Embarassing Revelations For Kelley et al…2008 German Radio Already Showed Focus On Climate Change Was Misplaced

The Kelley et al study is increasingly looking like a politically bought panic paper, designed to send out a certain message and mislead the public.

What is especially tragic about the whole nonsense is that the paper only serves to shift the focus away from the real causes behind the worsening tragedy in the Syrian region.

A couple of days ago I wrote about a Spiegel piece that shredded the paper and exposed it as very shoddy work of science.

At Twitter the author of the Spiegel piece, Axel Bojanowski, got a reply from another rather high caliber German journalist, Gabor Paal, who confirms that the situation in Syria has much less to do with climate change, and much more to do with lousy land-use and agricultural practices.

On March 7 Bojanowski wrote:

Did climate change really spark the Syria War as claimed? The basis for that is flimsy.”

On March 9, Paal responded to Bojanowski:

@Axel_Bojanowski I was in Syria in 2008. Scientists acquired funding with reference to ‘climate change’. Land-use was clearly the bigger problem.”

So what we have here is yet another journalist casting grave doubt on the claims made by Kelley et al.

Paal provided the link to a 2008 radio documentary on Syria he had produced with the focus on the crop failures that the Middle Eastern country had been experiencing and their causes. The radio documentary was featured at SWF South German Broadcasting. Throughout the documentary the emphasis on the reasons for the crop problems in Syria was squarely on land-use and poor agricultural practices, with climate change not playing any real role.

The documentary begins by explaining how Syria is divided into 5 different climate zones. In Zone 5, the largest and most arid, groundwater has been pumped out to such an extent that vegetation can no longer thrive. At the 10-minute mark:

More than half the country belongs to Zone 5, the steppes and desert region. Here it rains less than 200 mm per year. Zone 5 is government property. There are no privets lots. Agriculture would be possible here only with irrigation, but the water table has dropped so much that the steppes have become so barren that the government has forbidden all use. The blame for this is not climate change, but rather the way the land is managed.”

The documentary explains how 75% of all farmers raise sheep to earn a living, and that millions of sheep are living where less than 150 mm of rain falls yearly. Vegetation has no chance. “15 – 20% of the steppes are lost and maybe we cannot recover them.” The documentary adds that there are 15 million sheep in Syria and that the figure is 4 times more than 10 years ago.

“Media fixated on climate”

Another problem the region faced, Paal said, was the threat of the UG 99 fungus that threatened the region’s grain crop.

At the very end of the SWR report Paal stated:

In the public media reporting, agricultural research has not made any progress. The media are fixated on climate and the focus on the ground beneath their feet has been lost. And now in the wake of the food crisis, international agricultural reseach has the chance to benefit once again.”

Today, some 7 years later, Kelley et al tells us that this has not come to pass – tragically. The focus still remains on the bogus problem of climate change and people are suffering more unimaginable misery than ever because of it.

Someone needs to go to jail.


Spiegel Demolishes Syria War-Climate Change Paper By Kelley et al. …”Hardly Tenable” … “Distraction From Real Problems”

Spiegel science journalist Axel Bojanowski here looks at the new paper Climate change in the Fertile Crescent and implications of the recent Syrian drought,” PNAS, March 2, 2015 by Kelley et al, which claims the 2007−2010 drought contributed to the war in the region.

A number of major news outlets, such as the New York Times and the AP were quick to uncritically dispense it as gospel truth.

Anthony Watts provides good background here.

Spiegel’s view is much more critical and skeptical of the paper’s findings and overall methodology when compared to the New York Times or AP. The online German magazine writes:

An alarming study has created a commotion worldwide. The authors claim that climate change contributed to the drought and civil war in Syria. However this claim is hardly tenable.”

Models in wide disagreement

Bojanowski writes that the decisive evidence in the paper is based on climate models, which show drier conditions for Syria as the greenhouse effect intensifies. However Bojanowski later points out that the climate system in Syria is highly complex and that even the IPCC questions the capability of models reliably simulating the climate system of Syria and that the models are in wide disagreement:

The region lies on the boundary of three climate regions where the weather patterns are hardly understood, the IPCC report says. Foremost the climate simulation models diverge widely from each other when it comes to precipitation. It thus appears unwarranted to use the results of models as a way of confirming the effect of greenhouse gases, believes [William]Briggs.”

Sparse data

Another problem with the study, Spiegel reports, is that the data used were way too sparse, and quoted climate scientist Tim Brücher of the Max Planck Institute for Meterology: “The data should have been handled more critically.”

“Renders a poor service on behalf of climate science”

Probably seeing the paper more as an embarrassment rather than a contribution to science, even warmist institutes were unable to refrain from critique. Bojanowski quotes Thomas Bernauer, a conflict researcher at ETH in Zürich: “The entire paper is problematic as it renders a poor service on behalf of climate science.”

“Study is problematic at a number of levels”

In total Bojanowski says scientists criticize the paper on five aspects, saying that after the criticism, nothing is really left of the paper. According to Spiegel, University of Hamburg expert Tobias Ide says, “The study is problematic at a number of levels.” Peace scientist Christiane Fröhlich of the same university says the civil war “had more to do with wealthy citizens provoking it“.

“A distraction” from the real causes

Francesca De Châtel, Syria expert at Radboud University in Nijmegen, called the paper “a distraction” from the real causes of the war, and pointed out that drought periods are more the norm for the region. The problems stem foremost from land mismanagement and shoddy agricultural practices. Bojanowski quotes De Châtel: “The role of climate change is not only irrelevant, emphasizing it is even damaging.”

No evidence linking drought to civil war

Also Norwegian doctoral candidate Ole Magnus Theisen states that there is no evidence of a relationship between drought and conflict, Spiegel writes.

Bojanowski adds that “the climate argument allows politicians to blame others outside of the country for the hunger.” The Spiegel journalist sums up the science of tying climate change to war in general:

The main causes of civil wars are political. The future security of Africa does not depend on climate, rather on political and economic development.”

In summary one would not be wrong in concluding that the PNAS was definitely asleep during the review of the paper. Hard to get any shoddier.

Spiegel report here.


Spiegel: Mongolia’s Shrinking Lakes Due To Mining, Agriculture – “Climate Change Not A Reason”!

Online Spiegel reports on a new study published in the PNAS titled: Rapid loss of lakes on the Mongolian Plateau.

Over the recent decades, satellite-based evaluations are showing that the Mongolian Plateau has been experiencing “remarkable lake shrinkage” because of “intensive human activities and climate changes“, the study claims.

Mongolia public domain image

Disappearing lakes due to mining and agriculture since the 1980s threaten Mongolia’s nomadic culture. Climate change not a factor, Spiegel writes. Image: Public domain.

The researchers, Spiegel writes, “are warning of catastrophic consequences.”

The shrinkage of the lakes over the Mongolian Plateau poses a real threat to nomadic societies, the scientists warn.

Yet Spiegel writes that the shrinking of the number of lakes in the region is not because of climate change.

Spiegel writes:

The number of lakes with a surface area of one square kilometer or more shrank from the end of the 1980s to 2010 from 785 to 577. And the trend seems to be strengthening.”

But according to Spiegel the major culprit is not climate change, as the authors suggest in the paper’s abstract, but rather has mostly to do with agriculture and large-scale mining operations. Spiegel writes (my emphasis).

The scientists investigated the reasons for the desertification – climate change is not among them. In sparsely populated Mongolia the number of lakes fell since the 1980s by about 18 percent. In the interior of Mongolia, which has a population density that is 10 times higher, the rate was almost twice as high at 34 percent.”

Spiegel writes that the biggest factor is the growing mining industry in the mineral rich country. Expanding agriculture is also responsible for reduced groundwater levels. The scientists recommend quick action be taken to “save the valuable lakes“, meaning better guidelines for companies conducting operations there.

It’s somewhat refreshing that the Chinese researchers are not advocating modern rain-dancing acts, like installing solar panels on homes in Alaska or Scandinavia to combat the problem.


Part 2 Of Documentary Totally Dismisses/Contradicts Michael Mann’s Claim Of A Steady Climate Since 1000 A.D.

Yesterday I posted on Part 1 of German ZDF television’s Terra-X series two-part documentary on climate and human history appearing on January 11  and 18. Part 1 covered the world’s climatic changes that occurred during the last ice age and up to the time of the Roman Empire.

Part 1 clearly showed that the earth’s climate changed naturally, at times very dramatically within a matter of a decade or two. Warm periods were accompanied by rains and periods of vibrant human prosperity. Cold periods saw droughts, crop failures, mass migrations and deadly political and societal instability.

Warm Roman Empire

Today the focus is on Part 2, which looks at the earth’s climate since the Roman Empire until today. It starts by stating how the “paradise-like” warmth during peak period of the Roman Empire was brought on by the optimal orientation between the earth and sun. The warm Roman period was marked by “stability” says Mark Maslin (3:10).

Tree ring studies from oak trees show that “the temperature 100 year before Christ indeed rose. On average the temperature was 2°C warmer than 100 years earlier” (3:37). Clearly such an increase is more than double today’s increase the globe has seen since 1900. That high Roman temperature level stayed some 300 years, the documentary tells us, allowing for “stable and strong growth“.

At the 4:30 mark the documentary tells us that glaciers in the Alps melted and allowed the Romans to expand their empire all the way to Scotland. The warm period also took hold globally, says the ZDF documentary, and was not a regional phenomena. The ZDF documentary shows at the 5:40 mark how the Chinese Empire blossomed at around 200 BC. All thanks to the sun.

Finally at the 8:24 mark German researcher Gunther Hischfelder of the University of Regensburg tells that the Romans eventually ran into an enemy they even could not vanquish: “Over the long-term there was one opponent that became so strong that even the Romans could not conquer it, and that was climate change.”

Always the sun

Surprisingly at the 8:38 mark, the ZDF documentary tells viewers something that has long been taboo in Germany:

Every climate change is controlled from outer space. It depends on the earth’s orbit around the sun, the tilt of its axis and on the predominant solar activity. After the change in times the solar activity was probably weaker and the Gulf current delivered less heat.”

This, the documentary says, led to a “clear [natural] cooling (9:00)“. Already in Part 2 we see that climate temperature changes of 2°C over a matter of decades were nothing unusual – and were all owing to natural factors that scientists today refuse to acknowledge are in play.

Cold…fall of Roman Empire

As the cooler temperatures began to take over during the Roman period, catastrophic droughts took hold and crop failures led to starvation. Rome was under pressure to supply food to its remote territories and outposts.

To illustrate the degree hardship, scientists analyzed the bones of a north German teenager uncovered from the swamps(10:10). DNA analysis of the arm and leg bones showed severe malnutrition. Twelve of the child’s 14 years were spent in a state of “severe hunger”. As had happened many times over the course of history, mass migrations occurred as cold led to crop failures.

Just before the end of the Roman Empire, these migrations were facilitated as natural borders and barriers such as large rivers and marshes froze over and allowed people easily walk across them (11:40).  For example in the year 406 AD, 90,000 Germanic tribespeople crossed a Frozen Rhine river and into Roman territory (11:58) in a single day. Bit by bit the Roman Empire was invaded before collapsing ushering in the post Roman dark ages.


This dark period was exacerbated further by the mega-eruption of llopango in El Salvador (13:02), which led to written records of extreme cold and darkness in the year 536 AD. Scientists believe the eruption ejected 84 cubic kilometers of ash into the atmosphere, destroying everything within a 1000 km radius and darkening the skies over Europe and even China. Ash from the llopango eruption is even seen in ice cores from Antarctica (15:55). The material reached into the stratosphere and caused an “18-month long climate anomaly of cold and darkness“. Millions of people of people died as a result.

As fear gripped the planet and nature regained the upper hand, the conditions became ideal for religions to thrive, warning of the wrath of God and offering the hope of salvation (20:00).

Rise of Central American civilizations

While war and fear plagued Europe, climate conditions were however ideal in Central America, and civilizations there blossomed (22:00). At the 22:30 mark we see the Nazca Lines (before they were ruined by Greenpeace). By 900 AD, natural climate change struck the Central American region again as prolonged droughts ground down the once mighty Latin American cultures (22:45). What was behind the sudden change? At the 23:20 mark the documentary again points at the sun.

Responsible was solar activity.”

Medieval Warm Period by the sun

But the documentary dances around about how solar activity impacts the earth, hinting at basic solar irradiance, and avoiding Svensmark’s theory.  At the 24:15 mark:

That also applies to the year 800 AD. The sun is at a maximum activity. It’s irradiance especially strong. The blue planet gradually begins to heat up.”

The warmth, the documentary says, “opened up the Arctic from North America to Europe” and allowed explorers to venture out and the Vikings to settle in “an almost ice-free” Iceland and in Greenland (25:30) 1050 years ago. Lief Ericson reached Newfoundland at about the year 1000 AD (26:30). In Europe the warming took hold with a vengeance. The documentary says at the 26:50 mark:

On average the temperature was 3°C warmer than the years before.”

Europe was transformed into a rich bread-basket (27:20). The weather was once again stable and planning was possible. At this point we get hints that the documentary is trying to tells us that normal weather in warm times is stable. Yet history tells us that storms also occurred during the warm Medieval Period.

Gunther Hischfelder tells that the warm period of the Medieval Period had consquences (29:25):

The creation of cities was a response to climate change and provided the spark for a take-off for human history, an explosion in culture and civilization, and is thus the reason it is the cornerstone for the creation of our modern world.”

All thanks to the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), which was as warm and even warmer than today. At the 29:50 mark we see that “three quarters of Germany’s cities were created during the Medieval Warm Period”. Growth exploded all over Europe. By the year 1250 AD, “Europe’s societies were as strong as never before” (31:35).

Strangely, and probably on purpose, the ZDF documentary focusses only on Europe for its look at the Medieval Warm Period, and presents no examples of it occurring at other locations on the globe – as it did for the earlier warm periods. Is the ZDF trying to have us believe that MWP was regionally isolated in Europe? Scientific proxy data tell us it was warm all over the globe.

Sun strangely disappears as a climate factor in the year 1250

At the 32:00 mark the documentary looks at the beginning of the end of the MWP: “In the second half of the thirteenth century it got markedly colder in Europe“. The reason was a number of erupting volcanoes at various locations around the globe, the documentary says (32:10) that it cooled the global climate for almost 500 years. So according to the ZDF, the sun stopped playing a role in climate change 800 years ago. Strange that all the other climate changes before that, the sun was always to blame.

No matter what the real reason for the post MWP cooling may have been, the ZDF tells us that it was warm during the Medieval Warm Period and that it then cooled substantially after 1300 AD. That de facto refutes the bogus claims of a steady climate made by Michael Mann.

Longest cold period since the last ice age

In fact, the ZDF documentary calls the Little Ice Age, which had a solid lock on Europe by the year 1500 AD, “the longest cold period since the last ice age” (33:15).  And there’s a huge magnitude of literature available from the times clearly documenting the extreme weather and hardship endured by Europe during this time. Here old records describe extreme storms and harsh weather, crop failures, starvation, pestilence and widespread death (36:00). In just 100 years, the population reduced by one third. Fear gripped the continent and sorcerers were blamed (36:50). (Sound familiar?) 60,000 people were burned at the stake for “cooperating with the Devil” in brewing bad weather. Today we have crazed lawyers wanting to put industries on trial for the same thing.

Clearly the ZDF documentary tells us that cold periods are disasters, and warm ones, like the one we are witnessing today, are hugely advantageous.

At the 37:30 mark the ZDF describes how glaciers advanced over North America, Scandinavia and the Alps, where entire villages were swallowed by the ice. Things got so bad that Europe plunged into war and mayhem (38:20), eventually culminating in the French Revolution (39:10). The final icing on the cake was delivered by the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815, which gave the world the year without a summer in 1816 (40:30).

Modern warming – sun nowhere near in sight

The Little ice Age ended around 1850 with what the ZDF suprisingly calls the “beginning of a period with moderate and stable temperatures. It characterizes the weather until today.” (41:30).

At the 42:00 minute mark the ZDF finally deviates from reason, claiming that for the first time in history, with industrialization, man has changed the climate of the earth. No more mention of the sun as a factor, which made its last appearance on the climate stage 800 years ago. Now it’s mankind’s fault. I was expecting the documentary to end in this silly way, and I was not wrong in doing so.

Mad Maslin

Mark Maslin at the end puts the icing on the cake, making a totally insane comment at the 42:30 mark where he proclaims that man actually now has the chance to take control of the climate – away from the sun, oceans and other forces of nature. Try not to burst out laughing:

We are now at the point where we can decide what the climate of the future will look like. When we as a 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 would control it. We can make sure that all future generations will have a stable climate.”

Wow! Just pay them indulgences. Apart from Maslin’s and the ZDF’s sheer nonsense in the last two minutes, an excellent documentary on the climate since the last ice age.


A New Year’s Resolution To Consider…And How “Consensus Science” May Have Almost Killed Andrew Revkin

As New Year’s Day approaches here’s something off-topic, but could make a real difference to your health. It has to mine.

Probably the most common New Year’s resolution one hears is “I’m going to get back in shape“. Unfortunately it is also the one that fails the most often. A year ago, at the age of 54, I was about 20 pounds overweight, on blood pressure medicine, and likely starting on that path to years of medication, cardiovascular disease and diabetes, all later eventually leading to bypasses, stents, and eventually a miserable death – if cancer didn’t get me first. However thanks to a major adjustment in my diet, all that has changed dramatically. Now I’m trim and feel better than ever.

