“Bring me to this rock that has the most incredible life.”
I guess all the mental institutions are full.
“Bring me to this rock that has the most incredible life.”
I guess all the mental institutions are full.
Here’s another compelling reason why we should all be hoping that the earth will warm and not cool over the coming decades. (After all, there is no way the temperature is going to stay stagnant).
The print edition of yesterday’s UK Daily Mail has a short report on an international study on the effects of temperature on death rates. The comprehensive study was conducted by the Dr. Antonio Gasparrini of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. It examined 74 million deaths in 13 countries.
Also read it at Science Daily (Can’t link because I’m writing from a mobile device – just Google it).
The result, The Daily Mail writes:
7.71 per cent of the deaths were caused by non-optimal temperatures. Cold was responsible for 7.29 per cent of deaths, while 0.42% were attributable to heat, according to the study, published by the Lancet medical journal.”
In other words, deaths from cold were some 20 times than those from heat.
What is interesting is that the study found that most of the deaths occurred when the temperatures were “moderately hot and cold”. This may be due to people underestimating the “moderate” anomalies, and thus failing to take the corresponding precautions. On extremely hot or cold days, on the other hand, the level of awareness is heightened due to media hype, and so people tend to behave accordingly, i.e. drink more fluids, or really bundle up.
Cold is the last thing we need
The study tells us one thing: Cold is the last thing we want to see, and any warming needs to be welcome. Unfortunately recent temperature data and climate trends bode ill, as a number of distinguished scientists are forecasting cooling over the coming decades due to ocean and solar cycles swinging into their cool modes.
Given the results of the study, which are obvious to most normal thinking people, one would need to be a total moron, or just plain mean-spirited, to be rooting for cooling.
The title may sound stunning, and unbelievable, but it’s true.
It’s also appearing in the main media elsewhere.
Berlin’s leftist daily Online Tagesspiegel here reports comprehensively on the German Green Party’s troubled past involving it’s earlier advocacy of pedophilia and practice by some of its former leading members, see background here, here, here and here.
Green Party Chairwoman Bettina Jarasch has just publicly apologized for what she calls an “institutional failure,” Tagesspiegel writes, as a commission report on the matter has been presented.
“On behalf of the Berlin Greens, we ask for foregiveness,” said Jarasch.
The Tagesspiegel adds:
In the Berlin state association of the Alternativen Liste, the forerunner organization of the Green Party, there was massive sexual abuse of children.”
The Greens’ advocacy of pedophilia rights was part of the party’s platform in the 1980s and early 1990s as it pushed neo-liberal ideas like “free and open relationships”. It still remains unclear as to why the Germany’s top environmental party took so long to issue an apology.
1000 child victims of sexual abuse
The number of victims is not known. However one Green Party Berlin parliamentarian and author of the report, Thomas Birk, in March mentioned “up to 1000 victims”, though he said the figure was “speculative”. The report itself gives releases no figure.
Current Green party official Daniel Wesener said that there were at least two repeat offenders who were tolerated within the party, one was convicted in 13 cases.
Currently the child sex abuse within the Green party is now under investigation by a special commission. The Green Party leaders pledge their full cooperation and to provide compensation to victims who step forward.
According to the Tagesspiegel, the investigation shed light into an “abuse network” within the forerunner of the Green party, Alternativen Liste, which included at least three leading figures who set up a “youth center” in Kreuzberg recreational center.
According to witnesses, they abused numerous youths who had been recruited at elementary schools.”
Today Green Party officials insist that the abuse, however, did not take place within the party structure itself.
Though some media outlets such as the Tagesspiegel reported on the story, much of the German media has been pretty mute on the topic.
A few years ago at a social event I had a brief discussion with a secondary school teacher who happened to be on some sort of committee in Hannover which decided the textbooks the children at Lower Saxony upper secondary schools were to use.
On that subject I told her I thought that the geography textbook our children were using was designed to indoctrinate the kids on the subject of climate change, and that it dissuaded them from critical thinking on the subject. My opinion was that the schools should teach children, and not indoctrinate them.
Needless to say, I got quite a stern, German-style reaction. I’ll never forget the icy, piercing look in her eyes, one that made my grade school principal Arlene Simons look angelic by comparison. Parents, especially cowboys, obviously were not expected to question the state when it comes matters concerning the education of children.
The following is a letter written by a biology teacher, posted at Die kalte Sonne site. It was sent to one of Germnay’s larger textbook publishers: Ernst Klett Verlag.
From: Teacher of Biology and Chemistry [anonymous in order to avoid problems with colleagues]
Sent: 18 March 2015
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
Because the general contact-page at your website is blocked, I am using this address and requesting that you pass my comments on the subject of climate change on to the responsible editors:
In the preparation of my lessons (Biology Grade 7) in your textbook Prisma Biology 2, ISBN 978-3-12-068390-2, I came upon an illustration depicting the causes of climate change which I find to be unserious and unscientific. Under the heading, ‘The greenhouse effect is being enhanced’ one finds the following text: ‘Over the past decades scientists have been measuring a steady increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. At the same time the average temperature of the earth has risen because the heat trapping gas barrier is getting tighter…“
Here the illusion of a causal relationship is being given, when this is everything but certain. Why do you not provide the development of the mean global temperature over the past? This would allow the pupils to see that warm periods have always occurred, long before man could have had an impact on the earth’s atmosphere. The pupils would be able to recognize that the climate in the Middle Ages was similar to today’s climate and that it provided significant benefits to the people living back then.
My view is that it is scientifically unserious to show only an increase over the last decades. Here it is being suggested that there weren’t any climate changes earlier.
Why don’t you show how little the share of man’s CO2 is in the earth’s entire CO2 budget?
Why do you not mention the ongoing discussion on CO2 climate sensitivity?
