Is “All-Time Antarctic 20.75C Record High Temperature” Just A Sensational Hoax? Station Data Show Only 16C

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

In Germany there have been rumors that the alleged Antarctic Seymour Island “all-time Antarctic record high” of 20.75°C set on February 9th is a hoax – originating by the AFP news agency and then spread by The Guardian.

The alleged 20.75°C was supposedly logged by Brazilian scientists and was supposedly almost a full degree higher than the previous record of 19.8C, taken on Signy Island in January 1982, The Guardian blared with much alarm, citing its own rush job chart.

Currently the WMO is seeking to obtain the actual temperature data for Seymour Island, part of a chain of islands off the Antarctic peninsula.

WMO cites media as source!

The WMO website itself is citing the media as its source, writing: “Media reports say that researchers logged a temperature of 20.75°C. Mr Cerveny cautioned that it is premature to say that Antarctica has exceeded 20°C for the first time.”

Thermometer data show only 16°C!

According to German Facebook site Klima.Wissen here and its readers, the “all-time record high reading” of 20.75°C appears to have its origins from the AFP news agency. It was then picked up by the always climate sensational The Guardian. But now the whole story is beginning to appear as just big sensational hoax.

First, WetterOnline.de here shows that the high temperature on February 9th at the Seymour Island station (Base Murambio) was merely 16°C!

 

There was much ado over the record set at the Antarctic station Esperanza, which was reported to have reached 18.4° on February 7. Here Wetteronline.de confirms it, as does the Argentine National Meteorological Service:

So what’s going on at the Seymour Island station? 16°C is not even close to the claimed 20.75°C record reading screamed out bloody-murder by the media across the globe. Maybe the Seymour station operators breathed on an unofficial thermometer outside, snapped a photo, and sent it out to the media. Who knows.

The chart The Guardian published is totally different from the one at the official wetteronline.de.

Looking at the Accuweather February temperatures, so far we see a high of only 7°C 0n February 9, 2020!

Depicted in tabular form:

We’ll keep an open mind, though, and see what comes out officially. But it would be awfully embarrassing if the record never really happened. Right now the media and alarmists can only hope that the WMO will play along with the hoax and just say it happened so that the global alarmist media complex can save its face.

But the thermometer is sure telling us a very different story.

Will take some time to confirm the reading

“We first need to analyse the very important station metadata, e.g., location, type of equipment, measurement practices, calibration of the instruments, etc.) from the researchers involved.  Once we have those data, we can begin a formal evaluation as to the observation’s validity.  Unfortunately, accomplishing those tasks does not happen quickly (particularly with remote polar weather stations) so it will likely be some time before we at the WMO Archive of Weather and Climate Extremes can even give a tentative evaluation of this observation,” WMO’s Weather and Climate Extremes rapporteur, Randall Cerveny said.

 

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

New Study: Greenland’s Largest Glacier Has Rapidly Thickened Since 2016…Fueled By 1.5°C Regional Ocean Cooling

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Greenland’s largest glacier (Jakobshavn) has quite abruptly thickened since 2016. The thickening has been so profound the ice elevations are nearly back to 2010-2011 levels. The nearby ocean has cooled ~1.5°C – a return to 1980s-era temperatures.

The world’s glaciers have not been following along with the CO2-driven catastrophic melting narrative.

Alaska

For example, in a study of 50 Alaskan glaciers for the warming period between 1972-2012, researchers (McNabb and Hock, 2014) found there was
“…no corresponding change in the number of glaciers retreating nor do we see corresponding acceleration of retreat rates. To the contrary, many glaciers in the region have advanced…”
Image Source: McNabb and Hock, 2014

Antarctica

In the Southern Hemisphere, an accumulating collection of (29) referenced studies (Lüning et al.,2019) indicate that not only has the Southern Ocean, Antarctic Peninsula, West Antarctica, and East Antarctica been cooling or not warming in recent decades, but many regional glaciers have begun advancing again.

