Our Greening Planet… German Science Magazine: Satellite Imagery Proves “World’s Vegetation Expanding Since Decades”

An “unusual greening of the planet,” reports German science magazine Wissenschaft. “A paradox.”
Hat-tip: Die kalte Sonne


Has been greening for 3 decades

While it is widely reported how the world’s rainforests are being chopped down, Wissenschaft reports, “Vegetation on earth has been expanding for decades, satellite data show.”

Yes, the planet is in fact greening, and this is embarrassing climate alarmists, who over the years managed to mislead much of the media and public into believing the planet has been “browning” and thirsting to death.

Confirmed by IPCC

“The opposite is the case: according to a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, satellite observations show a greening of vegetation over the past three decades in parts of Asia, Europe, South America, Central North America and Southeast Australia,” reports Wissenschaft magazine. “Although there are regions that would become browner, the bottom line is that there is a larger area on our planet that is greened than browned.”

Thanks to CO2 fertilization

For the welcome trend, scientists attribute the surprising development on “a mixture of factors”, foremost the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration, which plants thrive on and humans have been mislead into believing is a “pollutant”.

“It is often forgotten that CO2 is not only a ‘problem’, but also a plant nutrient” that forms a crucial part of the “basis of the food chain,” reported Wissenschaft. In short: More atmospheric CO2 means more plant growth, and thus more food for more life.”

That has become an inconvenient fact for alarmists and climate activists, who insist life on the planet is dying.

Rainforests still threatened

Other suspected contributing factors include: nitrogen deposition, land-use changes and reforestation projects. But Wissenschaft warns that man-made greenery through agriculture and reforestation falls far short in terms of biotope quality, and so destruction of virgin rainforests remains a huge problem that requires real action.

Wissenschaft summarizes: “The bottom line, most experts say, is that from an ecological point of view the phenomenon of greening cannot replace the losses.”

CO2 lending a huge hand of support

The good thing: More CO2 in the atmosphere will certainly make the job of protecting vegetation and life far easier.

67 responses to “Our Greening Planet… German Science Magazine: Satellite Imagery Proves “World’s Vegetation Expanding Since Decades””

  1. Kenan Meyer

    “The good thing: More CO2 in the atmosphere will certainly make the job of protecting vegetation and life far easier.”

    NO! Sorry, but the translator obviously didn’t read the article carefully. One of the conclusions is, that at some point the growing CO2 part in the air will kill the plants. It is absolutely consistent with the narrative of climate alarmism.

    1. jim baldwin

      Were you a little to high in high school chemistry and biology? Do they not teach them any more? The analogy of ” You can’t argue with stupid” really applies.

      1. Kenan Meyer

        Don’t shoot the messenger. I have read the article in german and that’s what its author wrote and what has been left out in the translation.

        1. Yonason

          “Don’t shoot the messenger.” – Kenan Meyer

          Killjoy! 🙂

          Seriously, it doesn’t matter what paranoid negative fantasies the author has. The fact that he acknowledges that CO2 is causing the world to become greener is the good news. Claiming that in the future it will be harmful is based on not a shred of real data. He’s making it up.

          So, why use him? He’s what you call a “hostile witness.” If a skeptic says the world is greening, many warmists say it isn’t, so it’s important to have him relating that fact. The only reason to highlight his fears would be to show he’s a warmist. But since his assertions about the future are fact-free, dwelling on them is rather pointless.

          Anyway, thanks for pointing out what else he says, even though anyone here could read if for themselves (Google Translate does a pretty good job to help one who’s German is rusty.)

        2. Philo

          You have to get CO2 over something like 10,000ppm for it to repress respiration in plants and animals. Fossil evidence, including 10ft. thick coal beds, show that during that time CO2 was at about 4000ppm and both plants and animals flourished.

          So, the author’s bow to global warming was merely a literary flourish.

          1. Yonason

            “So, the author’s bow to global warming was merely a literary flourish.”

            Most likely. Until scientists can get their papers published without it, we can expect that to continue.

      2. Highwood

        Yup. Pretty much

    2. Kenneth Richard

      at some point the growing CO2 part in the air will kill the plants

      According to scientists, doubling CO2 will lead to further greening of the Earth.


