The Great Climate Fear Factory

If you found a worm in your sliced bread you would be horrified. You would probably share photos and outrage on social media and return the loaf to the shop you bought it from.

Consider then that mealworm powder has just been approved by the European Union as a novel food ingredient and is now legally allowed to constitute up to 4% of food products like bread, biscuits, cakes, cheese, pasta and potato-based snacks.

But why mealworms? Why bread? And why now?

Mealworms, the larvae of darkling beetles, are presented as an environmentally friendly alternative to traditional livestock, as they are said to have a lower carbon footprint and require fewer resources to farm.

The problem is we don’t want to eat bugs and creepy crawlies. It’s fair to say that despite the almost total lack of demand, supranational organisations like the United Nations, and entities such as the World Economic Forum, along with celebrities and TV cookery programmes, have all jumped on the insect bandwagon, hailing them as the future of food.

The Mandible in the Door

As a 2022 study entitled ‘Consumers’ acceptance of the first novel insect food approved in the European Union: Predictors of yellow mealworm chips consumption’ says, most European consumers “react with disgust” to insect-based food. This is apparently our fault for having “neophobia” (fear of the new), rather than being justifiably ill-disposed to eating things which squirm through waste, effluence and rotting bodies.

As Patrick Fagan and I wrote in Free Your Mind, the push for ‘edible insects’ is a prime example of nudging and psychological manipulation. Since we won’t make the ‘right’ choice by ourselves, we must be sneakily influenced, incentivised, tricked and manipulated to be sensible little serfs and eat bugs.

Breads, pasta and snacks are well-liked, common and tasty foods, and so are the ideal place to hide a few insects, or at least their powdered forms. As the study says, “the inclusion of insects as ingredients in familiar and appreciated foods such as cookies and chips with preferred flavours can be another step toward their acceptance”.

And then there is the selection of the mealworm as ingredient. I challenge you to salivate and smack your lips at this:

Yet, consider the name. The insects currently on offer as novel foods tend to have some connection to food terminology, where mealworms remind us of meals and crickets are phonetically similar to chicken. Both are less offensive than some of their insect-world competitors. The propagandists don’t try to get us to eat cockroaches, spiders or wasps, though all three are equally as fit (or not) for consumption as crickets.

Despite this, mealworms and crickets don’t yet fit into our cultural nutritional lexicon. Grinding their bones, or lack thereof, and making our bread with them is one way to disguise them.

Another is to take tiny insect-sized steps, one at a time, and hope we don’t notice the revolting ruse. It’s here that the foot in the door — or rather the mandible in the door — technique comes into play. We are to be gradually accustomed to the idea of eating creepy crawlies by way of slow, subtle increments. 4% worm flour? You might just about risk it for a triple chocolate chip cookie. And from there to 8%. Then 20%. And on and on, until one day your favourite cookies are replaced in the supermarket aisle with a bag of mealworm crisps.

Well, that’s the idea. I don’t think it’s going to take off. And I’m not alone. Italian politicians were vocally opposed to the vote in the European Parliament. One described the move as “an affront to the farmers and food traditions of our countries” and another asked, “Does the EU want insects on the table? Let them eat them.” Quite.

The media are complicit in this push. From BBC articles about the ‘health benefits’ of cockroach milk to TV chefs endorsing cricket gougères on popular shows like The Great British Bake Off, the mainstream narrative is being carefully controlled. Articles, press releases and research studies about the environmental benefits of eating insects flood our feeds, nudging us toward an acceptance we’re not entirely comfortable with. The more we’re exposed to the idea, the more likely we are to accept it as a fact.

This isn’t just about getting us to eat insects today. It’s about changing the long-term habits of future generations.

Take the example of children being targeted by ‘workshops’ in Wales, where they are taught about the environmental benefits of ‘alternative proteins’ such as insects. Children, we are told, are more open-minded, and by changing their attitudes early, we can influence the food choices they make as adults. It’s the ultimate form of behavioural engineering and I don’t think this what any of us send our kids to school for.

Manipulating Children to Reshape Society

And this brings me to another recent news story about ‘environmentalism’.

The manipulation of children doesn’t stop at food. It extends to the wider climate narrative, where young minds are relentlessly bombarded with a terrifying message: the planet is dying, and it’s their responsibility to fix it.

A new survey commissioned by Greenpeace has revealed that 78% of children under the age of 12 are now ‘worried’ about climate change. Well, why wouldn’t they be? The media bang on about climate disaster non-stop and ‘the environment’ is embedded throughout the curriculum. Extinction Rebellion has put out unconscionably daft videos like ‘Advice to Young People as They Face Annihilation’. Soap opera storylines are purposefully threaded with eco-panic. And today’s doom-laden headline, courtesy of Sky News: ‘Dangerous climate breakdown warning as hottest January on record shocks scientists.’