Image Source: Lüning et al.,2019

Greenland

Greenland’s ice sheet mass losses have significantly decelerated since 2013 – a reversal from the rapid retreat from the 1990s to 2012 driven by cloud forcing and the NAO (Ruan et al., 2019).

The 47 largest Greenland glaciers also experienced a “relatively stable” period of rather insignificant retreat from 2013 to 2018 (Andersen et al., 2019).

Only 21 of the 47 Greenland glaciers retreated in 2018, 12 advanced, and the other 14 showed no trends in either direction (Polar Portal, 2019).

Greenland’s largest glacier, Jakobshavn, earned headlines in 2019 for it’s surprising and non-predicted rapid thickening in recent years.

Image Source: BBC, 2019

New Study

A new study (Joughin et al., 2020) finds that the Jakobshavn glacier thickening that began in 2016 has continued apace, and ice elevation has now nearly completely returned to 2010/2011 amplitudes.

The authors attribute much of the glacier advance to the rapid 1.5°C ocean cooling impacting the region in recent years.

Ocean temperatures have returned to 1980s-era levels.

Image Source: Joughin et al., 2020
Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Germany’s Transition To Green Energies Is “An Impending Disaster”, German Expert Tells Audience

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Last Thursday evening in Münster, Germany, amid an atmosphere of loudly protesting students and Extinction Rebellion activists outside shouting obscenities and beating drums, prominent SPD social democrat and climate science critic Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt spoke on why Germany was headed down the wrong path with its now flailing transition to green energies, dubbed “Energiewende“.

Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt. Image: GWPF. 

Vahrenholt called the Energiewende: “An impending disaster.”

According to the Westfälische Nachricten here, “Scientists for Future activists handed out leaflets to emphasize that in their opinion the climate models of the IPCC (‘Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’) accurately depicted climate warming and that only trace gas CO2 was responsible for it.”

Hat-tip: Die kalte Sonne

But Vahrenholt, former environment senator of Hamburg, refuted the claims and showed why he thought CO2 is only half responsible for climate change today and that the rest was due to natural factors like sun and clouds.

In his 45-minute presentation, Vahrenholt showed those in attendance how Germany’s foray into green energies was doomed to fail. As leaders in Germany continue to insist wind energy is able to supply the country’s energy needs, Vahrenholt – an environmentalist and one of the founders of Germany’s modern environmental movement – pointed out the major technical obstacle: the inability to store wind energy for periods of low wind.

“Not even in the grid, like one well-known Green politician claimed,” said Vahrenholt, taking a shot at Green party leader Annalena Baerbock, who once famously claimed the power grid could store energy.

German electricity prices among world’s highest

Vahrenholt also reminded that the Energiewende has made Germany’s electricity prices among the highest in the world and that it would hit the poor especially hard. “I never understood the SPD here,” said Vahrenholt, criticizing his own party. The retired professor said it would take 90,000 wind turbines to supply Germany with electricity, a number that would lead to the country having a turbine every 2 kilometers.

The Westfälische Nachrichten sums up on whether the Energiewende is going to work:

At the end of the complex, 45-minute presentation, the majority in the hall were probably convinced: it can’t. The facts and figures presented by the environmentalist were too overwhelming.”

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Greta’s, The Guardian’s Latest Panic Attack Over Antarctica Record Ignores Cooling Trends Of Recent Decades

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

In her latest panic attack, teenage Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg – citing the Guardian –  once again appeared to be proclaiming the end of the world was a step closer when she tweeted Antarctica has set a new record high temperature:

Two new warm records

According to the Guardian, “The 20.75C logged by Brazilian scientists at Seymour Island on 9 February was almost a full degree higher than the previous record of 19.8C, taken on Signy Island in January 1982.”

That reading, the Guardian reports, follows the February 6 record of 18.3C recorded at the Argentinian research station, Esperanza measured.

As is the case with most alarmists, every warm single datapoint anomaly gets uncritically accepted with open arms as solid evidence of man-made global warming while cold trends get dismissed or downgraded as “natural variability”.

Seymour Island has been cooling for over a quarter century

So we have two recent warm records set at and near the Antarctic peninsula over the past week or so and that means the region there is heating up, alarmists like Greta and the Guardian want us to believe. But what are the real TRENDS there? Do the 2 recent warm records mean the region is heating up.

