Proposer – Greg Page Seconder – Dino Philippos
Conference reaffirms The Workers Party’s commitments to the redistribution of wealth and power in favour of working people, the rebuilding of British industry, the production of more local and national food and the protection of our natural environment. In order to achieve these objectives we call for The Climate Change Act 2008, and related Net Zero targets, to be revoked.
CO² makes up approximately 0.04% of the Earth’s atmosphere, and of that 0.04%, just 0.0016% is generated by humans. Comprehensive studies have shown that solar activity and volcanic emissions are the main drivers of global temperatures, and that water vapour is the most significant contributor to the greenhouse effect. Studies also show that CO² does not cause a rise in global temperatures, and that solar warming cycles are the main cause of rises in CO² levels, usually over a period of 500-800 years.
In 2022, more than 1900 highly-respected scientists, who broadly concur with these findings, published the World Climate Declaration, with the message “There is no climate emergency”. The declaration also states that CO² is essential to all life, and that more CO² produces a greener planet, with higher crop yields. Dr Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, has warned that very low CO² levels could result in global famine.
However, the IPCC continues to disregard this side of the argument, and prefers to highlight reports that are based on computer modelling that analyses data from the last 200 years only. The UN and WHO, with the help of the mainstream media and corporate lobbyists, are determined to maintain the fraudulent ‘Climate Crisis’ narrative. The resulting policies adopted by successive governments have facilitated a huge transfer of wealth from the poorest to the wealthiest, by way of taxes, to meet the enormous costs of subsidising the installation and running of solar farms, wind farms etc.
The policies also demand drastic reductions in manufacturing and processing operations that are deemed to have high carbon footprints. This has already resulted in significant job losses, and will continue to do so in the future. Because of the present government’s decision to place more reliance on ‘renewable’ energy sources, we are already seeing the prospect of blackouts when there is high demand for energy. Net Zero targets are also being used to justify the takeover of productive farmland by corporate developers, in order to install large solar farms.
The notion that Net Zero is of benefit to the global environment is perverse. Solar panels, wind turbines and storage batteries are all built with non-renewable materials, including many rare earth metals. The extraction (often carried out using child labour), processing and construction of those materials require much more energy from conventional sources than is needed for the processing of oil and gas. It’s estimated that the scale of mining for the materials needed for these ‘green’ technologies will have to increase by around 2000%, which will mean that vast areas of biodiversity on pristine land will be lost.
Drill, baby drill! I am in full support of this motion!
Talking rubbish. An increasing majority of experts accept that greenhouse gases are causing a steady rise in temperatures. 2024 was a record year, and so was 2023.
I’ve done a collection on Flickr, https://www.flickr.com/photos/45909111@N00/albums/72157718503259706/with/43312567634. A selection of all the raw data that Denialists must explain away.
I’ve also blogged, see https://mrgwydionmwilliams.quora.com/Climate-Chaos-Caused-By-Greed and https://gwydionmadawc.com/my-blogs/.
It is also silly to put as an alternative that “water vapour is the most significant contributor to the greenhouse effect”. It is known to be part of the process, but we have more water vapour because global temperatures are higher.
We can sensibly complain about the wrong people being asked to pay. But the process is real. And it’s only a matter of time before Britain gets another really bad year. We have been one of the least hurt in the last few years.
There’s no point in posting a patchwork of MSM propaganda from so-called experts to try to dismiss the studies of eminent scientists, some of whom are Nobel laureates. Here’s the statement from those scientists, plus a few of the countless articles that show what’s really going on.
https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
https://www.sott.net/article/420049-Remember-when-NASA-acknowledged-climate-change-occurs-because-of-changes-in-Earths-solar-orbit-not-because-of-SUVs-and-fossil-fuels
https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/scientists-puzzled-as-greenlands-largest-glacier-not-only-starts-growing-again-but-thickens/
https://electroverse.co/antarcticas-latest-60c-76f-reading-ever-recorded-noaa-cold-pool-returns-in-bering-sea-sun/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/19/europes-48c-horror-that-never-wasesa-media-sharply-criticized-for-manipulative-reporting/
Fully support this motion. If the aims of the net zero zealots were to be realised, the British working class would be much poorer, colder, hungrier and likely depressed.
If anyone doubts that the ‘climate crisis’ is a huge scam, I would ask them to watch this excellent documentary – Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth
https://www.bitchute.com/video/2b18kAneSfM/
It’s not overlong or deeply technical, but it’s a very good account of how climate actually works, and how governments and corporations are using the ‘climate emergency’ to acquire more money and power, while suppressing open debate, freedom of speech and democracy
This motion should be much higher on our agenda. Along with motions to invest in big nuclear infrastructure long term and to drill, frak and mine as much of Britain’s resources for the British until we get French levels of Nuclear. Buying bird mincing windmills and hailstorm prone solar panels, produced with Chinese coal power and imported with diesel powered ships is not sustainable or reducing global temperatures in any way at all.
Fully support this motion. Net Zero is a part of the WEF agenda. Look out for more of it to come. It would appear opposition has mainly come from the political right. We have to at least join the debate.
There may be a case for fracking in the US, in vast areas where possible contamination of the water supply wouldn’t be an issue, but because of the UK’s size and population density I’m not sure that it would be environmentally safe. We do of course have plenty of oil and gas (plus coal, if the mines are still viable) that’s needed to boost our manufacturing industries, but Milliband has made it clear that no more of those resources will be made available.
And just when you thought things couldn’t get any worse, the Climate and Nature Bill is due to be debated in Parliament on Jan 24th, and will almost certainly be passed. This will mean the introduction of more unnecessary, draconian measures for a crisis that doesn’t exist.
Climatologist Paul Burgess made this video – The Nightmare of Ed Milliband’s Net Zero – shortly after the General Election. He explains the ridiculous cost of implementing the ‘green’ projects being proposed, and how they won’t even be able to meet the UK’s energy demands
Two percent of Climate Scientists Can’t Be Wrong?
A depressingly large number of members are very happy to stake our future on this.
And seem convinced that it is the Green Lobby that has the gigantic pull. Not oil companies, keen to stay in business. Or rich people keen to avoid as much tax as possible.
Biden is taking more of a long view. The growing climate crisis is leading to greater suspicion of politics. Yet our party is supposed to go endorsing the enthusiasts for capitalism on this matter.
Biden’s view is, of course, no longer relevant.
Net Zero is an absolute farce. The usual government target that will be fudged and smudged and ultimately missed and then restated as a new target to clapping hands in smart suits. No one cares about our environment more than the working classes. No one wants to protect our rivers, seas, green fields, farmlands, wildlife more than the working classes. Nature is our common heritage and treasury. It is not us who have raped and pillaged this land and other lands for private wealth. And it is not the working classes who should be taxed and held responsible. Net zero is a middle class liberal/establishment fudge, a sentimental heart string tugging badly written chick flick. All who are against it are uneducated zealots cry the paid B movie actors. We were met with such tears over Brexit. We have seen this film over and over again. It’s a tired worn out plot.
Gwydion
If by ‘2% of climate scientists’ you’re referring to the signatories to the CLINTEL declaration, they base their findings on observable, measurable data that can be easily verified. Using computer modelling that relies on the false assumption that CO² is the major cause of global warming, and coming up with projections that are consistently wrong, does not make you a climate expert, but it does get you unlimited funding from taxpayers whose governments are pushing the UN’s Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.
This will provide the means for a network of billionaires to further increase their wealth, power and control over the rest of humanity, and has nothing to do with saving the planet
If 2% “base their findings on observable, measurable data” and at least 90% of the rest are convinced of the opposite, we must believe the 2%? Many of whom are well paid by the gigantic commercial interests that want to avoid paying for climate change.
Billionaire views are split. Those following Biden-Harris are more concerned with the USA’s global hegemony, and so must do something for parts of the Global South suffering record temperatures outside all previous records.
