Archive for the ‘propaganda’ Category

Gare de Lyon, Paris [image credit:]

Gare de Lyon, Paris [image credit:]

We can already hear the ‘hitting the buffers’ and ‘going off the rails’ quips coming down the line, as another desperate effort to stir up interest in so-called climate change hits the tracks. Voice of America reports from the station.

PARIS—A train is chugging its way across France this month to raise awareness about climate change and what is at stake during December’s climate summit in Paris. The climate train got a high-level send-off Tuesday at Paris’ Gare de Lyon station that included champagne and speeches by Environment Minister Segolene Royal and other officials.

Those invited wandered through rail cars displaying maps and interactive images of how a warming climate will change our planet — and how it already has made changes. High school student Anne-Marie Coelho visited the train with her father. She attended this week’s event, she said, to learn more about sustainable development and climate change.


Re-blog of a post by Russell Cook on American Thinker

We’re told there is a moral imperative to stop catastrophicDnyer human-induced global warming, as seen in twin events last week where Pope Francis implied as much in his visit to the US, and within a letter signed by 20 scientists to President Obama imploring him to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to punish immoral “corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”

The operative word in these twin events is the word “trust.” Trust that the pope sought the advice of the whole range of experts on global warming, and trust what the authors of the RICO letter (viewable now only in archive form here, since it has been erased from its original online location) say in their second paragraph about extensively documented sources proving the corruption of those “corporations and other organizations”.

What happens if you attempt to verify if the situations are true? First, the pope is revealed to have received advice on the global warming issue from highly questionable individuals, and second, the RICO letter’s assertion about extensively documented corruption is revealed to be a literally unsupportable talking point.

Allow me to elaborate on that second problem.


An ought to read

“Canadian journalist Donna Laframboise has been watching the climate world since 2009. What she sees isn’t pretty.” — strap line from her blog. Donna has now put up a transcript with slides of a talk she gave to World Federation of Scientists in Erice, Italy, during August 2015




Not the John Wayne classic

Not the John Wayne classic

You have to laugh – doesn’t this man have a country to run? Mashable lets its imagination run wild.

It’s official: POTUS is going to be on Running Wild with Bear Grylls. NBC’s press release about the show was relatively vague; we know the episode will take place in Alaska and focus on climate change’s effects on the area, but not much else.

So we couldn’t help but imagine what President Obama will be doing with the survivalist.

Spin doctor at work

Spin doctor at work

Cato at Liberty reports from the US on the myth of carbon dioxide as ‘carbon pollution’, when in fact it’s essential to life on Earth. What we really have is state-sponsored mind pollution.

The Spin Cycle is a reoccurring feature based upon just how much the latest weather or climate story, policy pronouncement, or simply poo-bah blather spins the truth. Statements are given a rating between 1-5 spin cycles, with less cycles meaning less spin.

President Obama is keen on calling carbon dioxide emitted from our nation’s fossil fuel-powered energy production, “carbon pollution.” For example, last week, when introducing EPA’s Clean Power Plan—new regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from the power plants that currently produce 67 percent of the country’s electricity—he used the term “carbon pollution” ten times. For example:


Wyoming coal trains [image credit:

Wyoming coal trains [image credit:]

The ‘fight against global warming’, as reported by AFP/Fox News below, is more like shadow boxing but the impact on the real US economy from the enforced shutting down of coal-fired power stations could be significant.

President Barack Obama will impose steeper cuts on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants across the country than previously expected, senior administration officials said Sunday, in what the president called the most significant step the U.S. has ever taken to fight global warming.


You have been warned!

You have been warned!

We should be used to this kind of bilge by now, but the absurdity of it all never ceases to amaze.

Prince Charles is warning that there are only 35 years left to save the planet from climate disaster, which represents a 33-year extension of his previous deadline, reports the Washington Times.

In March 2009, the heir to the British throne predicted that the world had 100 months “before we risk catastrophic climate change,” as pointed out by Climate Depot’s Marc Morano.