What did I do? I ignored the scientific and medical consensus on “healthy nutrition” and changed over to a high-fat, low-carb diet. The results have been beyond anything I expected. Today I’m off the blood pressure medication and my blood values are all okay. Everyone is happy – that is except the pharmaceutical industry and the greedy doctors.

Here are the four steps you need to take:

1) Get off the killer high carb, low-fat diet

It’s a deadly, junk-science myth that has needlessly killed millions of people. Yes, for decades we’ve been bamboozled and deceived by the food, medical and pharmaceutical industry. As David Diamond shows, when your diet changes over to a high fat, low carb one, your health improves dramatically. Carbohydrates, especially processed sugars, are the real killers. So drastically reduce your intake of sugars, bread, starches, potatoes, processed snacks and eat more fresh meats, animal fats, cheese, butter, vegetables, chicken, fish, nuts, bacon, eggs, and so on.

If you start with anything, it should be first getting yourself off the processed carbs and sugar, which also have profound impacts on people’s behavior. This cannot be overstressed. And by all means, absolutely stay away from the artificial sweeteners.

2) Stop eating so-called “healthy whole-wheat grains”

Contrary to what most people believe, so-called “healthy whole-wheat grains” are toxic and pose a serious hazard to your health. There are three reasons why:

a) The gluten protein damages (for some people very severely) the small intestine and thus leads to mal-absorption of nutrients.

b) Wheat is a powerful carbohydrate with a high glycemic index and wreaks havoc with your blood sugar, which we all know has terrible consequences.

c) Wheat is an opiate and is in fact addictive. It causes people to experience cravings. Studies show that people who are off wheat consume 400 calories per day less than people who consume the grain. That means 146,000 extra calories annually – or two months equivalent! No wonder so many people struggle with their weight. Wheat causes cravings and the food industry has long known and shamelessly exploited this.

3) Vegetable oils cause cancer and cardiovascular disease

If you are consuming salad dressings, margarine, sunflower oil, Crisco, or cooking with these oils, stop doing so now. These are loaded with omega 6 fatty acids which are inflammatory and associated with cancer-causing free radicals. Consume instead foods rich in omega 3 fatty acids, which are non-inflammatory. Before industrialization, the ratio of omega 6 to omega 3 fatty acids consumed was about 1 to 1. Today in the US the ratio is over a stunning 20 to 1. Elevated omega 6 intake is associated with cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, cancer and a host of other diseases.

efa content of oils

Source: here.

Proctor & Gamble and the Edible Oil Industry used fraudulent science to demonize animal fats and to promote vegetable oils as a “healthy alternative”, see 19 min. mark.

4) Supplement with vitamins and minerals

Eating “balanced meals” does not ensure that you are getting the 60 essential minerals, 16 vitamins, 12 amino acids and 3 fatty acids. Much of the agricultural soils are depleted of minerals and today’s industrially processed foods are woefully deficient. Therefore supplementing can lead to dramatic health improvements. If you are into extreme sports, then you are highly vulnerable to serious illnesses or injury from chronic mineral deficiencies. I do moderate sport and take Centrum once a day.


I’ve pretty much stuck to the above rules and have seen a profound difference in every respect over the last 7 months. The pounds and associated health problems literally shed away by themselves. Of course some moderate regular exercise is essential. The toughest part is finding alternatives to the carbs we have become so accustomed to.

I hope you’ll take the time to watch the videos I’ve linked to…it could lead to adding many precious years to your life. If this post changes the health and life of a single reader, then it will have been worth it.

Andrew Revkin’s “stroke of luck”

Remember that a high-carb, low-fat diet was and is still the “consensus science” – all heartily endorsed by the backwards AMA, NAS, AHA, ADA, etc. Today we are finding out they all have been dead wrong, and even perhaps deceptive. Westerners are more obese and seriously ill than ever. And the situation will explode into a major crisis in the years ahead. When are these institutes ever going to wake up?

On May 13, 2013 in a piece titled My Stroke of Luck, science writer Andrew Revkin recounts his experience of having suffered a stroke caused by a diseased carotid artery in near his brain. The root cause of the potentially lethal ailment may be hotly debated, of course, but these things are rarely “genetic” and more often are the result of years of exposure to an improper diet. Such a condition does not develop out of the blue in generally healthy people. I suspect Mr Revkin probably became an unfortunate victim of the farcical high-carb, low-fat diet that the “medical consensus” had promoted for decades. If 99 doctors tell you high-carb/low fat is good and 1 doesn’t, who do you think Mr. Revkin will listen to? We know his answer on this in climate science.

Mr. Revkin will likely deem my speculation concerning the cause of his stroke nonsense. I may be wrong. But then again, if he isn’t on the low-carb/high fat diet by now, he may want to take a real close and honest look at the lipid hypothesis and the phony data underpinning it, and to do so far more seriously than he does with climate data. Here his life depends on it.

It just goes to show that the idea of science by consensus is indeed a very dangerous one, especially when the data are tainted to begin with.


President Bill Clinton No Longer Believes The “Consensus Science”. Why? Because It Almost Killed Him!

For decades the science told us that humans needed to cut back on fatty foods like red meat, eggs, chicken, cheese, butter and that we should switch to high carb diets, with lots of exercises. High carb, low fat was The Consensus. Backed by all the US medical associations and 99% of all doctors. Dissenters were dismissed, marginalized and labeled as kooks.

Decades later, America (and much of western society) now finds itself on the brink of a public health catastrophe with tens of millions having suffered heart attacks and tens of millions becoming obese and diabetic. Even the most optimistic of statistics show an even gloomier future.

What’s even worse, these nutrition-related diseases, once known to almost only afflict adults, are now spreading rapidly to children. The scientific consensus on nutrition has turned out to be disastrously wrong and it will go down as the greatest scientific folly in the history of mankind.

Bill Clinton, it turns out, a person who has had his share of heart trouble, has had enough of the “scientific consensus” on nutrition: Ex-Vegans Anne Hathaway And Bill Clinton Praise Paleo-Style Low-Carb Diets For Energy And Weight Loss

Also Anne Hathaway has woken up to the junk science (religion) of “climate-saving” veganism.

Anne noted that the difference between eating a vegan diet and consuming animal protein was notable overnight.

‘I just didn’t feel good or healthy,’ Hathaway recalled of her vegan days.”

Read more here.

2014 Sees Record Harvests Worldwide…Demolishing Gloomy Myth Global Warming Would Lead To Acute Crop Failures

It’s early November and now is a good time to look at some of this year’s global crop harvest results. Let’s recall that global warming models projected poor harvests and hunger in the future due to droughts (and floods).

But that is hardly the case…at least certainly for this year. And recall how Joe Bastardi last spring projected a “Garden of Eden” harvest for the US Great Plains. Looks like he was right. The story is similar many places worldwide, and not just the US.

10-foot corn

For example Bloomberg here reports of a record US corn harvest in 2014, writing:

From Ohio to Nebraska, thousands of field inspections this week during the Pro Farmer Midwest Crop Tour show corn output in the U.S., the world’s top producer, will be 0.4 percent above the government’s estimate. Months of timely rains and mild weather created ideal growing conditions, leaving ears with more kernels than normal on 10-foot (3-meter) corn stalks and more seed pods on dark, green soy plants.”

All-time high of 3.631 billion bushels of soybean

Bloomberg also writes here that the US production of soybean “will jump 10 percent this year to an all-time high of 3.631 billion bushels, and inventories before the 2015 harvest will be double a year earlier.”

In Europe the story is the similar. Last May the online marktkompass here already wrote of record wheat harvests:

In all regions of Central and Eastern Europe the weather for growth was close to being optimal and the yield potential has drastically improved.”

“All-time records” in Europe

In Germany’s agricultural state of Mecklenburg West-Pomerania, corn and barley reached record harvests. The online bauwesta reports that both winter and summer barley harvests set all-time records. Overall across Europe Crop Site reports this year’s cereal harvest “has generally been strong in Europe and Ukraine“.

Doom and gloom media silent on bumper crop yields

Moreover, numerous analysts report of falling grain and commodity prices. All of this, of course, is great news for consumers and a planet that still has close to a billion people who do not get enough to eat. Yet the good news is generally not getting reported by the doom-and-gloom obsessed media.

“Bounty of wheat, barley and oats”

Almost every country one looks at in Europe, one is finding record bumper crops this year. The usually gloom-obsessed UK Guardian also reported in September on UK 2014 harvests:

Long sunny spells after a mild winter and early spring delivers a bounty of wheat, barley and oats. […] 2014 could be the biggest yield ever for wheat when the final data is released in October.”

If climate change is supposed to be resulting in poor harvests, higher food prices and acute hunger for the poor, as many experts have warned incessantly, then the opposite must mean that climate change is not happening at all, or that it is having a profoundly beneficial effect for man instead.

Glut of apples

The Guardian also reports of bumper apple harvests and that “growers still face losses due to glut of apples and supermarket price wars.” The Guardian adds, “A cold winter gave the trees a good rest, then plenty of rain – especially in August – helped plump up the fruit, and then a dry September allowed the picking to get started early.”

If anything, all the bumper crops are leading to only one single food crisis: the rock bottom prices farmers are getting for their crops!

“bumper world harvest this year”

thompsonslimited.com here reports that the bumper-crop low-price crisis has also not spared Canada for almost everything from apples to zucchini. It writes that the “world commodity prices are worryingly low for arable farmers following a bumper world harvest this year.”

Russia “in awash in grain”

www.martellcropprojections.com here writes that Russia “is awash in grain from a bumper harvest in the growing season just ended.  The 2014 grain harvest increased to 105 million tonnes threatening to break a record.”

The Crop Site also reports of record rice production in Bangladesh, and bumper maize harvests in Pakistan. Even Scotland’s 2014 cereal harvestis estimated to be the largest in 20 years, with favourable conditions expected to produce more than three million tonnes of cereals.”

So, if you are not moping about all the good news on this year’s global harvest, and failed predictions of catastrophe, and wish instead to celebrate the good news with glasses of cheer, the wine-searcher here reports that France is “looking forward to a bigger and better wine harvest“. Indeed all the natural ingredients needed for fermenting or brewing your favorite spirit appear to be in bountiful supply this year.

Visions of Ehrlichian-style widespread crop failures and mass starvations postponed yet again. And they show absolutely no signs of ever materializing any time soon.

In fact one could easily argue that the world is better fed today than at any time in human history. We can in part thank higher CO2 concentrations and warmer climate for that.

Coming Meat Ban? New Study: Meat-Eaters Emit More Than Twice As Much Greenhouse Gases As Vegans

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!


Climate Profoundly Impacted Development Of Civilization…Cool Periods Brought On Plagues/Death

A Short History of the Human Race
Part 4/4. The Iron Age to the Present
Research by Ed Caryl

Climate historians usually recognize one Holocene Climate Optimum, from the end of the last ice age to about 4000 years ago. But as we have seen in this series of articles, there were three major warm periods, the first in the Upper Neolithic from 11,000 years BP to the 8.2 KY event, another from 8.2 KY to the 5.9 KY event, then the Bronze Age from 5.9 KY to 3.2 KY before present.

Each warm period resulted in a rise in sea level, the first melting most of the remaining ice from the ice age, the second finishing off the last ice in Canada and northern Europe. Each of these warm periods gave rise to a surge in population and technology. Each warm period advanced civilization. In the Bronze Age, empires arose in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Anatolia. At 3200 years ago, all this came to an end.

At 3200 years BP, cold dropped sea levels by over 2 meters. Populations went on the move in response to crop failures. The Egyptian, Hittite, and Mycenaean Greek empires collapsed. Piracy (the Sea People) reigned supreme in the Mediterranean. No one knows for sure who the Sea People were because their incursions did not result in their establishing another empire, they simply looted and destroyed most of the cities around the Mediterranean. This was the Greek Age of Heroes. The time Homer attempted to record in the Iliad and the Odyssey. The history of this period survives as myth. This was also the time of Moses as recorded in the first four books of the Bible.


Figure 1 (from upper to lower trace) is sea level, Greenland ice core, and Antarctic ice core temperatures, with the orange Alpine Recession time line at bottom. Some notable events are indicated on the Greenland temperature trace.

Trade was interrupted during this period, so tin imports for bronze were cut off. Bronze continued to be recycled, but the shortage encouraged the use of iron. This was the beginning of the Iron Age. The Iron Age should probably be called the steel age because pure iron is nearly as soft as bronze. Early blacksmiths learned quickly that working carbon into the iron made it much harder. Doing so results in steel, but making steel requires high temperatures making it more costly, so steel edges were welded to iron axes to produce an edge that would remain sharp with use while the whole tool remained less expensive. This is sometimes still done today.

Cool periods brought on plagues and death

The Greek Dark Age lasted for 300  years. Other areas recovered a bit more quickly, but Greece even lost their written language during this interval, only recovering it in the Greek Archaic Period. The Archaic Period began during a warm period seen in a 200-year period of Alpine Recession, sea level stabilization, and southern hemisphere warming. In this period, architecture, art and literature of all kinds flourished. Population increased. Greek colonies were established all around the Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts. All this came to a halt in another cool period.

In 430 BCE, the Plague of Athens struck. It has not been determined what pathogen caused this plague. Typhus, typhoid, the Ebola virus, Marburg, Small Pox, and Measles have all been suggested as possibilities. It killed a third to two-thirds of the population of Athens, including their general at the time, Pericles. It weakened the Greeks to the extent that the Macedonians, and then the Romans, dominated Greece until the middle ages. Population and trade growth at this time exacerbated the spread of disease across the then known world. If the Plague of Athens was caused by the Ebola or Marburg virus, import of animals from Africa, as well as overcrowding and poor sanitation, was the likely cause.

Temperatures and sea levels were rising after this time. Alexander the Great conquered most of the Middle East, but after he died, his generals couldn’t hold that territory. Rome began to flourish, and by 100 Common Era (CE), had conquered most of Europe and a large part of the Middle East. The glaciers in the Alps were in recession for 300 years, 150 years before, and 150 years after, the birth of Christ. Edpart4_2

Figure 2 is a map of the Roman Empire in the time of Emperor Trajan. (Wikipedia Commons)

A period of cooling then began in about the year 150 ACE. The Hatepe/Taupo Lake VEI 7 eruption took place in 186 CE. The dust and sulfates may have precipitated more cooling, and the effects were seen in Rome and China. Sea levels began to fall. Crops in northern Europe began to fail. Disease began to take a toll.

The Antonine Plague struck Rome in 165 CE, lasting for 15 years. It killed up to one million people and devastated the Roman army. A few years later, the Plague of Cyprian in 250 to 270 CE repeated this devastation. These plagues carried off several Roman Emperors and caused manpower shortages in agriculture and the Roman army. During this period, germanic tribes began moving south across Europe, putting pressure on Rome at a time when Rome could least resist.

As the temperature dropped from the high of the Roman Warm Period, conflict and migrations stirred Europe and the middle East. Plagues and warfare continued to impact populations. For example, the population of Rome went from one or two million at its hight in the 2nd Century to as low as 100,000 in the 6th Century. The Plague of Justinian struck the eastern Mediterranean in 541 CE. Over the next few years it killed perhaps 25% of the population. As many as 25 million people died over the next three centuries. More migrations took place. This population summary is taken from Wikipedia here. The population levels of Europe during the Middle Ages can be roughly categorized:[1]

•       280–400 (Late Antiquity): population decline.
•       400–1000 (Early Middle Ages): stable at a low level.
•       1000–1250 (High Middle Ages): population boom and expansion.
•       1250–1350 (Late Middle Ages): stable at a high level.
•       1350–1420 (Late Middle Ages): steep decline
•       1420–1470 (Late Middle Ages): stable at a low level.
•       1470–onward: slow expansion gaining momentum in the early 16th century.

Notice how this description follows the global temperature as seen in the sea level curve in Figure 1. During the Medieval Warm Period, 950 to 1250 CE, and the resulting population boom and expansion, the construction of large cathedrals began all across Europe. The Vikings expanded across the Atlantic to Iceland and Greenland, even briefly establishing a colony in Newfoundland. All this came to and end, again because of climate. Mt Rinjani in Indonesia, erupted in a VEI 7 event in 1257 CE. This event may have precipitated the Little Ice Age. There was a famine across Europe in 1315, caused by bad weather triggered by another volcano, Mount Tarawera in New Zealand. The Black Death struck in 1346, beginning in the Crimea. It is estimated that 30 to 60% of the European population died. The Spörer Solar Minimum from 1460 to 1550 contributed to low temperatures. Edpart4_3

Figure 3

The low-stand in global temperature in the Little Ice Age is reflected in the CO2 level as seen in the Antarctic Law Dome ice core data, Figure 3. This is because of lower sea surface temperatures. Low temperatures span the Maunder Minimum and end at the Dalton Minimum of the early 19th Century.

If the solar minimums of the 15th and 17th centuries contributed to the Little Ice Age, then the Modern Maximum must contribute to our current higher temperatures. As one can clearly see, high temperatures drive increasing populations, increasing crops, increasing innovation and technology.

Low temperatures drive famine, disease, social unrest, and declining populations. In the last 10,000 years, There were many times when the temperatures were higher than today. These were times when mankind expanded in many ways. We have had times of cold in the recent and far past. These were times when humanity declined.

We need not fear warmer temperatures. We do need to prepare for cooler temperatures, whether those arrive next winter, decade, century, or millennium.