Note also that while we have been discussing the matter, the whole of Ireland had been hit by a storm with record-breaking wind speeds. Which is also unusually bad for Scotland, and quite bad for parts of Northern England and Northern Wales. One of several low pressure system carried by an unusual jet stream pattern. One partly caused by abnormal cold in the southern USA, released from the arctic because a slightly less cold arctic breaks down the polar vortex that normally keeps that air confined.
Not sure where you actually got the figure of 2% from, but the number of genuine climatologists who have used the observable, measurable, verified data are virtually unanimous in their conclusion that CO² does not cause global warming. The so-called experts who perpetuate the myth that CO² does cause global warming have never produced any observable, measurable, verified data to support their claims, just meaningless, incorrect, estimated forecasts. But the IPCC deliberately dismisses studies that don’t concur with this myth, purely for political, not scientific reasons.
The signatories to the CLINTEL declaration have taken a great risk in making their joint statement because many of them have had their reputations trashed by lobbyists and the media, and some have had to abandon their careers because they’re shunned by academic institutions that don’t want to give up the huge grants they receive to promote the ‘climate crisis’ lie.
Energy companies, and their stakeholders, have no interest in buying scientists, or lobbying against Net Zero, because they know that fossil fuels will continue to be in demand for decades to come, in order to produce the colossal, wasteful infrastructure needed for the ‘green’ technologies. So achieving Net Zero will, in effect, deplete the reserves of fossil fuels more quickly than if the program were to be aborted.
You can’t be bothered to check the balance of opinion? Easy to Google for.
“The scientific consensus is overwhelming. Climate change is already happening, here and now. About 97 percent of climate experts—the scientists who are most active in carrying out and publishing research on climate change—agree that the observed recent warming is real and serious and overwhelmingly human-caused, and that it will become even more serious unless we make big changes in how we generate energy. Nevertheless, some people remain unconvinced. They continue to repeat climate myths and falsehoods.”
https://thebulletin.org/premium/2020-12/facts-and-opinions-about-climate-change/
Which is not to say that the other 3% are denialists. 2% was someone’s guess, but not far out.
The first paragraph of the article you provided a link for gives you a clue as to the focus of the Somerville’s research. He says that ‘When The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists was founded… there were no global climate models, no supercomputers and no satellite remote-sensing data.’ The projections that the supercomputers’ global climate models generate are based on the assumption that CO² is the cause of global warming, and they have been consistently wrong, effectively proving that the assumption is wrong.
He concedes that it’s the Sun’s effect on the planet that determines the beginning and ends of ice ages, but fails to mention that the beginnings of ice ages coincide with high levels of CO² and the ends of ice ages coincide with low levels of CO². He also fails to mention the many solar cycles that occur within much smaller timescales. Since the 1880s, CO² levels have been steadily rising, so if CO² is assumed to be a significant warming factor, you would expect a corresponding steady rise in temperatures. However, temperatures actually peaked in the 1940s, followed by a marked cooling until the 1970s, when ‘experts’ were predicting the imminent beginning of an ice age.
Temperatures have recovered since then, but we are presently at Solar Maximum and, based on previous solar cycles, it’s expected that the next two solar cycles, which take us up to 2040, are going to show a diminishing of the Sun’s activity. Some researchers are admitting that we could soon be seeing the start of a decade or more of very cold weather. This is already being seen from record cold temperatures at the poles and record snowfall across the world, including places like Florida and Texas. This is why the ‘climate crisis’ frenzy is being ramped up now.
Somerville also fails to mention other possible causes of rising temperatures, such as volcanic activity. Last year’s eruptions from Mt Etna released more than 10,000 times the amount of CO² into the atmosphere than mankind ever has, and eruptions on this scale are fairly frequent. In 2022, the Hunga Tonga-Hunga underwater volcano eruption ejected over 40 trillion gallons of water vapour, increasing the overall volume of water vapour in the stratosphere by more than 10%. Water vapour is a much more significant greenhouse gas than CO² is, so it’s predicted that this will contribute to a rise in temperature for the next four years, but don’t count on the IPCC or the media to mention that.
