The United Nations has abandoned any pretense of rationality and has fully unleashed its doomsday cult dark side.

It appears that the UN climate change executive secretary, Simon Steel, has picked up where Al Gore left off, trying to scare us all into believing in the climate boogeyman. Thing is, thanks to Al Gore, we’ve heard it all before. We were supposed to be dead by now. The Pacific Islands were supposed to be underwater by now. The polar bears were supposed to be extinct. The Arctic was supposed to be ice free by now. We’ve passed deadline after deadline of if we don’t act before then, then it will be too late. Okay, then I guess it’s all too late cuz we didn’t act by then. But conveniently, they keep coming up with more time. Somehow the deadline wasn’t actually the deadline, but this next one. Oh, this next deadline that we’re announcing right now. This one’s really super serious. And if we don’t act before then, look out.

Simon Steele himself has played this game. Giving a speech in April last year headlined 2 years to save the world. Okay, mate, calm down, cuz we’re already 25 years past the year 2000 deadline that I can remember from my childhood. If we don’t act before the year 2000, it’ll be too late. So, Simon, how about you start explaining to me why they were all wrong and yet somehow you are right. In the hope that Simon might have had something valuable to say at that two years to save the world speech from last year, I actually watched the entire thing and I’ll admit I did learn something new.

[From video]

The transformative potential of bold climate action in tandem with steps to advance gender equality is one of the fastest ways to move away from business as usual. [End video]

Who knew? Who knew that gender inequality was a key driver of the climate catastrophe? I’ll be honest, I had no idea. And that’s why we need people like Simon traveling the world and educating us all. He certainly had some alarming things to say in his recent visit to Australia. And we’ll get to more on that in just a minute. But first, my name’s Topher Field. This is the Topher Project. And I help busy people like you to keep up with the world as it changes around you. I am 100% viewer supported and I really appreciate each and every one of you who has taken the time to buy me a coffee via the button at topherfield.net. And to those of you who have bought my books, my DVDs or any of my merch, including, by the way, my new designs from the Oddcast, which are now available they are bright, they are retro, and they are fun. And they are there alongside my established Topher designs that you know and love. And all of my Topher designs are now also available in a long sleeve tee, not just these short-sleeved ones. And all of it’s available from goodpeoplebreakbadlaws.com. And I thank you so much for your support.

So Simon Steele has come to Australia to share his wisdom with us.

And I feel honored to have someone of his caliber lecturing me about the end of the world. I was hoping he might take a moment to explain the link between gender equality and the global mean temperature, but sadly he didn’t have the time. He was busy telling us that pretty soon we’ll all be eating a carnivore diet. Well, he didn’t put it in quite those words. He said, and I’m going to quote from The Australian, who published these quotes because interestingly, I can’t find a full video of Simon’s speech anywhere online. There’s only short highlights. Now, maybe I’ve missed it. Maybe it’s out there somewhere. Or maybe they didn’t put the full video up because, well, because he said this, according to The Australian: mega droughts will make fresh fruit and veg a once a year treat.

Kind of sounds a bit like Tim Flannery saying that even the rains we have won’t be enough to fill our rivers and our dams anymore. Hmm. Simon, how about we come back to that little prediction when the Arctic is actually ice free or when hurricanes actually become more frequent and intense or when wildfire burned area actually increases rather than decreasing. Or just the damage done and the lives lost to extreme weather goes up instead of down. Or hey, maybe when our dams are actually empty. Or just something some evidence of one of the climate cult’s past predictions of doom actually coming true. Because right now, I gotta be honest with you Simon, I don’t have a lot of reasons to listen to a single word you say.

Too hard? Can’t do that? Fine, I’ll do you a deal. How about you just explain to me what gender equality has to do with the global mean temperature. Let’s just start there. No?

Well, Simon actually manages to go one better in the very next sentence. The country could face a $6.8 trillion GDP loss by the year 2050. Wow, that’s a big number that’s supposed to sound scary. It actually comes from a report by the Investor Group on Climate Change. And as best as I can tell from reading that report, they are talking in Australian dollars.

So, let’s do some quick math to see just how scary a $6.8 trillion GDP loss over the next 25 years will really be for Australia.

The Australian GDP in 2024 was 1.76 trillion USD or 2.7 trillion Australian dollars. That’s just in that one year last year alone. Now according to the PricewaterhouseCooper report titled The World in 2050, we can expect the Australian GDP per capita—that’s the per person GDP—to grow by about 40% from what it is now by the year 2050. In addition to that, we’re going to add about another 10 million people to Australia according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics over the same period of time.

So we do some quick sums, and we can expect our cumulative GDP over the next 25 years to be something like 99 trillion Australian, which means that even in this doomsday do nothing scenario where climate change costs us barely 7% of our GDP (which is a lot until you realize that $6.8 trillion is only 20% of the expected increase in our GDP over the next 25 years)… So, and stick with me here because I know this stuff’s kind of boring, but I promise you it’s worth it: At worst, what Simon is saying in this doomsday do nothing scenario assuming that everything they say is actually correct and will actually come to pass climate change will cost us about 20% of the growth in GDP over the next 25 years.

Not 20% of GDP, not a 20% reduction in your quality of life, your GDP as you experience it today. No, no, no. 20% reduction in the growth.

That’s a vitally important detail. 20% of the growth. Because what they’re admitting, whilst trying not to admit it, is that climate change even in their worst-case scenarios—is not going to make your life worse. It’s just going to slow down the rate at which your life gets better. And even then, it’ll only shave 20% (1/5th) off the rate at which your life gets better over the next 25 years. That’s it.

