King Charles Delivers Highly Politicised Speech At COP28
By Paul Homewood
It could have been worse. King Charles could have ascended to his desert dais and pronounced that we had just 96 months to avert “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse”. But that was the Right Charlie back in 2009, giving us the benefit of his sandwich-board scientific wisdom. These days it is all fashionable bad weather and undefined “tipping points”. The man is now King, and at COP28 he threw away his irksome politically-neutral constitutional role, wrapped himself in Guardianista pseudoscience, and punched down hard on the poor who will be forced to pay for the collectivist madness that is the Net Zero project.
King Charles is no friend of general humanity. Speaking at COP28, he said: “The Earth does not belong to us, we belong to the Earth.” As with many know-your-place elitists, he appears to abhor the impacts that humans have on the planet. He exhibits, sadly on a world stage, a snobbish distain for capitalism – what used to be dismissed in British aristocratic circles as ‘trade’. This capitalist trend over the last 200 years has harnessed the power of natural hydrocarbons to raise billions to a standard of living and health unimaginable to previous generations. In 2009, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and the “age of convenience” was over.
Full story here.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
He and his family are a waste of space. Get rid of the lot of them.
It’s curious that in the last 500 years or so, it’s is only our queen’s who have really distinguished themselves – the two Elizabeth’s and Victoria. The kings have pretty much all been wastes of space.
King George V1 did very well after his despicable brother chased after an American divorcee,
What he didn’t say…
Get rid of Monarchy by Civil War.? Parliament is an institution which reports to the Monarch. The Law Courts are there to administer the Kings Justice and so on. If you want a country ruled by rival gangs, as it can easily be,look into the mediaeval history of England. It took centuries to get to the current stable set up. H.Ms opinions have no legal effect The only excuse is. he had an education at Gordonstoun where environmental education had a preWar German tinge, to put it mildly… see origins of the Green Parties inGerman Romantic fiction of the 19th Century The KIng has no university education because Princes take up military education, normally. I think he was in the Royal Navy.
I bet Buck House and all the other houses are nice and warm today!
No Heat Pumps then.
We hoped the queen would outlive Charles for the very reason that he would promote his stupid political ideas. Was it 2009 when he said we only had 8 years left to save the planet? Only Princess Anne in the royal family now has any commonsense.
Usually the case of the second born of three or more siblings
Not always. Prince William has been infected by his father’s eco zealotry, but I’d find it hard to choose between him and his brother.
How do third and other siblings affect the commonsense of the second born?
Jeremy there are only two of them not three or more.
Philip First born gets more attention than the second, hence the ginger whinger, then third and subsequent siblings then get more attention than the second ie Andrew. The middle/second child makes it’s own way in life uumollycoddled.
Personal observation and totally unscientific.
” Only Princess Anne in the royal family now has any commonsense. ”
As someone else wrote: Anne was the son that Philip always wanted
The man is, was and always will be a total pillock. He talks to his greenhouse plants, thus spraying them with CO2, marvels at how well they grow, and then campaigns against CO2. Que? Unfortunately his son and heir is just as stupid.
The Earth does belong to us. We certainly do not belong to the Earth. This is Lauren’s van der Post quasi-religious nonsense, a silly mysticism for the nor very bright. When humans are long gone, the Earth will still be here. What we do is a bkink of an eye in the Earth’s timescale.
The idea that we belong to the earth is certainly nonsense but the whole religious aspect of humanity’s relationship with the planet makes any discussion difficult. Two of the major mainstream religions, Judaism and Christianity, base their position vis-a-vis Earth on the bible which gives us the responsibility to care for it while at the same time exploiting it, ie using its resources while not wasting them needlessly.
But that surely applies whether we choose to believe in a deity or not.
Where we are failing is in allowing ourselves to be exploited by pseudo-experts with an agenda of their own. There is, for example, no scientific evidence to support the hypothesis that CO2 levels influence atmospheric temperatures or that a relatively minute increase in temperature (which would only restore the situation of the MWP) will bring about disaster.
And yet that single ‘factoid’ is what the entire climate change/global warming edifice is built on. And to date we have not succeeded in puncturing the hypocrisy, naivety and egocentricity that keeps the scam afloat.
