1. US based interests are supreme at manipulating us into taking useless tests and harmful mRNA products and vaccines that make markets for yet more products. They excel at designing studies that appear to exonerate saturated animal fat and thus maintain markets for useless and harmful statins. They are successful at marketing puberty blockers, life-long drugs and radical surgery to be who we already are and at medicalising depression and childhood.

The misunderstanding that symptoms and immune cells in human bodies are indications of disease, when they are in fact the healing, has also been successfully used to create mistrust over well understood ecological processes.

Ill health in humans is not caused by so-called ‘viruses’ nor bacteria nor fungi. Neither are humans a virus on the Earth that is being fought off by it. Ill health in humans is caused by the conditions of modernity, as are Earth system imbalances. Malnutrition, over-nutrition, loneliness, trauma, poverty, poor sanitation, toxins, pollution and stress all cause the symptoms of rebalancing in humans, known as infections or cancer. Industrialisation also causes changes to the Earth as it rebalances its energy.

The planet is not dying, though it is rapidly changing. Life will continue, species will adapt and evolve, though probably not mammals. What is dying is human civilisation. After humans have died or been drastically reduced, human emissions will stop and reforesting will occur, co2 will be sucked back out of the atmosphere and cooling and climate stabilisation will occur.

2. US based interests are supreme at manipulating us into thinking that veganism and anthropogenic climate change are tools of control rather than a human and scientific response to the evidence.

3. US based interests, who already control our food, water and energy supply distract us with culture wars and thus continue to hide behind manufactured fears of seed oils, surveillance, AI and DEI.

4. US based interests are supreme at selling proxy wars against Russia, Iran, North Korea and China, who present no threat, making us purchase lucrative nuclear deterrents and US-made arms rather than spending on social programs or preparing for water and food shortages.

5. US based interests are actively accelerating the depopulation causing environmental crisis because it will affect first and worst those they see as their economic rivals in the global majority. If our aim is to leave as little damage to the Earth after we have gone, that means not extending industrialised society by a some decades by converting parts of it to renewables or cultured food.

Even though I appear to suggest inaction; I am not a doomer.The word doom has too many connotations of moral judgement, catastrophe and tragedy for me. Human’s doom is not revenge on the part of Gaia, it’s cause and effect and the laws of physics.

Our doom may be a catastrophe for us; but it’s not for life nor the Earth itself which will continue without us. Our doom is not a tragedy for billions of other animals farmed for food and used in testing and medicine; it’s the opposite; it’s blissful relief.

The beginning of feminism was known as women’s lib. Women attempted to free themselves from the subjugation and repression of the patriarchy (that traps men just as much as it does women). I wish animals and the Earth to be freed from the tyranny, devastation, exploitation and subjugation of human consumption.

Life is now, therefore wanting emancipation comes with the responsibility to free life now, though not with violence or sabotage. What we do in the present moment, being kind or unkind, loving or unloving, regardless of future consequences, is worthwhile and significant in and of itself.

Conclusion.

The US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, pharma and arms manipulated governments to enforce totally nuts measures to protect us from normal symptoms of rebalancing. They ramped up the fear with midazolam and remdesivir deaths for effect. They deliberately linked the crazy measures to a communist conspiracy with a green agenda; that they’d also made up. Those on the climate side they fooled with a major threat from Russia, who they pretend are in league with the right wing in the UK and US.

They then encouraged us to scorn our opposites over the great divide of the right-wing, Sinophobic, climate denying ‘anti-vaxxers’ vs the left-wing, Russophobic, climate accepting ‘covidiots’. Then they sat back and watched us squabble; while laughing all the way to the bank, and to the destruction of the global south that they desire.

The fossil fuel, animal ag, pharma and arms industries will collapse; either we stop buying into them and they’re gone or they take us all down with them via physics.

🐒

The whole conspiracy of globalists, NATO, the EU, the WEF, Zionists, Israel, technocrats, panopticons, global governance and ULEZ cameras controlling us with faked climate change and surveillance is fake.

US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, arms, finance, media, tech, gambling, gaming, porn, entertainment and pharma already control and surveil every aspect of our lives.

US interests are scaring us with evil baddies so that we oppose governance and regulation on their behalf.

Focusing on the baddies, on AI data centres and the air conditioning culture wars deflects from the accelerating climate crisis itself as well as obscuring the only way that we can lessen its impact.

That is; by not buying into the products of those who created the fake evil agenda. Less cars, less traffic accidents, no flying, less pollution, more health, community, shared local transport, healers and whole plant based food will also mitigate, a little, for a little while, the effects of the self-induced poly crisis.

If you identify as right or left; this is also part of the problem. Being a centrist (ie seeing both sides) is not a dirty word.

The powers that be (US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, tech, media, pharma and arms) use ‘right’ against the ‘left’ to distract from their control and to finely tune that control using politicians, algorithms, mainstream and social media.

The swing ‘right’ boosted by the unevidenced and corrupt covid debacle and the backing of an ideology requiring life long drugs and drastic surgery to be who one already is, as well as lies; enabled them to spread anti-woke fervour, Islamophobia and climate crisis denial.

The theatre stage or box ring is set.

On the right The Spectator, the Free Speech Union, Toby Young, Douglas Murray, Friends of Israel, JK Rowling and (US led proxy) war against ‘communist’ China and on the left the Good Law Project, Jolyon Maughan, Sadiq Khan, climate science, Palestine and (US led proxy) war with Russia.

Both sides are correct and both are totally mislead, but the scripts and divisions hold.

Somehow we have to extricate ourselves from the roles we’ve been told to play and the lines that have been forced into our mouths.

It’s not about left vs right. Both are controlled and used by the puppet masters.

🐒

The Climate Brink

The war in Iran shows us another cost of our fossil-fuel economy

When people debate the cost of fossil fuels versus renewables, the conversation almost always centers on the price at the pump or the cost per kilowatt-hour on your electricity bill. That’s understandable — those are the costs you can see. But they’re not the whole story…

Read more

6 months ago · 114 likes · 36 comments · Andrew Dessler

I agree subsidies for fossil fuels are hidden; making the price appear cheaper than it is. The costs to the environment of fossil fuels and animal ag are, of course, also being carried by the tax payer. However, the US is not spending $trillions on ‘defence’ to protect the world’s supply of oil. They are spending $trillions to control the world’s supply of oil and energy.

During the current iteration of their decades long war against Iran the US have carefully manipulated the price of oil to maintain overall stability. However, the purpose is not protection, it’s a giant protection racket.

The US could at any time cut off the world’s supply from the Middle East by destroying all ships in the Strait of Hormuz. It has the capability to do so. Instead the US continues to wage on/off war, on multiple fronts, and to manipulate the price of oil with the collusion of the media. The price goes down when the US releases propaganda about a pause or a cease fire.

Nations, such as China, may indeed wish to gain independence from US energy control via renewables. However, in the short term less advanced nations become more, not less, dependent on the US. Thailand, for example, is ‘investing in’, ie becoming politically dependent on, US LNG rather than Russian energy because a) they fear sanctions if they trade with Russia or China b) they see the ‘Ukrainian’ strikes on Russian energy (using US and EU drones) and fear energy instability and destruction of their investment.

In the short term the war also accelerates the climate crisis that affects the global south and less developed countries first and worst; meaning that they have to address floods, fires, droughts and famines whilst trying to make a major transition to renewables.

The EU is already more dependent on US LNG shipped across the ocean after US led sanctions and the blowing up of the Nord Stream cut them off from Russian gas. Large parts of the public in the UK writes to its MPs telling them to oppose Netzero and politicians prefer to restart drilling the North Sea and re-industrialise with the manufacture of arms rather than make a green investment and transistion to independence from the US.

The US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, pharma, tech, media, finance and arms, who control the west, will not stop. Even if Iran collapses there will not be an opportunity for the world to decarbonise. This is because the war on Iran is part of a wider war on multipolarity, particularly China. The US will not cease trying, by all means available, to stop China’s rise.

Political and market capture, militarisation and devastating hot wars will continue. Added to them are the increasing effects of climate change.

Decarbonisation will come by the collapse of nations, whether it’s the US and its vassals or the multipolar world. Decarbonisation will come by nations not being able to grow enough food and starving.

There is no silver lining to the war on Iran.

🐒

1) they have fooled the ‘left’ that Putin is the enemy, that he’s colluding with Trump and Reform and that Ukraine is doing well.

2) they have fooled the ‘right’ that Putin was provoked by EU ‘globalists’ who have a green agenda to control us.

3) they have fooled both ‘left’ and ‘right’ that the enemy (apart from Putin and ‘globalists’) is AI, data centres, surveillance, Zionists and Big Brother state authoritarianism rather than their own Big Interests.

🐒

Natural variations may explain the residual heating, particularly in the past 4 years, once the heating due to human activity has been accounted for, but nothing more. But do they?

This post looks at the influence of El Nino, Hunga Tonga, solar activity, reduced sulphur emissions, changes in cloud cover and atmospheric circulations, natural variability before 1950 that masked human caused warming and the alternative theories try to explain global warming that don’t involve greenhouse gases .

Firstly, El Nino, Hunga Tonga, solar activity, reduced sulphur emissions and changes in cloud cover.

From Zeke Hausfather. ‘The past three years (2023-25) have been exceptionally warm globally. In 2023, global temperatures reached a new high, after they significantly exceeded expectations.

This record was surpassed in 2024 – the first year where average global temperatures were 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

Now, 2025 is on track to be the second- or third-warmest year on record.

What has caused this apparent acceleration in warming has been subject to a lot of attention in both the media and the scientific community. Dozens of papers have been published investigating the different factors that could have contributed to these record temperatures.

In 2024, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) discussed potential drivers for the warmth in a special section of its “state of the global climate” report, while the American Geophysical Union ran a session on the topic at its annual meeting.

In this article, Carbon Brief explores four different factors that have been proposed for the exceptional warmth seen in recent years. These are:

• A strong El Niño event that developed in the latter part of 2023.

• Rapid declines in sulphur dioxide emissions – particularly from international shipping and China.

• An unusual volcanic eruption in Tonga in 2022.

• A stronger-than-expected solar cycle.

Carbon Brief’s analysis finds that a combination of these factors explains most of the unusual warmth observed in 2024 and half of the difference between observed and expected warming in 2023.

However, natural fluctuations in the Earth’s climate may have also played a role in the exceptional temperatures, alongside signs of declining cloud cover that may have implications for the sensitivity of the climate to human-caused emissions.

An unusually warm three years. Between 1970 and 2014, average surface temperatures rose at a fairly steady rate of around 0.18C per decade.

Set against this long-term trend, temperature increases during the period from 2015 to 2022 were on the upper end of what would be expected.

The increases seen in 2023, 2024 and 2025 were well outside of that range. The high temperatures of the past three years reflect a broader acceleration in the rate of warming over the past decade.

However, the past three years were unusually warm, even when compared to other years in the 2010s and 2020s. Record-breaking warmth in 2023 meant that it beat the prior warmest year of 2016 by 0.17C – the largest magnitude of a new record in the past 140 years.

The year 2024 then swiftly broke 2023’s record, becoming the first year where average global temperatures exceeded 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. The 10 months of data available for 2025 indicates that the year is likely to be slightly cooler than 2023 – though it is possible it may tie or be slightly warmer.

The figure below shows global surface temperatures between 1970 and 2025. (The figures for 2025 include uncertainty based on the remaining three months of the year.)

It includes a smoothed average based on temperature data for 1970-2022 that takes into account some acceleration of warming – and then extrapolates that smoothed average forward to 2023-25 to determine what the expected temperature for those years would have been. (This follows the approach used in the WMO’s “state of the global climate 2024” report.)

Global average surface temperature changes between 1970 and 2024 using the WMO average of six groups that report global surface temperature records (dark blue), estimated 2025 temperatures and uncertainties (red) based on the first nine months of the year and a long-term average locally linear smooth (light blue).

This approach calculates how much warmer the past three years were than would be expected given the long-term trend in temperatures. It shows that 2023 was around 0.18C warmer than expected, 2024 was a massive 0.25C warmer and 2025 is likely to be 0.11C warmer.

Researchers have identified a number of potential drivers of unexpected warmth over 2023-25. Here, Carbon Brief looks at the evidence for each one.

a) A weirdly behaving El Niño event. El Niño is a climate pattern of unusually warm sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the tropical Pacific that naturally occurs every two to seven years. Strong El Niño years generally have warmer global temperatures, with the largest effect generally occurring in the months after El Niño conditions peak (when SSTs reach their highest levels in the tropical Pacific).

A relatively strong El Niño event developed in the latter half of 2023, peaking around November before fading in the spring of 2024. This event was the fourth-strongest El Niño ever recorded, as measured according to SSTs in the Niño 3.4 region in the central tropical Pacific. However, it was notably weaker than the El Niño events in both 1998 and 2016.

This can be seen in the chart below, which shows the strength of El Niño events (red shading) since the 1980s. (The blue shading indicates La Niña events – the opposite part of the cycle to El Niño, which results in cooler SSTs in the tropical Pacific.)

NOAA’s Niño 3.4 region Oceanic Niño Index using detrended data from ERSSTv5.

(It is worth noting that measuring the strength of El Niño events is not entirely straightforward. Other tools used by scientists to monitor changes to El Niño – such as the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) multivariate ENSO index – show the 2023-24 event was much weaker than indicated in the Niño 3.4 dataset.)

Global surface air temperatures tend to be elevated by around 0.1-0.2C in the six months after the peak of a strong El Niño event – defined here as when SSTs in the Niño 3.4 region reach 1.5C above normal.

The figure below shows the range of global temperature change for the 12 months before and 22 months after the peak of all 10 strong El Niño events since 1950. The light line represents the average of past strong El Niño events, the dark blue line the temperature change observed during the 2023-24 event and the shaded blue area the 5-95th percentile range.

Global mean surface temperatures for the 12 months prior to peak El Niño conditions and the 22 months following for strong El Niño events. Calculations by Carbon Brief using data from Copernicus/ECMWF’s ERA5 and NOAA’s Oceanic Niño Index.

The figure shows the 2023-24 El Niño was quite unusual compared to other strong El Niño events since 1970. Global temperatures rose to around 0.4C above expected levels – which is on the high side of previous El Niños.

The heat also came early, with high temperatures showing up around four months before the El Niño event peaked. This early heat is unlike any other El Niño event in modern history and is one of the reasons why 2023’s global temperatures were so unexpectedly warm.

Global temperatures remained elevated for a full 18 months after the El Niño peaked, well after conditions in the tropical Pacific shifted into neutral conditions – and even after mild La Niña conditions developed at the end of 2024 and into early 2025.

This figure does not explain how much of this unusual heat was actually caused by El Niño, compared to other factors, but it does suggest that El Niño behaviour alone does not fully explain unusually high temperatures in recent years.

Based on the historical relationship between El Niño and global temperatures, Carbon Brief estimates that El Niño contributed a modest 0.013C to 2023 temperatures and a more substantial 0.128C to 2024 temperatures, albeit with large uncertainties. (See “methodology” section at the end for details.)

However, it is possible that this 2023 estimate is too low. There are some suggestions in the literature that 2023-24 El Niño’s early warmth may have been caused by the rapid transition out of a particularly extended La Niña event. There are indications that temperatures have spiked in similar situations further back in the historical temperature record.

b) Falling sulphur dioxide emissions (* see below for how this influences European heatwave persistence and intensity).

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is an aerosol that is emitted into the lower atmosphere by the burning of coal and oil. It has a powerful climate cooling effect – Carbon Brief analysis shows that global emissions of SO2 have masked about one-third of historical warming.

Global SO2 emissions have declined around 40% over the past 18 years, as countries have increasingly prioritised reducing air pollution, including through the installation of scrubbers at coal plants.

These declines have been particularly concentrated in China, which has seen a 70% decline in SO2 emissions since 2007. In addition, a rule introduced for international shipping in 2020 by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has resulted in an 80% decline in the sulphur content of shipping fuel used around the world.

The decline of SO2 emissions is shown in the figure below.

Annual SO2 emissions from China, international shipping and the rest of the world. Data from the Community Earth atmospheric Data System (CEDS).

Shipping in particular has been suggested as a potential culprit for recent temperatures, given that ships emit SO2 over oceans where the air tends to be cleaner and so emissions have a bigger effect.

Seven of the eight studies that have explored the temperature impact of the IMO regulations have suggested a relatively modest effect, in the range of 0.03-0.08C. However, one study – led by former NASA scientist Dr James Hansen – calculated a much stronger effect of 0.2C that would explain virtually all the unusual warmth of recent years.

The figure below shows Carbon Brief’s estimate of the global average surface temperature changes caused by the low-sulphur shipping fuel rules, using the estimates produced by all eight studies. The central estimate (dark blue line) is relatively low, at around 0.05C, but the uncertainty range (light blue shading) across the studies remains large.

Range (5th to 95th percentile) and central estimate (50th percentile) of simulated global average surface temperature responses to the IMO 2020 regulations across the radiative forcing estimates in the literature. Analysis by Carbon Brief using the FaIR model.

Overall, Carbon Brief’s analysis finds that around 0.04C of warming over 2020-23 and 0.05C of warming over 2020-24 can be attributed to SO2 declines from shipping and other sources.

However, this approach might slightly overstate the effects of SO2 on the exceptional temperatures of the past three years, as shipping and other SO2 declines would have had some effect on 2021 and 2022 as well.

It is also worth noting that the total effects of SO2 declines on global temperatures have been considerably larger and are estimated to be responsible for around one-quarter of all warming since 2007.

However, these SO2 decreases occurred over a long period of time and do not clearly explain the recent spike in temperatures.

c) An unusual volcanic eruption in Tonga. In early 2022, the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai underwater volcano erupted spectacularly, sending a plume 55km into the atmosphere. This was by far the most explosive volcanic eruption since Mount Pinatubo erupted in 1991.

This was a highly unusual volcanic eruption, which vaporised vast amounts of sea water and lofted it high into the atmosphere. Overall, around 146m metric tonnes of water vapour ended up in the stratosphere, which is the layer of the atmosphere above the troposphere.

Water vapour is a powerful greenhouse gas. While it is short-lived in the lower atmosphere, it can stick around for years in the stratosphere, where it has a significant warming effect on the climate.

The figure below shows the concentration of water vapour in the stratosphere between 2005 and mid-2025. It shows how the 2022 eruption increased atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gas by around 15%. More than half the added water vapour has subsequently fallen out of the upper atmosphere.

Upper atmosphere water vapor content from NASA’s Aura MLS satellite. Figure from Dr Robert Rohde.

Most early studies of the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano focused specifically on the effects of stratospheric water vapour. These tended to show strong warming in the lower stratosphere and cooling in the middle-to-upper stratosphere, but only a slight warming effect on global surface temperatures of around 0.05C.

Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai had much lower sulphur emissions than prior explosive eruptions, such as Pinatubo and El Chichon. However it put 0.5–1.5m tonnes of sulphur into the stratosphere – the biggest increase in “aerosol optical depth” (a measure of how much sunlight is blocked by aerosols) from an eruption since Pinatubo.

Studies that included both sulphur and water vapour effects tend to find that the net effect of the eruption on surface temperatures was slight global cooling, concentrated in the southern hemisphere.

By using the estimates published in a 2024 study published in Geophysical Research Letters, which used the FaIR climate emulator model, Carbon Brief estimates that the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai eruption cooled global surface temperatures by -0.01C in 2023 and -0.02C in 2024.

This suggests that the eruption was likely only a minor contributor to recent global surface temperatures.

d) A stronger-than-expected solar cycle. The source of almost all energy on Earth is the sun. Over hundreds of millions of years, variations in solar output have a big impact on the global climate.

Thankfully, over shorter periods of time the sun is remarkably stable, helping keep the Earth’s climate habitable for life. (Big changes – such as ice ages – have more to do with variations in the Earth’s orbit than changes in solar output.)

However, slight changes in solar output do occur – and when they do, they can influence climate change over shorter periods of time. The most important of these is the roughly 11-year solar cycle, which is linked with the sun’s magnetic field and results in changes in the number of sunspots and amount of solar energy reaching Earth.

The figure below shows a best-estimate of changes in total solar irradiance since 1980, based on satellite observations. Total solar irradiance is a measure of the overall amount of solar energy that reaches the top of the Earth’s atmosphere and is measured in watts per metre squared.

Total solar irradiance from the PMOD composite (blue) along with a smoothed average (red) from 1980 to 2025.

The 11-year solar cycle is relatively modest compared to the sun’s total output, varying only a few watts per metre squared between peak and trough – amounting to around 0.01% of solar output. However, these changes can result in variations of up to 0.1C in global temperatures within a decade.

The most recent solar cycle – solar cycle 25 – began around 2020 and has been the strongest solar cycle measured since 1980. It was stronger than most models had anticipated and likely contributed to around 0.04C global warming in 2023 and 0.07C in 2024.

Effects of above combined. By combining earlier estimates of different factors contributing to 2023 and 2024 global surface temperatures, about half of 2023’s unusual warmth and almost all of 2024’s unusual warmth can be effectively explained.

This is illustrated in the figure below, which shows the five different factors discussed earlier – El Niño, shipping SO2, Chinese SO2, the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano and solar cycle changes – along with their respective uncertainties.

The sum of all the factors is shown in the “combined” bar, while the actual warming compared to expectations is shown in red.

The upper chart shows 2023, while the lower one shows 2024.

Attribution of 2023 and 2024 anomalous warmth. Light blue bars show individual factors and their uncertainties, the dark blue bar shows the combined effects and combination of uncertainties and the red bar shows the actual warming compared with expectations. Adapted from Figure 12 in WMO’s state of the global climate 2024 report.

It is important to note that the first bar includes both El Niño and natural year-to-year variability; the height of the bar reflects the best estimate of El Niño’s effects, while the uncertainty range encompasses year-to-year variability in global temperatures that may be – at least in part – unrelated to El Niño.

Large natural variability to the Earth’s climate is one of the main reasons why the combined value of the different drivers of expected warmth in 2023 has an uncertainty range that exceeds the observed warming – even though the best-estimate of combined factors only explains half of temperatures.

Or, to put it another way, there is up 0.15C difference in global temperatures year-on-year that cannot be explained solely by El Niño, human-driven global warming, or natural “forcings” – such as volcanoes or variations in solar output.

e) Natural or human caused changes in cloud cover to explain the difference. Even if unusual recent global warmth can be mostly attributed to a combination of El Niño, falling SO2 emissions, the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano, solar cycle changes and natural climate variability, there are a number of questions that remain unanswered.

Most important is what the record warmth means for the climate going forward. Is it likely to revert to the long-term average warming level, or does it reflect an acceleration in the underlying rate of warming – and, if so, what might its causes be?

As explained by Carbon Brief in a 2023 article, climate models have suggested that warming will speed up. Some of this acceleration is built into the analysis presented here, which includes a slightly faster rate of warming in recent years than has characterised the period since 1970.

But there are broader questions about what – beyond declining SO2 and other aerosols – is driving this acceleration.

Research recently published in the journal Science offered some potential clues. It found a significant decline in planetary reflectivity – known as albedo – over the past decade, associated with a reduced low-level cloud cover that is unprecedented in the satellite record.

The authors suggest it could be due to a combination of three different factors: natural climate variability, changing SO2 and other aerosol emissions and the effects of global warming on cloud reflectivity.

Natural climate variability seems unlikely to have played a major role in reduced cloud cover, given that it was relatively stable until 2015. However, it is hard to fully rule it out given the relatively short satellite record.

Reductions in SO2 emissions are expected to reduce cloud reflectivity, but the magnitude of the observed cloud reflectivity changes are much larger than models simulate.

Models might be underestimating the impact of aerosols on the climate. But, if this were the case, it would indicate that climate sensitivity might be on the higher end of the range of model estimates, because models that simulate stronger aerosol cooling effects tend to have higher climate sensitivity.

Finally, cloud cover might be changing and becoming less reflective as a result of warming. Cloud responses to climate change are one of the largest drivers of uncertainty in future warming. One of the main reasons that some climate models find a higher climate sensitivity is due to their simulation of less-reflective clouds in a warming world.

The Science study concludes that the 2023 heat “may be here to stay” if the cloud-related albedo decline was not “solely” caused by natural variability. This would also suggest the Earth’s climate sensitivity may be closer to the upper range of current estimates, it notes.’ End of article.

James Hansen claims that the albedo forcing of aerosols was via their effect on clouds in the first place.

