Bob Geldof Predicts the Death of All Humans by 2030
By Staff News & Analysis - October 08, 2013

Sir Bob Geldof: 'All humans will die before 2030'… Bob Geldof based his miserable prediction on the effects of climate change The musician-turned-activist reckons the world will end in 2030 – leading to the extinction of humankind. Sir Bob, 61, based his miserable prediction on the effects of climate change. “The world can decide in a fit of madness to kill itself," he told a group of youngsters at a summit in Johannesburg, South Africa. “We may not get to 2030. We need to address the problem of climate change urgently.” – Daily Star

Dominant Social Theme: Once again, as before, for any one of a number of reasons WE ARE ALL GOING TO FREAKIN’ DIE!

Free-Market Analysis: Geldof’s latest rant is actually very good news. Just as a fever spikes before subsiding, so Geldof’s hysterics as reported above show clearly that the warmist tide is receding.

Despite literally trillions of dollars thrown at this meme, the world is not convinced, much of the evidence has been exposed as fakery and those who made the mistake of linking their careers and rhetoric to this promotion are now lashing out in anger and grief.

It seemed so simple! This was the biggest of all dominant social themes, a promotion to which the mightiest of the elite had attached themselves. Heck, the Rothschilds themselves were starting a weather forecasting company, weren’t they? How could it miss?

And yet it has. … The UN’s IPCC recently released a long-awaited – and long-dreaded – report reaffirming global warming. But irascible warmist critic James Delingpole penned an article in the Telegraph just before its release that predicted the reaction to the UN’s inevitable finding.

In “Global warming believers are feeling the heat,” he wrote the following:

On Friday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change delivers its latest verdict on the state of man-made global warming. Though the details are a secret, one thing is clear: the version of events you will see and hear in much of the media, especially from organisations like the BBC, will be the opposite of what the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report actually says.

Already we have had a taste of the nonsense to come: a pre-announcement to the effect that “climate scientists” are now “95 per cent certain” that humans are to blame for climate change; an evidence-free declaration by the economist who wrote the discredited Stern Report that the computer models cited by the IPCC “substantially underestimate” the scale of the problem; a statement by the panel’s chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, that “the scientific evidence of… climate change has strengthened year after year”.

As an exercise in bravura spin, these claims are up there with Churchill’s attempts to reinvent the British Expeditionary Force’s humiliating retreat from Dunkirk as a victory. In truth, though, the new report offers scant consolation to those many alarmists whose careers depend on talking up the threat. It says not that they are winning the war to persuade the world of the case for catastrophic anthropogenic climate change – but that the battle is all but lost.

At the heart of the problem lie the computer models which, for 25 years, have formed the basis for the IPCC’s scaremongering: they predicted runaway global warming, when the real rise in temperatures has been much more modest. So modest, indeed, that it has fallen outside the lowest parameters of the IPCC’s prediction range. The computer models, in short, are bunk.

Delingpole captures the moment. The computer models have indeed been shown to be almost entirely manufactured. Those operating them obviously began with a conclusion in mind and then tailored the models to fit. Even more astonishingly, the IPCC – when they did finally issue their report – acknowledged a 16-year hiatus in rising temperatures but then claimed that this would not be significant until it reached 30 years!

In the meantime, the rest of the evidence (ignoring the lag in temperatures) painted a much grimmer picture. The IPCC basically said the world was in an emergency situation. This gives those backing global warming the opportunity to campaign for more ridiculous outcomes. They will build more “carbon marts” that no one will want to use and try to establish them in places like Nigeria and The Ivory Coast, where they can try to bully second- and third-world indigenous people into using them.

They will continue to advocate the insanity of “carbon capture,” in which this healthy, life-giving gas is solidified and buried in the ground. And they will present yet more nonsensical science to explain the lack of continued temperature rises.

One of the big reasons, we’re hearing now, is because the heat that models claimed would be present in the atmosphere has been “trapped” in oceanic depths. Oceans, therefore are warming even if the land is not. And this in turn will melt the ice caps. Of course, as we can see from Delingpole’s reporting, this is not happening, either. Seas are apparently getting colder not warmer.

Warmist proponents, perhaps, cannot be blamed for their increasingly hysterical posture when faced with facts regarding global warming (AKA climate change). Many warmists are also Peak Oil proponents and that meme has also subsided. Turns out that because of shale oil and the technology to release it, there’s plenty of oil and natural gas, too, in the world.

We’ve written that for years. The world is not so resource poor as the fear-mongers would like us to believe. And it’s not heating up rapidly, either. In fact, it might be going the other way. Here’s more from the above article:

Sir Bob is best-known for his attempts in helping to fight famine in Africa, staging Live Aid at Wembley Stadium in 1985. He finished his speech by apologising for being "bloody miserable", but added: "just get on with it".

Despite the dire warnings on climate change, it emerged last month that a million square miles of Arctic seas have frozen in the past year as a new environmental trend takes hold, dubbed "global cooling". The extraordinary "reverse" of global warming has led to a 60 per cent rise in ice-covered ocean. Just six years ago, some scientists were predicting that all of this ice would have melted away by 2013.

The big chill has persuaded some experts that temperatures will keep falling for decades and throws fresh doubts on claims that global warming will devastate the planet. Details of the latest twist in the debate emerged in a secret memo to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It says that a chillier-than-usual summer has left a thick ice layer stretching from the Canadian islands to the northern coast of Russia. The ice prevented dozens of yachts and a cruiser getting through America's North-West Passage.

The shock memo surfaced just days before the Arctic freeze is about to begin and six years after warnings that global warming would melt the ice by this winter. An ice-free Arctic was boldly predicted in a 2007 by Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. He said his grim but conservative estimate was provided by the most realistic computer models. Cambridge University expert Professor Peter Wadhams added: "This is not a cycle, not just a fluctuation. In the end, it will all just melt away quite suddenly."

On the back of the dire warnings, billions of pounds were invested in green measures to combat agents of climate change such as greenhouse gas emissions. But the secret UN memo revealed that the ice has spread quickly following the smallest ever frozen surface area, this time last year. It also shows how governments who fund the panel are terrified at the implications of the new predictions.

In the 21st century, dominant social themes generally are a good deal harder to promote. And this is, as we indicated above, one of the reasons for Geldof’s hysteria. He and others like him thought they understood the infallibility of their allies. Global warming was seen as a sure thing … but it was not.

Plenty of people have lost plenty of money thus far betting with the elite on global warming, Peak Oil and a variety of other memes. In the 20th century, if you understood the comprehensiveness of the system (and few really did) then you almost couldn’t go wrong betting on it.

But the 21st century has made dominant social themes a good deal less persuasive. The rise of the Internet and associated information has turned people into wary consumers. More and more of them are aware of the manipulations they are subject to.

After Thoughts

The Daily Bell stands at the cusp of this sputtering strategy and offers its analysis. The task for all of us is to ascertain which difficulties may manufacture potential wealth and which ones will sputter and fail. Global warming, like Geldof, is sputtering.

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap