Watching wildlife programs can be fun – and in the winter watching arctic creatures makes you appreciate the relative warmth of your living room! Some of the films even include ‘behind the scenes’ segments so you feel included in the clandestine world of nature filming.
But how much are these programmes entertainment or science? They are obviously not science as that is a long-term, laborious and data-driven discipline with reviews and checks. So they must be entertainment which needs funding from the BBC or Netflix or WWF to pay for film crews, travel, advisors, a narrator. And they need to make stuff people will watch.
All these programmes are filmed in places we’re not familiar with – that provides part of the interest - but we’ve no way of checking whether they are true or balanced. When a scientist who has been operating in an area for many years spots something that is clearly untrue it raises a few alarms, as it did for long-term Arctic scientist Dr Susan Crockford and colleagues.
The following story is taken from the 2022 book ‘Fallen Icon: Sir David Attenborough and the Walrus Deception’ which covers events around the 2019 Netflix series including film about many walrus falling to their death from a cliff in the Russian arctic. It was very distressing footage, amplified by slow-motion playback. These deaths were blamed on overcrowding on a haul-out beach due to global warming reducing sea-ice. It turned out that the deaths were most likely caused by out-of-shot polar bears panicking the walrus who like to crowd each other even when there's lots of spare beach available. The film included shots taken by a drone – which can also panic walrus and should not be used. Sea-ice is not a limiting factor and it has been shown that Walrus (and Polar Bear) numbers have actually been increasing.
Message for wef-ers
This Netflix series 'Our Planet' had a special preview at WEF/Davos in Jan 2019 (attendees included David Attenborough, Prince William) p117, 122. The WEF must have felt it was useful to show to its participants (CEOs, Government Officials, UN chiefs etc), but why the need to mislead with such graphic and upsetting footage? A later BBC series using related footage showed the Polar Bears (Seven Worlds, One Planet).
If we know anything about the WEF, it is that they have an agenda that involves their participants (the private-jet set) wanting to assume more control, 'for our safety' – over the heads of national democratic processes. This control is financial as well as political and societal but to achieve it they need emergencies - which we are then grateful to be saved from and will give up freedoms to secure... So the more fearful the better and fear is best created in the absence of observable facts, so the ‘climate crisis’ is a great vehicle, as we cannot observe the effect of CO2 or even global-warming. We see weather extremes but these are not actually getting worse - see Apocalypse Never.
Helping the controllers control
The WEF help the controllers control. Government heads naturally lap up any opportunity to corral more power. The UN would love to get more money for their expensive agencies to extend their not always helpful unscrutinised influence. CEOs are supposedly just providing value for shareholders, following market demand but maybe they can get an edge on the competition by shaping demand and creating monopolies or cartels. It all boils down to autocratic central planning – Soviet style.
All of this paternalism might be excusable if the climate really was in crisis. Why are there scientists saying it is? They have to make a living: get published and hopefully win another research grant from the government or WWF, or get that sought-after teaching/research post at the university, or be an advisor to the BBC or Netflix. So they are frequently not free from bias and groupthink, especially when their livelihood is on the line.
However, it is notable that there are an increasing number of scientists who are interpreting the observed facts very differently to the WEF-related scientists. They tend to be more senior both because they have more experience and confidence in what they are saying, they understand office-politics and are also not so worried about losing those government grants or university sinecures. They generally say of-course the climate is changing – it always has done and there is little we can do to affect that. The rise in CO2 has been higher in the past, is actually beneficial to plant growth, and it’s not settled-science what it does to temperature. What is settled is the need for reliable electricity across the world (20% don’t have it) as this is key to Development and a higher priority. So many scientists with relevant expertise consider the current climate actions out of proportion. See Climate Change is Real. Global Warming is a Hoax. Dr. Patrick Moore co-funder of Greenpeace agrees.
Climate narrative not motive-free
So the WEF (Gov/Business/UN) climate narrative is not motive-free and seems largely not scientifically correct. It is aggressively pushed ‘you know we own the science’ (!) WEF ‘Sustainable Development Impact Meeting 2022’ and Google have ‘partnered’ with them to display the right search results – you may have seen the qualification boxes on YouTube.
We’re already giving lots of money to green beneficiaries through subsidies when this money could be spent on more positive technologies that will actually help people (https://www.lomborg.com/). Governments are using ‘climate crisis’ to aggressively curtail freedom – 15 minute cities, control of transport, carbon passports (projected), enforced through CBDCs (just announced!), higher energy costs through lack of investment, reduced food through banning fertilisers (caused Sri Lankan famine).
'You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy'
What is not controlled via climate-policy (or tried during Covid) is done through social progressivism, another story..., but they all end up with authoritarian elites, poorer people, diminished populations. The infamous quote 'You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy' means they will own everything and make you a dependent. If you watch this WEF promo video you might think – who voted for this? Who are the WEF to decide for us? Some of these directives you may welcome – but they may not be enforced the way you'd want. All the policies mentioned are being aggressively implemented even while our Governments pretend they aren’t.
Whatever mask is put on, or false ideology believed, this is not the way of the Kingdom and so it's part of our role to think harder and speak up about these things, even just for the sake of truth and honesty, but also for good government, human flourishing, simple freedom.