Looking at official data from NASA, it turns out that warming isn’t true. And because climate is always changing, the temperature in the region in question has also not remained completely steady. The only possibility left? COOLING.

Seymour Island, also known as Marambio Island is an island in the chain of 16 major islands around the tip of the Graham Land on the Antarctic Peninsula. What follows is a plot of the mean annual temperature measured at Seymour Island – based on NASA data – going back to the time all the global warming predictions began in earnest:

Contrary to that implied by The Guardian and Greta, the island has in fact cooled a bit during the period, despite the warm spike of 2016.

13 of 13 Antarctic Peninsula/island stations cooling

Next we look at the Antarctic Peninsula, which global warming alarmists also like to have us believe is teetering on the brink of meltdown. Not long ago Japanese climate blogger Kirye posted a chart showing the mean annual temperatures of 13 stations located there – going back two decades.

For alarmists, the results turn out to be terribly inconvenient. The following map shows the location of the stations:

The following chart shows the plots of the mean annual temperature of the 13 stations, using NASA Version 4 unadjusted data:

13 of 13 Antarctic Peninsula and nearby island stations show cooling over the past 21 years. There hasn’t been any warming there so far this century. Data source: NASA GISS, Version 4 unadjusted. 

Natural ocean cycles

Buried near the end of the Guardian article is mention of the real reason behind Antarctic temperature trends:

Scientists on the Brazilian Antarctic programme say this appears to be influenced by shifts in ocean currents and El Niño events: “We have climatic changes in the atmosphere, which is closely related to changes in permafrost and the ocean. The whole thing is very interrelated.”

Indeed it is. Very likely in ways the climate alarmists prefer not to mention.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Green Energy Professor’s Solution To Volatile Wind Energy: Install Even More Wind Turbines!

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Europe storm leads to negative electricity prices

By Die kalte Sonne
(Translated/edited by P. Gosselin)

It almost hurts a little that “specialist for renewable energies” (own claim on Twitter) Prof. Volker Quaschning gets mentioned here so often. This is simply due to the absurd tweets the man continuously puts out.

His latest prank has to do with the storm Sabine, which earlier this week swept across Germany. It supplied a lot of energy in the form of wind, which made the wind turbines rotate strongly.

Even in the otherwise regulated electricity market, the laws of the market cannot simply be levered out. Supply and demand determine the price. If supply is higher than demand, the price falls.

In the case of electricity, even money might be included with the product when this electricity is purchased, meaning negative prices. Electricity is an extremely perishable “commodity”, it must be consumed at the moment of production. However, the “expert” Quaschning does not blame this oversupply and the negative prices on the volatile wind power plants, but rather on nuclear power and coal. They deliver very reliably and not wildly fluctuating like wind power.

Prof. Volker Quaschning tweeted in response to the negative electricity prices from overproduction which Germany saw during the recent storm:

In English: “Storm and lots of wind are again causing negative stock market electricity prices. This is a clear sign that coal-fired and nuclear power plants are too inflexible and are not suitable as back-up for renewable energies. We therefore need a faster #coal exit.
#FridaysForFuture #Scientists4Future.”

A logical train of thought actually would have been to realize that highly volatile power sources such as wind and the simultaneous provision of base load are difficult to reconcile. Unfortunately, the energy source gas is also being massively fought by people like Quaschning, although it is more flexible and at the same time more CO2-friendly. In any case, however, it is only a crutch that might have to supply a great deal of energy, namely when we have the well-known lulls in wind and sun.

Every wind turbine and every photovoltaic system needs a backup. And anyone who has ever wondered why the wind countries of Denmark and Germany have such high electricity prices knows the reason. We are paying for a double power infrastructure. The prices will not decrease with an increasing share of renewable energies, but rather will continue to rise.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Physics Professor: CO2’s 0.5°C Impact After Rising To 700 ppm Is So Negligible It’s ‘Effectively Unmeasurable’

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

A new study (Stallinga, 2020) assesses the climate sensitivity to rising CO2 concentrations is just 0.0014°C per ppm. 