      CO2 kills plants?

      1. Yonason

        FACT vs FICTION

        The FACT is, as they have reported, that CO2 is greening the planet.

        The FANTASY is, as they wildly speculate, that CO2 will eventually harm the planet.

        It seems that Kenan Meyer drinks the fiction KoolAid, having no better ability than Wissenshaft(dot)de to distinguish it from fact.

        Paranoid delusions are, as all skeptics here know, not a substitute for knowledge of any kind.

      2. David Appell

        How much more water will this greening take up?
        How much of this new greening are weeds?
        How many insects will this new greening create?
        Greening’s albedo is a positive feedback on global warming.

        1. Yonason

          How many silly posts must a troll write down, before you can call him a troll?

    3. Henning Nielsen

      Hi Kenan, does the report say at which level co2 will “kill plants”? I wonder if we now will see a campaign against those plant-loving persons who sing to their plants? After all, it is 40.000 ppm coming out of their lungs.

      Greenhouses often have 1000-1200 ppm to make the plants grow better. Still quite some time before even Chinese coal-plants (sic) can produce that level of atmospheric co2, isn’t it?

    4. richard


      The Cambrian period saw the biggest increase in live, ever , on the planet for tens of millions of years, the CO2 levels were 15x today’s level.

      They are experimenting growing vegetables on Submarines, where they grow really well.
      “We try to keep CO2 levels in our U.S. Navy submarines no higher than 8,000 parts per million, about 20 time current atmospheric levels”

      1. richard

        in life- not live!

      2. Terry J

        CO2 toxicity in humans
        Carbon dioxide at low concentration has little, if any, toxicological effects. At higher concentrations (>5%), it causes the development of hypercapnia and respiratory acidosis. Severe acidosis increases the effects of parasympathetic nervous activity, possibly by interfering the hydrolysis of acetylcholine by acetylcholinesterase, resulting in a depression of the respiration and the circulation [6]. Concentrations of more than 10% carbon dioxide may cause convulsions, coma, and death [1, 15]. CO2 levels of more than 30% act rapidly leading to loss of consciousness in seconds. This would explain why victims of accidental intoxications often do not act to resolve the situation (open a door, etc.) [7, 10, 16].

        1. Yonason

          5% is 125 times what it is today. Atmospheric CO2 has never been that high. Not ever going to get that high.

  2. Ilmastohätätilahuoli | Roskasaitti

    […] vihertymisen ei pitäisikään olla uutinen, niin linkitän NTZ-sivulta aiheeseen liittyvän uutisen ihan siksikin (Linkki), ettei menisi liian synkäksi. Tämä globaali vihertyminenkin on saatu aika […]

  3. Curious George

    We provide plants with more CO2. They grow. A paradox.

    1. Opus

      And plants provide us with more oxygen. At least if what I lirnd back in high school science class was correct. What do they teach today?

      1. Yonason

        “What do they teach today?”

        I shudder to think!

    2. Yonason

      “We provide plants with more CO2. They grow.” – curious george

      Sounds like a quid pro quo to me. “You don’t get the CO2 if you don’t grow. We have a wood chipper, and we know how to use it.” And threats?! There needs to be an investigation. Impeach the realists!

  4. CO2isLife

    While the Globe is Greening, Governments are trying to kill the Agricultural Industry.

    The Protests aren’t limited to Ireland. They are also in France. The key is “Newsflash: By Allowing the Government To Control the Food, Energy and Healthcare Sector, the Government Owns the Individual. There Is A Reason The Progressives Target These Critical Industries, They Want To Own The Individual.”

    French Farmers Descend On Paris In Fresh Revolt Against Globalist Regulations; I’m Beginning to Notice a Pattern

    Farmers bring central Dublin to a halt with tractor protest

  5. Shoki Kaneda

    It’s slightly warmer, wettter and we have more of the precious, life-giving, beneficial trace gas, CO2. Yet, they call increased greening a “paradox”?

  6. raygun

    It was a statement by The Marxist and some of their followers, Cloward and Piven and Saul Alinsky that it is necessary to control EVERYTHING in order to install socialism/communism. Primarily, socialist healthcare.

