Andrew Neil Interviews XR’s Roger Hallam
June 25, 2021
By Paul Homewood
h/t stewgreen
Andrew Neil puts the XR founder Roger Hallam through his paces:
The interview is mainly notable for Hallam’s very open admission about what his policies would mean for the UK economy.
Unfortunately, Andrew Neil only makes a brief mention about emissions in China and the rest of the world, and fails to drive home that fundamental weakness in XR’s position.
51 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Become a slave and you will be free.
Not nearly critical enough. More like a recruitment ad.
Yes, I was disappointed, hardly a shredding.
On the plus side Hallam comes across as clearly unhinged.
He also just about confirms that XR is just the occupy movement re-branded and it clearly has pretty much the same aims. Once you realise that, XR and claims of environmental motivations are no longer credible.
God help us if Hallam and his cohorts have their way, the man is a total nutter!
What an ill-informed dickhead Hallam is.
Hallam became so convinced about “climate change” when his organic farm venture in Wales failed after 4 years…nothing to do with his farming ability then.
Yes, how come his was the only farm to fail? I suppose we already knew global warming was very selective!!
Not a good piece by Andrew Neil. He had an opportunity to show what CO2 is and why the planet will not be heated by 4 degrees by CO2. That then destroys ER’s whole argument.Someone needs to put Andrew Neil straight.
Not Neil at his best, however it did show what an absolute disaster Hallam truly is to society. Almost laughable if it wasn’t for the disruption he and others in XR cause.b
I wrote to GB News asking them to give Paul Homewood a slot, no response. This channel prides itself on going to the people (with regional reporters) but the point is rather lost when all that is discussed is matters churning at the national level, localism doesn’t get much of a look-in. The other thing is, of course, that the BBC forbids any talk on opposing the common understanding of the world’s end through climate change. If this channel is to make it to make a difference then nothing should be beyond an airing. Giving Paul a slot would go a long way to redressing the balance. A few facts in a desert of statistics would not go amiss. Perhaps Paul should send them a primer video?
Is the BBC in a position to forbid GB News from discussing anything? How come?
Sorry Tim, a bit imprecise; within the BBC
“>
I wrote to GB News asking them to give Paul Homewood a slot, no response
”
On Tuesday evening, the streaming platform broke its silence and reinstated TalkRadio’s account. “TalkRadio’s YouTube channel was briefly suspended, but upon further review, has now been reinstated,” a YouTube spokesperson said. “We quickly remove flagged content that violate our Community Guidelines, including Covid-19 content that explicitly contradict expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization. We make exceptions for material posted with an educational, s, scientific or artistic purpose, as was deemed in this case.”
<"
Questioning the consensus! How dare they!
quotation marks and horizontal v breaks the formatting. I’ll try again
quote
I wrote to GB News asking them to give Paul Homewood a slot, no response
unquote
Is not “Talk Radio” a potential platform for non-believers?
I’m sure that Julia Hartley-Brewer and Mike Graham have questioned the belief that mankind is responsible for dangerous climate change. Talk Radio has already been banned and then subsequently reinstated by youtube for Talk Radio’s outspoken views on the management of Covid-19.
Guardian, 5th Jan 2021
quote
On Tuesday evening, the streaming platform broke its silence and reinstated TalkRadio’s account. “TalkRadio’s YouTube channel was briefly suspended, but upon further review, has now been reinstated,” a YouTube spokesperson said. “We quickly remove flagged content that violate our Community Guidelines, including Covid-19 content that explicitly contradict expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization. We make exceptions for material posted with an educational, s, scientific or artistic purpose, as was deemed in this case.”
unquote
Questioning the consensus! How dare they!
Andrew Neil has said he is ‘stepping back for a few months’ and last night was a very distracted performance. Draw your own conclusions.
That’s a worrying development, as there’s no reason for Andrew Neil to be stepping back so early in GB News’ adventure on TV or media grounds.
I hope his health isn’t in question.
I suspect that he has a medical problem, but I would doubt that it is cancer or anything equally serious. There are many conditions that will take you out of work for a couple of months at 72 that are completely treatable. Unpleasant, but treatable.
Roger Hallam’s whole argument was based on the IPCC scenario known as RCP8.5. As Andrew Neil pointed out, it was the most extreme situation imaginable and extremely unlikely. Hallam based his position on this one possibility become real – with no modification as the situation developed. Then he quoted one scientist at the Potsdam Institute as if that person spoke for the whole scientific community.
Given his recipe would result in the destruction of life as we know it, it seemed reasonable to query why that fate was preferable to the one under RCP8.5, implemented without any possible feedback to mitigate its effects.
All in all, Hallam was condemned out of his own mouth – hence his being deserted by other XR groups.
Andrew gave him enough rope, and sure enough, he hanged himself.
Started watching, but couldn’t take any more after about he started quoting the most extreme IPCC scenario and trying to make out it was likely.
I don’t disagree that there are forces out there who support XR because they are doing the same job as the psyop operations around covid. But its pointless wasting time on the ‘useful idiots’. To get anywhere at all with this you have to go after the prime movers. An interview with the likes of Carney and investigating the financial goals of his masters will be far more fruitful.