Dr. Peter Stallinga has published a comprehensive analysis of the Earth’s greenhouse effect. He finds an inconsequential role for CO2.

Doubling CO2 from 350 to 700 ppm yields a warming of less than 0.5°C (500 mK).

Feedbacks to warming are likely negative, as adding CO2 may only serve to speed up natural return-to-equilibrium processes.

As for absorption-reemission perturbation from CO2, “there is nothing CO2 would add to the current heat balance in the atmosphere.”

Image Source: Stallinga, 2020

A portion of Dr. Stallinga’s paper worth highlighting – which he mentions only in passing – refers to the early history of the Earth’s greenhouse effect paradigm.

K. Ångström receives little attention as a pioneer of the conceptualization that warming and cooling resul from radiative imbalances within a planetary greenhouse effect.

About 120 years ago, Ångström (1900) contradicted the oft-cited Arrhenius (1896) – the atmospheric physicist referred to by proponents of anthropogenic global warming.

Ångström suggested Earth’s greenhouse effect is already saturated in its current (1900) state, and therefore increasing CO2 will have “no effect whatsoever” on climate (Stallinga, 2020).

Ångström’s conclusions were largely ignored.

Image Source: Arrhenius, 1896 and Stallinga, 2020
Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Arctic Sea Ice Sees “Dramatic Recovery And Expansion”… Northern Europe January Cooling 30 Years!

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

By Kirye
and Pierre Gosselin

Northern Europe and the Arctic show signs of winter cooling over the past decades. Could the global warming theory be in for an upset?

Looking at January data over the northern Europe, we see no real warming trend for the month, according to data from the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA).

When plotting mean January temperatures for Norway for stations where data are available since 1988, we see that 7 of 11 stations show a cooling trend since 1988, despite rising CO2:

Data: JMA

January cooling in Finland

The story is the same in Finland, a country that stretches into the Arctic:

All stations with data going back to 1988 show a cooling trend in Finland for the month of January. Data: JMA

Ireland cooling more than warming

In Ireland, situated in the North Atlantic, we also see signs of cooling mid winters. warming has been AWOL for some time now:

 

In Ireland 4 of 6 stations with data going back to 1988 show a cooling trend for the month of January. Data: JMA

Arctic sea ice rebound

Next we move to the Arctic. This year’s winter is seeing an impressive rebound in sea ice, tweets meteorologist Chris Martz, reaching the 3rd highest level in 15 years:

“Dramatic recovery” for Arctic sea ice

Obviously the situation in the Arctic is nowhere as dire as alarmists like to deceive others into thinking. According to meteorologist Justin Berk here, “Arctic Sea Ice has made a dramatic recovery and expansion this winter.”

Image: National Snow and Ice Data Center

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Germany’s Green New Deal Begins To Deliver: Industry Sees “Horrible Numbers”, A “Disaster”!

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Germany’s onslaught on its famed automotive and production industries appears to be taking an economic toll as the country pushes ahead to go green by phasing out internal combustion engines and coal power plants.

Recently we reported how electricity prices are again slated to increase this year, and thus will continue to make German power among the most expensive worldwide.

A wave of green activism has led to tighter regulations against the internal combustion engines and to a planned phase-out of coal-fired power plants.

Teetering on recession

Just recently German online business daily Handelsblatt reported here that there are “new concerns about an economic slump in Germany” as “surprisingly weak figures are fueling new worries about a downturn”.

“Horrible numbers”…a “disaster”

“Experts spoke of ‘horrible numbers’, a ‘disaster’. Industry, construction, and energy providers produced a full 3.5 percent less in December than in the previous month,” the Handelsblatt reports.

December production plummets 6.8%

The economic bloodbath was even worse in the production sector which “fell even more sharply, with output falling by 6.8 percent – the sharpest drop since the end of 2009,” writes the Handelsblatt. “Concerns are growing again that the German economy may be in more difficult waters than expected.”

