Even before our first surface stations report in 2009, The Heartland Institute led the way in reporting on problems with the surface temperature record.
We have highlighted how the surface station record did not correspond to the temperatures recorded by global satellites and weather balloons, two alternative temperature data sources whose data sets closely track each other. Heartland has repeatedly exposed instances in both the United States and abroad where official agencies tamper with past temperature data at pristine stations, adjusting it to appear cooler than what was actually recorded, while adjusting recent temperatures upward. We were all over the adjustments made by corrupt NOAA scientists in 2015 before the Paris climate treaty negotiations—mixing data from unbiased ocean buoys with heat-biased temperature measurements taken from ships’ engine water intake inlets, which made it appear the ocean was suddenly warming faster than before.
Also, first, foremost, and most forcefully, we independently documented the serious problems with the official surface temperature record arising from the fact that the vast majority of temperature stations are poorly sited. Stations fail NOAA’s own standards for quality, unbiased stations in reporting temperatures skewed by the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect.
My colleague, award-winning meteorologist Anthony Watts, in 2009, and then again, as a follow-up, in 2022, detailed with station location data and photographic evidence the problematic surfaces stations. Stations providing official data that were sited in locations where surrounding surfaces, structures, and equipment radiated stored heat or emitted heat directly biasing or driving the recorded temperatures higher than were recorded at stations in the same region, uncompromised by the well-known UHI (that is widely ignored by alarmists and official government agencies).
Of the sampling of hundreds of stations across the country Watts and his volunteer team documented in 2009, Watts wrote:
We found stations located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat. We found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas.
In fact, we found that 89 percent of the stations—nearly 9 of every 10—fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements …
If someone wished to destroy America, could he do anything more catastrophic than what we currently see and hear each day? What would an existential enemy do that we have not already done to ourselves?
Here are eleven now familiar steps to civilizational destruction:
1) Wipe out a 2,000 mile border. Allow 10-million foreign nationals to enter unlawfully. Have no audit of any; nullify all federal immigration laws. Let toxic drugs in that kill 100,000 Americans a year. Give free support for those millions who broke the law. Smear any objectors as racists and xenophobes.
2) Run up $35 trillion in national debt. Keep adding $1 trillion to it each 100 days. Defame anyone wishing to cut wild spending as cruel and inhumane.
AP Award-Winning Photograph of murdered rape victim beingtransported to Gaza for purposes of necrophilia.
3). Appease or subsidize enemies like Iran and China. Demonize allies like Israel. Allow terrorists to attack Americans without response. See Islam as either similar or superior to Christianity. Make amends to leftist governments for supposedly past toxic American international behavior. Follow the lead of international agencies like the UN, ICC, and WHO to atone forpast American neocolonial and imperialist behavior. Recede to second-tier international status, befitting American decline.
4) In a multiracial democracy, redefine identity only as one’s tribal affiliation. Ensure each identity group rivals the other for victimhood and the state spoils it confers. Redefine all political issues by race and sex oppressors and oppressed. Destroy all meritocratic standards of admission, retention, promotion, and commendation.
5) Redefine violent crime as understandable, cry-of-the-heart expressions of social justice. Ensure no bail and same-day release for arrested, repeat violent felons. Empathize with the violent killer and rapist; ignore their victims, especially if slain police-officers.
6). Emasculate the military by using non-meritocratic standards of race, gender, and sexual orientation to determine promotion and commendation. Deliberately smear as racists and insurrectionists the largest demographic in the military who in recent wars died at twice their numbers in the population—so that they leave or never join the military. Encourage retired high officers to slander their Commander-in-Chief. Cut the defense budget. Stop producing sufficient weapons, but leave billions of dollars’ worth of arms to terrorists.
7) Reinvent the justice system to indict, bankrupt, convict, jail and eliminate political opponents. Use ballot removal, impeachment, civil suits, and state and federal indictments rather than elections to defeat an opponent. Mob the homes of non-compliant Supreme Court Justices, attack them personally by name.
8) Encourage the fusion of the bureaucratic state with the electric media to form a powerful force for political audit, surveillance, censorship, and coercion. Marry the FBI to Silicon Valley and hire its contractors to warp the news and hound supposed enemies of the people.
9.) Make war on affordable gasoline and natural gas. Substitute inefficient, unreliable, and expensive wind and solar power, even as energy prices bankrupt the middle class.
10.) Marry late, but preferably not at all. Consider males toxic, especially boys. Have no children, or as few as possible. Otherwise, assure children they are entitled, and must be sheltered. Raise them to have grievances against past generations and current norms.
11.) Turn world-class universities into indoctrination centers. Suspend the Bill of Rights on campuses. Train youth to graduate despising their own culture and civilization. Recruit foreign students from hostile nations to subsidize campus commissarbloat. Replace the curriculum with therapeutic propaganda. Ban the SAT/ACT and do not evaluate high school GPAs. Ensure merit does not select the student body. Charge tuition higher than the rate of inflation. Bill the government when students default on their loans.
So why are those controlling Biden using him to advance much of such a destructive agenda that would end America as we know it?
1) They are delusional and think their socialist and globalist agendas are working and will save us.
2) They are raging nihilists who do not like the U.S. and deliberately want it destroyed as a service to the world. A ruined U.S. is preferable to a strong America.
3) They are Jacobin revolutionaries who are intentionally erasing the old United States as a prerequisite for creating an entirely new America that will arise from the ashes with no trace or even memory of its past.
4) They have no agenda. They are aimless fools, and utter incompetents. These bunglers just wing it day-to-day, in response to what their radical media, academic, and political masters dictate is necessary for them to retain power. They have no idea of the damage they are doing.
A new Bill Gates-funded scheme has emerged that seeks to pump compressed carbon dioxide (CO2) underground with ferocious force in order to meet “Net Zero” targets.
In the UK, the government’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) has approved the plan to “decarbonize” the country’s energy.
The CCC’s plan for “Net Zero” is to shift transport and heating from using fossil fuels to using electricity.
After this shift is complete, the government will then “decarbonize” the electricity grid.
To decarbonize the grid, it is assumed that electricity will be generated using nuclear and renewables.
During periods when nuclear, wind, and solar cannot meet demand, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) will be deployed to remove CO2 emissions as the electricity must be generated using gas.
CCS is being championed by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates.
When delta smelt were listed as a threatened species, the biggest cause of their population decline was identified as reduced freshwater flow into the estuary. This makes the water saltier, which leads to dehydration. This is similar to the reason humans shouldn’t drink saltwater when they’re thirsty. Because of this, a recovery plan was made that mandated increased freshwater flow for the smelt, which meant less water for agriculture.
They were willing to cause environmental damage to agriculture for a relatively unremarkable fish, all for political reasons.
Record Rain
The net is a water shortage. It was blamed on global warming, but that just shows the level of lowness they will go to in California for political gain.
Now, with the flooding that happened yesterday, there is an abundance of water, but since it’s regulated against the farmers, it will be diverted away and crops will likely suffer later in the year.
An intense, long-lasting atmospheric river is moving across California — bringing widespread power outages and the potential for mudslides and life-threatening flooding as it dumps heavy rain and snow. Follow our live coverage here. This is what’s happening:
• Rare high flood risk persists: A firehose of rain has parked over Southern California, including Los Angeles, worsening the high risk of flooding throughout Monday. Torrential rainfall and “locally catastrophic” flooding is possible in Orange County through Tuesday, according to the National Weather Service office in San Diego.
In the end, climate change will be blamed for what was government mismanagement and stupidity.
It’s just another step in the climate staircase that is built on government regulations. In fact, if they’d stop laundering money through yet another scare tactic to distract the population, there would be no water shortage since nature took care of it already.
Unfortunately, California is the canary in the coal mines of the US. This craziness needs to be stomped out and put to death before it fully infects the rest of the country.
Cities coast-to-coast grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed ..
Between the federal government, states and municipalities, untold billions in taxpayer dollars have been spent adding electric buses to transit fleets across the U.S. in an effort to reduce carbon emissions.
However, cities from coast-to-coast are grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed, are too expensive to fix, or they have scrapped their electric fleets altogether.
Officials in Asheville, North Carolina, recently expressed frustration that three of the five e-buses the city purchased for millions in 2018 are now sitting idle due to a combination of software issues, mechanical problems and an inability to obtain replacement parts.
Earlier this month, The Denver Gazette reported two of the four e-buses Colorado Springs’ Mountain Metropolitan Transit acquired in 2021 are not running. They cost $1.2 million a piece, mostly paid for by government grants.
Part of the problem is the manufacturer of the buses, Proterra, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August. The company, founded in 2004, rose to become the largest e-bus company in the U.S., representing nearly 40% of the market prior to going belly-up.
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm sat on Proterra’s board until she joined the Biden administration
The bullshit that is spewed from Washington, the current White House, the MSM, anyone connected to Covid and the upcoming elections, so we need to know how to figure out the truth. If you don’t want to read, the answer is usually the opposite of whatever they are trying.
If they are accusing someone of something, it is what they are doing.
The current status quo on racism for example is that only white, conservative, Christian, republican men are racist and/or can be discriminated against.
For the entire time since the Civil war, it has been the democrats, the MSM and the woke who mostly are responsible for racism and discrimination. We had almost put racial identity politics behind us until Obama and Holder divided the nation.
It makes us cringe when we hear black Americans praise Lyndon B. Johnson and talk about how he passed the Civil Rights Act and signed it into law. He was a known racist. The crazy thing is, some sources also attribute this quote to Johnson: “We will have those n-word’s voting Democrat for the next 200 years.” So while he was signing the Civil Rights Act into law with one hand, he was unapologetically spewing racist words and trying to control the black vote with the other hand.
He didn’t care about blacks.
Now, anything that is not from the left or if they don’t get their way is racist.
Joy Reid, Shiela Jackson Lee, Kamala Harris, Maxine Waters, Lewis Hamilton, Bubba Wallace, Colin Kaepernick, Don Lemon, MSNBC, CNN, Whoopi Goldberg, Lebron James, Jussie Smollet and the Squad have all cried racism, when in fact they have been the racist ones.
Joe Biden has a list a mile long of racist remarks, yet uses it when he doesn’t get his way, like the recent speech on the voting bill. He quoted Jefferson Davis, George Wallace as what we were if we didn’t support him. Davis was a democrat. Biden was friends with Robert Byrd, Grand Cleagle of the KKK.
On 2/3/2022 Biden made this racist comment:
President Joe Biden referred to blacks as “colored” during a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday during Black History Month.
Biden was telling the story of seeing “colored kids” on a bus when he moved from Scranton, Pa., to Claymont, Dela.
In context: Joe Biden, George Wallace, Bull Connor and Jefferson Davis are all Democrats.
both democrats and life long compatriots
Byrd in full uniform
Never forget what Democrats, & notably @JoeBiden, did to Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen – but more… Miguel Estrada. Destroying a good man specifically because he is Hispanic. We know this to be factually true, but the beltway media elites brush it aside. #RacistDCDemocratshttps://t.co/2KKXUUsWlr
The South in the Civil War were democrats. Slave owners were mostly democrats.
I can go on with this, but the pattern is there. It is those who cry racism because is is a cheap threat to get their way. They then make false claims that if said by a white male would be called racist, therefore what they say is racist. It’s logic.
2. It’s not a socialist agenda. The hell it’s not. The current Congress is trying to fix elections so they can stay in power, are making millions on insider stock trades (both parties) and pass laws to keep one class in power to rule the others. They want to take away guns, the start of a communist movement and regulate everything. (that is why they hated Trump so much, he took away their overbearing regulatory powers)
It says right on the BLM website that they are a Marxist organization. Bernie Sanders is a communist.
3. Collusion with Russia and China. After a 3 year circus which cost the taxpayers 30+ million dollars. We found out that Trump didn’t do anything. On the other hand, Hunter Biden is on the board of Burisma and is being bought by the Russians and the Chinese. Hillary sold the rights to much of our uranium to the Russians.
His whoring and drugging is well documented, but the MSM isn’t covering a bit of it. The FBI should be all over this, but they are protecting their own.
So if they say someone else is colluding, it is who is saying it.
4. The vaccine is the only cure to Covid and that it will cure Covid.
If you go to the Danish studies, or look at the vaccine failure in Israel, you can pretty much know that the jab has nothing to do with preventing either getting or spreading Covid. It’s a cover for a power grab.
Ending Covid
They have a plan to end Covid and Donald Trump doesn’t. They campaigned on not to take a trump vax, and claimed they weren’t left with any vaccines or plans when Trump left. Biden had plenty of vaccine supply (when we thought it worked) and a Plan (Operation Warp Speed) to handle it. Fucking it up was the Biden/Harris job.
Harris said she wouldn’t trust a jab that Trump developed. Now we should get 3 shots because it is the B/H vaxx now. Talk about a flip/flop.
3. Global Warming. This is a socialist agenda that is just another scare dreamed up to scam money. The biggest bullshitter was Al Gore.
Right now, countries are shutting off fossil fuels with no back up. Solar and wind energy have failed to provide what is needed and they are closing down nuclear plants. Now, prices are skyrocketing for fuel and that is all that is working.
men and women are equal – sports will be men and co-ed
Military needs to be woke – china laughing at us. military needs to defend country. goal is to kill and protect, not dress up
We need absentee voter pickup boxes,
It’s already been determined, from research by Rodney Doyle at the Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute in Irving, Texas, that the $419.5 million Mark Zuckerberg of Meta gave the Center for Technology and Civil Life and the Center for Election Innovation and Research essentially bought the 2020 election for Joe Biden.
Now there’s evidence that was the strategy all along, that the goal of such election manipulation had been birthed years before and ultimately used by extremists.
The procedure was that Zuckerberg handed over the money and leftist activists distributed it before the election – not in a nonpartisan fashion as some have claimed – but specifically to extremists like themselves who used it for get-out-the-vote efforts specifically aimed at benefiting Biden.
A new analysis at The Federalist, by Doyle, confirms that the money was used “to manipulate the 2020 election in favor of President Joe Biden.”
January 6th was an attack on democracy
Feminists will go all Karen on the USA, white men and discrimination in America, but will ignore women’s rights around the world where the oppression really takes place.
DW reports that German farmers are enraged at proposed diesel subsidy cuts and taxes directly affecting them. They say these could cost them up to €1 billion. The government says the cuts are needed to balance the country’s 2024 budget.
Farmers from across Germany descended upon Berlin on Monday. Hundreds of tractors converged on the city’s famous Brandenburg Gate. The motto on the gate, “Too much is too much!”
