Brits Are Beginning To Realise The Truth About ‘Net Zero’
A YouGov opinion poll reveals plummeting support for ‘net-zero’ policies in all age groups, accompanied by a sharp rise in the number of people who think the threat of ‘climate change’ is exaggerated
Ed Miliband’s fanaticism, Greta Thunberg’s rage and Just Stop Oil’s vandalism are not just failing to persuade us; they are backfiring.
We “lukewarmers”, who have argued for years that the scientific evidence does not justify even the mildest panic about the slowly changing climate, have until recently been shouting into the wind.
(Lukewarmers are those like Mr Ridley here, John Christy & Roy Spencer from UAH, Marc Morano and Greg Wrightstone, who believe CO2 does drive temperature, but to only a small amount. Taking this position means they get attacked from alarmists and skeptics alike – Ed)
Exaggerated alarm has been too popular, lucrative and convenient for politicians. Tory, Labour and Lib Dem fell over each other to preach the apocalypse because: first, doom-mongering always goes down well with voters; second, it drew in donations and supplied post-seat-loss career opportunities; and third, it provided the perfect excuse for their own mistakes.
Fail to build flood defences or prevent moorland fires? Just blame ‘climate change’.
But now the public is getting sceptical, all but the ‘greenest’ politicians will catch on and follow suit. According to the new poll, the number of people who think the threat has been exaggerated has jumped from 16 per cent to 25 percent in just four years – which makes for a tempting slice of the electorate.
Solid and growing majorities now object to restricting our access to gas boilers, petrol or diesel cars, holiday flights and red meat.
As the cost of ‘net zero’ begins to really bite, and the lie that it will pay for itself is exposed, those numbers will only grow. Greg Jackson, CEO of Octopus Energy, said recently that unless we find a way to lower our world-beating electricity prices in Britain, “support for net zero is going to collapse.”
Remember this growing scepticism is happening while the BBC, by far the most dominant voice in the media, relentlessly relays the views of the exaggerators who say ‘climate change’ will kill billions and wreck the planet, sexing up every heatwave into a thermal cataclysm.
It also imposes a near total ban on allowing anybody even to discuss the lukewarmer view, let alone the full-fat “it’s a scam” version of climate scepticism.
Imagine how many would turn sceptical if Auntie let people like Richard Lindzen back on the airwaves. “It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that CO2, the life of plants, was deemed for a time to be a deadly poison,” he says.
Who he? Only one of the world’s leading climate scientists, who was the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the world’s top university.
For 40 years now we have been told to expect Climageddon yet scare after scare has been a damp squib. According to Al Gore, the Arctic Ocean was supposed to be free of ice by 2013, twelve years ago (even the scientist he was supposedly quoting rebuked him for that one).
Next week it will reach its annual minimum extent and there is almost 30 per cent more ice (4.6 million square kilometres of the stuff) than on the same date in 2012 and 10 per cent more than in 2007.
Storms, floods and droughts show no sign of getting significantly worse on a global scale – to the frustration of activists who are forced to resort to models of the future instead of data.
Sea level is inching up by about a foot per century. The most measurable effects of warming are that winter nights are a bit milder and deserts a bit greener.
No wonder people are starting to think that even if the climate is changing, and even if it is man-made, then maybe it will be cheaper to adapt to it than try to prevent it.
Especially given that America, China and India are not prepared to pay through the nose for electricity in the vain hope of stopping the warming while we generate a mere 0.8 per cent of global emissions.
The realistic scientific models have never predicted catastrophe. They say that ‘climate change’ will make the much richer people of 2100 slightly less rich – but still much richer than today.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s “middle of the road” scenario, the average person on Earth could be 4.5 times as well off in 2100 without ‘climate change’ but 4.3 times because of the cost of ‘climate change’.
Is more than quadrupling your income really a catastrophe?
See more here telegraph.co.uk
Header image: BBC
Bold emphasis added
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.