As shown by this recent study.
https://notrickszone.com/2023/11/27/new-study-finds-the-post-1900-co2-rise-has-not-discernibly-altered-the-greenhouse-effect/
|Are you sure about this two-way business? It’s a while since I reviewed the matter but my reading of Biblical and Koranic creation accounts is that the Earth was put there for the benefit of humankind – i.e. its bounty ours for the taking. Stewardship (in other words a responsibility to care for it) is a johnny-come-lately concept arriving with the Green movement.
I think the one implies the other. Unless you tend the earth it won’t continue to “give of its fulness”. The writers of the Bible may not have had much acquaintance with rare earth metals but the principle applies across the board. Simply ravaging and moving on was not what was intended, surely.
You’re invoking modern concepts which would have been totally alien to the founders of those religions. The present incarnations are of course only to happen to latch unto the stewardship notion as it makes them sound virtuous and compatible with current environmental shibboleths but is it an about-turn on the original thinking. Garden of Eden and all that.
Charles was so weak in allowing men like van der Post – and then Porrit – to inform his view pn CC. Sadly, that brain-washing has continued with William and onwards to his children.
He actually has three entries in the list of failed climate disasters:
Click to access Apocalypse-Now_-Communicating-extreme-forecasts-IJGW.pdf
He has a 2:2 in History, and, so far as I am aware, has never studied climate science. Some of his ideas have been disastrous:
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2023/05/04/king_charles_iii_has_a_climate_record_to_live_down_897662.html
Those at Cambridge will tell you he really doesn’t have a 2:2! Apparently he really is extremely dim.
I was not going to say that, although I know he switched degrees part way through (from archaeology and anthropology). What you say really doesn’t surprise me.
Going by the FICTIONAL “The Crown”, it appears that royals tend not to be educated – rather ‘brainwashed’.
He barely scraped two A levels – not sure of the subjects but I think it was architecture and history – hardly an impressive achievement and no one else would have been accepted at any university. But of course Charles was welcomed open arms at Cambridge and of course he was awarded a degree.
It wouldn’t matter if he was not the brightest if he employed highly intelligent people with common sense to advise him. Unfortunately he is is yet to realise that.
He is probably like the lying oaf Johnson in surrounding themselves only with people who have the same level of intelligence and knowledge.
I believe the odious ultra-Green Zac Goldsmith may have some influence too.
I find it most instructive that there are so many extremely rich people who declare themselves to be Socialists but when it comes to spending OPM don’t want that to include theirs. NZC is a rich-man’s hobby. It wouldn’t be if the effects of it were felt from the top down.
In the light of this, perhaps it would be a good idea if we campaigned for a new law legislated through Parliament, that we will all accept ‘ Net Zero’ but all the top 10% constituting our ‘elites’ must conform first and be deprived of all their fixed and liquid assets above average population levels. That’s fair.
You read my mind, Orde.
‘He uses these to call for “transformational action” to be taken to save the planet.’
Why should I save the planet? It’s not mine, he says.
‘In his COP28 speech, he called for the restoration of nature, the need for sustainable agriculture, and co-operation between the public and private sectors.’
Destruction of cities, government control of food, and fascism. Dictators need some charisma to get the people accept such bovine excrement.
They are saving the planet…for themselves. The Royal Family need to keep the grift going because it is now a big source of their income via wind farm licensing through Crown Estates.
Let’s keep our facts right, shall we?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate
Yes the RF are well aware of how taking a load of cash from windfarms won’t go down well with the public. They’re not Dale Vince afterall
Indeed:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/29/crown-estate-enjoys-huge-rise-in-profits-thanks-to-offshore-wind
“The crown estate has generated record profits of almost half a billion pounds from Britain’s offshore windfarms, as talks continue over how much of the windfall should be shared with King Charles.
The royal property manager made £443m in profits in its last financial year, up by almost £130m from the year before, in large part thanks to payments made by renewable energy companies for the right to access the seabed. Six new offshore windfarms that could power 7m homes have also helped to increase the value of King Charles III’s property manager, which also controls hundreds of properties in London, by 1.3% to £15.8bn as of the end of March.
The crown estate, an ancient portfolio of land and property including more than 200 sites in central London, belongs to the reigning monarch “in right of the crown” but it is not the king’s private property. Under current rules, the crown estate hands its profits to the Treasury before 25% is returned to the royal household in the form of the sovereign grant, which would put the royal household in line for a windfall of almost £111m for last year.
The sovereign grant was increased in 2017 from its previous level of 15% to help pay for extensive renovations at Buckingham Palace, which are likely to run until 2027. The funding formula is now being reviewed before an expected multibillion-pound deluge of wind power profits for the crown estate over the next decade, which is likely to cut the payouts made to the royal household.”
This was forecast when the sea bed leases went up for sale.
July 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/17/offshore-wind-auction-could-raise-millions-for-queen
“Industry experts expect the complex bidding process to raise record sums, which could increase energy bills and hand a windfall to the crown – potentially generating hundreds of millions for the Queen.”
The word “renewables” is still used extensively. There’s no such thing, as we know. If the drive towards net zero runs its full course we will run out of such raw materials as lithium, cobalt, copper long before we exhaust the supply of oil and gas. Perhaps we should avoid entering into the endless debates and discussions regarding the validity of climate change and focus on pointing this out every time we see or hear a mention of the word “renewable”. Spread widely enough it might make those who use it start to think twice, and then more deeply about what they are condemning us to. Could be the little acorns that grow into big oaks!
If farming was not already sustainable it would have conked out long ago.
If humans were incapable of finding solutions to problems when they arise, we would have vanished a long time ago! But instead of solving problems we now simply resort to banning things.
I am gonna pinch that!! Thanks.
On reply to A C Baker.
‘Sustainable’ is wokespeak for government control. In this case, it means everyone starves.
Been tried in the USSR in the 30s. Also as a tool of oppression Holodomor
The republican movement must be delighted this idiot is now king. I have never really thought much about our monarchy in the past but Charlie boy and his likely successors have now tipped me off the fence and into the abolition camp.
Time for them all to go.
The monarchy is a tourist draw, so you may not want to ditch it entirely.
As an egalitarian American, I suggest you ditch the whole caste system, Lords and all.
I don’t mind calling Nick Faldo “sir,” but I can’t think of anyone else.
It is claimed (maybe true, maybe not) that France is the world’s “most visited country”. Losing their monarchy quite a while ago didn’t seem to harm their tourism industry that much.
They have a tower and an arch.
And end up with President Tony B Liar – or worse, Boris Johnson?
I read recently that only a minority of Germans could actually name their President and that the vast majority of Brits didn’t even know that Germany actually had a President. I have no idea who the Irish president is (and care even less)
In similar vein most Americans are apparently still trying to figure out who their President actually is. And as for Canadians well do they give a toss?
Do we actually need what is nothing more than a notional Head of State?
Between Charles and the Pope (who believes in a mystical god in heaven, somewhere within clouds, populated by young ladies with wings, playing harps (my ideal brothel), they have zero knowledge of the facts about the climate. Ideal choices then to address the green loonies and free loaders (academics).
Did anyone find the list of delegates?
Apparently a full list of attendees will be published after the event but latest predictions break the 100,000 barrier. Perhaps more relevant to this article is that Charlie boy himself toted “16 members of King Charles’s royal household”.
No doubt these were his personal dresser, the guy who puts the toothpaste on his tooth brush, the royal arse wiper, the one who irons his missuses face straight etc, etc.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-have-sent-the-most-delegates-to-cop28/
Thanks Ray, COP28 heading for the rocks?
A new report from The Lancet: Link: https://www.thelancet.com/countdown-health-climate ,includes the opening statement “Heat-related deaths for adults over 65 have increased by 85% since the 1990s”. This was repeated several times on the BBC Radio 4 News this morning. No clarification. “Annual heat-related deaths worldwide for people over 65 are projected to increase by 370%” Widely reported elsewhere. Link:https://abcnews.go.com/Health/heat-deaths-older-adults-increase-370-mid-century/story?id=104878632
Anything that increases by a very large percentage was almost certainly a very small number to begin with. Its a very important rule of thumb when listening to claims about health and deaths.
‘Heat-related deaths’ is broad enough to be any number they want.
I suspect the increase has more to do with the fashionable idea that such deaths will increase with increasing global temperatures leading to increased attribution rather than any reality.
No doubt the article was “peer reviewed” before publication by the Lancet.
A quote which always amuses me is:
“peer review to the public is portrayed as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller, but we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong’.
Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet.
It would seem non-peer review would be better.
Just ask them for the reduction in deaths due to cold. That is always many times greater.
The dopey old thing should stand down, mix G&Ts for his missus and let his sister take over.
The Monarch should NEVER open his gob on anything even vaguely political.
I intend to pounce on the word “renewable” every time I read or hear it. Telling those who use it that here’s nothing remotely renewable about using lithium, cobalt, etcetera in the electricity generation process might even make them nervous enough to think about what they are saying. If net zero is allowed to run its course we will run out of those commodities long before oil and gas.
Terry if this article doesn’t make your blood boil then nothing will!
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/01/do-electric-cars-have-problem-mining-for-minerals
The Graun has descended way below the gutter.
Mind you, Ray, only a fool would take an EV up the M6 today. (Titter)
Typical guardian article, it leaves out most of the negatives, particularly the low abundance of lithium and cobalt, leading to a lot of waste. Comparing to mining of iron ore is not really valid, iron ore and Bauxite (Aluminium) are abundant.
However another hot article caught my eye, The head of COP28 has just said the 1.5 degree max is not possible unless we all go back to living in caves.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/03/back-into-caves-cop28-president-dismisses-phase-out-of-fossil-fuels
“Charlie” is an embarrassment
“Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and the ‘age of convenience’ was over.”
Lead by example King George, I mean Charles, and go live in a hut on one of the many hills of your beautiful country. The rest of us will get along just fine with consuming those conveniences that improve the quality of life.
Hypocrisy of stratospheric order
The British removed the monarchy once, and then invited a new monarch to reign a few years later.
George V (and his family) should have been sent back to Germany in the summer of 1914 due to his failure as British head of state to negotiate with his cousin Wilhelm to avoid WW1.
But for a legal barrier in Hanover, women were excluded from the Hanoverian succession in salic law operating in Hanover prevented it. Britain had been sharing a monarch with the German state since 1714 and the Wee Bit German Lairdie.
Interesting speculation to wonder what would have happened had she died without children.
“The man is now King ….”
And he wants everyone at COP28 to know it!
He alone of the 97,000 attendees, gave his title and not his name!
From the UNFCCC’s spreadsheet, click the ‘Parties’ tab, then scroll down to Row 22,602, or, CTRL+F ‘H.M. The King’, the only *nameless* attendee at the beano. There are 74 returns for ‘The King’, but these are mainly attendees from one of the many ‘the King’…doms represented.
https://unfccc.int/documents/634503
The Media tab shows nearly 4,000 people.
Clicked on one of the “negotiators” at random and looked up his credentials.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/sschonfield/
Lists his language as Hebrew but no mention of English?! But what get’s me is the standard of his comments such as 3 days ago from COP28 “The food here is insane” The UK’s finest? Erm I think not.
An adult in the room at last.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/03/back-into-caves-cop28-president-dismisses-phase-out-of-fossil-fuels
For the last four days, in the North East the temperatures have never got above freezing. Renewable energy is contributing under 3% of demand. Yet Miliband wants us to decarbonise electricity by 2030, and to convert heating and transport to electricity would need 3 to 5 times current levels of supply.
Don’t worry Hartlepool and Heysham 1 nuclear power plants will close in under 3 years time. The new renewables brought online between now and then will not even make up for their loss.
” The comments were “incredibly concerning” and “verging on climate denial”, scientists said, and they were at odds with the position of the UN secretary general, António Guterres. ”
There is hope !
I fear William will be much more trouble.
A Masters in Geography (2:1) does not a climate scientist make.
Actually a goodly dose of the sort of appreciation that was the core of the climatology component of a geography course is exactly what is needed by the modern “climate scientists” wedded to computer model output. That is a knowledge of the where, when and why of different weather patterns across the globe and how they condition nature and society. Embedding that within the much larger Earth System picture of material and energy exchanges between geosphere, biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and cryosphere would reinforce how far removed from reality is their preoccupation with numerical solutions of differential equations for one small element of the whole.
A dissertation on the coral reefs of the Indian ocean is not that helpful.
Ponder on “The Earth does not belong to us, we belong to the Earth.”
Doesn’t that mean that everything man does, including making a decent living from burning much needed fuels the earth can provide, is a part of belonging to the Earth?
He’s abusing his position. He should have no business commenting on this galling hype. Why doesn’t he follow the wonderful example his mother set?