  7. MGJ

    I’ve been waiting for it. It had to happen. Yes, the ‘P’ word has arrived. For those familiar with medical and dietary publications, the word ‘paradox’ is an instant red flag. Sometimes they substitute ‘counter-intuitive’ for it.

    In plain language it translates as:

    “we’ve just said something heretical but objectively true, we’re REALLY sorry, PLEASE don’t take away our funding”!

    1. A. Emgard

      A very perspicacious comment on “paradox” in this context, exposing the dread of….”The danger of an outbreak of sanity.”
      (quoting prof.Eric Weinstein, The Portal)

  8. Petit_Barde

    “An “unusual greening of the planet,” reports German science magazine Wissenschaft. “A paradox.””

    What is unusual ? Where is the paradox ?
    Have they ever visited an actual greenhouse where the CO2 concentration is maintained at 1000ppm or even more ?

    T increase -> CO2 and WV concentration increase -> a greening planet.

    Nothing new, nothing unusual, no paradox.

    1. David Appell

      Greenhouses can control the temperature their plants are grown under, and the amount of water they receive.

      Not so out in nature, or even most agricultural fields.

  9. Brian

    Nov 28, 2019 This becomes advocacy and propaganda rather than science

    European Parliament, Strasbourg, 28 November 2019


  10. Brian

    Apr 26, 2016 Rising CO2 Levels Greening Earth

    From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.


  11. John F. Hultquist

    It is often forgotten that CO2 is not only a ‘problem’, but also a plant nutrient

    The term “nutrient” is somewhat misleading.
    Plants use CO2 as their essential food.
    Iron, selenium, . . ., and zinc, are nutrients very minor in scale to CO2.

    And if there is “a problem” regarding CO2 it will be going down toward 180 ppm and on to 150 ppm. Bad news, that!

  12. drumphish

    If the sun became one giant, super-sized sunspot, would it then be a black hole? Is a sunspot a micro black hole?

    The leaves have fallen from the deciduous trees, shrubs, they don’t need any CO2 at this time, maybe some, but not much. The grasses probably have some CO2 intake during winter months in continental climates that have cold winters. No cabbage growing, no tomatoes, no melons, nothing. Alfalfa roots go sixteen feet deep, alfalfa will always be able to obtain water, alfalfa needs warm weather to grow, doesn’t grow during the winter months. The foliage dies back, plant becomes dormant all winter until spring.

    Bluegrass is a tall grass, will grow five feet tall, lodge, lots of detritus if you let the Poa pratensis grow. The sub-species, canadensis, is what probably grows here, too close to Canada and too far from Kentucky.

    Temperature is the number one limiting factor in plant growth, temperature does help the plant physiological mechanisms function.

    Cold temperatures limit growth severely for autotrophs.

    The sun is shining darn near all day long in Antarctica today, it can shine as much as it wants, if the continent doesn’t reach warm enough temperatures to allow for the existence of flora, you’re out of luck, sorry, too bad. It ain’t gonna work, no way, no how. Not even. No greening on Antarctica, wishing and hoping ain’t going to make it so.

    Cucumber seeds need a soil temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit to germinate. Wheat is 39 degrees. If the ground doesn’t warm enough to germinate the seed, it will not sprout, not develop whatsoever.

    Experience teaches you what will happen. I planted cucumber seed in a low spot that became one hundred percent saturated, the daytime temps were cool, flooding was taking place in the area. The cucumber seed would not germinate, had to plow higher dry ground, planted the cucumber seed, had a bumper crop of cucumbers.

    Problem solving is what you have to do, can’t complete much of anything if you can’t solve a problem.

    If the temperatures are not at a point to allow for active optimized plant growth, seed germination, you then will have problems with cultivars that won’t grow like they should and yet every doggone native plant species still grows like wildfire. Grasses can grow abundantly at lower temperatures, invade, dominate, and choke out most anything planted.

    Mallow will grow anytime of year, stems 4-6 feet long is what you see. The leaves never brown, stay green all seasons. A real problem, mallow, the seed in the soil remains viable for up to six years, you’ll have tough time controlling mallow, never fully eliminate it. Nightshade species invade and never leave, you cannot rid your growing area of the noxious weed. Red-rooted pigweed will be the bane of your existence. Burning is about the most useful method of control.

