Green/Climate

2024-05-21

Richard Vobes interviews Ian Simpson, climate sleuth, who tells us what he knows about the artificial clouds that pervade our skies - and why we should perhaps be gargling with red wine...

"... most of it is tiny plastic fibres... people can't see the sky until they remove these things... "

"... the idea really is to do it without being caught... "

There are a lot of new ideas here, but clearly more research is needed!

(67 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2024-05-21

The last word on chemtrails? Who's conning whom? And why?

"... one is to block out the sun in accordance with the... fraudulent Paris Climate Accord... "

"... we're being very slowly and insidiously poisoned: Barium, Strontium, Aluminium oxide... " 

... and who knows what else?

(56 minutes)

Make of this what you will.

2024-05-18

It's been quite a long time since Clif gave one of his own videos, but his new rig is definitely superior to the old.

Here he takes issue with Elon Musk and Alex Jones, muses on his understanding of how human memory works (simplistic overview only, thank Heaven he didn't go into the detailed version!).

I'm not going to try to summarise the rest of Clif's brain dump, but MK Ultra / mind control processes are reviewed, not to mention love-making, fight or flight, 1947... and aluminium oxide, chemtrails, 5G, Finns, Kalahari Bushmen + a few others, and Atlantis.

Oh, and more...

We are all MK-Ultra'd now.

Enjoy!

(52 minutes)

2024-05-17

It's pretty obvious that the assertions of cheap renewable power are somewhat adrift from reality when such assertions coincide with ever rising fuel bills, despite ever more "renewable" power installations, not to mention opaque subsidy schemes.

Either some middle-man is making a killing between power generation and delivery, or some cherry-picking of the definition of "costs" is involved, or total incompetence, outright fraud, or maybe all four...

The continuing need for subsidies to make it all compatible with gas-powered generation (itself not exactly becoming any cheaper since the machinations around the Ukraine war), and the somewhat opaque government power pricing scheme that could have been designed to confuse the uninitiated, and one begins to see the scale of the deception.

David Turner (Daily Sceptic) puts it all into the realm of facts and figures for us.

It seems that most of the subsidies go to

2024-05-17

Leaving aside the inconvenient fact that without carbon dioxide, vegetation would not grow and we would all perish from starvation, it could still be just about plausible that too much CO₂ would be in some way damaging... for instance, if we had 100% CO₂ then we would all suffocate for lack of oxygen.

Happily, in the presence of sunlight and green vegetation, 100% CO₂ would be impossible, since the vegetation would convert it to oxygen in short order (probably strangling us within its infinitely-enfolding tendrils in the process). All without even considering the similar aquatic life that also processes CO₂ in the oceans.

Which rather begs the question: if the vegetation (farmed or natural) already performs the carbon capture process for free, what need to invent an artificial capture process?

And is it really wise to even consider blocking the sun (chemtrails etc) thus limiting the power of vegetation to

2024-05-14

John Droz Jr reviews the imbalance of influence in today's politics with regard to "Green" initiatives, asking how the one-sided influence of paid lobbyists in our political system is balanced in the interests of the public at large.

The public at large however is also subject to influence from many quarters, primarily from the mainstream media in all its forms - articles from (biased / unbiased) sources, advertisements, but also direct suggestions for "home improvements" (possibly sponsored by local government / national government and often communicated by unsolicited phone calls that may well be illegal), not to mention from their "elected representatives" especially at election time when they presume to tell us what policies we should be demanding.

Maybe it's time for the public at large to organise policy forums that review our political parties' policy offerings from the point of view of the man in the street (and a coherent fully formed analysis,

2024-05-14

Well...   it depends. 

How many data centres can it accommodate?

And how many "renewable" wind turbines can be installed in order to power these centres day in, day out, with a vast uninterruptible electricity supply?

Or are our governments encouraging us to rely on unreliable intermittent "renewables" for our own needs whilst burning fossil fuels to power their spyware centres?

If Mother Earth is going to hell in a handcart because of all the CO₂ emissions, then how can we afford all the data centres required to monitor all the messages on the internet? Who needs them, and what for?

"This growth has accelerated in orders of magnitude, driven by one, the number of data centers requesting to be connected to our system, two, the size of

2024-05-09

This is an interesting Substack which makes the case that "renewable" power sources may in practice release just as much or even more radiation into the environment as nuclear reactors, when assessed over their working lifespan.

Whoa! How does that work?

As so often with "renewables", we encounter the hidden hypocrisies of "outsourcing" the dirty secrets overseas. This time it's not about child slave labour in the Congo, but pollution in China (and possibly elsewhere).

Nothing surprises me any more... until next week...

Time to shut the world down and take stock?

2024-05-09

Last night I attended a local town renewable energy "workshop", billed as an exploration of how our local area might develop its potential for local power generation. No actual planning, no actual commitments, just getting local people "involved".

So being quite interested in the possibility of local power generation for local power needs (devolution of control of power provision may well be a step in the right direction), I decided to pay a call and attend.

