Authored by Chris Morrison via DailySceptic.org,
Heavier and longer summer monsoon rains are said to be fuelling a rise in child marriages in Pakistan, reports Agence France-Presse (AFP). Human rights workers are warning such weddings are on the rise “due to climate-driven economic insecurity”. Great story since it holds out a small hope that banning hydrocarbon use can help solve a problem of forced and under-aged female abuse that has been endemic in many cultures since time immemorial. It is just a shame about the facts. According to the World Bank climate change knowledge portal, monsoon rains in June, July and August in the period 1991-2020 were marginally less in Pakistan than fell during 1961-1990.
In an error-strewn article reproduced in many publications around the world, the French State-owned agency claimed that flooding in Pakistan in 2022 plunged a third of the country under water. Looking at a contour map would show this is unlikely – impossible even – and the true level of inundation was around 8-10%. Even the BBC’s statistical programme More or Less confirmed the much lower figures. AFP claims that “scientists say” climate change is making the monsoons heavier and longer, “raising 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 away their female children in exchange for money. But massive flooding in low-lying parts of Pakistan is not new. In the recent past – in 1950, 1992, 1993 and 2010 – it killed more people than it did in 2022.
The AFP nonsense story is just the latest in a tidal wave of mainstream fear-mongering designed to boost Net Zero. It takes an emotional theme and tacks on unprovable claims of climate damage caused by humans. The emotion is obvious, but false claims about the volume of rainfall and the inundation of a recent flood are made. Do the people who write this stuff think that nobody will check their facts and sources? Apparently not.
AGF is an organ of the French State and it is all in on grooming the world to accept Net Zero. The climate side is run by Marlowe Hood who describes himself as the “Herald of the Anthropocene”. Certainly, all this heralding seems to be very profitable for Hood who was recently awarded £88,000 by the Foundation arm of a Spanish bank heavily involved in financing green technologies. Recently, he played a major part in organising the eventual retraction of a paper written by a number of Italian physics professors who examined climate and weather data put out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and concluded there was no climate emergency.
Led by Professor Gianluca Alimonti of Milan University, the professors found that rainfall intensity and frequency was static in many parts of the world. Other meteorological categories including natural disasters, floods, droughts and ecosystem productivity showed no “clear positive trend of extreme events”. None of this would be much of a surprise to anyone who has read the IPCC reports, but Hood claimed the data was “grossly manipulated” and “fundamentally flawed”. The distinguished science writer Roger Pielke Jr. has covered the Alimonti scandal in great detail and notes: “Shenanigans continue in climate science with influential scientists teaming up with journalists to corrupt peer review”.
Three AFP writers are currently taking a six-month sabbatical on the latest Oxford Climate Journalism Network (OCJN) course which is funded by elite billionaire money including contributions from Sir Christopher Hohn, a past provider for the eco louts at Extinction Rebellion. They are Ivan Couronne, Future of the Planet editor, Sara Hussein, Future of the Planet reporter and agency editor Linda Tonn. The course provides an immersion in the correct political narrative surrounding climate ‘collapse’, the so-called ‘settled’ science and the need for extreme Net Zero measures. This term, BBC participants include senior climate data reporter Becky Dale and Samah Hanaysha, a London-based broadcaster for BBC Arabic. Interestingly, all these participants will be joined by Ellen Ormesher of DeSmog, a foundation-funded operation that publishes a ‘blacklist’ of so-called climate deniers. Sadly, the list does not appear to be regularly updated these days, possibly on the grounds that it has become too large!
Past speakers at the OCJN have suggested “fines and imprisonment” for those expressing scepticism about “well supported” science and cautioned journalists against the use of photographs of people enjoying themselves in the open air at times of “extreme” summer weather.
Infantile suggestions are provided asking participants to write a story about a mango, discussing why it isn’t as tasty as the year before due to climate change.
All of which explains how stories about climate change leading to more child marriages end up in the increasingly unpopular prints.
For the last three years, Paul Homewood has chronicled the climate bloopers at the BBC and he summarised this year’s edition in yesterday’s Daily Sceptic. It notes numerous howlers which have added to the gaiety of the nation. How we laughed when we were reminded of Matt – “Yes, we have no bananas” – McGrath reporting that climate change posed an enormous threat to banana supply. Production has increased six-fold since the 1960s. Or the no more beer piss-take. Apparently, it could get too hot to grow hops in Kent although that is not a problem for growers in warmer central European climes, but again don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story. Then there are the coral reefs about to die off, while in the real world the Great Barrier Reef continue to show stonking levels of record growth. Finally, we have the much loved rare bird sighting story. Last year it was the turn of the black-winged stilt that is moving north due to climate change. As it appears to have done for hundreds of years, according to ornithological reports. One unfortunate passing passerine even being shot in 1684. Again, as with the child bride story, why are basic facts not checked to stop all this alarmist drivel being printed in the first place? Attending climate grooming courses funded by elite billionaires with an obvious political agenda would fill any independent, investigating journalist with horror.
As Homewood notes, many have concluded that the BBC’s coverage of climate change cannot be trusted. His comments could equally apply to many other mainstream outlets. “For years their treatment has been one-sided, full of misinformation and at times factual errors, along with the omission of alternative views and inconvenient facts,” he observes. Quite so.