    Too much water is worse than drought, nothing grows. Have to see it happen to believe it. The plants do not grow, it spells disaster, you’re dumbfounded at what happens. You can still trudge through the dreaded drudgery and still make sense of it all, but it is not easy to do at times. A deluge of rain one June day lasted 25 minutes and totaled 3.28 inches.

    The soil is driven flat.

    If you want even one potato there has to be warm enough temperatures during the growing season to have the results you want, a harvest.

    Colder summertime temps will definitely reduce yields, this year, that is what happened.

    Got lucky with the potato crop, the right amount of rain at the right time, the yield was worth the effort, still have to harvest them, can’t leave them in the ground, they’ll freeze, rot, be useless.

    Can’t use Roundup, it’ll kill every plant in the garden. Not a small garden, it is a commercial-sized spread, you need a tractor and implements.

    The work never ends. Mother Nature is the teacher in the final analysis.

    I’ll take sunshine and warm weather, cold with rain and snow gets here soon enough.

    Under all circumstances in all cases, the sun becomes the workhorse for us all.

    Your from the ground up ground floor report.

    1. Yonason

      “Nightshade species invade and never leave”

      Except tomatoes. Why can’t my favorite tomatoes be “weeds?”

      And with the other weeds, it’s different in Cent., FL, where pretty much all that will grow are weeds, like Bidens (same worthless junk as the politician). Once you get it in your yard, you can never get rid of it. You’re lucky if you can control it. Tons of other weeds you don’t have up North, all of them nasty, but that one seems the worst.

      Sorry, but your post triggered my ‘rant about weeds’ button.

  13. Damian Ousley

    CO2 will insure that many flowering species will survive even through the next ice age. Trees are optimal at 550 to 600 ppm CO2. What is not spoken is that rainforests were only 10 percent of their current range during the last ice age 12000 years ago. If the levels of CO2 were to fall below 170 ppm as in the last ice age then many trees and flowering species would go extinct.

  14. Alex

    The Sahel has been greening for decades, and the reason for that is partly the increase in atmospheric CO2 levels. Satellite imagery has proven this as a fact, but nobody is saying it. It would otherwise depress Greta more than she actually is.

  15. PJEH

    To: Pierre Gosselin
    “Greening of the Planet”

    The Gaia Hypothesis postulates that the world is a self-regulating system that maintains the climate conditions necessary for life via the Carbon Cycle. The increased greening with rising CO2, if correct, could be strong evidence in support of Lovelock’s 1979 speculations about the ‘role of biota in maintaining a climatic homeostasis’.

  16. Henryk

    About 4 bln years ago the original atmosphere of planet Earth was composed of: methane, hydrogen sulfide and CO2 in concentration 200 times higher than today. There was no O2 in it and Earth looked red from space due to high concentration of methane. Around 2 bln years ago first anaerobic bacteria and algae started photosynthesis and production of O2. This process lasted for 2 bln years and O2 level reached 12% (750 mln years ago). Earth changed color from red to blue due to oxidization of methane. Next there was “Cambrian explosion” (540-460 mln years ago) with sudden occurrence of hundreds new types of plants and marine animals. At that time level of CO2 concentration declined to 4500 ppm. (10-12 x present level). For next 200 mln years CO2 level was between 4000 to 6500 ppm.after that 350-100 mln years ago CO2 was between 1800-2000 ppm which is believed to be “optimal” level for plant growth and than rose again to 4000 ppm. After last glacial period 10 000 years ago level of CO2 dropped to lowest in the history of the planet Earth-270 ppm. Current level of 380-400 ppm is still well below optimal for plant growth. CO2 is green live giving gas without which there would be no live on planet Earth. It as simple as that.

  17. Rick Kincer

    Its my understanding that plants need at least 150 ppm. to stay alive. 40 years ago the CO2 levels were falling below the plants minimum food requirement. leaving all life on the edge of dying.

    1. Yonason


      see here.

      See also here…

      Greenie lunatics and their plans for the future are the real threat to our future.

  18. Galen Barnes

    The climate wackos responsible for Greta’s indoctrination and brainwashing should be put in prison for life for child abuse.

