, and the taxation and energy policies which have been predicated on it have been published than have appeared in years. Undoubtedly this is partly because of the late snows and freezing temperatures endured by an increasingly climate-propaganda weary public. A couple of newspapers which have always been in the vanguard of alarmist doomsaying, such as the Guardian have attempted to reverse the spin, but it is looking increasingly as if the majority of the UK press has had enough, and is coming over the wall to the sceptics position.
However, this may have as much to do with the late UK snow and revenge for the fallout from the Leveson enquiry as any genuine realisation of the shortcomings of the IPCC and the half-baked-one-side-only science it relies on. The impetus in the German media from their even colder spring may keep the ball rolling. Time will tell.
Anyway, the fallout from this climate reporting shift could be spectacular. Once the dam wall starts to leak, the trickle soon becomes a torrent, and stories which the media has sat on for years will start coming out of the dusty intray pile. An example of this is the Daily Mail’s late Saturday night article ‘
Leading the attack is committee member Sir Brian Hoskins, who is also director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College, London. In a blog on the Committee on Climate Change’s website, Sir Brian insisted: ‘The scientific basis for significant long-term climate risks remains robust, despite the points raised . . . Early and deep cuts in emissions are still required.’
He also claimed our report ‘misunderstood’ the value of computer models. Yet in an interview three years ago, Sir Brian conceded that when he started out as a climate scientist, the models were ‘pretty lousy, and they’re still pretty lousy, really’.
Expect more revelations of scientists admitting their work should never have been relied on for policy formation by politicians soon.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Reblogged this on grumpydenier and commented:
Maybe there is time before I shed the mortal coil to see the back of this and witness the rent-seeking troughers get their just desserts. We live in hope.
Of course Sir Brian Hoskins (Committee on climate change, Grantham Institute for Climate change, Council member for the Natural Environment Research Council that funds and supports most of the environmental research in the UK) gets not a penny for his selfless work (http://www.adbiogas.co.uk/tag/prof-sir-brian-hoskins/)
Not at all like Tim Yeo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2187948/Conservative-MP-chairs-climate-committee-earns-140k-green-energy-firms.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/2529667/Tory-MP-Tim-Yeo-in-conflict-of-interest-row-over-car-tax-report.html
http://eotp.org/2012/09/19/2012-conservative-m-p-tim-yeo-conflict-of-interest/
And so on- ad infinitum
The imposition of climate change policy in the UK has relied on a sustained propaganda campaign and gradualism – the Boiling Frog Effect. You can’t spring all the taxes and nonsenses on people right off the bat, but you can lead them to a ridiculous position degree by degree and by hiding the costs.
If anything punctuates the gradualism, people take stock. This is more than unseasonal snow in March, it’s a run of cold winters and lousy summers. The Boiling Frog Effect seems intuitive, but I’m not sure it actually works.
When people take stock, they see us closing a few coal fired power stations to our great cost when over a thousand are being built elsewhere in the world, they notice the increased bills and that whackos like Booker, who’ve been warning that this is going to lead to blackouts, are not whackos at all. They see a huge expensive policy initiative which looks like being lead up a blind ally. They see unjust enrichment at the expense of the old and vulnerable. We’re not creating huge new world beating industries in green technology, and we’re making no difference to the dubious solution of a maybe problem. It’s all a hiding to nothing.
I see signs of change, but getting a political and administrative machinery which has ample reason to support the nonsense and absolutely doesn’t want to abandon it, won’t be easy.
Mainstream media – except the Sunday Times today it seems, with Lomborg trying to tread the “third way” by agreeing that current legislation is stupid and harmful and we should not abandon fossil fuels until we have made alternatives more attractive.
But,
he and it seems The Sunday Times, still support MAN as the main cause of global warming(tm) and it is MAN who, alone, can beat it.
Let’s hear it for Lomborg – a total Canute !
‘and it seems The Sunday Times, still support MAN as the main cause of global warming(tm) and it is MAN who, alone, can beat it.’
Shouldn’t that say ‘mann’?
Roger,
Whilst I agree there has been a welcome shift in the MSM coverage of the issue , until that monolith tax taker the BBC starts changing , the majority of the masses will not notice . They are used to being spoon fed either aurally or visually, reading is far too difficult.
Electric Wedge ?
N&K
‘The Con-Man’…Cartoon Here. (Energy policy explained.)
Heh, hi Neil. I still have dreams of a turbocharged lpg wedge, but I think I’ll settle for a standard 1984 model if I can get it completed again. Need some help really.
It’s good to see this starting, and I agree it will spread. The truth will out regardless, but the MSM can rip it open faster and further and present it to the masses quicker than any other group. Their sales will go up, too. People the world over are fed up with being lied to and manipulated, they will want to read all about the shonky science and who has their snouts (and two front trotters) in the trough. Hard times ahead for watermelons everywhere. Should be interesting to watch.