Theoretical study; molecular modeling as SARS-CoV-2 protease inhibitors

Published on July 7, 2021Written by Bevan Dockery

Cocoa beans contain antioxidant molecules with the potential to inhibit type 2 coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), which causes a severe acute respiratory syndrome (COVID-19). In particular, protease. Therefore, using in silico tests, 30 molecules obtained from cocoa were evaluated.

Using molecular docking and quantum mechanics calculations, the chemical properties and binding efficiency of each ligand was evaluated, which allowed the selection of 5 compounds of this series. The ability of amentoflavone, isorhoifolin, nicotiflorin, naringin and rutin to bind to the main viral protease was studied by means of free energy calculations and structural analysis performed from molecular dynamics simulations of the enzyme/inhibitor complex.
Isorhoifolin and rutin stand out, presenting a more negative binding ΔG than the reference inhibitor N-[(5-methylisoxazol-3-yl)carbonyl]alanyl-l-valyl-N~1~-((1R,2Z)−4-(benzyloxy)−4-oxo-1-{[(3R)−2-oxopyrrolidin-3-yl]methyl}but-2-enyl)-L-leucinamide (N3). These results are consistent with high affinities of these molecules for the major SARS-CoV-2. The results presented in this paper are a solid starting point for future in vitro and in vivo experiments aiming to validate these molecules and /or test similar substances as inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 protease.
The cocoa tree is known since ancient times in Mesoamerica, as drinks obtained from its seeds can be traced through archeological and chemical studies that show the presence, in pottery containers dating from approximately 1000 B.C., of compounds originating from the secondary metabolism of this species [1], [2]. Shortly after the arrival of the Spanish in the new world, this product became known in Europe, and in 1737 Carl Nilsson Linnaeus designated it taxonomically as Theobroma cacao L. [3].
Currently the genus Theobroma comprises 22 species and is classified within the family Malvaceae, and 9 of them are native to the Amazon forest [4], [5], [6]. Cocoa beans are a rich source of phenolic compounds (10–12%, dry weight), specifically catechins (flavan-3-ols) and procyanidins, which are a large and diverse group of metabolites acting as antioxidants [7], [8]. According to the literature reviewed, 2 main genetic groups are considered, known as Criollo and Forastero, based on their geographic origins and morphological characteristics.
In addition, there is a third group known as Trinitario, which is considered a hybrid product of the previous varieties [9]. The phenol content depends mainly on the genetics of the trees and can also vary according to the area of cultivation, fruit maturity, climatic conditions, harvest time and storage time of the cobs until they are opened [10], [11], [12]. The 3 main groups of polyphenols are present in cocoa beans – catechins, anthocyanins and proanthocyanidins – representing 35, 4% and 58 percent, respectively [13].
It has been shown that during the different stages of processing and manufacturing (fermentation, drying, roasting and refining), the chemical composition of cocoa beans changes drastically, affecting the content and structure of polyphenols, and resulting in a reduction of their antioxidant activity [2], [14], [15]. The high content of antioxidant compounds makes cocoa a very interesting product because it can protect against various diseases generated by reactive oxygen species (ROS), such as neurodegenerative diseases [16], [17], cardiometabolic diseases and cancers [18], [19], [20].
Quite recently, compounds have been postulated for the inhibition of the main protease of the virus with a specific interaction in the potential treatment of infected patients [21], [22]. However, secondary metabolites are an unexplored source of chemical resources to control SARS-CoV-2 proliferation. Among natural products there are substances such as nitrogenous, terpenic and phenolic compounds, and some of them exhibit antiviral properties [23], [24].
In the polyphenol family we find flavonoids, and literature reports show the ability of some of them, such as formononetin and penduletin, to inhibit virus replication. Both are reported to be effective in vivo models against enterovirus infections that cause hand, foot and mouth disease [25]. In addition, baicalin inhibits replication of the Dengue virus in an in vitro model [26].
The increased effect of the biflavone amentoflavone compared to flavones and biflavonoid derivatives with methoxy groups [27], and the enzyme inhibiting activity of pectolinarin, herbacetin and rhoifolin [28], have been reported to inhibit SARS-CoV 3CLpro. The flavonoids hesperidin and naringin, which are abundant in citrus fruits, exhibit potential in the inhibition of the proteins responsible for the replication and propagation of SARS-CoV-2 [29].
In silico studies show that caflanone, hesperetin, myricetin and 5′-chloroquercetin can bind with high affinity to the spike protein, helicase, and protease sites on the ACE2 receptor [30], and penimethavone, a molecule mined from microorganisms, presents a high potential to modulate/inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro active site [31].
In this work, we present an in silico investigation of the antioxidant capacity and of the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitory activity of 30 polyphenolic molecules derived from Theobroma cacao: flavonoids, hydroxybenzoic acids, hydroxycinnamic acids and N-phenylpropenoyl-L-amido acids.
The computational study started by evaluating some reactivity descriptors, defined in the framework of density functional theory (DFT), in order to inspect the reactive nature of these molecules. This methodology has been tested and applied in the literature by several research groups, proving to be very useful to rationalize the reactivity patterns of molecular systems.
Subsequently, the evaluation of 30 flavonoids by molecular docking showed promising results on the anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity of 5 compounds: Amentoflavone, isorhoifolin, nicotiflorin, naringin, and rutin. These compounds were subjected to more specific computational analysis to establish their potential inhibitory activity.
A set of molecular dynamics simulations and free energy calculations, using MMGBSA and quantum mechanical calculations, established that all the selected compounds have binding energies very close to that of N3, a reference molecule with a high inhibitory activity against SARS-CoV-2.
We emphasize that isorhoifolin and rutin possess more negative binding energies than N3, approximately by 5 kcal mol−1. These results can be associated with the high proximity and formation of hydrogen bonds with Glu166, Cys145 and His41 residues, fundamental amino acids for the activity of Mpro. These promising results make it possible to propose these selected compounds for future experimental tests.
2. Computational methods

2.1. Density functional theory (DFT) calculations
Thirty polyphenolic compounds selected for their possible capability to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 protease Mpro, and N3 (reference compound) obtained from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) [32] (PDB id: 6LU7), were drawn using Discovery Studio [33] 3.1 (Accelrys, CA) and geometries were optimized using the M06–2X-D3 method [34], [35] in conjunction with the 6–31G(d,p) basis set.
M06–2X-D3 is the best dispersion-corrected meta-GGA hybrid functional on the GMTKN30 database [36], and it is implemented in the Gaussian16 software program suite [37]. The water was simulated as a solvent using the SMD parametrization of the IEF-PCM.

Some DFT-based global reactivity descriptors (Table 1), such as electronegativity (χ), global hardness (η), electrophilicity (ω), electrodonating (ω–), electroaccepting (ω+) and net electrophilicity (Δω±), were calculated to better understand the molecules reactivity.
Table 1. Equations for global reactivity indexes calculated in TAFF [38] pipeline.

2.2. Molecular docking
The 30 polyphenolic compounds and N3 were docked in the binding cavity of the main protease Mpro of SARS-CoV-2 using the AutoDock 4.0 [49] suite. The crystal structure of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro protein (2.16 Å resolution) [32] (PDB Code: 6LU7, was downloaded from the PDB [50]. The SARS-CoV-2 Mpro model was modified with the Schrödinger [51] Protein Preparation Wizard [52].
Polar hydrogen atoms were added, non-polar hydrogen atoms were merged, and charges were assigned, in addition to delimiting the binding region of possible inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro [21], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58]. The binding pocket of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro was established as the center of mass between the Cys145 and His41 residues of the catalytic site. In general, the grid maps were calculated using the AutoGrid 4.0 option and the volume chosen for the grid maps was made up of 60×60×60 points, with a grid-point spacing of 0.375 Å.
The author’s option was used to define the rotating bond in the ligand. In the Lamarckian genetic algorithm (LGA) dockings, an initial population of random individuals with a population size of 150, a maximum number of 2.5 × 107 energy evaluations, a maximum number of generations of 27,000, a mutation rate of 0.02 and crossover rate of 0.80 were employed. Each complex was built using the lowest docked-energy binding positions.
The van der Waals interactions were computed by means of a smoothed 12–6 Lennard Jones potential, while the hydrogen bonding interactions were evaluated by a 12–10 function which incorporated a directionality term. That is, interactions which deviate from ideal hydrogen bonding geometries were progressively weighted.

The partial charges of each ligand were determined with the PM6-D3H4 semi-empirical method [59], [60] implemented in the MOPAC2016 software [61]. PM6-D3H4 introduces dispersion and hydrogen-bonded corrections to the PM6 method. 3D representations of the docking results were analyzed using the VMD molecular graphics system [62].

2.3. Ligand efficiency approach

2.4. Molecular dynamics simulations
MD calculations were performed for the five systems with the lowest binding energy according to the docking calculations and also for compound N3, which is our reference ligand. Each model was confined inside a periodic simulation box. The compounds were bound to SARS-CoV-2 Mpro protein [32] (PDB ID: 6LU7) in aqueous solution with an explicit solvent TIP3P water model [68] (≈20.000 water molecules).
Protonation states of ionizable residues corresponding to pH 7.0 were determined by the H++ web interface that computes pK values of ionizable groups in macromolecules and adds missing hydrogen atoms according to the specified pH of the environment [69]. The N3, amentoflavone, isorhoifolin, nicotiflorin, naringin and rutin molecules were parameterized using the GAFF Force Field for organic molecules [70], [71], using the Antechamber module in AmberTools18.
The partial charges of each compound were determined by the restrained electrostatic potential (RESP) model [72] M06–2X-D3/6–31G(d,p) level. MD simulations were carried out using the modeled ff14SB [73] force field [74], [75] within the AMBER-GPU Implementations18 [76].
The simulations were carried out using a standard MD protocol: i) Minimization and structural relaxation of water molecules with 2000 steps of minimization and MD simulation with an NPT (300 K) assembly for 1000 ps using harmonic restrictions of 10 kcal mol Å−2 for protein and ligand; ii) minimization of the complete structure considering 6500 steps of conjugate gradient minimization; iii) the minimized systems were progressively heated to 300 K, with harmonic restrictions of 10 kcal mol Å−2 in the backbone protein and ligand during 0.5 ns; iv) the system was then equilibrated for 0.5 ns maintaining the restrictions and then for 5 ns without restrictions at 300 K in a canonical assembly (NVT); v) finally, the total duration of simulation was approximately 75 ns for each system.
During the MD simulations, motion equations were integrated with a 2 fs time step in the NPT ensemble at a pressure of 1 atm. The SHAKE algorithm was applied to all hydrogen atoms, and the van der Waals cutoff was set to 12 Å. The temperature was maintained at 310 K, employing the Langevin thermostat method with a relaxation time of 1 ps. The Berendsen barostat was used to control the pressure at 1 atm.
Long-range electrostatic forces were taken into account by means of the particle-mesh Ewald (PME) approach. Data were collected every 1 ps during the MD runs. Molecular visualization of the systems and MD trajectory analysis were carried out with the VMD software package [62].

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Global reactivity molecular descriptors

The global reactivity indices, approximated using the Koopmans’ theorem, are evaluated to predict the ligand molecules reactivity against and biological receptors. The electronegativity (χ), global hardness (η) electrophilicity (ω), electrodonating (ω–), electroaccepting (ω+) and net electrophilicity (Δω±) of antioxidants from Theobroma cacao L. and the reference molecule N3 are presented in Table 2.
In general terms we can see that amentoflavone, isorhoifolin, nicotiflorin, naringin and rutin compounds have electronegativity values very close to N3′s. Now, systems with high electronegativity values tend to accept H-bonds, and the bond strength should increase with the electronegativity of the two bonded atoms, i.e., hydrogen bonding interactions could form in the active site. On the other hand, these molecules have lower hardness values than the reference molecule N3, therefore they are less averse to the arrival of electrons, and thus they are more reactive systems.
These results contribute to proposals in the literature that compounds with phenol groups are more susceptible to electron donation [83]. In the case of electrophilicity values, there is an increase relative to the value of N3, indicating that these molecules are more electrophilic.
3.2. Molecular docking analysis

Mpro is a homodimeric cysteine protease and plays an important role in the SARS virus replication and transcription. When the mRNA of the virus is translated into polyproteins, Mpro is first self-cleaved to become a mature enzyme, which in turn cleaves all of the 11 remaining downstream nonstructural proteins of the polyproteins into polypeptides which are required for the replication process of the virus [84].
Consequently, Mpro is a key drug target for the inhibition of SARS-CoV-2. The binding site of Mpro is made up of subsites S1, S2, S3, S4, and S1′, which are represented based on the binding position of the substrate polyprotein [57]. The binding site is located in the groove between a His41 and Cys145 catalytic dyad. Cys145 is involved in the covalent binding of some Mpro inhibitors, specifically N3.
Tung Ngo et al. reported in recent studies that Glu166 also has a prominent and important role in binding ligands to Mpro [85]. In order to investigate the possible mechanism by which selected flavonoids act, molecular docking analysis of all the flavonoids was done in the active site of Mpro. The flavonoid names and docking scores are displayed in Table 3. Five prominent ligands with the highest affinities for the active site are amentoflavone, naringin, isorhoifolin, rutin and nicotiflorin, with binding energies of −10.0, −9.0, −8.8, −8.7 and −8.5 kcal mol−1, respectively.
These values are more negative than those obtained for N3 (7.5 kcal mol−1). Furthermore, it is clearly shown that glycosylated flavonoids show the highest scores, with a maximum value of 10.0 kcal mol−1, which is complemented by the study carried out by Cherrak et al. [86]. Amentoflavone showed hydrogen bond interactions with Asn142, Glu166 and Thr190. Naringin showed hydrogen bonds with His163, His164 and Phe140. Isorhoifolin showed hydrogen bonds with Ser305, Cys145 and Thr24.
Rutin showed hydrogen bonds with Glu166 and Gln189. Nicotiflorin showed hydrogen bonds with Asn142, Glu166 and Cys44. The reference ligand N3 shows four hydrogen bonds with Arg188, Gln189, Cys145 and Gly143 residues. This allows us to conclude that the hydrogen bonds and the hydrophobic interactions dominate formation of these complexes.
This is from a very long article. Read the rest here:
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.

Remembering Tunguska: Still Baffling Over a Century Later

Published on July 7, 2021Written by

Locals felt their skin burning from forty miles away. Windows shattered within a hundred-mile radius. It was an event that shook Siberia and left roughly 80 million trees completely flattened. Something, with the destructive force of over a thousand Hiroshima explosions, exploded in Siberia in 1908. The problem is that no one knows what it was.

Whatever happened over the Tunguska River was seen, heard, or felt by thousands of people. Although several theories have been brought forward to explain it, the Tunguska event remains a mystery over a hundred years later.
According to many reports that would eventually be collected, on the morning of June 30th, 1908, a blueish-white light lit up the entire sky. The Evenki native people, who lived in the hills just beyond the Tunguska River, watched as a streak of colored light shot across the sky on a trajectory of impact. After about ten minutes of watching the light, there was a bright flash and a thunderous explosion that literally knocked them off their feet. 

The region around Tunguska.
Astoundingly, shockwaves from the event were reported to have even stretched as far as the U.K and even Washington D.C. in the United States. For many days after, the skies over Europe and Asia burned bright, some people claiming to be able to read the newspaper at night.
In California, the Mount Wilson Observatory noted that atmospheric transparency was very low for months, with an unusual amount of dust particles filling the air.
Whatever had happened in Siberia was more powerful than anyone could have imagined. But what exactly was it that exploded over Tunguska?
Many newspapers worldwide reported on the event but could only speculate about what it could have been. The region contained extremely rough terrain and was inaccessible to most within Russia. The country’s political situation also made it close to impossible for scientists to investigate the aftermath.
It wouldn’t be until the 1920’s that a thorough analysis of the area would be undertaken. Leonid Kulik, the chief curator of the meteorite collection at the St. Petersburg Museum, would eventually lead an expedition to investigate. But harsh weather conditions would delay his expedition until 1927, almost twenty years after the incident.

Leonid Kulik. Image: Russian Archive Public Domain
Kulik and his team would discover over 800 square miles of devastated forest and trees pressed to the ground in a radial pattern.

Image: The Conversation
Kulik would follow the radial pattern inward of the Tunguska forest to what they assumed would be an impact site in the center. But curiously, no impact crater or material from a meteor could be found.

The pattern of felled trees. The arrow points north and the object came in at a shallow angle from the north. The circle marks the point of explosion. Image: Soviet Academy of Sciences
In the Fall of 1927, Kulik published a preliminary report, theorizing that it could have possibly have been an iron meteorite that had actually exploded in the atmosphere, which would account for the early reports of a bright flash in the sky and a thunderous explosion.
Ground zero was a large area of very marshy ground, and Kulik’s team attempted to drain it looking for meteor fragments, but found nothing.

The epicentre of the Tunguska event. Image: Atlas Obscura
It also would explain why no meteorite was found on the ground. But many questioned how no physical evidence of a meteorite could not have been found, even if it had exploded in mid-air. Kulik’s findings were challenged in 1934 by Soviet astronomers who proposed that a giant comet was the cause. Considering that comets are mostly made up of ice, it might have been completely vaporized by the impact, leaving absolutely no trace behind.
While many who have looked into the Tunguska incident tend to believe something came from above to cause the devastation, one individual theorized that perhaps it came from below. 
In a paper published in 2003 in the Chinese Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, German Astrophysicist Wolfgang Kundt suggested that the cause of the explosion was an eruption of gas from a volcanic rock known as kimberlite. 
In the paper, he stated, “It would have come from the molten earth, some 3,000 kilometers deep (1,864 miles). The natural gas would be stored as a fluid that deep, and when it reaches the surface, it would become a gas and expand by a factor of a thousand in volume, for a huge explosion.” 
Kundt supports his theory by observing how the trees fell in the radial pattern and several other chemical anomalies that earlier expeditions had discovered at the site.
Another highly speculative theory suggested that this was the aftermath of a mad scientist’s invention of a “death ray.” Nikola Tesla had supposedly been attempting to create a machine that would achieve the wireless transformation of energy over vast distances. He believed this could be used to defend against any attacks during wartime.
While testing this “death ray” one night in 1908, Tesla alegedly aimed it towards the Arctic and turned it on. He then eagerly awaited any news about destruction in the Arctic. But all he could find were newswires stating that something unexplainable exploded in the Tunguska forest, destroying miles of land and injuring locals. 
Thankful that nobody had died at the hands of his “death ray,” he soon dismantled the war machine and destroyed it. While this story is ridiculous, it does add to the enigmatic lore of Nikola Tesla and his strange creations.
Returning to the skies, more sensational explanations have come forward as well. Aleksander Kasantsews, an engineer and science fiction writer, proposed that the powerful explosion was caused by an extraterrestrial craft that had crashed in the forest. He also said it might have been an interplanetary weapon that was detonated and caused a nuclear explosion. But it doesn’t stop there. 
Dating back to 1973, another highly speculative explanation came in a paper published in the Nature journal. American scientists Albert Jackson and Michael Ryan stated that perhaps a small black hole had collided with earth, causing an antimatter explosion in the atmosphere. 
They also stated in the paper, “Since the black hole would leave no crater or material residue, it explains the mystery of the Tunguska event. It would enter the earth, and the rigidity of the rock would allow no underground shock wave. Because of its high velocity and because it loses only a fraction of its energy in passing through the earth, the black hole should very nearly follow a straight line through the earth, entering at 30 degrees to the horizon and leaving through the North Atlantic.”
Perhaps the most recent development in the entire Tunguska affair came in the form of an official document obtained by John Greenewald Jr. of The Black Vault website. According to the document, a 1960s era investigation by the Soviet Union posed the possibility of a UFO crash being the cause of the destructive event. 
It traces a history of UFO reports throughout Russia and argues that the Tunguska object, whatever it was, “carried out a maneuver as it was falling down from the sky.” The majority of this document was solely the personal opinions of its original author but was interesting enough to have been filed deep in the recesses of a CIA file cabinet.
While many of the more sensational explanations for the Tunguska event are interesting, if totally implausible, the most widely accepted explanation is that a celestial body, such as a comet or meteor, had entered the atmosphere. That being said, no definitive explanation has satisfied the majority of the scientific community, leaving the Tunguska event a mystery.
Whether or not something anomalous truly happened, it has kept locals and scholars alike looking up, somewhere in the Siberian skies.
See more here:
Header image: Forbes
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.

BBC caves in to climate alarmists again

Published on July 6, 2021Written by Andy Rowlands

A few days ago, the Daily Mail noted the BBC has deleted it’s GCSE revision guide on the Bitesize part of their website that listed the benefits of ‘climate change’ after fury from environmental activists.

They found themselves on the receiving end of furious outrage from environmental activists after including an online GCSE revision guide that listed the creation of shipping routes due to melting ice and lower heating bills thanks to warmer winters among a list of benefits of a warmer climate.
Inevitably, the indoctrinated activists called the decision an ‘absolute disgrace’.
The BBC said it decided to remove the list of ‘positive’ effects because it did not ‘follow the national curriculum‘. The guide now shows only the negative impacts of global warming, such as rising sea levels, droughts and greater risk of flooding. It completely ignores the fact that, as Dr Tim Ball told me, ‘extreme weather’ is reduced in a warmer world, NOT increased. Extreme weather increases in a cooler world.
In other words, only climate alarmism can now be taught in schools, skepticism is strictly verboten.
The image below shows what the BBC had said.

Other benefits of a warmer climate included warmer temperatures leading to ‘healthier outdoor lifestyles’, there would be ‘new tourist destinations’, ‘oil becoming available in Alaska and Siberia’ as the ice melts, and some animals and plants may ‘flourish’.
We already know plant and crop growth is increasing steadily as the climate warms and from the CO2 fertilisation effect, but the alarmists can’t have the public knowing this.
The well-known indoctrinated activist, and Guardian ‘journalist’; George Monbiot, was the first to slam the BBC, after he was apparently ‘tipped off by a teacher‘. He argued the web page read like ‘fossil fuel propaganda’ and would leave schoolchildren thinking global warming was ‘pretty good’.
That’s rich considering the alarmist propaganda he spouts.
‘Climate experts‘, campaigners and teachers said the arguments were ‘flat wrong’ and did not reflect what was on the current syllabus.
They are correct about the syllabus, as that only allows alarmist propaganda and lies to be taught in schools.
However…other commenters called for a change to Government guidance, as they claimed it was not the BBC’s fault.
One person wrote online: ‘And once again the BBC is taking the flak for a government decision. The national curriculum requires that positives must be taught as well as negatives, even for things like catastrophic climate change. BBC Bitesize follows the curriculum.‘
Hooray, someone with an ounce of common sense!
Exam board Eduqas said the suggestions were not within its GCSE geography specifications, adding that while it asked students to explore opposing attitudes to climate change it did not ‘advocate a positive viewpoint’.
We know they don’t.
Stuart Lock, the chief executive of a group of schools in Bedfordshire, tweeted: ‘I think this is flat wrong, doesn’t align with the national curriculum or exam specs, and needs reconsidering. Climate change isn’t a “both sides” argument.’
You can ‘think’ whatever you like Mr Lock, but that doesn’t make it a fact.
Extinction Rebellion’s south-east group said: ‘GCSE students, young people, those facing future disasters, deserve better than to be judged on questions which warp and distort the truth.’
That’s laughable considering how they parrot alarmist lies.
On July 2nd, the BBC said: ‘We have reviewed the page and have amended the content to be in line with current curricula.’
In 2018, the BBC made the decision not to include skeptics in any broadcast piece on the climate.
In a briefing note sent to staff, and added to a corner of their website, it stated: ‘To achieve impartiality, you do not need to include outright deniers of climate change in BBC coverage, in the same way you would not have someone denying that Manchester United won 2-0 last Saturday. The referee has spoken.’
Note the use of the word ‘deniers’.
They seem to think being impartial explicitly excludes climate skeptics. That is NOT being impartial. That is taking a political stance, something which violates their own constitution.
They have also said they accept the IPCC position on climate change without question.
See the Daily Mail article here:
I don’t know about you folks, but to me this just brings home how the BBC has become a political mouthpiece for climate alarmism, seemingly intent on indoctrinating the public into believing we face an existential threat, which in reality simply does not exist.
About the author: Andy Rowlands is a university graduate in space science and British Principia Scientific International researcher, writer and editor who co-edited the new climate science book, ‘The Sky Dragon Slayers: Victory Lap‘
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.