Guardian promotes climate lockdown every two years
The Guardian has suggested that global lockdowns will be needed every two years in order to save the planet.
The outlet used the (now changed) alarmist headline ‘Global Lockdown Every Two Years Needed To Meet Paris CO2 Goals – Study’.
The piece refers to study published in the Nature journal by a team of researchers at the University of East Anglia, who concluded that CO2 emissions need to drop by the same amount as they have during the recent lockdown period “roughly every two years” in order to offset global warming.
The study did not advocate global lockdowns in order to achieve this, despite the Guardian’s misleading headline. In fact it called for “completely different methods”.
The headline was changed to the slightly less fear mongering ‘Equivalent of Covid emissions drop needed every two years – study’ after a backlash ensued.
After many climate alarmists began touting the environmental virtues of lockdowns last year, we warned that climate lockdowns would become a thing:
The Guardian also has a history of over-hyping alarmist climate warnings, having previously reported that by 2020 we would be seeing “millions” of deaths, major European cities being sunken, and nuclear war due to planetary warming.
The Newspaper’s alarmist call for lockdowns comes days after the World Economic Forum was slammed for praising the effects lockdowns have had on cities:
The WEF had posted a video praising the “silence” and cleaner air due to a lack of people, but later deleted the post after social media users pointed out that cities are not supposed to be quiet, and lockdowns are leaving many facing extreme financial hardship.
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Peter F Gill
| #
Grauniad articles like this one are hardly news. It is exactly what one would expect. News is more like man bites dog or Moonbat sees a future for coal in the UK.
Reply
Alan
| #
Only if The Guardian has to close completely during the lockdown.
Reply
Charles Higley
| #
So these blithering idiots think that one can make enough income in one year to get through every other year of lockdown. Let’s just ignore that businesses, factories, and shops have to maintain themselves through the lockdown year in order to be viable the next year. And good employers would then have to pay their employees more than twice as much in order for them to survive the off year and come back. Cynical employers would pay piddle and simply assume they will find people a year later, as needed. This is socialism on steroids as it diminishes and destroys EVERYTHING. Yeah, that’s what socialism does, but this is the way to make is destroy everything faster than even socialism. They would be making sure that there will be almost no “other peoples money” to draw from to keep their stupid government/country alive. Anarchy, here we come.
Let’s also not forget that a certain part of the economy would have to be running during the lockdown year, as we know that people cannot and should not stay home for a year and also have normal needs and FOOD.
Reply
aaron
| #
Definition of anarchy
1a : absence of government
2a : absence or denial of any authority or established order
i am all in, as the majority if not all of the issues we face are govts doing
socialism is what the elite now enjoy, too bad for us we are paying their way
trouble is that isms are all the same, run by the wealthy for the benefit of the wealthy, who made their fortunes off the backs of others and who are only good at manipulation, (some would call it makin/earning money) and no other skill-set to offer society
who needs em?
the US even started that way, why should now be different
Reply