But there might be another reason that children appear to be scared — this particular survey was funded by Greenpeace, an organisation with a vested interest in stoking the flames of climate anxiety.

As Sir Humphrey Appleby so deftly demonstrated in Yes, Minister, surveys can be crafted to produce the results you want. When organisations like Greenpeace commission surveys that focus on fear-inducing questions about the future of the planet, you have to ask how accurate a representation of children’s concerns they are really seeking. Are they in fact pushing an agenda that plays on fear, uncertainty and guilt? Is it because they want these children to grow up believing they are directly responsible for solving an existential crisis they can’t even fully comprehend? In other words, is a survey about fear seeking to manufacture fear?

This is nothing new. In my 2022 article Little Climate Foot Soldiers, I highlighted how surveys into children’s climate anxiety are often skewed to amplify young people’s emotional distress.

This brings us back to the study ‘Young People’s Voices on Climate Anxiety, Government Betrayal and Moral Injury: A Global Phenomenon’. It was conducted by CAST, the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations. Although it purports that young people are very frightened about climate change, the research only sought agreement with very negative statements such as “the future is frightening” and “humanity is doomed”. Respondents were not asked to agree with any neutral or positive statements. If they weren’t frightened about a perilous future at the start of the survey, they probably were by the end.

When you push children into a state of panic, it’s no surprise that they’re ‘worried’ about climate change. This is a grotesque inversion of the adult-child relationship. Children’s psychological and emotional well-being is sacrificed to serve the aims of ill-informed and exploitative adults. The climate cult is psychopathic.

This manufactured fear is then used to justify ever more radical climate interventions, from accepting economic decline and restrictions on our lifestyle to carbon taxes and, yes, eating insects.

It’s like a sick dog eating its own tail: the fear is created, the fear is polled, and the fear is then used to justify even more fear.

The war for our dinner plate and the war on our children’s minds are one and the same. From mealworm powder in bread to indoctrinating and terrifying children, we are witnessing a full-scale assault on our choices, our culture, and our future.

This isn’t just about what’s on the menu, it’s about who’s doing the ordering.

This article was first published on Laura’s Substack, the Free Mind. Subscribe here.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

38 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
FerdIII
1 year ago

No different than the Corona scam/plandemic. 24 hours of fear porn. Bat virus flew around the world meaning instant death. Funny that I see bats around my house at twilight but no bat virus around us….I guess I need to do an Ozzie O. to get the next scamdemic going…

Same with plant food. Since 1988. Rebranded many times, now it is ‘climate’. Hot, cold, windy, wet, dry, disasters, no disasters, typhoons, no typhoons, deadly cold winters, mild winters…matters not. As with ‘evolution’ or ‘relativity’ every result and observation completely proves the ‘science’ (aka religious cult) even when it destroys it.

Money. Trillions. Control. Power. Nothing has changed since Ecclesiasticus was penned.

The issue is this – as with the Rona plandemic, too many idiots believe. Too many sheeple. Too many non critical thinkers. Too many who think that the idiot box is truth. Too many who will comply and follow.

Just too many morons around. That is what they rely on. That premise is the basis of all their plans.

allanplaskett
allanplaskett
1 year ago
Reply to  FerdIII

Er, you come across as malevolent. Everyone’s a moron except, er…you? Have a think. Do you like anyone? Does anyone like you?

varmint
1 year ago
Reply to  FerdIII

The “moron” excuse is an easy one. But you need to remember that climate scaremongering is everywhere. I have read maybe 200 books on this issue so there is no way the scaremongering can ever work with me. I am aware what the scare is about and I can see that it is phony. But you gotta remember that not everyone has the time to do what I do. Most people are busy with work and family life. Making dinner and seeing to kids after a busy day etc etc. They switch on their 6 O’Clock News and hear on a daily basis about the “climate crisis”. ——-They think Investigative Journalists are doing the investigating on issues for them but sadly when it comes to Politicised issues like climate change they have become activists instead and simply regurgitate the official world view. —-An unsuspecting public are not all “morons”, but I am sorry to say that they are certainly being manipulated. As Goebells knew “The bigger the lie, the more people believe it”

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  varmint

A fair counter to Ferd’s position but perhaps the answer is somewhere in the middle.

The bulk of my social circle consists of nominally highly educated individuals including bio- chemist’s, doctors, solicitors, engineers etc and yet amongst these people the majority still accept the Scamdemic lies and definitely believe in the nonsense of eco nuttery and climate change. One lady is a PhD Physics who fervently believes the world should run on bicycles and considers me to be a “conspiracy theorist” when I point out the stupidity of so-called “global boiling” or whatever has been chosen as the latest moniker. The answer I believe is a mixture of sheer bloody laziness and fear.