Why do you not mention that the global mean temperature of the earth has not risen over the past 18 years, even though the CO2 atmospheric concentration of the atmosphere has risen during the same period?
Why do you not mention that many studies have shown that in the past temperature increased first, and then CO2 and methane concentration followed, and thus the driving force for the earth’s temperature could not have been these gases?
And why do you fail to mention that the climate models, which projected a significant warming of the earth, have been proven false?
What I find to be especially manipulative and unserious is the exercise: ‘Evaluate the single information sources using this sentence: Who posted what, and with what intention, in the Internet?“ This is all about speculation and the manipulation of 13-year olds who do not yet possess the knowledge necessary for assessing the seriousness of a source in the Internet. It may very well be that the ideological stipulations of political parties may lead a school textbook publisher to depict the reality as such, so that it fits the political narrative. But this has absolutely nothing to do with science. Serious would be to show in a neutral manner the different views on climate changes of the last 150 years, side by side, and to provide as many of the known facts as possible.
Well, don’t expect the Lower Saxony Ministry of Education to give this letter an A+ by any means.
Today Germany’s kids are being told what they can be critical about, and climate science is certainly not one of them. Even the concerns of parents are being dismissed by what appears to be a state apparatus that has gotten excessively arrogant on the subject. Indeed it’s back to school – the old nasty German one of thought control.
And it’s unbelievable that the climate of intimidation in academia has become so aggressive that the biology teacher fears being identified, and thus chose to stay anonymous. This should make anyone pause and think.
Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. – 1 Corinthians 3:18
Towering arrogance from speech-rights midgets? The self-appointed gate-keepers of the Truth: Image cropped here.
Rather than ranking websites on their popularity, a Google research group is looking into ranking websites based on how “factual” they are. If implemented, it would literally mean Google taking on the gatekeeper role of who deciding fact from fiction. Google has already created a “knowledge vault” containing “commonly believed facts”. In summary sites found to deviate from what Google considers facts, would be automatically down-ranked in searches. Result: dissident opinions would surely get buried.
Though the system may have some merits, it is chock-full of pitfalls and it risks the establishment of an information dictatorship – a so-called Orwellian Ministry Of Truth. In other countries such information control programs are the sort of things one associates with tyrannies and dictatorships, like Iran, North Korea, Red China, Russia, Venezuela or Islamic fundamentalist states. Note in all these states, leaders are convinced it’s for the overall good of the people.
“That is very troubling,” writes Jim Lakely, Director of Communications of the Chicago-based think-tank The Heartland Institute in an e-mail. He thinks there is no doubt that the ‘facts’ of politicized sites who clearly have a defined agenda will get favorable treatment in Google’s ‘knowledge vault’ while dissident sites will be locked out.
“I worry about this issue greatly… My site gets a significant portion of its daily traffic from Google,” Anthony Watts told FoxNews.com. “It is a very slippery and dangerous slope because there’s no arguing with a machine,” he added.
While Google maintains this project is only in the development phase, others are not so sure. One climate science dissident, who wishes to remain anonymous for the time being, believes that Google is already “heavily biased and directing traffic away” from climate science skeptic sites.
When it comes to science, the move reveals that Google seems oblivious to how the discipline works. It that is so, it makes the omnipotent company all the more dangerous. Science is always hotly disputed. For example is used to be a universal “fact” that saturated fats were bad for human health – before dissidents forced a rethinking. With Google’s new proposed policy, dissident voices would never see the light of day and progress would be stunted as a result. Dissidence is the life blood of science itself. By removing dissidence, as Google unwisely moves to do, science itself would de facto get starved and be catapulted back to the Dark Ages and the times of the Inquisition.
Global warming alarmists have long been working to get Google to suppress dissident voices on the subject of climate change. In 2009 conservative news site Newsbusters here wrote:
Former Vice President Al Gore a few years ago advised Internet behemoth Google about “aspects of search quality.”Such was reported by the New Yorker in its October 12 issue (subscription required). […] given the ongoing concerns about Google’s political leanings and how its search algorithms might be manipulated to favor liberal news outlets over conservative points of view, the very idea that Gore might have had any input to this process is worrisome to say the least.”
Thus we see that the Google project has long been in the works, and so the preparation appears to be grand and fundamental in scale. It cannot be that an organization with the power and might of Google would take it upon itself to police the world’s body of knowledge and to decide who is trustworthy and who isn’t. This borders on dangerous megalomania.
Censorship can be fought
The irresponsible and arguably arrogant deeming of “unreliable sources” is not something that Google alone is contemplating, but was already once reality among some powerful government institutions worldwide just months ago. For example Germany’s Federal Ministry of Environment issued a 123-page publication that singled out German and American journalists and scientists who it claimed were responsible for “spreading doubt and false information“ on climate change. Among them: Fred Singer, Sallie Baliunas, Willie Soon, Frederick Seitz, Joe Barton, Pat Michaels, John Christy and Ross McKitrick.
Fortunately the German journalists and scientists who were targeted did not take the state-sponsored attack lying down. The brochure is no longer available. A small victory for the freedom of scientific dissent.
So will Google and its many backstage operators be successful?
If anything, the move confirms yet again that the globalist alarmists have lost the argument and that the public debate has become unwinnable for them. This is the reason for the “state-of-emergency” scale move. Despite their huge advantages in the media and state funding, they are unable to explain the harsh winters, the models’s failure, the sea ice growth and the many other warmer Holocene periods. Now they are forced to shut down dissidents, a-la-Inquisition.
But it will never work. Every lie has a short shelf-life and can be propped up only for so long. Eventually it gets stale, and no one is left to swallow it.