  19. Robert Folkerts

    Hi Henryk,
    How can you know what you say about the makeup of the earth in the past is correct.
    As far as I am aware there were no humans there to observe what may have happened.
    Is it modelling / guesswork, perhaps like climate modelling?

    1. Terry Shipman

      Ask any competent geologist who hasn’t been corrupted by the global warming scam. Geologists are the planet’s historians, including the climate history of eons past. They have pretty good proxy data telling us what CO2 levels were before humans walked the planet.

      1. Robert Folkerts

        Terry Shipman,
        “pretty good proxy data” based on assumptions which lead to speculation. The past can not be tested with the “scientific method”, by definition.

        1. Terry Shipman

          Wrong. Since no one lived back then we must depend on proxy data. I stand by by phrase “pretty good” since it is the best geologists can do. We can’t use the legal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” because there is always going to be a measure of uncertainty. So we do the best we can-without political interference. So the lessor legal standard of “the preponderance of the evidence” is used. I’d say that’s a pretty good standard to live by. The preponderance of the evidence suggests a much higher level of CO2 in geologic ages past. In my study of history I’ve found one person’s account is an anecdote. A thousand similar accounts makes a history. That’s what reputable scientists do with numerous studies that mark the historicity of such events as the MWP and the Little Ice Age. By that standard Michael Mann and his hockey stick fails miserably.

          1. Robert Folkerts

            Terry Shipman,

            Wrong huh. You cannot avoid that every proxy studied is done so based on assumptions. These assumptions may turn out to be correct, or they may turn out to be wrong. There is no way to prove them as the past events can not be repeated.
            A study of rocks formed by the Mt ST Helens eruption blows so many previously held assumptions about rocks and their history, right out of the water.
            That event, right there, is sufficient for me to remain sceptical about the claimed knowledge of the past, rather than hold to a dogmatic paradigm.

  20. West Houston

    “…at some point the growing CO2 part in the air will kill the plants. It is absolutely consistent with the narrative of climate alarmism.”
    In fact, commercial greenhouses use concentrations of CO2 that are many times the atmospheric level to accelerate growth and reduce water usage. That is not consistent with “kill the plants”.

    1. David Appell

      So where are the plants on Venus, where the atmosphere is 96% CO2?

      1. Yonason

        Plants on Venus haven’t yet evolved to metabolize Sulfuric Acid.

    2. Yonason

      Poor David. He’s just a comic strip character come-to-life to amuse and annoy us.

  21. Henryk


    Prehistoric chemical composition may be reconstructed using concentration of isotopes and chemicals in rock deposits. It is based on hard data not on worthless models.
    Robert please, go to above link and read it attentively.
    If something will still remain vague ask Greta for the explanation.

  22. Dennis G Sandberg

    Despite the bad news that, “Carbon intensity of power sector down in 2019″ the USA economy is doing well. Our problem isn’t that we are emitting too much CO2, our problem is that we are not emitting enough. Back in 1973 – 2013, because of our “energy crisis”, industry strategies and government regulations created a perfect storm for destroying our energy intensive industries. Now that the USA has resumed it’s leadership in energy production it’s time to rebuilt these industries and put our coal back to work. bad mouthing China and India for their emissions for producing the goods we in the West require, but refuse to produce, is beyond stupid. We should admire their efforts.

  23. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #388 | Watts Up With That?
  24. Weekly Local weather and Power Information Roundup #388 – All My Daily News
  25. Weekly Local weather and Power Information Roundup #388 – Daily News
  26. Yonason

    More CO2 is virtually wholly beneficial, says…

    Freeman Dyson

    Will Happer


  27. Pope Francis News Round Up – Marxism Economies Push – Vatican II Masonry- Tribalism and One World Church Movements – The Marks Of This Pontificate | Traditional Catholics Emerge
  28. Satelitní snímky dokazují, že s tím, jak přibývá v ovzduší CO2, je naše planeta čím dál zelenější - Reformy.cz
  29. David

    How much more water will this greening require?

    Will this impact human needs, who already use ~50% of all freshwater (which isn’t distributed equally)?

