Guardian Ramps Up Efforts to Ban All Climate Dissent
No green activist operation makes clearer why they need to ban free speech and cancel scientific debate to achieve Net Zero hegemony than the Guardian newspaper. Last Saturday, we learnt from its Environment Editor Damian Carrington that campaigners had said the UK’s TV and radio regulator Ofcom was allowing GB News and others to ‘flout” accuracy rules and broadcast “climate change denial”, whatever that last phrase means. Carrington noted in response to frequent suggestions of inaccuracy in UN climate models going back to 1979, that, “in fact, UN climate models have been remarkably accurate”. How Carrington, one of three journalists of the year in 2023 at the Green Blob-funded Covering Climate Now, can write this with a straight face is anyone’s guess.
Net Zero is dead in the United States and there has been a welcome revival of the scientific process that has killed off the ridiculous notion that a science opinion can somehow be ‘settled’. The recent official climate report from the US Department of Energy noted that climate models are the primary tool used to project future change in response to higher levels of anthropogenic greenhouse gases. “Of great concern is the fact that after several decades of the climate modelling enterprise… the range of future warming they produce in response to a hypothetical doubling of CO2 extends over a factor three.” This range of disagreement has not decreased for decades, the five eminent science authors add.
Tittle-tattling Reliable Media is behind the GB News campaign and, egged on by Guardian Central, the anti-science desperation is clear. One GB News contributor described climate change as “rubbish’. Another described it as a “scam”, an opinion recently expressed at the United Nation’s General Assembly by the elected President of the US Government. It might be thought that the scientific process can withstand a few harsh words, but Reliable Media is outraged. It charges that Ofcom has “effectively suspended its accuracy rules on this life-and-death issue”.
Carrington finds room for reporting the fine of £17,000 levied recently by the French equivalent state broadcast regulator Arcom on the centre-Right TV channel CNews. In this case a contributor had dared to air the opinion that climate change was “a lie, a scam”.
The French complaint was made by the activist Eva Morel from QuotaClimat. She stated that:
When the media blur the line between facts and opinions, it doesn’t lead people to trust in alternative truths; it leads them to trust in nothing at all. Sowing doubt about climate science serves to obstruct climate action and it endangers lives.
In an excellent article in Watts Up With That?, Eric Worrall pointed out that the problem with enforced agreement on the ‘facts’ is that in science, “there is no such thing as a fact which cannot be challenged”.
Ofcom rules specifically note that an example of an issue which it considers to be broadly settled is the “scientific principles behind the theory of anthropogenic global warming”. This is plainly anti-science. For a start, the scale of human-caused global warming is a scientific hypothesis (opinion), not a validated theory. Ofcom’s claim is a political notion concocted by state bureaucrats who obviously have little understanding of the language of science and the way it actually works. In fact, Ofcom seems vaguely aware of the stupidity that lies behind its fashionable claim. Carrington reports that it has received 1,221 complaints related to the ‘climate crisis’ since January 2020 and none had resulted in a ruling that the broadcasting code had been breached.
Worrall is withering in his concluding assessment of the shenanigans of activists seeking to quash dissenting scientific voices in public spaces.
My point is, to declare some facts are beyond challenges, especially ‘facts’ produced by artefacts as flimsy as climate models, is to strike at the foundations of freedom of expression and scientific inquiry. Forcing broadcasters to embrace a uniform, government-approved version of unassailable facts, then claiming they somehow have freedom of expression, is utter nonsense.
Reliable Media is a grubby little hard-Left operation. Few details of its finances and funding are available since it was formed as a limited-by-guarantee company to take forward the ‘Just Stop Hate’ and ‘Just Stop Heat’ campaigns. It claims that it is making “climate change denial unprofitable”, and it does this by seeking to destroy the ability of free speech media operations such as the increasingly successful GB News to attract advertisers. If this is its aim, it presumably has good legal advice, although its latest filed accounts to June 2024 suggest money might be tight. A sum of £107,940 is said to be held as cash at bank, but an identical sum is set aside for creditors due within one year. Whatever its financial position, its activities resemble those of the class sneak, running off to teacher to blub about the bigger boys, those who are more confident and entrepreneurial, better at sports and more successful with the girls. As the brilliant comedy song writer Dominic Frisby sang, maybe jokingly, in his composition about ways to stop freaks like Ed Miliband: “We need to bring back school bullying.” Science, he adds, is only discovering the value of it now.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.
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.
Voodoo science and The Guardian – a marriage made in hell.
The Guardiian (of the Establushment)
Instead of speaking truth to power they help power crush the truth.
They must be so proud.
The madleft haters of our world – the people whose hatred of humanity knows no bounds – are running scared. The forty years of failed predictions will soon be fifty years of failed predictions. The madleft can sense that their day in the sun is passing, and they’re beginning to ask themselves how they are going to impose their tyranny on the world. Their current answer is to make real science a heresy.
I hope you are correct
Of course the science is settled.
Just like everyone knew that strict bed-rest was essential after heart attack.
Thanks for this. I shall add Dr Bernard Lown to my rather small gallery of good medical folk, which includes Oscar Semmelweiss and Frances Oldham Kelsey.
I find the modern parallels with the abuse that Levine and Lown received particularly telling:
Along with hundreds of other examples – the sun revolves around the earth, cholera is caused by bad air etc..
And bloodletting cures almost every ill.
MARXISTS BAN CLIMATE DISSENT
Karl Marx, an evil lazy bar steward, like his followers.
The covid fiasco showed these people what could be done to stifle even hard evidence that went against the narrative. They always use the excuse that the very existence of human life is being jeopardised by “dissenting” views. Personally, to be on the safe side, I believe the earth is flat and the sun goes round it.
The only reason they want to ban so many things is that they don’t have any rational arguments against them.
Quite right. If you believe in what you say you should be able to defend it without having a hissy fit and resorting to ad hominem attacks or sueing as climate crook Michael Mann does.
Hear, hear. Absolutely right!
I would bet that both of the Guardians readers are behind this
In NL Professor Meesters has just published a report on Nitrogen, which is scathing about the science used by the Dutch government to justify Nitrogen levels as the reason to halve the number of farm animals in the Netherlands. Agriculture is the second biggest exporter in the Netherlands.
Let’a see what the elections do today….
All the Guardian are doing here is revealing that the climate change agenda isn’t about science, it is about politics, because in science you question everything. They think when it comes to climate change that we should live in a scientific dictatorship.