Want to fight global warming? Start rationing as Britain did in World War 2! At least, that’s the idea that “one of Britain’s oldest and most influential newspapers” is promoting.
British publication The Times ran one of the nuttiest bits of climate change babble in a Feb. 20 story headlined: “How to fix global warming? Bring back rationing, say scientists.” [emphasis, links added]
The first sentence of the piece dripped with brain-melting nonsense: “Second World War-style rationing of petrol, household energy, and meat could help to fight climate change, British scientists have recommended.”
The newspaper cited “researchers” – whom it does not name until the end of the article – from the University of Leeds who published climate propaganda disguised as analysis in the journal Ethics, Policy & Environment.
The Times quoted the study, which also suggested giving citizens a “carbon allowance” and creating a “scarcity of fossil fuels.”
Apparently, the elitist Times is itching for a déjà vu to satisfy the extremism of woke climate idealists. The Times currently has an estimated Monday-Saturday print readership of 843,766.
JunkScience.com founder Steve Milloy slammed the British newspaper in comments to MRC Business: “Climate alarm has always been about increasing government control of our lives. Climate is tyranny disguised as a necessity.”
Of course, what The Times was selling was massive government intervention. “The researchers argue that, as a first step, governments would need to regulate sectors such as the oil industry, with the importing of fossil fuels ‘banned or restricted’ in certain areas.”
In effect, said The Times, “[t]his would create a scarcity of fossil fuels, with rationing then introduced to ‘manage the scarcity’, they explain.”
The actual so-called “study” cited by The Times took the insanity a step further: “‘Governments could limit the number of long-haul flights an individual could make in a year or they could limit the amount of petrol one can buy in a month.’”
Uh, what? How is that a good thing? Statista noted that Britain’s dependence on fossil fuels in 2021 was still a sizable 78.3 percent, which indicates disaster if the British government starts rationing out fuel.
Apparently, The Times pushed for other nations to adopt this same insane model: “Researchers from Leeds said that rationing would help countries to cut their carbon emissions ‘rapidly and fairly’ even though it was often seen as an ‘unpalatable option.’”
The newspaper even promoted how “[a]n alternative method would be through the ‘modernization of rationing with carbon cards, like bank cards, to keep track of your carbon allowance rather than ration cards.’”
Milloy stated that “[r]ather than calling for rationing, scientists should be asking why there has been no global warming since 2015 despite about 500 billion tons of emissions.”
He continued: “We are told that every emission causes warming, yet there has been none since 2015. So what good would rationing even do?”
The suggestion to force people onto an unwanted diet to fight the left’s green boogeyman is about as stupid as when climate change extremists were advocating for “melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot” to stave off so-called global cooling in the 1970s.
Top image screencap via YouTube.
Read more at NewsBusters
Always odd how such articles will state that “scientists say…” without ever identifying who these scientists are and what qualifications they have. Nor how they derived their suggested solutions. We are just expected to accept the authority of these so-called “scientists”.
Correct Steve,
All proper studies cite relevant sources.
The UK already has a rationing program. By making energy artificially expense, most are limited in how much they can use. The wealthy elite are exempt because they can afford the higher prices. This is why a rationing plan will never be implemented. Suddenly these elite would also be required to limit their consumption.
No, they’ll just winter in Spain. Funny old thing about the rich and climate control. Many of the UK castles and manors were demolished because the gormless b@st@rd owners wouldn’t spend their inheritance heating or maintaining them. The local councils stopped absorbing them as tourist attractions. If you plunked one of those heritage buildings down anywhere in North America, they’d be priceless.
I visited Scotland in the ’80s. I noticed that most of the garden walls had been stripped of their iron rails. The metal was needed for the war effort. Anyone who didn’t give up their iron was shamed. That was real. I was also told that children were told to gather milkweed pods to make parachutes for the troops, and gather pine cones for fuel. That was phony.
“They” say that the first victim of war is the truth. We’re living in a phony idealogical war. Truth was dismissed before the first shot was fired. You and I will be the victims unless we vote NO!
All this over totally fake threat why dont they Ration out to those in their Paralament instead of the People
We don’t need to ration. If all the climatistas, rent seekers and craven, lying politicians were gone, there would be enough for everybody.
Climate change is not about science, it never has been. Sure it claimed its place on the world stage via pseudo-science,theory, innuendo and hyper-activism. But it’s real strength lies in its shape-shifting, chameleon-esque role-playing tour de force! CC has been endowed with omnipresence with a dash of omnipotence thrown in–it is cast as the cause of floods, drought, heat, cold, snow, rain, not to mention disease and pestilence—you name it! Environmentalists have bathed in the opium calling CC their religion while governments codify rules, guidance’s and laws using CC like a hammer forcing unnecessary change on their citizens! Soon even Americans will stop uttering unintelligible, double-speak like sound-bite repeaters and realize the fight against CC is coming for them!!!!!
The Times is sounding more like Tabloid BUT THEN EVEN batboy is a little more believable then the M.S. Media