Green Party Agriculture Minister Cem Özdemir was among those criticizing the government’s approach. He said farmers have “no alternative” to diesel, adding “farmers are the ones who supply us with food, these cuts overburden the sector.”
Farmers in Germany dump manure in the heart of Berlin to protest against the rise in the price of agricultural diesel and the introduction of a new tax.
More than 1,500 tractors demonstrate in the city.
The German farmers are copying the French farmer protest tactics
Once again proving that this is a money laundering hoax.
The fact that these global-warming alarmists are surrounded by Earth’s deepest pools of fossil fuels makes their Hajj infinitely ironic.
Also astonishing is the nearly immeasurable impact of these people’s gyrations. They blow trillions of dollars, bludgeon human freedom, and yet do shockingly little to fix their vaunted “climate crisis.” One practically needs an electron microscope to find their promised reductions in allegedly venomous carbon dioxide or supposedly lethal temperatures.
According to #ActInTime’s Climate Clock high above Manhattan’s Union Square, humans have—at this writing—five years and 228 days until we boil to death in a cauldron of steaming carbon.
Since The End is scheduled for Saturday, July 21, 2029 (mark your calendars!), Big Government liberals offer jaw-droppingly paltry climate benefits, despite their spine-chilling predictions and unbridled interventionism.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s proposed Clean Power Plan was a diamond-encrusted specimen of do-nothingism. According to a May 2015 analysis by their own Energy Information Agency, between 2015 and 2025, the Clean Power Plan would have slashed real gross domestic product by $993 billion, or an average of $39.7 billion per year. It would have sliced real disposable income by $382 billion, or $15.3 billion annually. It also would have chopped manufacturing shipments by $1.13 trillion, or $45.4 billion per year.
The Energy Information Agency forecast a decrease of 0.035 degrees Fahrenheit. This would have cranked a thermometer from 72 degrees Fahrenheit way down to 71.965 degrees.
Failure theaters continue to play in Dubai during the United Nations Climate Conference of Parties (CoP28).
To begin with, getting to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was more challenging than normal for some participants…as Germany experienced a record-breaking level of snowfall for any December in recorded history.
The airport in Munich resumed limited operations Sunday morning after being closed for nearly a day because of record snowfall that disrupted transportation across the region.
About 17 inches of snow fell in parts of southern Germany on Saturday, an unusually large amount for early December, and what local news media reported was the biggest daily snowfall in Munich in December since records had been kept.
Then, he lets out the only gas that is dangerous while making specious claims.
In a desperate bid to remain relevant, former Vice President Al Gore slammed the UAE, saying its position as overseer of international negotiations on global warming this year was an abuse of public trust.
The comments, made to Reuters in an interview on the sidelines of the conference in Dubai, reflected skepticism among some delegates that COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber, head of the UAE’s national oil company ADNOC, can be an honest broker of a climate deal.
“They are abusing the public’s trust by naming the CEO of one of the largest and least responsible oil companies in the world as head of the COP,” Gore said.
But, the truth comes out anyway:
Kaboom at #COP28… conference president Sultan Al Jaber rejects climate hoax:
"I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve… pic.twitter.com/yhoJZFDytj
There is “no science” that says the world should phase out fossil fuels to curb global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, according to Sultan Al Jaber, the president of the COP28 climate summit, the Guardian and the Centre for Climate Reporting report.
“There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C,” Al Jaber said in an online event last month, the remarks from which the Guardian reported on December 3, days after the COP28 summit in Dubai began on November 30.
Al Jaber made those comments in response to questions from Mary Robinson, the chair of the Elders group and a former UN special envoy for climate change.
His parents were related, no wonder he makes inbred comments like this. When you are insulated from the real world and have the carbon footprint of a city, this is the kind of argument you make while showing the world what a fool you really are. The King has no clothes. (see at the end of the post how he lives a hypocritical life)
“Net Zero” is a list of unrealistic goals laid out by the World Economic Forum (WEF), with backing from the United Nations (UN), that seeks to advance a globalist collectivism agenda.
Thinly veiled as environmentalism, the unachievable goals of “Net Zero” would bankrupt society and make the public dependent on an unelected corporatocratic elite.
Yesterday, King Charles III delivered a speech at the opening ceremony of COP28.
He said that “they” needed $4.5 to $5 trillion per year to drive the transformation that’s needed because of “climate change.”
“28 eight years ago I was most touched to be asked to speak at the opening of COP21 in Paris which of course culminated in the Paris agreement,” Charles III said at COP28.
The Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015 during the COP21 climate conference stipulates that the increase in the global average temperature is to be kept well below 2°C above “pre-industrial levels” and that efforts are pursued to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above “pre-industrial levels.”
However, as former renewable energy manager and head of the German Wildlife Foundation Fritz Vahrenholt discovered in 2017, closer inspection of the treaty text reveals that the term “pre-industrial levels” is nowhere defined in this epochal UN document.
It could have been worse. King Charles could have ascended to his desert dais and pronounced that we had just 96 months to avert “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse”. But that was the Right Charlie back in 2009, giving us the benefit of his sandwich-board scientific wisdom. These days it is all fashionable bad weather and undefined “tipping points”. The man is now King, and at COP28 he threw away his irksome politically-neutral constitutional role, wrapped himself in Guardianista pseudoscience, and punched down hard on the poor who will be forced to pay for the collectivist madness that is the Net Zero project.
King Charles is no friend of general humanity. Speaking at COP28, he said: “The Earth does not belong to us, we belong to the Earth.” As with many know-your-place elitists, he appears to abhor the impacts that humans have on the planet. He exhibits, sadly on a world stage, a snobbish distain for capitalism – what used to be dismissed in British aristocratic circles as ‘trade’. This capitalist trend over the last 200 years has harnessed the power of natural hydrocarbons to raise billions to a standard of living and health unimaginable to previous generations. In 2009, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and the “age of convenience” was over.
Not for the new British King, it need hardly be observed. He lives a life of pampered indulgence where no expense is spared to ensure his every comfort. On his accession to the throne, he added considerably to his Palace Portfolio. To spread his malevolent Net Zero fantasies, he has a fleet of cars, private planes and even a personal train at his command. He uses these to call for “transformational action” to be taken to save the planet. In his COP28 speech, he called for the restoration of nature, the need for sustainable agriculture, and co-operation between the public and private sectors.
To illustrate how damaging Germany’s transition to renewable energies and the green movement have been, news is out that things are worse than we thought. Yet, don’t expect the climastalinistas to acknowledge this. Quite to the contrary, they’ll just blame all the economic troubles on the green movement going to slowly!In reality, though, slowing the economy is what they’ve wanted all along.
Drop is “much more than expected”
Blackout News here reports on how industrial production in Germany has slumped “much more than economists expected in June” and that “many experts expect this trend to continue in the coming months.”
The results are based on data from the Federal Statistical Office released last Tuesday.
Slump to continue
“Alexander Krüger of Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe Privatbank thinks many companies are even more pessimistic than they were a few weeks ago,” Blackout News adds. “Jörg Krämer of Commerzbank expects a further slump in the economy in the second half of the year.”
Germany’s high energy costs driving inflation
Much of the decline in production is due to sectors hard hit by Germany’s energy policies. One example is the automotive industry because its future is fraught with huge uncertainty as combustion engines are planned to be phased out.
High interest rates dampening construction
The construction sector has been hit hard as well as energy norms and heating regulations for homes threaten to make building even more unaffordable to many. High energy prices also have fueled inflation, which in turn has forced bank interest rates up and made home financing unattractive. Building permits issued for new homes are extremely low.
One bright spot has been the the aerospace sector. But overall the coming months continue to appear especially gloomy for Germany, Europe’s largest economy. High energy costs have also led to many companies moving operations out of the country.
According to analyst Jens-Oliver Niklasch of Landesbank Baden-Württemberg, “Industrial performance is rather weak at the moment.”
Until Germany gets back to reality with its energy policies, don’t expect improvement anytime soon. Again, this is what the climastalinistas want.
Whales and dolphins, the second most intelligent animals and the farce that is global warming is slaughtering them. Where are the animal rights activists now?
Does the climate crowd value money over life that much?
Yesterday marked the 60th known whale death on the East Coast since Dec 1, 2022. This is not normal.
The government says it’s not because of the wind industry’s high decibel pile driving & boat traffic in previously pristine waters. They’re lying. And now we have the proof. pic.twitter.com/7BcVrgz04X
A surprising source of PFAS exposure and pollution is toilet paper, as a recent study reveals.
Toilet paper has been shown to contain significant doses of PFAS chemicals linked to impaired testicular function in men. 👇
A study from March of this year revealed that significant quantities of PFAS are found in virtually every brand of toilet paper on the market. The average American will use 26kg of toilet paper a year. 19+ billion lb of toilet paper are flushed down American toilets each year.
PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) are vicious hormone-disrupting chemicals that are ubiquitous today because of their use in plastics, fire retardants, non-stick coatings, ammunition and contact lenses, among other things. PFAS are also obesogenic and linked to a…
wide variety of other conditions like cancers and auto-immune disorders.
If you want to read more about PFAS, try my latest article for American Greatness.
In the recent study, the researchers looked at toilet paper and sewage from around the world and tested for the presence of 34 different types of PFAS.
PFAS chemicals are regularly used in paper-manufacturing.
Recycled paper will often get a double dose (i.e. once when the paper was first made, then again when it’s recycled).
The PFAS most present in toilet paper and sewage was 6:2 diPAP, which has been linked to impaired testicular function in men (👇).
6:2 diPAP was 91% of all PFAS detected in the toilet paper samples, and 54% in the sewage samples. Toilet paper usage contributes PFAS to the water supply in the parts per billion. The EPA measures dangerous levels of PFAS in parts per TRILLION…
What’s even worse about 6:2 diPAP is that it is a precursor chemical. It can become far worse chemicals by interacting with human waste, including PFOA, among the most dangerous forms of PFAS. It’s likely that toilet paper may be putting large quantities of PFOA into wastewater.
It’s also probable that the anus is therefore also a significant source of PFAS absorption into the body.
Maybe what we need now is a brand of organic PFAS-free right-wing toilet paper…
I’ve known this for a long time. I actually like the taste of mineral water, but realized a while back that it has C02 in it when I bought a Soda Stream. It uses C02 tanks. It’s good for the plants so good for the environment.
Now it comes out that that the climatards just figured this out. Bear in mind that Perrier and San Pelagrino have been around well before these weenies were born and there wasn’t a climate problem.
It’s the little victories that count. I find it funny every time I can do something they get upset about, especially when they are wrong. They are in it to ruin our lives and pimp us for more money.
I’ll be toasting to Al Gore when I have a glass tonight.
Now Mineral Water Has Also Become a “Climate Killer”
In the joint large-scale undertaking of an informal ideological Stasi made up of scientists, NGOs and state-related institutions to scour the entire everyday life of Germans for climate-damaging consumption habits and behavior in order to feed the results of the political decision-making process for the gradual implementation of a totalitarian climate dictatorship, no area of life and no detail is spared: The “non-profit” association “a tip:tap” recently commissioned a remarkable study on the climate damage caused by sparkling water. Somebody must have noticed that sparkling water equals carbon dioxide equals CO2 — which is essential for life (on Earth), but deemed a “climate killer” and thus as a trace gas, an alleged “environmental toxin”, for whose symbolic “reduction” Germany is wildly prepared to sacrifice its civilizational prosperity.
The result of the study followed as expected: it now also declares drinking mineral water to be a climate sin. Because: Its consumption in Germany consumes around 1.5 times as much CO2 as the entire domestic German air traffic, calculate the green flunky scientists. Even during its production, mineral water requires many more process steps than tap water because it has to be cleaned after treatment and bottled under higher standards. In addition, the production of the bottles, the transport to the supermarket and the way home from there drive emissions even further up. Overall, according to the study, mineral water produces 202.74 g of CO2 equivalents per liter — tap water, on the other hand, only 0.35 g. This means that still water performs around 586 times better than bottled mineral water.
Inquisition and abjuration mechanisms
Extrapolated to the annual consumption in Germany, which is currently 181.4 liters per capita, and a population of over 83 million, this would add up to three million tons of CO2. Of course: an intolerable situation! The green regulators and prohibition high priests are in demand! Therefore — and in order to promote a climate-friendly way of life — the association logically calls for a switch to consumption limited solely to tap water. Support for this next plan for paternalism and restricting freedom comes from the radical left-wing ZDF [public broadcaster] dirt-slinger Jan Böhmermann: He had already taken up the issue in a typical agitprop manner and also used the opportunity to launch one of his slanderous sweeping attacks — this time against the water provider and well builder “Viva con Agua”.
Among other things, Böhmermann complained that the company not only dared to produce mineral water, but also had no workers’ council and paid its employees too poorly. According to today’s inquisition and abjuration mechanisms, ”Viva con Agua” immediately rolled over and publicly announced that they would fully support drinking more tap water in Germany in the future. The company management also bowed and submissively justified itself that the employees in the filling plant had not previously asked for the formation of a workers’ council and were paid according to the applicable industry standards. This climate of high-handed public accusations and flaunted remorse, along with a bad conscience, does not bode well: It is not impossible that the Greens will start a campaign for a mineral water ban and order the future consumption of only tap water — or better yet, collected rainwater. [And I’m pretty sure that people will have to pay for that water according to the yearly rainfall, and I’m pretty sure that Coca-Cola will be exempt from this madness, too.]
There is more at the link above, but I think you get the drift
Create a scare or panic, then profit from it before the sheep and under educated figure it out.
This fraud has both the climate scam and the leader of fake and biased news, the NY Times in it. When I had to work with New Yorker’s at IBM, they worshiped the Times both for what it said and how we treated it in the land of public relations. My co-worker Tom Belz would quote anti-Bush stuff as well as global warming panic from this bible. I’d laugh it off by telling him it was from the NYT and everyone knew they were lying. The anti-Bush (or anti-truth) rhetoric stopped with the revelation that he graduated both from Harvard and Yale. They couldn’t understand that one of their own wasn’t (then) part of the left cabal.
Then, I had to deal with the zealots like Greenmonk and Internet Trolls like Tim O’Reilly who were sure that then named global warming was the greatest problem in the world and that tides were rising.
A little history provides the facts I knew back then. It was all a lie. While the facts are now it place, I knew they couldn’t predict the weather next week, let alone decades from now.
Many of those beaches are along the East Coast. However, back in 1995, the New York Times ran a story with “experts” genuinely concerned those beaches would be gone in 25 years.