Not wishing to come empty-handed, I printed off afew leaflets summarising some of the more obvious points of relevance to power generation on the scale to which we have all become accustomed, and as I was one of the early arrivals I spread them around the available tables, subsequently chatting to a few of the attendees and volunteer staff to explain my offering. This was noted with politeness and subsequently

2024-05-07

This is a follow-on from our recent article How Dangerous Is Nuclear? which was about the dangers of normal operation of nuclear plants.

This article examines the dangers from accidents and disasters associated with nuclear power plants.

Missing is any real discussion of small modular reactors whose use has hitherto been mostly confined to military purposes, which are not exactly subject to in-depth reporting when things go wrong.

Whilst in-depth reporting on any major event (nuclear or not) often seems to be coloured by vested interests which might prefer their own failings to remain hidden, some might think that this article may be based upon an unreliable dataset. However, we are where we are, and maybe there is a useful case to

2024-05-06

Have we reached "peak insanity" yet? Part of me believes that we reached it long ago, but that other irritating yet maddeningly always correct part of me avers that if that were true, things would by now be getting better, rather than worse. 

So I must concede - no, we have not reached peak insanity just yet.

How long will it take?

Oh please - I gave up making such predictions long ago. You will just have to make up your own answers on this one.

But before you do, I recommend recalibrating your expectations by reading the latest report in the Daily Sceptic about the current eye-wateringly expensive completely madcap stupidity that is certain (yes, I can confidently predict this one!) to make many more well-connected people extremely rich before it bankrupts the rest of us and fails laughably on

2024-05-03

Given that the green transition seems to be in deep trouble for lack of resources (amongst much else), why the reluctance to develop nuclear?

Because it's dangerous.

But given that so much of what we have been taught (climate change, pandemics, quaxxines) isnow being challenged and indeed found wanting by many, should we not be reviewing the supposed dangers of nuclear radiation from nuclear plants seriously? Is this danger really as great as we suppose?

Well, I don't know, but it does seem that governments around the world are taking different views on this, given the panicked rush to renewables isn't working out too well, and that France seems to have made an adequate job of running its electricity supply on nuclear, to the point where it can export this power to other countries.

And alongside

2024-05-03

What won't?

The Green Energy Transition to Net Zero Happening within the official timescale dictated by what passes for our Government.

Who says so?

An independent financial publication whose team represents both the pro renewables and anti renewables viewpoints (both being relevant to the purpose of investing our private savings).

Why won't it?

Nobody did the due diligence on the planning.

To be brutally honest, has any large scale government sponsored project ever come in anywhere near on time within living memory? Can anybody think of a bigger UK national project than our transition to Net Zero?

So why the surprise?

And, given that this target date is enshrined in law, who will go to gaol?

...

2024-05-01

OK, strictly we are talking here about cities on a seashore, but I couldn't resist the headline 😎.

Yes, it's time to divert down the climate change rabbit hole of the always expanding body of predictions that they would rather we forget... this time about the "rising sea level".

Please pay attention, this is serious.

(10 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2024-05-01

Another hoax?

Covid and Climate Change not enough? 

Actually, this one is way way old...  as old as the nuclear industry.

Is what he says really true? 

I don't know, but nothing these days would surprise me... make of it what you will.

Video of Mr Galen Windsor, of the Manhattan Project and various civilian/governmental nuclear facilities since the end of WW2. One can see how old the film is as it has obviously been digitised from an original photographic master... 

(91 minutes)

The Other Biggest Fraud in the World ...

2024-04-20

Personally I'm getting very bored with this dialogue of the deaf, where one camp shouts at the other and the other shouts back, heedless of the requirement to acknowledge the doubts and difficulties and yes, even the evidence and the logical arguments.

This site sets a good deal of store by evidence and logic (I can't help it, it's a working life-time of training), so shouting interminably across the fence isn't my cup of tea.

"Climate change" is a wonderful propaganda weapon in so far as the workings of the climate is probably the most complex topic known to man, so unfounded assertions based upon dubious modelling are notoriously difficult to prove or disprove in the absolute. So the onus falls upon the deniers to disprove the assertions of remote global authorities, whereas the onus of proof should be falling on those who would demonise the past decades of advancement of healthy civilisation and consign our future prospects of health and global sufficiency to the scrap-heap.

...

2024-04-17

Neil Oliver with another hard to hear monologue, asking many questions that will never be answered by any of the usual suspects.

Pfizer, Cass, NHS... to name just a few.

Have they no shame? 

(19 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2024-04-17

Covid or Climate Change? Which is/was the greater menace?

If either?

And what of the future?

(62 minutes)

Download the Slides here.

2024-04-17

No, not bombs - base load!

The sleuths at Fortune and Freedom have been sorting through the entrails of what passes for government energy policy, and have doubts that more nuclear power plants is the answer to the intermittency of renewables.

This one is a bit technical, but one can see their point. Well, points actually. Flexible response of power generation is necessary when the wind stops blowing and hail destroys the solar panels (or night-time occurs).

Can nuclear solve the intermittency conundrum? Even if the government could miraculously change its record of failure in delivering major projects, with immediate