By Jo Nova
What were they thinking?
Despite 30 years of wall-to-wall propaganda most adults seem to feel that Climate Change is not an emergency. For some reason, they’d rather cut their electricity bill now, than cool the world by a thousandth of a degree in a hundred years time.
It’s taken billions of dollars worth of prime time news, school doom projects, clean-green advertising, and hot-weather-girl hyperbole to keep the fantasy levitating. Not to mention the weeping lectures from 97% of experts — yet somehow, improbably, most people are not buying it.
Imagine if we had a free press, and the Nobel Prize winners who disagreed were interviewed by the 7:30 Report or 60 minutes? Imagine if they talked to electrical engineers and geologists on the news? It wouldn’t be 60% of voters who were skeptical, it would be 100%.
He who controls the media, can confuse 40% of the people.
Thanks to Will Jones at the Daily Sceptic.
Nigel Farage speaks for voters on net zero. Here’s how we know
Michael Deacon, Telegraph, UK
This week, a new polling firm called Merlin Strategy asked voters for their views on tackling climate change. But here’s the crucial thing, it didn’t merely ask them: “Do you support net zero?” Instead, it asked them which was more important: action to achieve net zero, or cutting the cost of living. And guess what they said? Almost 60 per cent chose cutting the cost of living, while a mere 13 per cent chose net zero.
So 13% were wealthy enough, or obsessed enough, that they were willing to say they wanted to pay more to “put environmental aims first”. (Or maybe they worked in the industry).
Cutting cost of living MUST come before expensive Net Zero drive
Jack Elsom, The Sun
A Merlin Strategy poll of 3,000 people found 59 per cent of Brits agreed that “action to reduce the cost of living has to come first over sustainability and being eco-friendly”.
Just 13 per cent of people thought ministers should put environmental aims first.
The verdict was returned by supporters of all parties. For Labour voters, 61 per cent agreed and 12 per cent disagreed, for Tories it was 70 per cent and eight per cent, and for Reform it was 65 per cent and 15 per cent.
Clearly most polls ask loaded silly questions so they get loaded silly answers. They ask open apple-pie questions “Would you like the government to spend other people’s money making storms nicer?”
But it isn’t exactly hard to write surveys that ask people to rank choices, or to quiz them about what they would be willing to pay, yet pollsters rarely do that.
The point of most polls is not to tell the Blob what the people want, it’s to tell the people what The Blob wants.
Think about what polls like this say about our democracies. In theory, after surveys like this come out (and they have many times) if political parties were trying to serve the people, they would quietly drop the Net Zero plans so they could win over more voters. Instead, the two major parties push on year after year, almost as if they serve something else.
This result is nearly identical to one two years ago in the UK that found 62% said reducing electricity bills was more important than climate targets. Yet the Tories self-immolated, and Labour got elected but dug themselves a hole they didn’t need to dig. Why?
________________________
PS: The New Pope has been picked –– a man of the times, American cardinal Robert Prevost, originally of Chicago – who is a described as a fierce opponent of same-sex marriage and gender studies. He opposed a plan in Peru to add gender studies instruction in classrooms, saying “The promotion of gender ideology is confusing, because it seeks to create genders that don’t exist.” I don’t think the Left will be happy with Pope Leo XIV. The ABC were clearly hoping for the more progressive candidates from Asia and Africa.
I repost Strop’s comment..
the climate apocalypse narrative is a social contagion that’s driven by power mad psychopaths who are hellbent on using fear and compulsion to make sure everyone steps in line so that they can continue with their acquisition of undeserved power
Jordan Peterson
Joe Rogan Experience episode #2308 @ 1:17:30
120
Very interesting, Jo. Makes me question why Australia is firmly heading in the opposite direction. We have very high cost of living, yet the newly reelected government is looking at more taxing and handouts. Hardly a way to bring inflation down. Trump is working on it in US, Farage will move on it next election in UK but Canada and Australia is moving to greater debt.
PS: Who do we owe the trillion dollars to?
