By Jo Nova
The latest Times polling shows British people have had enough with paying more for electricity bills, taxes and meat in order to change the weather.
Fully 87% said they would not be willing to pay more for domestic electricity or heating bills. 70% said they didn’t want higher taxes, and almost the same number didn’t want to pay more for meat or dairy either.
In a democracy, these would be the easy winners. Rarely on key topics are numbers so far above 50%. Yet somehow, some way, the UK conservative party completely missed the big 80:20 issues and lost the election, and then the Australian conservatives did too.
The EV thrill is over for the British:
The biggest mood shift was away from electric vehicles, and in polling terms, it was seismic. Sometime in the last four years nearly a quarter of Britons changed their mind about whether the government should ban petrol and diesel cars. Between 2021 and now polls shifted from 51% supporting the idea (what were they thinking?) to 58% oppose.
Australian politicians should note how brief the infatuation with EV’s really was. Enthusiasm might be over here before it even starts.
Revealed: Global warming exaggerated, say soaring number of Britons
The Money question: Which if any of the following would you be willing to see increase in cost in order to combat climate change?
Hands-up?! Who believes in climate change?
Somehow 59% of people still say they “believe” in climate change, but the question has become a mindless cheerleading chant. What does it mean to “believe”? Only 16 per cent of voters said they would be prepared to pay higher gas bills to encourage the switch to electricity. It means nearly half the country were able to say “yes they believe in climate change” and also tick the box “‘Not willing to pay higher gas bills”. Perhaps they think mankind is doing something to the climate, but either they like the warmer weather and don’t want to solve climate change, or they don’t believe their gas bill will achieve anything.
Or, perhaps they just know they are supposed to say “I believe in climate change” even if they don’t. It’s become a mantra.
REFERENCES
The Times — Revealed: Global warming exaggerated, say soaring number of Britons
Yougov poll results: https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/TheTimes_Results_250604_w.pdf
https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Eurotrack_ClimateChange_Apr25_w.pdf
I believe in climate change.
It does, and it always has.
I do not ‘believe’ in – nor have I seen evidence for – Anthropogenic climate change.
Let alone Catastrophic ditto.
Auto
710
“Climate change” is no more than fancy words used in a fallacious argument!
170
Releasing measurable amounts of carbon into the atmosphere in the form of CO2 has caused significant changes in climate. It is most noticeable in the greening of the planet:
https://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/146000/146296/greening_tamo_2000-2018.png
Productivity of crops and forests has increased measurably this century. The associated transpiration tempers the climate by moderating both cold and hot.
Some of the climate changes are simply the result of the changing solar intensity across latitudes but the majority of the greening is the result of enhancing biomass production through increasing CO2 concentrations.
100
I think most people have always been sceptical but you can’t admit that you don’t care about those nice cuddly polar bears can you?
The proof of the pudding however is that few people are willing to pay anything to stop the climate Armageddon that the media and politicians assure us is just round the corner.
It will take a long time for politicians to climb down however as that means they wil lose control of the general narrative which Is far broader than merely climate change.
400
I think everyone who is concerned about polar bears should have to meet one.
Preferably a starving one.
330
I doubt that – particularly in the UK. Most people have faith in long standing institutions like governments, academia and government funded agencies. Do you still fund your BBC? Surely King Charles is well informed on the topic and his subjects are aligned with his views.
The whole scam would not have gained traction if populations were told they would have to sacrifice their lifestyle to one of subsistence living to stop climate change by not burning -carbon based fuels In fact, it has been a slow burn with many getting on board the gravy train at the expense of others. Australia is approaching half of the roofs having solar panels mounted on them.
I consider most Australians have TDS because Trump is nearly always painted as a untrustworthy womaniser by the Australian press. PM Albanese does not want to be seen with Trump for fear of what it might do to his supporters opinion of him.
120
From what I can see it looks like the least of their problems.
240
“Green” power was never going to work.
It is non-viable and the only reason it works at all is the massive subsidies or forced purchase of its defective product.
The entire business model has nothing whatever to do with energy but about harvesting subsidies.or tax concessions.
As Warren Buffett said:
420
Case in point for the coldest place on Earth:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/572717/building-a-wind-farm-at-73-degrees-ross-island-plans-move-forward
Is that -73° latitude? Or -73° air temperature? Or another example of jab-affected churnalistic chowder in the style of ABC/BBC/RNZ?
NZ’s Antarctic Scott Base has been waiting (a few years) for its 3 subsidy harvesting totem poles to be replaced: the original supplier went bankrupt, so the govt has sourced a new hole to pour our tax dollars into which, fingers crossed, will be completed in 2 years’ time (hope the diesel genies don’t run out of fuel in the meantime).
With temperatures ranging between -5 to -30, often accompanied by a -73°C windchill factor, Antarctica ain’t a walk in the park: the accompanying photo shows Scott Base clinging to the rocky shore of Ross Island, with volcanic Mt Erebus stewing & brewing in the background, while pressure waves ripple the frozen ice-shelf in the bay.
Once completed (if ever) the 3 whirligigs will also supply “renewable energy” to the US’s McMurdo Station just over the hill… unless they go back to utilising nukular as they once did.
190
California Lawmakers Squeezed Refineries Out, Now Scramble To Pay One Well-Known Company To Keep Theirs Running
Or
Watching The End Game Of New York’s Climate Madness Begin To Play Out
As I have written many times, with New York’s fantasy “net zero” energy plans, it is not a question of whether they will fail, but only when and how.
The Democrats, who dominate state politics, and their environmentalist allies, are firmly committed to the impossible.
Thus, they are caught in a trap of their own making, and from which there is no good escape. The fact that they are caught in this trap is obvious to anyone with basic arithmetic skills, but almost all of our politicians and environmentalists lack those. However, a small handful of them are starting to sense the impending crash. This makes for amusing interplay.
The state’s Climate Act of 2019 directs hostility to fossil fuels on all fronts. In the realm of electricity, the Act mandates 70% of electricity from “renewables” by 2030, and 100% from “zero emissions” sources by 2040. The official plan for achieving those mandates basically boils down to building lots of wind turbines and solar panels, and then lots more of same — principally off-shore wind turbines — until a flood of infinitely “free” wind and sun washes over us and brings us to energy nirvana. Meanwhile, also on the path to “net zero,” development of natural gas infrastructure is to be halted and reversed. More than half way to the 2030 deadline, the progress toward the 70% renewable electricity goal has actually been negative (due to the premature closure of two large nuclear power plants). On the natural gas front, two big pipeline projects have been blocked by the state environmental regulator (DEC) on phony grounds of “water quality.” And meanwhile there are plans for big new electricity consumers (chip plants and data centers) in the upstate area.
Time to crank up the wind turbines! And then President Trump swept back into office, and as one of his first acts pulled the plug on the off-shore wind projects.
So as of this past Spring, here’s where we were: lots of new electricity demand coming along, all new natural gas infrastructure (including two big new pipelines) blocked, and the planned future of wind turbines (which wouldn’t work in any event) also blocked. Does anyone see a potential problem here?
170
As US multi-billionaire Warren Buffett advised his clients via his regular newsletter several years ago.
90
As Auto said above, the climate changes.
That’s an undeniable fact.
We know that it has happened in historic times such as the Minoan, Egyptian, Roman and Medieval climate optima, warm times when Civilisation thrived.
Civilisation loves warmth.
Humans love warmth. That’s why they tend to vacation in warm places, not cold (unless for winter sports or adventure)?
The whole problem, arising from our dumbed-down population brought about by the Left’s destruction of the education system, is that many people have an Aristotlean world view, that is, a belief thst the whole earth system is static and unchanging.
Thus any perceived or real change in climate, no matter how minor, and even if the change is not real but fabricated, such as BoM (Australia) “homogenisation” altering historical temperature records (documented on these pages), similarly for NASA as documented by Tony Heller, alarms people.
I’m glad there is finally pushback against this madness.
372
Hello Dinosaurs at Lark Dinosaur Quarry 130Km SW of Winton QLD – Where are You?
Oh – You mean the Climate changed and No Humans were involved and you are no longer there?
120
I believe in climate change.
Climate change has been happening for billions of years ever since a bunch of space dust coalesced into the third rock from the sun. And it will continue to happen until the sun goes red giant and it’s gravity breaks the third rock back into space dust and absorbs it.
I might even go so far as to believe that some small degree of climate change in the last 50 years has been anthropogenic.
But what I refuse to believe is that it is the apocalyptic rhetoric around the issue. We are still well within established norms that can be found in the long timeframe of the geologic record and even the short timeframe of human historical records. Nothing we have seen thus far is catastrophic or outside the limits of human ingenuity to address. And the fear mongering about ‘tipping points’ is just that.
So no, I don’t want to pay higher electric bills today or to strip away the benefits of our high energy society from future generations because a bunch of terrified loons are afraid of a little bad weather. If you are worried about global warming, move to the plains of Canada or the steppes of Siberia, but leave me (and future generations) alone.
280
No poll has ever shown that people will committ much financially in the name of climate change probably because they do not really see any harmful effects. People in the UK are struggling with rising inflation, mortgage rates that are going up and the highest tax bill in living memory so a bit more warmer weather is no bad thing, especially if it reduces our heating bills.
200
I don’t believe in anything. I look for evidence and conform to a view – or don’t – on it’s evidential basis, or lack thereof.
Man made Climate Change is therefore a steaming pile of boloney. No experimental proof, none, zilch, zip, nada. It’s a Religion.
232
Paying more to “combat climate change‘.
Fossil fuels create CO2 which builds up in the atmosphere and causes Climate Change.
We are fighting this. Why not measure what 500,000 windmills and billions of solar panels and a hundred trillion dollars has achieved.
Look at CO2 in the atmosphere for the last 50 years but especially the last 20 years of pain and lockdown and shuttered industries and soaring electricity prices.
270
Also, TdeF, you have also mentioned before the horrific 35% “carbon” tax which soon will apply to Australia’s top 250 CO2 producers.
It’s something that is ignored by the Lamestream Media and fake conservative “opposition” Liberal Party.
It will dramatically increase prices of everything for all Australians and will be the final death blow for Australian industry.
You have mentioned it here, and elsewhere:
https://joannenova.com.au/2025/03/tuesday-101/#comment-2838771
321
And many more. Taxes never in plain sight, hidden in the price you pay for everything. As Julia Gillard promised, there will never be a carbon tax, at least one you can see.
Because the people of Australia do NOT want carbon taxes. So it’s legislated carbon tax theft in your electricity prices, paying double for coal electrons or petrol or diesel electrons.
The ONLY thing not carbon taxed is petrol, because people would notice. But everything else, from sewage to cemeteries is carbon taxed.
And it’s not just taxes based on the opinions of a few. In Victoria fracking is illegal under our Constitution! Coal Seam Gas, which is endless also illegal. Uranium and Thorium as well.
But there are insidious bans, like the ban on gas supply to new suburbs. Or repair parts for existing gas appliances. Or the sale of new gas appliances. It’s hard to track all the ways in which a vocal minority is wrecking the joint with bans and laws and regulations, but it’s not democracy. All based on made up political science, none of it proven.
And what good has it done in reducing total CO2? Because reducing total atmospheric CO2 is as scientifically true as expecting the ocean to recede out of respect. As demonstrated by King Cnut.
Clearly he faced the same ridiculous idea that humans, the king in particular, controlled the planet. (King of England from 1016, King of Denmark from 1018, and King of Norway from 1028 until his death in 1035.)
We Australians need a referendum on all forms of carbon dioxide taxes, visible and invisible.
241
As for Net Zero, it is a very deliberate political distraction device, to focus attention on fossil fuel ’emissions’ and NOT on the alleged problem, total CO2.
Total CO2 has not been the slightest bit affected by human activity and cannot be changed by humans. CO2 levels are determined by the ocean temperature, nothing more (also concentrations and pressure).
The actual amount of CO2 in the ocean and air is actually trivial. CO2 is only 0.042% of the air which is 1/350th of the weight of the ocean.
Annual CO2 ’emissions’ are 1% of the total CO2 in the atmosphere which is in turn only 2% of what is in the ocean. So ’emissions’ add only 0.02% annually to total CO2. And this is quickly distributed 98:2 into the oceans.
Lies, lies and really wrong science. We are drowning in proof that humans have not changed and cannot change CO2 levels by any means. Now opportunists talk of being a sequestration superpower in Australia! The CO2 madness never seems to end.
290
So CO2 concentration has increased 30% in 50 years. That being the case one would expect great changes if, a big if, CO2 has a serious negative effect on our weather/climate. The fact is that any change has been minor and, so far, beneficial. It must have been beneficial because our population has increased from 5 billion to 8 billion in that time and apparently a smaller proportion of those people go hungry. A casual glance at those figures would tell you that the more CO2 the better. I am surprised that the exceedingly well educated climate scientists that abound in universities and government funded bodies haven’t seen the same connection.
50
This is the important bit-
“One in four voters now believe that concerns over climate change are not as real as scientists have said, amid growing public concern at the cost of the government’s net zero policies.”
So even if they believe the climate is warming, they don’t believe the scientists, the media or the politicians. Hopefully this sense of scepticism spreads to other mandated problems in life, such as diseases and immigration.
The idea of efficiency gains from fewer people ruling over larger and larger areas have not happened, so a return to a smaller life focus will be better. So what if something is happening in China, worry about what your local Council is planning for you.
190
Mass indoctrination by media ,academia and politicians keep the masses subdued and compliant by scaring the s#it out of them. Poor buggers. There even was a tornado -maybe a few in the Central West of NSW yesterday and only climate change can do that (sarc). Hold on to yer barn folks.
141
In the antipodes we still have a problem with MSM disinformation.
https://poll.lowyinstitute.org/charts/climate-change/
101
Can anyone please explain these more dangerous weather or climate changes over the last 60 or 100 years?
The data clearly proves that we live in a much safer world and death rates from extreme weather events have dropped by at least 98% since the 1920s.
Again, just 2 billion people in the 1920s and over 8.2 bn people today.
Can anyone please explain why they don’t understand the facts or the data?
161
Again here’s the OWI Data deaths from extreme weather events since 1900 and note the big drop after the 1960s.
Again, just 3 billion people in 1960 and 5.2 bn increase in population and at risk today. When will they think about these numbers and wake up?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/natural-disaster-death-rates?country=Wildfire~Wet+mass+movement~Flood~Extreme+weather~Extreme+temperature~Drought
111
Belief is a religious term that doesn’t belong in science, but it’s become synonymous with CC science. Amusingly, the CC Greta disciples always claim they follow the science even when almost all of their divine predictions end up looking like your weekly astrology reading. Even more amusingly, they double down on their belief with every failed prediction. Of course when these people end up running the country, that’s when the fun stops, with people having to go hungry and shiver through winter because of outrageously expensive electricity, or have their livelihoods destroyed by having their work place shuttered, or farm lands confiscated by authoritarian decree. And all of this is being done under a false religious belief of what is nothing more than a failed fanatical astrology experiment.
In recent years, authoritarian western governments have become clever in distracting society from any one issue, such as CC and we now see mass immigration, bizarre transgender politics and indigenous politics being rammed through parliaments to make us “look over there”. New censorship laws are also being used to silence political dissent and huge crime waves with machete attacks have resulted from tag and release policing of dangerous criminals. We also now see daily radicalised street protests on issues that have nothing to do with this country. It’s now impossible to focus on any one issue these days because the government has deliberately created so many and has society so divided and blinded by so many manipulated causes. In Victoria, the debt is so bad and taxes so high, the people were starting to rebel, and the government’s answer was to force through a treaty to distract from their spectacular failures and then brand all opponents of this new policy as racist. This is now the modus-operandi of all left wing governments in western countries.
When I look outside today, I no longer see Australia, a once great country where we were all united proudly under one flag, working together and supporting each other to make this a special place. Instead, I see a world of hatred, violence, intolerance, crime, poverty and homelessness, with politicians that run agendas that only look after themselves and their wealthy bedfellows, and damn everyone else. It’s as though we’ve deliberately discarded everything that was good and replaced it with the worst of what we saw elsewhere. How did we get here and how can we make it better ?. I don’t know if anyone can answer this question, but I know there is no going back.
230
“I don’t know if anyone can answer this question, but I know there is no going back.”
Back to when we were building a country and it wasn’t a welfare state?? Back to when we needed dams built, houses built, power stations built and had European tradesmen arriving by boat? When we used to actually make things and sell them?
No, now we will pay people to do nothing, use machines to do what used to be work, and we have such wealth we can afford to worry more about ‘safety’ or what sex you want to be, than to worry about getting the job done.
The problem is that we no longer have to strive, the Welfare Govt has taken that vital part of us away. Its what Socialism always does, and it will always lead to ruin.
40
There is an important democratic problem at issue here.
Human control of CO2 levels (not Emissions) is impossible. Some believe it is possible.
Either way, this intrusion of unproven science into legislation is the first time a religion has been used to pass punitive laws on everyone. In a world where we are supposed to turn a blind eye to extremists like Islamists. Still we are being taxed and bullied and intimidated and robbed for the control of CO2, something which is impossible.
Such things should at the very least go to a referendum, not decided by politicians with hardly a scientist or engineer to be seen.
We saw all this with the Chinese Military made Wuhan bioweapon where socialist governments used fear as an excuse to lock up innocent people for daring to express an opinion, banning marches and mandating innocculation with unproven experimental mRNA vaccines. But allowed massive Black Lives Matters marches to go ahead because it suited their politics.
This whole ripoff of electricity, cars, transmissions lines, grid, solar, wind and endless taxes and regulation is based on nothing more than opinion. And often by people who are not qualified to express more than a private opinion. We cannot even say consensus as there has been no attempt to establish consensus. That’s a referendum.
Science and technology is now use to control whole populations without anyone even attempting to have a debate, let alone in parliament. Where is the Royal Commission? Where is the National debate? After 37 years, where is the Referendum on man’s control of Carbon Dioxide let alone rapid end of world global warming. Let’s have a Royal Commission. Why are we leaving the most devastating taxes and regulations in history to people who know nothing about science? Or to their friends in government controlled departments who always agree with their bosses?
And if Consensus of degreed Australian physical scientists were taken today (physics, mathematics, engineering, chemistry), would Australian scientists actually support the man made CO2 driven urgent devastating Global Warming as a reality? I would exclude clearly compromised recently minted ‘Climate Scientists’ who have based their careers on man made CO2 driven Climate Change being true.
190
Speaking of democratic problems, anybody who wants to support us in Vicdanistan can sign this petition against a treaty. Despite the majority of Victorians voting against The Voice, the Allan Government is trying to make it happen.
https://www.change.org/p/oppose-the-treaty-process-in-victoria
90
Here’s a recent longer video from Alex Epstein explaining why the left wing loonies are really anti humans and why they hate all the benefits of BASELOAD fossil fuels.
Trust me we can all learn something new about the world if we have the time to watch this video.
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=alex+epstein+fossil+fuels+make+us+safer&mid=4C008070C762D76571384C008070C762D7657138&FORM=VIRE&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0
81
Man-made warming is just a canard,
Still believed as old habits die hard,
Calls to take climate action,
By the globalist faction,
Are calls everyday folk disregard.
190
It’s hard work deprogramming the cultists and convincing them that fossil and nuclear fuels are the best thing that has ever happened to humanity. But it’s starting to pay off.
131
How much economic destruction do you think Australians are prepared to tolerate?
I would have thought we’re long passed that point but most people have no understanding of the issues and are not interested in finding out.
161
Spot on David and why do these silly people want to destroy our environments and at a cost or waste of TRILLIONs of $ and also ZERO change for our climate or weather?
None of this WASTE and misery makes any sense.
110
During the 1990s recession, the worst for sixty years here, I attended a budget breakfast meeting at a major accountancy firm in Sydney CBD where a senior mining executive (multinational corporation) addressed us. He talked about the many problems facing investors and at that time native land title, sacred sites for example and others.
His main point was that when foreign investment and local investors are no longer prepared to take risks here the people generally do not notice immediately, it takes about a decade before the declining national economic prosperity becomes too obvious to ignore.
141
When and at what cost will suburban and country local area grids be upgraded to meet the EV recharging future, or is EV all about politics?
120
Agreed, TdeF,
The science of climate change is strictly for qualified scientists. Although I am a scientist with Chemistry major, I am qualified to join in only some parts of overall climate change. It is probable that most other scientists can also contribute only on certain topics, that is, few if any people should be named as “climate change scientists” or afforded special recognition as experts.
Besides, climate change is not a social debate about likes and dislikes among the general public. That is mere uninformed gossip among non-specialists, though sometimes is is spot on, other times fairy tale stuff.
TdeF, you have often stated that people cannot control CO2 levels in the air, but physics and chemistry can explain observed variation. Happily, we agree on this. If you like, Nature will act to adjust levels that mankind might change, to follow a Nature-controlled path. It is hard to prove this without doubt. There will always be doubt, no doubt about that! But, the assumption of CO2 control by Nature not people is reasonable and withstands alternative explanations. Thank you for your persistence and probability of being correct. Geoff S
140
My proof is simple. Cosmic ray induced C14 levels are exactly what they were for the last few million years. Fossil fuel CO2 in the air is only 2.0% by direct measurement. And that is in transit, 2 years worth. So in absolute measurement terms, the whole thing is busted. All other alleged ‘evidence’ is argument from coincidence, correlation, nothing more.