For Germany, “2019 was not only the worst year for industrial orders since 2008, it was also the first time since 2002 that German order books shrank for two years in a row,” reports Yahoo here.

Massive automotive layoffs

The German auto sector has been hard hit. For example, car maker Opel recently announced 2,100 job cuts in Germany. Late last year Daimler, owner of Mercedes Benz, announced plans “to ax at least 10,000 jobs,” Volkswagen’s Audi said “it would slash up to 9,500 jobs or one in ten staff by 2025 and car suppliers Continental and Osram announced staff and cost cuts.”

The Financial Times reported today that Daimler suffered its “worst results in decade” and that its earnings “plunged 60% in 2019 amid ‘Dieselgate’ woes.” Daimler also “refused to deny reports” that an additional 5,000 jobs could be cut.

The Financial Times adds: “Daimler is being forced to spend heavily on electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids in order to avoid fines from Brussels for breaching new emissions regulations.”

Other reasons cited for the poor German economic results are the ongoing global trade disputes. Figures are expected to come under even greater pressure due to the spreading corona virus in China.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Scientists: Oxygen & Nitrogen ‘Radiatively Important’ Greenhouse Gases With IR Absorption Temps Similar To CO2

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Earth’s atmosphere is made of 78% nitrogen (N2) and 21% oxygen (O2). The “consensus” view is N2 and O2 are not greenhouse gases (GHGs) and don’t absorb infrared radiation (IR). But scientists have been saying N2 absorbs and radiates IR since 1944 and more recent (2012, 2016) studies have found N2 and O2 are “radiatively important” greenhouse gases with IR temperature absorption capacities similar to CO2.

It’s been known for 75 years that nitrogen – the Earth’s most prevalent atmospheric gas – absorbs and “strongly” radiates infrared energy (Stebbins et al., 1944)

Image Source: Stebbins et al., 1944

Methane (CH4) is thought to be an 84 times more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

Image Source: Environmental Defense Fund

Nitrogen, oxygen are “natural greenhouse gases”

Scientists (Höpfner et al., 2012) publishing in Geophysical Research Letters dispute the “common perception” that nitrogen and oxygen – accounting for 78% and 21% of the Earth’s atmospheric gases – do not contribute signficantly to the Earth’s greenhouse effect.

They assert N2 and O2 are “radiatively important” “natural greenhouse gases” primarily because their concentration is “about 2000 (550) times higher than that of CO2 and about 4.4 × 105 (1.2 × 105) times more abundant than CH4.”

Nitrogen, oxygen combined are more potent GHGs than methane

The atmospheric abundance of N2 and O2 compensates for their relatively weaker IR function (when directly compared to CH4).

For example, “the natural greenhouse effect of N2 and O2 would be larger than that of CH4 by a factor of 1.3” when considering their combined isolated GHE influence.

Further, the reduction in the atmosphere’s infrared transmission amounts to 25.7% for N2, 14.2% for O2, and only 6.9% for CH4.

Nitrogen’s greenhouse gas influence also rivals CO2’s

Höpfner and colleagues also suggest N2 reduces outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) by 4.6 W/m² compared to CO2’s 5.1 W/m² when assesing their solo absorption capacity. This would appear to be a rather minor difference.

If the number of N2 molecules in the atmosphere were hypothetically doubled, it would produce a 12 W/m² longwave greenhouse effect forcing.

Doubling CO2 from 280 ppm to 560 ppm only yields a 3.7 W/m² radiative forcing.

The authors reject the “view that the radiative forcing of N2 increase operates only indirectly by broadening the absorption lines of other gases.” Instead, N2 has a “direct impact” (as well as an indirect impact) within greenhouse effect forcing.

Image Source: Höpfner et al., 2012

Experiment: nitrogen, oxygen absorb IR to about the same limiting temperature as CO2

A real-world experiment (Allmendinger, 2016) assessing the efficacy of CO2’s IR-absorption temperature capacity relative to air (N2, O2) and Argon (Ar) further establishes CO2 is not the “special” GHG it is commonly thought to be.

