  

Home About Subscribe To Subscribe To Download Current The Entire Archive of the Donation Contact
Us Print Edition Digital Edition Digital Edition Salisbury Review Us

SEARCH …

Home  Blog  The Great Climate Hoax? ELIZABETH THE SECOND. 1926 – 2022

The Great Climate Hoax?

 23rd July 2022  Alistair Miller  Blog  42

THANK YOU WHOLEHEARTEDLY FOR

YOUR WONDERFUL MAGAZINE

“It’s like a breath of fresh air. My husband and I

read every article avidly while nodding and
exclaiming “yes, yes yes”!!  You have no idea of
the relief to have access to Conservative thought
presented in an honest but non- confrontational
way.”  EM
_________________________________
“When I win the lottery I’ll send a lot more — I
A FRESH APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE love you clever, sane, sensible people! — K”
 
“The Salisbury Review is a glimpse of sanity in an
Shocking scenes earlier this week from Wennington, where suburban houses went up in
otherwise mad world” Mr N
8ames after wild:res spread across tinder dry :elds, and :remen struggled to contain the
blaze in record temperatures of 40 degrees. Meanwhile, :res have ranged across France,
Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece. Italy has declared a state of emergency because of the
worst drought in 70 years.

But the good news is that we need not be alarmed. The climate hoaxers are at it again.
Fake news, fake data, fake science, and fake reporting. Even the weather stations that
record the temperatures are fake. The mainstream media is whipping up hysteria, fanning
the 8ames, you might say, merely to further its liberal agenda. Let’s just get out and enjoy
the sunshine.

Articles in the Autumn Edition of the

The spoiler scientists of the British Antarctic Survey claim that they have incontrovertible
magazine out next week.  
proof of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming, the result of many years of  
conducting research and analysing data from the polar regions. Likewise, NASA, who have Editorial.  Two worse candidates for Prime
unique access to satellite data relating to sea-levels, ice coverage, and the chemical Minster could not be imagined.
composition of the atmosphere. Likewise, the Met OUce, whose meteorological  

observations from ground and air-based instruments, and research aircraft, inform their Mark Mantel. “Putting Beauty back in her Seat.”
 
climate models. Likewise the Royal Society, who in 2018, together with 21 other national
Transgender Madness: Theodore Dalrymple
academies and societies of science representing the consensus views of tens of thousands
wonders why gender dysphoria attracts so much
of scientists launched a Consensus Statement on Climate Change. Indeed, all the world’s attention as it aHects only .005% of the
leading scienti:c organisations support the consensus that global warming is man-made. population.
 
We need not be alarmed. Again, it is all fake data, fake modelling, fake analysis. The world “On the National Death.”  Myles Harris explains
scienti:c community is involved in a worldwide plot engineered by the global liberal elite to how the left has seized control of the merciless
further their nefarious agenda. Individual scientists may not even be conscious what is bureaucratic machine that is the NHS.

going on, for they have been bewitched by ‘groupthink’. Although normally impeccably  
Craig Milne: How for lack of nuclear power the
rational and cool-headed in their pursuit of the truth, they have in this case been
Greens may cause you to shiver, even to die this
indoctrinated, brainwashed, succumbed to mass hallucination, in accepting a paradigm –
winter.
anthropogenic global warming – that is obviously bogus.  
Daryl McCann: On why people smuggling matters,
How do we know? The global elite, who have masterminded the conspiracy (possibly with how Australia managed to halt it, but maybe is
extra-terrestrial assistance), have masterfully covered their tracks for they are devious about to lose control of it again.
beyond belief. It is the same global liberal elite that denied Donald Trump his landslide  
election victory (every electoral oUcial in the country was in on it) and foisted killer Percy Carlyle: How the Conservatives have

vaccines on the world under the pretext of a manufactured pandemic. It is the same NASA scrapped marriage.
 
that faked the Moon landings on a stage set at a USAF base and, at least according to Flat
Being the 40th Anniversary Edition of the
Earthers, doctored satellite images of the Earth to make it look spherical.
Salisbury Review, we publish a selection of
articles from going back to 1992. Here are a
We know because a minority of brave scientists have dissented. These modern-day
few.
Galileos have spurned the orthodoxy, turned their back on oUcial sources of funding, Roger Scruton. “The Conservative Conscience.”
risking their academic careers in the process, and with generous :nancial help from the 2007
fossil fuels industry and organisations funded by it, published compelling research that  
reveals climate change to be a hoax. Enoch Powell on the EU. “A New Continental
System.” 1992
Naturally, these heretics are ridiculed by the establishment. Their papers are pilloried  
Tristan Jones. “An encounter with Kim Philby.”
when they are peer-reviewed and declared fraudulent. The climate change hoaxers do
2007
what they can to confuse the issue by making their arguments as complex as possible, by
 
appealing to sophisticated models with hundreds of variables, to complex chemical and
Michael Wharton. “Colonel Sibthorpe.”2002
physical processes, and by utilising needlessly technical terms – all spurious – solely  
intended to bamboozle us. Merrie Cave. “Making mock of uniforms that
guard you while you sleep.” 2016
luckily, we amateurs are able miraculously to see through the mass of data – the same  
data that climate scientists have devoted their professional lives to making sense of. No Heather Ollerenshaw. “Rolling John.” 2018
need to study meteorology, biochemistry, thermodynamics, atmospheric physics or  
Brian Ridley FRS. “Global Warming: Beyond Belief?
chemistry, solar physics, geophysics, oceanography, glaciology, paleoclimatology, applied
2018
mathematics, or computer modelling. No need for a laborious process of peer-review,
 
which in any case merely serves the interest of the elite. By cobbling together a few items
Myles Harris. “Britain’s Second Betrayal of Poland”
of cherry-picked data, a few choice variables, and some causal linkages, we can prove (1) 2017
that there is no global warming, and (2) that even if there were, humanity has nothing to  
do with it.  
 
Luckily, there are innumerable websites to assist us in this. No need for studying the  
relevant science or sophisticated computer modelling when 5 minutes ‘research’ on the net
will furnish the evidence needed to con:rm our beliefs. Aliens living on the far side of the
OUR MAIN CONTRIBUTORS
Moon? Flat Earth? Men from Venus? It’s all there.

Myles Harris Myles Harris is the editor of

Just a few minutes ‘research’ and you too can go online to disprove the man-made climate
The Salisbury Review. Well
change thesis, the consensus of tens of thousands of climate scientists, with a Mickey struck in years, he remembers
Mouse model. Try it! when hangings were
announced in received English
PREVIOUS ARTICLE NEXT ARTICLE by a man wearing a bow tie on
the BBC Home Service, midwives rode bicycles,
Lady Almoners looked after the deserving poor in
hospitals and children were separated by the 11
Leave a Reply plus into sheep and goats.

Your email address will not be published.

See all articles by Myles Harris and subscribe
Comment to his RSS feed.

Theodore Dalrymple is a
retired prison doctor and
psychiatrist. A highly popular
Name *
journalist, he writes for
publications including The
Times, The British Medical
Email *
Journal, The Observer, Daily Telegraph, The
Spectator and The Salisbury Review. He is also

Website contributing editor to City Journal, where he is

Dietrich Weismann Fellow. His books include Life
at the Bottom, Our Culture, What’s Left of It and
Spoilt Rotten.
POST COMMENT

See all articles by Theodore Dalrymple and

subscribe to his RSS feed.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

41 COMMENTS ON THE GREAT CLIMATE HOAX?

Jane Kelly Jane Kelly worked for the Daily
Mail for 15 years as a leading
celebrity interviewer. Among
her interviewees were Hillary
Farlane McSproat 13TH AUGUST 2022 AT 2:50 PM
Clinton, Jack Nicholson, Russell
Crowe, George Clooney,
Michael Portillo, Tony Benn, JeHrey Archer,
The questions I should like to see answered by those who dismiss the anthropogenic climate Edwina Curry, Scarlett Johansson, Arthur Scargill,
change theory are these: Vanessa Redgrave and Elizabeth Taylor. She has
1. Do you agree that it is not possible to change even one thing in the world without changing at written two books; a biography of Colin Farrell,
least one other thing? and Inside – an account of working as a teacher in
2. Do you agree in cause and eHect? Wormwood Scrubs Prison, London.
3. Do you agree that the annual consumption of oil is about 35 billion barrels?
4. Do you agree that the annual consumption of coal is about 8 billon tons?
See all articles by Jane Kelly and subscribe to
5. Do you agree that the annual consumption of natural gas is about 4 trillion cubic metres? her RSS feed.
6. Do you agree that the combustion products of the above are exhausted to the atmosphere?
7. Bearing in mind your answer to 1 and 2, do you think it possible that burning all these billions
of barrels of oil, billions of tons of coal, and trillions of cubic metres of gas, and discharging the
RECENT COMMENTS
combustion products to the atmosphere results in no changes other than the fact of those
discharges?
BRIAN ROCKFORD ON Where are you
8. If you agree that such discharges must create eHects beyond the mere fact of the discharges
really from? Lady Hussey was right to
themselves, on what basis do you exclude climatic eHects?
ask
9. If you agree that such discharges may have climatic eHects, on what basis do you dismiss
warming eHects from among those eHects?

BRIAN ROCKFORD ON Foot in Mouth

REPLY
Disease at the Palace

DAVID ASHTON ON Foot in Mouth

PJR 21ST AUGUST 2022 AT 8:25 PM
Disease at the Palace

1 and 2. These are philosophical questions to which diHerent philosophers oHer EM-KREM ON Queering the pitch in
diHerent answers. Neither is an axiom. Qatar. A fortnight of fun ahead.

3, 4 and 5. Yes, and we need alternatives to resources that will run out. Luckily, nuclear
power exists, and is safe and clean as long as corners aren’t cut. DONG LI ON Wokery is Maoism.

6, 7, 8 and 9. The theory is logical, despite my doubts about axioms 1 and 2, but I don’t
believe it’s supported by evidence in the real world. Clive James’s satirical vision of deep-
fried polar bears Woating over a submerged London is no more likely to happen now
that it was Xfteen years ago when he devised it.

But even if it’s all true, nuclear power provides a complete solution to the problem, so
why aren’t the Green Party and Extinction Rebellion campaigning for it, instead of
protesting against it? Is it perhaps because they’re very, very stupid? Or very, very
Marxist? Or, as seems very plausible to me, both?

REPLY

Skeptic 12TH AUGUST 2022 AT 7:19 PM

It is hard to take seriously, as environmentalist saviors, the rich celebrities who use private jets
to Wy to Davos to listen to a disturbed teenager. It’s not what scientists say that is the issue, it is
the obvious religious fervor of “repent for the end of days is upon us” Wavor of the whole
movement that is turning people oH.

REPLY

PJR 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 7:15 PM

Only scientists can judge theories about quantum mechanics, because we can’t build particle
accelerators in our back gardens, but anybody old enough can work out whether it’s hotter
nowadays than it used to be.

The climate change hypothesis suHers from the problem that anybody old enough can tell that
it isn’t hotter nowadays than it used to be.

Any real scientist would abandon a hypothesis when its predictions proved to be false, but the
pseudo-scientists of climate change are too poorly educated in the principles of scientiXc
method to change their minds, so they tell lies instead.

“It’s a bit warmer than it was on an arbitrary date 250 years ago, so let’s panic!”

Alternatively, let’s enjoy the current spell of warm weather, because real scientists, like
everybody else, know it won’t last as long as we’d like.

REPLY

Werdna 13TH AUGUST 2022 AT 1:36 PM

I’m old enough, and I can promise you it certainly is hotter than it used to be. However,
the people who have been recording temperatures properly, using proper scientiXc
instruments and controlled conditions, tell us that it’s hotter than it used to be.

This kind of denial of reality is deXnitely a symptom of a mental illness. Get help “PJR”.
You can take Blaiklock with you.

I can remember when it was said, when the temperatures reached the 70s (Fahrenheit)
that it was going to be a nice warm summers day. You could play outside all day without
having to worry about 2nd degree burns or sunstroke. 75F is around 24°C. Now, we
regularly have temperatures of 35+°C, and even now 40°C, and we are told to use
“common sense” and not go out in it. Think of that. It is now too hot in England to safely
stay outside all day. Not hotter? PHHt. Sometimes I wonder whether you’re aware you’re
actually pissing yourself and not spilling the Chablis down your legs.

REPLY

PJR 13TH AUGUST 2022 AT 9:49 PM

There are at least four rational grounds for doubting the current climate panic:

1. Temperatures are now being measured in more places than in the past,
including new places that were perhaps always hotter.

2. Buildings reWect heat, so places that are more built-up than they used to be
are hotter.

3. In all scientiXc measurements, there’s a tendency to drift. Even the sacred

constants of physics seem to change.

4. Human beings being what we are, it’s likely that some of the measurements
are fraudulent.

I regard the climate panic the same way I regard the COVID panic and the Putin
panic: I assume that I’m being lied to now because I know I’ve been lied to in the
past. But feel free to be gullible, Andrew.

REPLY

Werdna 10TH AUGUST 2022 AT 5:28 PM

What a beautiful article! Alistair, you have elevated the glorious art of irony to a level we have
never seen before. I can only hope it’s not lost in this place*, where for example, Catherine
Blaiklock has stated in a previous article that the current levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere to be
“dangerously low”. She claims, in order to justify this extraordinary assertion, to have studied
climatology at Oxford, but even if you think a single module in a geography degree qualiXes, it is
hard to believe that this is something that would have been taught by that institution.

*Although having now read the other comments below I realise that, depressingly but
predictably enough, that it apparently is.

REPLY

PJR 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 7:26 PM

In what way is Catherine Blaiklock’s Oxford science degree inferior to any other trained
scientist’s degree, Andrew?
Do you perhaps (like Odious Attenborough and Thick Thunberg) approve of scientists
only when their conclusions support your prejudices?

REPLY

Werdna 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 8:02 PM

I don’t have any prejudices about scientiXc research, so that’s a meaningless

question. If the science demonstrates a clear result, disagreeing with it because
you don’t like it—such as the fossil fuel industry is known to have done—is
irrelevant.

And really? “Odious Attenborough”? What a vile little man you are. Where’s your
research-based insight into it all? Pathetic.

REPLY

PJR 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 8:32 PM

“Odious” and “thick” are the kind of adjectives you’d use yourself for
people you disagreed with, though “vile” and “little” are the ones you
happened to choose today.

You didn’t answer either of my questions. My answer to your question is

implicit in my comment to which you replied. I think any neutral observer
would consider me to be the winner of our little debate so far.

REPLY

Sandra Cooke 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 10:39 PM

@ PJR
Poor old Weirdna – the word “vile” is used more than once from
his limited stock of insults that he mistakes for argument.
However, I think the evidence for climate change is pretty
substantial, the role of British carbon emissions negligible, and
that technology is part of the answer to these problems.

Werdna 13TH AUGUST 2022 AT 1:48 PM

Well pjr, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a Geography degree from
Oxford university. It’s very prestigious. However, she has apparently
rejected whatever she was taught in order to make such an absurd
statement about the current level of CO₂, because I think it’s safe to say
that Oxford University wouldn’t be teaching such ignorant, unscientiXc
bullshit. Not even in 1985. You cannot claim authority on a subject
because you went to Oxford, and then make it up on the hoof.

REPLY

PJR 13TH AUGUST 2022 AT 10:05 PM

Do you seriously think that one should never disagree with what
one was taught by one’s tutors? If you don’t think it, why did you
say it?

Fongy 31ST JULY 2022 AT 8:01 AM

The average daily temperatures from June 1st to July 21 in Central England was 23.9 C in 1976
and 21.6C this year. How is this Climate Change?

REPLY

MICHAEL HARRIS 30TH JULY 2022 AT 3:37 PM

https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-
so-called-experts-are-0-50/
The logic is against man made climate change. Since 1967 scientists have made 41 predictions of
world annihilation due to human activity [See article above]. None have come true. This is just
another prediction; its motivation can only be understood in a political context.

REPLY

Steven Carr 30TH JULY 2022 AT 9:05 AM

‘sophisticated computer modelling’

Just look how well sophisticated computer modelling did with COVID.

But warming is man-made. That is a fact. The highest temperatures were recorded at Heathrow
and RAF Coningsby. You can’t get more man-made than the busiest airport in Britain and an RAF
airXeld.

REPLY

Noa 10TH AUGUST 2022 AT 5:56 PM

RAF Coningsby has more than four operational Typhoons able to contribute to the
British Global warming disaster? I’m amazed.

REPLY

Steven Carr 30TH JULY 2022 AT 8:02 AM

There have been two hot days in July.

The rest of the month is cold. People are wearing coats or jumpers

REPLY

Had enough 29TH JULY 2022 AT 2:48 PM

Re the (Xrst) “moon landing”, was it possible for the technology of the day to have achieved what
was claimed? Having passed through the dangerous Van Allen radiation belts with the barest
minimum of protection, and having reached moon orbit, they then detached the lunar lander
which made a controlled soft landing on its feet, two of them exited the capsule and walked
around in searing sun heat with air-con packs on their backs, took oH again and made a perfect
connection to the moon-orbiting module which was in exactly the right place, then Xred more
rockets to send it accurately back to earth, through the Van Allen belts again, all as a Xrst-time
unrehearsed programme to fantastic accuracy. And the astronauts all lived happily ever after,
no radiation eHects. It all raises an awful lot of questions, and did. And if you want to see how
such an event could be faked, the Xlm Capricorn One will show you. For the arguments and
rebuttals about the Apollo programme, see “Moon landing conspiracy theories” on Wikipedia.
Take your pick!

REPLY

Mike Thompson 29TH JULY 2022 AT 8:08 PM

Were all the Apollo missions faked, or just the 11th?

REPLY

Werdna 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 8:07 PM

Except the Russians never exposed it as a fraud, because they, like many other
countries, had tracked the mission by radio all the way to the Moon and back. The
particular motion would have been impossible to fake for everybody’s viewpoint.

The Russians would have loved to prove it fake.

All of your points are trivial and have all been debunked. People survived nuclear
bombings and Chernobyl, never mind a few minutes in the van Allen belts.

REPLY

Werdna 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 8:23 PM

And yes, the technology was capable of it. We’ve had rockets for thousands of
years and airtight vessels—submarines—for I think hundreds. And the
mathematics and theory of gravity for hundreds too.

REPLY

PJR 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 8:37 PM

Thousands of years of rockets! Hundreds of years of submarines! Andrew

evidently has all the necessary qualiXcations to be a leading climate-
change pseudo-scientist!

REPLY

Andy Car Park 29TH JULY 2022 AT 1:18 PM

I am so glad this putrid bully pulpit of a magazine is going down the Xnancial tubes.

REPLY

Myles Harris 29TH JULY 2022 AT 2:07 PM

What makes you think that ? Sorry to disappoint you we are solvent in exceptionally
ditcult trading conditions, more than be said for the Guardian which can only survive
on income from the stock market ! Also like all left organisations, no reader comment
pages. I am sure Andy approves

REPLY

Werdna 10TH AUGUST 2022 AT 5:34 PM

How about cut out all the racist stuH? This is an absolute cesspit of vileness,
apart from the ignorant ravings under this beautiful piece of writing.

REPLY

Brian S. Rockford 11TH AUGUST 2022 AT 10:56 PM

An “absolute cesspit” of “racist stuH”? What, SR?!

Are all human populations identical? Are some peoples better adapted to
some environments than others? Are those who recognise genetic, racial
and national diHerences, and their cultural eHects, “complete morons”?

REPLY

David Joseph 29TH JULY 2022 AT 1:05 PM

I do take the points made , but it seems to me that the Climate is always changing. The issue is
what we do, and why…
I do not advocate brazen pollution or the destruction of the environment. Nevertheless I have
not seen any accounts of climate change from normal cycles, the variations in the Earth’s axis
etc.
The present Hysteria is motivated by someone’s interest… surely?! There is a world wide
advertising campaign about it. And the alternative ‘renewables’ require resources, heat and
pollution to make ..
If the problem is Human activity then surely the answer is depopulation ?? And we can start at
home with a stop on all further immigration, and especially from cultures obsessed by massive
breeding…

REPLY

Had enough 29TH JULY 2022 AT 11:26 AM

It would have been useful if the article had included a few direct links from the last two
paragraphs.

REPLY

Fiscal McFee 29TH JULY 2022 AT 11:13 AM

So, Professor Richard Lindzen, Professor William Happer, Professor Ian Plimer, Dr Willie Soon,
Professor Judith Curry, Dr Patrick Moore and very many other real scientists are all wrong? It’s
politics-based pseudo-science, not science, which has become a religion, a cult.

REPLY

Alistair Miller 29TH JULY 2022 AT 8:42 PM

Got it in one! Apart from Patrick Moore, do any of the above not receive funding from, or
have Xnancial interests in, the fossil fuels industry?

REPLY

Werdna 10TH AUGUST 2022 AT 5:24 PM

Patrick Moore, famously not a scientist. Equally famously, deceased.

REPLY

Skeptic 26TH JULY 2022 AT 8:13 AM

I noted that whenever there is cold weather, they claim “weather isn’t climate!” but whenever
there is hot weather, the weather suddenly *is* climate again.

REPLY

Kit 25TH JULY 2022 AT 11:07 AM

Group think. People believe it because people believe because people believe it.

REPLY

Martin Armstrong 24TH JULY 2022 AT 4:12 PM

Well-written article brilliantly ridiculing climate change deniers.

REPLY
 Robert Sharpe 24TH JULY 2022 AT 11:54 PM

That’s all very well but every disaster the Left has raved about – the new ice age, acid
rain, bird Wu, mad cow disease, AIDS, covid etc has Xzzled out. The Left has cried wolf so
many times it has grown hoarse.
That’s why the latest terror has to be nebulous: easy to frighten people with and – given
that there is nothing as mutable as the weather – very ditcult to disprove. For the
Marxists and their fellow travellers, what’s not to like?

REPLY

Brian S. Rockford 8TH AUGUST 2022 AT 1:30 PM

Whatever the reason for famine in Africa and Asia now and in future, their
peoples will try to come to Britain. Worldwide climate change and pollution are
now blamed on the Industrial Revolution itself, i.e. whitey!!! It would be oHensive
to say “They breed ’em, and we feed ’em,” so I’ll just write it.

REPLY

Robert Sharpe 24TH JULY 2022 AT 11:58 AM

The BBC is the UK’s greatest public exponent of climate change.

The BBC is renowned for its honesty and integrity.
Which of these statements is true?

REPLY

Werdna 10TH AUGUST 2022 AT 5:04 PM

What’s your source for the Xrst statement? I think it’s accepted pretty much universally
now by anybody who isn’t a complete moron.

REPLY

Brian S. Rockford 23RD JULY 2022 AT 10:11 PM

Fair enough.
But UK CO2 emissions are not the problem. Chinese and Indian emissions are.
Meanwhile, why not extract oil from our coal as the South Africans did – the technology has
been known for 100 years?

REPLY

Kit 25TH JULY 2022 AT 11:10 AM

Climate change isn’t about climate change. Have you noticed that whatever the problem
is, the answer is always the same? The answer is always more taxes, more government
employees and more regulations and more controls.

Solving the problem would be a disaster to those who claim to care about the problem.

REPLY

1 TRACKBACKS & PINGBACKS

 News Round-Up – The Daily Sceptic

OUR 2021 APPEAL STAY CONNECTED SITE NAVIGATION THE SALISBURY REVIEW

Support The Salisbury Review Home Permissions & Reproductions

Privacy Policy
   About Us
Terms & Conditions
Subscribe To Print Edition Take Down Policy
Write for Us
Subscribe To Digital Edition

Download Current Digital Edition REGISTERED OFFICE

The Entire Archive of the Salisbury

Review The Salisbury Review, PO Box 81,
ShePord, Bedfordshire, SG17 9AP, UK.
Donation Telephone: 01462 234 279

Contact Us info@salisburyreview.co.uk

Copyright © The Salisbury Review 2019. All rights reserved.