Like a floater, the littleturd with a fart trapped inside it, that simply will not go down your toilet no matter how many times you flush it, the climate change scare story has bobbed back to the yop of news bulletins and newspaer front pages in recent months. Porotests by eco terrorist group Excinction Rebellion and their offshoot organisations have brought buisiness and social traffic to a standstil in many European, American, Australian and American cities and added to the destruction wreaked by the COVID pandemic and its associated lockdowns and disruption.

But is the charge towards "net xero" an achievable goal or is it wishful thinking by the crusties and wierdie - beardies and were we to achieve "net zero" in the developed nations, at the cost of exporting outr industrial bases to China and India, destroying European . American cibilisation and impoverishing the people of the formerly democratic nations would it actuall "save the planet" or would it simply enable emotionally needey virtue signallers to feel good about themselves as they turned a blind eye to the suffering arpund them?

One of the things the woke wankers who report science related news for the BBC, CNN, The Daily Mail, Sky News and the rest of the tree hugging, left leaning media have in common is that no part of the "green" agenda is ever questioned. The science is settled is the first item in the credo of the corporater owned news and opinion manufacturing industry. The High Priesthood of the so-called climate science community love to babble about their scientific integrity in TV, radio and print media interviews, but never question the dogma of thius most cultish of sciences and will certainly never answer questions that are raised by people outside their cult, we usually get brushed off with something like, "You're not a scientist ts so you wouldn't be able to understand the science.

In a recent interview I watched online, a disciple of the cult was actually asked a question concerning what the short and long term practical effects of climate change in the county of Yorkshire in northern England. The answer, which involved so much circumlocution the intervieweee was in danger of disappearing up his own arse was in a nutshell, in future, Yorkshire may have a hot summer once every ten years rather than once in a lifetime. To most people in northern England this would be very welcome.

The fact is of course that nobody can possibly predict exactly what will happen in the future, the predictions of the last twenty years, none of which have been borne out by the way, as a little research using a decent search engine will confirm, have been based the reults of mathematical modelling rather collecting and analysing real world data.

Those of us who live north of the fiftieth parallel, traditional dividing line betweek USA and Canada and also the latitude touched by the most southerly point in Britain have been awatre of the recent cranking up of the climate change fear and panic generator but most of us are as unimpressed as usual when we hear or read sensationalised news reports of "the warmest June 2021 on record (in fact 2018,2017, 1976 and 1940 were all very slightly hotter,) or September this year being the second warmest September on record. The reason for such a cool response to the panicked screecing of the Warmageddon brigade is that they forget to mention the unseasonally cool July and first three weeks of August. Statistics can and are often presented to be misleading and looking at the raw data I note in the past few years we have sen a pattern of warmer nights and cooler days. A similar pattern noted by others and only reported here is a trend towards warmer winters and cooler summers.

Thus we are not even in the same range as the medieval warm period when according such records as there were and evidence from sediment layers, bog oaks and records of crop yields, for over three centuries vinyards thrived in these northern latitudes, or evan as recently as the 1920s and 1930s, dates conveniently before the records used to calculate global warming. If, as the climate change screechers insist, atmospheric levels of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) are the sole cause if global warming how could the Medieval warm Period have happened? Scientists have done their best to erase itis episode from history and discredit the empirical and scientific evidence showing that it did, but why would medieval monks recoded details of the grape harvest in Yorkshire when they could not possibly know anything of agruments about Anthropogenic Global Warming that would engage us in the 21st century? And why would Scandinavians who settled in Greenland send messages to their king about successfully havesting crops of oats and barley and also breeding pigs, sheep and goats on land now covered by ice?

The natural cycles of the earth have created hot and cold periods throughout human history and the same patterns have been observed in pre - history. Natural evens such as volcanic activity and unnatural ( I should say extra - terrestrial) events like solar storms or asteroid hits as said to have caused mass extinctions, but life on earth survived as did the earth itself, despite being a rock surrounded by a thin layer of atmosphere. So given the planet's proven resilience what are the "save the planet" protestors really trying to save? As many of their leaders are on record as saying humanity must become extinct in order to save the planet it seems they are not interested in our fate or in preserving our civilisation so it is reasonable to assume these 'climate activists' whether they be protestors supergluig their arses to the tarmac of Britain's trunk roads or pseudoscientists of the academic community predicting death and destruction on a Biblical scale from the evidence provided by their mathematical models or reality.

When I started blogging and writing about Warmageddon it was known as global warming, but a brief warming trend that began in the late 1970s abruptly creased in 1998 since when global averages habe reduced by an insignificant margin. This, along with the reported cooling of Antarctica, regrowth of the Great Barrier Reef and increase in sea ice around the northern ice cap (all of which are observable in real life but according to the scientists' self programmed mathematical models are not happening) suggest things are not exactly as we have been told.

These inconvenient truths have forced the Green Blob to rebrand Global Warming which is why every tropical storm, sunny day in England, record snowfall in Texas or a flash flood anywhere will be reported by mainstream media as evidence of the catastrophic climate change being driven by Carbon Dioxide emissions from human activities. It would be interesting to know how the green blob explain the inundations described in The Book Of Genesis or The Epic Of Gilgamesh. While I would not suggest the story of Noah, or its equivalent in Sumerian myth are anything to do with factual history, there is irrefutable evidence of thre great inundations around the end of the last ice age.

The objective of this article however, is not to argue about whether climate change is rwal or another propaganda psy - op planned and engineered by advocates of globalism, but to examine government policies ostensibly aimed at mitigating the effects of this alleged Carbon Dioxide and halting or reven reversing climate change. Why are people in the media, whose job is to expose government jiggery pokery to public scrutiny and call politicians, their corporate cronies and the bureaucrats on whom they rely to do their thinking, to account? Nobody in the media is prepared to question the policies our leaders are adopting at astronomical cost to us poor taxpayers, or point out publicly that they much hyped goal of 'net zero' (reducing CO2 emissions by decarbonising processes or increasing the absorbation of the gas by planting trees,) will wreak havoc with industry, much of which has already been exported to China and India, and cause social upheaval.

Politicians seem to grab hold of whatever pronouncement falls from the lips of Swedish trolette Greta Thunberg and treat it as some great scientific revelation although most of Little Froken T's utterances are hackneyed old climate alarmist cliches, scripted for her by seasoned Scandinavian eco - warriors, which make their way from an autocue to he brain and hence out of her mouth. But in spite of Greta's doom lated warnings and the scarmongering scientistists with their mathematical models of mass human extinction, many things could happen in the next few days that would change everything. As I write the Cumbre Vieja volcano on the Altantic Island of La Palma is erupting violently during a period of high seismic activity around the world. It would only take simultanous eruptions in several large volcanic calderas to tear the planet apart.

China is becoming militarily aggressive in the far east, the giant, communist power is threatening its tiny neighbout Taiwan, which is backed by The USA and Australia. Unfortunately the USA is led by a petulant and unpredictable demented geriatric. What could go wrong? Governments are still scaremongering about a virus that poses little threat to 95% of us, having already trashed economies and destroyed the social fabric of nations in a bid to suppress dissent. There is evidence that the COVID virus was genetically engineered to attack the old and chronically ill. Noe it is becoming clear that the COVID pandemic has failed to reduce enough of us to a state of snivelling obedience what monstrous microbe may be released from a secret biological weapons laboratory next.

And on a less dramatic level there are possibilities of financial collapse (not least of the Eurozone), technical failure knockking out the internet, thius didsabling banking and financial systems, healthcare organisations, industry and commerce, public transport and ... well everything, thus demonstrating the folloy of putting al of one's eggs in a single container. The list goes is endless.And yet our leaders and intellectuals obsess over a one degree increase in global temperature.

According to noises being made by Prime Minister Johnson and various members of his government, ssorted academics, self - styled 'experts' and publicity hungry celebrities Britain could be the first developed nation to become totally green. OK, the weirdie - beardies of the world would love us but at wahat cost to the great majority of British people. Furthermore our idustrial base is so small and so clean that in relation to global carbon emissions we are not significant. And yet this government, like tose of David Cameron and Tony Blair before it continue to offshore our emissions, jobs and prosperity to the China, a country that produces 27 per cent of the world's CO2 emissions and India, currently producing 9% but planning to double coal production. China is commissioning coal fired power stations every week and has some of the worst pollution problems in the world. India has claimed exemption from the voluntary limits required by climate agreements like the Paris accord on the grounds that it is a developing nation that has a huge poverty problem to solve. The hypocrisy of our virtue signalling politicians in demanding that the people of the United Kingdom (population 67 million) make sacrifices "for the sake of the planet, when trade agreements are being sought with China (population 1.5 billion,) while aid and investment are being pumped into India (population 1.4 billion) and other large population third world countries that can offer low labour cost production facilities?

While we invest in unreliable and uneconomic green energy, such as wind turbines and solar panels, for which people are already paying green levies in their utility bills to subsidise the operators of these intermittent, low output generators, we sit on vast reserves of natural gas which could be safely fracked were the Prime Minister and his cowardly cohort to develop sufficient testicular fortitude to stand up to the green screamers. A resource that would provide cheap, clean energy, prosperity and most of all, energy security for British homes and British business which should be the Government's number one priority.