Riccardo777

: About 80–120 million more people are in below-normal (colder) areas than in above-normal (warmer) areas for this 7-day period. Why isnt that the bigger news

Climate has been weaponized to drive a global agenda—orchestrated by the United Nations and backed by a projected $147 trillion in forced structural reinvestment (McKinsey Global, 2022). The physical reality of this shift involves up to 1.3 million wind turbines and eight billion solar panels (so far). They are darkening our most iconic land and seascapes, blighting rural farmlands, and cutting massive corridors through pristine native forests. By definition, climate is simply the study of regional weather patterns over a standard 30-year period. Over time, however, it has transformed into a convenient metaphor for a broader ideological struggle. The underlying reality is that no one can accurately predict a climate crisis decades into the future, when meteorologists struggle with a three-day forecast. Yet, a computer-model 'scenario' has been elevated into the defining crisis of our time. The evidence for this doomsday narrative is threadbare. While global temperatures have risen by roughly 1.4 degrees since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in 1769 - when the world’s population was just one billion - that modest warming has already occurred, and humanity has thrived alongside it. Even the IPCC has quietly backed away from its extreme five-degree doomsday scenarios. To claim a degree or two represents an existential threat ignores human history; we are an adaptable species that thrives from the equator to the Arctic. Yet this erratic metric now underpins a multi-decade campaign that is actively dismantling Western economies. The consequences are no longer theoretical. The real-world cost is arriving daily—leaving Western society to face its highest electricity prices in history.

NASA says global warming is amplifying wildfires. The example on its website highlights the 2021 Marshall Fire in Colorado. But investigators traced the ignition to human sources: an improperly extinguished slash fire, and a disconnected power line. Temperatures were only around 41F at the time. The fire spread through dry grass and fast Chinook winds off the Rockies. So NASA's example rests on human ignition, dry grass, and extreme local wind - not a clean climate signal. And the global fire data are even worse for the narrative. MODIS satellite data show global burned area has declined since the early 2000s. Copernicus fire emissions data point the same way. The likes of Africa, South America, and Asia have all helped drive historically low global fire emissions. The world is burning less, not more.

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate "Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data. Regarding scientific transparency, a defining characteristic of science is the open sharing of scientific data, theories and procedures so that independent parties, and especially skeptics of a particular theory or hypothesis, can replicate and validate asserted experiments or observations. Emails between Climategate scientists, however, show a concerted effort to hide rather than disseminate underlying evidence and procedures. “I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI [Freedom of Information] Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process,”writes Phil Jones, a scientist working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in a newly released email. “Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.” The original Climategate emails contained similar evidence of destroying information and data that the public would naturally assume would be available according to freedom of information principles. “Mike, can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re AR4 [UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment]?” Jones wrote to Penn State University scientist Michael Mann in an email released in Climategate 1.0. “Keith will do likewise. … We will be getting Caspar [Ammann] to do likewise. I see that CA [the Climate Audit Web site] claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!” The new emails also reveal the scientists’ attempts to politicize the debate and advance predetermined outcomes. “The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out” of IPCC reports, writes Jonathan Overpeck, coordinating lead author for the IPCC’s most recent climate assessment." (2011)

I’ve been made aware that a constituent who asked for my help has previously served time for benefit fraud. As an MP, I have to take people at face value. My office does not run background checks on constituents who come to us asking for support. The issues my office assisted with were entirely unrelated to that offence. Reform UK stands firmly against benefit fraud and abuse of the system. But a responsible MP must deal with each case on its merits and support constituents who ask for help.