Holocene Cold Spells Brought Drought And Famine…Sea Levels Were Often Much Higher Than Today

A Short History of the Human Race
The Climb Out Of The Ice Age
Part 2
By Ed Caryl

Below is a plot of sea level and temperature for the last 21,000 years, when the world warmed out of the last ice age, and civilization became possible. This is the end of the Upper Pleistocene and the dawn of the Holocene. Note, that at the end of the last ice age it took 12,000 years for all the ice to melt. It was a long slog out of the caves. That first warm period, from 10,200 Before Present (BP) to 8200 BP was warmer than it is today, even though a third of the ice was still melting. The last major ice melted about 6500 years ago.


Figure 1 is a plot of the last 21,000 years. The heavy purple and green traces are sea level with the scale on the right. The thin rust and blue traces are temperature from a greenland ice core and the Antarctic Dome C ice core respectively with the scale on the left. Three other time lines are: thick blue, the time of the last North African Pluvial period, when the Sahara was a grassland; dark orange, the time of the Persian Gulf flooding; and the light orange timeline, interrupted several times, were times of Alpine glacier recession. The short 8.2 kilo year cold period is marked in light blue. Various sea level high stands just above the green sea level trace are labeled in the legend. The grey time-line is the time of the Clovis Amerindian culture. The pink timeline is the time of the Folsom Amerindian culture.

I call your attention to several things in Figure 1. From right to left, old to more recent: The end of the ice age began about 20,000 years ago, when the northern hemisphere suddenly warmed by 5°C as seen at the source of the Greenland ice, the North Atlantic. The Southern Ocean, as seen at Dome C, did not warm for another 2000 years. But, the Bølling Interstadial warming took place simultaneously, globally, 14,500 years ago. During that short warming interval, the ancestors of the American Indians made their way across the Beringian plain, down either the west coast of what is now Canada, or down through an ice-free corridor through Alaska and central Canada, thence down across the length of the Americas to as far south as Terra Del Fuego in just a couple of thousand years.

In North America, by 13,500 years BP, the Amerindian Clovis culture was living off the megafauna, the large mammals present in this era, using beautifully worked large stone spear-points. 1500 years later, after the megafauna were killed off, either by the Clovis people or the cold Younger Dryas period, they morphed into the Folsom Culture, using smaller stone spear-points more suited to the smaller remaining animals.

In North Africa, and southwest Asia, beginning 15,000 years ago, because earth’s axis tilt began to favor the northern hemisphere during summer, the deserts were favored with additional summer monsoon rainfall. This allowed more human migration from north Africa into the Levant. At this time the Persian Gulf was a low valley watered by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and several others, some now dry wadis, combining into the Ur Schott river, and before the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), at least two large lakes. Fresh water springs, now 4 or 5 fathoms under the gulf off Bahrain, supplied additional water.


Figure 2 is a history of the Persian Gulf over the period from 74,000 years before present to 6,000 years ago. Source here.

There must have been people living in this valley, though because it is now flooded with 40 to 60 meters of water, the archeology necessary to prove it will be very difficult. But we do know that those occupation sites shown in the Stage IV panel above appeared very suddenly 8500 years ago on the Arabian shore and the people in those sites came from somewhere close by as they share a common and unique culture, the Ubaid culture. This valley may have been the source of the Eden stories. The sea level at the time of the Ubaid culture didn’t stop rising when it reached the level it has now. It rose an additional 5 meters in this area, flooding what is now southern Iraq for a hundred miles inland. Ur was established as a port, on the shore of this inland sea. There is evidence of reed-hulled sail boats in this time period, including bitumen fragments of the coating used to protect the reed structure, ceramic toy models, and an image on pottery showing a bipod masted craft. The ruins of Ur are now in the desert northwest of Basra, Iraq, far from the sea.

In this same period, Doggerland in what is now the North Sea, was also being flooded. The last bit of land there, what is now Dogger Bank, was an ever-shrinking island for several thousand years. Human produced artifacts have been dredged up by fishermen for many years. The last bit of land there went under about 6500 years ago.

Florida was also much larger before the sea level rose. Any coastal activity by Clovis culture people along the coast of the Americas is now under water. This is also true of many areas along in the Red Sea, the coast of India, and southeast Asia. A large area in what is now the South China Sea, the Sunda Strait, was also dry land and almost certainly settled.

The warm period from 11,500 to 8200 years ago was a time of many important advances for the human race. In this period, most of the important animals and agricultural crops we know today were domesticated in the Persian Gulf and Fertile Crescent region. Before this time people were nomadic, moving from one food source to another in the course of each year, building shelter as needed or living in caves. After this time many people lived in villages in permanent dwellings. By 8000 years BP, corn (maize) was domesticated in central Mexico.

As an example, Jericho is the oldest permanently occupied town, with the oldest level dating from 11,400 years BP. Before this time, the site had been used only as a temporary camp, as there is a large permanent spring nearby. The oldest level even had a 2 meter wall all around it with a watchtower that is still standing as it was buried in the tell. The dwellings were round pit houses, half sunken into the ground, with stone walls and a “wattle and daub” or adobe roof. World-wide, this type of house appears as the first permanent type dwelling in many cultures. It is still found in Northern Syria. At a similar village 5 miles north of Jericho, seedless domesticated figs have been found dating from this era. These would have had to have been propagated by cuttings, as the seeds never developed beyond the embryonic stage. Grains found at early Jericho were still of the wild variety, though they were gathered in quantity and stored for later use.

At Ur and H3 (above map, Figure 2, stage IV), domesticated grains were found, and 8200 years ago, evidence of irrigation, as well as domestic cattle, sheep, and goats. At this time, the domestic cat is found, though who domesticated who has not been established. Cats seem to have wandered in from the desert, found a source of food (domestic mice and domestic house swallows feeding on the stored domestic grain) and shelter, and decided to stay on. Some authors say this is “self-domestication.” I suspect cats domesticated us.

The first Holocene cold snap occurred 8200 years ago. Global temperature dropped about 2 degrees as seen at both poles. This lasted for about 200 years and was accompanied by drought and famine. This forced an increasing reliance on domesticated crops and animals, triggered the use of irrigation in Mesopotamia, and the domestication of corn (maize) in Central America. In North America, this split up the Folsom Culture people and drove the beginning of tribalism in the Paleo-Amerindians. This cold and arid spell was overcome by the technology, and the animal and plant domestication, that had developed in the earlier warm period.

Advances were made possible by the warm period that began more than 3000 years before all the ice melted. Sea levels were rising to be much higher than today and the human race was thriving on all continents except Antarctica. Warm is good. Cold is bad.

Next: The later Holocene and the rise of empires.


History Is Clear: Humans Prospered In Climates That Were Warmer Than Today’s…Died In Cooler Ones

A Short History of the Human Race
Part 1, The Late Pleistocene, A Story of Survival
By Ed Caryl

The story of the human race, Homo Sapiens, is really a story driven by climate, particularly temperatures, rainfall, and sea level. Most of that history has taken place in the last 20,000 years, since the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). But there was also some pre-history. Before we could advance to civilization, we needed to survive the the last glacial period. This was not easily done. 100,000 years ago, there were several species of Homo. By 10,000 years ago there was just us, and that was just by the skin of our teeth. There is genetic evidence that in the period around 70,000 years ago, there may have been as few as 10,000 Homo Sapiens in the world.


Figure 1 is a plot of Deuterium in a Greenland ice core, GISP2, a proxy for temperature.

Several points are indicated in figure 1. Reading from oldest at the right to the present day at the left, the Toba super-volcano in Indonesia caused an abrupt severe cooling that dropped the global temperature by about four degrees in a very short time. Prior to that, the climate had already cycled by similar amounts several times, but this cooling was much more severe. At that time, our ancestors were mostly confined to tropical Africa, but the cooling was accompanied by severe drying, putting pressure on the savannas in Africa that were our preferred habitat. Fortunately for us, after about a thousand years of starving out, the temperature and rainfall swung the other way, the Sahara Desert became green for a time, and we were able to migrate out of Africa through the Middle East, filling the vacuum left by Homo Erectus and putting pressure on the Neanderthals. Before the Eemian interglacial, Homo Erectus had gone extinct in Asia, except for locally adapted populations like Homo floresiensis in Indonesia and the Denisovans in central Asia. The last non-Modern Human population to die out was the Red Deer Cave people in China. They disappeared about the time Jericho was first settled in the Jordan Valley, 11,500 years ago.


Figure 2 is a detail from figure 1 of the period from 60,000 to 75,000 years ago.

This period is a perfect example of what happens in a cold period (we die) versus what happens in a warm period (we thrive). In a span of 4000 years, mankind went from a severe population bottle-neck, to spreading across three continents.