Google’s move, however, is indeed extremely worrisome and very serious. The new US Congress needs to move swiftly and forcefully, and to put these obviously out-of-control Google executives on the hot seat for a serious grilling or two and a little schooling on the virtues of un-monopolized dissent. The human right to be heard, and to not be silenced, is at stake here. Sympathetic lawmakers need to be contacted.
Kennedy aptly concludes: “Whoever controls the Truth, controls the world“.
The power to determine the truth belongs to the people, and not to Google.
of the UK online Spectator presents a highly interesting portrait of environmentalist, doomsday-believer Dylan Evans and his Utopia Experiment. Lewis concludes from it: “Designs for living always end in tears, or worse.”
So disconnected from reality was Evans, and academic, that he believed he could actually make himself a better life departing the comforts of the modern age and getting back to the natural beauty of raw survival with other like-minded persons – in the raw climate of northern Scotland of all places.
Strangely Evans selected a site that he thought would allow the generation of electric power to accompany his natural living.
Some excerpts on how his “Experiment” turned out:
Evans admits that his utopia was doomed to failure. It attracted only idealists and disaffected romantics when what was needed were people with practical skills… […]
…the small group began to disintegrate. One member even started to invent his own religion, building a shrine. […]
He himself was soon fed up with sleeping under rancid fleece blankets … the sanitary arrangements were grotesque. […]
It soon became apparent that ‘the whole experiment had been a huge mistake’. […]
Evans was eventually detained under the Mental Health Act in a maximum security psychiatric hospital. […]
He fretted unduly about global warming and ‘the looming energy crisis’… Evans, the doctors concluded, was already craving the abyss and in the throes of panic-attacks and a breakdown.”
If the story of Evans tells us anything, it is that it vividly illustrates how far out to lunch academics in the ivory towers can sometimes become. Why on earth would policymakers ever listen to their loony utopian ideas to begin with? Evans just proved that its all lunacy.
Evans and the loads of past academics show that their radical formulae for rendering utopian life are pure delusions of deranged minds. Yet these are precisely the minds behind the doomsday global warming scenarios, and the advocacy of a carbon-free utopia.
The proof that these minds are deranged is the fact that none, except for Evans for a brief time, are willing to give up the carbon life themselves. Man was destined to escape nature, and not to stay at its mercy.
Finally one cannot help but notice the contempt loony academics and pseudo-intellectual journalists hold for humans. Lewis writes;
It’s best to muddle along as we are, not because human beings are morons or suckers, or traitors to the cause, but because life is meant to be messy, muddled, contrary, comic.”
Actually, as Evans clearly illustrates, the real morons are the academics and all the gullible media and policymaker idiots who believe the utopia that they preach. At least there is hope for Lewis as well, who seems to grudgingly concede that maybe the current system isn’t so bad after all and sure beats living in the cold mud.
According to University of California pediatric endocrinologist Robert Lustig, the US had 6 million “seriously overweight” kids in 2001. Since then that number has skyrocketed to over 20 million.
Worldwide there are 366 million people with diabetes. By 2030, if trends are not curbed, 165 million Americans will be obese and by 2050 100 million will have diabetes. Lustig calls it “a standard pandemic” The related health costs will be astronomical – and unaffordable. No modern civilization can survive that.
Tragically these are the numbers that were necessary to finally get the US government to concede that its longstanding dietary guidelines (once solidly and irrefutably confirmed by the “vast consensus of scientific experts”) had been severely flawed for decades. Read here and here.
Why did it take so damn long for the government to wake up? It gets down to obstinate egomaniacal scientists, greedy food and pharmaceutical industries, and governments corrupted by the same industries. See here.
Because established scientists have a long habit of insisting their pet theories are right and scoff at those who challenge them, renowned German physicist Max Planck once wisely remarked, “Science advances one funeral at a time.” he noticed that false theories don’t die until their founders do. Sadly, as the case of nutritional sciences shows, hundreds of millions of people have gotten or are about to get early funerals. Hence, government science advances 100 million funerals at a time. Such is now the case with the science concerning saturated fats and human health.
The very same tragedy has begun in earnest in climate science today. Just as the saturated fat theory was founded on the junk science and phony 7-Country chart of Ancel Keys, the CO2 global warming theory was founded on the junk science of NASA scientist James Hansen and the dubious hockey stick graph of Michael E. Mann. And just as dissenters were ignored, marginalized and cut off from funding in the nutritional sciences, so are skeptic global warming scientists experiencing the same today. And just as a consensus among all scientists was claimed endorsing the saturated fat theory (fully backed by the National Academy of Sciences and virtually every American medical association), an illusionary 97% consensus is also being claimed in climate science today. And just as the American Dietary Guidelines were promoted and made official by a Democrat Presidential loser candidate (George McGovern), the global warming science and proposed energy dietary guidelines are being promoted today by Democrat Presidential loser candidate Al Gore. The parallels between the two sciences indeed could not be more stunning.
It would be nice if the parallels ended there, but it is unlikely they will. Just as the case has been with the saturated fat theory, the CO2 climate change theory now risks killing hundreds of millions in the future – thanks to energy poverty and starvation. Without energy, people die horrible deaths from exposure.
All of this could be avoided, of course, if only governments were honest in their interpretation of climate data and stopped making up excuses for colder and colder winters, and 18 years of zero warming. Unfortunately that does not appear likely to happen anytime soon. Tragically it’ll probably take tens of millions of unnecessary premature deaths resulting from energy deprivation to get the governments to realize they have made a horrible mistake. Instead of making a course correction on the climate issue, the US government, led by NASA, is now altering the historical temperature data in a manner that would even make Ancel Keyes blush.
People can argue about the impacts of faulty science on human life. But one thing cannot be argued: Truth leads to life; lies lead to death.
Clearly the US policy will likely have to see another 100 million or so early funerals before it allows climate science to advance.
