JoculRec

2022 was a different time. They really said skipping the vaccine causes car crashes. And people believed this.

Labour... 5 year olds can choose their sex 15 year olds cannot use facebook 16 year olds can vote More taxes will make the country richer Banning North Sea drilling will give us energy security Giving £millions to France will stop the boats Never vote Labour-they are idiots.

My name is Frank Zelenko @frank_zelenko . In 2020 I opened this account for my brother Dr Vladimir Zev Zelenko of blessed memory. This was his first account and it was one of the first accounts shadow banned, throttled and suspended by the old Twitter regime during Covid. Around the time Elon Musk took over twitter the suspension was lifted. However, he’d already opened a second account which became his primary account for the last few years. A few months ago that primary account was hacked and we’ve been pleading with X to help us get it back from the hackers. So far we’ve not heard back from X. So I will be posting my brother’s content here, especially his primary message regarding the treatment of ssRNA viruses.

'Turkish' barbers are run by Kurds or Albanians. 18,000 of them on your streets near your homes. They run most of the illegal cigarette business worth £3 billion a year. Behind it is a network of goods smuggling, counterfeiting, people trafficking, and cigarettes and drugs. These are massive organised crime groups like the Mafia right in the middle of our smallest towns.

Hansen, easily the biggest fraudster in history? Oh boy where do I start? This is an activist who got his PhD by claiming that Venus is hot due to a so-called "Greenhouse Effect"! What an absolute JOKE. This activist got promoted to be the head of GISS, where he tampered with the data for decades, to force it to fit his fake CO2-driven models. Hansen's data tampering has been documented (since 1999) at Real Science; stevengoddard.wordpress.com/data-tampering… climatism.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/ano… stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/noa… climatism.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/screen… climatism.wordpress.com/category/hocke… climatism.wordpress.com/2013/11/10/gis… climatism.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/nas… And at Milton Conservative; miltonconservative.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/data-t… Nov 2015; massive new NOAA climate data fraud exposed by journalist Günter Ederer on the site Principia Scientific, data checked by Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert; principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-i… The methods employed were; • Reducing the annual mean in the early phase. • Reducing the high values in the first warming phase. • Increasing individual values during the second warming phase. • Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995. • Shortening the early decades of the datasets. • With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened. Real Climate Science has found a ‘special +1c anomaly temperature fraud’ which was apparently especially concocted for the Paris COP21 meeting in December, 2015; realclimatescience.com/2015/11/record… Now you can get the global temperature you want to order – exactly when you need it! Incredibly, the ‘scientists’ at NASA even knew what the October 2015 temperature would be – within 0.01c – even BEFORE they had calculated any of the data! Another site has been monitoring all the data tampering in all the datasets since 2006; climate4you.com/index.htm The UK’s CRU have also recently switched from HadCRUT3 to HadCRUT4 to try and bump up the record, because 3 was cooling strongly. They have fraudulently lowered 1998 by 0.1c in HadCRUT4 and boosted 2007 by 0.25c to make it appear that 1998 was not the hottest. See the adjustments that were made after 2008 here; #HadCRUT" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">climate4you.com/GlobalTemperat… MaturityDiagram Here is HadCRUT3 and 4 compared; woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3v… The most reliable long-term record we have is HadCRUT3, which shows just 0.3c of warming in the last 75 years; that is - a rate of warming of 0.4c per century. An overview of the 'adjustments' to NOAA's NCDC temperature record can be found here; climate4you.com/images/NCDC%20… Only the changes done since 2006 have been documented; even so this has amounted to about 0.2c over the 20th century. The effect of the changes is to make all temperatures recorded prior to 1945 cooler and all those after 1945 warmer, resulting in a much steeper rise in 20th century temperatures. Data fraud at the NCDC; climate4you.com/images/NCDC%20… Data fraud at NOAA with poorly-sited US stations; dailycaller.com/2015/12/17/exc… Data fraud at the UK’s MET; wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/12/met… Anthony Watts; youtube.com/watch?v=pjlPvw… Data fraud in Brazil; notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/11/22/mas… Even the Russians have documented the fraud of their datasets by the UK’s MET and the CRU; iea.ru/article/kioto_… wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/12/met… Data fraud in Australia at BOM; jennifermarohasy.com/tag/temperatur… jennifermarohasy.com/wp-content/upl… jennifermarohasy.com/2014/09/homoge… theaustralian.com.au/national-affai… If just the raw data itself is used, Australia's hottest year was 1885. Data fraud at New Zealand’s NIWA; #more-26173" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/09/new… Switzerland have been caught too; Science journalist Markus Schär of the Swiss news weekly Weltwochediscovered the Swiss Meteorological Service (SMS) tampered with its datasets as well. notrickszone.com/wp-content/upl… More tampering has been found, this time in Paraguay; notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/26/all… And in the Arctic; notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/tem… GAST temperature fraud in detail as reported by Dr Idso, Dr Wallage and Dr D’Aleo; heartland.org/_template-asse… Investigations are now being carried out into all this data fraud in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and in the UK. Activist Hansen is arrested YET AGAIN; 10:52 AM · Apr 20, 2026

