About the Author

Oomeen Basing: credentials and experience

1960s:

After getting a B.Sc. in Chemistry, I went on to gain a Ph.D. in Spectroscopy studying the absorption of far-infrared and microwave radiation by polar molecules. This mechanism of heating has similarities to Greenhouse gas absorption of infrared radiation. My expertise in computer modelling started during this study, with variance-minimising multi-variate analysis fitting to observed data (verified by error analysis).

1970s:

I briefly qualified and worked as an accountant but combined this with part-time study for a B.Sc. in astrophysics and numerical analysis before starting a career in the heavy chemical industry.

In 1973 I voluntarily swapped Northern England with its 9⁰C average temperature for Southern hemisphere heat: 21⁰C. This 12⁰C sel-imposed warming of my personal environment was most beneficial!

Before leaving the North of England, I had experienced a cooling trend for all my life. Snow and the freezzing of local rivers meant I was inclined to go along with the theory ‘another ice-age is coming’.

Although discounted nowadays, the threat seemed real to those of us (rather anthropocentrically, I admit) experiencing the cooling at the time.

Unfortunately, I was in the Southern hemisphere when the Northern Hemisphere experience the paradigm shifting hot summer of 1976 so I did not experience first-hand the Damascene conversion from 'another ice age is coming' to 'we're killing the planet by Global Warming'.

1980s:

During my time in heavy industry, my mathematical modelling skills were honed to a level where my model's output benefitted my employing company to the tune of millions of dollars a week.

The optimising linkage of Linear Programming to Empirical Parameter Simulation Modelling was pioneered during these years.

From the mid 1970s and the 1980s, I travelled widely in Central and Southern Africa experiencing environments varying from lush tropical forests to deserts. Talking to locals in all these locations I found that everyone considered the current hot / cold / wet / dry weather to be ‘unusual’. This manifest unreliability of personal anecdotal views has been taken up by the modern media morphing into an unabated stream of climate hysteria.

Later in the 1980s, my employing company returned me to the Northern Hemisphere – the jolt of a drop of 10⁰C to 'mild' Southern England I found to be unpleasant.

1990s:

Finding a London job personally unsuitable, after a spell pursuing a rural outdoors career, I returned to my area of expertise of fuels, heating and mathematical modelling.

Believing, at the time, that carbon dioxide emissions cause Global Warming, I became expert in lifetime emissions calculations that underpin the choice of alternative fuels such as bio-fuels, hydrogen and electricity (which is an energy-vector and not a fuel). Like many at the time – including Margaret Thatcher - as a chemist I ‘knew’ (or at least thought I knew) how the mechanism of the Greenhouse effect worked so went along with the exagerations of the Global Warming threat. In the event this ‘knowledge’ has proved to be misleading, blinding me and many chemists, physicists and other scientist into believing the Global Warming propaganda.

2000s:

Continuing in low-carbon alternative fuels projects, methanol became highlighted as a fuel considerably superior to bio-fuels, hydrogen and electricity. I joined a small team in a Government-sponsored 10-year study into the practicalities and benefits of introducing methanol as a road fuel into the UK.

During this time there was frequent contact with UK Government departments and quangos. This very unsatisfactory experience was edifying as the attitude of 'The Anointed' as I would come to know them (20-years later) came through loud and clear.

Almost all the ‘officials’ (with a few notable exceptions) only found reasons to stop this UK-led initiative from happening.

The deference shown by UK bureaucrats to the EU was disappointing.

It became clear that the UK was not in control of its energy policy and, in any case, Electric Vehicles had already been chosen as the solution to be expensively rammed down the throats of the increasingly intractable ‘masses’.

The formation of UK energy policy by undemocratic globalist quangos using indoctrinated zealots as agents (most younger civil servants) was very much in evidence.

2010s:

By the middle of the decade, it was clear the methanol project was going nowhere, so I retired from my energy-oriented career that had spanned over 45 years since the early 1970s.

2020s:

The decade began with Covid and Lockdown.

The egregious use by the UK Government of ‘models’ and ‘following the science’ spurred me back into action.
My repeated communication to a junior-minister (also my voted-for MP) criticising the Covid models and their extreme alarming projections being used to justify freedom-restricting lockdown was met by a typical anodyne response I have come to expect from the Anointed: “We know best. You can rely on is to do 'what is right'. We will 'follow the science." All this followed by the warning: "Just keep your opinions to yourself as they are not congruent with Government policy.” At the time, I did not know that many scientists held similar lockdown-critical views. Many epidemiologists and experts on modelling were critical of the Governments ‘house arrest-like” rules. I subsequently discovered that dissenting views (like mine) were officially suppressed. Very much in a 1984-like manner. A fine example of 'Cancellation of the Dissenters'.

The crimes of this Covid pandemic pseudo-science group obsessed with lockdown continue to the present (late 2025). The Covid enquiry used the same discredited and deeply-flawed models to justify the enquiry’s preliminary conclusion that: “we should have locked down sooner and harder”. The Covid debacle sensitised me to deliberate political misconstruing of (pseudo?) science.

I also noticed that reports about anthropogenic emissions and the anticipation of ‘Climate-Breakdown’ were becoming ever more hysterical.

As the science underlying Climate Change alarmism is much less transparent to laypersons than the pseudo-science supporting lockdown, I was motivated into action to research the topic.

Was my ‘informed’ knowledge of Global Warming – that it was real but not likely to lead to ‘Apocalyptic Climate Breakdown. well-founded?

The extreme hysteria of 'Climate Change Alarmism' indicated that the alarmism was politically motivated - not dissimilar to the Covid model-generated 'Project Fear'. Like lockdowns, the policies arising from this ‘Climate Change project fear’ were economy-destroying in nature so extreme fear was the only way the political class could foist these immiseration policies on the ‘masses’.

My academic background, practical experience of modelling puts me in a unique position to research the issue.

The five years of research and model-building lead me to an epiphany moment: Climate Change is not based on proper science it is a cynical eco-socialist belief system meant to break the economies of the ‘Global North’.

This website and my books try to provide my reasoning and the scientific fundamentals for this conclusion.

“Natural and Anthropogenic Climate Variability" (published End-2025)

Following criticism of my earlier book “Just Stop the Insanity” for being ‘too technical' and 'containing too many numbers and graphs', I re-wrote my findings in two volumes. The issues have been researched more deeply but I wrote Volume One to be more accessible to laypersons. It is 125 pages long with a minimum of numbers, no graphs and simplified explanations for laypersons.

The 450 pages of Volume Two is for anyone interested in the detail. As best as is possible for a scientist, the language and content of Volume Two has been made simplified to be more accessible to the layperson. Volume Two contains many numbers, graphs and a few equations. The more technical content is relegated to a 50-page appendix.