Thread by @clim8resistance

The @BBC's correspondents are incapable of subjecting the political agenda of institutional science to any scrutiny.

But this is a deeply political - ideological - report, and the scientific foundation very thin.

bbc.co.uk/news/science-e…

@BBC "Sir Ian said polluting activities should incur more tax. He believes the Treasury should reform taxation policy to reward people with low-carbon lifestyles and nudge heavy consumers into more frugal patterns of behaviour."

"Science" here, exceeds its authority.

@BBC Whether or not there is an environmental problem, the more certain fact is that the relationship that Sir Ian proposes should exist between people and government is particular -- it is an ideological, not a scientific claim.

@BBC One obvious consequence is that it will allow the rich to continue to enjoy opulence, while most people will be forced to have less.

This is not just a transformation of the relationship between people and government. It is a transformation of institutional science's role, too.

@BBC In an earlier historical era, and despite deep geopolitical conflicts, institutional science sought ways to unleash more, and better material productivity.

In late C20th institutional science onward, its role is to find a basis to legitimise material restraint.

@BBC For instance, despite 30 years of searching for global policies, with tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of "scientists" and "researchers", all that they have to offer is arguments for imposing material limits on the populations that democratic governments were answerable to.

@BBC That's to say that governments have sought a 'scientific' argument for regulating lifestyle to the Nth degree. That is precisely what the Net Zero target is now, and that is what the agenda has been since the beginning of the UN's environmental programme.

@BBC That may sounds like an extraordinary statement. But it is not hyperbole.

Notice what the 30+ years of searching for climate policies did NOT consider to any significant degree: finding ways to produce cheap, abundant energy that can sustain growth and development.

@BBC "Science" was not tasked with finding plausible alternatives to cheap, abundant energy and better ways of producing things. Because if equivalents could be found then the entirely political dynamic would have changed.

@BBC "Science" was only tasked with that which furthered the ideological agenda: to create scarcity while society in fact stood on the brink of abundance.

Abundance is anathema to environmentalism -- the political ideology that drives Sir Ian's reporting.

@BBC Don't tell me that the $trillions wasted on the green agenda in Europe alone could not have accelerated development of new energy techniques.

@BBC Is this still far-fetched? Am I some unhinged denier?

No. I'm saying exactly what Sir Ian says.

See for yourself: ...

@BBC Report: "People must use less transport, eat less red meat and buy fewer clothes if the UK is to virtually halt greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the government's chief environment scientist has warned."

Me: spiked-online.com/2019/05/08/aus…

@BBC Report: "Prof Sir Ian Boyd said the public had little idea of the scale of the challenge from the ... Net Zero emissions target"

Me: "[it] is a manifesto for permanent green austerity: the perpetual transfer of wealth upwards, for the benefit of the political establishment".

@BBC In reality, the Net Zero report is the superficially scientific justification for an extreme form of 'managed decline'. It is a manifesto, produced by technocrats, not just for permanent austerity, but to protect a debased political class from democracy and the public.

@BBC Again, this is not hyperbole, the 'scientist' and the BBC 'journalist' are in complete agreement: "He believes the Treasury should reform taxation policy to reward people with low-carbon lifestyles and nudge heavy consumers into more frugal patterns of behaviour." Austerity.

@BBC They are going to take away your cars and they are going to restrict your freedom of movement. They are going to restrict what you put on your family's dinner plates. They are going to take away your gas boilers and central heating. They are going to charge you for the cost.

@BBC Read it for yourselves. MPs are determined to take away all these things -- and much more besides -- and they are not going to offer you an alternative, nor the opportunity to express your view. parliament.uk/business/commi…

@BBC "In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership therefore does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation. The Government should not aim to achieve emissions reductions simply by replacing existing vehicles with lower-emissions versions."

@BBC MPs are *ACTIVELY* seeking to prevent the only possibility of abundance: " the Government should seek to support new nuclear power generation so as to sustain, but not grow, the UK’s nuclear power industry."

So much for "science".

@BBC "Science", the BBC, and the UK's legacy political parties share this ideology in common. This is because they are degenerate.

Political parties no longer have a connection with the public.

'Scientists' and 'journalists' no longer hold government to account, but act for it.

@BBC The BBC is not only incapable of holding any proponent of this agenda to account, it is actively hostile to anyone who takes a different view of the "science" or political orthodoxy it seeks to promote.

It would rather interview unhinged, drug-addled XR activists than 'deniers'.

@BBC Ditto, institutional "science" and research funding organisations (using public money) direct hundreds of £millions each year, to further the same agenda. Any researcher with a different idea will be left out in the cold, and will face censure from institutional science.

@BBC Similarly, political parties no longer consider themselves answerable to the public. They instead prefer green NGOs, who engineer cross-party consensuses, to act against the public's interest.

@BBC This degeneration of the public and political sphere has allowed special -- and weird, ideological -- interests to dominate policy-making, behind closed doors, and to displace and overwhelm criticism.

@BBC Climate change -- whether or not it is real -- is the biggest political fig leaf in history. It covers much shame.

But for how much longer?