Many readers and myself have become quite dismayed by the Vatican’s new position on the junk climate science-based, anti-humanity movement against fossil fuels.
Interestingly today I read a report in the Catholic Herald here where it is clearly miffed by how Britain’s UKIP party “now commands the support of an estimated one in six Catholics” and is “causing increasing alarm among Church leaders.” My, how could that be!
Well, we all understand that things move glacially slow at the Vatican, and we don’t expect them to see the light any time soon, even though it’s staring at them straight in the face. These things can take centuries.
Catholics reject intolerance and hatred
One reason Catholics are rejecting the positions held by the Church is no better illustrated than by the following article appearing in the The Daily Mail:
I’ve never supported the British National Party or the Ku Klux Klan. I’ve never belonged to the Paedophile Information Exchange, or denied the Holocaust, or made a penny from the banking crash.
But if you read The Guardian newspaper’s website, you might think otherwise. A commentator on it urged my own children to murder me.
He did so because of one of the many stories I’ve written for this newspaper about climate change. I first reported on the subject nearly six years ago: my article was about the ‘climategate’ scandal, where leaked emails…”
…”But ultimately, where are they taking us? Citing climate change is certainly an effective way of making schoolchildren feel fearful and guilty, much as preachers once used to.”
Read more at the Daily Mail.
Leaders will have to learn to face one fact: thanks to the Internet followers are much better informed today and many can see the cliff up ahead which their leaders are blindly leading them to. The Catholic Church is part of that green movement.
Catholics want nothing to do with and are appalled by the hate and bigotry that gets aimed at honest dissenters such as David Rose. And we reject the deception-riddled plot to deny the world of life-giving fossil fuels as well as the mentally ill hysteria of a world coming to an end.
If anything what we need is an encyclical on the necessity of fossil fuels.
It’s truly stunning that the Church can be so tolerant of the bigotry and intolerance on one side of the debate, yet be so quick to condemn honest dissent on the other.
Image Mark Maslin, cropped from ZDF
At the very end of Part 2, the otherwise excellent German public television documentary abruptly descends into sheer lunacy in claiming that the globe has “strongly heated up” recently and that it is now wresting with “global warming” – and to drive the point home, it inserts an amazing comment by University College London Climatology Professor Mark Maslin at the 42:27 mark (translated from the German voice-over):
We are now at the point where we can decide how the climate of the future will look. When we as a collective world community, all nations working together, are able to really prevent global warming, that would be fantastic. That would be the first time that the climate doesn’t control us, but rather us controlling it. We could make sure that all future generations will have a stable climate.”
Maslin clearly suggests humans collectively have the power to override the global natural climate factors and to tame and steer the world’s climate in any desired direction, and to do so for “all future generations”.
Throughout previous 88 minutes the documentary looked at earlier climate changes that were greater than those experienced today and attributed them to natural factors such as solar activity, volcanoes and ocean dynamics. These natural climate change events included the “very rapid changes in climate” during the last ice age, the end of the last ice age, the 8.2 kiloyear event, the green Sahara, ancient Egyptian warm period, the Roman warm period, and the Little Ice Age.
Strangely, according to the documentary, the sun as a climate driver in the past seem to have just disappeared since 1250 AD. Now we are supposed to believe that humans took control of the climate some 100 years ago.
Physicist: “blatant silliness”
This is blatant silliness, probably forced upon the professor to include at least a sentence seen to be politically correct and Zeitgeist aware. This last conclusion is the more silly, as all previous examples clearly have shown that the changes of the climate were not caused by human activity. And today, never mind our technological achievements, we are still unable to change the tilt of the axis of the globe, modify solar activity or put a lid on volcanoes to avoid their eruptions.”
Indeed. In fact governments aren’t even able to control their runaway spending and deficits, let alone the world’s temperature and climate.
Screaming bloody murder over nothing? Keep in mind that RSS recently released the satellite measured global temperature for 2014 and found it is not even close to a new record. Three days ago one of Germany’s leading climate science sites Science Skeptical issued the following comment.
Global Temperature Record 2014?
By Michael Krueger
(Translated, edited by P Gosselin)
A new temperature record for Germany has been announced by the DWD German Weather Service. With 10.3°C the warmest year since 1881 has been measured. Here are the facts.
2014 was the warmest year in Germany since 1881, but the warmest 12-months occurred from July 2006 to June 2007 with a mean of 11.3°C. Therefore the annual mean for 2006/2007 as 1°C over the current annual mean.
Chart depicts Germany’s temperature since 1761. Rose line is the annual mean temperature and the dark red line depicts the 5-year smoothing.
Moreover since 2000 Germany’s temperature has barely risen – in contradiction to atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
How does the global temperature appear?
There are different datasets available for global tempertaure. I’m selecting the most alarmist, which comes from NASA. The gray shading shows the monthly mean values and the red curve is the smoothed annual mean (over 12 months).
Since 1880 the global temperature has risen about 0.8°C, i.e. not even a full degree. Since 1998 (a powerful El-Nino-year) there’s been practically no rise. What follows is a blow-up for the recent period.
In 2007 and 2010 it was just as warm as in 2014, or even warmer. We’re talking about 1/100 °C, which is deep inside the range of uncertainty. Yet the concentrations of atmospheric CO2 continued their steady rise. Based on these data, spreading climate alarmism is complete hyperbolism.
Very likely in the days ahead NASA will be announcing a global temperature record that in reality never was.
“N’en déplaise à ces fous nommés sages de Grèce,
En ce monde il n’est point de parfaite sagesse;
Tous les hommes sont fous, et malgré tous leurs soîns
Ne diffèrent entre eux que du plus ou du moins.”
