PLEASE send your letters (as short as you like) to info@conservativewoman.co.uk and mark them ‘for possible publication’. We need your name and if possible, a county address, eg Yorkshire or London. We will include biographical details if you volunteer them. Letters may be shortened.
***
All aboard the Climate Gravy Train
Dear Editor,
Since the Climate Change Express left Berlin in 1995 (COP1) it has become increasingly crowded with the world’s scientists, politicians, carbon traders and journalists. Now renamed the Climate Gravy Train, it departs Egypt after its 27th stop en route to COP28 where it will pull into the desert city of Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, the playground of the rich built from oil with immigrant labour and with possibly the largest carbon footprint in the world. Another carriage will have been added to accommodate vociferous representatives from the poor, ‘exploited’ nations of the world which now seek ‘reparations’ amounting to £253billion by 2030 for loss and damage incurred as a consequence of emissions from developed nations. Green zealots are there at every stop applauding new arrivals and hailing the swelling numbers as vindication of their moral crusade to save the planet. The tickets are not cheap. If the Climate Gravy Train’s occupants finally arrive at their chosen Net Zero destination in 27 years’ time (2050) the cumulative global cost will have reached the unfathomable sum of around £8.4trillion. However, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres at COP27 maintained that this is all for the good because it will have been money wisely spent in diverting us from what he portentously describes as the ‘highway to climate hell’.
This is a powerful but wholly inappropriate alliance between politics, science and the media. It is perfectly summed up by the former Director of International Arctic Research, Syun- Ichi Akasofu who said ‘Sceptics don’t doubt science, they doubt unscientific claims cloaked in the authority of science.’ A couple of examples illustrate this point. The frequently repeated 97 per cent scientific consensus on human caused climate change has been shown in a recent study to have been a manipulation of data. It revealed that this figure shrank to just 8.2 per cent of scientists who explicitly agreed with the theory. A number of these consensus scientists are aboard the Climate Gravy Train as they seek to further their careers and secure ‘research’ funding regardless of the fact that their computer models have proved to be consistently inaccurate. Many sectors of the media are also party to further exaggerations and deceit when they perpetually ascribe every extreme weather event to human emissions. A recent critical assessment from the European Physical Journal Plus revealed no significantly increased extreme trends in global weather. Never slow to sense a moneymaking opportunity, a new breed of Green Capitalists, the carbon traders, are also cashing in to the tune of some £716billion last year.
Although carbon is only one very small component of a huge range of factors that influence climate, politicians see fit to boost their depleted coffers and manipulate our behaviour by imposing carbon taxes on any businesses that fail to comply with their reduction targets in the deluded belief that this will control the climate.
Neil J Bryce
Kelso
Climate activists blow hot and cold
Dear Editor
I was struck by the reference to climate activists of the 70s and 80s made in the sermon Guy Phoenix had to endure: that they were allegedly treated as crackpots. It is important to distinguish concerns about climate and concerns about the environment: we can certainly do something about looking after the environment, but climate is a different issue and should be treated as such. I seem to remember that the activism in the 70s and 80s was mostly on environmental issues, and often treated sympathetically. The specifically climate anxieties of the 70s were about the threat of global cooling. There is a famous cover of Time showing glaciers advancing on Manhattan, and scientists were warning of imminent disaster if action was not taken immediately to avert an ice age. The narrative switched to global warming during the1980s. In fact the real climate science is now showing some cooling globally (especially in North America and the southern hemisphere) with further cooling predicted over the next few decades. We should be preparing for a return of more severe winters.
Phil Beckley
Lancs
***
Let’s teach protesters a lesson
Dear Editor,
A fitting ‘penalty’ for those whose protests cause disproportionate or dangerous disruption: Let them be required to obtain an accredited level of knowledge of chemistry, biology and statistics (such as required for university entrance). If necessary, detain them for as long as it takes.
Paul Gregory
Haute-Loire, France
***
Wake up to eco-reality
Dear Editor
There is a large spanner in the works about to hit ‘renewable’ advocates head on. The incontrovertible fact is that no transition from fossil fuels to ‘green’ energy sources is under way, nor will it occur, ever.
Why? Because wind and solar installations are entirely parasitic: they cannot be produced without using enormous quantities of fossil fuels.