140
We need someone game enough to do the basic sums and advise the public.
Simple approach…rebuild the coal-fired stations and regain our lowest cost reliable electricity supply….how much?
To build equivalent renewable capacity including battery/hydro to cover no wind/no sun situations and get the electricity to the customers…how much? ( and include cost of reduced rural output related to productive land being grabbed by transmission lines and solar panels and wind turbines).
No one from any political persuasion is game to set up a bias-free analysis process.
20
And add that the list of countries where politicians, not scientists, push this absurd CO2 agenda is very small.
Western Europe, Australia and NZ, the UK and Ireland, Canada. That’s about 400 million people from the world’s 8Billion, so 5%.
And of the 5% who are forced to pay CO2 handouts hidden in their cost of living, mining, working, travelling 2/3 disagree with the whole thing because it’s pointless. So 97% of the world’s population think it’s wrong.
Plus the very idea has never been proven. No one has proven the increase in CO2 is man made. No one has proven that this small increase in a tiny gas is significant. No one has proven warming is a problem. No one has proven we could change the amount of CO2 in the air if we wanted to do so. (NASA has proven growing trees doesn’t reduce CO2)
What is very difficult in Australia is that Labor, Liberals, Greens, Nationals all think ripping off Australians and sending the cash to China is a great idea. And you can believe Jordan Petersen that it’s all about absolute power. Or wonder what hold China has on critical politicians?
160
And while our political masters, none scientists, claim that they are “Climate Agnostic“(John Howard) or “not a scientist“(Peter Dutton) they all enthusiastically embrace legislating the silent and massive theft from Australians to send overseas. To stop something which they are not convinced exists? There has to be a better explanation than don’t know. Or is it the Mitch McConnell effect? Just as treasurer Chalmer’s hero Paul Keating chaired the China/Australia business association. There is no target bigger than a poor politician like Joe Biden.
The best thing which has happened to upend fantasy Climate Change is Donald Trump. Drill, baby drill. The US, not Saudi or UAE or Russia or Venezuela is the biggest producer of oil in the world. And Canada has just done a deal. I expect a banker like Mark Carney has agreed to more than he says or states like Alberta will secede. And let’s see what Trump has done with his other great enemy, Keir Starmer who has just seized back control of what’s left of British Steel from the Chinese. The battle for world supremacy is all about energy. With cheap energy you can do anything. You can make water.
120
It’s just getting exposed.
Pandemic was the big ‘Science’ op after the Climate Change ‘Science’ op.
‘Science’ has now become a meme that many associate with political abuse and corruption.
(Funny how ‘Science’ seems clueless about this and shows no interest in rebuilding its’ reputation.)
A Uni near me just had Fauci visit and discuss how heroic ‘Science’ is, and how backward ‘Science’ resisters are … ’cause misinformation.
A highly educated circle … well, you know.
Guess the real question is what is The Blob’s next big play.
My money is on alien invasion.
100
Don’t you already have 20 million aliens?
20
This is why they lie and say that Nutz Zero policies will save you money, when it’s obvious that it is not the case.
60
In Australia they keep endlessly repeating that “renewables” are the cheapest of all electricity generating methods. A blatantly obvious lie that people see when they get their bills for some of the world’s most expensive electricity when it used to be among the cheapest.
Orwell in Nineteen Eighty Four foresaw just about everything that’s happening to us now (but you have TRUMP to fix this).
00
The point you make is equally valid in Australia and the Labor government and the complicit media knew that. So in 2022 they didnt run on a campaign that they could solve climate change with renewables only that electricity bills would fall by $275 . If they wouldve campaigned that your bills will rise by $700 and taxpayers would pay a fortune to support ineffective Green schemes they wouldn’t have got in. So in 2025 it’s the same pea and thimble trick. To refute the nuclear proposal they didnt claim that nuclear would create 3 eyed fish they said that it would cost an astronomical $600 billion for 4% of the grid. If the truth were known that even the CSIRO claim of $118 billion was probably exaggerated there was a risk that people not only would think that nuclear was affordable but that the cost of renewables is way more than the government claimed.
This election was (amongst other things) lost because the opposition could never effectively argue that nuclear not only is cleaner and better for the environment but that it would cost less. The inability to refute the obvious lies of the government was why they lost and when voters were lied to in 2022 on energy this was the precedent the Liberals shouldve used to destroy Labor on this issue. And the fact that they themselves had a 53% renewables target and retained commitment to Paris agreement targets and nett zero showed they didnt have their hearts in it. this was such an easy arguement to win as Nigel Farage is showing but you have to have genuine belief and conviction. There are still especially in NSW Liberals who continue to sabotage the party from inside by continuing to believe that Australia needs to be doing things to change the weather. Unfortunately it’s only the smaller parties like the Libertarians and One Nation who have policies that reject all the climate change rubbish. Even nuclear is a compromise.The whole process of believing we even need to reduce emissions is flawed . The way the rest of the world is going its clear that the failure to reject this issue will create enormous damage to the economy especially compared to the rest of the world. The Spanish blackouts shouldve been a coup de gras for the Liberals in the week of the election but they couldnt exploit it because of they themselves were limited by their stupid commitment to nett zero.
100
Nut zero.
And no politician said let’s build more coal power plants. China is building 810 of them but not the clever country.
30
If they really want net zero why not build reliable, baseload energy like Nuclear for about 0.15 trillion $? Nuclear capacity factor is 93%, so what’s their problem?
So why would any sane govt choose to destroy our environments on land and sea using toxic unreliable W & S + batteries + Gas for about 9 TRILLION $?
Obviously zero change to climate or weather by 2100, so why waste 9 trillion $ on toxic, junk energy that has a combined capacity factor of about 22.5 %?
These are very simple sums so why can’t Albo and B O Bowen etc get help to understand the data?
80
It’s a cult Neville, once you understand that there are no more questions that need asking.
30
The newly minted Pope Leo XIV is pro-climate change so more of the same from The Vatican. “Dominion over nature should not be tyrannical”
20
I think it’s more a case of “the boy who cried wolf” is coming back to bite them on the bum
10
I can’t picture that.
20
Texas getting the green light for an SMR at Abilene and Dow proposing another will further ratchet up the pressure on the Big Climate and Renewables gang of thieves.
10
A movie made in 1970 – The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer – written by John Cleese, Peter Cook & Grahame Chapman forecast use of polls to manipulate the public. It starred Peter Cook as a pollster who rose to PM through aggressive polling. Brilliant.
20
Yes Grant and very different and often funny and I had a look on you tube a few years ago.
Geeez that’s 55 years ago, just unbelievable but true. I’m starting to feel old.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT_prfYb6DE
00
Good news.
However, the disbelief in the Official Narrative about climate, mRNA covid “vaccinations” or anything else is why the Leftist regimes of the world, including Australia’s are pushing hard for more and more censorship.
In fact, in Australia, we don’t even usually know what’s been censored because the e Safety Kommissar is not obliged to publish a list of what she has censored and why.
Fortunately TRUMP and Musk do support free speech and thus there’ll be always a source of truth there, as long as the Australian and other Leftist Governments don’t block your access or prosecute you for attempting to access material not compliant with the Official Narrative. I have no doubt also that longer term, pro-truth blogs such as this will be targetted.
All that of course, is unless Australia and other nations who are victims of Leftist totalitarianism actively support and elect freedom parties.
E.g. Farage in UK, in Australia conservative parties such as One Nation, Trumpets, Libertarian etc.. (Or reform the Liberal Party (fake conservative) although that seems to be beyond hope.)
Australia’s conservative parties should form an alliance and form a new conservative party.
00
I was hoping for a more fire-and-brimstone traditionalist type candidate (as a counter to the years of ‘progressive’ leadership under Pope Frank), but I am cautiously optimistic about the American guy, even if he is from Chicago. Hopefully, he’s not a Cubs fan.
10