Mandelson was a member of the Trilateral Commision. So was Epstein until his death. Starmer still is a member. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilatera… Like Starmer, Mandelson started out as a Communist despite the fact that his Mum was the daughter of Baron Herbert Morrison a former Labour Minister. Peter became a TV producer even though he had no experience. But he was a firm friend of Lord Birt who later ran The BBC. Birts wife was a Director of Fujitsu who made the Horizon Computer system which caused all of the problems for the Post Office managers. Mandelson recommended the Fujitsu system to Blair who forced the Post Office to use it. Mandelson began his political career at Labour run Lambeth Council which has been forced to pay out over £70 Million to children who suffered abuse in their Childrens Homes when Councillors allowed known pedo's to run orphanages. Oh what tangled web's we weave?

I've never seen so many people this happy to be ripped off. Is there a clinical term pending for this disorder?

OK one last go..... for those who follow or interact with me the usual caveats around apologising for repetition. For anyone remotely interested in protecting the vulnerable from sexual and physical harm, particularly children please read the below. All of the facts and statistics I will refer to are openly and relatively early verifiable. Yoy can even use Grok to check should you have difficult believing me. I work in Public Protection. It comes under many names in different forces, MOSOVO, Jigsaw e.t.c but it all concerns the same thing. Managing the risk posed by Registered Sex Offenders and other Potentially Dangerous Persons to the Public. I have done this role for approximately six years as Police Officer and have a number of other skills and roles which are part time including being a level 2 Officer (riot Officer in common parlance) and a CBRN Officer alongside some additional skillsets. Prior to this I was on a mixture of Response and C.I.D. teams. In my current role I have arrested and taken to Court approximately 300 Registered Sex Offenders for further offending. I say this not to boast or for self aggrandisement but to try and establish my credentials and to demonstrate that what I am saying is backed by experience and profound knowledge of the subject matter. We are fucked. It is the fault of successive Governments and public apathy. If you wish to know why and the reality of the situation then please read on. If you don't then do so in the knowledge you are making a choice to not understand what is happening to the people trying to protect you and your children from RSO's. That might make you feel angry and upset. It should do. We would not be in this situation without your apathy. If you wish to do something about that we need you to harness those emotions and utilise them accordingly. The Sex Offenders Register began in 1997. It's genesis came from the realisation and acknowledgement that sex offenders need a degree of monitoring and controlling to protect the public. Thus was born VISOR. The Violent and Sexual Offender Register. This is a database maintained and updated by the Police which monitor and tracks Sex Offenders and tries to ensure they are tracked, monitored and adhering to the requirements needed of them. This was further added to by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and formally codified in the Sex Offender Notification Requirements. These are requirements incumbent on ALL rso's to register their names, aliases, addresses, passports etc. Failure to do so is a criminal offence with a maximum sentence of breaching being 5 years imprisonment. At this juncture it is worth pointing out that we are one of the few countries to have such a Register. America and Australia (along with a few others) also have one. Almost none of our European contemporaries do. Indeed the idea of a European Sex Offenders registry has been mooted numerous times and has failed to come to fruition. A number of European countries including Spain and France have explicitly argued that such a Register would breach the human rights enshrined by the ECHR for those subjected to it. All these countries despite not having such a Register to manage and Police have vastly greater Policing resources available to them. The U.K. has one of the lowest Officer to population ratio in all of Europe. Approximately half that of France, Spain, Italy, Greece and Russia. About a third less than Germany. Bear that in mind as and if you read on as despite us having such low numbers and resources we have correspondingly far greater duties. All whilst being routinely unarmed. In the U.K. when the Register was first established it was recognised that it would need officers and staff to manage the RSO's on it. To visit, monitor, support and if necessary arrest them for infractions of their conditions or further offending. When the guidelines for workload were drawn up it was decreed that no individual Officer would have more than thirty Offenders to manage. Anything more was seen and inherently unworkable and likely to result in increased risk. This number and the time it was created is, again, very important to bear in mind as you read on. The limit of thirty was imposed before the creation of Sexual Offenders Prevention Orders and their later successor Sexual Harm Prevention Orders. These are Court Orders bespoke and tailored to an RSO's offending. They will limit things such as an Offenders access to children, Internet access, apps they can use, registering internet enabled devices with Police e.t.c. e.t.c. Their use has vastly increased and results in large numbers of arrests and investigations as Offenders breach them. Again the maximum sentence for breaching such an order is 5 years. Fast forward to 2010 and the Home Office quietly changed the maximum number of Offenders an individual Officer could manage. Instead of thirty it was now fifty. This was not debated in Parliament. It was not really debated at all. It was not imposed due to increasing resources or lack of work the stark naked truth was there were too many Offenders and not enough Officers. Indeed despite the ever increasing number of RSO's there had been an approximately 20 percent in the number of Public Protection Offficers to deal with them with greater workload and complexity due to the introdution of SOPO's. You will note the date. 2010. The start of austerity. Bear in mind how bad the situation was therfore prior to austerity and brace yourself accordingly for what has come next. Since 2014 the number of RSO's has doubled. From approximately 50,000 to 100,000. In that same timeframe Police funding has been catastrophically slashed. The Met alone has lost a billion pounds in real term funding. My own force has lost hundreds of millions. Between 6 to 8 hundred Police Stations have closed. Tens of thousands of Officers have left. That was all needed experience. As of today around a third of Officers in the U.K. have less than five years experience. That is an appalling, disastrous figure. Government spokesman about healthy churn. In reality they wished to gut Police of experience as it was cheaper to have lots of inexperienced Officers bith in terms of general pay and pensions. Governmental Ministers will often talk about protecting the front line. This is meaningless jargon. Back office staff are crucial and critical. Worse when they are gone the tasks they performed still have to be done..... by the front line. Remember this when you are struggling to get hold of emergency response officers with their tiny numbers and horrific myriad of duties and tasks they need to complete. You were warned about this. You were warned of the consequences of the cuts and what it would mean to Policing. You did not listen. The Government gambled, correctly, on your stupidity, myopia, apathy and ignorance. They