Author: dizzy

  • Vote Labour for Genocidal Mass-murder like the Nazis did

    Spread the love
    UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel's Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don't do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
    UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel’s Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don’t do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
    UK Labour Party Shadow Foreign Secretary repeatedly heckled at a speech to the Fabian Society over his and the Labour Party's support for and complicity in Israel's genocide of Gaza.
    UK Labour Party Shadow Foreign Secretary repeatedly heckled at a speech to the Fabian Society over his and the Labour Party’s support for and complicity in Israel’s genocide of Gaza.
    Vote For Genocide Vote Labour.
    Vote Labour For Genocide.

  • Revealed: The areas where more than half of disabled people could lose their benefits

    Spread the love

    https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/benefit-cuts-pip-dwp-labour-disabled-people/

    Chancellor Rachel Reeves. Image: Flickr/ Alecsandra Dragoi/ Treasury

    Labour’s disability benefit cuts will impact an estimated 800,000 people, of whom half will lose their PIP entirely

    More than half of disabled people with daily living needs in parts of England and Wales could lose their benefits under the government’s welfare cuts, the Big Issue can reveal.

    Analysis of data from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), which was published in response to a written parliamentary question from Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesman Steve Darling, shows that at least half of all current claimants of the personal independence payment (PIP) daily living allowance in ten constituencies could lose this benefit under the government’s plans, which MPs are set to vote on next month.

    These include highly deprived Labour seats such as Tipton and Wednesbury and Wolverhampton South East – the constituency of senior cabinet minister Pat McFadden. Meanwhile the least affected constituencies tend to be those with much lower deprivation levels such as Guildford – although even here, more than a third of PIP daily living claimants are at risk from the cuts. 

    The most exposed constituency is Boston and Skegness, where 52% of claimants are at risk. The seat is represented in parliament by Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice. Polling for the Big Issue recently found that 68% of Reform voters believe Labour is failing on poverty.  

    …

    The DWP’s dataset is detailed, showing what proportion of current PIP daily living claimants with each type of disability scored under four points in all daily living assessment categories, putting them at risk from Labour’s plans:

    • There are 97 seats where at least 80% of PIP daily living claimants with arthritis are at risk, peaking at 87% in Derbyshire Dales
    • Almost three-quarters of claimants with cardiovascular disease in North Cotswolds could lose out under the cuts
    • More than 70% of claimants with multiple sclerosis and neuropathic diseases in Lewisham East and Sheffield Heeley are exposed to the rule change

    The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has published an interactive breakdown of the figures by constituency, though not including figures for the overall PIP caseload in each seat.

    …

    See the original article at https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/benefit-cuts-pip-dwp-labour-disabled-people/

    Keir Starmer says that the Labour Party under his leadership all feel a small part of Scunthorpe.
    Keir Starmer says that the Labour Party under his leadership all feel a small part of Scunthorpe.

  • What ACTUAL Genocide Experts Say about Gaza

    Spread the love
    UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel's Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don't do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
    UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel’s Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don’t do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
  • Institute of Economic Affairs Under Investigation by the Charity Commission

    Spread the love

    Original article by Sam Bright republished from DeSmog.

    A DeSmog collage. The Institute of Economic Affairs has its headquarters on Lord North Street, Westminster. Credit: Des Blenkinsopp (CC BY-SA 2.0)

    The regulator has opened a case against the Tufton Street group.

    The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) pressure group, which campaigns against clean energy policies, is being investigated by the charities regulator.

    The Good Law Project (GLP), a legal advocacy group, yesterday announced that it had been successful in forcing the Charity Commission to open a “regulatory compliance case” against the IEA.

    A Charity Commission spokesperson told DeSmog: “We can confirm that, following an internal review, we have opened a regulatory compliance case to assess potential regulatory concerns about the Institute for Economic Affairs.

    “Our case will examine the trustees’ management of perceptions of potential political bias, perceptions of a potential lack of transparency around funding, and perceptions that the charity may have pre-determined policy positions which would not be in keeping with its charitable purposes to advance education.”

    The IEA is registered as a charity, and the regulator states that “political activity must not become the reason for the charity’s existence.”

    In 2018, Greenpeace’s investigative journalism unit Unearthed revealed that the IEA had received funding from oil major BP every year since 1967. In response to the story, an IEA spokeswoman said: “It is surely uncontroversial that the IEA’s principles coincide with the interests of our donors.” 

    The IEA also received a £21,000 grant from U.S. oil major ExxonMobil in 2005.

    However, the IEA does not publicly declare its donors, and it’s not known if the pressure group has received funding from BP or ExxonMobil in more recent years.

    The IEA has extensive influence in politics and the media. It was pivotal to Liz Truss’s short-lived premiership as prime minister, and has boasted of its access to Conservative ministers and MPs.

    The IEA is a prominent supporter of the continued and extended use of fossil fuels. The group has advocated for the ban to be lifted on fracking for shale gas, calling it the “moral and economic choice”. The IEA has also said that a ban on new North Sea oil and gas licences would be “madness”, has criticised the windfall tax imposed by the UK on fossil fuel firms, and said that the previous government’s commitment to “max out” the UK’s oil and gas reserves was a “welcome step”.

    The IEA is part of the Tufton Street network – a cluster of libertarian think tanks and pressure groups that are in favour of more fossil fuel extraction and are opposed to state-led climate action. These groups are characterised by a lack of transparency over their sources of funding. 

    The Charity Commission initially rejected the GLP’s complaint about the IEA, which was lodged in March 2024 and backed by MPs from the Green Party, Liberal Democrats, and the Scottish National Party. The Charity Commission rejected the complaint after just 12 days.

    However, after the GLP threatened formal legal action against the Charity Commission for failing to properly consider the evidence against the IEA, it has agreed to open a compliance case.

    “We welcome this screeching u-turn from the Charity Commission who raced to clear the IEA last year,” said Good Law Project’s executive director Jolyon Maugham.

    “It shouldn’t have taken the threat of legal action to force the regulator to do its job. The IEA’s activities are the polar opposite of public benefit and we’re now urging the Charity Commission to go further in its investigation.”

    However, it’s unclear what action, if any, will be taken against the IEA if the regulator finds it in breach of charity rules. A previous case brought against the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) – the UK’s leading climate science denial group – didn’t lead to any meaningful sanctions against the Tufton Street group.

    The GLP accused the GWPF of breaching charity law by spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on one-sided research attacking climate science, and by funding the lobbying activities of its campaign arm Net Zero Watch. However, the Charity Commission asked the GWPF to make only minor changes to its ownership structure and output.

    An IEA spokesperson said: “We have received a letter from the Charity Commission and will be responding to them thoroughly in due course.”

    Original article by Sam Bright republished from DeSmog.

    Open Democracy: Think tanks helped Liz Truss crash the UK economy

  • Global wheat yields would be ‘10%’ higher without climate change

    Spread the love

    Original article by Orla Dwyer republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license.

    Wheat affected by drought conditions in Bremen, Germany in May 2025. Credit: dpa picture alliance / Alamy Stock Photo.

    Global yields of wheat are around 10% lower now than they would have been without the influence of climate change, according to a new study. 

    The research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, looks at data on climate change and growing conditions for wheat and other major crops around the world over the past 50 years. 

    It comes as heat and drought have this year been putting wheat supplies at risk in key grain-producing regions, including parts of Europe, China and Russia. 

    The study finds that increasingly hot and dry conditions negatively impacted yields of three of the five key crops examined. 

    Overall, global grain yields soared during the study period due to technological advancements, improved seeds and access to synthetic fertilisers. 

    But these yield setbacks have “important ramifications for prices and food security”, the study authors write. 

    Grain impacts 

    Most parts of the world have experienced “significant” yield increases in staple crops since the mid-20th century. 

    The new study notes that, in the past 50 years, yields increased by 69-123% for the five staple crops included in the research – wheat, maize, barley, soya beans and rice. 

    But crop production is increasingly threatened by climate change and extreme weather. A 2021 study projected “major shifts” in global crop productivity due to climate change within the next two decades.

    Earlier this year, Carbon Brief mapped out news stories of crops being destroyed around the world by heat, drought, floods and other weather extremes in 2023-24. Maize and wheat were the crops that appeared most frequently in these reports. 

    The crops that appeared most frequently in media reports of extreme weather impacts analysed by Carbon Brief, ranked in order of most to least frequent: maize, wheat, rice, potatoes, soya beans, olives, bananas, grapes, sunflowers and coffee. Credit: Carbon Brief.
    The crops that appeared most frequently in media reports of extreme weather impacts analysed by Carbon Brief, ranked in order of most to least frequent: maize, wheat, rice, potatoes, soya beans, olives, bananas, grapes, sunflowers and coffee. Credit: Carbon Brief.

    Hot and dry weather is currently threatening wheat crops in parts of China, the world’s largest wheat producer, Reuters reported this month.

    In the UK, wheat crops are struggling amid the “driest start to spring in England for almost 70 years”, the Times recently reported. Farm groups say some crops are already failing, the Guardian said. 

    As a result, global wheat supplies are “tight”, according to Bloomberg, with price rises possible depending on weather conditions in parts of Europe, China and Russia. 

    Food security and prices

    The study uses climate datasets, modelling and national crop statistics from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization to assess crop production and climate trends in key grain-producing countries over 1974-2023, including Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, the EU, Russia and the US. 

    The researchers assess climate observations and then use crop models to calculate what yields would have been with and without these climate changes. 

    For example, “if it has warmed 1C over 50 years and the model says that 1C leads to 5% yield loss, we’d calculate that the warming trend caused a loss of 5%”, Prof David Lobell, the lead study author and a professor at Stanford University, tells Carbon Brief. 

    The study looks at two reanalysis climate datasets that include information on temperature and rainfall over the past 50 years: TerraClimate (TC) and ERA5-Land. (Reanalysis data combines observations with a modern forecasting model.)

    The researchers find that yields of three of the five crops are lower than they would have been without warmer temperatures and other climate impacts in the past 50 years. 

    Yields were lower than they otherwise would have been by 12-14% for barley, 8-12% for wheat and 4% for maize. 

    The impacts on soya beans were less clear as there were “significant differences” between data sources. But both datasets show a negative impact on yields, ranging from 2% to 8%.

    The effects on rice yields were inconclusive, with one dataset showing a positive effect of around 1% while the other showed a negative effect of about 3%.   

    The chart below shows the estimated yield impacts for each crop based on the calculations from the two climate datasets.

    The estimated percentage impact of climate factors on yields of wheat (brown), maize (yellow), rice (blue), soya bean (green) and barley (purple) from 1974-2023, using two different historical climate datasets. Source: Lobell et al. (2025).
    The estimated percentage impact of climate factors on yields of wheat (brown), maize (yellow), rice (blue), soya bean (green) and barley (purple) from 1974-2023, using two different historical climate datasets. Source: Lobell et al. (2025).

    Given soaring overall crop yields during this time, impacts of 4-13% “may seem trivial”, the researchers write. But, they say, it can have “important ramifications for prices and food security” given growing food demand, noting: 

    “The overall picture of the past half-century is that climate trends have led to a deterioration of growing conditions for many of the main grain-producing regions of the world.” 

    Water stress and heat

    The study also assesses the impacts that warming and vapour pressure deficit – a key driver of plant water stress – have on crop yields. 

    Vapour pressure deficit is the difference between the amount of water vapour in the air and the point at which water vapour in the air becomes saturated. As air becomes warmer, it can hold more water vapour. 