The article covered the assessment conducted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
According to draft sections of the new forecast, some of the predicted effects of climate change may now be emerging for the first time or with increasing clarity. The possible early effects include these:
*A continuing rise in average global sea level, which is likely to amount to more than a foot and a half by the year 2100. This, say the scientists, would inundate parts of many heavily populated river deltas and the cities on them, making them uninhabitable, and would destroy many beaches around the world. At the most likely rate of rise, some experts say, most of the beaches on the East Coast of the United States would be gone in 25 years. They are already disappearing at an average of 2 to 3 feet a year.
Yet, somehow, East Coast beaches remain. Sadly, marine mammals are routinely washing up along the coastal shores, and one of the concerns is that their deaths can be attributed to climate change “solutions.
(Plymouth Rock, the same tide level as 1620)
In addition to these dire predictions being entirely wrong, chasing after solutions to nonexistent problems is turning out to be expensive: Trillion dollars.
No one said that combating climate change would be cheap. Still, a report released during the COP27 climate talks made for a sobering reminder. The report, commissioned by Britain and Egypt as the past and current hosts of the UN summit, said that developing countries alone need a combined $1trn a year in external funding to meet the goals set out in their Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs (the climate action plan set out in the Paris Agreement).
This funding, in addition to the countries’ own expenditure, is needed for things like cutting emissions, dealing with deadly disasters and restoring nature. In one encouraging development, it was reported on November 11th that America and Japan would provide Indonesia with at least $15bn to help retire some coal-fired power stations early.
Time, talent, and treasure is squandered on bad policy built on “narrative science.”
Meanwhile, some recent studies shed light that on the Earth’s past that show the climate has long been in flux.
Researchers from Aarhus University, in collaboration with Stockholm University and the United States Geological Survey, recently published a report on their findings related to samples from the previously inaccessible region north of Greenland. Their findings indicated Arctic sea ice in this region melted away during summer months around 10,000 years ago.
The researchers have used data from the Early Holocene period to predict when the sea ice will melt today. During this time period, summer temperatures in the Arctic were higher than today. Although this was caused by natural climate variability opposed to the human-induced warming, it still is a natural laboratory for studying the fate of this region in the immediate future.
And while the authors argue their study confirms the need to be climate extremists, I assert that their data show man’s impact on the global climate isn’t panic-worthy. In fact, humanity would do better to focus efforts and resources on dealing with local pollution problems and perhaps exploring nuclear energy options.
The experience with Covid should have taught us not to trust global “experts” who offer simple solutions to complex issues. This should be doubly true with the “climate crisis,” especially as the long-term projections made nearly 30 years ago have proven to be wrong.
The good news: The East Coast beaches are still here. The bad news: So is the climate hysteria.
Lord Monkton has been a shining star on the truth of the climate issue. Here is what he delivers as damning evidence.
I know people who worship the climate as their religion and wouldn’t believe the truth were it this clear. I marvel at how far some will go to be wrong. SMH
The true economic, social, and political cost of the measures proposed by governments (in the West only) to destroy their nations’ businesses and jobs and to impoverish every household is becoming ever more visible. At last, therefore, a few brave souls in the scientific and academic communities are beginning to question what I shall call — with more than a little justification — the Communist Party line on climate change.
Three devastating equations have emerged, each of which calls fundamentally into question the imagined (and imaginary) basis for the economic hara-kiri by which the West is throwing away its gentle and beneficent global hegemony. Power and wealth are passing inexorably from the democracies of the West to the communist-led tyrannies of the East.
However, the three equations stand firmly in the way. It is these three equations — simple enough to be explained here for the general reader, yet devastating enough utterly to destroy the official climate change narrative — that will soon lay low the enemies of prosperity, democracy, and liberty who have, until now, gotten away with undermining the West, no less from within than from without, by their childishly apocalyptic climate change narrative.
The first of these equations was presented to you here a few months ago. Therefore, I shall summarize that discussion briefly. The equation comes in two versions: the wrong version, on the basis of which the climate science establishment felt improperly confident that unabated emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmless greenhouse gases would soon bring about Thermageddon, and the corrected version, which shows that IPCC’s predictions of large and dangerous global warming are false and without scientific foundation.
The system-gain factor is the variable by which the predicted 1.2 K direct warming by doubled CO2 in the air is multiplied to obtain the predicted final warming by doubled CO2 after taking account of feedback response, a knock-on, additional warming signal driven by and proportional to the direct or reference signal.
The erroneous version of the equation neglects what engineers call the base signal, the 260 K direct sunshine temperature. Climate scientists call this the emission temperature. It is the temperature that would obtain at the Earth’s surface in the absence of any greenhouse gases.
The 29 K total greenhouse effect is the sum of 8 K direct warming by natural greenhouse gases, 1 K direct warming by anthropogenic greenhouse gases, and 20 K total feedback response.
Multiply the 1.2 K direct doubled-CO2 warming by the erroneous system-gain factor 3.2 to get climatologists’ 3.85 K final doubled-CO2 warming. Sure enough, the average final or equilibrium doubled-CO2 warming predicted by the general-circulation models in the sixth and latest generation of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project is 3.85 K.
But the corrected system-gain factor bears in mind — as climatologists in this crucial respect do not — that the sun is shining and that, therefore, the dominant 260 K sunshine temperature must be included in the corrected equation. Therefore, the system-gain factor is not 29 / 9, or 3.2, but (260 + 29) / (260 + 9), or just 1.1. Then the final warming to be expected in response to the 1.2 K direct warming by doubled CO2 is not 3.85 K, but more like 1.3 K, which is small, harmless, and net-beneficial.
Climate scientists made their error when they borrowed the physics of feedback from a branch of engineering physics known as control theory. They did not understand what they had borrowed. When I pointed out their grave error to the world’s most eminent climatologist, he said he did not believe that the feedback processes in the climate (chiefly the extra water vapor — itself a greenhouse gas — that the air can hold as it is directly warmed by the non-condensing greenhouse gases) would respond to the sunshine temperature.
So I asked him how the inanimate feedback processes in the climate knew that at any given moment, such as the present, they should not respond in the slightest to the 260 K sunshine temperature but should respond violently and extremely to the 9 K direct warming by natural and anthropogenic greenhouse gases. A Kelvin is a Kelvin is a Kelvin, I said. He had no answer to my question. He shuffled off, looking baffled.
It was hitherto unnoticed that feedbacks such as the water vapor feedback (the only one that really matters — all the others broadly self-cancel) necessarily respond to the entire 269 K input signal or reference temperature. Therefore (I shall not show the working for this, but trust me), just 0.01 unit of increase in feedback strength would add as much as 1 K to the final warming by doubled CO2. But it is entirely impossible to measure feedback strength directly by any method, and certainly not to a precision of only a few hundredths of a unit.
Therefore, after correction of climate scientists’ error, no method of deriving predictions of anthropogenic global warming that is based on feedback analysis — as just about all of the current official predictions are — is capable of producing predictions that are any better than mere guesswork.
The IPCC, not realizing this even though it has been told about the error, bases very nearly all of its predictions upon feedback analysis. Its 2013 Fifth Assessment Report mentions “feedback” more than 1,100 times, its 2021 Sixth Assessment Report more than 2,600 times. In short, the IPCC’s entire analysis of the “how much warming” question is meaningless and valueless.
How could so crass a mistake have been made? The answer is that when the climatologists asked the control theorists how to calculate feedback response, they were told that they should base the calculation only on the gain signal (in the climate, the 9 K direct warming by natural and anthropogenic greenhouse gases) and on the 20 K feedback response. Control theorists do things this way because in typical control-theoretic applications, such as electronic long-distance telephone circuits or factory control processes, the feedback response signal is 10 to 100 times larger than any other signal in the circuit. Therefore, neglecting the base signal usually makes no significant difference to the calculation, so they neglect it.
In the climate, however, it is the other way about. The base signal in the climate, the 260 K sunshine temperature, is almost 30 times the 9 K direct warming by greenhouse gases, and 13 times the feedback response. The sunshine dominates. Therefore, as common sense would in any event dictate, one cannot ignore it in carrying out the “how much warming” calculation.
The significance of this first equation, then, is that it proves beyond reasonable doubt that climatologists’ profitable but misguided whining about the rate of future global warming is based on a very large and very serious error of physics that has gone undetected until now because different scientific disciplines — here climatology and control theory — are increasingly narrow in their specialization. The climate scientists did not (and do not) understand the control theory they had borrowed, and the control theorists did not (and do not) realize what climate scientists have done with the borrowed theory. It is in this disastrous interdisciplinary compartmentalization that the climate change scare is rooted.
The truth is that one must use methods other than feedback analysis to derive estimates of future anthropogenic warming. But all such methods, which are based on observation rather than theoretical manipulation of data in climate models, show far less global warming than diagnosis of feedback strength from the models’ outputs shows.
The simplest observational method is this. The IPCC in 1990 predicted that until 2090, the world would warm by between 0.2 and 0.5 K/decade, with a midrange estimate of 0.3 K/decade (i.e., 2 to 5 K per century equivalent, with a best estimate of 3 K). Likewise, now as then, the IPCC predicts that final warming in response to doubled CO2 in the air will be 2 to 5 K, with a best estimate of 3 K. However, according to the University of Alabama in Huntsville, which maintains the most accurate and up-to-date satellite temperature record, since the IPCC’s First Assessment Report in 1990 there has only been 0.136 K warming per decade.
This slow warming is equivalent to less than 1.4 K per century or, per CO2 doubling, well below the lower bound of the IPCC’s range of predictions, and less than half its midrange prediction.
Note how close that 1.36 K is to the 1.3 K we obtained by correcting official climatology’s error of feedback analysis. A more elaborate method, known as the energy-budget method, also shows about 1.3 K warming per century or per CO2 doubling, with a range of 1 to 2 K. The first equation, then, powerfully suggests that our sins of emission have not caused and will not cause a problem, crisis, emergency, or apocalypse.
But let us pretend, just for the sake of argument, that climatologists had not perpetrated their elementary error and that, therefore, there might, after all, be an impending cataclysm. In that case, what can we do about it? The second of our three equations demonstrates that the currently favored method of Saving the Planet — replacing coal and gas generation with windmills and solar panels — will make little or no difference to global temperature.
Our second equation says excess generation E by wind and solar power in a given grid is the difference between the installed nameplate capacity N of wind and solar in that grid (their output in ideal weather) and the total mean hourly demand D for electricity from that grid.
Obvious though this equation seems, grid operators and governments are, as far as we can discover, wholly unaware of it. But by rights it ought to signal the E = N — D of any further costly destruction of the countryside and the oceans, the birds, bees and bats, the whales and dolphins by ugly solar panels and wind turbines.
Douglas Pollock, the Chilean engineer who discovered the equation, has investigated several Western national grids and has plotted the results on the graph below.
The United States could, if it wished, add more wind and solar power to its grid, but the cost would be enormous and the CO2 emissions abated surprisingly small, because coal and gas-fired backup generation must be kept running at wasteful spinning reserve at all times in case the wind drops and the sun goes down.
However, the seven countries listed as already exceeding the fundamental hourly-demand limit on wind and solar capacity will not reduce CO2 emissions at all if they try installing any more wind and solar power. All they will do is to drive up the cost of electricity, which is already eight times greater in the West than in China or India, where the expansion of the world’s cheapest form of electricity — coal-fired power — is continuing rapidly.
This second of our equations also puts an E = N — D to the notion that replacing real autos with electric buggies at twice the capital and running costs will reduce emissions. It won’t, because in most Western countries, wind and solar power are already at or above their Pollock limit, so that the power for the buggies will have to come from coal and gas, at least until the soi-disant “Greens” abandon their sullen opposition to the peaceful use of nuclear power.
The Traffic-Light Tendency — the Greens too yellow to admit they’re really Reds — are opposed to coal-fired, gas-fired, oil-fired, nuclear, and hydroelectric generation. Yet wind and solar power, which they favor, cannot keep the lights on 24/7; are cripplingly expensive; are cruel to landscape, seascape, and wildlife; and, though their exceptionally low energy density, do more environmental damage per MWh generated than any other form of power.
Why, then, do the climate communists advocate wind and solar power and oppose just about everything else? They do so precisely because there is no quicker or more certain way to destroy the economies of the hated West and to end its hegemony than to destroy its energy infrastructure. For that, and not Saving the Planet, is their true objective. What they advocate makes sense when seen in that light and makes no sense otherwise.
So to our third simple but decisively powerful equation. Let us pretend not only that there may be a global warming Armageddon (though we have proven there will not be), but also that we can do something about it by the proliferation of windmills and solar panels (though we have proven that we can achieve nothing by that method except crippling our grids and vastly increasing the already prohibitive cost of electrical power, further turning the terms of trade to the advantage of the communist-led countries that are vastly increasing their coal-fired generation).
How much global warming would worldwide attainment of net zero emissions by 2050 prevent? It is a measure of the extent to which such little debate as the far left have permitted on the climate question has been stifled, and of the extent to which the objective of climate policy is political rather than scientific or existential, that this question does not seem to have been asked before.
I was in Parliament the other day, talking to a Conservative M.P. I asked him what he thought about global warming. He said, “I’m a mathematician, so I know we have to show leadership by getting to net zero emissions by 2050.”
“So,” I replied, “if the whole world followed the policy of just about all the British governing class and went to net zero emissions by 2050, how much global warming that would otherwise have occurred by that year would be prevented?”
His face was a picture. He had clearly never thought of asking that surely elementary question. When I told him the answer, he was dismayed. But the answer is not in doubt, for the necessary equation is again unchallengeably simple.
First, we need to know how much global warming would occur on present trends. Typically, one goes back at least 30 years, so let us go back to 1990, the date of the IPCC’s First Assessment Report. Since then, our sins of emission have added one 30th of a unit of influence every year in a near-perfect straight line. All those trillions squandered on trying to make global warming go away have not altered that third-of-a-century-long trend one iota.
Now, if the whole world went immediately to net zero emissions today, we should be able to abate 27/30 units of our influence on the climate. But if we get there in a straight line over the next 27 years, we shall abate about half of those 0.9 units — i.e., 0.45 units.
Next, how much global warming would each unit we abate prevent? Here, as throughout, we are using official figures. The IPCC says that the warming over the next 70 years if we suddenly doubled the CO2 in the air today would be 1.8 C. This is known as the “transient doubled-CO2 response,” or TCR. And, again according to the IPCC, there is an “effective radiative forcing,” or ERF, of 3.93 units of anthropogenic influence in response to doubled CO2. Therefore, temperature change per unit of influence is 1.8 / 3.93, or 0.46 K per unit.
Multiply the 0.45 units the world would abate if all nations went to net zero by 0.46 K per unit, and the total warming prevented by global net zero emissions would be just 0.2 K.
The M.P., on being told this strikingly puny figure, said: “Oh, well, there must be a very large uncertainty in that number.”
“No,” I said, “there isn’t. The IPCC predicts up to 5 K warming this century. But even if the whole world actually got to net zero emissions, which it won’t because the communist-led nations are expanding their coal-fired capacity at a very rapid rate, somewhere between 0.1 and 0.3 K of that warming would be prevented by 2050. The midrange estimate is 0.2 K.”
In fact, even less warming than this would be prevented. For we have used official midrange estimates to calculate the 0.2 K warming that even global net zero would prevent. But those estimates are proven to have overstated the true medium-term rate of global warming by more than double. So the true warming the world would prevent if all nations, rather than just those of the empty-headed West, were to go together to net zero would be less than 0.1 K.
Then I added the clincher. I told the M.P. that the U.K. National Grid had estimated $3.6 trillion as the cost of re-engineering the grid to meet the net zero target; that electricity generation accounts for less than a quarter of U.K. emissions; and that, therefore, the cost to the U.K. of getting to net zero by 2050 would be more than $15 trillion, or six years’ total annual GDP.
Therefore, I said, every $1 billion the world squanders on trying to get to net zero emissions by 2050 would prevent only one 16-millionth of a degree of warming. Did he, as a mathematician, consider that to be value for money?
The M.P. capitulated. “The trouble with you, Monckton,” he said, “is that you take impossible positions on everything, and you’re always right.”
Now, the purpose of this unusual exercise has been to reduce the apparently complex global warming argument to just three equations so simple that they can be explained to a layman without too much difficulty, and then to explain them. In my submission, any one of these three equations, on its own, would in a rational world be more than sufficient to lead Western governments to abandon all their global warming mitigation policies at once.
The three equations together are devastating. There is no global warming problem; even if there were, our current method of addressing it will make no difference; and even if the whole world attained net zero by 2050, global temperature would barely change.
These three arguments are simple, but they are strong. It is only because the far left have captured the debate and have silenced discussions such as this that governments have allowed themselves to be fooled. Soon, that will change, whether the far left and their paymasters and instructors in the FSB and the Ministry of State Security like it or not. For the laws of physics, of economics, and of mathematics are not up for repeal.
There are two easy answers that no one wants to use. The second is the real answer in the title of this post
First, nuclear power. It’s clean, safe and as affordable as the waste of money that has occurred chasing carbon as a bogeyman. It has it’s detractors, but if the climatards were serious it would be the main source of their energy. They just want to penalize the USA and some western countries and it’s petroleum production to line their wallets. They don’t mind using other countries gas. That puts our country at a disadvantage for cost of goods produced and sold. It’s on purpose. We already saw our economic freedom between 2016 and 2020 with fracking.
Here is a recent example of one western country cutting it’s own throat, but proves that it is a cheaper solution for energy.
Germany just shut down its last nuclear power plant
Now, German energy prices are increasing by up to 45%
On top of that, Germany started importing nuclear energy from France on Saturday to cover a shortfall 🤦♀ pic.twitter.com/2kJ5YjuOd2
The wrong people are leading the the self created energy crisis and climate scam.
The real answer is fusion energy. It is self perpetuating and an endless source. Of course that would mean the end of the climate gravy train and control of the narrative that we are being assaulted with.
Here goes:
On Dec. 5, for a fraction of a second, a man-made star was created at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California. The occasion was an experiment in nuclear fusion that succeeded in doing something no fusion experiment had done before: It emitted more energy than it consumed.
The experiment amounted to a big step forward in basic science. If the technology used at NIF is developed to its full potential, it could provide a virtually endless source of energy that would be clean and inexpensive. You’d think that nuclear fusion technology would be pushed forward by billions of dollars in research and development, but you’d be wrong, because it doesn’t fit into the “climate change” industry’s mantra that any nuclear power generation has to be bad.
Nuclear fusion is what happens on and in the sun. At temperatures up to 27 million degrees Fahrenheit, the sun fuses types of hydrogen — tritium and deuterium — under enormous pressure in such a way as to produce enough heat and light to warm and illuminate our planet, which is about 93 million miles away.
One of the benefits of fusion technology is that it produces virtually no nuclear waste like a nuclear fission plant does. Moreover, the “half-life” of the “activated” materials is far shorter than those of the conventional nuclear power plant, which produces “hot” waste such as fuel rods that are radioactive for hundreds of years.
Oh, it has it’s problems, but we went from the Wright brothers to the moon in 66 years. If we were serious about the problem of replacing petroleum, then it would get solved.
For example:
First, the “target” mass of tritium and deuterium is destroyed by the fusion that takes place within it. To render the technology feasible, you have to create targets about 10 times per second, not over a period of months as they are now.
Second, fusion emits neutrons that, at this stage, have to be converted into heat and steam to power a turbine engine that will produce electricity. Along the path of research, scientists may discover how to convert neutrons into electricity more simply and directly.
Both of these problems have to be solved — as well as the “unk-unks” that are encountered — before fusion can be made into a usable technology. And that’s where the government has to come in.
But if the Government was actually interested in the energy/climate issue other than an ATM…..
Industry can only spend money on research that is paid for either by the government or by rapid transformation into profitable products. The government’s proper role is to fund research into technologies that can later be made into profitable products. It did so many times, from the development of stealth aircraft to former President Donald Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed,” which developed the COVID vaccines in months rather than the decade or more it would normally have taken.
Fusion research will continue, but at a far slower pace than it could were it better funded. The outlook is good, but fusion won’t, at the current rate, produce practical — i.e., usable — fusion technology for at least a decade or two.
What is needed is a major research effort, such as the Manhattan Project, which produced nuclear weapons in the 1940s. But that won’t happen while President Joe Biden and his “climate change” minions govern us. Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro said on March 1: “As the Secretary of the Navy, I can tell you that I have made climate one of my top priorities since the first day I came into office.” Climate change is his priority rather than rebuilding our Navy, which has far fewer ships than the Chinese navy.
As always, it comes down to money. The climate change clowns are investing in reducing carbon emissions — eliminating fuels such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum — and converting us to weather-dependent sources of energy such as wind and solar power. They won’t even consider building more nuclear power plants regardless of how safe they are. (One of my friends used to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. He often reminds me that our nuclear-powered Navy ships have had zero accidents.)
Our government wastes billions on too many idiotic ideas. They are far too many to rehearse here. If we have a new president in 2025, Biden’s priorities can be tossed aside, and those billions can be spent in productive research and development of fusion and other technologies that could make us more secure and energy independent again.
Lastly, we aren’t going to run out of petroleum reserves, and it is the cheapest and easiest source of energy. Hating it is the cheapest and easiest source of increasing bank accounts and control of the masses by tyrants.
Instead of trashing the USA and using the climate scam as a shell game to get rich.
It took 10,144,035 tons of Coal, 50,084,600 tons of Quartz, 11,271,150 tons of Charcoal and 5,635,575 tons of Woodchips to build this 345 acre 196,320 panel solar field in China, and that's just the metallurgical-grade silicon, not any copper, steels or plastics. #GreenEnergypic.twitter.com/Tm3IU4t9hp
The gig is up on sustainable energy, even for the staunchest of supporters. Before the discussion begins on those who are having to scramble to get ready for winter, China and India are laughing. They are expanding coal mining and coal power plants and are the worlds largest polluters. Still, the weenies who bought the (money laundering) Global Warming story are going to pay the most this winter.
Despite the fanfare surrounding wind and solar, the world’s dependency on fossil fuels is increasing. Last week, Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser said that the world is now “transitioning to coal.”
Saad al-Kaabi, Energy Minister of Qatar, says, “Many countries particularly in Europe which had been strong advocates of green energy and carbon-free future have made a sudden and sharp U-turn. Today, coal burning is once again on the rise reaching its highest levels since 2014.”
They are right. Global coal demand will reach an historic high in 2022, similar to 2013’s record levels. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), “Global coal consumption is forecast to rise by 0.7 percent in 2022 to 8 billion tons…. Coal consumption in the European Union is expected to rise by seven percent in 2022 on top of last year’s 14 percent jump.”
Coal will continue to be a sought-after energy source as “rising gas prices after 2030 will make existing coal-fired generation more economic,” the IEA says. Global energy demand will grow by 47 percent from now through 2050, and oil is expected to be the major source of energy.
Analysts are projecting “a huge gas-to-coal fuel transition in power and industrial sectors” of Europe. Yes, not gas to renewables, but gas to coal. In fact, the European Union’s coal consumption grew 16 percent year-on-year for the first half of 2022. European countries imported 7.9 million tons of thermal coal in June, more than doubling year-on-year. Annual coal imports are expected to reach 100 million tons by the end of the year, the highest since 2017.
Even in the most developed economies of the West like Germany and the UK, fossil fuels continue to dominate as the only dependable source of energy. Germany is set to become the third highest importer of Indonesian coal in 2023, ranked just below coal-guzzling China and India.
AP says, “Coal, long treated as a legacy fuel in Europe, is now helping the continent safeguard its power supply and cope with the dramatic rise in natural gas prices caused by the war.” Rather than wind or solar, it is coal that is keeping the lights on in Europe.
So the Greens lied to us about the nuclear power plant issue!
The Greens assured us again and again that it would not make sense to continue operating the nuclear power plants. We would have “no electricity problem,” said Economics Minister Robert Habeck, Environment Minister Steffi Lemke and Green Party leader Ricarda Lang, like a mantra. But that was a lie that was spread against the advice of experts: This is proven by 166 documents from the environment and economics ministries, which environment minister Steffi Lemke (Greens) had to hand over to the Die Welt am Sonntag and the Cicero on application [both are behind a paywall].
Explosive: Robert Habeck and his Federal Ministry of Economics and Climate Protection refused to hand over the documents, which they are legally obliged to do! He wanted to cover up what Welt was able to prove anyway: the Greens lied to us in the nuclear debate — and neutralized experts who wanted to tell the truth.
The files show how Habeck and company put their crude anti-nuclear ideology above the security of supply in Germany: Against the advice of their own experts. Experts in Habeck’s ministry “obviously” considered the continued operation of the remaining nuclear power plants to be the right, sensible decision — Habeck ignored them. Just like the Ministry of the Environment, which apparently let a letter from the BMWK [Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Protection] experts go straight into the wastepaper basket, ignoring the words of the experts as well. When the head of the “Society for Reactor Safety”, which is close to the ministry, criticized the phase-out of nuclear power, he was quickly muzzled by State Secretary for the Environment Christian Kühn (Green Party) and was no longer allowed to comment.
Ever since signing the Paris climate agreement, Vietnam has shown interest in reducing its dependency on fossil fuels, introducing in recent years a slew of measures to cut consumption.
However, in what is considered to be a major U-turn, Vietnam’s government announced last month that it will increase coal imports for the next 13 years.
Critics of fossil fuels, including most mainstream media, are out of sync with the world’s energy realities. They are consistently premature in their celebrations of the emission-reduction promises of developing nations like Vietnam only to see commitments yield to the need to meet growing energy demand with coal, oil and natural gas. Even developed economies like Germany and the UK have ditched — or suspended — grandiose plans for “carbon-free” utopias to fend off social unrest or economic collapse.
In a new strategy drafted to develop the coal sector, Vietnam’s Ministry of Industry and Trade says that it will increase annual coal imports to as much as 83 million tons during 2025-35.
This decision is a marked departure from ambitious emission-reduction plans that the country seemed keen to embrace, thus delivering another blow to the international campaign against fossil fuels.
Vietnam’s consumption of coal has increased rapidly in the last decade largely to generate electricity — from 27.8 million tons in 2011 to 38.77 million tons in 2015 and 53.52 million tons in 2021. Demand for coal is projected to peak at 125-127 million tons in 2030, mainly due to growing needs in power generation and in the cement, metallurgy and chemical industries.
For countries like Vietnam, there is no option but to increase fossil fuel consumption in the coming decades. Coal, oil, and gas together represent the most affordable, dependable, and abundant source of energy. In fact, a majority of the world’s primary energy comes from these fuels.
The favored technologies of climate alarmists — wind and solar — cannot meet energy needs of large populations. What little electricity they do produce is intermittent and expensive. So, developing countries cannot reduce fossil fuel consumption without a significant compromise in power reliability and economic growth. The consequences of energy shortages due to the anti-fossil fuel stance is greater in developing countries where poverty is still rampant.
Coal consumption correlates closely to Vietnam’s growth in gross domestic product (GDP). The doubling of consumption between 2011-21 tracks with a steady increase in the rate of growth over the same period.
#NBADJT
Also, it must suck that Trump said this would happen if they relied on Russian oil.
A great sport has been overtaken by the environmentalists saying this is the future of clean energy and the usual word salad to prove their point. They have created some of the most cutting edge technology and speed you can possibly do. It was at the cost of fun, enjoyment of the car and the rush you get from all of your senses.
Before I get to the facts below, everyone likes the sound of a screaming V-12,10 or even 8 over a hybrid car. You can hear them before you see them and the noise and smell enhance your senses of excitement.
It’s not going to happen though, but here’s why it should:
The electric car’s biggest disadvantage on greenhouse gas emissions is the production of an EV battery, which requires energy-intensive mining and processing, and generates twice as much carbon emissions as the manufacture of an internal combustion engine. This means that the EV starts off with a bigger carbon footprint than a gasoline-powered car when it rolls off the assembly line and takes time to catch up to a gasoline-powered car.
One of the big unknowns is whether EV batteries will have to be replaced. While the EV industry says battery technology is improving so that degradation is limited, if that assurance proves overly optimistic and auto warranties have to replace expensive battery packs, the new battery would create a second carbon footprint that the EV would have to work off over time, partially erasing the promised greenhouse-gas benefits.
With governments now in the business of mandating electric vehicles, the battery challenge assumes a global scale. The majority of lithium-ion batteries are produced in China, where most electricity comes from coal-burning power plants.
The process of mining critical minerals is sometimes described in language that evokes strip mining and fracking, an inconvenient truth that is beginning to attract notice. “Electric cars and renewable energy may not be as green as they appear,” a 2021 New York Times article noted. “Production of raw materials like lithium, cobalt and nickel that are essential to these technologies are often ruinous to land, water, wildlife and people.” The Times has also warned that with global demand for electric vehicles projected to grow sixfold by 2030, “the dirty origins of this otherwise promising green industry have become a looming crisis.”