15,000 years later, about 50,000 years ago, another warm spell triggered a further migration to what is now New Guinea and Australia. All through this period, and for much of the last glaciated phase, sea levels were much lower than today, as much as 120 meters lower, joining islands and continents with dry land. Except for the migration to Australia, this meant that ships and rafts were not necessary for these migrations. Walking sufficed.

About 40,000 years ago, another super volcano erupted, Archiflegreo on the Italian coast. This triggered another 1000-year cold spell, putting more pressure on our neighbors in Europe and Western Asia, Homo Neanderthalensis. After many cycles of warm and cold, even though they were cold-adapted, their population finally collapsed 30,000 years ago.

15,000 years ago, the last great migration, that of the ancestors of the Amerindians to the New World, took place during a period nearly as warm as at present, but before the great ice sheets had melted sufficiently for Beringia to be flooded. Beringia is the continental shelf in the Bering Sea joining Asia and North America, now under 50 to 100 meters of cold sea water.


Figure 3 is a map of Beringia 21,000 years ago. Source here.

The great migrations, out of Africa, the crossing into New Guinea/Australia, the migration into the New World, were all made possible by warm, wet, periods during an ice age. When it is cold and arid, we huddle in our caves, starve and freeze. When it is warm, we multiply, innovate, and go on the move. When possible, we move to warmer and more hospitable climes, or at least empty areas. From Beringia, we populated North America and expanded to South America in about a thousand years. Just like today, when we move to Arizona or Florida, southern France or Spain.


Greenpeace Activists Destroyed Sight-Saving Golden Rice. NYT, Beeb, New Scientist Made False Reports

Bill Gates tweets Revkin on the need for Golden Rice. Green activists acting out of pure ideology and emotion sabotage sight-saving crop…

Bill Gates Revkin

The True Story About Who Destroyed a Genetically Modified Rice Crop

Did you hear that a group of 400 angry farmers attacked and destroyed a field trial of genetically modified rice in the Philippines this month? That, it turns out, was a lie. The crop was actually destroyed by a small number of activists while farmers who had been bussed in to attend the event looked on in dismay.

The nature of the attack was widely misreported, from the New York Times to New Scientist to BBC News, based on false claims by the activists. But then anti-GMO activists often lie. In support of the vandals, Greenpeace has claimed that there are health concerns about the genetically modified rice. In fact there is no evidence of risk, and the destruction of this field trial could lead to needless deaths.

The rice is genetically enhanced to produce the vitamin A precursor beta-carotene, giving it a golden color. …

Andrew Revkin on Greenpeace role in fighting Golden Rice:

I’ve been a fan of Greenpeace’s creative, but legal, work to press big companies over destructive forest practices. I called it “activism at its best” last year. But the group’s distorted and incendiary rhetoric on this issue, mashing up anti-corporate emotion with baseless or distorted arguments about this rice strain, is activism at its worst.” …

Continue reading…


Why Is CO2 Rising? Biosphere Destruction Is The Primary Source, And Not Fossil Fuel Burning

By Ed Caryl

The natural CO2 flux to and from oceans and land plants amounts to approximately 210 gigatons of carbon annually. (Note that this is carbon. Multiply the numbers by 3.7 for the total weight of CO2 including the two oxygen atoms.) Man currently causes about 9 gigatons of carbon to be injected into the atmosphere, about 4% of the natural annual flux. There are estimates that about half of man’s emissions are taken up by nature, or 2%. Why only half?


Figure 1 from NOAA and the IPCC, 2001 numbers, here.

The chart above updated to current numbers, implies that 3 gigatons of man’s emissions are absorbed by the oceans and 1.5 gigatons by the rest of the biosphere. If the vegetation on land absorbs 120 gigatons and if rising CO2 improves biosphere production, why isn’t all the excess CO2 also absorbed? It is because the biosphere is being destroyed faster than it can adapt to rising CO2.

About 60 years ago, I read somewhere, probably National Geographic, that the Amazon rain forests were the “lungs of the earth”, the place where CO2 was recycled back to oxygen. This phrase is still widely used, just Google “lungs of the earth” with the quotes and examine the result. One article in particular drew my attention. A quote:

…as recently as 19th century, tropical rain forests in their own right covered around 20% of all the dry land area of the Earth, but this figure was only 7% by the end of the 20th century.”


Image: NASA Jeff Schmaltz, LANCE/EOSDIS MODIS Rapid Response Team, GSFC

The world-wide increase in CO2 is not due to fossil fuel burning, it is due to the destruction of the worlds lungs. Clearing tropical forests for Biofuels production is contributing to that destruction.

Tropical rainforest destruction world-wide runs between 0.5% and 1% by area annually. The world’s lungs are suffering from TB, timber burning. For a horrifying world view of this problem go here, and view the video. Here is a MODIS satellite image of Myanmar on just one day. The red areas are fire.


Paging Paul Ehrlich: UN Predicts Record-Setting Grain Harvest…7% More Than Last Year!

Remember Paul Ehrlich’s prophesy of doom and gloom back in 1970 when he predicted rising global population (then 4 billion) would lead to mass global starvation already by the 1980s. Today more than 40 years later the planet has a population of over 7 billion and experts are warning of another global menace: obesity.


Global warming alarmists wrong again! UN expects record global grain harvest this year. Photo credit: Hinrich, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Germany license.

Ehrlich’s prophesy was pure rubbish.

At the Achse des Guten website here Benny Peiser brings our attention to a short report in the German media. The report is good news and is of global significance, and so you’d think it would be worthy of front page news. Not so with today’s cynical, catastrophe-obsessed media. The best they could do was write an obscure itty-bitty blurb and bury it deep in their website pages. The public doesn’t need to know about this.

The online German RP writes:

According estimates of the UN Agricultural Organization, the global grain production will reach a record high with 2.5 billion tonnes. That means an increase of 7% over a year earlier. Wheat production will increase by almost 7% to a high of 700 million tonnes. Therefore it will be able to more than offset the drop of last year.”

Rice production also has not withered away, rising 2%, the RP writes.

So what about all the bad climate change that was supposed to have a massively negative impact on crops? All silly Ehrlich-type scare stories as usual. Agricultural output continues its overall climb. There’s even food to burn in millions of cars.


The EU’s Fast-Approaching Food Tyranny…EU Undertakes To “Radically Transform” People’s Dietary Habits!

EU Food tyrannyThe EU in partnership with the WWF has just released a strategy report dubbed: ADOPTING HEALTHY, SUSTAINABLE DIETS: KEY OPPORTUNITIES AND BARRIERS, which is part of LiveWell for LIFE, “a pioneering project which aims to contribute towards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the EU food supply chain, and demonstrate what sustainable diets could look like for different European countries.”

Hat-tip DirkH.

The report’s introduction begins by stating that the European super state now needs to control our food diets:

Food consumption patterns in Europe are currently unsustainable: European food consumption is responsible for a large part of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions. It is accepted that there needs to be a reduction in global greenhouse gas emission which are contributing to climate change. […] LiveWell for LIFE is a pioneering project which aims to contribute towards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the EU food supply chain, and demonstrate what sustainable diets could look like for different European countries.”

The report writes that it “is a summary of the efforts of LiveWell for LIFE and the Network of European Food Stakeholders to find the most important social and economic barriers and opportunities for sustainable diets in Spain, France and Sweden and in the EU“.

It’s no secret that environmentalist, left-wing, vegetarian, authoritarian wackos have had their eye on dictating human eating habits for a long time, and have had a hard time stomaching our appetite for meat on our plates and barbecue grills. Read here for example.  Before too long we’ll have to content ourselves with celery and carrot sticks.

The report writes on pages 11-12:

The Italian Barilla Centre for Food and Nutrition has identified the rise of the responsible consumer and what it terms consumActors – sustainability-savvy consumers who want to be involved in the food production process. According to its research, people’s dietary habits will have to radically transform in order to meet the dietary and nutritional needs of a growing population in a world that is more affluent and more urbanised. And they’ll have to take responsibility for their choices too – something that may come as a shock to the average post-modern consumer.”

A growing number of consumers are open to the idea of changing their diets. For example in the UK, government research found that 62% of respondents were ‘very or fairly willing’ to give up red meat, while 36% were ‘very or fairly willing’ to give up dairy products. Dutch research has identified a growing interest in flexitarian eating: a vegetarian diet that occasionally includes meat.”

Here we note that the target food staple is meat and dairy products. Getting people to change their eating habits and abstain from consuming certain staples is no easy task. The report has identified motivation factors. Interestingly, environmental factors rank at the very bottom (p. 13):

Health is a motivator for behaviour change – more than any concern about the environment. UK government research into attitudes and behaviour around sustainable food found that health is the most important factor for consumers (81%). Environmental sustainability was the least important (26%). A study of consumers in the 27 EU member states also showed that health was more important than environmental concerns for consumer food choices. Some 32% of people said they would like to buy meat or meat products less often. The main reason given was for health (54%) compared to 16% for environmental reasons.”