Twin styrofoam Saran-wrap-sealed tubes exposed to sunlight were used, one with pure (1,000,000 ppm) CO2 and the other with air (N2, O2) and/or Ar.

The results were admittedly “surprising” given expectations CO2 would operate as a radiatively distinct GHG.

The tube absorbing IR with N2 and O2 (air) and Ar warmed to a temperature limit quite similar to (55°C to 58°C) the temperature limit in the 100% CO2 tube (58°C).

There was no remarkable or  “special” heat absorption capacity for CO2 relative to air observed. And Argon – not considered a greenhouse gas – absorbed IR to the same temperature limit as CO2. With a concentration of 9300 ppm, Ar is the third-most abundant gas in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Because there is so little to distinguish CO2 from the most abundant gas molecules in Earth’s atmosphere, Dr. Allmendinger assesses “a significant efect of carbon-dioxide on the direct sunlight absorption can already be exluded.”

Further, “the greenhouse theory has to be questioned.”

Image Source: Allmendinger, 2016
Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Germans On Course To Permanently Ruining Remaining Forests – To Protect The Climate

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Of good trees and bad trees: an unimaginable story

By Die kalte Sonne
(Text translated by P Gosselin)

We have already reported about the very different views on trees in this blog. Perhaps this phenomenon has something to do with the fact that the words environmental protection and nature conservation are slowly but surely disappearing from our language and being displaced by climate protection. Everything has to subordinate itself to this, also environmental and nature protection. Sometimes this has has had disastrous consequences.

The value of trees is in the eye of the observer or his agenda

Trees are extremely valuable carbon stores. They are true CO2 sinks. It is estimated that a large tree removes and stores about 12.5 kg of CO2 per year from the atmosphere. Actually, one would have to think, we should not only reforest massively, as Professor Werner Sinn suggested in his lecture “How we save the climate and how not“, but also preserve existing tree populations.

Of course, trees are protected, sometimes with drastic means such as in the Hambach Forest. There, however, not for CO2 storage reasons but because the activists want to prevent lignite mining. Such actions are spectacular and get through the media. So this is about good trees.

Much less attention is paid to protests by residents of Grünheide in Brandenburg, who are mobilizing against the deforestation of an area the size of 420 football pitches, which are to make way for Tesla’s new megafactory. Here too, nature is losing carbon stores, and no activist is really itching because they are bad trees. Or were there demos of Fridays For Future (FFF) or Extinction Rebellion in Grünheide?

Weird swaps in Scotland

Just as little interest in Scotland. There it has now been discovered that almost 14 million trees have had to be felled since 2000 to build wind turbines (WTGs). According to the above calculation, Scotland has thus “given up” 175,000 tonnes of CO2 reduction per year in order to save the climate. Even planting 100,000 trees, as in Scotland, is of little use, as they only replace the lost capacity to a very limited extent. Trees simply need time until they are stately and can absorb the above-mentioned amount of CO2 annually.

Foundations and access

The areas for the foundations are still the least of the evils, although in Schleswig Holstein alone, a sealed area of 3 million square meters was assumed in 2018. Approximately 1300 cubic meters of concrete and 180 tons of steel disappear in such foundations.

Image: By Mussklprozz (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0 )],via Wikimedia Commons

It is not even clear how such colossuses are to be removed from the forest later on, or how they can be removed at all. Anyone who has ever spent a holiday in France on the Atlantic Ocean knows that concrete remains, i.e. bunkers, of the 3rd Reich bunkers stubbornly refuse to decay on the coasts. Ina 1000 years probably only the bunkers of the Nazis or the foundations of wind turbines will remain.

Access to wind turbines is much more serious than the foundations, which only cover a relatively small area. Wind turbines are getting ever taller and the rotors ever bigger. The radius that the special transport vehicles now is so large that a massive quantities of trees have to make way for access roads. And since the wind turbines only have a limited lifetime, the access roads have to remain, because at some point they will have to be dismantled or maintained. The forest at this point is lost and chopped up.

