Deceit behind global warming by Christopher Booker and Richard North

November 4, 2007 at 8:48 am | Posted in Climate change, Lies, Propaganda, Remembrance, War | 5 Comments

Telegraph Remembrance Poppy logoEARTH MOST VIEWED
The deceit behind global warming
Christopher Booker and Richard North reveal the distortion behind global warming.
04 Nov 2007

The title speaks for itself.

The article ends thus:

If global warming does turn out to have been a scare like all the others, it will certainly represent as great a collective flight from reality as history has ever recorded. The evidence of the next 10 years will be very interesting.

“Very interesting”? Indeed. Armoured observation posts at the ready.

Under the special seasonal Telegraph banner commemorating Remembrance Day, this article, The deceit behind global warming, exemplifies the twisted horrors of wartime propaganda. Its penning and printing is a disgrace to all those who fought on the Western Front as well as the Home Front for King and country in the first global war, WWI.

Both my grandfathers spent years suffering in the trenches in The Great War to protect the lives of those of us who came after, and it has been said that ‘an Allied victory led to the maintenance and even extension of liberal democracy in Europe.‘ Now we see their efforts being overturned by the powers accrued by *special* interests, whose malevolent operations endanger us all.

War veterans would turn in their graves if they saw now that a paper that describes itself as “Britain’s No.1 quality newspaper website” prints articles like this—full of deception, acting against the best interests of humankind, while flying the Remembrance Day banner—and under the section heading “Earth news”. This is completely dishonourable. Quality propaganda for *special* interests’ gain is not news. It is horrid.



RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. Your link doesn’t work for me. This does.
    [Oh, sorry, William. Thanks for correcting my faulty link.]

  2. Its not just deception, bits of it are simple direct lies. “For instance, he claimed that by the end of this century world sea levels will have risen by 20 ft”, or “His graph now concedes that the hottest year of the 20th century was not 1998 but 1934”. But these people have a book to sell, and the Torygraph has retired Colonels to pander to.

  3. Yes. You are correct on the first one, and the second one is quibble-worthy. Not by me, but by a lawyer, who would argue that “his graph” is defined in the prior sentence as “his influential record of US surface temperatures” which provides a loophole that prevents the term “lie” from being hung on that one. They have been pretty clever to mislead without too many outright lies in this piece, which is exactly the way to produce credible propaganda 😉

  4. It seems like the UK is suffering an increase in denialist/contrarian press akin to that we’ve had in the US for quite a while, unfortunately. OR, is that just my recent impression, sensitized by watching Viscount Monckton’s efforts? [Please, take him back, an unwelcome import to US.]

    Also, I’ve recently run across the Scientific Alliance folks, who seem all too akin to the thinktanks and fronts around Washington, DC. Are there many more like that in UK?

  5. Anyone know how to reach Booker and North? I’ve got a little offer for them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: