Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow. People who describe the unprecedented comfort and ease of modern life as a climate disaster, in my opinion have no idea what a real problem is.
Stephen King is a Democrat voting climate alarmist left wing liberal, but surely even he must be having some concerns about the quality of the green narrative. My prediction, sooner or later the great author will recognise the global warming scare for what it really is – poorly constructed, low quality horror fiction.
Like a bad slasher movie which dissipates its original promise with one lousy sequel too many.
Global warming set to break key 1.5C limit for first time
By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent
Our overheating world is likely to break a key temperature limit for the first time over the next few years, scientists predict.
Researchers say there’s now a 66% chance we will pass the 1.5C global warming threshold between now and 2027.
The chances are rising due to emissions from human activities and a likely El Niño weather pattern later this year.
If the world passes the limit, scientists stress the breach, while worrying, will likely be temporary.
…
Going over 1.5C every year for a decade or two would see far greater impacts of warming, such as longer heatwaves, more intense storms and wildfires.
But passing the level in one of the next few years would not mean that the Paris limit had been broken. Scientists say there is still time to restrict global warming by cutting emissions sharply.
What are they going to do, when the limit is breached, and nothing unusually bad happens?
The reality is, they set the limit too low for property dramatic effect. They needed an imminent target, so people didn’t get bored waiting, but now the limit is upon us, their predictions of the consequences have gone all vague and diffuse.
“longer heatwaves, more intense storms and wildfires” – this is the best they have to show, for all the billions spent on climate research? We could all save so much money: a few dollars given to a carnival fortune teller could provide us with that level of predictive skill.
Perhaps before spinning their 1.5C narrative, they should have read some advice from legendary horror fiction author Stephen King (from Danse Macabre):
… The artistic work of horror is almost always a disappointment. It is the classic no-win situation. You can scare people with the unknown for a long, long time, but sooner or later, as in poker, you have to turn your down cards up. You have to open the door and show the audience what’s behind it. …
Stephen King is a Democrat voting climate alarmist left wing liberal, but surely even he must be having some concerns about the quality of the green narrative. My prediction, sooner or later the great author will recognise the global warming scare for what it really is – poorly constructed, low quality horror fiction.
People should be celebrating, not demonizing, modern increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). We cannot overstate the importance of the gas. Without it, life doesn’t exist.
First, a bit of history: During each of the last four glacial advances, CO2’s concentration fell below 190 parts per million (ppm), less than 50 percent of our current concentration of 420 ppm. When glaciers began receding about 14,000 years ago – a blink in geological time – CO2 levels fell to 182 ppm, a concentration thought to be the lowest in Earth’s history.
Line of Death
Why is this alarming? Because below 150 ppm, most terrestrial plant life dies. Without plants, there are no animals.
In other words, the Earth came within 30 ppm in CO2’s atmospheric concentration of witnessing the extinction of most land-based plants and all higher terrestrial life-forms – nearly a true climate apocalypse. Before industrialization began adding CO2 to the atmosphere, there was no telling whether the critical 150-ppm threshold wouldn’t be reached during the next glacial period.
Contrary to the mantra that today’s CO2 concentration is unprecedentedly high, our current geologic period, the Quaternary, has seen the lowest average levels of carbon dioxide since the end of the Pre-Cambrian Period more than 600 million years ago. The average CO2 concentration throughout Earth’s history was more than 2,600 ppm, nearly seven times current levels.
Beneficial CO2 Increases
CO2 increased from 280 ppm in 1750 to 420 ppm today, most of it after World War II as industrial activity accelerated. The higher concentration has been beneficial because of the gas’s role as a plant food in increasing photosynthesis.
Its benefits include:
— Faster plant growth with less water and larger crop yields.
— Expansion of forests and grasslands.
— Less erosion of topsoil because of more plant growth.
— Increases in plants’ natural insect repellents.
A summary of 270 laboratory studies covering 83 food crops showed that increasing CO2 concentrations by 300 ppm boosts plant growth by an average of 46 percent. Conversely, many studies show adverse effects of low-CO2 environments.
For instance, one indicated that, compared to today, plant growth was eight percent less in the period before the Industrial Revolution, with a low concentration of 280 ppm CO2.
Therefore, attempts to reduce CO2 concentrations are bad for plants, animals and humankind.
Data reported in a recent paper by Dr. Indur Goklany, and published by the CO2 Coalition, indicates that up to 50 percent of Earth’s vegetated areas became greener between 1982-2011.
Researchers attribute 70 percent of the greening to CO2 fertilization from of fossil fuel emissions. (Another nine percent is attributed to fertilizers derived from fossil fuels.)
Dr. Goklany also reported that the beneficial fertilization effect of CO2 – along with the use of hydrocarbon-dependent machinery, pesticides and fertilizers – have saved at least 20 percent of land area from being converted to agricultural purposes – an area 25 percent larger than North America.
The amazing increase in agricultural productivity, partly the result of more CO2, has allowed the planet to feed eight billion people, compared to the fewer than 800,000 inhabitants living a short 300 years ago.
More CO2 in the air means more moisture in the soil. The major cause of water loss in plants is attributable to transpiration, in which the stomata, or pores, on the undersides of the leaves open to absorb CO2 and expel oxygen and water vapor.
With more CO2, the stomata are open for shorter periods, the leaves lose less water, and more moisture remains in the soil. The associated increase in soil moisture has been linked to global decreases in wildfires, droughts and heat waves.
