From the Daily Skeptic
Chris Morrison
Heavier and longer summer monsoon rains are said to be leading to an increase in child marriages in Pakistan, AFP reported. Human rights workers warn that such weddings are on the rise “due to climate-driven economic insecurity”. It's a great story because it raises a small hope that banning the use of hydrocarbons can help solve the problem of coercion and the abuse of underage women that has been prevalent in many cultures since ancient times. The truth is really sad. According to the World Bank's Climate Change Knowledge Portal, Pakistan's monsoon rainfall in June, July and August during 1991-2020 was slightly less than during 1961-1990.
In an error-ridden article reprinted by numerous publications around the world, France's state agency claimed that floods in Pakistan in 2022 left a third of the country under water. Judging from the contour maps, this is unlikely – even impossible – and the true inundation rate is about 8-10%. Even the BBC statistics program more or less Much lower figures were confirmed. Agence France-Presse stated that “scientists say” climate change is making monsoons more intense and longer-lasting, “increasing the risk of landslides, floods and long-term crop damage.” This is said to have led to a new trend of “monsoon brides” as families give up their daughters for money. But massive flooding in low-lying areas of Pakistan is not new. In the recent past — 1950, 1992, 1993 and 2010 — it has killed more people than it will in 2022.
The AFP nonsense is just the latest in a wave of mainstream fear-mongering aimed at driving the Net Zero movement. It plays on emotional themes and highlights unverifiable claims of human-caused climate damage. The sentiment is palpable, but misrepresentations are made about rainfall levels and inundation in recent floods. Do the people who write these things think that no one will check their facts and sources? Apparently not.
The AGF is the French national agency dedicated to guiding the world to embrace net zero emissions. The climate aspect is led by Marlo Hood, a self-proclaimed “pioneer of the Anthropocene.” Of course, all this bodes well for Hood, who was recently awarded £88,000 by the foundation arm of a Spanish bank heavily involved in green technology financing. Most recently, he was instrumental in organizing the eventual retraction of a paper written by several Italian physics professors that examined climate and weather data published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and concluded The conclusion that there is no climate emergency.
The professors, led by Professor Gianluca Alimonti of the University of Milan, found that rainfall intensity and frequency are static in many parts of the world. Other meteorological categories, including natural disasters, floods, droughts and ecosystem productivity, showed no “clear positive trends in extreme events.” None of this will come as a surprise to anyone who has read the IPCC report, but Hood claimed the data was “grossly manipulated” and “fundamentally flawed”. Prominent science writer Roger Pielke Jr. reported on the Alimonti scandal in detail, noting that “the hoax in climate science continues, with influential scientists and journalists teaming up to undermine peer review.”
Three AFP writers are currently taking a six-month sabbatical from the latest Oxford Climate Journalism Network (OCJN) course, funded by elite billionaire money including Sir Christopher Hohn Donations to the eco-mobs in Extinction Rebellion. They are Ivan Kurona, Earth's future Editor, Sara Hussain, Earth's future Journalist and news agency editor Linda Tone. The course immerses students in the politically correct narrative surrounding climate “breakdown”, so-called “established” science and the need for extreme net zero measures. This term, BBC participants include senior climate reporter Becky Dale and BBC Arabic London-based Samah Hanaysha. Interestingly, all of these players will be joined by Ellen Ormesher of DeSmog, a foundation-funded organization that publishes a “blacklist” of so-called climate deniers. Sadly, the list doesn't seem to be updated regularly these days, probably because it's gotten too big!
Past OCJN spokespeople have suggested “fines and jail time” for those who express doubts about “well-supported” science and warned reporters against using photos of people enjoying themselves outdoors in “extreme” summer weather. Childish advice was provided, asking participants to write a story about mangoes and discuss why mangoes don't taste as good as they did the year before due to climate change.
All of this explains how stories about climate change leading to more child marriages are ending up in increasingly unpopular print. Paul Homewood has chronicled the BBC's climate scandal for the past three years and summed up this year's edition in yesterday's show daily skeptic. It noted the many cries that added joy to the nation. We laugh a lot when we think of Matt – “Yeah, we don't have bananas” – and McGrath reports that climate change poses a huge threat to banana supplies. Since the 1960s, production has increased sixfold. Or stop drinking beer and peeing. Obviously the weather in Kent can get too hot for growing hops, although this won't be a problem for growers in warm central European climates, but again don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. Then there's the dying coral reef, and in the real world, the Great Barrier Reef continues to show staggering record levels of growth. Finally, we have the much-loved rare bird watching story. Last year, black-winged stilts migrated north due to climate change. According to ornithological reports, it appears to have been this way for hundreds of years. In 1684, a passerine unfortunate enough to be passing by was even shot. Attending a climate grooming course funded by elite billionaires with a clear political agenda would terrify any independent investigative journalist.
As Homewood points out, many people have concluded that the BBC’s coverage of climate change cannot be trusted. His comments apply equally to many other mainstream media outlets. “For years, their treatment has been one-sided, full of misinformation and sometimes factual errors, and the omission of other perspectives and unpleasant facts,” he observed. Indeed.
Chris Morrison is daily skepticEnvironment editor.
Relevant
