COVID-19 vaccination in the UK - my choice or "We give zee orders"

UK government have given out contracts for 8 different COVID-19 vaccines.

Four issues dominate my thinking on this:

• Choice: When I asked whether I could chose which vaccine to take, I was told I have no choice in it. Make an appointment, and you'll get what's available on the day. I find this attitude unacceptable. It's as if, as kids, NHS proto-bureaucrats watched those bad NAZI movies from the 1940s onwards where the NAZI villains stampt their jackboots and snap: "We give zee orders". Instead of thinking "scumbags" - like normal people do), our NHS proto-bureaucrats thought "Yes - that's me - I'll be giving orders too when I grow up.". It won't do for me. I demand choice.
• Safety: I fear the genetic delivery systems of most of these vaccines, especially the mRNA ones making spike protein. Because (1) I believe the spike-protein is, itself, toxic, and (2) I fear the amount of S-protein made is highly variable depending on the person and circumstances. I fear that our natural reaction to the S-protein can kill or seriously debilitate us for the rest of our lives.
• Over-reach: Government demands for mandatory vaccination are authoritarian over-reach, which is unacception. I almost feel that I must reject all vaccines until governments stop behaving like NAZI villains from world war 2 movies.
• "everyone should be vaccinated"?: I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I'm a pro-vaxxer. I've always taken vaccines in the past when they were conveniently available to me. But, this time - with so many spooked politicians and regulators waving everything through - I'll take the safest one.

Based on what I know about the vaccines, I'd avoid all vaxxes which deliever the vaccine using a genomic vector; which is most of them (5). I'll provisionally recommend 3. My preference is for Valneva, NovaVax, GlaxoSmithKline. In that order. Beware: a 2nd GlaxoSmithKline vax is in the works, and it will be another S-protein made using mRNA.

Y/N	Manufacturer	Ordered by UK (m)	Description
N	Pfizer BioNTech	135	messenger RNA making S-protein, adenovirus delivery
N	Oxford AstraZeneca	100	DNA making mRNA which makes S-protein, adenovirus delivery
Y	Valneva	100	"inactivated whole virus particles of SARS-CoV-2 with high S-protein density, in combination with two adjuvants, alum and CpG 1018", (link)
Y	GlaxoSmithKline	60	"adjuvanted recombinant protein-based vaccine candidate"
Y	NovaVax	60	COVID-19 S-protein, also protects against delta "unlike the other three approved vaccines that “work by tricking the body’s cells to manufacture the parts of the virus that then trigger the immune system,” it “is made up with proteins from the virus already attached to a carrier and these trigger the immune system directly”, explained University of East Anglia professor in medicine Paul Hunter." (link)
N	CureVac	50	messenger RNA making S-protein, adenovirus delivery, (link)
N	Janssen	20	messenger RNA making S-protein, adenovirus delivery
N	Moderna	17	messenger RNA making S-protein, adenovirus delivery

News:

UK ends Valneva contract with French company.

Unlike the RNA and DNA vaccines, which only make spike protein, and are known to kill or maim some people, the Valneva vaccine was more traditional with no genomic part: an "inactivated whole virus particles of SARS-CoV-2 with high S-protein density, in combination with two adjuvants, alum and CpG 1018".

French cry foul "It smacks of revenge following AstraZeneca's problems..."

Bret Weinstein is wrong on climate change

Bret Weinstein ((the guy who supports Ivermectin, and is somewhat suspicious of spike protein vaccines) promotes more climate alarm in his Odysee chat: "Justifying Riots (from Livestream #42)".

It's the usual nonsense liberals get up to when chatting about the evils of capitalism. The science is "Climate Crisis for Idiots" level. Bret is mates with James Hansen, so he repeats all of Hansen's myths and fairy tales about the greenhouse gas effect. His talk is so wrong headed. IMHO, if you don't know about climate science, you should probably shut up. It took me 2 years of intense study to understand the climate system. I already had a good understanding of maths, stats, chemistry and physics. Yet I still needed a lot of time to figure it out. I read scores of books and papers. Talked to lots of people.

It is the sun, not the man. Don Easterbrook has the best summary evidence for this.

What about the greenhouse gas effect?

Bret says "CO2 and methane trap heat". I already dealt with the fraudulent science behind this. "fraudulent science"! Isn't that a bit extreme? No, today, it's fraud. It is a sustained attempt to gaslight humanity with the general aim of promoting poverty and human limits. It was, arguably, bad science many decades ago, but modelers had the science explained to them time and again. By now, they either know they're wrong or they want to be wrong: to spread climate alarm, promote their careers, or both.

James Hansen is an extremely unreliable, fanatical, person. Oh, he's "nice", and a lefty like Bret. So Bret trusts him! There is no evidence for a greenhouse gas effect and plenty of evidence against it. The claim for the greenhouse gas effect is that, on average, it is supposed to warm earth's suface temperature by 32C. So point me to the empirical study which shows that. No such studies exist. Modelers, like Hansen, have no interest in science (which is empirical observation). Hansen is ONLY a modeller. During Obama's 8 years, climate science research funding was over $3billion per year. What did they do with their money? They did not demonstrate a greenhouse gas effect. They did not even seriously try. Elsewhere I explain, in detail, why the greenhouse gas effect is fake science.