“No offense to those crazy appointed sages of Greece,
In this world there is no perfect wisdom;
All men are fools, and despite all their care
is differentiated as the more or less.”
From: The title page, Charles MacKay (portrait above). Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (Kindle Location 1046). Published in London, 1852. Available free in your chosen format here. Image from Wikipedia Commons, here.
My wife asked me the other day if there were other examples in history of the Climate Delusion presently infecting the world. I immediately thought of the above famous work from the Nineteenth Century, though I had not read it in its entirety until now. I downloaded the Kindle edition and will be quoting it extensively. MacKay devoted two volumes to the history of this phenomenon, though he said he could have devoted 50.
The present may be considered more of a miscellany of delusions than a history— a chapter only in the great and awful book of human folly which yet remains to be written, and which Porson once jestingly said he would write in five hundred volumes!” (Kindle Locations 1152-1153)
Every age has its peculiar folly; some scheme, project, or phantasy into which it plunges, spurred on either by the love of gain, the necessity of excitement, or the mere force of imitation. Failing in these, it has some madness, to which it is goaded by political or religious causes, or both combined.” (Kindle Locations 6961-6963).
Most of the delusions MacKay describes somehow involve money. Many describe financial “bubbles” like Tulipomania, the South Sea Bubble, and the Mississippi stock scheme. Mesmerism/Magnetisers and Alchemy made money for the direct practitioners. Pilgrimages to the Holy Land profited the Islamists for hundreds of years until the crusading knights attempted to retrieve the treasure. Whole forests of oaks were reduced to fragments of the True Cross and imported to Europe at huge expense.
In many of these delusions, the practitioners, as well as those practiced upon, were themselves deluded. This was especially true for those delusions associated with the practice of medicine such as the Magnetisers. These practices probably held back the advancement of medicine for many years. Alchemy both advanced and retarded the study of chemistry, leading practitioners into blind alleys and dead ends in search of the “Philosopher’s Stone,” but developing equipment and techniques that would be later used to advance the science.
Men go mad in herds
The parallels with Climate Science are clear: the delusions of the “97%” climate scientists leads to cherry-picking of data and confirmation bias that poison all the work. The bias is driven constantly by the knowledge that only “correct” answers will keep the paycheck coming. In an ancient example from MacKay, Kepler:
In sending a copy of his Ephemerides to Professor Gerlach, he wrote, that they were nothing but worthless conjectures; but he was obliged to devote himself to them, or he would have starved.” (Kindle Locations 5632-5633).
Why don’t the climate scientists see the error of their ways? They sometimes do; usually after retirement, when the press of money no longer holds, or when they are in a position of safety.
Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.” (Kindle Locations 1143-1144).
So it is not surprising that we see some older and wiser heads in Climate Science, one by one, leaving the clique. So, why the constant projections of calamity from Climate Science? Here too, MacKay has an answer:
Omens. Among the other means of self-annoyance upon which men have stumbled, in their vain hope of discovering the future, signs and omens hold a conspicuous place. There is scarcely an occurrence in nature which, happening at a certain time, is not looked upon by some persons as a prognosticator either of good or evil. The latter are in the greatest number, so much more ingenious are we in tormenting ourselves than in discovering reasons for enjoyment in the things that surround us. We go out of our course to make ourselves uncomfortable; the cup of life is not bitter enough to our palate, and we distil [sic] superfluous poison to put into it, or conjure up hideous things to frighten ourselves at, which would never exist if we did not make them.” (Kindle Locations 5742-5746).
The mountaineer makes the natural phenomena which he most frequently witnesses prognosticative of the future. The dweller in the plains, in a similar manner, seeks to know his fate among the signs of the things that surround him, and tints his superstition with the hues of his own clime. The same spirit animates them all— the same desire to know that which Infinite Mercy has concealed. There is but little probability that the curiosity of mankind in this respect will ever be wholly eradicated. Death and ill fortune are continual bugbears to the weak-minded, the irreligious, and the ignorant; and while such exist in the world, divines will preach upon its impiety and philosophers discourse upon its absurdity in vain.” (Kindle Locations 5849-5852).
Is there no hope? Are we doomed to live in fear of the future? Will the doomsayers win? The above quote continues:
Still it is evident that these follies have greatly diminished. Soothsayers and prophets have lost the credit they formerly enjoyed, and skulk in secret now where they once shewed their faces in the blaze of day. So far there is manifest improvement.” (Kindle Locations 5852-5854).
As the predictions of the modern climate soothsayers fall into repeated failure, so will climate science slowly improve. One by one, the workers in this field will correct their errors. Some will fall from a great height and be destroyed. Some will suffer large and small epiphanies and ease into the light.
Like Churchill said, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
Here’s proof that mainstream media journalism is either sloppy and just too lazy to check the data themselves, or is catatonically stuck in their now 18-year long illusion of global warming.
Recently a number of leading media outlets trumpeted (loudly) scary claims of “accelerating polar ice melt”. For example last May Germany’s leading online financial daily Handelsblatt cited a NASA study appearing in the Geophysical Research Letters and reported: “Polar ice melting much faster than assumed“, and warned of sea levels rising more than a meter.
Antarctica sets satellite-era all time record high sea ice extent. Source: sunshinehours.wordpress.com
It’s obvious that neither journalists and nor NASA scientists have been looking at what is really happening. Antarctica has spent much of the current year smashing one daily maximum sea ice record after another. Today we see that Antarctic sea ice has totally smashed the all-time satellite-era record (see chart above). So far not a peep on that from the German mainstream media.
Instead it’s been all about meltdown. Citing the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) in Bremerhaven, German news weekly Stern wrote: “The ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting at record speed, according to satellite measurements.”
Let’s wait and see if the reality-disconnected Stern will report on the record Antarctic sea ice in the days and weeks ahead. In the meantime we just have to think they and the AWI are really reporting on a different planet, one perhaps made of cheese.
Last month Spiegel here cited a study by Heinrich Miller of the AWI and reported that “both polar caps are melting more rapidly than originally thought“.
Obviously the record high ice extent at the South Pole hasn’t made an impression on Spiegel. To be fair, when the reader wades deeper into the Spiegel article, we find out that the rapid south polar melting they write ABOUT is actually restricted to the West Antarctic Ice Shelf, an area that is only 1% of Antarctica’s total surface area and not representative of the South Pole.
As the chart above indicates, we can expect to see more smashed all-time records in the days ahead. It will be interesting to see if the media and scientists remain in their 18-year long catatonic state of a melting and warming planet illusion.
The general public is realizing that the climate data are showing nothing to be alarmed about. Depending on data study one looks at, global temperatures have stagnated 18 years (have even fallen over the last 10 years), sea level rise is decelerating, and again we are beginning to experience winters like we saw in the 1960s. Climate is cyclic.
So if the data aren’t at all worrisome, then what can be done to convey the message of grave concern and worry to the public? The latest stunt concocted by the imaginative minds of climate hysterics is posing before a camera and to put on the most concerned look they could possibly muster. It’s a black-and-white photography series dubbed “Scared Scientists” by Nick Bowers. Read here.
Climate propaganda has reached Orwellian dimensions.
These scientists have cooperated with a professional photographer to handle this project. Lower the lights, turn your head bit to the right. Don’t blink! Be more tense…imagine your funding is about to be eliminated – yes, perfect! Exactly the photo we want!
Yes, this is exactly the kind of worry they wanted to capture on camera – to convey their fright and worry over man-made climate change.
Just like they are trying to do their best to feign a climate catastrophe with carefully selected and posed data, the climate-alarmism centerfold scientists are now doing their utmost to feign alarmism.
Even other alarmist science journalists are skeptical of the stunt. For example David Appell at his site writes:
It looks as fake as it is, and it also comes across as emotional manipulation. Probably we should be emotional about climate change, but come on, no one sits around all day looking worried, as if their checking account is low and the rent’s past due.”
Moreover he adds:
Look for this to be widely mocked. I can’t honestly blame anyone if they do.”
This is not something to mock. Rather it is something to be very concerned about. These scientists are no longer capable of doing objective scientific work. They’ve succumbed to their emotions and the results of their work will be potentially entirely contaminated and thus untrustworthy.
An ugly pedophilia chapter of Germany’s environmentalist Green Party refused to be forgotten – and will now be dealt with through a hotline for “victims of sexual violence“.
The German Greens have scrambled to keep an embarrassing reality under the carpet of history, away from the public’s view. That notorious chapter is their once strident advocacy for the legalization of pedophilia, see background here.
On Wednesday Germany’s leftist Berlin-based TAZ published an article reporting the German Green Party has, after months of stalling, finally set up an official “telephone hotline for the victims of sexual violence.” The TAZ calls the move “surprising”.
What was the extent of pedophile involvement in the Green Party? Spiegel wrote in-depth here (my emphasis):
No political group in Germany promoted the interests of men with pedophile tendencies as staunchly as the environmental party. For a period of time in the mid-1980s, it practically served as the parliamentary arm of the pedophile movement.” […]
When the Green Party was founded in 1980, pedophiles were part of the movement from the start […] were joined by the so-called ‘Urban Indians,’ who advocated the ‘legalization of all affectionate sexual relations between adults and children’.”
These “Urban Indians”, Spiegel wrote, “were often a visible part of Green Party gatherings.”
That dark past obviously has become an unbearable thorn for the Greens in the present. The TAZ writes that for years the top honchos of the environmentalist-pacifist party refused to take the step of setting up a contact-center for victims, preferring to downplaying the whole messy . But, to her credit, current party chief Simone Peter has decided to set up the hotline at Green Party headquarters, following the recommendation of the Green Party working group “AG Rehabilitation” which, according to the TAZ, has been since last December pursing the subject of pedophile involvement within the Greens.
Wikipedia presents a comprehensive overview (in German) of the Green Party’s debate on the topic and provides quotes from prominent Green Party leaders, such as Daniel Cohn-Bendit who in 1982 said on a French Antenne 2 (today, France 2) talkshow “Apostrophes“ on 23 April 1982:
You know, the sexuality of a kid is something absolutely fantastic. […] You know when a little girl of five years starts to undress herself, it’s just great because it is a game, a fantastically erotic game.”
Though some have attempted to downplay the issue as a past, fringe one within the Green Party, Cohn-Bendit himself insisted that the pedophilia rights were “mainstream” in the Green Party.
Keep in mind that for years leading Green figures such as Cohn-Bendit were welcome darlings of the European media. These are people who, as Spiegel wrote, “tolerated people whose agenda had nothing to do with progress and emancipation, but solely with the exploitation of their position of power and trust in relation to minors”
Perhaps Wikipedia editor and UK Green Party member William Connelly could put the German Wikipedia content up in English. Of course who could blame him for deleting it altogether? In the meantime, the ugly history is well-portrayed by Spiegel here.
Whether a hotline (open only 2 hours a week) will be enough to undo the damage caused by the Green Party’s earlier staunch encouragement of the exploitation of small children by fantasy-obsessed men remains highly doubtful.
Knutti’s study and the 20min.ch article are in a panicked scramble to explain why there hasn’t been any warming in more than 15 years, insisting that global warming has only paused and eventually will resume with renewed vigor – at time yet to be determined time in the future.
The title of the 20min.ch piece is: “Climate Warming Takes a Break“.
The 20min.ch introduction reads:
Climate warming continues, but it’s taking a break. The reasons for that, among others, are the temporary weak solar irradiance and phenomena such as La Niña.”
The tone of the 20min.ch article is one of shaking a finger at the incorrigible, irresponsible and manipulative climate skeptics and advising readers to not stop being afraid and to never ever believe those skeptics.
Litany of excuses
Citing Prof Knutti’s ETH, 20min.ch writes that “multiple possible reasons have been systematically investigated for the first time.”
The all new litany of excuses they present includes:
* aerosols (of course)
* La Niña
* weaker solar radiation
* low sunspot number
* volcano eruptions
* inadequate, unreliable temperature measurement methodology!
That’s right, all the factors that they stupidly refused to adequately incorporate in their models, despite being told time and again by skeptics not to neglect them. Now they are FINALLY telling us there’s indeed a Mai Tai cocktail of natural reasons for the absence of warming.
Their panic is truly palpable, at least in Switzerland. Knutti and his fellow warmists are so antsy about rescuing their warming that he is now actively hinting at making up temperature data. The 20min.ch writes that according to Knutti, satellites “do not deliver any data on especially high upward spikes. As a result the average temperature has been under-stated.”
To me that is a clear statement advocating adjusting the data upwards. He talks about the lack of Arctic stations and hints at “filling in” where data do not exist…i.e. making them up. And speaking of the temporary cooling impacts, Knutti insists:
They don’t change anything when it comes to the longer term climate warming due to the greenhouse gas emissions.”
All sounds like a religion desperately clinging to doctrine.
How much longer must we wait?
So just how much longer are we supposed to wait before these “temporary, short-term” climate factors go away? 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? A couple of generations?
Gradually, but with increasing acceleration, scientists in lots of other fields are beginning to see this type of sorrowful climate science as a monumental laughing stock.
They can adjust upwards and fill in all they want, but it is not going to keep the sea ice from setting new all-time record highs and frosts and snows from blanketing us in the wintertime, or in August. Eventually it’s all going to collapse and the only place global warming will continue existing will be at the nuthouse.
If you’re wondering about the long-term future of the climate doomsday scare, what follows is a clue.
A reader brought my attention to a 2008 paper by Horeis that completely demolished the forest die-off scare of the 1980s.
The starting point were local damages to certain tree species which scientists, journalists and politicians eagerly interpreted as a global threat to all forests. Man-made emissions were seen as the cause of the Waldsterben which was expected to thoroughly deforest the country within a few years. However, none of the apocalyptic prophecies of that time fulfilled. Seen in retrospect, Waldsterben spared the trees. It only seized the minds of the people.”
Expect the same in a couple decades time for the current global warming scare…
Here’s the weather craziness of the week story.
Officials of the German town of Reutlingen have voted to allocate 50,000 euros in a bid to tame the bad weather that typically occurs during thunderstorms. The plan is to hire an airplane to spray silver iodide into storm clouds with the hopes of reducing the size of hail, and so reduce property damage on the ground.
Hat tip meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann at Twitter.
Exactly one year since the devastating hailstorm over Reutlingen, local politicians indeed want to support the use of a hail plane. On Monday evening the county council voted by a wide majority to allocate 50,000 euros for this, a spokeswoman said.”
They actually believe this is going to work!
In response, high-profile Swiss meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann writes at Twitter: “Now it’s out: Germany’s dumbest politicians are located in the Reutlingen legislature.”
Mr. Kachelmann has written before on the topic of using the bright yellow “weather-making” chemical, claiming that the method has a very low success rate and that certain conditions have to be right on the borderline for it to work. Overall Kachelmann characterizes the practice as “nonsense”.
Kachelmann also notes with sarcasm that the process seems to work especially after weathermen have already forecast the desired effect is going to take place anyway. Wow, the hailstones were pretty small this time. The silver iodide spraying worked!
I’ve also inquired with veteran meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls of the European institute of Climate and Energy (EIKE). He also agrees that the spraying is nonsense, writing that “over the decades there have been serious! attempts time and again and entire projects devoted to this. All of them failed and were stopped.”
Citizens demanding politicians do something about the bad weather
Not only might the dumbest politicians be found in Reutlingen, but also the dumbest citizens, too. The Reutlinger General-Anzeige writes:
Lately in Reutlingen the call from citizens and companies for hail defense has gotten increasingly louder. In Stuttgart and in the Black Forest hail planes have been in use for years to prevent damage.”
Apparently the citizens of Reutlingen really do believe their local government has power over weather. Moreover, these citizens appear no longer able to take steps on their own to protect themselves – seemingly unaware that there are other options available to them, like insurance, or carports. Like the German government is expected to save the world’s climate, the citizens of Reutlingen also expect their local politicians to save them from bad weather.
If you happen to have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell, go to Reutlingen!
Just a couple of anecdotes today to illustrate how wacky the climate-change religion is getting.
First is a short blurb appearing at the online Linux Magazine bearing the title: “Mobile phones are climate killers“. This is for real.
Using your mobile phone and sending text messages apparently is contributing to bad weather and the death of the climate. Linux magazine writes:
The greenhouse gases coming from the recharging of mobile phone and tablets – this year already will be 6.4 megatonnes, about half of what is projected for 2019, – is equivalent to the emissions of about 1.1 million cars.”
Linux Magazine cites a study conducted by Juniper Research.
The other sign showing the climate trend is getting increasingly kooky that caught my eye today is a photo posted by Rudolf Kipp at Facebook.
Photo: Rudolf Kipp
Would you like your wine dry, sweet…or green?
I’m sure glad I drink Scotch instead. And when it comes to wine, I never liked Dornfelder anyhow.
And seeing how masses of people are stupid and gullible enough to accept all the nonsense hook, line and sinker, a little Scotch now and then certainly helps.
And a final word to all the distillers of Scotch out there. I warn you: If I hear or see any of this bio/sustainable madness with regards to the production of your products, then I’ll never buy another bottle from you again. I hope especially you Islay distillers take note.
The latest is a report appearing in Germany’s print high-profile national daily the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) which features climate economist Richard Tol titled: “The apocalypse won’t take place“.
Image above, right: FAZ
The subheading reads: “Climate economist Richard Tol sees the consequences of global warming as manageable – he has become a “figure of hate for green activists”
The FAZ describes the controversial 44-year old Dutch scientist and outspoken IPCC critic as someone who in the early days was “quite green”, comes from a modest background, but who developed to become one of the world’s leading authorities in his field. The FAZ:
Tol is one of the most productive and most respected researchers in his field. He is (co)author of more than 250 papers in renowned journals and according to the Ideas-Repec databank, among the top 100 scientists worldwide.”
The FAZ reports on how Tol believes the IPCC has gone overboard with hysterical scenarios for the future and as a result had his name removed from the IPCC’s final report.
On claims that 97% of climate scientists are in agreement, the FAZ writes:
Such a consensus does not exist, he explains. ‘Climate science is very bitter and politicized.’ He sees the unpleasant tendency of scientists getting more attention by issuing ever more drastic warnings.”
According to the FAZ, Tol is confident that humans can overcome the challenges posed by climate change through their uncanny ability to adapt by applying their ingenuity. His come country of Holland is cited as an example with the construction of dikes to hold back the seas. Another example he cites is the huge gain in agricultural yields over the past decades that will provide ample supplies of food in a warmer world.
Overall Tol believes “the European Union is on the wrong path” with its climate policy of costly subsidies for the feed-in of green energies, which has scarcely has an impact on climate.
It should all be discarded and the ten thousand climate bureaucrats should look for new jobs. We need a policy change”
In the FAZ article, Tol is in favour of a carbon tax because in his view it is “the only effective measure.”
Richard Tol is Professor of the Economics of Climate Change at the Institute for Environmental Studies & Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam; Research Fellow at the Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam; Research Network Fellow at the CESifo, Munich, Germany; and Co-Editor of Energy Economics
A new study by researchers in England claim that people who eat lots of meat emit much more CO2 than vegans. Worse: the nutty scientists are urging governments to change dietary guidelines.
At the journal of Climatic Change, Peter Scarborough et al claim that “reducing the intake of meat and other animal based products can make a valuable contribution to climate change mitigation.”
Moreover they urge: “National governments that are considering an update of dietary recommendations in order to define a ‘healthy, sustainable diet’ must incorporate the recommendation to lower the consumption of animal-based products.”
The team of scientists computed the average daily CO2 emissions for 6 different diet groups. Here are their results:
1. high meat eaters: 7.19 kg/day
2. Medium meat-eaters: 5.63 kg/day
3. low meat-eaters: 4.67 kg/day
4. fish-eaters: 3.91 kg/day
5. vegetarians: 3.81 kg/day
6. vegans: 2.89 kg/day
The paper’s abstract follows:
The production of animal-based foods is associated with higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than plant-based foods. The objective of this study was to estimate the difference in dietary GHG emissions between self-selected meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK. Subjects were participants in the EPIC-Oxford cohort study. The diets of 2,041 vegans, 15,751 vegetarians, 8,123 fish-eaters and 29,589 meat-eaters aged 20–79 were assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Comparable GHG emissions parameters were developed for the underlying food codes using a dataset of GHG emissions for 94 food commodities in the UK, with a weighting for the global warming potential of each component gas. The average GHG emissions associated with a standard 2,000 kcal diet were estimated for all subjects. ANOVA was used to estimate average dietary GHG emissions by diet group adjusted for sex and age. The age-and-sex-adjusted mean (95 % confidence interval) GHG emissions in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents per day (kgCO2e/day) were 7.19 (7.16, 7.22) for high meat-eaters ( > = 100 g/d), 5.63 (5.61, 5.65) for medium meat-eaters (50-99 g/d), 4.67 (4.65, 4.70) for low meat-eaters ( < 50 g/d), 3.91 (3.88, 3.94) for, 3.81 (3.79, 3.83) for vegetarians and 2.89 (2.83, 2.94) for vegans.
In conclusion, dietary GHG emissions in self-selected meat-eaters are approximately twice as high as those in vegans. It is likely that reductions in meat consumption would lead to reductions in dietary GHG emissions.”
The science road to disaster
It’s rather frightening that scientists are now attempting to urge governments to promote extremely dubious if not dangerous diets onto the population, all based on the junk science of global warming. Should scientists narrowly focused on one topic be in the business of advising governments on matters concerning nutrition.
The low-fat/high carb diet massively promoted by western governments and corrupt food and pharmaceutical industries over the course of the 21st century, and based on junk science, has already led to a nutrition genocide where tens of millions of people are now dying slow/painful deaths from cardiovascular disease, cancer, record obesity and diabetes. Now a worsening of the human diet is being pushed.
Governments are gearing up to take an already catastrophic nutritional situation and to turn it into global mass murder by mal-nutrition and starvation. It’s mass human sacrifice, all being justified by the superstition and nonsense of a man-made climate catastrophe – in the year 2100 or 2200.
Skeptical climate scientists who have remained silent so far better start speaking up very soon. This movement has been taken over by some real nut-cases, and threatens to really get out of hand.
Watching/listening to the following videos may save your life or extend it 10-20 years:
– Oiling of America
– How Bad Science and Big Business Created the Obesity Epidemic
– Wheat Murder (skip first 6 mins.)
And if you think veganism is good for you, then look at what it does to kids:
– Tree-Hugging Vegetarian Environmentalists…Just Look At Their Kids!