    1. Yonason

      “How much more water will this greening require?” – David the willfully obtuse

      You can’t be serious! Plants lose water from their stomata. The more the stomata are open, the more water they lose. When starved for CO2, AS THEY ARE NOW, the stomata lose more water. With higher [CO2] plants can absorb the CO2 they need with stomata being less open, and will hence lose less water.

      I.e., plants will need LESS water, not more.

  30. David Appell

    Plants are less nutritious when grown under elevated CO2:

    “Total protein and nitrogen concentrations in plants generally decline under elevated CO2 atmospheres…. Recently, several meta-analyses have indicated that CO2 inhibition of nitrate assimilation is the explanation most consistent with observations. Here, we present the first direct field test of this explanation….. In leaf tissue, the ratio of nitrate to total nitrogen concentration and the stable isotope ratios of organic nitrogen and free nitrate showed that nitrate assimilation was slower under elevated than ambient CO2. These findings imply that food quality will suffer under the CO2 levels anticipated during this century unless more sophisticated approaches to nitrogen fertilization are employed.”
    — “Nitrate assimilation is inhibited by elevated CO2 in field-grown wheat,” Arnold J. Bloom et al, Nature Climate Change, April 6 2014.

    “Higher CO2 tends to inhibit the ability of plants to make protein… And this explains why food quality seems to have been declining and will continue to decline as CO2 rises — because of this inhibition of nitrate conversion into protein…. “It’s going to be fairly universal that we’ll be struggling with trying to sustain food quality and it’s not just protein… it’s also micronutrients such as zinc and iron that suffer as well as protein.”
    – University of California at Davis Professor Arnold J. Bloom, on Yale Climate Connections 10/7/14

    Abstract: “Dietary deficiencies of zinc and iron are a substantial global public health problem. An estimated two billion people suffer these deficiencies, causing a loss of 63 million life-years annually. Most of these people depend on C3 grains and legumes as their primary dietary source of zinc and iron. Here we report that C3 grains and legumes have lower concentrations of zinc and iron when grown under field conditions at the elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration predicted for the middle of this century. C3 crops other than legumes also have lower concentrations of protein, whereas C4 crops seem to be less affected. Differences between cultivars of a single crop suggest that breeding for decreased sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 concentration could partly address these new challenges to global health.”
    — “Increasing CO2 threatens human nutrition,” Samuel S. Myers et al, Nature 510, 139–142 (05 June 2014).

    1. Yonason

      Living at a time when [CO2] was 5X Today’s, how did they get THIS BIG? You don’t get that much protein by eating carbs.

      Also, any gardener knows that if you want lots of green foliar growth you MUST have nitrogen. (Blood Meal and Fish Emulsion are excellent sources.)

      ASSERTION – High CO2 means plants can’t use Nitrogen as well.
      FACT – Nitrogen is required for plants to green.
      FACT – World is greening.

      If you believe David’s references then you must believe that the greening that’s happening isn’t really happening.


      David needs to get out more.

      1. Yonason

        No, seriously David, get out of that dank basement and get some sun.

        Maybe sunlight and fresh air will help clear your muddled thinking, and they you can better discriminate between reality and B.S.

  31. Yonason

    “Fact Check: Rice Crop Yield Improves With Global Warming, Higher CO2 Levels – Opposite of Alarmist Predictions”

    Contrary to what the David Appells of the world want you to believe, based on junk science, a little warming and a good deal more CO2 will be better, rather than worse.

    Q – Who is against warming and increased CO2?
    A – Globalists and faux-Greenies, who think the world is too populated.

    Q2 – Why would they be concerned about lower plant productivity, given that they want to eliminate most of the people on the planet?
    A2 – They aren’t.

    It’s just one more lie to impose Global Socialism on what’s left of the Earth’s population, with themselves running the show.

  32. Yonason

    Will Happer speaks about what an utter crock the global warming religion is.

    H/T – John Ray’s Greenie Watch blog

  33. Nejenže od roku 2005 stoupají počty ledních medvědů, kteří podle alarmistů měli být na pokraji vyhynutí, ale navíc se díky nárůstu CO2 ozeleňuje planeta. To je skandál!

    […] No Tricks Zone Překlad: Reformy.cz 28.listopadu 2019 Titulní obrázek © Profesor R.Myneni, Boston […]

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