‘The basis for believing that the aerosol forcing was unchanging during 1970-2005 was the fact that the estimated sulfur content of fossil fuels burned in that period was nearly constant and sulfate aerosols are the dominant human-made aerosol. If the aerosol forcing were simply due to reflection of sunlight by the aerosols per se, constant aerosol forcing would have been a good approximation. However, much, probably most, of the aerosol forcing is via the effect of aerosols on clouds, and that effect is very nonlinear. Adding aerosols to a pristine atmosphere has more effect on clouds than adding aerosols to already heavily polluted air. Prior to 1970, the U.S. and Europe were the main sources of increasing aerosols, but in the next few decades emissions there began to decline as emissions rose in Asia and as ship traffic became extensive over a greater ocean area. Thus, aerosol forcing became stronger. Although aerosol-cloud models are primitive, the most realistic of the Bauer et al. models found a continuing decline of −0.5 W/m², reducing the decadal (GHG + aerosol) forcing from about +0.45 W/m² to +0.3 W/m²/decade. Then, because China reduced aerosol emissions and ships were required to use low sulfur fuel, the aerosol change in the past decade had the opposite sign and the net GHG + aerosol forcing growth rate at least doubled to +0.6 W/m²/decade.’

‘A remarkable decrease of Earth’s albedo (reflectivity) and thus increase of solar radiation absorbed by Earth began in 2010-2015 . Earth responds to accelerated warming by emitting more heat to space, but because the ocean requires time to approach a new equilibrium temperature, the increase in net climate forcing has pushed Earth farther out of energy balance. The current imbalance (past decade) is roughly twice the average imbalance during the first 15 years of this century. As long as the planet is this far out of energy balance, the accelerated rate of global warming will continue.
Further support of our interpretation is provided by several independent evaluations supporting climate sensitivity in the range 4-5°C for doubled CO₂. With such high climate sensitivity, the observed post-1970 warming rate implies the existence of a negative forcing stronger than assumed by IPCC et al. Indeed, the zonal-mean absorbed solar radiation reveals strong midlatitude increases of absorbed solar radiation that can only be provided by reduced cloud albedos, consistent with high climate sensitivity.’

Heatwaves in Europe in 2026; intensified by changes in atmospheric circulation.

Heatwaves are caused by natural variation but are hotter with human caused global warming. The residual rise in heatwave intensity in Europe seems to be at least partly explained by changes in atmospheric dynamics leading to increased persistency of double jet streams that block high pressure in one place for longer.

‘This is a first-order approximation giving an estimate of the thermodynamic contribution (human caused forcings) by the mean midlatitude trend of 0.62 °C/dec. For Europe, we then define a “residual trend” as the total trend minus this thermodynamic contribution, which averaged over the full European region is~1.05 °C/dec, and ~0.54 °C/dec for western Europe’

These changes do not cause climate change, but do intensify it. As do drier soils, loss of forests leading to loss of sequestration and cooling and warmer oceans, all caused by human activity. The study found that across Europe the increase in double jet streams contributed about 30% of the total increase in heatwave intensity and about 50% of total in Western Europe, matching that of direct human caused forcings, where there was less of a heatwave temperature anomaly.

‘Our linear model captures fairly well the decadal trend patterns over large parts of Europe, but with smaller magnitudes. This is to be expected as other factors, such as soil moisture-temperature feedbacks, certainly play a role in shaping or amplifying heatwave trends. Still, the increasing persistence of double jet states captures large parts of the residual trend, especially over western Europe and European Russia. Following this approach we find that, averaged over Europe, ~30% of the total observed trend in HW cumulative intensity can be attributed to the increase in double jet persistence, under the assumptions provided above. Even more strikingly, for western Europe the contribution is much higher, i.e. ~100%, thus explaining all of the residual trend. This supports the hypothesis that for western Europe the dynamical changes towards more-persistent double jets are key to understanding the accelerated heatwave trend.’

The jet stream is controlled by the temperature difference between the Artic and the Tropics so the changes could be due to the Artic warming three times faster than the global average, but this has not been verified in models and other theories link these changes to increased moisture in the atmosphere.

The study concludes “But the interesting question is what makes double jets more persistent? A possible explanation is the enhanced warming of high-latitudes, in particular over land regions like Siberia, Northern Canada and Alaska. In summer those regions have warmed much faster than the Arctic ocean, as over the ocean the excess energy is used to melt sea ice.” The land surrounding the Arctic ocean has seen very rapid warming in summer associated with rapid retreat in late spring snow cover. ” This increasing temperature difference between land and ocean favours the persistence of double jet states in summer,” says Coumou. Kornhuber adds: “Climate models tend to underestimate extreme weather risks. Thus future research needs to assess to what degree the identified relationships are captured by the models, as projections of extreme heat under continued greenhouse gas emissions might be too conservative.“

As with changes in cloud cover; it is unlikely that natural variation plays a major role in the significant increases in double jet persistence and longevity in recent decades. See below for influence of reduced aerosols on atmospheric dynamics.

Another paper puts the acceleration down to increase of about 24% in the period studied in Southerly Flows. If the increase is due to models not being able to capture the internal variability in the system they would be expected to decrease. However, ‘If related to unforced internal variability—internal variability simulated by models is too small—then the mismatch is expected to decrease in the future, but the term of this decrease is unknown and could be years or decades, leaving the fate of Western Europe heatwaves in large uncertainty.’ ‘If due to a wrong forced dynamical regional response—models underestimate the forced response to greenhouse gases—then this mismatch is expected to remain and even strengthen in the future, as global warming increases'. ‘Determining the cause of model-observations dynamical trends mismatch is critical to assess whether the large observed warming TXx trend is likely or unlikely to continue.’

*Reduction in aerosols on European heatwaves.

This study from June 2026 shows that when the underestimation of the effect of declining human made aerosols from sulphur shipping oil is adjusted for; the changes in atmospheric dynamics that lead to blocking events and heatwaves largely accounts for the discrepancy between observed and expected temperatures across Europe.

‘This underestimation of temperature changes has been linked to an underestimation of changes in atmospheric circulation during the last decades, including the more frequent southerly flows over Western Europe (Vautard et al., 2023), the more frequent summer depressions in the western Atlantic (D’Andrea et al., 2024), the weakening of storm tracks (Chemke & Coumou, 2024), and the presence of double jets (Rousi et al., 2022).’

‘Aerosol forcing, which has switched from globally increasing to a decreasing trend in the last decades (Bauer et al., 2022), is known to produce sea ice variations (Gagné et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2018) and NH summer circulation changes (Dong et al., 2022; Marcet-Carbonell et al., 2026), with an impact on European summer temperatures. Other forcing factors like volcanoes (Birkel et al., 2018; Ottera et al., 2010) and changes in solar activity (Chiodo et al., 2016) may also contribute, producing a weakening of the jet stream and blocking over Europe (Ineson et al., 2015; Maycock et al., 2011).’

‘Dong and Sutton (2025) shows that the accelerated European summer warming with respect to global warming can be associated to a large extent with dynamical processes, being the reduction of aerosol emissions during the last decades the main factor for these changes. However, the reasons why this change is underestimated by the models and potential links with internal variability and signal-to-noise errors (Scaife & Smith, 2018) remain largely unexplored. Open questions also remain on the physical mechanisms through which aerosols alter the North Atlantic atmospheric circulation, as well as on the response of different climate models to changes in aerosol emissions.

This work analyzes model simulations from the Large Ensemble Single Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (LESFMIP, Smith et al., 2022), to investigate how different forcing factors contribute to the increase of European summer temperatures. The use of single forcing experiments allows to isolate the contribution of aerosols from that of GHG, and to explore the responses of models in terms of atmospheric circulation and summer temperatures. The use of a large ensemble of simulations allows to separate the predictable forced signal from the unpredictable internal variability.’

They found that:-

‘These results are consistent with the literature, which links the underestimation of European summer temperature increases to a mismodeling of atmospheric circulation phenomena and the inability of models to accurately predict the atmospheric blocking (Chemke & Coumou, 2024; D’Andrea et al., 2024; Dong & Sutton, 2025; Rousi et al., 2022).

Their ‘adjustment shows that the increase of European summer temperatures with respect to ENH and QSW over Europe is largely associated with the external forcing (Figure 3a), and particularly with a decrease of sulfate aerosol emissions over Europe starting from 1980... While the forcing responses are small when taking the model data at face value, correcting for the signal-to-noise errors via calibration indicates that the historical and observed changes are primarily a response to aerosol forcing. This further suggests that some of the recently reported changes, such as the accelerated summer warming in western Europe (Vautard et al., 2023), or the trends toward lower pressure over the eastern North Atlantic (D’Andrea et al., 2024), would then be to a large extent a response to aerosol forcing.

The aerosol ‘forcing’ is merely the revealing of masked heating by the removal of cooling from albedo; therefore, the difference in atmospheric dynamics, themselves associated with causing the difference between observed and expected temperatures, are caused by anthropogenic climate change rather than by natural variability.

Note on heatwave deaths. Those in England and Wales were estimated at 2700, with 42% from climate change. However, they were taken from a model of deaths tracking heat and mortuary statistics in Greece, not from death certificates. They may well not be matched by actual excess deaths figures; an understandable argument against using unreliable models put forward by skeptics that discredits ‘climate alarmists’. However, even if these deaths do not appear in the ‘excess deaths’ they could still have occurred if they were masked by less deaths this year as part of a standard deviation from the 5 year average, or if the 5 year average is high. The rest of the Europe statistics seem to be taken from actual ‘excess deaths’ records.

Early 20th-century warming masked by natural variation.

Until the 1940s one might have also been forgiven for thinking global warming was a natural cycle as the Earth left the little Ice Age, because the temperature tracked changes in solar, volcanic activity and some natural variations. However, since the 1970s the greenhouse effect from human activities accounts for virtually all the warming; which has also doubled in rate.

‘The early 20th century warming is not an unsolved mystery that undermines climate attribution. It was caused by rising greenhouse gases (contributing ~0.23C of forced warming, before aerosol offsets), recovery from early-century volcanic eruptions, a slightly brighter sun, and at least some multi-decadal internal variability (though exactly how much remains unclear given uncertainties in the observations). The modern era is fundamentally different: since 1970, natural forcings have been roughly flat, internal variability averages out over the longer period, and greenhouse gases explain essentially all of the observed warming.

The same aerosol masking that counterbalanced warming from greenhouse gases early in the century is now running in reverse. As air quality regulations cut sulfur emissions, warming from greenhouse gases is being unmasked. The early 20th century is a useful reminder that the temperature record is a story of many different counterbalancing factors rather than CO2 alone.

So next time someone shows you the run-up to the mid-1940s and argues that today’s warming is just more of the same, you can show them this article. Even taking the most generous possible period for the early warming, human emissions an important contributor, and the world warmed at 0.1C per decade. Today they are essentially the whole story, and we are warming at least twice as fast.’

Alternative theories; warming since 1850 is the Earth ‘recovering’ from the Little Age and due to changes in ocean circulations.

A theory suggests that the warming seen since the Little Ice age is due to the planet ‘recovering’ as well as due to changes in ocean circulations. The theory also claims, to fit in with observations, that warming had ‘halted’; which it has not.

No physical mechanism for this warming, apparently set to continue indefinitely though we no known cause, is given. The theory is merely curve fitting and confusing correlation with causation. It has been roundly rejected.

‘One of the most important concepts to understand when trying to grasp how the Earth’s climate works, is that every climate change must have a physical cause. Over the past century, climate scientists have developed a solid understanding about how the climate works and the physical mechanisms that cause it to change. By building that knowledge into complex climate models, scientists have been able to accurately reproduce past observed global surface temperature changes.

Global mean near-surface temperatures from observations (black) and as obtained from 58 simulations produced by 14 different climate models driven by both natural and human-caused factors that influence climate in the 2007 IPCC report (yellow). The mean of all these runs is also shown (thick red line). Vertical grey lines indicate the timing of major volcanic eruptions.

For example, we know the increased greenhouse effect is creating a global energy imbalance that will cause the Earth’s surface temperature to rise. Any alternative explanation has to identify why the increased greenhouse effect isn’t causing the warming we expect based on fundamental physics, and why the climate change ‘fingerprints’ are consistent with the increased greenhouse effect.

A brand new scientific journal called Climate published a paper by Syun-Ichi Akasofu, a retired geophysicist and former director of the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. Despite having a background in physical sciences, Akasofu made a very unphysical argument in that paper. He claimed that the current global warming is merely a result of the planet “recovering” from the Little Ice Age – a cool period (the cooling mostly isolated in Europe) that lasted between the years of about 1550 and 1850.

Problem – Akasofu didn’t identify any physical cause for this supposed ‘recovery.’ Instead he engaged in what’s known as “curve fitting,” in which you take data that is correlated to your desired graph and scale it to match, then argue you’ve proven that your data is the cause of the changes shown in that graph. In other words, it confuses correlation with causation. If I can take data regarding the number of pirates in the Caribbean and consumption of spaghetti in Ireland and make it fit the global temperature data, that doesn’t mean that pirates and Irish spaghetti are causing global warming. A physical cause must be identified.

Akasofu didn’t do that. He just roughly fit some ocean cycle data to the global temperature measurements and decided that a linear global warming trend was left over. He then declared that linear trend was the “recovery” from the Little Ice Age, and that it would continue indefinitely into the future, despite not knowing its cause.

Unfortunately the peer-review process isn’t perfect. It’s necessary but insufficient in separating the good from the flawed research. Sometimes a bad paper will slip through the cracks, whether due to a poor choice of reviewers, or the judgment of the journal editor. Akasofu’s paper was published in the very first edition of Climate, which caused great concern amongst its editorial staff (many of whom recognized the poor quality of the paper), and even caused one editor to resign from the journal.

Climate also published Nuccitelli et al. (2013), which debunked Akasofu’s paper mainly by pointing out that it had no physical basis. Akasofu’s paper also focused on the claim that global warming has “halted,” but Nuccitelli et al. (2013) also pointed out that studies that have accounted for the warming of the entire climate (oceans, air, ice, and land) have shown that if anything, global warming is accelerating.

Global heat accumulation data (ocean heating in blue; land, atmosphere, and ice heating in red) from Nuccitelli et al. (2012)

The problem with many anything but carbon (ABC) climate contrarian hypotheses like Akasofu’s is that they throw out what we know about how the Earth’s climate works. It’s fine to try and account the influences of ocean cycles – that’s what mainstream climate scientists are doing – but we’ve known how the Earth warms in response to the increased greenhouse effect for over a century. We also know that any long-term global warming must be caused by a global energy imbalance.

Any valid climate research has to work within that known framework. When you throw out everything we know about the Earth’s climate, you’re stuck making unphysical arguments based on nothing more than correlations and curve fitting, as Akasofu did. The problem for climate contrarians is that our existing climate framework is very solid. We understand the fundamentals about how the climate operates well enough to accurately reproduce the observed changes, based on solid, well-understood physical mechanisms like the increased greenhouse effect. That’s not about to get overturned by magical thinking and curve fitting.’

Conclusion.

The decline in sulphur emissions, the loss of sequestration and cooling from land use changes for animal ag plus increasing urbanisation, drier soils, and warmer oceans are all human activities that contribute, either directly or indirectly to warming. So does natural variability such as Hunga Tonga, El Nino and solar activity and volcanoes as do changes in cloud cover and reflectivity and changes in atmospheric circulation, such as frequency of double jet stream, which may or may not be partly or solely caused by human activity. All of the above may help to explain some of the anomaly, or residual heating once the expected increase from human activity is taken into account, particularly for recent extreme heat, but that is all.

These natural variations, whether or not caused by human activities, are not able to explain the global heating seen since 1950 and though they may intensify the effects of human activities on the climate there is no mechanism by which they can cause any of the observed patterns. Any alternative theory must also be able to explain why the well known cause that creates warming when more greenhouse gas is added to the atmosphere is not being effected.

The papers in this post demonstrate that global heating as well as the increase in European temperatures and heatwave intensity and persistence is largely caused by emissions of greenhouse gases and loss of sequestration and not by natural variation.

🐒

Jonathan says ‘Israel may be a rogue state but it is a rogue state made entirely in the western elite’s image. The West’s only real concern is in ensuring its own publics don’t realise, as they watch a genocidal state disappear the Palestinians, that they are looking into the mirror.’

No Jonathan Cook this is not the Western elites in oil and arms real concern. They actively encourage us to regard the ‘state’ as the enemy and to fear that we’re all going to end up in panopticons or killed like the Palestinians.

What the elites fear is that their publics, read consumers, will realise that we are the ones enabling the genocides and continued neo-colonial oppression; with our wilfully ignorant lifestyles. We therefore have the power to stop them if we wished.

The mirror that we’re looking into isn’t the fate of the Palestinians but the actions of the Israelis.

Stirring fear of the ‘state’, AI, surveillance and that our fate is that of the Palestinians avoids looking at who and what supports heinous Israel. Focusing on Israeli actions helps the public to avoid facing;-

a) how our own lifestyles and continued support for US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, pharma, tech, media and arms maintains the hated status quo in Israel; it being 100% dependent on them.

b) how are own lifestyles accelerate the climate crisis that these colonial interests geopolitically benefit from, how they cause inequity all over the world and take take food away from the indigenous; cattle owned by foreigners often have plenty of land and food and the people very little.

c) how US based interests have politically captured our government who obediently sanction Russia, increase our military spending, buy US made weapons, arm and train neonazis in Ukraine, block peace deals, spread Russophobic propaganda and prepare the UK to be fed through the meat grinder of proxy war in which 100,000s of Ukrainians and Russians have already needlessly died- all to the detriment of the British people- and with barely a peep from alternative media who are myopically focused on purposefully grotesque Israel.

The war in Ukraine is not the result of democrats being miffed at losing in 2016 nor NATO or EU ‘globalists’ taking away our sovereignty. This is propaganda from US interests in arms and oil that they can hide behind. Politics is theatre and politicians and the EU are puppets.

Hurrying other people into the whole truth that they are being lied to and mislead by both mainstream and alternative media, and by whom and why, is far preferable to patronisingly and arrogantly drip feeding them what we think they can handle and understand. The public can then understand why and how the mainstream media publishes such biased and infuriating ‘journalism’; without us in alternative media having to constantly explain it to them. The whole truth does not confuse them, hurt the ‘left’s’ cause nor stuff up the comments section. It allows conflicts all over the world to suddenly and easily make sense. People can then base important and urgent decisions on all the facts.

I make no apology. I shall continue to ‘troll’ and express frustration at a writer’s lack of accountability and urgency and at their obsession with a deliberate mind-blowingly grotesque distraction provided by US corporate interests that, disastrously for us, these interests continue to hide behind.

🐒

This would seriously harm US based profits and undermine their power. They’d far rather we dreamt of revolution than focused on climate change and avoiding proxy war with Russia.

These interests make out that Palestine is a testing ground for the surveillance and assassinations that may soon be applied to us; their ‘real’ target. They want us to identify with Palestinians rather than as who we actually are; the class who enable genocide by our continued support for US based big oil. They flatter us that they’re preparing to use new technology to suppress revolutionary uprising. They don’t fear this or us at all but rather are happy for us to identify as rebels; all the while we are conforming.

I maintain that hope in a revolution, projected vaguely into the future, dismantling and rebuilding, without a plan, the entire western world is by far the most popular option with us, and with them, precisely because it obviates the need for personal change in our luxuries.

The inherent contradictions between human rights and enforced measures for the public ‘good’ during the pandemic of testing made an inevitable, desired and deliberately created social backlash against big government. The focus on government and state as the problem allows the giant interests who control them to continue to extract, exploit and pollute with impunity.

Both the ‘covid’ dissenters on the right, such as Mike Yeadon, say that opposing digital IDs is the most important thing we must do and Jonathan Cook and Caitlin Johnstone on the left, who fear surveillance, panopticons and police robot dogs, have been manipulated into this mind set.

The people who control us, and who already watch everything we do, did this. We can knock ourselves out being ‘against’ AI and Big Brother; but meanwhile we continue with our lifestyles that support the very people who control us and sleep walk into the meat grinder of their proxy wars.

They’d far rather we blamed Microsoft for everything and feared state authoritarianism than realised they put this information on social media, not to normalise it, but to deliberately stir up social media anger and fear. It’s this raging that these interests hide behind.

The continued burning of fossil fuels, the eating of animals and the fake threats of Putin, Iran or China, leading to increased military spending and a widening of proxy wars, also increase climate change. Climate change will affect the Global Majority first and worst. A lucky break for the US interests who are more than happy to weaken, if not destroy, their rivals.

Hugely accelerating environmental crises and war are the major life and death issues of our time; not jobs being taken by AI, mechanisation of policing, authoritarianism, already existing total surveillance nor age restrictions on the internet.

The interests driving both climate change and war are happy for us to stick our heads in the social media digital sandstorm that they themselves created.

🐒

Admittedly our patriarchal conditioning, marketing and political capture of government and media have made it difficult for us; but many of us have been knowingly doing accelerating the climate crisis and global inequity for years.

The unequal share of wealth and power by the ‘capitalists’ would never have happened without our continued buying into their products while knowing their effects.

We allowed ourselves the wilful ignorance of thinking that flying on holiday, or for our important work, and driving around in our cars was somehow OK or that ‘grass-fed/regen/holistic’ animal farming was in any way sustainable, scaleable and a fair distribution of land or that it had answered all the questions about animal welfare and exploitation.

I’m not suggesting we now live in caves or under bridges or wear hair shirts.

I suggest we accept the fact of our knowing complicity and stop trying to blame everything on outside forces or on other people.

I suggest we accept that although we are happy to repost, march, rant and protest we still have no will to change our lifestyles in order to keep the world within 2°C (that’s probably not even possible) of warming and to address continued colonialism.

I suggest that we still accept ourselves with unconditional compassion even while acknowledging this.

And if you think this is a cop out; know that berating and shaming ourselves and each other has had only a minimal effect on improving the situation, indeed, they quite possibly have made it worse.

Change comes because we want it; not because we tell ourselves it’s the right thing to do. Should have, would have, could have. There is only what is. This is how we actually are.

What is happening is what is happening; whether we like it or not and whether we accept it or not.

I suggest unconditional compassionate acceptance, firstly and foremostly for ourselves, is always going to help.

🐒

We would have to reach zero emissions by about 3035. We’ve left it so late; we would have to change everything.

We are effectively choosing to exceed 2 degrees of warming, with all its attendant instability, droughts, fires, floods and agricultural failures.

That is all.

🐒

When the US billionaires went to China; I don’t think it was to make deals. I think it was a willy-waving exercise of US potency (Trump’s claim of being over 6ft were also called into question as he seems to be the same height as Xi, whose about 5’ 10’‘.) The boys were saying ‘see, we still have the richest people in the world.’

Mine’s this big.

Though emotional and irrational the US still has clinical ability with propaganda and manipulation of the narrative in both mainstream and alternative media. They’re successful in passing off war with Iran and Russia as the fault of their proxies Israel and the EU (and using their own Islamo and Russophobia). The US based interests in oil and animal ag trash renewables and veganism as part of a plot by ‘globalists’ and they are trying to cut Asia off from energy, as they have with the EU, to create further political dependency. US interests cannot co-exist in a multipolar world- they cannot share power.

They also have the climate crisis on their side; that even clued in pundits have yet to address. This will affect the global south first and worst (though, of course, their proxies and people in America as well). The billionaires hope to retreat to bunkers while the world and US debt burns to re-emerge into their god-given unipolarity once again.

This is why they are actively accelerating the crisis with propaganda that fossil fuels are needed to run, for example, AI centres. US puppet and hate figure Blair recently using the supposed need for data centres for national security as an excuse to double down on North Sea drilling. Data centres could easily run on renewables and be used to optimise integrating them into the grid; plus these centres use between 200 and 20,000 times less water than animal agriculture. If we didn't have any feed lots nor pasture for animal ag, because we don't need to eat other animals at all, 5/6's of agricultural land would be returned for actual rewilding for wild animals and trees, biodiversity would increase, gallons of fresh water would become available and sequestration would increase so much that the world would start cooling even without reducing emissions. This is why big oil and big animal ag throw shade on AI data centres instead.

US interests spread propaganda that anthropogenic climate change is not happening or is ‘alarmism’ by the left wing. They also deliberately accelerate it with the massive co2 emissions from the manufacture of weapons and ammunitions and from the explosions and constant rebuilding that constitute modern warfare.

These posts usually end with admonitions, judgements and suggestions on what best to do about it all. I think some acceptance of what is happening to us is required before we all start advising each other.

Humanity is 100% dependent on the small window of temperature, ecological and whether conditions that grow the food our physiology is adapted to. Whoever’s fault it is; we are rapidly leaving it.

🐒

Those who write the narrative are US based interests in oil, animal ag (including ‘grass-fed’), pharma, tech, news, gambling, finance, narcotics, entertainment, media, automotive (including EVs), aviation, travel, porn and arms.

Counter-narratives work by using heavy-handed crackdowns and lockdowns on human rights supposedly perpetrated by evil villains. The villains; the surveillance state, the WEF, ‘globalists’, Tony Blair, Bill Gates, Peter Thiel, Israel or Jews supposedly use immigrants, AI, ULEZ, bioweapons and green policies to control us. Their actual job is to deflect and distract from the narrative writers.

The aim of the writers is to keep us constantly consuming more and more of their products so that we are fat, sick, lonely, bored, restless, flying away on holiday, on pharmaceutical or narcotic drugs, addicted to petrol, meat, cheese, pornography, doom-scrolling, the news, gaming, gambling, drinking, hating and at war. They need our custom to continue to assert their hegemony over the world.

They are dependent on us; therefore we have agency.

The solution that brings health, independence from the US, world peace and addresses the environmental and climate crises is therefore the same thing. That is why this simple fact is obscured from us.

Stop buying what US based interests are selling- remembering that alternative media are also selling you these things- and help others to do so.

The solution is not as popular as being up in arms and complaining; though it can be peaceful, effective, fun and full of love.

🐒

We’re being led to believe that saying ‘I support Palestine Action’, or even getting arrested for action, is really rocking a system that is threatened by us. It is not and they are not.

Unfortunately, even if they have to take their jobs abroad, they don’t give a shit what we say or do. The controversy is entirely manufactured. Those who control the system are Elbit Systems, BAE systems, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin,Tyson Foods, Cargill, BP, Pfizer, Moderna and Exxon; not the PM, president, Israel nor the ‘state’ as they would have us believe.

We can oppose fascism and the surveillance state until we’re blue in the face. Those actually in control will still be laughing all the way to the bank because we’ll still be supporting them.

As long as we continue to increase military spending for US led proxy war against Russia, drive around in private cars, jet off for ‘well earned’ holidays and consume meat and dairy (yes, including ‘grass-fed’ and greenwashed), all of which, as many of us know, actively supports neo-colonialism, genocide, global inequality and accelerates the climate crisis; we can knock ourselves out supporting Palestine Action.

🐒

To do this they must surround and contain China, its biggest economic rival and therefore enemy No. 1. To this end they must weaken China’s allies; Russia and Iran, the only major nations not politically captured by US interests.

The US, via the NED, CIA and others, politically captures nations with coups, colour revolutions, by stirring unrest and by creating political swings and backlashes. The swing is their aim, they don’t care whether the nation’s government is left, right, neoliberal, far right, eco-populist or nationalist. They use them all.

A case in point is the so-called ‘left wing’ management of ‘covid’ (by placing quotes I don’t mean to imply that nobody died nor became very ill during this time; but to question the made-up syndrome of common and wide-ranging symptoms that were all alleged to have one, infectious cause). The event made a huge amount of money for US based big pharma. However, the incredibly restrictive and unevidenced policies and the suppression of free speech swung much of the public into believing that climate change policies were also without evidence or justification. Thus making a lot of money for oil and animal ag (pharma’s biggest client) who continue to pollute and profit with impunity. The crisis itself is also being accelerated and weaponised as the US believe it will affect the global south more severely.

Suppression of the debate on ‘covid’ happened, not because Pfizer needed to be saved by the judiciary from protestors and marchers, but to create a backlash.

The current proscription of Palestine Action for throwing red paint on an Elbit site is similarly a sledge hammer approach. Can it be that the future and profits of a massive arms company is seriously threatened by such action? Or could the politicians and judges enforcing it be puppets in a massive and deliberate over-reaction?

The Israelis are making themselves as vile and disgusting as possible; claiming they are the master race and carrying out atrocities in front of the world. The support in the press by the over-represented group of journalists who identify as Jewish is illogical and infuriating to those on the ‘left’; could it be for a reason?

Those dissenting against ‘covid’, mostly those on the ‘right’, were targeted with conspiracies about Jews destroying the west. Many fell for it- Yuval Noah Harai was a particular figure of hatred.

The goal of those attempting to convince the public that PA’s opposition to genocide was illegal (that only the political and media class appear to be convinced of) is to deliberately focus attention on the ‘British security state’ and its collusion with genocide and not on those who are really behind the attempt. US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, pharma, tech, media, finance and arms dictate UK policy, have successfully created a backlash against the ‘British security state’ and continue to laugh, quietly, all the way to the bank.

Disgust at Israel is stirred on both ‘left’ and ‘right’. Israel is a useful proxy and scapegoat for the US interests; as well as a rabid attack dog. They take the blame for the US getting its way; attacking Iran, destabilising the ME and extending Iran. Under the ‘deal’ they can continue to bomb Iran’s allies in Lebanon. I can see them being fed through the meat grinder on US’ behalf to weaken Iran; just like Ukraine is to weaken Russia.

Which brings us back to Russia. A split between the US and the UK over Ukraine is currently being sold, and bought, by many. The US told the UK and EU to increase military spending, particularly for US arms, though Elbit also sells weapons to Ukraine. The UK has proudly and dutifully carried out these instructions. The US leaving the UK in the lurch and vulnerable to a (non-existent) threat from Russia helps sell war to the public. However, the ‘covid’ ‘right’ quickly sussed that Putin’s ‘invasion’ was no such thing and was part of ‘Biden’s’ proxy war against Russia, led by the US, using Ukraine. Farage, though not a man of integrity, will find it hard to sell Britain putting boots on the ground. So will Lowe.

Enter Polanski. He is currently being promoted besting journalists on youtube as well as being a target of slurs and threats of arrest. Both add to his reputation and kudos. He is far more likely to take the UK into war with Russia; which is the primary task allotted to the UK at the moment. Could there be a deliberate swing to the pro-Palestine ‘left’ for this reason?

The UK is already at war with Russia; through providing lethal aid, training for neonazis, operational support and intelligence, increasing our military spending as commanded by the US and recently seizing a Russian tanker legally carrying crude oil in British waters (to make US rivals more dependent on US energy). Due to US attacking Iran; renewables may well be receiving a boost, however, they take time to install- in the short term Asia and Europe will become more dependent on US exported LNG. The short term is all the US cares about-it only has a short window within which to contain the rise of China.

I think we can agree that Labour and the Tories are over. The new political theatre being written is between eco-populists and the far-right. Polanski and his supporters have fallen for the lie that the ‘invasion’ of Ukraine presents a threat to the EU and UK. Farage and his have not. Polanski is willing to put more British boots on the ground if ‘necessary’.

The drums of war are beating louder but are drowned out by all the bleating about Israeli influence of MPs. Perhaps we should take care that we are not being manipulated into a swing that will feed British citizens feet first into the meat grinder after the last Ukrainian.

🐒

However, this is not the case. The fear of authoritarianism in the west has been deliberately created. The fear that ‘they’ want to take away our chickens, lock us up and impoverish us was spread, of course, by the chicken industry and the rest of the billionaires. The war in the west is over our addictions, aspirations and comforts that allow the oppression of the rest of the world.

The US led multinationals want us to fear big government so that we forget we have the power to stop the oppression and genocides by those who’ve politically captured our governments. All we need do is stop buying into what they’re selling.

They want us to stop paying taxes (that support social programs) rather than stop paying their profits (that support inequality, war and genocide).

Dreams of a socialist revolution against the global capitalists are also sold to prevent effective action against them.

If we all stopping buying (and provided alternatives and assistance for others to do so) into US based fossil fuels, animal foods and products, cars, luxury, convenience, growth, entertainment, news, foreign holidays and travel (both research and journalism can be done by locals), Google, Amazon, cheap goods, gambling, narcotics and pharmaceuticals; the major corporations who control the world would be bankrupted.

The irony being that this would also slow imminent doom from anthropogenic climate change; that they’ve also managed to throw doubt on in the minds of millions. Green renewables, black immigrants and age controls on the internet are, of course, not inherently problems. However, they’ve cleverly got us resisting them as part of a plot to crush us. This prevents us addressing the huge inherent problems of climate change, global inequality, pornography and control by the algorithm; all are directly caused by our buying into their products and propaganda. The billionaires only have the power that we in the west give them.

We could stop. So why don’t we?

🐒

US based interests don’t just want to shut people up: they’re much cleverer than that. Big oil, animal ag, pharma, media and arms want to appear to censor people, give them an audience on ‘alternative media’ by revealing partial truths to draw others in and then manipulate or dictate to these people into what to say. They’ve been extremely successful at it.

Alternative media balances and complements mainstream media.

Broadly:-

Alternative media believes that the anthropogenic climate crisis is a hoax or is exaggerated. This complements the mainstream apparent acceptance of climate change yet silence on its causes and urgency. US based big oil and big animal ag are allowed to continue to profit, pollute and accelerate the crisis with impunity.

Alternative media got a big boost from the ‘covid’ debacle but quickly became a vehicle for spreading propaganda that benefits big oil and big animal (who happen to be pharma’s biggest client by far); whether this was knowingly done or not.

Alternative media think that either Trump/Polanski/Mandini/Farage are fighting the deep state and therefore spend hours talking about politicians. As does MSM. Both deflect from those actually running our countries.

Alternative media think that we should disobey and organise a revolution rather than cease to buy into the products of those who are actually running our countries.

Alternative media believes that the problem is Israel, Zionists or globalists rather than US interests. This balances the mainstream that the problem is terrorists, Russia or China rather than US interests. No one addresses the problem.

Both alternative and mainstream media are tools of US based interests.

🐒

Every sneer at an ‘anti-vaxxer’ (someone who’d read the research or was standing up for the right to personal autonomy) and every aggressive swipe at JK (protecting women and girl’s rights under the Equality Act) was a boost for Farage.

Climate scientists didn’t help with the rubbish that they wrote about ‘covid’ and vaccination: people could be justified in thinking they knew nothing about climate science either.

Influential climate science youtubers such as potholer54 insist that Mike Yeadon is wrong on mask wearing efficacy; although on this Yeadon is correct.

Of course, ‘covid’ dissenters were immediately targeted with well funded propaganda, from the Heartland Institute and others, about the climate crisis being a hoax by globalists wishing to impoverish us and destroy us with armies of black immigrants This, obviously to me, protects the profits of those behind both ‘covid’ and gender ideology ie US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, pharma, auto, finance, tech, media, entertainment and arms- as well as supporting useful white, patriarchal, racist, christian nationalism and Islamophobia for hot and cold war with Iran, Russia and ultimately China.

Unfortunately most of health freedom fighters fell for the WEF plot hook, line and sinker. Reform supporters wish to scrap any policy on climate change or animal welfare that harms the profits of the US based industries who control the UK.

JK and the other gender criticals were also targeted with misleading information on Palestine, immigration and shit-stirring over poorly handled policies regarding ethnic background creating pro-Israel sentiment and outright Islamophobia. Unfortunately many, including JK, are buying into it.

Take home message? Beware of your algorithm. Open your mind. Think for yourself.

Every sneer at ‘anti-vaxxers’, every call by leading philosophers and politicians for the unvaccinated to be isolated, every blind, virtuous acceptance, every dismissal of scientific debate as conspiracy thinking by ‘troofers’ were not only gifts to the ‘right’; they were also gifts to massive US based industries in fossil fuels, animal ag and their sister pharma.

🐒

Banksy, London

As the US based war of aggression on Iran continues to cut Asia's access to Iranian oil (the US having already cut the EU’s access to Russian gas).

As they continue to control global energy and create a monopoly for US LNG.

As the UK and EU governments continue to up military spending as dictated by US masters in arms and fossil fuels although no country, apart from the US, is a threat to them.

And as the UK prepares to send her citizens feet first into the meat grinder of the US provoked proxy war against Russia after the last Ukrainian:-

this statue couldn't be more apt or powerful.

It can also be read as being blinded to the bigger picture of US based interest’s war on China by all the countering we’re doing after the absurd accusations of antisemitism for criticising Israel.

The statue can also be read as the blindness of those protecting the US based interests in fossil fuels, animal ag, auto, arms, AI and pharma, as well as those with allegiance to the manifest destiny of the white, nominally-christian patriarchy; who are leading us all into the human catastrophe of the climate crisis that these interests are largely responsible for.

🐒

They do this by creating markets and monopolies for their products.

They create fictional ‘globalists’, allegedly controlling us by faking or exaggerating the climate crisis, in order to protect the profits of their own industries.

They shame, intimidate or physically arrest and abuse us for any dissent over their control.

They insist that protest against their actions is ‘anti-semitic’.

That standing up for reality and the Equality act is ‘transphobic’.

That questioning their unevidenced ‘covid’ rules means we don’t care about the elderly and are unpatriotic.

Oil

By smearing renewables, ridiculing environmentalists, blowing up gas pipelines from Russia and cutting Asia off from oil from the ME. Capturing politicians and kidnapping presidents

Animal Ag and sister industry Pharma

By smearing plant based food, ridiculing vegans. Greenwashing farmsteads and ‘grass-fed’.

Pharma

By creating fear of a deadly virus to market a vaccine. By organising ‘lockdowns’ that increased profits for gambling and junk food. By funding absurd gender ideology requiring brutal surgery and life-long drugs. By keeping us fat, sick and on drugs.

Arms

Painting multipolarism, particularly China, as the enemy. Forcing their vassals, such as Japan, to build the military equipment necessary for a war. Forcing the UK to take over the proxy war using Ukraine to weaken Russia.

Legacy and Social Media and Entertainment

Promoting all of the above with sophisticated targeted algorithms using partial awareness of some of the above stirring white nationalism, support for the patriarchy as well as for oil, animal ag and thus their sister industry pharma. They keep us lonely and divided.

As veganism, preventative medicine, co-operation, the climate crisis and multipolarity has grown, so has the grip of US based interests.

We step out of it by ceasing to buy into their propaganda and products and going the other way.

🐒

The lie that ‘viruses’ are mainly responsible for causing ill-health and that we need big pharma to inject healthy day old babies or shut down half the world to wait for a vaccine comes from the same place as the lie that ‘globalists’ are faking climate change to control us. They may each have been targeted differently, however, it should be obvious where the lies and the algorithms originate from.

Who stands to gain?

Massive industries with huge lobbying power; the US based interests in hydrocarbons, animal ag (including ‘farmsteads’ and ‘grass-fed’), animal ag’s sister industry pharma, finance, AI, tech, media, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, narcotics, entertainment, junk food, motor cars, military equipment and arms. These industries are run by white, nominally christian, men who wish to retain power. They do this by fooling us that nature is trying to kill us, by smearing alternative and preventative medicine and by casting doubt on a climate crisis or telling us it’s all caused by CIA ‘chemtrails’ and weather modification. Belief in ‘globalist’ plots aiming to destroy sovereignty with armies of immigrants also helps to stir up racism and nationalism and maintain the white, patriarchal status quo.

Why spread these lies?

To deflect from the real causes of disease; malnutrition, chronic stress, impoverishment, inequality, saturated animal fat, lack of exercise, lack of fresh water, fruit and vegetables, loneliness, isolation, pharmaceuticals, vaccines, long-term antibiotic use, pollution and rising temperatures; ie themselves. And, of course, continue to make lots of money, by exploiting, polluting and profiting with impunity.

Why do people believe these lies?

People tend to believe what they want to hear. That they’re not responsible for their own health. That the major causes of disease in developing countries isn’t lack of pharmaceuticals but exploitation by the above industries. That they don’t have to worry about burning fossil fuels or eating other animals. That the climate crisis isn’t happening.

Have they been successful?

Both lies, and targeting, have proven to be very effective. If a person sees through one; they are brainwashed into believing the other.

What to do?

Look at the evidence with open minds. Look at the US based industries and their profits.

🐒

Yes, US interests want to control global energy supply.

Yes, the US wants war, division and instability; it’s profitable and suits their agenda.

Yes, the US wants One World Government, but based in Washington and Wall Street; not Davos.

Yes, the US wants to enslave, make dependent and remove sovereignty of nations and individuals; but using propaganda, poverty, inequality, racism, the algorithm, consumerism, fear, loneliness and political capture; not sustainable development goals aimed at combating them.

Yes, the want to impoverish and destroy their rivals but using the climate crisis, that they're largely responsible for, not policies trying to mitigate it.

Yes, they want to depopulate; so that their white descendants can re-emerge into primacy in the future.

They are, of course, insane.

🐒