knew that when the chickens came home to roost that the Police would be Blamed for the effects of the cuts imposed upon them. They were, heartbreakingly, entirely correct to gamble as such. So 100,000 RSO's, decreasing staff and Officer numbers, greater tasks. On my team the current average is now 64 Offenders each to manage within the community. Over double the number to manage than when the Register started. Every single member of my team failed their last psychological screening which we have to complete yearly. Every single one. If one of them goes off sick or decides they can no longer bear to carry on the number we will manage will jump to around 76 each. This isn't manageable. It isn't right. This is a national disgrace replicated across the board. If you think my colleagues seem weak or unmotivated consider the conditions they labour under on your behalf. Due to our tiny numbers we have noone to hand onto. This means if we arrest someone we deal with them entirely. Arrest, searches(section 32 and 18), interview, casefile building, going to CPS to obtain charges e.t.c. An arrest will usually result in a remand given the level of risk we deal with. That means a shift of, ordinarily, between 16 to 20 hours. On average we arrest 2-3 RSO's a week. Our stations are often, literally, falling apart with leaks and crumbling infrastructure. Waiting for solicitors which, like us, have been denuded of funding and investment so there are not nearly enough. This means my team are exhausted with massive impacts on their personal lives and missing out on children and family events e.t.c... even basic expectations of sleep cannot be met. My colleagues and I regularly deal with extrme offences and exceptionally dangerous people. Two weeks ago one of the men we deal with was sentenced, amongst the things we uncovered, for assaulting two of my colleagues whilst arresting him. To say nothing of the appalling material we regularly are subjected to when gathering evidence. Having to grade multiple videos of babies and toddlers being raped and provide a statment after 16 hours on duty in a station so stripmined off funds it cannot even supply sachets of squash for its officers to drink is not an ideal work environment. All this before we get to the Courts.. The Court system has, broadly, ceased to function. There are not enough specialist lawyers and Judges to deal with normal cases let alone specialist and sexual cases. Trial dates are, in of themselves, a national emergency. Basic task like transferring Defendants from prison to Court or getting liveliness to prison regularly simply fail to work. Accelerated by the privatisation of these services. The prisons themselves are collapsing. In the U.K. the Prison estate is operating at just under 100% capacity. That is a disgrace. Again successive Governments have failed to invest and fund. The Public have failed to hold them to account. Prison Officers operate in squalid, dangerous, terrifying conditions. They don't have the equipment and backup they need because Governments have "allowed" themselves to be led by pressure groups and activisits because its chepaer than properly equipping them. Something that many of these groups may wish to ponder. Yoy are simply carrying water for Governments looking to do things on the cheap. Prison Officers don't have tasers because the reality is it costs money. Both for the equipment and training. It is cheaper to "listen" to pressure groups to provide the political cover as a reason. The Government don't really believe or care that violent prisoners might be "traumatised" by the sight of a taser that may have been used on them outside of prison. It's just a hook to hang failure to resource on. This complete abrogation of responsibility from those who Govern in our name has made our prison estate woefully over populated, highly dangerous and open to corruption and subversion by organised crime. The tactics and technology are readily available, for instance, to prevent drone drops of money, drugs, phones e.t.c. They are not implemented because they cost money. Or indeed because the tentacles of corruption have embedded themselves ever further up the chain. It is hard to believe our ministers are such paragons of virtue that they are beyond the purview of being corrupted by organised crime. I am now arresting and breaching Offenders who are arriving at bail hostels with undeclared internet enabled devices, simcards and USB sticks that they have brought with them from prison. Prisoners in many establishments openly film and record themselves, they have YouTube channels and update their dating profiles from inside.... and continue to offend. That prison crisis directly impacts the management of RSO's. Prison terms have been cut from 50% of a sentence to 40% now to 30%. Ministers have repeatedly assured us that violent and sexual offenders are exempt from th3se releases. That is a straight lie. Sexual and Violent Offenders as graded by Police and Probation are regularly being let out using these schemes. I have already arrested and remanded quite alot of them for further offending. Ministers language has now changed saying that dangerous offenders will not be released. Again this is pure mendacity. Mendacity erected on your gambled ignorance. What Ministers are saying here is that those prisoners designated as a dangerous offender by a Judge and sentenced accordingly are exempt from these release schemes. That is a very rare designation. It means that an offender who is found dangerous will serve two thirds of their sentence and be subject to an extended license period. The vast majority of sexual and violent offenders are not so designated. From rapists to domestic abusers north of 95% of such individuals will not be deemed dangerous. When Ministers say dangerous offenders will not be released they are lying. They are deliberately using technical legal terminology not in any way shape or from the meaning of dangerous as the public would understand it. There's so much more to discuss but most won't ever read as far as this. Asylum seekers? There's a hot button issue. Are yoy aware that the Home Office won't deport someone (as rarely as they do anyway) if they have an active criminal investigation against them? Repeatedly raped a child?when you're released and waiting for the deportation process carry on committing crime. It stops the process. What a design system. I haven't even touched on Probation and their crucification and disintegration. Reactive management of RSO's? Such a cornucopia of horror and decay you are all kept deliberately ignorant of I can only use the tools and resources given to me by the Government to protect you. The Government will only give to me what it feelsit can get away with. It is up to the Public to redress the balance. I cannot strike. The Police and the Military give up the right to strike to serve You. You will note that bith organisations have been filleted and gutted by successive Governments. The Police are the Public. The Public the Police. When you denigrate me and mock me for failings that I have had no hand in creating and you have allowed you are simply engaging in self-harm. The results of that are now manifest everywhere in our society. If you want to start to redress the issues than do so. Ask politicians about what i am saying. Demand answers. Is anyone marching and protesting about this? Are they bollox. I have said it before but it is worth repeating I find it more stress relieving and rewarding to drive aid convoys to Kyiv them I do serving the British public. I go again October. I will be met by people who are kind and decent to me, pleased to see and grateful for my meagre efforts at help. Go on ask your local MP about all thus, ask your elected officials. They will not answer me. I have tried. They will all, uniformly, ignore me. It's cheaper that way.