German conservative CDU now poised to play along

The CDU Lower Saxony is now poised to go along with a proposal that more wind turbines in forests should be approved. Whether an impact assessment has been made here? Especially in forests, the population of birds of prey is high and one can only guess what will happen if huge rotors rotate over birds or their breeding grounds and habitat. These rotors are, as studies show, a considerable hazard for birds of prey.

Indeed the wind power lobby is trying to invalidate such studies, for example by pointing out the large number of songbirds and garden birds that are killed annually by windows, cars or cats. But if you use your common sense, here you see whataboutism in its purest form. Birds of prey very rarely die from windows, cars or cats and songbirds and garden birds rarely die from wind turbines. At the latest, when the census of seabirds in the Irish Sea – an area with a lot of wind turbines – shows that the population is declining massively, the windscreen/cat/car argument falls apart.

The same outcome, but completely different reactions

But it gets really crazy when we look at the situation in places like the Reinhardts Forest in the state of Hesse. This forest is very valuable, because it still has a virgin forest character in parts. Nevertheless, wind turbines are to be built there with all the consequences described above. Residents’ protests are being dismissed as an obstacle to technology and energy production transformation.

Yet, at the same time, the people go into collective outrage when the Amazon becomes smaller through slash-and-burn clearing. In both cases forests, biotopes and very same carbon reservoirs are lost, but with completely contrary reactions. Good and bad trees.

Used to be tranquility above the tree tops

But forests are much more. Many people pursue various activities there. A climate activist from Berlin Kreuzberg or Hamburg Ottensen may find this hard to imagine, but there are actually people who visit the forests enjoy tranquility or the sounds of nature. If the plans of wind power advocates are anything to go by, then in many forests this will soon be lost forever.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

NTZ “Being Very Unfair”, Says Heartland Institute. “‘Pay To Play’ Not What Heartland Does”

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

I feel obligated to upgrade a reader comment by Jim Lakely, Communications Director, The Heartland Institute, to a post. He says I was “being very unfair” yesterday.

My main gripe is that these two very dishonest Correctiv “journalists” should have never been allowed to get as far as they did. Now we independent skeptics here in Germany have to deal with being smeared nationally again.

In Germany, the skeptics are outnumbered by like 20 to 1; it’s not a 50-50 deal like in USA. German MSM journalists like those at ZDF are very nasty, unfair and dishonest to legitimate climate science critics.

Jim Lakely, Director of Communications, The Heartland Institute

I have other comments, but will hold them for another time.

I’d love to see a point-by-point rebuttal from Heartland to the nonsense made by ZDF Frontal 21 and Correctiv so that we can defend ourselves here.
============================================================

Pierre,
You are being VERY unfair to James Taylor and Heartland, and Naomi Seibt — who is not “distraught,” but angry (as is Heartland) at how this has been able “to weave a highly distorted, one-sided, yet believable hit piece.” You had it right on “distorted,” and not so right with the rest.

First: James is surely flattered by your battlefield promotion, but he is not the president of The Heartland Institute. He is the Director of Heartland’s Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy.

Second: They “worked” James spottily over several days in two cities over two weeks before he sat down for a brief talk. That’s a lot of squeeze for no juice. Their big “get” was a big nothing. They tried to bait James into agreeing for a “pay to play” arrangement, and the reporters say … “he didn’t say no.” Really? After two weeks of work, they finally get around to asking their “money question” and that’s it?

There’s a reason James didn’t say “yes”: Because “pay to play” is not what Heartland does, unlike many think tanks on the left. You’re seriously faulting James for steering a (fake) potential donor away from that “gotcha” dishonorable idea into discussing honorable like-minded work with a donor? By that standard, no one in the climate realist movement would ever be able to raise any funds to support our work.

Ask yourself: If these “journalists” had a genuine “smoking gun,” wouldn’t they have presented that instead of that lame “gotcha”?

Third: To compare this lame, days-long caper to the work of Project Veritas is a massive insult to the latter’s fantastic work.

I hope, Pierre, that you will consider giving Heartland some space on your site to more fully rebut for your readers your unfair and uncharitable take on this. Considering all Heartland has done to promote climate realism over many years, I hope you don’t consider that an unreasonable request.