Heathrow pantomime [image credit: BBC]

Heathrow pantomime [image credit: BBC]

What effect will this have on public perceptions? Might help to consign climate change to the fringes of acceptability as an issue with any luck. The BBC reports:

Protesters disrupted flights at Heathrow Airport by cutting through a fence and chaining themselves together on a runway.

Direct action group Plane Stupid said 13 demonstrators opposed to the airport’s expansion plans got on to the northern runway at 03:30 BST.

The runway was closed for nearly three hours and 13 flights were cancelled.


Ocean crisis or hot air?

Posted: July 3, 2015 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Ocean dynamics, opinion, propaganda

The carbon cycle [credit:]

The carbon cycle [credit:]

The BBC enthusiastically churns out another alarm-filled report on the supposed state of the climate, this time focussing on the oceans. But look closer and there are some awkward questions. First the report:

Scientists have warned that marine life will be irreversibly changed unless CO2 emissions are drastically cut.

Writing in Science, experts say the oceans are heating, losing oxygen and becoming more acidic because of CO2.

They warn that the 2C maximum temperature rise for climate change agreed by governments will not prevent dramatic impacts on ocean systems.


Daily Media Review cuts through the headlines and scare stories to point out some of the key fallacies and failed assumptions relied upon by the climate change scare industry.

The mainstream media love to lecture us daily about the coming apocalypse as a result of catastrophic climate change, but are we being told the complete story?


Paris climate conference - get ready for this

Paris climate conference – get ready for this

Scottish Sceptic has an amusing piece about the forthcoming climate charade in Paris, which looks like being as full of hot air as it is empty of credible substance:

There’s a boringly familiar pattern to these climate talks in Paris. The rhetoric is all about making deals, but the reality is that everyone is backpedalling furiously behind the scenes trying the darnest to prevent any serious deal getting made. But what is different this time is that if anything the parties are being far more open in their desire not to come to any deal this time than all the previous clown fests from Jokenhagen onward.


Snowy Boston 2015

Snowy Boston 2015

Despite the fact that former climate guru James Hansen conceded there had been a temperature standstill in the current century, it’s now claimed by the NOAA that it was all a myth.

A reported pause in global warming—a mystery that has vexed scientists and delighted contrarians—was an illusion based on inadequate data, U.S. government researchers reported Thursday.

The findings by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) researchers that there was no warming “hiatus” over the past 15 years could reshape consensus science on recent climate change. The research undercuts an argument of pundits and politicians who oppose taking action.



Good question. Politics and science is a bad mix.

Originally posted on Real Science:

According to the EPA, US heatwaves are much less common and severe than they used to be.

ScreenHunter_8323 Apr. 04 15.47

High and Low Temperatures | Climate Change | US EPA

According to NOAA, violent tornadoes have declined in the US


tornadotrend.jpg (872×528)

According to NCDC, droughts have become less frequent and less severe in the US.

ScreenHunter_8325 Apr. 04 15.55

Climate at a Glance: Time Series | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

According to Rutgers University, autumn and winter snow extent is increasing in the US

ScreenHunter_8326 Apr. 04 15.57ScreenHunter_8327 Apr. 04 15.57

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

All of these things have happened as CO2 has increased.


What is it that Barack Obama is hoping to stop by making “electricity prices skyrocket?”

View original

Shouting match?

Shouting match?

Is the political element of the climate change debate taking over from the science factors? That seems to be the implication of the opinion piece reported on here.

An excellent new meme has entered the climate change debate thanks to David Harsanyi, writing in The Federalist. In his article he articulates why wide acceptance of catastrophic climate change is failing to manifest: because it comes along with an enormous amount of left wing baggage. He summarises it as ‘leftist malware’.

For those not familiar, ‘malware’ is a term used to describe software that is often harmful or intrusive and usually installs itself on your computer without your consent or knowledge. I can’t think of a better metaphor that captures the essential noxiousness of the climate change movement so neatly.


Heads in the clouds?

Heads in the clouds?

If temperatures won’t go up, bring the so-called ‘target’ down. That’s the latest brainwave of climate fear merchants, seemingly oblivious to the lack of any temperature rise this century.

Former Guardian writer Fred Pearce reports:
Is the world’s target of limiting global warming to 2 °C too high, or too low? Does it even make scientific sense? The consensus around the target, which was agreed at climate talks in Copenhagen in 2009, seems to be coming unstuck.

Back in October, US climate analysts David Victor and Charles Kennel called it scientifically meaningless and politically unachievable. We should get used to the idea of something warmer, they said.

Now the target has been denounced as “utterly inadequate”, by Petra Tschakert of Penn State University in University Park, who has been involved in a UN review of the target. She wants a 1.5 °C target instead. Writing in the journal Climate Change Responses, she says this lower limit is necessary if we want sea levels to rise less than a metre, to protect half of all coral reefs, and to still have some ice during Arctic summers.


Gas heating [image credit: CVO Fire]

Gas heating [image credit: CVO Fire]

A committee of MPs has been accused of listening to “ill-informed” green groups instead of scientific evidence, after it called for a ban on fracking for shale gas, citing health and environmental fears, the Daily Telegraph reports.

The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) on Monday called for fracking to be put on hold indefinitely, and at a minimum banned in national parks, amid “huge uncertainties around the impact that fracking could have on water supplies, air quality and public health”.

Developing shale gas is also “incompatible” with the UK’s legally-binding climate change targets, it claimed.


This is the second half of an article on the UK website Conservative Woman. Check out the link to Jo Nova’s article too.

bbc-greenpeace-medBack in October, behind the masquerade of what the BBC’s army of 180 publicists claim is the world’s ‘most trusted media brand’, the Corporation launched with a glossy release a multi-pronged initiative to broadcast to Australia material about the G20 summit.

Chris Davies, Director of Sales and Marketing, for BBC Global News Limited, one of the BBC’s subsidiaries that is the engine of the growth, said: “Australia is a priority market for us and with this local market investment together with our large network of international journalists, we are uniquely placed to offer readers stories they don’t normally hear from local media, giving them the full picture on news that affects them.”

Excuse me? That sounds very like the BBC believes ‘local media’ are not doing their job. How very patronising.  Those colonialist oiks have not had the benefit of the BBC’s version of ‘impartiality’.


The BBC’s Roger Harrabin reports on a Royal Society report into the Somerset flooding (with a straight face). We covered this extensively as it happened last winter

somerset-flood-updateThe authors of a Royal Society report on resilience to extreme weather have told BBC News that they believe the campaign to protect the Levels prompted politics to override science.

They say those resident on the Levels may have to get used to living with floods, and they question whether investment to protect farmland is the best use of public money.

“These so-called experts haven’t got a clue what they are talking about. We are used to being flooded – but we don’t expect to get ignored for so long”

James WinsladeSomerset farmer


More Deceptive Images From The BBC

Posted: November 15, 2014 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, propaganda


At least these BBC reporters don’t bother to disguise the fact that they are hardcore propagandists for climate alarmism, at licence payer expense of course.

Originally posted on NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT:

By Paul Homewood

h/t Ron Hughes


While we’re on the topic of BBC deception, take a look at this image of a coal power station from last year.

Bear in mind, that in 2009 the BBC Trust noted that this guidance had already been issued by BBC News on how to deal with images of cooling towers.



The McGrath article appears to break just about every bit of the guidance:

1) The caption talks about “coal-fired plants like this”, without explaining that the cooling towers have nothing to do with CO2, and would look similar on, say, a nuclear plant.

2) It is hard to see how the cooling towers could be given more prominence.

3) The photo is used in the headline.

As for the grossly deceptive impression that black smoke is being given off, this is in clear breach of the BBC Guidelines, which state:

View original 27 more words

ccaA hard hitting article appears in the Mail which slams the climate change act.

Six years ago today, an ambitious Labour politician, newly appointed climate change secretary, set Britain on a ruinous path that threatens our energy-dependent civilisation with collapse.
Such is the devastating conclusion of Owen Paterson, the Tory former Environment Secretary, who yesterday joined Lord Lawson among the highest-profile critics of the political consensus on energy policy.
For it was on October 16, 2008, that the new secretary of state – Ed Miliband, by name – set us the legally binding goal of meeting the EU’s wildly ambitious target to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent before 2050 (and how significant that no other country has followed his lead).