    A high deficit can reduce plant growth and increase water stress. The models show that these effects may be the main driver of losses in grain yield, with heat having a more “indirect effect”, as higher temperatures drive water stress. 

    Agricultural irrigation system watering dry soil on a crop field in the US. Credit: Andrii Biletskyi / Alamy Stock Photo. Image ID: 3AKGHEX.
    Agricultural irrigation system watering dry soil on a crop field in the US. Credit: Andrii Biletskyi / Alamy Stock Photo.

    The study finds that vapour pressure deficit increased in most temperate regions in the past 50 years. 

    The researchers compare their data to climate modelling simulations covering the past 50 years. They find largely similar results, but notice a “significant underestimation” of vapour pressure deficit increases in temperate regions in most climate models. 

    Many maize-growing areas in the EU, China, Argentina and much of Africa have vapour deficit trends that “exceed even the highest trend in models”, they write. 

    The researchers also find that most regions experienced “rapid warming” during the study period, with the average crop-growing season now warmer than more than 80% of growing seasons 50 years ago. 

    The findings indicate that, in some areas, “even the coolest growing season in the present day is warmer than the warmest season that would have occurred 50 years ago”. 

    Wheat growing in a field. Credit: Jon Freeman / Alamy Stock Photo. Image ID: EXYNXR.
    Wheat growing in a field. Credit: Jon Freeman / Alamy Stock Photo.

    An exception to this is in the US and Canada, they find, with most maize and soya bean crop areas in the US experiencing lower levels of warming than other parts of the world and a “slight cooling” in wheat-growing areas of the northern Great Plains and central Canada.

    (The central US has experienced a cooling trend in summer daytime temperatures since the middle of the 20th century, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. There are many theories behind this “warming hole”, which has continued despite climate change.) 

    CO2 greening 

    Dr Corey Lesk, a postdoctoral researcher at Dartmouth College who studies the impacts of climate on crops, says these findings are in line with other recent estimates. He tells Carbon Brief: 

    “There are some uncertainties and sensitivity to model specification here – but it’s somewhat likely climate change has already reduced crop yields in the global mean.” 

    The study’s “main limitation” is that it is “behind” on including certain advances in understanding how soil moisture impacts crops, Lesk adds: 

    “Moisture changes and CO2 [carbon dioxide] effects are the largest present uncertainties in past and future crop impacts of climate change. This paper is somewhat limited in advancing understanding on those aspects, but it’s illuminating to pause and take stock.”

    The research looks at whether the benefits of CO2 increases during the past 50 years exceed the negative effects of higher levels of the greenhouse gas. 

    Rising CO2 levels can boost plant growth in some areas in a process called “CO2 fertilisation”. However, a 2019 study found that this “global greening” could be stalled by growing water stress. 

    Yield losses for wheat, maize and barley “likely exceeded” any benefits of CO2 increases in the past 50 years, the study finds. 

    The opposite is true for soya beans and rice, they find, with a net-positive impact of more than 4% on yields. 

    Soya beans growing in a field. Credit: Volodymyr Shtun / Alamy Stock Photo. Image ID: 3B84F7G.
    Soya beans growing in a field. Credit: Volodymyr Shtun / Alamy Stock Photo.

    Climate science has “done a remarkable job of anticipating global impacts on the main grains and we should continue to rely on this science to guide policy decisions”, Lobell, the lead study author, says in a press release. 

    He adds that there may be “blind spots” on specialised crops, such as coffee, cocoa, oranges and olives, which “don’t have as much modelling” as key commodity crops, noting: 

    “All these have been seeing supply challenges and price increases. These matter less for food security, but may be more eye-catching for consumers who might not otherwise care about climate change.”

     Lobell et al. (2025), A half-century of climate change in major agricultural regions: Trends, impacts, and surprises, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, doi:10.1073/pnas.2502789122

    Original article by Orla Dwyer republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license.

    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes' concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country's economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.