The widely quoted figure of 97% of scientists being in agreement about climate change is a massive distortion. If you can be bothered to watch Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth, you’ll understand why.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/2b18kAneSfM/
No, the Bulletin is a convenient source for what is said almost everywhere. It just happened to come top after I googled.
The 97% is a solid fact, which you could have confirmed from any number of sources.
The internet is full of dubious sources, some of them barefaced liars. And others decieved.
‘The end is nigh’ has been popular with most religious cults out there trying to frighten us and control us. It’s a well used method to get you to put money in their tin. This tin just fills up straight from your taxes here… but it’s essentially the same method. Makes you feel all cuddly and warm putting money in their tin tin for eternal life.
None of these end-of-the-world ideas have the support of 97% of scientists with expertise in the field.
You and others have fallen for a variety of con – fool them by making them think correct advice is intended to trick them.
Oil companies make vast profits, and the rich don’t want to pay more tax, or any tax. Do not want vast schemes of public works. So they let you think Climate Change is unreal, even as temperature records fall all over the world.
The motion says “The notion that Net Zero is of benefit to the global environment is perverse. Solar panels, wind turbines and storage batteries are all built with non-renewable materials, including many rare earth metals. ”
Blatantly wrong. There are issues over lithium batteries, but these are preferred for mobile devices, being lighter than other batteries of similar power. Many common materials can be used, including water pumped to a high reservoir. You can find this at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage.
The same for ‘child labour’. No material is exclusively obtained that way. Many exist in quantities far beyond any human needs.
I think we don’t rattle the tin in front of the working classes and say put in more tax money… But by all means take the tin around to big business and billionaires and say “you are responsible, you will be taxed for any crime you have committed” …. and there have been many crimes comrade Gwydion , I agree with you there.
The establishment want you to pay more in taxes whilst the multi millionaires are offered offshore tax havens… ‘Net Zero tax for billionaires’ is the ultimate goal
Net Zero is about carbon dioxide. Atmospheric gases do not pay tax. And the gigantic oil industry want drilling to continue for as long as possible.
I STRONGLY oppose this motion. This can make a lot of political harm on the party. This motion will make the party look stupid, like a “flat earth” sect.
Global warming IS a scientific fact. It is not a conspiracy theory, not a hypothesis it is SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. There is an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community about the global warming and it’s man-made causes. As usual in the scientific community there are one or two “dissidents” (you know, scientists are crazy sometimes) but the absolute majority have no doubts about it. Picking opinions of a couple of dissidents and ignoring the overwhelming scientific consensus is just the sign of ignorance, nothing more.
The problem with the “net zero” policy is not that it is “wrong”, but that it is not practical. Any country which would follow it on it’s own while other just ignoring it will not do much good to the environment but jut lose in the economic competition. It will work only when all countries, which are major contributors to the global warming will coordinate their efforts, which it pretty much impossible in the system of liberal capitalism which promotes competition at the expense of the common good. But that’s not the reason to deny scientific facts.
The conspiracy is the man-made climate change propaganda, and it’s not, as you say, ‘one or two dissidents’ who are rejecting the narrative, it includes almost 2,000 highly respected scientists, whose findings are based on verified historical and current data, but are dismissed by the IPCC, so that it can push the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and the WEF’s Great Reset, which are all about acquiring wealth and power for billionaire globalists, and nothing to do with saving the planet.
You must be able to accept that the MSM who lied about Brexit, Covid, Ukraine and Palestine, might also be lying about climate change, because they’re controlled by the globalists. No-one who’s expressed their opposition to this motion here has commented on the video I suggested you should watch, which shows the level of corruption involved. If you’re not prepared to consider what’s being said by eminent climatologists, but casually believe the wildly inaccurate projections of computer-modelling opportunists and corporate lobbyists, then you’re part of the problem.
Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth
https://www.bitchute.com/video/2b18kAneSfM/