Jim Lakely
Director of Communications
The Heartland Institute”

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

German “Leftist” Journalists Go Undercover – Infiltrate, Set Up Heartland Institute’s James Taylor

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

[Correction: James Taylor is Director of Heartland’s Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy, and not the President of The Heartland Institute]

Today I’m writing about a public relations disaster here in Germany by the Heartland Institute where its president, James Taylor, allowed himself to be fully duped by leftist journalists posing as industry lobbyists offering half a million dollars to his Chicago-based think tank.

Image: Correctiv

Just days ago, flagship ZDF German public television broadcast a segment here — created by “investigative” site Correctiv here — at its popular weekly Frontal 21 magazine. Frontal 21 describes how the two “investigative” journalists from the leftist Correctiv infiltrated Heartland Institute and exposed its “lobbying and climate disinformation campaign”.

The ZDF’s Frontal 21 magazine shows how Correctiv set up a phony PR agency, fake website and printed phony business cards so that two of its reporters could pose as lobbyists representing the German automotive and coal industry. Their Project Veritas-like mission: to infiltrate Heartland and uncover “what goes on in the climate denier scene, how it works, which strategies it’s pursuing in Europe and how influential it is.”

“That’s how we want to find out whether and how to question climate change in exchange for money and to buy influence,” reported Frontal 21.

Unfortunately, James Taylor fell for the entire ploy. The ZDF’s Frontal 21 (and Corectiv) took the material and later pieced together a major hit piece seen nationally on February 4th. A blow to the skeptic scene in Germany.

First meeting in Munich

The two undercover German journalists started by making their way from their base in Berlin to the Munich Climate Conference last November, where they had an easy time fooling James Taylor.

Equipped with hidden cameras, they sat down with Taylor for dinner and asked how he went about convincing people of his mission. ZDF’s Frontal 21 quotes Taylor: “The people cannot be motivated by logical things; you have to argue emotionally.”

$500,000 offer in Madrid

According to Frontal 21, after dinner Taylor then personally invited the two “German lobbyists” to Madrid for a later conference, where they met again with Taylor in the Marriott Hotel lobby.

ZDF Frontal 21 reported: “Taylor boasted about his good contacts to the Trump administration. ‘The Trump administration often asked for advice and about what we could do. We worked closely together.'” Taylor even told the undercover journalists that Heartland’s budget was $6 million.”

When asked how a $500,000 donation could be made, Frontal 21 says Taylor told them to donate it directly to Heartland. “And if you want to remain anonymous, then give it to an organization. One of them is Donors Trust.”

“To keep it hidden?” one undercover Correctiv journalist asked.”

“Yeah right, exactly,” replied Taylor, alleges Frontal 21.

Untypical for interviews, Taylor’s voice is completely filtered out by Correctiv editors, so it’s impossible to ascertain whether Frontal 21 translated Taylor’s words accurately.

In the Marriott lobby meeting, Taylor discloses Heartland’s future plans for Germany, where he also brings up young German influencer Naomi Seibt – the “anti-Greta”.

Duped by the mean and nasty media

Weeks later, Taylor sends the two undercover journalists his proposal dubbed “Funding Proposal: Germany Environmental Issues”, outlining Heartland’s strategy for Germany and that Heartland was interested in the funding in order to inform the public about the minimal effects of diesel exhaust and to produce videos on the negative impacts of excessive environmental regulation.

The set-up succeeded, and Correctiv got all the footage they needed, and much more, to allow German ZDF public television to weave a highly distorted, one-sided, yet believable hit piece. All in all, a major PR blow for climate skeptics in Germany.

A little research and precaution on Heartland’s part could have avoided being duped to the extent they were. They were sloppy. And we also have to feel bad that a young, promising German influencer got caught up in it and was so inaccurately portrayed on national television.

In her latest video, a visibly distraught Naomi tells of her experience of being observed by impostors under the table by hidden cameras, yet bravely pledges to keep up the fight for what she believes to be the truth. Now she understands just how mean and nasty the German media really are.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close