Jim Matkin

The climate crisis agenda was built upon a predicted global warming scenario, now widely recognised as 'implausible'. The Earth is not facing runaway warming. First introduced in 2011 to guide policy, this extreme high-emissions projection - known as RCP8.5 (and later SSP5-8.5) - predicted a 5.5°C temperature rise by 2100. This misleading scenario was used to create subsequent dramatic news headlines for over a decade. With the retirement of the extreme 5°C baseline ahead of the 7th Assessment Report (AR7), the ceiling for high-emissions projections has dropped significantly. The IPCC’s high-end baselines have been downgraded towards a 3.3°C ceiling - but even this appears to be implausible. The flaws in this runaway warming scenario lies in the record of Earth's long climate history. The world exists within a long-term ice age regime that has spanned 34 million years. Current temperatures are actually 9°C 'colder' than the planet's 24°C average across the past 485 million years (Judd et al., Science 2024). The current average temperature stands at approximately 15°C. This already low ceiling reflects a modest increase of up to 1.4°C over the past 250 years since the start of the Industrial Revolution. It also shows that increases in CO₂ do not automatically trigger runaway temperatures. Earth’s climate system is amazingly complex, and is driven by multiple interacting variables. The principal driver of our current ice age cycle lies in orbital anomalies known as Milankovitch cycles, while global surface temperatures remain a composite of distinct regional dynamics. Far from causing ecological collapse, the atmospheric CO₂ rise of just over 100 ppm has actually driven a substantial expansion of global leaf area across previously sparse terrain. Certain crop yields have surged, a phenomenon confirmed worldwide via NASA satellite vegetation data. At roughly 420 parts per million, CO₂ remains a trace gas - still among the lowest concentrations in geological history. The atmosphere is more than 99.9% nitrogen, oxygen, and argon, while atmospheric water vapor exceeds CO₂ concentrations many times over. A deceptive, anthropogenic CO₂-driven warming narrative had been heavily promoted by the United Nations and it's agencies, the World Meteorological Organization and the IPCC. This served as the foundational justification for Net Zero mandates. In practice, it forced the premature dismantling of reliable hydrocarbon energy infrastructure across most Western nations. The downstream result has been widespread economic decline and a historic transfer of industrial capacity to Beijing. China now produces roughly 90% of the world's wind turbines, solar panels and critical processing components. Many consider this to be the greatest transfer of wealth in world history. However, it also suggests the world faces a vast and unpredictable geopolitical shakeup.

The United Nations bureaucracy and it's global media echo chamber have manufactured a permanent state of climate weather alarm. This climate narrative did not emerge in a vacuum; it was driven by a massive, self-perpetuating global apparatus. The World Meteorological Organization is often seen as a neutral referee, but it is far from impartial. The WMO became a specialised UN agency in 1951, and it operates on an annual budget of roughly $138.7 million with a staff of 350 to 400. Rather than serving as a passive or reliable coordinator of daily weather data, it is the central public relations engine for a global strategy rooted in alarmism. This institution sits within an even broader framework: the United Nations itself, with an annual budget of $3.45 billion and a workforce of approximately 190,000. Arguably the biggest non-governmental network in the world, the UN spent decades laying the groundwork for an environmental emergency before officially launching the narrative in 1988. That same year, the WMO and the UN Environment Programme co-founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - the institutional core tasked with synthesising meteorological observations into an ongoing, bubbling crisis. Together, this triad forms an unbroken line of influence: The WMO bridges meteorological data with international political agendas. The IPCC relies on selective, distorted frameworks to shape the scientific consensus. The UN leverages the resulting narratives to push global policy and economic centralisation. We see the output of this institutional framework every day on our screens and in our feeds. A global PR machine continuously feeds the public worst-case scenarios packaged in dramatic rhetoric: 'heat domes', 'bomb cyclones' and 'code red emergencies'. The daily weather cycle has devolved into advertising junk that systematically ignores counter-balancing observations. Isobars on TV weather maps now glow in increasingly alarming shades of crimson to visually reinforce danger. Meteorologists routinely overhype routine weather events by sticking to WMO and IPCC guidelines. Local news outlets and national meteorological agencies are thoroughly embedded in this UN ecosystem, steeped in high-alarm daily targets that prioritise speculative, worst-case computer models over real-world data.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was established 38 years ago, ostensibly as a neutral agency to gather objective scientific information on climate. Instead, it became the focused, driving force behind the greatest environmental and social upheaval in modern history. From day one, the IPCC was a highly politicised body. Founded entirely by United Nations agencies - the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the UN Environment Programme - it gave the UN complete administrative control over the climate agenda. The sheer complexity of the machinery combined with the aura of technical secrecy is precisely what insulates it from scrutiny. The WMO bridges the gap between raw meteorological data, international political agendas and the media. By linking thousands of land stations, ocean buoys, aircraft and satellites, its role is to share critical weather and water data. However, this infrastructure was co-opted into a public relations framework. Consequently, the world has been bombarded with overhyped weather hysteria for almost 40 years. Mainstream news outlets routinely prioritise speculative, worst-case climate models over empirical observations, maintaining a permanent state of crisis designed to shape public compliance. Climate management bears no relation to the UN’s foundational charter of resolving international conflict; this is a textbook case of bureaucratic mission creep. Nor are UN agencies passive coordinators. Through the WMO, they ensured a crisis framework became the baseline for all weather reporting. Local weather outlets and national agencies now operate inside an ecosystem heavily influenced by overarching, high-alarm targets, broadcasting continuous warnings of global boiling, sea level rises, and a 'Code Red for Mankind' - with UN leadership acting as the chief amplifier. The IPCC did not recruit independent scientific staff; instead, its administrative apparatus became active in sponsoring and selecting studies that supported the carbon dioxide hypothesis. Research raising questions or doubts was minimised or discarded. Critics found their work starved of publishers, and in some cases, university tenures were threatened. This environment birthed foundational, highly charged studies designed to lock in future warming projections. Among the earliest was the 1999 'hockey stick' graph by Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes, which erased historical temperature variations to present a sharp, unprecedented upward spike in the twentieth century. For decades, the institution promoted worst-case scenarios. A prime example is the IPCC's 2011 report warning of a 5.5-degree temperature rise - a prediction so extreme that mainstream scientists have finally conceded it was implausible and quietly withdrawn it. Yet the pattern of reliance on flawed models over real-world observation had already been set. Armed with this manufactured crisis, the UN called for the rapid dismantling of hydrocarbon fuels - coal, oil and natural gas - which had lifted humanity out of stagnation and powered the Industrial Revolution. Almost every aspect of modern civilisation, from transport networks to manufacturing plants, relies entirely on these dense, inexpensive, and reliable energy sources. The proposed replacements - intermittent wind and solar - have proven fundamentally incapable of providing raw baseload power. Yet the push to phase out hydrocarbons has marched forward regardless, driving the planned decline of heavy industrial production, severe economic downturns, and widespread job losses across Western nations. By establishing the IPCC, the UN created a centralised machinery that successfully synthesised climate science into a global political weapon - sacrificing empirical reality on the altar of bureaucratic expansion.

Dramatic predictions of a 5.5°C rise by 2100 are now dismissed as 'implausible' - and planet Earth is not even remotely facing runaway warming. The United Nations warming scenario is now widely acknowledged by scientists as implausible. We also live within a cooler ice age regime that has lasted tens of millions of years. Global temperatures remain a full 9°C colder than the 24°C average spanning the past 485 million years (Judd et al., Science 2024). Also, world temperatures have only changed by up to 1.4°C over the roughly 250 years since the start of the Industrial Revolution. This is not sufficient justification for a crisis. First introduced in 2011 to guide policy, this extreme scenario - known as RCP8.5 (and later SSP5-8.5) - served as the primary engine for the terrifying headlines for over a decade. With the retirement of the extreme 5.5°C baseline ahead of the 7th Assessment Report (AR7), the ceiling for high-emissions temperature projections has been dropped. The IPCC's high-end baselines have been downgraded toward a maximum around 3.3°C, and even this is likely to be just as implausible. Perhaps this is why the latest AR7 committee hearings have just been suspended. Changes in CO₂ concentrations do not automatically trigger runaway temperatures. The world is too complex, and too many other factors have been left out. Any analysis of past climate reveals the world does not have a single temperature or a single climate; these are computerised composites, designed to maximise existential dread. A lift in CO₂ has already delivered measurable green leaf expansion across the world, as captured by NASA satellite data. Some cereal crop yields have jumped by 280%. CO₂ is a trace atmospheric gas - around 420 parts per million - which is among the lowest concentrations in all geological history, while the atmosphere is over 99% nitrogen, oxygen, and argon, with water vapor exceeding CO₂ many times over. This deceptive original scenario - promoted heavily through the UN and the media - galvanised Net Zero and unleashed global hysteria. It forced the premature decline of reliable energy systems across the West and deindustrialised heavy industry. The West's arch competitor, China, inherited the title of the world's greatest manufacturing nation in history. Now Beijing provides around 90% of the world's turbines, solar panels and components. Its industrial power is built on the world's greatest volume of coal-fired power stations. It is also the world's largest annual emitter of carbon dioxide, producing roughly 30% to 33% of global carbon dioxide emissions annually - releasing over 13 billion tons per year. This is the greatest transfer of wealth in history - without a shot fired in anger.

Part 2 of 2: Without consultation with their own citizens, Western governments aligned with the UN and its coterie of globalist institutions, signed onto framework agreements like the 2015 Paris Accord. What began as voluntary, moralising international commitments were rapidly written into binding domestic legislation. The end goal has been the erosion of national sovereignty, democracy and economic freedom. The resulting legacy routinely excludes taxpayers from decision-making while elite-driven administrations power ahead. These governments commit billions in subsidies to unproven pet projects - such as Australia’s disastrous $9 trillion scheme to become a green hydrogen superpower. Prior to this shift, Western industrial policy prioritised dense, dispatchable energy security - the foundation of modern life. Today, governments lock in multi-decade decarbonisation commitments that outlast their electoral tenures by decades. Vast tracts of agricultural and wilderness land have been greenlit and bulldozed for transmission corridors, access roads and sprawling industrial turbine arrays. All of this serves an intangible belief system that vilifies carbon dioxide - the fundamental building block of biological growth and energy creation. The result is the most expensive household power bills in history, the destruction of dispatchable coal and gas capacity and chronic damage to national economic and defensive resilience. Rule by decree was the governance model of communism under Lenin, not of democratic representation. Net Zero stands as the most diabolical act of self-inflicted harm ever visited upon democratic nations by their own leadership.

The loss of cultural Western icons to raging mobs has opened the floodgates - and the old world order is on the ropes. Make no mistake, this is an orchestrated agenda, ranging from climate alarmism to unchecked mass migration. The coordinated assault on cities across France and the United Kingdom is eating away at a cultural heritage preserved across generations going back a thousand years. That is its purpose. A web of interconnected forces has reversed the historic relationship between the free citizen and the state. Suddenly, democracy has been forgotten, and Western leaders are revealing just how deeply the rot has spread. These mobs are highly organised. We see hard-bitten socialists, driven by hatred for a society that left them in the lurch living on welfare and resentment, now eager to tear down the structures built around them. Today, they operate alongside hundreds of thousands of migrants from Africa and the Middle East, with targets increasingly defined by new ideological fault lines. Carrying Palestinian flags, they target and loot Jewish-owned stores. The traditional bonds of society are being torn apart. At the apex of this tsunami sits the immutable United Nations, spreading its fear campaigns and overstepping authority under the banner of a climate crisis. Under the guise of humanitarianism, the UN apparatus has 'enabled' migration flows - providing accommodation, communications and transport. Unelected and unaligned with Western national interests, this global bureaucracy of nearly 190,000 officials has become the staging ground for a One World Government. This vast network of people and agencies is quietly at work eroding the tottering sovereignty and supremacy of the West. Domestically, governments are using heavy-handed, creeping authoritarianism to quell dissent. They imagine that this is how democracy works, but it isn't. Armed with arbitrary authority, they police language, values and daily behavior. This is starkly evident in the fractured responses to these uprisings across the United Kingdom, France and Sweden, where national authorities increasingly thunder at their own citizens for daring to voice anger over an exploding cultural time bomb. They throw their own people before the courts, then lock them up to silence everyone else. Let's face it. The West has been self-destructing for decades. It's just that time has finally caught up. As state power expands, the fabric of civilisation shrinks. Within a single generation, traditional family structures - once the basis for moral instruction, emotional security, and self-reliance - have been displaced by a doctrine of supreme executive control. No one believed it would end this way. But it does look like the end.

Weather reporting has transitioned from a routine public service into a continuous broadcast of existential dread. Day after day, audiences are subjected to a barrage of dramatic terminology like 'heat domes', 'bomb cyclones' and 'climate emergencies'. They are shown on weather maps glowing with increasingly alarming shades of crimson. Yet who sets the tone for this relentless narrative, and why does the media machine strictly adhere to worst-case scenarios yet ignore counter-balancing data? I have looked beyond local news outlets to the insternational framework that created global climate news. I found the crisis narrative isn't an accident; it's driven from top-down by global institutions using slick public relations tactics. The mainstream media pretends climate alarmism is a spontaneous response to current events, but its structural roots are deeply institutional. The World Meteorological Organization is a specialised agency of the United Nations, not a passive coordinator of weather data. Critically, the WMO and UN Environment Programme founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1988. By establishing the IPCC, they created a central body responsible for synthesising climate science into a global climate crisis. This connection is vital. The WMO bridges the gap between meteorological data and international political agendas. While a direct, covert directive ordering local meteorologists to falsify daily forecasts can't be explicitly proven, the WMO’s role in the IPCC ensures a 'crisis framework' is the baseline for meteorological reports. Local weather outlets and national agencies operate inside an ecosystem heavily influenced by the WMO’s overarching, high-alarm targets. The crisis agenda is broadcast and printed by daily media, which relies on this heavily doctored public relations framework. Mainstream news outlets systematically prioritise worst-case, speculative climate models over real wold observations. This aligns with the political agenda of international bodies, and feeds the media's 'attention economy', where fear translates directly into clicks, views and revenue. What is entirely absent from modern journalism is any meaningful self-analysis or critique of this invisible climate PR structure. Media outlets broadcast dire predictions, but rarely hold themselves to account when predictions fail to materialise. By continuously dramatising short-term weather as proof of climate collapse, the news media operates as the PR arm of global climate agendas. This avoids any investigation into the framework that actually funds and promotes the climate crisis narrative. Perhaps the most telling evidence of a biased narrative is what the media chooses not to report. While worst-case scenarios get wall-to-wall coverage, significant scientific data that complicates the narrative is routinely ignored. A prime example is the phenomenon of 'global greening', identified by NASA satellites over multiple decades. It has revealed a significant increase in green vegetation across the planet, largely driven by increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which acts as a fertiliser for plant life. According to satellite observations, this greening effect has added millions of square kilometres of vegetation - equivalent to a new continent of green. Yet, this massive, verifiable ecological shift is virtually never analysed or reported by major weather news outlets. To report global greening would introduce unwanted nuance, defuse public anxiety, and contradict the narrative of impending, unmitigated catastrophe. The constant state of unease permeating modern weather reporting is the product of this highly coordinated systemic framework, run by the WMO and UN. The media apparatus thrives on sensationalism and ignores balancing scientific observations, like NASA's global greening data. The result is a public relations machine designed to drive a permanent state of crisis.