For the climate change zealots and their profiteering masters, October 2024 may go down as one of the most damaging months in the movement’s history. A series of bombshell studies, published in their own ‘bibles of truth’, have – in my opinion – dismantled the so-called ‘climate change consensus’.

Unsurprisingly, it was crickets from the mainstream media. But behind the scenes, it’s becoming evident that the ‘climate boiling’ narrative is quietly being retired to the scrap heap of non-existent global emergencies, joining the ranks of acid rain, the new ice age, and the hole in the ozone layer.

The most devastating was published in Nature on October 16, Terrestrial photosynthesis inferred from plant carbonyl sulphide uptake. This study found that plants absorb roughly 31 per cent more CO2 than previously thought. The significance of this discovery cannot be overstated.

In my view, this is particularly interesting in light of a second study published in Nature the following week, on October 25, Enhanced ocean CO2 uptake due to near-surface temperature gradients. This study revealed that Earth’s oceans, in this case, the Atlantic, absorb 7 per cent more CO2 than earlier models suggested.

A small error of, say, 4 per cent in earlier predictions might be embarrassing, but an error margin of this size could render current climate models useless, raising serious questions about future emissions scenarios and the legitimacy of global Net Zero policies.

These findings add to the growing evidence that the natural world is remarkably efficient at managing carbon. For example, Nasa’s study CO2 is making Earth greener for now revealed that Earth has actually become greener over the past three decades. This aligns with the theories of a ‘cancelled’ astrophysicist who argued that Earth’s atmosphere is self-regulating, naturally adapting to balance gases like CO2, methane, and other vapours.

The third October study, published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Rapid shift in methane carbon isotopes suggests microbial emissions drove record high atmospheric methane growth in 2020-22, suggests that the surge in atmospheric methane from 2020 to 2022 came from natural microbial activity.

Despite this, over 150 countries, including Australia, have signed the Global Methane Pledge to cut methane emissions by 30 per cent by 2030. In response, some nations have started culling cattle and adding supplements to livestock feed without determining whether the methane emissions were natural or linked to human activity, such as farming. This global knee-jerk response to the climate change ideology has led to farmer suicides, land seizures, and further destabilisation of fragile food chains.

Adding to the revelations, an FOI request to the UK’s Meteorological Office (Met Office) delivered another blow to the global warming narrative. Ray Sanders’ October 31 report revealed that of the 302 sites listed as collecting climate data across the UK, 103 did not exist.

Official documentation lists figures from the closed sites as ‘estimated’. Unsurprisingly, the Met was not forthcoming on how these estimated figures were calculated. Even worse, some sites have been reporting figures for over 14 years.

The FOI request also revealed that many rural sites had been closed in favour of urban-based ones. Given the well-documented Urban Heat Island Effect, which can make cities up to 7 degrees warmer than surrounding rural areas, it’s not hard to see how data could be skewed to support alarmist rhetoric.

Worse still was the location of some of these temperature sites: they were placed in car parks, on beaches, near water treatment plants, surrounded by solar farms, or – straight out of a Monty Python sketch – between a Royal Air Force runway and a sewage treatment tank.

As a result, nearly 85 per cent of Met sites were deemed unacceptable for climate data reporting by the World Meteorological Organisation and the International Standards Organisation.

This matters because Met figures feed into global datasets the United Nations uses to ‘prove’ global warming. These same datasets justify expensive and damaging policies imposed on citizens worldwide through coercion and taxation.

Indeed, most climate policies are cloaked in the rhetoric of fear, shame and guilt, reinforced by threats of social disgrace, fines, or even imprisonment. Brutally deployed during the pandemic, these psychological tactics remain potent tools for enforcing compliance, even when such compliance undermines individual well-being.

Once internalised, these ‘mechanisms of control’ are so powerful they can evoke feelings of guilt and shame even when we’re alone and even when a behaviour or action is entirely innocent.

These methods of psychological manipulation are cruel and disproportionately punish those least responsible for the so-called ‘emergency’. Never mind that 80 per cent of global CO2 emissions come from just 57 companies. Presenting a very easy ‘fix’ if that was the actual goal of this agenda.

Yet, despite two decades of relentless climate ‘fear porn,’ cracks in the narrative are showing. Scepticism will only grow as climate ‘milestone years’ continue to pass without the predicted catastrophes.

Even in Australia, once a bastion of climate alarmism, public concern is waning. What the weather may or may not be doing one hundred years from now is of little concern when you’re struggling to put food on the table and keep a roof over your head.

The latest Melbourne Institute’s Taking the Pulse of the Nation Poll shows that the number of Australians listing climate change as one of their most critical election issues has slipped from 59 per cent in 2022 to 42 per cent this year. Support has declined most among Labor voters, 79.2 per cent to 58.6 per cent, and Greens voters, 90.4 per cent to 79 per cent. These two-year drops are enormous.

It will be interesting to see how the Teal party pivots in the 2025 election, given that their 2022 campaign was almost entirely focused on climate change and heavily funded by one of Australia’s richest and most outspoken climate activists.

These developments, including the fact that these narrative-shattering studies were ‘allowed’ to be published, particularly in those journals, make me nervous. It signals that the pervasive end-of-the-world narrative is about to shift, and recent history warns that with each new global emergency, the fear, shame, guilt, alarmism, and costs to citizens have grown exponentially.

This reminds me of the infamous quote from the Club of Rome’s 1994 book The First Global Revolution:

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill … All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.

So, with the death knoll sounding on the climate change narrative, the question becomes: What will be the next manufactured global crisis employed to ‘fix’ the problem of humanity?