121
And as a chemist you know that equilibrium is not some fragile, static, accidental thing but established with every CO2 molecule which leaves the ocean surface and every CO2 molecule which gets absorbed across 3/4 of the planet, driven by the wind. Just as in the CO2/O2 exchange in our lungs. This equilibrium is not fragile. Proven half life is 5 years for complete exchange of all atmospheric CO2. Add a very small 1% of fossil CO2 to the one side of the massive exchange and it is quickly distributed 98:2 ocean to atmosphere. So 98% of all historic fossil fuel CO2 is now in the oceans.
To read the stories about the poor planet’s greenery not being able to cope, trees are in lock step with CO2. CO2 goes up, they increase. NASA proved it by world wide satellite observation. Trees sequester trillions of tons of CO2 each year without affecting CO2 which is constant from pole to pole and year to year within 1%. That’s rapid dynamic equilibrium at work, not some fantasy about the poor plants not being able to cope.
In fact if CO2 goes up, phytoplankton take off rapidly in days. They are part of the equilibrium process and complicate the simple Henry’s Law response in the warm tropical waters. We do not see either effect in the NZ data but we do see the plankton explosion in the South Pacific.
You can also see the activity in the Mauna Loa in the tropics where as with Henry’s Law where CO2 goes up with temperature but the phytoplankton pull it down rapidly. NOAA cannot tell summer from winter in their story, but you can see the whole story in the graph
121
And it’s annoying that everytime we have confirmation of the dramatic effect of CO2 on plants and phytoplankton, the PR people of the CSIRO/NASA/NOAA say that’s ‘fertilization’. They denigrate their common enemy CO2. As if plants are made from fertilizer.
They should learn some biology that all living things are made from CO2. All living things burn when dried because they are made from hydrocarbons/carbohydrate and derivatives like protein. Their food is CO2 which combined with sunlight produces carbohydrate. Fertilizer is a trace chemical which is in short supply and boosts plant growth but is not the plant. The plant is made from CO2 and H2O and very little else. Fertilizer adds that little else, like Nitrogen which is critical but tiny. Phosphorous ditto. Even iron.
Organic chemistry is all about carbon. And leads on to biochemistry and microbiology and the role of the other trace elements. But now Carbon is the internationally declared enemy of mankind, the world is spending $20 trillion a year to defeat and control evil carbon dioxide. It would be funny if it was not so seriously wrong.
101
If we take a sober look at ‘Climate Change’ and ‘Multiculturalism’ acute in Britain, but observable the across the West, both are falsely branded surreptitious political movements.
As was Pandemic.
All for the purpose of elite zealotry imagining of utopic World Order.
No different than imagined by historical religious movements.
And producing the same result.
The British non-elite indigenous are just being punished for rejecting European control with the collaboration of their own masters.
Old story.
In parallel to the first Reformation, the main problem for the elite is the internet.
We’ll see if the good guys win a second time.
Or not.
If the bad guys win, Wikipedia will magically cleanse it.
It’s already been in our faces, what were once heretics, are now labeled ‘conspiracy theorists’.
Exact same cultural and political functional manifestation.
Again, the primal reason for this blog.
40
Nut Zero and “free” wind always looked great … until the huge costs of “free” wind and the insanity of (not) living under Nut Zero becomes known.
We sceptics told everyone it was a bad idea … and far from heeding our advice, they attacked us in the vilest ways and went ahead … and now they are suffering the consequences.
Same with the covid jab. It’s now clear there was no evidence to support its use and plenty against, yet still it was foisted on the public by greedy commercial interests like climate.
I doubt those parties that pushed the cimate and covid insanities will get back into power.
40
Friends of mine raises show dogs and one is a grand champion. The got a beautiful Wedgwood plate as an award to commemorate the distinction. It was made in China.
I think people have caught on that climate change policy is a game of hide the pea. The savings and sacrifice one country makes is a business opportunity for another.
50
One in four?
That’s all?!
Damn, we have failed. Humanity is too stupid to live.
10