A major, painstaking study for the Finland Geological Survey (GTK) by Professor Simon Michaux, Professor of Geometallurgy, found the necessary amounts of certain minerals, their mining and processing, to be impossibly large.
For example, at 2019 production levels, it would take 10,000 years to mine the lithium and 29,000 years for the germanium needed for just one generation of technology to replace fossil fuels. All will require frequent running replacement.
This means that every projection that anyone has made of the ultimate cost of a wind and solar economy is vastly too low. It also means that the cost of pretty much everything else we buy, from cars to cell phones and anything that requires equipment to produce, will also rise beyond the resources of the average consumer. In short, a cripplingly expensive, self-inflicted environmental disaster.
It’s time for the gullible to wake up – the cure is a great deal worse than the disease!
George Herraghty
Moray
***
Bond villains in charge – but no 007 to rescue us
Dear Editor
I remember, when I was a young mum in the late 1970s/80s, there were marches around Europe against Globalism. As I was a struggling single parent, through no fault of my own, I didn’t have the time or money to get involved. I thought that it was a waste of time as marches rarely change anything.
Looking back I wish that everyone had taken more notice as our world today has changed beyond belief. Many years ago I felt we were rushing blindly into danger. Those people rich beyond anyone’s wild imagination have the power. Gates, Bezos, Musk etc, and those who stay in the shadows, pulling the strings as money is power. I compared them to the Bond villains who want to rule the world but we have no James Bond to ride to the rescue. I was derided loudly by my children, now adults, and friends smiled benignly while wondering how long it would be before I was sectioned. I have recently heard two national broadcasters say the same thing.
With Gates talking about compulsory lockdowns and forced vaccinations in future pandemics, social media and our education system pushing the socialist agenda, and vacuous ‘influencers’ affecting our children’s views on life, I think we have rushed into a dead-end and wonder if there will ever be a chink of light at the end where we can escape and try to get some sanity, individualism and common sense back into the world.
We let the ultra-rich influence the world at our peril, their tentacles slither into every aspect of our lives and the leaders of our countries are only too willing to listen to them.
Once a home of our own was just that, a family home, now they are an investment and buy to lets are common, no matter that it prices ordinary people out of the market. We seem to value ourselves on how much wealth we accumulate and not how we live our lives.
All the calls now are for the government to give us free money, help people with their mortgages, energy bills etc – there is no sense of individual responsibility. It depresses me.
Rowena Wood
***
Living without a smartphone is easier said than done
Dear Editor
I have just read today’s excellent but too brief article by Francoise Thompson titled ‘This sinister smartphone takeover’. https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/this-sinister-smartphone-takeover/
About seven years ago, flying off for a week’s skiing, I resolved that on my return flight I would have used the time on the piste to figure out how to live without a smartphone. Needless to say I failed. I would be interested if Francoise Thompson has any suggestions.
Oliver Wells
London
***
Sorry, sir, I forgot to ask if you are pregnant
Dear Editor
A 47-year-old gentleman, a large strong physically active gentleman, was admitted to our hospital with an ST elevation myocardial infarction (heart attack).
The policy now is that patients of either sex under 56 should be asked if they could be pregnant.
The patient was treated as is normal fashion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (an immediate procedure to open the blocked heart artery). This procedure went very well and the patient is expected to make a good recovery. As a part of this procedure the groin has to be shaved, so the patient’s genitals will almost invariably be seen, albeit briefly.
The member of staff who is meant to ask about pregnancy forgot to do this prior to the procedure. As such the staff member (in order to fulfil the audit requirements) had to go to the ward to perform a ‘duty of candour’, telling the patient that he had forgotten to ask him whether he was pregnant.
The patient took this well but it does demonstrate the invasion of gender theory into a life and death situation in healthcare.
Name supplied
***
The working classes know they’ve been conned
Dear Editor
The theory of Marxism, the end of the bourgeoisie and the rise of the oppressed proletariat, has never happened in any society that is called communist. The rich middle classes, who seem to really like this doctrine, are the ones who still remain in charge. I don’t think terms like naive or idealist can really describe these people. What they like is a system that can disrupt and oppress people while remaining rich and content themselves. They have had a bumper two years with Covid, BLM and climate change being used to force ideologies on people while causing actual poverty, just as happened in countries such as USSR, China and present-day Zimbabwe. It is families from the working classes, who were very pro-Labour, who finally realised they had been conned and voted first UKIP and then Brexit who are the proletariat and it’s the bourgeoisie who are trying to thwart their wishes.
Kathleen Carr
Sheffield
***
MPs need to remember what they are for
This letter, sent to a reader’s MP, was kindly shared with TCW.
Open letter to Fleur Anderson, Labour MP for Putney, Roehampton & Southfields
Dear Ms Anderson,
Subject: E-petition debate on Covid-19 vaccine injuries and deaths
Last year I wrote to you to express my strong opposition to all Covid vaccine mandates, whether for care-workers or healthcare workers, which the government ultimately withdrew for the latter at the eleventh hour. I included in my e-mail medical data flagging up some of the known wide-ranging risks of these experimental products.
You responded with the slogan that such measures were essential to ‘protect the most vulnerable in society’, as if blackmailing a much-needed workforce on pain of loss of employment, which subsequently caused the exodus of some 40,000 care workers, was ever destined to ‘protect the vulnerable’.
In the recent debate on vaccine injury organised by members of the APPG, it was encouraging to observe Danny Kruger, member for Devizes, have the humility and integrity to publicly acknowledge that he was ‘particularly ashamed of his own vote to dismiss care-workers who did not want to take the vaccine’, as reported in TCW. He referenced the fact he now knew the vaccines did not prevent infection and therefore transmission, as Pfizer had recently been forced to admit those were never endpoints of their clinical trials.
Non-parliamentarians have been aware of this for a long time, not only because it was there for all to witness in real time how many people fell ill with Covid who had been fully ‘vaccinated’, but because the caches of Pfizer clinical trial data prised out of the US Food and Drug Administration by order of a judge, thanks to two lawsuits brought by the organisation Public Health and Medical Practitioners for Transparency in 2021, were analysed by groups of independent scientists and shared with the public.
Many people who contacted their MPs to raise their concerns about these injections have been brushed off with empty rhetoric such as that the vaccines have been rigorously tested for safety and efficacy and that the MHRA monitors adverse effects and acts appropriately, when nothing could be further from the truth. It is an insult to constituents’ intelligence who well understand that a medical regulator primarily funded by the companies which produce the drugs and vaccines it regulates is not interested in health.
With few notable exceptions it seems to have escaped MPs that in a representative democracy their role is to engage with the concerns of their constituents, who in this instance are clearly better informed than they, undertake genuinely independent research and act accordingly. Instead, against the law and in breach of all standards of ethics, Parliament has acted to coerce people into taking experimental injections without informed consent, which will have far-reaching consequences into the future.
Serena Wylde
End gold-plated pensions for the public sector
Dear Editor
The Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, is looking for ways to close a £50billion black hole in the public sector finances. In the private sector there are very few final salary schemes because they are far too expensive for employers. However no such problem exists for the public sector and politicians where final salary pension schemes are paid for by the taxpayer and council taxpayer. Politicians should lead by example and change to a cheaper defined contribution scheme in which pay-outs are based on contributions from both employer and employee. New employees in the public sector should only be offered the defined contribution scheme and if they do not like it then they refuse the job. Others will be queuing up. This suggestion and a freeze on politicians’ salaries and on public sector salaries of over £70,000 should recoup the £50billion within a few years.
Clark Cross
Linlithgow
***
World Cup logic
Dear Editor
Conversation between a footballer and a sensible person:
SP. Do you think it is right to tell another race of people how they should treat gays?
F. Err. What do you mean?
SP. Well you are objecting to the Omanis’ laws about gays.
F. Well yes. It’s wrong. They shouldn’t be like that.
SP. Who says they shouldn’t?
F. Err. It’s obvious innit.
SP. Why is it obvious?
F. Well it is.
SP. But clearly the Omanis don’t think it is.
F. Well they are wrong. It’s obvious
SP. But if it’s obvious and they don’t agree then they must be stupid.
F. Yes. I suppose so.
SP. So you are calling the Omanis stupid.Isn’t that rather racist?
F. runs away
James