All of these CO2 metrics could come into play in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s recently proposed rule that would require publicly traded companies to disclose the greenhouse gas emissions they produce directly, as well emissions produced indirectly through their supply chains around the world. While the implications aren’t clear yet, the new rule could standardize CO2 disclosures and transparency on EV carbon impacts, but some say that such calculations are nearly impossible for global contractors, and automakers would have to rely on the same kinds of estimates and modeling that are used now. Echoing a common concern, EV battery maker Nikola Corp. told the SEC that “some climate data is not readily available, complete, or definitive.”
As a result of these uncertainties, many consumers don’t understand the complexity of these analyses and may assume that their electric cars are literally zero-emissions, or that what matters most is that EVs are better for the environment and the precise degree is not that important.
more….
EV advocates are optimistic that in the coming decades electric cars will become cleaner as power grids are “decarbonized” and the industrialized world reduces its reliance on CO2-spewing fossil fuels, primarily coal and natural gas. Exactly how much cleaner is not easy to pinpoint. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 60% of the nation’s electricity was generated from coal and gas in 2021. In its Annual Energy Outlook, the agency projects those two fossil fuels will generate 44% of U.S. electricity by 2050.
But those percentages can be misleading. Even as the relative fuel proportions change over time, overall electricity demand is going up, so the total amount of fossil fuels actually burned in the mid-21st century goes down by only about 5%, according to EIA estimates. Future greenhouse gas emissions will depend on the number of EVs on the road and how electricity is generated, and those forecasts swing wildly. The EIA forecasts a mere 18.9 million EVs on U.S. roads in 2050, which is very conservative compared with advocacy group EVAdoption’s prediction of more than 25 million EVs on U.S. roads by 2030, only eight years away. BloombergNEF forecasts 125 million EVs on U.S. roads in 2040, up from 1.61 million at the end of last year, which would constitute about half the cars in this country.
“They’re making these forecasts that are basically licking your finger and sticking it up in the air,” David Rapson, a professor of energy economics at the University of California, Davis, who analyzes electric vehicle policy, said about California forecasts, which also applies more broadly. “Nobody knows what’s going to happen.”
Back to me.
Don’t try to tell me racing a hybrid is environmentally helpful when you fly around the world in many private and cargo jets each F1 weekend. Hauling the freight to one race is the pollution (carbon is not pollution) of all the cars in every race.
Cut us some slack and put real engines that we can hear coming, building our excitement.
Even the greenie drivers loved it when Fernando Alonso drove his championship winning Renault to some exhibition laps. They miss the sound also.
It’s not a step backwards, rather a step in the right direction.
There must be some people who are afraid of him running again. They are friends of Epstein, who didn’t kill himself. He must be a threat to their power base and them hiding the evidence and the client list at the Island.
They want power and control. We know how that eventually works out. In 2 short years, the best economy ever, for most of the world just went in the toilet.
Naturally, those currently in charge are claiming that Constitutionalists are Fascist’s. Let’s look at one of the real fascists to see. After all, politicians are doing what they say the other side is doing as they get up on the alter of high holiness.
I don’t expect the greenies who worship the earth (read money) who won’t believe it anyway, but the actual science is below. Did we have cars and jets and coal plants during the melting of the ice age? What about the fossils being discovered under conditions the opposite of what they are today?
Having been close to this (not by choice but for work), it is the scam they say it is. It’s about money, not saving the earth.
Why would they fly all those private jets to climate conferences if they were really worried?
Al Gore is the prime example. He has 3 mansions and travels on private jets.
IT’S ABOUT THE MONEY.
This year’s heat waves and subsequent droughts resulted in the hottest summer in recorded European history, according to a report by the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) – an EU-funded Earth observation agency.
“We’ve not only had record August temperatures for Europe, but also for the summer, with the previous summer record only being one year old,” said Freja Vamborg, a senior scientist at the Copernicus Climate Change Service.
Of course, this ‘record’ heat in the summer has prompted activists to trot out the same old tropes that this ‘confirms climate change’ is having a catastrophic effect on the world already. With the energy crisis facing Europe, this is not a particularly comfortable topic as numerous nations abandon – albeit apparently temporarily – their green policies in favor of not letting their citizenry starve or freeze.
Given that it’s all ‘settled science’, the following RT News anchor was probably expecting a rote response to his questions about climate change.
California has loved to stifle any form of capitalism with overbearing environmental laws has just done this:
A “catastrophic failure” killed 21,000 fish at a UC Davis research facility, the university announced Thursday.
We’ve had to listen to decades of them protecting water against farmers using it so a worthless fish (compared to what they killed) could stand in the way of irrigation.
There is enough water for the state if they would quit mismanaging it.
I could go on about them killing raptors (especially eagles) in favor of turbines, that don’t help their rolling blackouts either.
They don’t really care about the environment as stated. They want to restrict resources to control the population. They have the most private jets flying around the world (to global warming conferences) so don’t give us the argument that this is for the climate. They only care to control money, the goal of climate change anyway.
This is after they protect pet fish also:
The center has made headlines in recent years for assisting with pet fish injured in California wildfires. In 2017, 16 koi fish were rushed to CABA for care after being impacted by the Wine Country wildfires; they recovered and were returned to their grateful owner.
Now I could tie this to the 20 plus food plants that have burned creating a food shortage, something the Soviets did to starve their population, but then that would be conspiratorial. People hate it when I am right on this so I won’t say anything.
There is a pattern here by the left. Using climate issues for control. It’s there for you to see.
One of the areas hit hard by the drought is the state’s farms. This is especially troubling as we enter an era of food scarcity concerns. Commenting on the poor state handling of the drought and its impact on California agriculture, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., blasted for mishandling the problem during his time in office.
“I think Gavin Newsom has failed when it comes to water,” McCarthy, who represents a district in California’s Central Valley, said.
…[F]armers’ yields and, consequently, their businesses, are suffering, said Sam Parnagian, a third generation California Central Valley farmer. Over one-third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of its fruits and nuts are grown in California, according to the state Department of Food and Agriculture.
“You’ll go see tens of thousands of acres that used to have nuts, almonds, pistachios, and they’re just bare,” “It’s just all dust.”
This is a grave matter, especially for those who love pasta and french fries. The poor planning and negligence in accommodating agricultural needs mean a looming tomato shortage.
California leads the world in production of processing tomatoes — the variety that gets canned and used in commercial kitchens to make some of the most popular foods. The problem is the worst drought in 1,200 years is forcing farmers to grapple with a water crisis that’s undermining the crop, threatening to further push up prices from salsa to spaghetti sauce.
Sure, Biden is a joke, but he’ll be gone soon. Chuckles will be King for life unless Prince William can bring some sanity to the throne.
The Queen held out as long as possible, every time he says something like this I watch her hang on a little bit longer:
“I can’t tell you how proud I am to be associated with the Royal College of Art, particularly as a result of seeing the remarkable ideas presented by many of the alumni and existing students,” Prince Charles said at the event where the prizes were given out. “May I say that it is critical because of the urgency we face in terms of the crisis confronting us in all directions and just how important is what their ideas represent in terms of finding solutions rapidly.”
But putting masks on cows? Really? Not only does it sound ridiculous, it sounds rather inhumane.
“I feel rather sorry for the cow. Animals don’t tend to like wearing stuff on their faces if they can help it and I should think the first thing they are going to try and do is scrape that thing off on a fence post and the fields will be left full of plastic masks.” said British journalist Ross Clark, who added that cows “got to be able to eat and breathe.”
Clark also noted that the device does nothing to stop methane emissions from the animals’ other end.
“When methane’s emitting from the mouth you can’t sort of cover the whole thing which is why this device has only really claimed to capture 60 percent of the methane emitted through a cow’s mouth and nothing out the rear end,” Clark stated.
Centuries of Georges, Williams, Richards and now Chuckles the 1st.
Twitter user Perry Lucas summed it up well, saying “Our future King, Prince Charles backs a face mask device for cows that catches Methane emissions in order to stop climate change. Jesus….what is he smoking? Truly are living in clown world.”
Meanwhile, many climate scientists — even climate-fanatic scientists — have dismissed the notion that a trace gas such as methane has much, if any, effect on global warming. Some climate modelers have even omitted it from their models.
Physicist Dr. Tom Sheahen points out that any effect that methane (CH4) might have is essentially canceled out by water vapor already in the atmosphere.
“The ratio of the percentages of water to methane is such that the effects of CH4 are completely masked by H2O. The amount of CH4 must increase 100-fold to make it comparable to H2O,” Sheahen notes.
It’s germane to point out that Prince Charles is a high-profile proponent of the so-called Great Reset, a plan pushed by the World Economic Forum that would have the common people move on to other sources of protein rather than livestock. Insects, for instance, are good enough for us.
The same people are proposing huge new taxes on meat, which could eventually make it unaffordable to the masses.
The extent of Arctic ice during the warmer months long has been a metric for climate-change alarmists. In 2007, Al Gore began warning the world that scientists were predicting that by 2013, the Arctic would be ice-free during the summer.
Arctic sea ice has not melted, it is the highest it’s been in 30 years, the same 30 that Al has been claiming that we’ll be ice free.
How long is it going to be before someone examines the facts? Don’t expect the media to cover the truth, look at Covid and the Election coverage. I guess they are paid to lie or be a part of the propaganda machine that is the media today.
The weather is changing, it always has. Blaming it solely on humans is just the same spew we heard from the over population crowd and the Covid Vaxx people. They can’t hide the facts forever.
Al got his $250 million from Al Jazeera, an oil producing company. That kind of exposes hypocrisy now doesn’t it? That it is at Davos and the WEF pushing kind of confirms it is about control, not facts.
Update: I just put that woke pronouns are silly. I’ll keep finding new ways to needle them for being woke.
I was very early to LinkedIn, as I was to blogging, Twitter, Facebook and others.
When I got fed up with them going woke or being so biased that I didn’t trust them, I de-platformed Twitter and Facebook.
Recently, LinkedIn stopped allowing revenue to anyone who is in their words a climate change denier. I worked in the Green and Sustainability Industry long enough to learn these things about climate and politics.
At the top, it is about money and power, not saving the planet.
The people that believe it treat it as their religion. The ones I’ve met are the real science deniers. This just confirmed it.
You can’t change the weather, it comes in cycles.
Bonus: They are hiding the past where the weather was the same as it is now. It’s a version of 1984 Newspeak.
Double Bonus: It is based on predictions that never come true, they just predict another one.
Triple Bonus: when they debunk the current cause of global warming, they change it as they do the name (note I used the first name of this nonsense).
Quadruple Bonus: Carbon Dioxide is plant food. It’s why they plant trees for an offset.
Quintuple Bonus: Almost everyone likes warmer weather and farmers grow more.
Not a Bonus: As with LinkedIn, when they don’t agree or lose the argument, they try to shut down the discussion and facts. I expect to lose readers at this point and doubt they’ll read any further, missing the point of the post.
Also not a Bonus: It is an excuse for everything from racism to global cooling.
“If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.” – Bertrand Russell
My pronouns went from woke pronouns are silly, to ho/hum and finally they/lied, just like Al Gore and Fauci, care of Elon.
So, when I heard that LinkedIn banished one side of the conversation on anything, I changed my profile to poke fun at them. Here are some of the changes.
My education is now Faber -Knowledge is Good. I put my fraternity as Delta Tau Chi. If you don’t get this reference, you missed one of the all time funniest movies. It was also a stab at my real college that went woke. I won’t even mention them here because I banished them too. I’ve recently changed it to Sigma Epsilon Chi, Eta Pi chapter. That’s SEX fraternity, one I made up in college.
I changed my current Job to writing a sarcastic blog and not finishing several books. This is actually true. I was in their Associates Program which is for freelancers, but I’m blowing them off now.
The rest of my work life is true for now, but I don’t give enough of a tinkers damn to take LinkedIn serious now, so I’m having fun where I can.
I now want to freelance the boil of wokeness that is on the ass of regular people by elites who think they know better.
I decided I didn’t care that much about them to take them seriously. Besides, I retired because I hate the corporate nonsense. See here, here and here for the above stated wankers.
According to the boring company, They are going to build a tunnel in Ft. Lauderdale from downtown to the Beach.
Musk is a smart guy with a good track record. I don’t know how well this one is thought out
I lived there for years. The traffic is horrendous in South Florida. I’ve documented it in my traffic post here. Almost anything that creates another artery to ease traffic is welcome, but will be overflowed quickly.
Here’s an excerpt:
Washington, DC (CNN)Fort Lauderdale, Florida plans to strike a deal withElon Musk‘s The Boring Company to build a tunnel between its downtown and the beach.The Boring Company would offer rides in Teslas to hundreds of people a day for $5-8 per person, the city’s leaders have said before. A similar ride in an Uber would cost about $10 per trip at current prices, according to Uber’s ride price estimator.”This could be a truly innovative way to reduce traffic congestion,” Mayor Dean Trantalis said Tuesday night, announcing the plan, though the costs to the city were initially undisclosed. He said other firms will have 45 days to submit competing proposals.
The project will be dubbed “The Las Olas Loop,” a reference to a local road that connects to the beach. The Boring Company offers a transit system called the Loop, in which people in standard Teslas are driven from station to station in tunnels. Its first project opened last month at the Las Vegas Convention Center. There are plans to extend the system through more of Las Vegas.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
Florida has about a 2 foot water table meaning no one builds basements there for a reason, they flood. To compound it, the water table is next to a centimeter at the beach. It’s a few feet above sea level in most places and is as much lakes inland as land in a lot of places, like South Florida.
As smart as Musk is, This isn’t drilling through rock. Florida is basically a big sand bar. Water flows easily through sand.
All I can say is good luck, and invest in industrial water pumps if this project gets off the ground. They will need to pump a lot of the Atlantic back into the sea.
This is stuff I laugh at because I know it applies to everyone, not just introverts. I just internalize more than most so I go through this when asked.
FWIW, I ask this about most other people at some point also.
Mauerbauertraurigkeit (n.) – the inexplicable urge to push people away.
This doozy of a word may add an extra dimension to our socially exhausted state. Mauerbauertraurigkeit means: “The inexplicable urge to push people away, even close friends who you really like — as if all your social taste buds suddenly went numb, leaving you unable to distinguish cheap politeness from the taste of genuine affection, unable to recognize its rich and ambiguous flavors, its long and delicate maturation, or the simple fact that each tasting is double-blind.”
