My Right to Reply to Independent attack


The Letters Editor,

The Independent,

Dear Sir,

I recently ventured a light-hearted Tweet criticising “Earth Hour”, and you saw fit to report this in a piece describing me as “an idiot”.

Surely the real idiots are those, like Ed Davey, who support a totally counter-productive and perverse UK/EU energy policy, which is doing untold economic damage, while arguably increasing global emissions.

We have turned our back on low-cost generation like coal, and invested heavily in expensive and intermittent renewables.  Energy costs are now driving energy-intensive industries out of the EU altogether, taking their jobs and their investment with them, and damaging our trade balance.  Former EU Industry Commissioner Antonio Tajani has said “We are creating an industrial massacre in Europe”.

Often these firms go to jurisdictions with lower environmental standards, thus increasing emissions per unit of production.  A recent report by Vivid Economics for DECC showed that imported refined petroleum products involve 35% higher emissions than equivalent products refined in the UK

Yours faithfully,


Note to Editor: The Vivid Economics Report:

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to My Right to Reply to Independent attack

  1. ehadmiral says:

    Roger, I concur with your comments, would that others would do the same, and on May 7th, vote UKIP Candidates into Office. Would make my 55th Wedding Anniversary Celebration Complete.

  2. omanuel says:

    Our primary goal must now be the return of sanity to troubled society, rather than defeating our opponents.

    Can we help the leftists escape the impossible position they are in so society can:

    1. Regain sanity knowing that science and religions agree: A benevolent and intelligent Higher Power created and sustains the world?

    2. Eliminate social insanity induced by irrefutable evidence: Malevolent and selfish world leaders allied with scientists to rule the world by deceit and enslave society, exactly as George Orwell predicted in the book he started writing in 1946, “Nineteen Eighty-Four”?

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      I’m not sure that insisting on theism helps with a political debate.

      • omanuel says:

        Science is a path to reality and realism seems consistent with theism.

      • omanuel says:

        Realism is not theism, but there is little or no difference in the conclusion.

      • Philip Rock says:

        Omanuel seems to prescribe a rather disparate collection of answers in order to try to sidestep the need to ‘defeat our opponents’.
        Among the answers prescribed are what appear to be the denial of the present day substitution of opinion in the stead of fact and evidence.
        Following the evidence in order to establish fact and reality is the founding tenet of ‘science’ laid down by Isaac Newton.
        Today the opposition consists of people who deliberately corrupt those basic tenets, people like Sir Paul Nurse, PRS, Nobel Peace Prizewinner in Physiology, CE and Director of the Francis Crick Institute, who actively argue against those basic tenets of science. You cannot return to righteousness and correctness with people like these corrupting and misdirecting us in our leadership.
        Any doubts felt about my words here will be assuaged by watching the BBC Horizon edition dedicated to airing Sir Paul’s insane philosophy with which he maliciously sets out to swipe aside Isaac Newton’s scientific principles. (BBC Horizon 25 January 2011, ‘Science Under Attack’.) In this programme Paul Nurse employs an approach that through wrong headed double talk attempts at one and the same time to establish that the conclusions that science draws upon are necessarily opinion (absolutely contrary to Newton’s tenet) and simultaneously argue that science is under attack by “climate change sceptics”.
        This is the method by which the celebrated Paul Nurse substitutes opinion instead of Newton’s science, and complains that people are doubting the conclusions of today’s “climate alarmist” scientists who themselves rely upon opinion!
        No wonder I despise this as outright premeditated dishonesty.
        Omanuel may have found it no more difficult to deNazify 1939 Germany with Hitler remaining in power in 1939 than to rectify the problems we face today with the likes of Paul Nurse remaining in the midst of our present day elite.

  3. Jane Davies says:

    I believe Prince Charles urged the peasants to turn off everything electric in response to earth hour and then a couple of days later he and his wife were transported the eighty miles from his home to Ascot and then back, not only that but the helicopter is based in Hampshire so the round trip used way more fuel than a road trip. It would seem that wasting energy is not something the millionaires of the UK are really bothered about. They talk the talk but have no intention of walking the walk.

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      Jane, You absolutely MUST READ Ross McKitrick’s damning attack on Earth Hour:

      • Flyinthesky says:

        Have you got a link to that Roger.

      • Jane Davies says:

        I totally agree with him Roger, I have never taken part in ‘earth hour’ it all seems so hypocritical. A bit like those godly folk who go to confession to assuage their guilt for all the bad things they have done, they get a cleaned slate so they can go on doing the bad things without worrying about their conscience. Anyway our last hurricane here on Vancouver Island caused us to have no electricity for four days so I have many power free hours in the bank!

      • catalanbrian says:

        Of course you would recommend it wouldn’t you as anything published by GPWF is bound to be biased against Earth Hour. But why? Earth hour is not about renewables, it is not about saving electricity nor, more importantly, is it about banning electricity, as the idiot McKitrick seems to believe. Far from being a damning attack, as you label it, it is the work of a fool who has not understood the purpose of Earth Hour. Earth hour is a symbolic act to remind ourselves that Earth’s resources are finite and that to squander them willy nilly, as you consistently suggest, is quite OK. It is not, and you should be ashamed of yourself for making your ridiculous and irresponsible suggestion.

    • Flyinthesky says:

      I thought you knew Jane, this carbon consciousness only applies to us lesser mortals. The movers and shakers of these proposals could afford their energy bills even if they were quadrupled. It’s the same with mass immigration the proponents are insulated from the consequences of their inflicted ideals by income and position, they enjoy the benefits while not realising the actual cost is socialised and borne by us.
      I have great respect for our future king but as a lot of the upper echelons of our society, insulated from the effects of their ideals, he’s swallowed the fluffy save the world perspective.