Does that really sound like a boogeyman that is so dangerous, so terrible, that we should risk everything risk destroying what we already have to protect ourselves from that?

Or maybe, just maybe, if this is literally their worst-case scenario (assuming that they are actually right about everything news flash, they’re not), should we maybe just relax a little bit?

Now, before you object that I’m being selfish because even though it won’t be that bad for us here in Australia, it’ll be devastating for everybody else what about the third world, or whatever you might choose to think of? Just hold that thought, because that same Investor Group on Climate Change report states plainly that Australia will likely face a greater hit to our GDP than the global average.

In other words, it won’t be worse for everyone else. It’s actually going to be harder on us than it will on most of them. And it’s not going to be very hard on us. And that actually makes perfect sense, because in developing economies, they have two distinct advantages over us in terms of growth. First is that their GDP growth tends to be much faster, much higher. That’s because they are benefiting from modern technology as well as from our wealth and the fact that with modern technology they can trade with us globally. So as a result, those developing economies are able to grow very, very quickly. But also they benefit from the fact that they don’t have the overhead of the old technology and infrastructure. They’re building everything now with current technology. They benefit from what we developed over the last 200 years. They’re kind of jumping in getting a hundred years’ worth of development in 10, 20 years. It’s not bad.

So, even if we take Simon at his word and assume that what he says will actually happen which is a very generous assumption, by the way then honestly, what are we worried about? That instead of being 50% richer than we are today, we’ll only be 40% richer? Is that really a reason to risk destroying ourselves?

If that’s the worst-case scenario, then I can already tell you with some confidence that the net zero medicine is way, way more destructive than the climate change disease. The UN has become a climate doomsday cult. And even when I give them the benefit of believing them against my own better judgment, I must say, I just can’t make myself be as frightened as what Simon clearly wants me to be.

See, in order to believe that we must pursue net zero, that we have to stop exporting fossil fuels, and we have to convert the entire Australian economy over to wind and solar power in order to believe that we have to do that, we have to believe quite a lot of other things first. First, we have to believe that CO2 is a significant driver of the temperature change here on Earth, rather than the other way around—that temperature is a significant driver of the oceans releasing or absorbing CO2 into the atmosphere.

Second, we’d have to believe that man’s emissions of CO2 are significant enough to affect the climate. Then thirdly, we’d have to believe that there is no natural balancing mechanism that keeps CO2 within reasonably safe boundaries which would be a perfectly reasonable thing to assume, given that our planet has supported life for a very long time without humans having any real influence on atmospheric CO2 levels before now. So something has been keeping them in check.

And then we’d have to believe that the changes to the climate being caused by this man-made CO2 that the Earth is not properly accommodating and keeping in check were actually going to be significant enough to be noticeable and harmful in some meaningful way. And then we would have to believe and this is the question we’ve looked at in this video that the cost of stopping those changes from happening is the better cost, as opposed to the cost of adapting to those changes as they happen.

See, even if we accepted the premise which I don’t that the climate is changing and that we’re the ones causing it, it doesn’t automatically follow that the changes will be for the worse.

It just means that what we’ve already built may no longer be ideal for the new climate. But given that over a 100-year timescale, almost every building has to get completely renovated, if not demolished and replaced, wouldn’t any adaptation to changes in temperature or to rainfall or to whatever simply take place organically as our infrastructure, our houses, our roads, etc., all get replaced and replenished and repaired in due course anyway?

If the worst-case scenario is only a 20% reduction in the increase in our wealth and quite frankly, I don’t believe that even that prediction will come true then does it make sense to completely disrupt everything we have and everything we’ve created, risking far worse outcomes if we get it wrong (and we are getting it wrong) in order to try and save ourselves from that?

And this is the problem that the UN have: the climate scare just isn’t scary enough. And people like Al Gore being wrong over and over and over again has kind of made most of us go meh. So they have evangelists like Simon traveling the world and making frankly laughable claims about gender equality and fruits and veggies being a once-a-year treat in what I can only presume is a last-ditch effort to remain relevant to scare us one more time and maybe squeeze a bit more money out of us before this whole boondoggle collapses.

It’s nonsense. It’s visible. It’s unworthy of even a Monty Python sketch.

And yet they expect to absolutely be taken seriously. Well, I refuse. The UN is a doomsday cult complete with priests, prophets, evangelists, and boy are they keen to take up an offering in the form of billions or even trillions of dollars globally being spent to try and appease the anger of the climate god.

There’s not much we can do about it at this point except for pointing and laughing at them. These people need to be mocked. Simon needs to be mocked. These people should never be allowed to forget their failed predictions. Tim Flannery saying that our dams would never fill again. Never forget that. Nonsense like fruit and veg being a once-a-year treat. Never let him forget that. That stuff needs to be rubbed in their faces for as long as they try and be taken seriously. And it’s up to us to make sure that they are the butt of every bad joke that we can think of because this has gone on long enough. It has cost us more than enough already. And I refuse to be silent when people like Simon Steele are still out there sprouting such nonsense.

My name’s Topher Field. This is the Topher Project and I help busy people like you to keep up with the world as it changes around you. I am 100% viewer supported. So please buy me a coffee via the button at topherfield.net and head over to goodpeoplebreakbadlaws.com to have a look at my range of books, DVDs, and a bunch of new merch that just came out this week, including long sleeve t-shirt versions of all of my popular designs and the launch of the Oddcast range filled with color and fun and inside jokes. For those of you who follow my work with Carly on the Oddcast, anything you buy will be helping us to keep doing what we do, and you’ll be helping me to keep the Topher Project going.

Thank you as always for watching all the way to the end. I really appreciate it.

Please like, comment, subscribe,

 And as always think free.