Laziness stops these people initiating their own research and the fear of finding that they have been lied to for years puts the proverbial tin hat on.

Or perhaps so-called clever, so-called well educated people are so convinced of their own superiority that they see no need for research.

Howard Arnaud
Howard Arnaud
1 year ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

Highly educated middle class professionals believe the guff because to do otherwise would put them outside the pale of their caste, with the resultant exclusion and loss of social status.

Our manipulators know this.

Let’s face it, not one in a thousand arts or social science graduates have the faintest scooby doo about the scientific basis of (real) climate science – just ask one of them to explain the greenhouse effect if you want evidence.

So why do they believe it? Climate catastrophism, that is.

I can only conclude that it’s because it’s said and pushed by people with whom they identify, namely other semi-educated middle class people like themselves.

These are exactly the people who are chosen by the manipulators to push the message, like, for instance Stephen Fry, Chris Packham, and the appalling Justin Rowlatt, who’s never off the BBC banging on about imminent climate collapse.

Rowlatt is an Oxford PPE graduate. QED

stewart
1 year ago

Crazy climate ideology aside, the problem that I see is that there is a large bureaucratic machinery that compulsively produces new rules and regulations. That is it’s sole purpose, to produce regulation after regulation after regulation. If it stopped doing so, it would have no purpose and cease exist and so it can’t do anything but dream up the next set of rules and regulations.

The ideological movements, like climate change or trans rights, or whatever it be are just the excuses for why new rules and regulations need to be drawn up. They are a useful excuse for what is compulsive behaviour that would otherwise just find another excuse.

We have to dismantle these bureaucracies if we are ever to be left in peace to live our lives.

Solentviews
Solentviews
1 year ago

I think we are close to a tipping point. People can now start to see that Millibrain won’t/can’t deliver on anything and that Net Zero just increases energy costs. Add this to other cost increases (council tax, water bills etc) plus rising unemployment and suddenly the population won’t have much time for ‘luxury beliefs’.

People will then look across the pond and see a thriving USA economy with fuel prices at a fraction of ours. The coming UK recession will undoubtedly focus minds and it won’t be towards insects.

Baldrick
Baldrick
1 year ago
Reply to  Solentviews

And ironically poor countries care less about the environment. It is only rich countries that do so. This is illustrated by the fact that charities, including conservation charities, costs have risen. On top of that they have fewer donations as people are poorer.

Mark Splane
Mark Splane
1 year ago
Reply to  Baldrick

Only rich countries and rich people can afford to care about the environment.Net Zero is the ultimate luxury belief. Ironically, to better protect the environment it is necessary to make people richer.

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  Baldrick

Donations to charities are just secondary taxation for the gullible.

varmint
1 year ago
Reply to  Solentviews

Miliband gave us the Climate Change Act in 2008 and the promise was cheaper bills as we “saved the planet”. Today the same idiot is back in charge of energy and the planet is still not saved and we have the highest electricity prices in the entire world. —-As someone once pointed out “The people get the governments they deserve”

Baldrick
Baldrick
1 year ago

I wonder why livestock is so bad for the environment, or any worse than crops. I mean who has measured the gaseous output of cattle and sheep? And should we not worry about the topsoil being washed away?

Climan
Climan
1 year ago
Reply to  Baldrick

One of the main arguments deployed is that forest gets felled to allow the growing of animal feed, but the same must apply to vegan feed.

Probably the main argument in favour of livestock is that they are machines for turning inedible grass into edible food and other useful products.

Art Simtotic
1 year ago

In prosperous countries like Britain, three centuries of scientific, technical, economic, social and medical progress, life expectancy more than doubled compared with the medieval squalor of feudalism – and the environment is inevitably cleaner in richer countries. Go figure, greenies.

Likewise the rest of the developed world, with the other half of the world wanting to catch up (if only aid policies with implicit energy restrictions would give them the chance).

All at serious risk of being chucked in the bin by perverted science, purveyed by the truth-twisting classes. For what reason, other than the time-honoured perversion of bending other people to the triumph of the purveyor’s will?

The battle of ideas between what were loosely termed fascism, communism and democracy, is said too have been the defining conflict of the first half of the 20th century. A hundred years later, the battle of energy policy, fundamental to the entirety of modern life, is now in its turn playing out.

Let there be light. Reason shall prevail.

Gezza England
Gezza England
1 year ago

Why is the far left so keen on child abuse at all levels? Drowning them with propaganda hoping they will influence their parents is probably less than some of what they do.

AJPotts
AJPotts
1 year ago

Those pushing climate alarmism are evil scum out to destroy freedom and democracy and impose their totalitarian will on ordinary folk. There will be a reckoning and no mercy should be shown to these pieces of filth.

Climan
Climan
1 year ago
Reply to  AJPotts

Steady, some are like religious fundamentalists, others are in it for money/virtue/votes, but “evil scum” is way OTT.

inamo
inamo
1 year ago
Reply to  AJPotts

At a meeting of the WEF, Melissa Fleming says that, “… we (the UN) own the (climate change) science..” Really?

https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/10/01/un-official-at-wef-we-own-the-science-the-world-should-know-it-so-we-partnered-with-google-to-to-ensure-only-un-results-appear/

Apparently, mis & dis information are universally bad, unless it’s information from a ‘partnered’ source that ‘ensures’ only UN results appear.

Is this where free speech and science both went to die?

Purpleone
1 year ago
Reply to  inamo

If wonder if they actually hear themselves say these things and think about the larger implications at all, or are these people also just reading a script?

Climan
Climan
1 year ago

Environmentalism is all part of the lefty mindset, it is a tiny step for them to go from capitalist exploitation of workers, to capitalist trashing of the environment.

But why are hippy concerts and environmental protests left strewn with litter?

Pilla
Pilla
1 year ago

Disgusting! Will mealworms be listed in the ingredients?

Ron Smith
Ron Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Pilla

I feed dried mealworms to the Birds, doesn’t mean I want to snack on them, and they smell disgusting too.

Pilla
Pilla
1 year ago
Reply to  Ron Smith

I think they’re what I feed to the robins!! I totally agree!

Purpleone
1 year ago
Reply to  Pilla

You’d expect under EU labelling laws (that UK adheres to still) they’d have to…

Pilla
Pilla
1 year ago
Reply to  Purpleone

Indeed

RTSC
RTSC
1 year ago

A scared population is a compliant population. A hungry population is a compliant population.

It’s all about control.

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  RTSC

👍👍👍

Finbar
Finbar
1 year ago

I wonder what they’ll call the mealworms on the ingredients on the packaging… Quite certain it won’t be a clear label…

Pilla
Pilla
1 year ago
Reply to  Finbar

A friend told me that some time ago C3 signed off that insects and such didn’t have to be listed in the ingredients…

Purpleone
1 year ago
Reply to  Pilla

What / who is C3 please?

Pilla
Pilla
1 year ago
Reply to  Purpleone

Charles III

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  Finbar

Acheta powder = crickets

marebobowl
marebobowl
1 year ago

Britain is doomed. You have no one speaking up for your people. Enjoy the bugs. You are already ingesting Bovaer, fed to cows to keep their farts and burps free of methane. FDA recommends it is not for human ingestion. Oh well a little won’t hurt. Looks like your UKHSA and MHRA are once again not on top of things. Last time this happened….unsafe and ineffective covid vaxxes were administered in the millions. How did that turn out?

varmint
1 year ago

Sustainable Development is for changing every human activity and reducing all consumption because the World Government in waiting at the UN and WEF have decided that 8 billion people cannot all have the same lifestyle as us in the wealthy west, because there are not the resources for that. If the whole planet used up all the coal oil and gas then there would be none left. So an excuse is required to stop us using those fuels. That excuse is climate change. The idea to eat insects just as with all the rest of the Green Agenda comes from the idea that us eating meat and dairy causes climate change. So meat and dairy must go, along with our petrol and diesel vehicles, our gas boilers, our holidays in aeroplanes etc etc. ——Does anyone ever recall voting for any of that?

Ron Smith
Ron Smith
1 year ago

” Cockroach milk ” Sounds disgusting. Reminds me of Pete & Bas!

“You’re a vegan, I bet you’re a vegan, you don’t want beef bitc*, I do. and I’ve just eaten.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO5GzlyODsE

Pete Sutton
Pete Sutton
1 year ago

Is there some inducement offered to food manufacturers to adulterate ther wares with powdered insects? If not, why would they do it?

Hoppy Uniatz
Hoppy Uniatz
1 year ago

As I explained at length to a random man on the train, basically there’s a lot of money to be made in the insect or plant based food industries if you can persuade people to buy the product.

No more worries about vet’s bills, animal husbandry or mending fences. Just shovel the soya or maggots into the hopper as industrial feedstock, and out comes the food product for which hopefully, the public will pay the price they’ve got used to for real food.

No wonder some industry players are so anxious to publicise it, and if people can think they are doing something virtuous as they pay for this gunk, so much the better.

He clearly hadn’t heard this argument before, but I could see it dawning on him that it was kind of obvious.