Hallam appeared to get publicity for his extreme and unfounded views (RCP 8.5 is his future). I though that Andrew Neil handled it well and let him hang himself. Hallam is clearly a slippery customer well used to being the butt of the joke.
Well when GBNews tweeted a clip, people were saying that Andrew Neil was hammering Hallam
That was the China segment .. https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1408148759436042242
That’s from minute 14 of the main video above
Direct link to that segment https://youtu.be/mQA8XIF1Apg?t=843
“The media are constantly talking about Climate Change ..
We’re responsible for less than one percent of emissions.
But you never mention China which is responsible for 27% of global emissions.
Why do you never mention China?”
etc.
Now let me go to the Youtube transcript and show you all the challenge lines from Andrew Neil
… oh the transcript is not available (yet ?)
But we can see a lot from the article
https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1454282/Andrew-Neil-shut-down-XR-Roger-Hallam-6-billion-die-climate-change-GB-News-video
Guido has just put up the full video ..but no transcript
However commenters add light
Larry David Niven
Eat insects so the Chinese can eat meat.
Ride a bike so the Chinese can drive cars.
Freeze to death so the Chinese can burn coal.
Andrew Neil’ comment piece (start of the show)
also ended by pushing back on Climate Activism …. https://youtu.be/_j4Lgpj5mfo?t=81
Transcript https://www.gbnews.uk/shows/andrew-neil-meddling-bosses-wont-stop-interfering-in-our-lives-even-after-covid/108057
“But the richest pickings for the Boss-Class are related to Climate Change”
This opens a veritable cornucopia of bossiness.
Local politicians in the West Midlands think you should stay at home even post-pandemic to help with their “accelerated pathway” to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
This morning the government’s Climate Change Committee said
we should be eating 20% less meat and dairy produce by 2030,
35% less by 2050.
Vegans are urging that it should be 100% less.
The Committee is also keen you should continue working from home.
And it wants to slap new taxes on flying, waste and other industries.
Along with various agencies it’s also limbering up to tell you to rip out your gas boiler.
And the Environment Bill currently going through parliament could require households to Use four separate bins — one each for glass, metal, plastic, and paper and card.
Plus a further three for garden waste, food waste and non-recyclables.
You might have lost your job in the pandemic.
But the boss class will never be out of work.
When it comes to meddling in our lives, it’s only just begun.
Interesting that that commentary does have a YouTube transcript
Yet the Hallam video , which has more views 40K, doesn’t yet.
A new tax on waste should be a boost to the fly-tipping industry. Unfortunately as it is run by organised crime it is a bit difficult to invest in it given the types you have to deal with, otherwise I would.
Gerry – HMG introduced the landfill tax to encourage recycling. The energy from waste business grew on the back of reducing landfill tax as energy production was classified as “recovery” (not waste disposal).
If HMG taxes energy from waste, it will increase the cost of probably the main route to reduce landfill tax. The bill will land on your mat as the council tax rises to pay for it. So, once again Gerry, it will be you and I who get it in the neck again.
Somebody once spoke about “squeezed middle”. Woe betide those who aspires to be comfortable.
I challenged Robert Jenrick in a letter about taxing energy from waste, and his reply was reasonable. If it is something we have to do and there is no sensible alternative, it is liable to tax. We need to raise money and that means EfW falls in the same category as fuel tax. Unwelcome but reasonable! Just make sure the alternative is more heavily taxed, so it stays a less attractive method.
If it is something we have to do why should it be taxed. As a general principle Tax should be on discretionary spending, not essential spending!
“And the Environment Bill currently going through parliament could require households to Use four separate bins — one each for glass, metal, plastic, and paper and card.
Plus a further three for garden waste, food waste and non-recyclables.”
Around fifteen years ago I thought that I should maybe make more of an effort with my recycling. They had lots of recycling bins in the Asda car park and I went along and wrote down a list of what goes in them*. Went home and set up some shelves in the outhouse with plastic bins labelled up and started putting the recyclable stuff in them. Maybe once a fortnight I took a trip to empty the bins before doing some shopping. It made a big difference to the number of times the kitchen bin needed emptying. Now we have our blue bin for recycling and everything goes in all mixed together, this never made sense to me.
*From memory, plastic bottles, steel cans, aluminium cans, glass seperated into colours, card and paper.
It is not a criticism of Andrew to point out how little he understands climate change even if he actually does understand more than Roger Hallam (not difficult). Nobody on the planet (all scientists included) understands it, if they did then we would be getting reliable provable forecasts of our future perhaps.
I do not think however that Andrew should have taken the interview and that Paul would have done a much better job.
A rapid and total reduction in carbon emissions to zero is simply not possible or economically viable as was pointed out. Billions would starve. But, even if it were done the atmosphere would not be changed significantly. The amount of CO2 already added would not be lowered by 2050. That can only be accomplished by direct air capture and permanent burial, a Net-zero process unable to take out even one part-per-million by 2050. More than 250 million tons each year?? Three quarters of a million a day.