I’m not sure if this is a true psychological condition that is being taught or is proven like the Theory of General Relativity, but I know it is true.
Recently, it happened to me and I pulled out of some things I was doing. Partly it was Covid and partly it was Mauerbauertraurigkeit. There were different reasons, but remember I’m a patterns in life guy. I notice when it happens.
It’s happened to me all my life. I can’t stay with a group for much more than a couple of years. It depends on how obsessed I am with what I’m doing as to how much I’ll put up with before I have to go. I get socially and emotionally exhausted and my will just forced me away. It was if I was watching what was happening and couldn’t (and didn’t want to) stop it.
As it turns out, all the groups I left were for a good reason and were the right decisions in aftermath, but at the time I was mentally overwhelmed. The realization that I was free from the social obligations that kill me inside was blissfully comforting.
Normally, Covid would have been a problem as I wouldn’t have to go to groups I didn’t want to. Unfortunately, they invented Zoom and those of us who actually need body language to read people can’t.
Fortunately, I live a whole different life in my head as do most Introverts so I go there many times during Zoom. If I’m on mute, I probably muted not thinking about what was on the call.
I will say this, most extroverts are not polite about this and want to include you on all of their tedious activities, and want to know why you don’t want to do everything with everybody. They literally force me away because they want to be all up into my stuff. I suffered at work from this until I found ways to get out of social activities.
The answer and I guess the moral is when I’ve had enough, either for the day or for life, I have to get away and I can’t help it. I leave and never come back usually.
I can’t be alone on this. A lot of people are overwhelmed socially, by extroverts.
I imagine some people think they were ghosted, when in fact the person couldn’t help themself from pulling away.
I’ve never felt better about myself than when I leave, any of them at any point of my life. I don’t think that I’m missed and don’t really care if they think I’m anti-social. As long as I’m not a part of them anymore is all that matters.
This is about climate warnings via scaring people, not whether there is global warming or whatever.
The trick to get people to do something is the carrot or stick. This one is kind of both.
I’m used to being told that the statue of liberty will drown or Miami Beach is going under water and rarely pay attention. I think they are just after money and will say almost anything.
Its a new low though when they go to your unit, your family jewels, the python of passion…..uh, stop right there. I think you get what I’m talking about.
Now, your dick is getting shorter or something. Really? If you want me to buy into this, at least make it believable.
The chemicals to blame for our reproductive crisis are found everywhere and in everything
The end of humankind? It may be coming sooner than we think, thanks to hormone-disrupting chemicals that are decimating fertility at an alarming rate around the globe. A new book called Countdown, by Shanna Swan, an environmental and reproductive epidemiologist at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, finds that sperm counts have dropped almost 60% since 1973. Following the trajectory we are on, Swan’s research suggests sperm counts could reach zero by 2045. Zero. Let that sink in. That would mean no babies. No reproduction. No more humans. Forgive me for asking: why isn’t the UN calling an emergency meeting on this right now?
The chemicals to blame for this crisis are found in everything from plastic containers and food wrapping, to waterproof clothes and fragrances in cleaning products, to soaps and shampoos, to electronics and carpeting. Some of them, called PFAS, are known as “forever chemicals”, because they don’t breakdown in the environment or the human body. They just accumulate and accumulate – doing more and more damage, minute by minute, hour by hour, day by day. Now, it seems, humanity is reaching a breaking point.
I trust that the vaccine’s being distributed and will help stop the China/Wuhan/Corona/Covid/Whatever virus and stop the deaths. I like old people, they are full of wisdom. We need that right now.
The other good news is that deaths from global warming are also down. As I say later, I think the climate is changing. Not wanting to play God, I don’t know how and it’s not for me to decide, but i believe that there are a lot of things who contribute to it together.
I’m just happy for good news.
On the plus side:
at the end of 2020 shows that climate related deaths are now approaching zero. The data spans 100 years of “global warming” back to 1920 and shows “climate related” deaths are now approaching zero.
“Back in the 1920s, the death count from climate-related disasters was 485,000 on average every year. In the last full decade, 2010-2019, the average was 18,357 dead per year or 96% lower. In the first year of the new decade, 2020, the preliminary number of dead was even lower at 8,086 — 98% lower than the 1920s average.
But because the world’s population also quadrupled at the same time, the climate-related *death risk* has dropped even faster. The death risk is the probability of you dying in any one year. In the 1920s, it was 243 out of a million people that would die from climate-related disasters.
In the 2010s, the risk was just 2.5 per million people — a drop of 99%. Now, in 2020, the preliminary number is 1 per million — 99.6% lower.”
This is clearly the opposite of what climate alarmists have been screaming about, but that is because we’re been exposed to a constant stream of “disaster TV” on cable news and Internet news outlets telling us daily about yet another new disaster, which invariably gets blamed on “climate change”.
There’s an important distinction that must be made: increased reports does not equal increased death risk.
I don’t have anything against climate change and as I said, I think it is happening. I also think that the climate alarmists used it to get rich off of an unfounded scare, documented here and here.
I’m just glad for a Vaccine and that climate deaths are not killing off the Senior Citizens. So whether they get rich off of scare tactics or not is not important to me.
I just read this headline. I’m not sure if Jane Fonda is that isolated from reality or just that stupid. Once again this is a person who is an actor trying to tell us those of us who have real lives what to do. Here is the link to WUWT if you want to shake your head wondering how did these people get this way.
Jane Fonda: “If we don’t cut our fossil fuel emissions in half by 2030, … democracy … will become impossible.
Sept. 6 (UPI) — A drastic temperature swing and a dose of early season snow will have residents from Montana to New Mexico wondering what month it is by Tuesday.
A storm is forecast to bring a mixture of rain and snow across the Intermountain West and the Plains Monday through Tuesday night, spreading precipitation from northern Montana to Texas.
Snow is forecast to begin falling in the northern Rockies of Montana and Wyoming on Monday, before extending southward through northeastern Utah, Colorado, and northern New Mexico into midweek.
This has nothing really to do about the climate for me because meteorologists can’t get the forecast right about tomorrow, let alone 2030. It’s about how out of touch the idiots in Hollywood are.
Covid has changed our lives for good, and possibly/probably not for the better. Let’s take it by activity.
Travel
Here is some history. Flying used to be fun, economical and had good service. We used to like going on an airplane until some jag-off decided to try and light his shoe bomb on a plane. Then another tried to blow up his underwear. We now have to queue in a long line and I’m not all that sure that it’s stopped anyone other than the average Joe traveler. It hasn’t stopped the TSA from copping a feel on strangers. The food sucks now and isn’t free anymore. Flying is more like the line for enlistment (including your prostate exam by the TSA) than to get on a plane.
With Covid, we can now add a temperature check, face masks and the the fear of catching anything from being in a tube for hours with little to no service. The airports are petri dishes for bacteria.
Given the losses on travel companies and equipment manufacturers, it doesn’t bode well for the travel industry or the travelers.
Going to the office to work.
The requirement to be in person at work not as necessary as thought.
Before remote working, we had to be in the office or no one could be fully sure that you were earning your pay. Travel and working remotely eased that but there still are some bosses who didn’t trust their employees. I had one piss-ant manager named R. Gorman when I worked at Thinkpad who didn’t trust anyone. He sent a memo called rules of the road where you had to be in the office. All that got him was no trust or loyalty from the team. We were technologically equipped to work from anywhere and always did on business travel, but there still was some requirement to be in the office otherwise.
Employees want to be empowered to succeed. When that happens, they find ways to be creative and accomplish their goals. Conversely, when you treat them like school children, many will act that way. Just like with Ray, our productivity went down and the Ray jokes went up.
Now, no one can go in to work while we are socially distancing, and most jobs (non-manufacturing) are still getting done. It’s easy to reach anyone at anytime (too easy and too intrusive) but the oversight of said taskmasters is not needed. In a way, the people are now empowered and they still get the work done. This one could be a benefit of Covid.
The downside is that a lot of empty buildings will lose their real estate value as there is no need to be in the office with the exception of essential workers.
How it affects the home
For us introverts, I thought it would be a time that we could cancel and/or avoid engagements until Zoom invaded our lives. Now even virtual happy hours are like a meeting. I’ve noticed that it’s hard to get privacy when kids and dogs are in the room or yelling in the background. Spouses or parents have been caught parading nude in front of the camera by accident.
When you meet in person, it’s easier to read body language and have someones attention. I tend to drift during Zoom meetings and have multiple devices that I often look at. I’ve noticed that I’m not alone.
Trouble for Introverts
Normally, we would be in pig heaven not to have to go to the office. In addition to the invasiveness of Zoom/Skype, we are stuck in the house with extroverts who won’t leave us alone. It’s like being trapped in hell. You want the quiet and the peace you got when the extrovert was in the office, instead your personal space is invaded and you can’t escape the dreaded small talk. The place that used to be your refuge has been invaded and there is no escape. It’s a fucking nightmare. It’s the people in your house that you can’t get away from.
How are you supposed to recharge your social battery when an extrovert is constantly draining it all day? Please, leave me alone and talk to your girlfriends.
Schools
The school model is now exposed, especially at college level. No more extortion for dorms when you can do 90% online. College professors are no longer as essential. Recorded classes, especially at the 100 and 200 level are adequate. Online testing and submitting required homework is routinely done online even well before this virus.
It turns out that colleges are a Breathtakingly overpriced product.
According to Mike Rowe: “They’re gonna’ find big thinkers with easily accessible ideas who are exponentially more interesting than professors, and soon, I hope, our obscene love affair with credentialing is going to stop, and we’re going to pause in every imaginable way, and look at what is essential – not just in workers or in work, but in education, in food, in fun. Everything is going to be forced through a different filter,” he said.
Colleges will also be exposed on their sports programs. Sports are a bank fund that pays for a lot of other school expenses and is a recruiting tool for enrollment. The schools will now have to rely on actual academics as a draw for students instead of March Madness or Bowl season. Maybe the students will now get an education instead of an indoctrination to Marxism.
Conversely, this is a big positive as the cost of education has the opportunity to go down (but so far the colleges are still extorting the same ransom from parents). Room and board are a large part of the cost of an education. Combine that with the lack of a requirement for many classrooms and there is the road to cutting costs.
It is not in the best interest of the Major institutions to charge less, but the cat is out of the bag that you can get almost as much done online. I hope that the masses will overcome and help this opportunity for cost cutting.
For elementary, middle and high school, I think it will hurt our youth. There is a need for hands on in basic learning and kids have the attention span of gnats. Sometimes you need to snatch their asses back to attention when it’s learning time.
New paradigm for getting essential needs like groceries.
Essential services like cancer, emergency rooms are same, but will change. Non-essential Dr. visits are now handled over the phone or via video. Dr.’s can now dedicate more of their time to real emergencies or necessary in-person visits. A person using the Emergency Room for healthcare because they don’t have insurance is going to go way down.
There is no downtime for paperwork and other overhead that comes with any job, but that got handled off-line mostly anyway.
Rely on technology more, but the risk is that you can take down a society like the virus did. Beware of hackers though, where there is opportunity, there will be bad guys looking to make your day worse.
Shopping
Groceries have taken a turn for the better/worse/something different. Now that we went through the great toilet paper shortage and people have enough to wipe their asses for the next 5 years. They can realize that a little planning can condense 5 shopping trips into one, or one delivery or pickup.
A lot converts have been made for grocery delivery. There are a few kinks that need to be worked out though. I’ve gotten stuff I didn’t order, but mostly I rarely get everything I wanted, even if I put in what the substitute would be product. There is no shopping for the store brand that is a whole lot cheaper.
We have gotten used to queuing a lot more now. It used to be the end of the world for some people who had to wait for more than one person to checkout. Now, we’re standing on X’s taped to the floor like kindergartners waiting to go potty.
As is the trend, online shopping has picked up and the downside is retail stores are less needed. Again, this is a loss in real estate value and will leave a lot of square footage available.
So all in all, some of this is good, but a lot of it was unnecessary. If it wasn’t an election year or if there were different political leaders, a whole lot of people wouldn’t be losing there freaking minds over every little thing that they look for to be offended by. HCQ would be over the counter like it is in a lot of countries and we wouldn’t be held hostage for masks as no one really seems to know whether it truly helps or hurts us yet.
I’ll remain optimistic that society will adapt. I’m pessimistic that this is a political power opportunity to control the masses and we should beware.
After reading a post that claimed rising tides threatened the world a while back, I suggested to him that the tides fluctuate. Science plus history prove the Statue of Liberty isn’t drowning, or Florida sinking like his hero Al Gore promised. I was pointing out the obvious to no avail. I’ve rarely encountered such an elitist, who was so wrong on a subject (except Al Gore).
check it out Tim, The tides aren’t rising in 500 years. Global warming science isn’t hard if you lie. I figured it out and so did you. I’m just the one pointing out the truth you don’t want to believe.One of Al Gore’s HousesWhich came true Tim O, or James G or Tom R? You guys were nuts and wrong every time.
His argument was that climate science is hard. (It is when you only try to scare others with fake predictions and not facts to back up your position and then the scare never happens). It’s hard to defend when none of those descriptions of doom ever come true, hot or cold. The tweet below shows the Grand Tetons the same as they were 100 years ago
— William Teach2 🏴☠️ #refuseresist (@WTeach2) July 2, 2022
What is funny to me is that instead of decent discussion which I offered, I instead got an ad hominem attack on my character. It was an ill advised use of a bully pulpit as without any personal knowlege of me, I was told I was a typical Fox News watcher (I refuse to watch any news channel, especially FOX l as they all are biased in some way, read my blog and you’ll see). This is typical leftist behavior when they don’t get their way. Start saying they are racists, supremacists, Hitler, deplorable’s and so forth.
There were the other usual liberal attacks on me personally about beliefs I was accused of but don’t have, typical of when you run out of facts. I was this or that, because I wouldn’t worship Gaia and no mention of my knowledge of science and history, and especially facts. So he lied about the tides and about me. Good job there boy.
I also know that Carbon Dioxide is a nutrient for plants. That is the settled science. These idiots call it poison and wanted to tax it. Did anyone go to biology class?
The offer to talk is now rescinded because I don’t have time for Internet trolls like Tim or people who won’t get educated about what they spew. They aren’t going to believe facts and have adjusted it to fit their pre-determined outcome.
Evidence That Climate Change Is A Hoax Perpetuated By The Rich, your hero’s.
proof the rich don’t believe it either
So the Greenland Ice is growing and Florida is still there. The water around the statue is at the same level it’s been for 100 years and Tim is a troll it appears and is wrong. I’ve added at hastag for TIm, a social media terrorist.
I offer a few facts, something Tim didn’t have when castigating others on social media.
The New Pause paused last month because I was ill. Many apologies for the interruption. Now, however, it resumes – and it has lengthened from 7 years 7 months to the end of April 2022. To the end of June 2022, the New Pause is now 7 years 10 months in length:
This Pause, like its predecessor, which was an impressive 18 years 8 months (UAH), or 18 years 9 months (HadCRUT4), is, as always, not cherry-picked. It is derived from the UAH monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature anomalies as the period from the earliest month starting with which the least-squares linear-regression trend to the most recent month for which data are available does not exceed zero. Whatever the data show, I show. Or, in the immortal words of Dr Roy Spencer, speaking of his dataset, “It is what it is”. In that splendid dictum speaks all true science.
The least-squares trend, which Professor Jones at the University of East Anglia used to recommend as the simplest and most robust method of deriving global-temperature trends, takes due account of all monthly values, not merely of the starting and ending values.
It sucks when you are wrong. But the point of climate change isn’t carbon reduction (Trump reduced it more than any president), it’s controlling others and grifting money.
I feel sorry for people like him. It must suck to go through life choosing to be purposely ignorant about science. It must suck to be wrong and to not change, but when you are in that deep, there is no getting out. You’ve bought the lie hook, line and sinker.
The European Union’s parliament has decided that nuclear power and gas power from plants now qualify as “green energy.” The proposal passes the EU parliament as Russia is threatening to cut off all natural gas transit to Europe in light of the ongoing war in Ukraine.
The news was reported by Disclose TV on Wednesday morning.
JUST IN – EU Parliament declares nuclear power and gas as “green” energy.
“EU Parliament declares nuclear power and gas as ‘green’ energy,” the news account tweeted.
It was also reported by the Associated Press in a piece that reads more like an outraged editorial.
“European Union lawmakers voted Wednesday to include natural gas and nuclear in the bloc’s list of sustainable activities, backing a proposal from the EU’s executive arm that has been drawing fierce criticism from environment groups and will likely trigger legal challenges,” the AP noted.
“And once the storm is over, you won’t remember how you made it through, how you managed to survive. You won’t even be sure, whether the storm is really over. But one thing is certain. When you come out of the storm, you won’t be the same person who walked in. That’s what this storm’s all about.” — Haruki Murakami
We will be different when the China/Wuhan/Covid-19/whatever virus has run its’ course. Some will act differently like washing their hands more or social distancing. Some may travel less. The smartest of these will stay off cruise ships. The wisest will decide who and what they believe in to as the rock to anchor their life on.
First, I am not going to weigh in on what a world leader has said. Every time I have ever tried it, nothing is gained as everyone has their own opinion and trying to sway it is not what I care about. Enjoy your center, left, right or whatever political position you wish.
I was looking for whether this actually exists. Here is what I’ve found.
Now, after reading this, one can add it to their travel plans to go and help, or avoid for sanitary purposes, you choose. If you go to San Francisco, zoom in and you can see where to not step in a pile of poop. As I type that, I realize that it is sad for what is supposed to be one of the leading cities of the US, and one so close to silicon valley.
It also gives everyone equal political fodder to take shots at whomever. In these days of political partisanship, nothing or nobody is safe by the 3rd or 4th comment, so I expect the same.
I just got curious and I wondered if what was said was true or not. Apparently it is.
After all is said and done, I thought that having to have a map to not step in a pile of human feces makes a city the biggest shithole. It turns out that I was wrong.
The City that Never Sleeps ranked the highest in three out of five categories, placing it as shittest-city-in-the-nation of 427.9 on Busy Bee’s “dirtiness index.” The next closest competitor for all the wrong reasons is Los Angeles, which has a dirtiness index of 317.8. To complete the top five list, the remaining dirtiest cities are Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco.
So not only do you have to pay way more more to live in these places, they have worse air, bigger rats and more cockroaches, they turn out to be the shitholes that we all thought they were. Why anyone would choose to live there knowing there?
Actors are people who are famous for being able to imitate and to pretend. This does not qualify them for NASA, Weather Condition determination or basically anything else. They are something to look at, listen to on-screen and forget. Rinse and repeat.
They used to be respected more when they cared for their country, their fans and people in general. Social media, fame and fortune have convinced them that someone actually cares what they think. There have been some who actually contributed to the betterment of the world, but most of them were in the WWII class.
These days, they seem to have a delusion that their opinion on politics, climate change, gender identity, what to eat and anything else would actually matter to someone outside of Hollywood. They are a part of the do as I say, not as I do crowd. In fact they are the president of the club.
TRAIN WRECK
The basic nature of people is that they care about people who think like they do or conversely, are looking for a train wreck. Celebrities and now many sports figures fit into these categories.
People are tired of them pontificating about anything or their pet cause, even if it is noble. Shut up and act and don’t tell us what to do. Most of us who live real lives are smarter and have more common sense.
SPORTS ALSO
The overpaid sports stars are now getting into the act by trying to inform us on how we are to act with respect to our personal patriotism. Again, shut up and play the game. They are entertainment for us to distract us from daily life at best. We don’t care about your personal vendetta’s that you thrust upon us because somehow your millions don’t make up for your perceived injustice.
How do I know this? The NFL is now worried about dwindling numbers both at the stadiums and the TV numbers. Go to the link and find one team who can’t even sell out a 27,000 seat stadium.
Some of the athletes think that we care what they think because they can play a kids game.
I read this at Diogenes Middle Finger and found it enlightening on the subject as he called out the assholiness of LeBron James. BTW, you should follow DMF, a blog I read daily and recommend it.
It’s not as if we’re talking about some of the real heroes in sports of my youth, here. The Lebron James’ of the world did not have to struggle, and in the process, advance the character and quality of American Life by their example, like some of my childhood heroes did. Lebron James is no Hank Aaron, suffering death threats for being good enough to threaten a cherished record, or being a — maybe THE — visible symbol of the pernicious, past influence of racism.
James wouldn’t be judged worthy to hold Muhammad Ali’s jockstrap, on his best day. He certainly couldn’t make you think about a common humanity, couldn’t be a universal symbol of hope, like Ali did and was.
Jim Brown would run Lebron James over and trample him into the dirt, demanding respect. Just respect. James will never have the grace, the quiet dignity, or garner the universal love, of a Gayle Sayers.
In fact, James is most likely the visible symbol of the moral decay and decadence of the Modern Athlete, and symptomatic of the greater trend in society wherein people who obviously couldn’t find their own asses with both hands and a road map consistently have microphones shoved in their faces with an expectation that they will — as if by magic — make some profound statement that will occupy the intellect and nourish the soul.
VOTING WITH OUR WALLETS
The net of it is that movie sales are declining, there are fewer attendees in sports and the only people who care about actors are other actors, and I’ll bet they don’t like each other that much either.
WHEN CELEBTARDS ARE BETTER NOT TALKING BECAUSE THEY DON’T THINK
Update: The 2018 Oscars were last night. They went on about #MeToo, yet it was their ilk that were the worst offenders of moral debauchery. Instead, they chose to reduce their likeability and their relevance by again making it political. I wonder how they justify in their minds that the rest of the country actually cares what they think about anything (except millineals who believe anything and eat Tide pods). Jennifer Lawrence, with her 8th grade education is going to save democracy while she is taking a year off from acting.
The most relevant tweet of the event was this one:
#Oscars90 A night where: people who fly private jets, with armed bodyguards, who never have to worry about the cost of healthcare, whose kids go to private schools, & have accounts for their taxes lecture the rest of us on: climate, gun control, education, and tax policy. STFU
In the song Mrs. Robinson is a line that states, Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio? I wondered the same about Al Gore. He went from front page man on global warming to I don’t hear anything about him anymore on #AGW. I wondered where he went and why?
There is a famous statement that goes: Where your treasure is, so will your heart will be also. I thought his heart was with global warming, but he’s no where to be found, so I looked for what his treasure was. If it wasn’t really global warming, what was it?
He enrolled in Divinity school so it appeared that he was looking for his treasure from God, but he didn’t finish his degree either. So what has he been chasing his whole life, really?
The rest of this post is merely an observation based on his actions throughout the years. Some will disagree, others will identify and most won’t care. No judgement is being passed, merely a commentary on the general state of man with the public record as documentation.
If you disagree or want to get into an ideological debate, please see the comments policy on the right.
According to Anthony Watts, one of the most trusted sources on Climate issues, “While preening at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2006 during the premiere of his An Inconvenient Truth fib-umentary, Gore made his grand declaration. The former vice president said, in the words of the AP reporter taking down his story, that unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return.” In Gore’s own words, he claimed we were in “a true planetary emergency.”
10 years later, there has been no measurable change in the Arctic ice. As with most of the climate predictions, it was based on prediction models. Anyone who has watched the weather knows that it is rarely right 5 days from now, let alone 5 years from now, yet he sold this snake oil and it was drunk by many or used as a political tool.
HIS EARLY TREASURE
It is common knowledge that he was funded by coal and tobacco, but people repent and so I supposed this was the case also. As of the latest search, he still hasn’t sold his fortune in Occidental stock and dividends he receives. It is nebulous as to whether he has or not, so we’ll give him a pass on it, although he’s earned $500,000 from zinc royalties (which causes environmental issues to produce) as of the last documented tax return that is public. Perhaps it is a legal reason that prevents him from selling this asset. Armand Hammer, the head of Occidental was well known for his communist ties to the Soviet Union was close to the Gore family.
Nevertheless, it appears that before global warming, it was MONEY that was more important than anything else. In the overall realm of things, climate issues appear to have only been a means to the end, or his treasure and not the end itself.
Most of what is below are documents from Climate Scientists or court records. I don’t challenge the views on climate on either side as minds are already made up. My thesis is that he was after money more than protecting the planet.
THE PATH OF HIS POLITICAL CAREER
He of course was a Senator and a Vice President for which he should be commended for serving his country.
It sticks in the craw of the Gore acolytes who generally are Bush 43 haters, that he lost. No matter how many times the media recounted the votes in Florida, Bush still won every recount. This signaled the end of his political career, but it wasn’t the treasure he was really seeking.
One thing that dogged him was that he had a low net worth compared with the other politicians who were his compatriots. I point to the fact that he wasn’t an astute investor given the fore-knowledge congress has of bills that affect corporations. They are not subject to insider trading laws, so just by being there any idiot should increase their wealth at an exponential rate as almost all have done.
AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
This film got a lot of play despite blatant errors which were discovered in court, but then Hollywood rarely gets the truth right and a politician making a movie sort of dooms it’s necessity for truth from the beginning. It did finally start the ball rolling for his money making from global warming, a cause he had pushed uphill for years.
He also won a Nobel Peace Prize. They soon after gave one to a President who had accomplished nothing up to that point.
On January 25th, 2006, while at the Sundance film festival screening “An Inconvenient Truth”, Al Gore said this as chronicled in an article by CBS News:
The former vice president came to town for the premiere of “An Inconvenient Truth,” a documentary chronicling what has become his crusade since losing the 2000 presidential election: Educating the masses that global warming is about to toast our ecology and our way of life.
Gore has been saying it for decades, since a college class in the 1960s convinced him that greenhouse gases from oil, coal and other carbon emissions were trapping the sun’s heat in the atmosphere, resulting in a glacial meltdown that could flood much of the planet.
Americans have been hearing it for decades, wavering between belief and skepticism that it all may just be a natural part of Earth’s cyclical warming and cooling phases.
And politicians and corporations have been ignoring the issue for decades, to the point that unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return, Gore said.
He sees the situation as “a true planetary emergency.”
“If you accept the truth of that, then nothing else really matters that much,” Gore said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We have to organize quickly to come up with a coherent and really strong response, and that’s what I’m devoting myself to.”
Nothing gets lost now thanks to the internet which he invented.
“Al Gore is the principal prophet of doom in the global warming debate, and the 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth is his gospel to true believers. But Gore has misled them.”
Two years ago, British High Court Justice Michael Burton characterized Gore’s film as “alarmism and exaggeration in support of his political thesis.” The court, responding said the film was “one-sided” and could not be shown in British schools unless it contained guidelines to balance Gore’s attempt at “political indoctrination.” This is the antithesis of the scientific method which requires independent proving of a hypothesis to be true science.
Some of these are the decline of Arctic ice (there was a huge re-freeze in 2015), the decline of polar bears and the rising sea level. I was called a flat-earther for questioning the rising tides by a believer in the global warming religion, Tim O’reilly. When I asked for any proof, I received the statement that climate science is hard.
What is hard is for the weatherman to get the forecast right next week. How in the world can you predict 10 years from now? The answer of course has proven to be quite obvious. If you go to the link starting with since (above) Tim, you’ll see that this is bunk. I’ve started to look at the climate change worshipers as the real flat-earther’s now. They seem to be equally as wrong.
HE WAS PROTECTED BY THE MEDIA
The Press Protected His Cause nevertheless as errors weren’t generally reported, and despite trying to kick start the alternative energy sector, most companies didn’t succeed in the free market economy, rather used government subsidies and regulation to survive. He was wise to benefit from the government backing, increasing his fortune.
Al was the nameplate for global warming until that name got tarnished. It morphed to climate change and whatever name that didn’t lose PR favor, but it was still the same gaia cause and Al was the figurehead. It didn’t matter what he said as he had the media covering for him on this initiative.
THE FINAL FRONTIER, HOW HE FOUND HIS HEART’S TREASURE
He started a TV channel, sat on the board of Apple (for which he benefited handsomely) and other money making ventures. While it did nothing to affect Climate change issues to speak of, this appears to be the treasure he was really seeking. He sold Current TV to Al-Jazeera, an oil funded carbon spewing country for hundreds of millions, and that was the antithesis of what he was preaching to the warmers. Al-Jazeera has closed doors on this project in 2016 having not been able to gain an audience in the US. Again, the media was mostly silent, he was one of theirs.
In selling the network to the huge oil producing carbon emitters, he Found the treasure he sought, but sold Out his followers in a big way. It doesn’t matter because what is done, is done. His record is there for history to judge. He is a rich man and now he is seeking ways to release his inner chakra, too bad for Tipper. Name calling for anyone who challenges the “settled science” has been the norm, but it turns out that they are the real flat earthers as they love to call anyone who doesn’t agree with them.
SO WHAT WAS THE REAL TREASURE IN HIS HEART?
Here is where we get to the answer. He was after the money, that was where his treasure really was, gathering wealth. The reason we haven’t heard from him is he is rich and got people to buy into what he was selling. He has big houses with carbon footprints of cities. He flies on private jets to conferences and stays in huge suites, and harass massage therapists.
He got his real treasure which was the dollar, and is riding happily into the sunset a very rich man.
Just like the Mayan calendar in 2012, the earth didn’t end or drown, but we won’t hear anything on Al flying in private jets either. It seems he is the biggest flat Earther of all.
Maybe the delusional devotees who have bought into the weather lie include Tim O’Reilly, who could only tell me that climate science is difficult when he couldn’t explain why the oceans aren’t rising when I asked him. Perhaps he will look past his devotion to this Gaia worship and see the facts, although I don’t expect him to admit both the error in judgement and the fact that he has completely shelved science for ideology. Other devotees like Tom Raftery at GreenMonk have gone out of business because they couldn’t make enough money (bilk companies) or get enough government subsidies. James Governor who helped found Greenmonk told me that he would “save” the planet or make money trying. None of these new Flat-Earthers can explain why it is cooler now than when Al received the Nobel Prize.
They have bought into the lie that Al was peddling and should have invested with him since he was after the money and would do or say whatever he needed to do to achieve it. James in fact never either saved the world or got rich trying.
This was years before Al Gore’s revelation that he was just after the money, so it seems that the climate changers are really just greedy. That makes them the real “Flat-Earthers”.
Here is a recent protest by the Climate change supporters:
This is not my data, rather a Bloomberg study. What I can’t figure out is how the US is so emotional except for the political discord recently (the article below says they are happy). I much more expected it from the Latin countries.
Singapore is the least emotional country in the world. ”Singaporeans recognize they have a problem,” Bloomberg Businessweek writes of the country’s “emotional deficit,” citing a culture in which schools “discourage students from thinking of themselves as individuals.” They also point to low work satisfaction, competitiveness, and the urban experience: “Staying emotionally neutral could be a way of coping with the stress of urban life in a place where 82 percent of the population lives in government-built housing.”
The Philippines is the world’s most emotional country. It’s not even close; the heavily Catholic, Southeast Asian nation, a former colony of Spain and the U.S., scores well above second-ranked El Salvador.
Post-Soviet countries are consistently among the most stoic. Other than Singapore (and, for some reason, Madagascar and Nepal), the least emotional countries in the world are all former members of the Soviet Union. They are also the greatest consumers of cigarettes and alcohol. This could be what you call and chicken-or-egg problem: if the two trends are related, which one came first? Europe appears almost like a gradient here, with emotions increasing as you move West. (their emotions are sedated)
People in the Americas are just exuberant. Every nation on the North and South American continents ranked highly on the survey. Americans and Canadians are both among the 15 most emotional countries in the world, as well as ten Latin countries. The only non-American countries in the top 15, other than the Philippines, are the Arab nations of Oman and Bahrain, both of which rank very highly. (they have it good there)
English- and Spanish-speaking societies tend to be highly emotional and happy. Though the Anglophone nations of the world retain deep cultural links, it’s not clear if Spain’s emotional depth has anything to do with Latin America’s. According to Gallup, “Latin America leads the world when it comes to positive emotions, with Panama, Paraguay, and Venezuela at the top of that list.” Yes, even Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela is apparently filled with happy people. (they have to say that or be imprisoned)
Africans are generally stoic, with some significant exceptions. The continent is among the world’s least emotional, though there is wide variation, which serves as a non-definitive but interesting reminder of Africa’s cultural diversity. Each could be its own captivating case study. It’s possible that South Africa’s high rating has to do with its cultural ties to Western Europe, for example, and Nigeria’s may have to do with the recent protest movement in the south and sectarian violence in the north. (life is tough for them, they cope)
The Middle East is not happy. Gallup notes, “Negative emotions are highest in the Middle East and North Africa, with Iraq, Bahrain, and the Palestinian Territories leading the world in negative daily experiences.” Still, that doesn’t quite fully explain the high emotions in the Levant and on the Arabian peninsula, compared to the lower emotions in Libya, Algeria, and Morocco. Perhaps this hints at how people in these countries are being affected by the still-ongoing political turmoil of the Arab Spring. (they are rife with terrorists who brim with hate)
What am I missing? Every color-coded national boundary here tells a story. Why is Haiti so bereft of emotion compared to its neighbors? Why is Angola so heavy with feeling? Leave your thoughts in the comments or reach me on social media. (Haiti was founded on voodoo so they believe in the devil).
If you look dead east to the hurricane, you’d find where I lived 20 some odd years ago. It hit like an atomic bomb that make south Florida look like Hiroshima.
It sounded like a freight train all night long. We had a new born and were mighty scared for hours. Fortunately, it moved fast and was over by the next day.
I had to crawl out of a window with a chain saw to cut a tree off of my front door so that we could get out of the house. We were lucky as it was a relatively compact storm and hit only about 40-50 miles south of where our house was. That was the difference between our house standing vs. being a pile of bricks.
Times are tough for teenagers to get a job. I’ve heard that unemployment is more that 20 +% for teenagers. My son has struck out getting a job, although he has put more effort into video games than looking for a job, so we started an eBay business.
It’s name is NeonDeal, Click on the name and see what he is selling, vintage fishing lures. The one in the picture is worth a few hundred dollars. Of course, I know something about it, but he built the blog and the Twitter account which you should follow and see what he is selling. He sold and shipped his first lures last week and made more money in one night than he would in a month at McDonald’s. He’s learned a valuable lesson, work for yourself and it’s good to be the boss. Michael Dell started a company called PC’s Limited out of his dorm room….It’s now call Dell Computers. Hope my son gets that kind of taste for the real green. So he’s self employed for the summer and is understanding inventory, shipping, logistics, marketing, sales, blogging and if you don’t work…you don’t get paid.
We must stand on the principles that made this country great, honor the memory of those who gave their lives to make us free and stand up to those who wish to defeat us now, or tear us down because we are not like them or are able, willing and ready to defend ourselves and our freedoms This is unlike the pacifistic and appeasers and even some of our current deleterious leaders who didn’t understand what Patton, MacArthur, Nimitz, Bradley and others knew. You fight to win, then you negotiate the terms of surrender and how business will be conducted. Even on my blog, there are some that just have no clue as to what we are about as demonstrated in the absurd comments of this entry.
Others feel this way also like Ricky Gilleland, quoting from this article:
Quiet, soft-spoken 17- year-old Ricky Gilleland spends most weekends surrounded by tombstones, as he walks through Arlington National Cemetery just outside Washington, D.C. looking for the burial sites of those individuals who have died in the line of duty since September 11, 2001. Gilleland has taken on the job that the historic cemetery has not been able to do itself.
Through his website, preserveandhonor.com, Gilleland has cataloged the thousands who are laid to rest in Section 60 of Arlington Cemetery. With a camera in hand, Gilleland shoots a photo of both the front and back of the headstone, “to provide a virtual place for loved ones and friends to both locate the graves of the fallen and reflect on the memory of their sacrifice.”
So I don’t wish a happy Memorial Day, although I hope you enjoy the hot dogs and family celebration. Rather, remember those who fought so that you could live free
After spending a year with the great minds of sustainability, I finally found a Global Warming Scientist that is correct and has some facts to back it up.
Piers Corbyn got laughed at when he made this prediction in November:
While he was laughed at and was told that the science was settled, he was proven right and called out why it is the Sun that is the correct predictor of the weather.
His Website shows how the facts are manipulated and as usual, follow the money….except that the carbon trading exchange has now been closed.
I wonder what the next inconvenient truth will be?
UPDATE: I found out later from Tres idiots Tim O’Reilly, Tom Raftery and James Governor got on their high horses to claim the end of the world because of CO2 and AGW also. They voice support for Hollywood celebrities who live in mansions, fly private jets to global warming conferences and believe all the Al Gore nonsense about settled science without a shred of evidence, hypotheses that could be proven true and not one prediction of a climate crisis that is correct. It turns out that distribution of money to fake environmental causes was the real reason they bought into this along with the worship of earth as their god instead of The God of the Bible as their religion. I hope this makes them feel better as they travel the road paved with good intentions that leads to you know where.
Note: I’ve edited this to accurately represent what really happened at the Green and Sustainability effort during my tenure at this job. It has died because once the fury of Green passed by, nobody cared about it. That accurately reflects the real position by everyone in the company that I worked with except the executive who got paid for running it. I don’t think he cared either once the assaignment was over because he moved on and it was dropped.
I was given a stretch assignment for Green IT at IBM this year. A stretch assignment means you get another job without the extra pay, or layoffs just happened and a person now has to do the work of 2 since they don’t want to backfill, or the powers that be don’t feel like you have enough to do so they use this as retribution. In this case it’s mostly the second one because they know I can deliver when others can’t, so they dump stuff on me frequently.
I have a lot ahead of me, thus the title of this blog post. The hardest thing about this assignment is that I know that IBM doesn’t really believe in it (and there is only a small faction of nuts in the company trying to get buy in). The entire premise is almost 100% hype for corporate responsibility and image rather than any actual product or offering. I really wasn’t given a choice whether I wanted to do it and I certainly will do my job, but as you can see in the details below, it’s hard to believe in something when it’s based on bullshit. I see through it and I know that TPTB are just being politically correct to avoid the (very small but politically damaging) social justice warrior hostage taking out there.
During the Major Analyst Conference we did in November, I had to get this nonsense into all the Smarter Planet materials to show (SJW and PC) compliance (so as to not get the Jessie Jackson-ish extortion treatment by the Al Gore crowd). It turns out to be a bunch of nonsense that is made up to try to fool the press and analysts into thinking IBM actually does something in the Green space.
It all started out with trying to be politically correct about global warming, since IBM really isn’t and has the carbon footprint of China (or Al Gore’s 2 houses and jet setting around the world). Now, everyone has started shying away from the words “global warming” once the world saw through that as a lie and ineffective, they renamed it Sustainability. That means you wrap up all the things that tangentially have something to do with being sustainable, since it is a nebulous name and concept and voila, you claim sustainability.
Once the word sustainability gets found out as a fraud as part of the global warming and money grabbing hoax, you then call it Smarter Planet or roll it up into that campaign and somehow you are politically correct, even if you aren’t really doing anything different (which IBM isn’t). We had to sell this crock to the press and analysts who wanted so badly to be able to charge extort us for pretending to buy our baloney of offering something in this space that resembled eco-friendliness. They were compliant in our scam as long as there was money.
The worst thing is having to deal with the idiots out there who buy into this Gaia religion like Tom Raftery of Greenmonk and James Governor of Redmonk and Greenmonk. Our executives in a briefing after a different Green Day analyst conference in London actually called James a wanker and Tom a whiner after the event due to their outbursts and views as they interrupted the entire day. Greenmonk has since gone dormant for lack of money, facts and believable content on climate. Their credibility was shot when they wanted a carbon tax at a dollar a pound. James told me the real truth was he wanted to make money while trying pretend that they were doing it to save the planet, making money being the operative words (see the above extortion tactics). I put the Dilbert cartoon in specifically for O’Reilly, Raftery and Governer – the 3 stooges.
The net of it is that IBM is pretending to be a player in this shell game but is a pseudo player. Fortunately, the analysts and press who are pushing it are just bully’s, but know as we all do that the evidence is not there, so they make up new stories when the lack of facts expose the wild goose chase de jour.
Too bad it is all a farce and IBM’s offering is equally a load of hogwash.
THE WORLD IS FLATTER, BUT NOT LIKE YOU THINK.
That is right, the real flat earther’s are the one’s who buy into this farce of “sustainability” like Greenmonk whose job was to suck around for money. Another dissembler Tim O’Reilly, who couldn’t defend global warming with anything other than “climate science is hard” (or I have no real facts so I’ll call you names), while condemning those who don’t believe in it wrong without any proof of his position was another nut I had to deal with. None of either’s positions are based on anything but computer climate predictions of which none have come even close. they based their position on the IPCC report. It now comes out that The IPCC; Never Has So Much Been Made Out of So Little by So Many at So Great A Cost. In other words it was a money transaction that had nothing to do with climate other than earth worshipping. Any other “climate facts” are 50 years in the future, which is an even bigger joke since real meteorologists can barely predict the weather next week. I could be convinced of global warming if there was one little thing called evidence. What I find unfathomable is the lack of backbone by IBM to stand up to this money grabbing extortion theme by these pseudo experts.
As it turns out, I had tweeted in response to Tim’s crisis about the rising tides that I didn’t believe him, but would accept his facts if he had any. Like all good climate warriors, he made ad hominem attacks on me and in a more harmless statement, said that I got all my information from Fox News (I don’t watch any news as my career with the media already told me that the press are biased). The only real facts about the state of Climate issues are found at What’s up with That unlike Tim who had no facts like all climate warriors.
As it turns out, the tides are receding Tim and here is the evidence. The waters on the island of Tuvalu (the tidal benchmark) are receding. This is one of the crisis places of the world that was supposed to be drowned along with the Statue of Liberty. So Tim, your views are biased and calling people flat-Earther’s because they don’t sign up for the pseudo science you have bought into is ridiculous, like your views.
Epilogue:
I got out of this assignment because I couldn’t lie for the company, nor lie to myself by doing something I didn’t believe in and realized was a lie. It’s lost its mojo because both the premise of Sustainability and climate change are based on predictive models that aren’t true. The fact that IBM doesn’t really do anything (other that trying to keep up with the Jones) was too much for me to take, and claim any sense of honesty. My credibility is more important than getting a paycheck for lying. I’d never make it as a politician.
I left the position right before a green conference where Al Gore was the speaker. It was the second time in my IBM career that I made a conscious decision to avoid him so as to not listen to his spew about global warming, nor be disappointed in humanity by seeing so many people being fooled by this scam based on redistribution of money to the climate warriors.
I told James that it was good that Gore wasn’t president on 9/11/2001 as he couldn’t lead a lottery winner to any bank (other than his bank account), let alone a nation in a real crisis. Being a good liberal, he was offended since he knew it was true and couldn’t defend his hero. He, like Biden and Cheney were only impeachment insurance for their respective presidents.
So having to lie to defend Climate anything, especially at IBM when I understood the facts makes it hard to be green. I’ve moved on to something I can be honest about.
The position went away as it became “under the guise of everything is sustainable” – (more lies) that we didn’t need a person babysitting it anymore. The real truth is that it didn’t develop into an issue like diversity that a company could be blackmailed into payment or bad PR due to non-compliance. It just went away as did the fake committment to global warming by my employer.
.jpg)
Delusions of Adequacy 