It goes without saying that consumers want healthy food. But at the same time many also want to experience eating pleasure. Each has to decide the balance that is right for him/herself.

It quickly becomes obvious in the report’s language that EU bureaucrats think that consumers are just too stupid to make the right decisions. Throughout the report one finds the terms like “unaware” or “confusion“, or “limited knowledge“, or “lack of understanding” to name a few when discussing the consumer.

The report is just one of the first steps in the EU’s scheme to take over the human diet. The report ends:

Going forward, LiveWell for LIFE will explore these opportunities and barriers as we find ways to adopt sustainable diets in the pilot countries, and the policy changes needed for a move towards sustainable diets across the EU.”

I smell massive meat taxes cooking in the EU regulatory kitchen. The food tyranny is coming! Be prepared to be spoon-fed bland, organic baby-food by the EU super-nanny state.

Image source: livewellforlife.eu/report.pdf


The Good Maize Gets Burned – While Toxic Leftovers Wind Up In Our Food Chain!

It’s bad enough that the environment is taking a hit from millions of acres of land being converted to a vast monoculture of maize to supply biogas plants and ethanol producers that are supposed to rescue the environment.

Maize harvest

Food for saving the climate. Consumers get stuck with contaminated leftovers. Photo credit: Bill Whittaker, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

And it is morally questionable that today thousands of tonnes of maize are being taken off the plates of the world’s hungry in order to rescue them from a computer-modelled climate change in 2100.

If that wasn’t bad enough, now the maize that’s left for consumers in Germany is contaminated with cancer-causing Alfatoxin fungus. Bottom line: The good stuff gets burned, and we en up eating the toxic crap that’s left!

As maize farmers in Germany sell their harvests of top quality maize to subsidized biogas plants next door for conversion to biogas fuel, animal feed producers and food processing companies can no longer pay the high local prices and thus have to source the maize they need from foreign countries with low standards and dubious agricultural practices. Result: garbage winds up in the human food chain.

Today, all the major German media outlets are reporting on the discovery of thousands of tons of animal-feed contaminated with Alfatoxin fungus. These animals are for future meat and dairy products consumption.

News magazine Spiegel writes:

In Lower Saxony at least 10,000 tonnes of toxic maize feed are now in the feed chain. The goods originate from Serbia, and according to the Minister of Agriculture they are contaminated with the carcinogenic Aflatoxin fungus.”

The question many are now asking is: What is all this dangerous-grade maize feed from Serbia doing in Germany when so much of it is grown here locally? Europeans are burning the high quality maize and poisoning themselves to protect the climate!

Spiegel reports that up to 3500 beef livestock farms may be affected, supplied by 13 feedmills in Lower Saxony. Overall, up to 45,000 tonnes of feed may be involved.

Spiegel writes that Aflatoxin B1 “is one of the most carcinogenic substances in nature” and that the shipment from Serbia had a concentration that was 10 times higher than the allowable limit. The substance was first detected in contaminated milk.

Authorities claim that there is a little danger to consumers.


Higher CO2 Concentrations Will Feed A Billion More People

Ed Caryl today presents the latest of his essays. This one on CO2 and plant growth.

What Should We Do About CO2 Emissions?
By Ed Caryl

So, what should we do about CO2 emissions? The answer is: nothing. The evidence that Co2 is harmful, that it is raising the earth’s temperature dramatically, has been largely fabricated, and at the least, overblown. Surprisingly, when all the facts are in, CO2 is beneficial! It is an essential trace gas, and a fertilizer. The current increase has boosted growth rates of vegetation worldwide by 13 to 15% (see here).

CO2 is used as a supplement in greenhouses. In a closed greenhouse, growth slows or stops if the plants use it up and CO2 drops below 200 ppm as the plants absorb it. CO2 supplement systems are sold to greenhouse farmers to supply supplemental CO2. Levels up to 1000 ppm or more are often used (see here). Extra CO2 also reduces a plant’s need for water by closing the leaf stomata (see here). Leaf stomata are the ports on the lower side of a leaf that lets plants breath.

One of the most important crops in the world is rice. Studies have been done on Co2 enhancing rice production. If CO2 is increased 200 ppm above the current levels, (which have already increased production by the 13 to 15% cited above) production will increase by another 13 to 15% (see here and here).

Here is an illustration of growth over a range of CO2 levels:

Rice and a wild grass that is the antecedent of Foxtail Millet. Source: Susanne von Caemmerer, W. Paul Quick, and Robert T. Furbank (2012). The Development of C4 Rice: Current Progress and Future Challenges. Science 336 (6089): 1671-1672.

C3 and C4 refers to the chemical pathway used by the chlorophyll in plant leaves to produce sugar. C4 plants include many grasses and corn. It has been argued that C4 plants are immune to changes in CO2, but as you can see in the illustration above, this is clearly not true. They just don’t respond as dramatically as C3 plants. They do, however, become more drought tolerant due to the stomata response reducing water vapor loss.

Plants need 3 major inputs to grow: water, CO2, and nitrogen. From these they produce sugar for energy and proteins and cellulose for structure. Some have argued that increased CO2 produces protein-poor plants. This is true only if increased nitrogen is not supplied along with the increased CO2. A plant needs both in balance. Any greenhouse farmer knows this. But still, this increased growth with increasing CO2 assumes no improvement from fertilization, genetic engineering or plant breeding.

The experiments have been done holding all factors except CO2 constant. That increase from CO2 alone is about 100 million metric tons for each 15% increase in yield per year. That feeds about 700 million more people if one assumes 150 kg of rice per person per year. Imagine the gain if additional fertilizer was supplied along with the increase in CO2. Wheat production with double the current levels of CO2 increased by up to 38 percent (see here). Corn responds to elevated CO2 by needing less water (see here). It is clear that CO2 increases will greatly improve our ability to feed a growing world population.

If we try to limit CO2, we will dramatically limit the economic growth of the world with no effect on the climate. This is already happening in Europe. Taxing CO2 in efforts to limit production of it only makes money for the Al Gore’s of the world. It limits our use of the energy we need for economic growth and the CO2 that our crops need to flourish. Limiting CO2, even if we could, would literally mean the starvation of a billion people in the next 50 years.

What is more important? Feeding and lifting most of the world from poverty orr preventing a questionable slight temperature rise which would lengthen the growing season? The Global Warming crowd is trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.


Die Zeit’s Slovenly Climate Journalism – How They Totally Botched The Story Of The Missing Wheat

What follows is the story of how editors at renowned German weekly Die Zeit completely botched the translation of English text passages to German, thus making their German story completely erroneous, and far more sensational.

Climate change threatens the global supply of noodles, Die Zeit claims. Source: www.kaltesonne.de


Embarrassing translation blunders in climate-alarm article by Zeit online: A welcome distortion of meaning?
By Dr Sebastian Lüning and Prof Fritz Vahrenholt
Translated/edited by P Gosselin

The climate catastrophe is known to be responsible for almost all of the world’s ills. Supposedly it will also be responsible for the demise of the noodle. At least that’s what our favorite newspaper Die Zeit told its readers in a recent online article.

The Die Zeit article is a translation of an English-language article by Mark Hertsgaard which appeared a week earlier at The Daily Beast, an Internet news page associated with Newsweek.

Let’s take a look at what’s going on with the noodle catastrophe. Die Zeit writes in German:

Wissenschaftler haben starke Belege für einen direkten Zusammenhang zwischen den steigenden Temperaturen und den weltweit sinkenden Erträgen in der Weizenproduktion. Allein in den vergangenen 50 Jahren sank die Weizenproduktion um 5,5 Prozent, während die durchschnittliche Temperatur anstieg.”

Which in English is:

Scientists have strong evidence of a direct relation between rising temperatures and falling worldwide yields of wheat production. In the past 50 years alone wheat production fell about 5.5%, while the average temperature rose.”

Oh man. That doesn’t sound good. The world’s population is growing and growing and wheat production over the last five decades has dropped. And that despite the ongoing mechanization, genetic improvements of seeds and well-designed irrigation systems. That half degree of warming since 960 is a real wheat killer and CO2 is a really bad noodle pestilence!

Yet, something appears fishy about the whole thing. That’s what an astute reader at the Wetterzentrale forum thought, and so he took the time to compare the Die Zeit German text to the original English text. In doing so, he discovered gross translation errors, which obviously somehow escaped the attention of the climate-activist editorial office. Here’s the original English:

Already, a mere 1 degree Fahrenheit of global temperature rise over the past 50 years has caused a 5.5 percent decline in wheat production compared to what would have occurred in the absence of global warming, according to a study published by David Lobell, a professor at Stanford University’s Center on Food Security and the Environment.”