  4. ian wragg says:

    You’re wasting your time Roger, the MSM is complicit in supporting the stupid LibLabCon to the detriment of the population at large.
    I had a letter printed in this weeks local paper finishing with …only UKIP have a sensible energy policy…. this was left out.

  5. Ian Terry says:

    When you try and bring a little bit of common sense and understanding to the overall Climate Change/Global Warming debate it is proved everyday time and time again that from the highest in the land through to nearly all the media in whatever format you could mention that it is like pissing against the wind. The supporters are so scared of stepping out of line they have no time to stop and think about what they are really saying, but that is the price one has to pay for working in companies like the BBC. The majority of the press are the same and as for our current lot of politicians apart from about one hundred, forget it. The three stooges talk the same old tripe and never once do they mention fuel debt and poverty not only afflicting the domestic market but industry as well. Prince Charles may have travelled in the chopper but what about his protection squad I expect some travelled by road so as not to infringe on his privacy!!

    All we can do is keep on banging away and try and get as many into Faulty Towers Westminster before the whole of the UK is swallowed up by slow but sure obedience to Agenda 21which is the actual agenda for all this saving the planet crap.

  6. Mika says:

    This is worrying.
    I was brought up like you in a Cambridge where there was a Fascist Club, where atheists were as welcome as Christians. Where you were encouraged to argue, to think, to find out where you stood. The word “know” was far more forbidden than any other four letter word – and we didn’t actually swear much.
    Not so now.
    Part of the reason, I am afraid, is our schools and universities, who seem to dislike arguing and much prefer to agree, to follow fashion.”The closing of the American mind” and Mark Steyn in “After America” support the decay of University thought.
    We, I regret, are just seen as old f””ts we ought simply to curl up and die.

  7. Katie says:

    Look at this link. This is why wind turbines have to be stopped.

    What is going on in Scotland under the banner of the SNP (nationalistic party) is absolutely abhorrent. What you see on this video is going on all over Scotland. There are thousands of turbines that have been consented waiting to be erected and guess what???? The rest of the country pays for the subsidies. There will be nothing natural to look at in Scotland soon. Please send the link to all your friends. We need people to be aware of what is happening.

  8. Anne says:


    Imposing in there hundreds,
    Such an army on display,
    Those alien grey metal monsters
    I saw while on my way.
    Aliens on our shores have landed,
    So tall, backs straight and true,
    At night they watch through flashing eyes
    Of red, at me and you.

    Some have scaled the mountains,
    Others near schools and homes,
    Of one thing I am certain,
    Those aliens have no souls.
    No “whispering” from their ranks at all,
    An unearthly sound they make,
    It envelops each and everyone,
    No more can humans take.

    Three giant arms revolving,
    Enveloping all around,
    They’re here to ‘save the planet’,
    The biggest “con” I have found.
    Such hideous tall grey monsters,
    Invade green and pleasant lands,
    To stay for generations,
    Unless the people make a stand.

    These aliens feed on power and wind,
    Without either, they will die,
    They’re NOT environmental friendly,
    They’re for profit, (at a cost), that’s WHY.

  9. The climate models on which the entire Catastrophic Global Warming delusion rests are built without regard to the natural 60 and more importantly 1000 year periodicities so obvious in the temperature record. The modelers approach is simply a scientific disaster and lacks even average commonsense .It is exactly like taking the temperature trend from say Feb – July and projecting it ahead linearly for 20 years or so. They back tune their models for less than 100 years when the relevant time scale is millennial. This is scientific malfeasance on a grand scale.
    The temperature projections of the IPCC – UK Met office models and all the impact studies which derive from them have no solid foundation in empirical science being derived from inherently useless and specifically structurally flawed models. They provide no basis for the discussion of future climate trends and represent an enormous waste of time and money. As a foundation for Governmental climate and energy policy their forecasts are already seen to be grossly in error and are therefore worse than useless. A new forecasting paradigm needs to be adopted.
    For forecasts of the timing and extent of the coming cooling based on the natural solar activity cycles – most importantly the millennial cycle – and using the neutron count and 10Be record as the most useful proxy for solar activity check my blog-post at
    The most important factor in climate forecasting is where earth is in regard to the quasi- millennial natural solar activity cycle which has a period of about 960 years .For evidence of this cycle see Figs 5-9. From Fig 9 it is obvious that the earth is just approaching ,just at or just past a peak in the millennial cycle.
    I suggest that more likely than not the general trends from 1000- 2000 seen in Fig 9 will likely generally repeat from 2000-3000 with the depths of the next LIA at about 2650. The best proxy for solar activity is the neutron monitor count and 10 Be data. My view ,based on the Oulu neutron count – Fig 14 is that the solar activity millennial maximum peaked in Cycle 22 in about 1991. There is a varying lag between the change in the in solar activity and the change in the different temperature metrics. There is a 12 year delay between the neutron peak and the probable millennial cyclic temperature peak seen in the RSS data in 2003.
    There has been a cooling temperature trend since then (Often mis-interpreted as a “pause”) There is likely to be a steepening of the cooling trend in 2017- 2018 corresponding to the very important Ap index break below all recent base values in 2005-6. Fig 13.
    The Polar excursions of the last few winters in North America.are harbingers of even more extreme winters to

  10. Richard111 says:

    Never mind The Independent, I think the so called BBC is far worse.
    My personal opinion; the so called BBC has been bought by the EU.
    The bias during this election period is so blatant I find I can no longer stomach watching.

  11. Pingback: Forget the science for a minute and judge with your heart | Paul J Chapman

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s