The urgency to lower emissions is grounded in the dire forecasts of climate models and little else. An extreme straw-man argument is leading this eco-nut to disrupt as much as he can. Peacefully? yelling FIRE! in an increasing crowded global theatre with no exits should be illegal
‘Billions would starve’ – which, according to Hallam, is his goal. He actually told AN that he thinks there are 8B too many on the planet. He is not far away from Pol Pot who tried out a prototype in Cambodia.
No matter their political leanings, key organisations like the BBC should be making people aware of this deranged man’s megalomania and his wish to destroy the planet. At least the likes of TwitFace should be cancelling him in the same way they (unfairly) treat the likes of Trump.
Mr Hallam is clearly sexually self sufficient…
About curtailing freedoms
https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/06/17/climate-lockdown/
Yes Andrew Neil clearly didnt have the knowledge needed to demolish Halams nonsense.
He didnt rip into the IPCCs fantasy af 4.5c warming. He could have cited Prof Happer who has pointed out that doubling CO2 would have a minimal effect on climate due to atmospheric physics.
Neil didnt challenge the citing of an alarmist looney in the Potsdam Idiot institue as just the fantasies of a nutter.
A couple of times Halam said ‘everyone agrees’ which Neil didnt challenge as hogwash – all us here dont agree with this nonsense.
A disappointment but at least he broached the subject.
Lindzen would have been a better counter-point.
Lindzen has as much knowledge as any scientist but he is boring to listen to, he would not have helped here IMHO
Colin. It might be so – that he’s boring – but I remember watching him giving evidence to a parliamentary committee and he totally owned them. He was giving them a lesson in costs of adaptation vs costs of prevention. Brilliant.
Hallam is one obviously insane individual. But would liked to have seen Neil wipe the floor with the cretin.
I remember watching a BBC puff piece for Hallam, when he first emerged, organising his XR groups – he did ALL of his travelling in a clapped out Vauxhall, not once did he use public transport – typical climate hypocrite!!!!
Perhaps not relevant to this discussion, but interesting view of all the good the UK and EU is doing on climate compared to China… perspective! https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/o6xjbv/oc_chinas_co2_emissions_almost_surpass_the_g7/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
China’s CO2 emissions in 2019 were 11.5 Gt. The G7’s were 8.6 Gt. https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2020
These 2 stories were next to each other under BBC ‘science’, could there be a better illustration of how the elite see the future?
Us. Seasonally available root vegetables and priced off the roads.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57580254
Them. Caviar canapés and pointless joyrides to the edge of space.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57611550
Engie Charger network is still down
…. https://www.twitter.com/Damreyuk73/status/1408337398824636418
IT local news coming up
“winds of change are coming to help with climate
.. but there are concerns turbines might harm wildlife”
ITV’s Kevin Ashford aired an apologist making claims
Give GB News time. Andrew could have totally destroyed Hallam but for the important audience it would have pushed things too far. Andrew is on our side. – but slowly, slowly catchee monkey!
David: Please don’t forget that GB News accepts advertising from the World Wildlife Foundation so AN’s position is highly compromised. I have no doubt the WWF took this into consideration when deciding to adverise on GBN.
The bit where Hallam says that Andrew was agreeing with him when Andrew definitely wasn’t agreeing with him, could look like Hallam is bonkers, but simply reveals how much of a habitual lie factory he is. Andrew lost his grip at that point because it was too bizarre for him to deal with, someone sharper could have skewered him.
The 6 billion deaths is doublespeak for what zero CO2 by 2025 could do, which is why Christiana Figueres supports XR.
As GBNews started I sent an email to gbviews@gbnews.uk -headed A Key Subject – and attaching William Happer;s lecture at Hilsdale College – https://youtu.be/CA1zUW4uOSw
Friends who have seen it think it is the most easily understood of any Co2 pieces. Whether Andrew Neill saw it I know not. I received no acknowledgement.
Oz journalist Tony Thomas did a good piece on XR last year, featuring Hallam and his colleagues:
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2020/04/the-most-disgusting-climate-cult-of-all/
The transcript has finally come out
AN : “You advocate mass civil disobedience,
shut down the economy, city centers financial districts and transport
And do it week after week after week
.. Even XR can’t deliver that
Is anybody listening to you ?”
RH : “well i think we’re we’re trying to communicate a truth to the british public
and we’re doing that in the best way we can, with the resources we’ve got
And i think the truth that we’re trying to communicate is that if we don’t act quickly then the freedoms that you are just talking about could be curtailed in a more severe way and in a permanently severe way, if we don’t get our act together on reducing carbon emissions”
AN “Do you think that the best way to get people to listen to you is to disrupt their lives ?”
RH : “Yes, cause i think we’ve had 30 years of being told that .”
etc
….. But you advocate the massive curtailment of freedoms you want zero emissions not net zero you want zero emissions in four years that would require the banning of all transport private and public you want the instant banning of all flying and you want to conference confiscate 90 percent of the assets of the wealthiest i mean all of that would require huge curtailing of freedom it would wouldn’t it ?
but you just said you didn’t want to do that?”
etc