Wheat production over the last 50 years namely has not decreased at all. To the contrary, global wheat production actually tripled during that time period (see Figure 1). The original English text says the rise in wheat production was 5% less than what it would have occurred had there been no climate warming. This is like a millionaire complaining that he made only 500,000 euros last year, and not the 525,000 euros he would have made had the lousy euro-crisis not interfered. Of course, we don’t need to feel bad about the “loss” the millionaire had to take. The same is true with the “missing” wheat. If anything we should feel bad for the translator who mangled the meaning, and for the climate editorial team at Die Zeit, who, because of their religious zealotry, have long abandoned the standards of science (see for example our blog report “The Climate Mercenaries: Investigative Reporters of  ZEIT Join In On The Holy Climate War“).

Figure 1: Global wheat production of the last 50 years. Data: FAO, wattsupwiththat.com (Willis Eschenbach)

Let’s read more of the quality translation from that quality weekly Die Zeit, which wrote in German:

Überall auf der Welt ändert sich gerade die Art und Weise, wie der Weizen angebaut werden kann. Drei Viertel der weltweiten Weizenproduktion kommen aus der Mittelmeerregion. Der Klimawandel wird Südeuropa sogar noch härter treffen als North Dakota.”

In English this is:

Everywhere in the world, the methods of how wheat can be planted are now changing. Three quarters of the worldwide wheat production comes from the Mediterranean region. Climate change will hit Southern Europe even harder than North Dakota.”

Wow, three quarters of worldwide wheat production comes from the Mediterranean region. That’s really heavy. China, Russia, India and die USA are left way behind in the dust of the Mediterranean wheat powerhouse. What’s the secret of the Mediterranean wheat farmers?

Utter nonsense. This couldn’t be more embarrassing. The climate quality assurance of Die Zeit had failed once again.

The reality is that wheat production is pretty much distributed all across the globe. China, Russia, India and the USA are all in the same league as the EU (Figure 2). In the real figures there’s not a trace of any wheat dominance. And certainly not when one considers durum wheat, which is especially important for noodle production.

Figure 2: Global overview of wheat producers. Source: Seekingalpha.com

Author Mark Hertsgaard then plays the climate-catastrophe card, predicting a great number of droughts and heat waves by 2050, based on dubious IPCC models. That would strongly and negatively impact wheat and noodles at the Mediterranean. Die Zeit writes:

Allein in Italien und Frankreich werden die Ernten bis zum Jahr 2050 um bis zu 15 Prozent zurückgehen, weil Hitzewellen und Dürren die Regionen heimsuchen werden, schätzt die Europäische Umweltagentur.”

Which in English is:

Alone in Italy and France, harvests will drop by up to 15% by the year 2050 because heat waves and droughts will afflict the regions, estimates the European Environment Agency.”

But even the European Environment Agency indeed meant something different from what Die Zeit wanted to understand:

As the frequency and intensity of heat waves and drought increase, yields of nonirrigated crops are projected to decline by 5 to 15 percent in Italy and southern France by the 2050s, according to a new report by the European Environmental Agency. Yields in Spain and Portugal could fall by 15 to 25 percent.”

Have you noticed? In the original English text, they are discussing  ‘non-irrigated areas’. Die Zeit simply leaves out this seemingly unimportant detail. Here the share of irrigated areas in the Mediterranean region is today already significant and will continue to gain. These areas are impacted far less.

So how could this series of errors, misinterpretations and distortions happen? Has the Die Zeit editorial board thrown every journalistic ethic overboard? Is the climate-activist urgency so great that all means are justified?

Perhaps the end of the year is a good occasion for the editorial board to think about a wise saying by Hanns Joachim Friedrichs: “A good journlaist is one who does not become subjective with any topic, also with a good topic.”

Also read more at wattsupwiththat.com.


New German Film Blasts Green Climate Movement…”Climate Protection = Environmental Crimes”

This week’s print edition of FOCUS includes an interview with the producer of a new environmental film to be shown in German cinemas beginning in January: Climate Crimes – Environmental crimes in the name of climate protection. It will premiere soon in Vienna.

Here’s the trailer (in German): The pictures tell the story…

If you are one of the skeptics, much of the film probably will be familiar to you. But if you’re a devout environmentalist who has been reading and believing all the climate propaganda put out by “environmental” and “climate protection” groups and institutes, then you may want to have an ambulance ready outside the cinema. It might be really tough to take.

Be sure to bring your environmentalist friends to see this film. Their reaction will be most interesting as it will reveal if they are truly open to the truth. Face it, there’s a huge industrial lobby behind the “green” movement too.

The film was produced by Ulrich Eichelmann. It is “The story of unique ecosystems, rare species, and people who are living with nature. They are all threatened – not by climate change, but by climate protection.”

Eichelmann believes that what is being sold as “climate protection” is not stopping global warming, but is actually accelerating the destruction of the environment and harming humans.”

We are able to show that many supposedly ‘green energies’ such as hydro, biodiesel and biogas are neither ecologically sensible nor sustainable, but are in fact crimes against nature and defrauding customers.”

Eichelmann cites Germany’s biogas and biodiesel sectors as examples. He claims that ‘on all continents large natural areas are now threatened’, all in the name of climate proection. “In Indonesia 2 million hectares of forests are wiped out annually and replaced with palm oil plantations so that we can fill up with bio-diesel.”

Eichelmann reminds us that hundreds of thousands of people are losing their homes because of “climate protection projects” like huge dams. Thousands of species are also threatened by monoculture-agriculture. Eichelmann says:

Many German companies and banks, often with the support of politicians, are involved in environmental crimes in other parts of the globe.”

While Eichelmann presents many examples of climate protection destroying the planet”, the alternatives he offers are hardly convincing:

We have to alter our lifestyles and drastically cut back our consumption. It is not that we are not producing too little energy – we are consuming too much.”

But getting people to consume less means increasing the price of energy. That in turn becomes a major threat to the world’s poor. And nothing is a bigger threat to the environment than human poverty.

Although I haven’t seen the film, I suspect there is little in it about the threats from wind parks, which involve widespread deforestation and altering of the landscape. never mind the threat they pose to birds.

If I had to infer Eichelmann’s underlying message, I’d say he’s advocating a very fundamentalist position like: No fossil fuels – and also forget most of the renewables like hydro, biogas and bio-diesel. Scale back industry as well. Learn to go without!

That of course would end up making lots of people very poor, limit their access to energy, and so they would have no way to keep warm – except, that is, to burn trees.

In summary, Eichelmann concludes the green movement has been a total environmental disaster so far.

If you consider all the environmental horrors caused by “green” energy, fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas are beginning to look real attractive again.


German Green Pols Forget Their Biofuels Implementation – Now Propose Powering Society With “Herbal Fuels”

Food prices have been in the headlines lately, with more than enough stories blaming the crop shortages on climate change. That’s what the German greens would like to have us believe.

Today, with huge swaths of land being covered and devoured by industrial-scale biofuels agriculture and food prices rapidly climbing to politically dangerous levels, the greens are now calling for an end to biofuels. This marks a course reversal for the greens, though they refuse to admit it. Indeed, just a few years ago, the greens ignored all the warnings and were big proponents of biofuels: They played the key role in mandating the disastrous biofuels debacle in Germany.

Jan Fleischhauer of Der Spiegel recently wrote:

Anyone expecting an apology from the responsible persons, or at least an admission they had gotten carried away by their eco-optimism, does not know the greens very well. Even the hardest of realities are no match against the green conscience.”

Fleischhauer reminds us how in November, 2005, German Green party boss, then Minister of Environment, Jürgen Trittin said:

Fields will become the oil wells of the 21st century, the farmer will become an energy businessman.”

In the same year, green Minister of Agriculture Renate Künast boldly proclaimed:

We want to clear the way for farmers for biofuels, and to accelerate their introduction to the market.”

This, of course, was done through massive subsidies and mandating Germany’s E10 ethanol fuel.

Bärbel Höhn, a green leader of North Rhine Westphalia, Germany’s most populated state, went so far, Fleischhauer writes, to declare “bioenergy as a national security issue” because oil is a raw material that wars have been fought over time and again, and thus she ranked the promotion of bioenergy as having crucial importance for German society. It was: “World peace through German biogas,” Fleischhauer writes, sarcastically.

Today no greens want to be reminded of their enthusiastic support for burning food in gas tanks while the world’s poor go hungry.

Renate Künast (far right)

Renate Künast recently told an audience of millions, with a straight face, on Germany’s ARD public television: “We were always against E10″. (E10 is now on the verge of being eliminated after years of failure).

Now that the greens have changed their minds and suddenly “have always been” against agrofuels, they need to come up with an alternative. No problem, Bärbel Höhn has a new solution: Fuel from wild herbs! Fleischhauer writes:

‘Fields of flowers instead of corn’, is the new slogan. Let’s hope this does not again turn into yet another state reform program. Otherwise picking dandelions will be fined soon – for violating the energy security of the Federal Republic of Germany.”

The greens have run out of ideas.

Also read: