Julie Birchill Blasts Eco-Nuts
May 10, 2021
By Paul Homewood
h/t Mark Welford
A blast of commonsense from the Telegraph for a change!
Unfortunately the Telegraph’s editorial policy is all over the place on climate change. While there are rare pieces of rationality from the likes of Julie Birchill, the Telegraph’s coverage is still dominated by the eco-loons.
It is time they laid out a clear policy, and took away all coverage of climate issues from Olivia Rudgard, Emma Gatten, Rachel Millard and the rest of the babies, and gave it instead to the grown ups.
22 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
The telegraph lost its last good reporter when Christopher Booker died.
And look how they treated him in his last years at the rag.
Hear Hear!
Christopher Booker is still sadly missed. I’ll remember him most for his compelling articles on groupthink.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/25/thirty-years-groupthink-led-people-believe-global-warming-things/
For all newspapers these days, their circulations under dire threat, appealing to a brainwashed
majority is tempting.
Great article. Thanks.
The biggest problem we have is that of education. The education system has been indoctrinating students from key stage 3 through to university degree level for the last 20 years at least. Hence these young reporters are believers of the faith of climate change. No critical thinking allowed.
This just about sums it up.
Greenpeace co-founder and former president of Greenpeace Canada Patrick Moore described the cynical and corrupt machinations fueling the narrative of anthropocentric global warming and “climate change” in a Wednesday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight with hosts Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak.
Moore explained how fear and guilt are leveraged by proponents of climate change:
Fear has been used all through history to gain control of people’s minds and wallets and all else, and the climate catastrophe is strictly a fear campaign — well, fear and guilt — you’re afraid you’re killing your children because you’re driving them in your SUV and emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and you feel guilty for doing that. There’s no stronger motivation than those two.
Scientists are co-opted and corrupted by politicians and bureaucracies invested in advancing the narrative of “climate change” in order to further centralize political power and control, explained Moore.
Daniel Hannan (former MEP) is also always worth a read. The garbage that some of their other correspondents produce shows how comprehensively “social conservatism” has been hijacked by these nutjobs. Witness a certain Prime Minister…
The trouble is the Editor Chris Evans – there will no hope of more climate logic till he is replaced.
What Evans should realise is that if he barred printing any of the many silly unproven stories on global warming and the environment that appear in his paper, and publish articles that are factual and common sense in their opposition to the church of forthcoming ecological disaster, he would gain a very many happy additional readership without upsetting but enlightening his existing readers. Come on Mr Evans, at least give equal prominence to sensible articles that oppose the current and ridiculous global warming mantra, even though it might not be to the liking of Mr and Mrs Boris. You really do have a duty to us all to publish fact not fiction..
2hmp. You have hit the nail on the head. Evans has brought total ambiguity into the Telegraph. As I posted a few days ago I am cancelling my subscription after decades.
The only reason I keep mine up is because it is now the only way to get unrestricted access to the crosswords. That plus Matt, Alan Cochrane and (usually) Sherelle Jacobs just about make the subscription worthwhile. A change of editor and a more informed approach to a lot of things would be very welcome.
Julies’s article mkes some excellent points. For those unable to read the small print my favourite ‘snipe’ is ” you can’t win people round by saying they are guilty. Afgar Cry from Greta thurnburg; Veruka Salt meets Dracula”
The Guardian seems to be the worst of the lot in the UK. But they just issued the worst of their “errors of judgement” by doubling down on one of them…
The Guardian’s mistakes…
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/may/07/guardian-200-what-we-got-wrong-the-guardians-worst-errors-of-judgment-over-200-years
” When the facts change, the Guardian changes its mind. In 1982 the paper thought that a windmill to generate electricity on “every British hilltop would be an environmental disaster”. It would not say that today.”
Would not say that now? Might be yet another error?
Good on Julie Burchill
Another one to watch is the MSM putting ALL the blame for the younger generation having psychological stress onto COVID. I find the constant apocalyptic “Climate Change” messages from Bumtherg, Attenbollox et al to be more chilling and depressing than even the COVID stuff, depressing though that may be.
“There’s is an eco-nut on the radio saying that trees should have the same rights as human beings.”
May be that’s an idea worth considering. Trees should have the right to access healthy levels of their favourite food, carbon dioxide gas and not be forced to endure the current 400 ppm starvation levels. Target 1000 ppm for the trees!
I am sure that Tolkein’s Middle Earth Ents would agree.
Philip: I partially agree but the target should be 3000 ppm which it was when the great forests flourished that became today’s coal fields.
Vernon,
I doubt that 3000 ppm is achievable given the current continent configuration on Planet Ocean, but I admire your ambition 🙂
Vernon, close but given that the average over Geological Time AND the level when the angiosperms evolved( the plants we eat) is around 2500ppm, that will do me just nicely thank you very much 🙂
Thanks Julie, but there’s nothing in her article that a lazy middle class lefty journalist who likes slagging off her fellow lefty middle class journalists couldn’t have have pilfered from a half remembered conversation with a disappointed green activist at a Brighton dinner party.
I prefer the Julie Burchill who recalled riding pillion on her communist dad’s motorbike as he rode round the country fomenting strikes. He came into her room the night the Berlin wall fell crying and said: “They’ve got us, Gel.”
I don’t expect many here to approve of the politics but you’ve got to admire her for writing that in the Guardian. (They sacked her and she was transferred to the Express I believe.) Readers of the rightwing press love a rebel that tickles their outrage. Try publishing something that actually challenges their beliefs though, about the necessity of tackling climate change or anything else. Homewood is Trotsky to Burchill’s George Bernard Shaw.
Your last sentence baffles me, Mr C.
Kindly explain and relieve my poor comprehension!
You’re not alone. Everything these fanatics say and do is baffling.
Fanatics? I’m as fanatical as anyone here I hope in my opposition to climate hysteria.
Leftwing amusers like Burchill and GBS have their place in the mainstream media (though not in the po-faced Graun) because they’re no threat to the system. Comparing Homewood with Trotsky is a stretch, I’ll admit, but both are/were admirably serious in their concerns, both have/had history and reason on their side, and both will be/were ignored by the media (except by the much-missed Booker of course.)