I agree with alot of what you say Clare and there are clearly real issues here. In my professional life I regularly encounter sex offenders literally discussing these concepts. I think a very under appreciated and under researched area is how much of this current crop of sexual mores and confusion was birthed in the early 2000s to 2010 on sites such as Tumblr, and Reddit and various other messaging boards that were all but unmoderated. Too few adults, particularly parents, appreciated the scale of grooming and community building amongst the paedophile community took place on these sites which were, broadly, at the time seen as very immature and were inundated with children using them. Much is the more controversial aspects of the current gender wars, and arguments around sexuality were created, refined and disseminated on these sites and had been for years until they exploded fully formed with millions already exposed, groomed and full adherents. It's one of the reasons that they were so powerful, so all encompassing and so quickly embraced. There was an entire generation of children that have ben marinated in language, beliefs and vocabulary that was, In many cases, explicitly engineered by paedophiles to break the links between parental and authority trust. I appreciate this might sound conspiratorial but I've seen it first hand. I've seen paedophile discussions, manuals and message boards explicitly targeting the church and earlier the gay rights movement for the same reasons as a legitimate struggle to be co-opted as a Trojan horse.

🧵 So following on from @Docstockk in @unherd, we now have another kooky, tongue in cheek ‘I have questions, but honestly I’m not a prude myself’ type article about the 'Summer of Sex' initiative by Labour MP Samantha Niblett. This one by @HadleyFreeman in @thetimes also entirely misses the point. (Why are feminist journalists so gullible?) This really is not a feminist issue about the pros and cons of porn and how it is discussed in Parliament. It is a glaring child safeguarding and lobbying scandal that requires urgent repudiation and enforcement, as I explain below... thetimes.com/comment/column…

Sir Keir Starmer's war with Olly Robbins just went to a whole new level The government has tonight taken the pretty extraordinary step of publishing what appears to be* a new legal opinion on the legislation surrounding national security vetting Allies of Robbins have cited the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act, which states that ministers do not oversee the national security vetting system Robbins is using this as part of his argument for not informing Starmer that Mandelson had failed his initial security vetting. The process, they say, is 'rightly independent' - something ministers have also said in the Commons But the government appears to have commissioned new legal advice which states: 'No law stops civil servants sensibly flagging UK Security Vetting recommendations' The government appears to have commissioned an ad hoc legal opinion as ammunition for Starmer ahead of his appearance in the Commons tomorrow Allies of Robbins point out two things. 1) This appears to be new legal advice - it didn't exist when Mandelson was appointed 2) It doesn't demonstrate that Robbins *should* have informed Starmer. It is effectively passive They say that the government appears to be attempting to retrofit a legal opinion to make Starmer's argument against Robbins * I say appears to be as it doesn't seem to have been signed off by a government lawyer, but that's v much the suggestion I'm getting from inside Govt

It’s not St George’s Day you absolute fraud.

Norway collected £50bn from North Sea oil and gas last year. We collected £4.4bn, having taxed our own producers into closure in pursuit of a #netzero fantasy. I cannot think of a cleaner example of a government failing its people @Keir_Starmer and @Ed_Miliband conservativewoman.co.uk/the-suicidal-m…

The Emperor Has No Clothes! How the IPCC Built a 38-Year Empire on a Circle of Lies Jonathan Cohler 16th International Climate Change Conference Hotel Washington • Washington, DC April 8, 2026

The Emperor Has No Clothes: How the IPCC Built a 38-Year Climate Empire on a Circle of Lies Summary of my talk at ICCC16 on April 8, 2026. The papers underlying this analysis are available at papers.jcohler.com. For nearly four decades, the world has been told a story. The story goes like this: the Earth is warming at an alarming rate, humans are causing it by burning fossil fuels, and unless we spend trillions of dollars to stop it, catastrophe awaits. Governments have reorganized their economies around this story. Children have grown up afraid of it. Scientists who questioned it have been ostracized. There is just one problem. The scientific foundation of that story — every single number the IPCC uses to tell it — is physically meaningless. Not uncertain. Not debatable. Physically meaningless, in the same way that the average of everyone's phone numbers in Washington, DC is meaningless. You can calculate it. The arithmetic works out fine. But the result tells you absolutely nothing about reality. This is not a fringe claim. It is a mathematical and physical demonstration, built on peer-reviewed papers and the foundational principles of thermodynamics. And once you see it, you cannot unsee it. The First Lie: A Temperature That Does Not Exist Everything begins with the Global Mean Surface Temperature, or GMST. This is the single number — usually expressed as an anomaly from a pre-industrial baseline — that the entire IPCC enterprise is built upon. When you hear that the Earth has warmed 1.2 degrees since the industrial revolution, you are hearing about GMST. When climate models project warming of 2 or 3 or 4 degrees by 2100, they are projecting changes in GMST. When the Paris Agreement sets a limit of 1.5 degrees, it is a limit on GMST. So what exactly is GMST? Here is where the story starts to unravel. Temperature, in physics, is what is called an intensive property. That means it describes the state of a specific physical system — a system that has boundaries, that is in or near thermal equilibrium, that has a single governing equation of state. You can meaningfully talk about the temperature of a cup of coffee, or a room, or the ocean at a particular depth, because each of those is a defined physical system. What you cannot do, without violating the laws of thermodynamics, is aggregate temperatures across systems that are not in thermal contact with each other and call the result a "temperature." The Earth's surface is not a thermodynamic system. It is a patchwork of thousands of local systems — deserts and rainforests, polar ice sheets and tropical oceans, mountain peaks and valley floors — none of which are in thermal equilibrium with each other. Averaging their temperatures produces a number, yes. But that number is not a temperature in any physically meaningful sense. It has no equation of state governing it. There is no physical law that connects it to anything. It is, as physicist Christopher Essex and colleagues demonstrated rigorously in a 2007 paper, simply not a temperature. This is not a technicality. It is the kind of category error that, in any other field of science, would end a research program immediately. Averaging intensive properties across non-equilibrium systems is like averaging the zip codes of everyone in New York City and then using the result to give someone directions. The arithmetic produces a number. The number means nothing. The International Organization for Standardization recognized this implicitly decades ago. ISO was tasked in 2002 with defining all important terms related to climate change — and to this day, "global average temperature" does not appear in their completed definitions. The omission is not an oversight. ISO's mandate requires metrological rigor, and "global average temperature" cannot survive it. Neither the IPCC nor any climate agency has ever produced a rigorous physical definition of GMST. They use it constantly — it appears in virtually every chapter of the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report — but they have never defined what physical quantity it represents, because no such definition is possible. The Second Lie: Models Built on Nothing If GMST is physically meaningless, what are the IPCC's climate models actually doing? The answer is uncomfortable. Every major climate model used by the IPCC — the ensemble known as CMIP, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project — is tuned to reproduce historical GMST trends. These models have hundreds of adjustable parameters, and those parameters are set so that the model's output matches the observed GMST record. This is called validation: you adjust the model until it fits the data, and then you declare that the model has been validated against observations. But if GMST is not a physically meaningful quantity, then tuning a model to reproduce it is not validation. It is curve-fitting against a number that has no physical content. The model learns to reproduce a mathematical artifact, not a physical reality. And because these are coupled global circulation models — where temperature interacts with precipitation, wind, ocean currents, sea ice, and dozens of other variables — the corruption spreads everywhere. Every projection the model produces, for every variable, inherits the original meaninglessness. The implications are staggering. Every temperature projection. Every sea level projection. Every extreme weather projection. Every carbon budget. Every remaining-emissions calculation. All of it flows from models validated against a quantity that does not physically exist. The Third Lie: An Ocean That Was Never Measured Recognizing that surface temperature records were contested and unreliable, the IPCC developed a second line of evidence: ocean heat content, or OHC. The argument was straightforward — if the planet is accumulating energy from the greenhouse effect, that energy must be going somewhere, and most of it should be going into the oceans. Measure the ocean's heat content over time, and you have a direct measurement of the planet's energy imbalance. This argument sounds compelling. It rests on a program called Argo — a network of roughly 4,400 robotic floats deployed across the world's oceans, each one diving to 2,000 meters and rising back to the surface every ten days, transmitting temperature and salinity profiles along the way. Argo is a genuine scientific achievement, an engineering marvel that has produced an enormous amount of valuable oceanographic data. But here is what Argo was actually designed to do, according to its founding documents from 1998: observe the evolving physical state of the upper ocean, track regional patterns of heat and salinity, support weather forecasting, and complement satellite altimeters. Global ocean heat content and Earth's energy imbalance are mentioned nowhere. The program was not designed for that purpose, and its design is fundamentally unsuited to it. The problem begins with basic physics. When an Argo float ascends from 2,000 meters to the surface over six to ten hours, it collects roughly 1,000 temperature measurements along the way. But the float is drifting the entire time. By the time it surfaces and phones home via satellite, it may be fifty kilometers from where its deepest measurements were taken. Those measurements are all assigned to the surface GPS position — the only location that is actually known. The actual underwater trajectory is entirely unknown. Every single data point below the surface is assigned to the wrong location. Then the interpolation begins. Those 12,000 real measurements per month — already spatially misassigned — are used to fill 45,000 three-dimensional grid cells covering the global ocean. The vast majority of the ocean is not measured at all; it is calculated. The polar regions, coastal zones, and marginal seas are largely excluded. About half the total ocean volume, including all water below 2,000 meters, is simply ignored. The calculations use correlation functions that blend measurements from water masses hundreds or even thousands of kilometers apart, destroying any local information the floats actually captured. The anomalies computed from this process — the differences from a historical baseline — then run into the same fundamental physics problem as GMST. Temperature is an intensive property. You cannot meaningfully average temperature anomalies across non-equilibrium volumes of ocean any more than you can average them across the Earth's surface. The resulting number has units attached to it, and the arithmetic is consistent, but it does not represent a physical reality. When all the genuine sources of uncertainty are properly quantified — the untracked trajectories, the interpolation errors, the deep ocean ignorance, the polar gaps, the mismatched measurement frameworks — the true uncertainty in the derived Earth Energy Imbalance figure is greater than plus or minus one watt per square meter at 95% confidence. The IPCC's AR6 reports it as 0.7 plus or minus 0.2 watts per square meter. The actual uncertainty is roughly five times larger than the signal being measured. The result is statistically indistinguishable from zero. The Fourth Lie: Satellites Adjusted to Match the Fiction The IPCC presents its ocean heat content figure and its satellite-derived energy imbalance figure as two independent lines of evidence that agree with each other. This agreement is cited as powerful confirmation that the Earth is accumulating energy at the rate claimed. What the IPCC does not prominently advertise is how that agreement was achieved. NASA's CERES instruments — satellites measuring the radiation budget at the top of the atmosphere — produce raw measurements with an absolute uncertainty of roughly three to five watts per square meter. The signal the IPCC claims to be measuring is 0.7 watts per square meter. The satellites, on their own, cannot resolve it. So what was done? The CERES data were adjusted — via a least-squares optimization — to force agreement with the Argo-derived ocean heat content estimate. The IPCC's own AR6 documentation acknowledges this directly: the CERES fluxes "were adjusted, within the estimated uncertainties, to ensure that the net TOA flux was consistent with the estimated Earth's energy imbalance based on ocean heat content measurements." In other words: they adjusted the satellites to match the floats, and then cited the match as independent confirmation. That is not science. That is circular reasoning with extra steps. This is not unprecedented behavior in the IPCC ecosystem. Kevin Trenberth, one of the architects of the ocean heat content framework, wrote in a now-famous 2009 email obtained through the ClimateGate disclosure: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in August shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong." When the satellites disagree with the models, the satellites are wrong. When the satellites are adjusted to agree, that agreement is cited as confirmation. The game is rigged by construction. The Fifth Lie: The CO₂ Fingerprint That Was Never There The final pillar of the IPCC's case is carbon dioxide attribution. Yes, CO₂ has risen in the atmosphere. Yes, human industrial activity emits CO₂. But the IPCC goes further, claiming that the rise in atmospheric CO₂ is almost entirely anthropogenic — that natural processes cannot account for it, and that the isotopic composition of atmospheric CO₂ provides an unambiguous human fingerprint. This claim rests on the Bern model, a mathematical framework describing how CO₂ moves between the atmosphere and natural reservoirs. The Bern model has a particularly alarming feature: it predicts that a substantial fraction of CO₂ emitted today will remain in the atmosphere for centuries or millennia. The IPCC's AR5 report states that fifteen to forty percent of emitted CO₂ will persist in the atmosphere for more than a thousand years. This is the foundation of carbon budgets and net-zero targets. The Bern model has been falsified by evidence that has been sitting in plain sight for sixty years. When atmospheric nuclear testing peaked in the early 1960s, it injected a massive pulse of radioactive carbon — bomb carbon-14 — into the atmosphere. This pulse has been tracked continuously ever since. If the Bern model were correct, that pulse should decay slowly, with a substantial permanent fraction remaining. Instead, it decays as a single exponential with an e-folding time of about seventeen years. The bomb carbon is gone. It cycled through the system and was absorbed — completely — in roughly half a century. The multi-exponential Bern model, with its permanent airborne fraction, is simply wrong. CO₂ does not persist in the atmosphere for millennia. It cycles through in years to decades. The isotopic evidence tells the same story. The carbon isotope ratio in atmospheric CO₂ — the quantity called delta-13C — is supposed to be declining as fossil fuel CO₂, which is isotopically light, mixes into the atmosphere. The IPCC treats this decline as the smoking gun of human causation. But a 2024 peer-reviewed study by Prof. Demetris Koutsoyiannis examined the actual isotopic data carefully and found something the consensus narrative cannot accommodate: the net isotopic input signature to the atmosphere has been essentially unchanged since the Little Ice Age. The value has remained stable — globally, across all major measurement sites, throughout the entire period of industrialization. A changing human fingerprint should show up as a changing net signature. It does not. The isotopic composition is consistent with natural biosphere dominance and an undetectable human contribution. The reason is not mysterious. The biosphere — plants, soils, oceans — cycles roughly twenty-five times more carbon per year than human industrial emissions. Natural processes are overwhelmingly dominant. Human emissions are noise on top of a vast natural signal. And temperature, not human activity, drives the dominant part of that signal: warming causes the biosphere to exhale more CO₂, which raises atmospheric concentrations. The causality runs from temperature to CO₂, not the reverse. 5 x 0 = 0 Step back and look at the full picture. The IPCC's case for human-caused climate catastrophe rests on five interlocking metrics: GMST, the climate models tuned to it, ocean heat content, Earth's energy imbalance derived from ocean heat, and CO₂ attribution. Each one is presented as an independent line of evidence. Together, the IPCC says, they constitute overwhelming proof. But they are not independent. They form a circle. GMST is physically meaningless. The models are tuned to GMST and inherit its meaninglessness. Ocean heat content is computed through a process that violates measurement physics and is statistically indistinguishable from zero. Earth's energy imbalance is derived from ocean heat content and confirmed by satellites that were adjusted to match it. CO₂ attribution rests on a model falsified by nuclear bomb data and an isotopic fingerprint that does not exist in the observations. Each element of the chain depends on the others. None stands independently. The IPCC calls this "multiple lines of evidence." But five times zero is still zero. What This Means None of this proves that the climate is not changing, or that human activity has no effect on the atmosphere. Climate changes continuously, and has for billions of years. What it demonstrates is that the specific metrics the IPCC uses to quantify the crisis — every number that drives the policy, every figure that justifies the spending, every projection that frightens the public — are built on a foundation that does not survive contact with basic physics. The International Organization for Standardization could not define global average temperature because it fails metrological requirements. Four different AI systems, presented with the mathematical arguments, reached the same conclusion independently. The emperor has no clothes — and even the tools his court built to defend him can see it. For thirty-eight years, an enormous scientific and political infrastructure has been constructed on top of these metrics. Trillions of dollars in spending have been justified by them. Careers, institutions, and international agreements depend on them. Questioning them has been treated as heresy. But physics does not negotiate. A number that has no physical meaning does not acquire one because important people find it useful. A measurement indistinguishable from zero does not become evidence of a crisis because a satellite was adjusted to agree with it. A model falsified by sixty years of bomb carbon data does not become valid because it has been cited ten thousand times. The work is done. The papers are published. The mathematics is there for anyone who wishes to examine it. The question now is not scientific. It is whether the institutions that built their empires on these numbers will acknowledge what the physics has always been trying to tell them. The emperor has no clothes. He never did. And it is long past time to say so. The presentation "The Emperor Has No Clothes" was delivered at the 16th International Climate Change Conference, Washington DC, April 8–9, 2026. 👇👇👇👇👇

This message was sent to me last night. At the time, I was speaking at a Rape Gang awareness event hosted by the very brave Fiona Goddard. Omar Sharif, is a key member of the Labour Party campaign team in Oldham, naming me in a group chat he wrote: "The guy has a serious problem with Muslims especially Pakistanis. Let's just say he's been addressed." His associates approved it with a thumbs up. This was not a response to anything I published about Oldham. It followed my interview with the New Culture Forum, where I detailed how the biraderi rig elections and control politicians and my encouragement for people to attend an event hosted by a rape gang survivor. Go and have a look on my timeline, I have said almost nothing about this May's local elections in Oldham. That is what prompted a man connected to Arooj Shah and Labour networks in Oldham to tell his contacts I had already been "addressed." Addressed how, Omar? Is there a hit out on me? Are some of the Glodwick Boys going to come pay me a visit? Have me followed me home again? Preach a sermon at the mosque against me? I want people to understand what this is. The rape gangs, the heroin networks, chicken shop cartels and the Labour politicians are not separate problems. They are the same network. The biraderi does not distinguish between the rape gangs, drug dealer on the corner and the councillor in the chamber. They protect each other. I name them. That is why I get "addressed." I will not be silenced. I have faced arrests, smear campaigns, and coordinated harassment for eight years. Every attempt failed. I am still here. Men like Omar Sharif do not scare me because I have seen what they are underneath the threats. They are cowards who have spent decades relying on a captured police force and a compliant political class to keep the lid on what they do. That lid is off. The phone numbers in this screenshot are visible. The names are visible. The message is on record. They post this openly because they believe they are untouchable. They believe Greater Manchester Police, the force Andy Burnham has shielded from full accountability on rape gang cover-ups, will not act against them. They are probably right about that. They are wrong about everything else. Every threat like this one gets published. Every name gets shared. The people are my protection. As for Oldham Council leader Arooj Shah and her network of Pakistani criminals, I'll see you all at the election count. Despite your threats, we have Reform candidates standing in every ward in Oldham. The people of my town are mobilising. Despite your best efforts, democracy is not yet dead in the town. We know who the real racists are. __________ I’m Raja Miah MBE. For seven years, I led a campaign that exposed how senior Labour politicians helped protect Pakistani rape gangs. The people of my town helped force the national inquiry. You won’t see me on the BBC. You won’t read my work in the legacy press. That’s not an accident. I take this to a place from where there is no coming back. My work is free. No paywalls. No gatekeeping. No exclusions. If you can afford to do so, supporting me costs as little as 75p a week (£30 a year). Sign up here; 👉 redwallandtherabble.co.uk If you can’t commit to a regular subscription, a one-off contribution genuinely helps keep this alive. You can support me using one of these links; 👉 BuyMeACoffee.com/recusantnine 👉 paypal.me/RecusantNine We’re up against a machine, politicians, police, officials, and media, working together to shrink, sanitise, and bury the truth. This work survives because of you. If you’ve ever shared my posts, learned something, or felt less alone reading them, stand with me. I need your help. Raja 🙏

Not gonna lie, I would have opened the door. We are so cooked. 😬

These people are fucking insane

🚨After 12 years of thinking I was born with a male brain in a female body, I now understand that I was born with an AUTISTIC brain in a female body. I then began to understand that I could cure my own crippling gender dysphoria by better understanding my autism. Instead of binding my breasts & pretending to be a man, I now meet my sensory needs with mild compression undershirts that don’t actively destroy my lungs, back, ribs, spine, nerves and breasts. I now intentionally choose to wear bras with a maximum of two textures, and thick straps that don’t twist as I move, in addition to the mild (full upper body) compression shirts because I know this is what I can tolerate. By managing the sensory needs of my whole body in all sorts of new ways, I no longer focus on the discomfort my breasts and 99.99% of bras cause me. As a result, my body is now a much more tolerable place for my brain to live. The only qualms I have now have with that part of my body I used to hate so much, was the destruction I’ve caused myself in the misguided attempt to fix an unacknowledged severe sensory issue (that as a kid caused me to toe walk and to compulsively pull out my eyelashes before it became fixated on gender) with an attempted gender transition. Happy autism awareness month!

There has never once been a civilization at any point in history that died from an aging population because it’s a problem that inevitably corrects itself. The population may wax and wane over the centuries, but low birth rates alone have never killed off a civilization. Meanwhile, countless civilizations have been completely destroyed from unchecked immigration. And they were destroyed because everything you just articulated is actually the inverse of how civilizations form in the first place. It’s particular peoples that produce particular civilizations. If you mass import a different particular group, then the civilization that original people produced dies. If you need proof, you can ask the Romans.