Exaggeration of CO2’s Warming Effect
Alarm over global warming stems from exaggerations of CO2’s potential to retain heat that otherwise would radiate to outer space. As with water vapor, methane and nitrous oxide, CO2 retains heat in the atmosphere by how it reacts to infrared portions of the electromagnetic spectrum.
However, the gas has saturated to a large extent within the infrared range, leaving relatively little potential for increased warming.
Both sides of the climate debate agree that the warming effect of each molecule of CO2 decreases significantly (logarithmically) as the concentration increases.
This is one reason why there was no runaway greenhouse warming when CO2 concentrations approached 20 times that of today. This inconvenient fact, despite its importance, is rarely mentioned because it undermines the theory of a future climate catastrophe.
A doubling of CO2 from today’s level of 420 ppm – an increase estimated to take 200 years to attain – would have an inconsequential effect on global temperature.
Pennsylvania’s solar-powered fossil fuels
CO2 being liberated today from Pennsylvania coal was removed from the atmosphere by the photosynthesis of trees that fed on sunlight and carbon dioxide and then died to have their remains accumulate in the vast coal swamps of the Carboniferous Period.
Pennsylvania Marcellus and Utica shale hydrocarbons being exploited today were also the likely hydrocarbon source of shallower reservoirs producing since the late 1800s.
The source of those hydrocarbons was algae remains that gathered on the bottom of the Ordovician and Devonian seas.
Like the coal deposits, the algae used solar-powered photosynthesis and CO2 (the algal blooms were likely fueled by regular dust storms) to remove vast amounts of CO2 from the air and lock it up as carbon-rich organic matter.
The provenance of these hydrocarbons spawns two novel ideas. First, there is a strong case that these are solar-powered fuels.
Second, the sequestering of carbon during the creation of the hydrocarbons lowered atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to sub-optimum levels for plants. Therefore, the combustion of today’s coal and gas is liberating valuable CO2 molecules that are turbocharging plant growth.
The plain fact of the matter is that the modest warming of less than one degree Celsius since 1900, combined with increasing CO2, is allowing ecosystems to thrive and humanity to prosper.
Additional information on CO2’s benefits and related topics are available at CO2Coalition.org, which includes a number of publications and resources of interest.
It did not take the BBC long to link the tragic Bologna floods this week to climate change. They even included this video at the start of their weather forecast, just in case people missed it.
There are several references to extreme weather, extreme rainfall and extreme drought. The weatherman, Chris Fawkes goes on to say:
“As our planet warms up, climate scientists tell us that extreme weather are likely to become more frequent, and I think that really does fit the bill for Italy for what we’ve seen”
Climate scientists say all sorts of things, much of it lies or baseless. What they say should not though be confused with evidence.
I have seen no official data for the rainfall yet, but 200mm appears credible. Bear in mind though this is over the mountains. Annual rainfall in Bologna is about 1000mm, so clearly the”half annual rainfall” claim is a fabrication.
It is a sad fact that Northern Italy is prone to these sort of disastrous floods. For instance, the 1966 Florence floods killed 101 people, when a third of a year’s average rainfall fell in two days:
Before that there were the River Po floods in 1957:
And in 1994, 77 lost their lives in the Piedmont flood. As in Florence, a third of a year’s rain fell in the space of three days.
Such weather events are due to meteorological conditions, not climate change, as even Chris Fawkes admits when he tells us that the storm was the result of the jet stream being far to the south of its usual position. Something incidentally which is more likely in a colder world. A recent study by Grazzini et al looked into the Piedmont floods, and concluded that it was the result of a meridionally elongated upper–level trough embedded in an incoming Rossby wave packet, just as previous severe floods had been.
But leaving the causes of this flood to one side until all the facts are known, which the BBC should have done, does the historic data for Bologna back up the BBC’s claims about climate change making these things worse?
Let’s start with the KNMI data, which goes up to 2021. (I do, by the way, feel very frustrated at times that it is so difficult to access up to date weather data from official sources, including our wonderful Met Office; if climate change is so critical, surely the least they should do is provide the public with this sort of information).
Bologna has data all the way back to 1813, and the daily rainfall chart below quite clearly indicates that rainfall used to be much more extreme in the past:
Clearly Fawkes’ claim does not stand up to scrutiny.
Before we finish, it is worth looking at annual rainfall, bearing in mind Fawkes’ claims of the extreme drought last year. Remembering that the data only runs to 2020, the evidence clearly shows that droughts were much worse prior to 1950. And there have always been large swings in rainfall from year to year, making a nonsense of his claims.
Luckily, those journalists who’ve specialised in climate and net-zero nuttery have a global Big Brother to train them, “tackle disinformation” and supply daily titbits to print and inspire.
Luckily, those journalists who’ve specialised in climate and net-zero nuttery have a global Big Brother to train them, “tackle disinformation” and supply daily titbits to print and inspire. More than 15,000 environment/climate reporters from 180 countries are subscribed to the Earth Journalism Network, run by a staff of about 30 (a dozen full-time plus project staff). It also boasts thousands of journos accessing EJN on social media.
EJN is funded by dozens of foundations – including woke billionaire entities such as the Hewletts and Packards and Rockefeller Brothers, along with official sugar-daddies like the European Commission, UN aid agencies and the US, UK and Swedish governments.
The network was founded in 2004 by the Internews global charity with its charter to strengthen human rights and trust in the media – especially in the Third World. Curiously, Internews originated in San Francisco 1982 to build good relationships between youth, the media and politicians in the US and in the Soviet Union, perhaps overlooking that everyone on the Brezhnev side would be managed by the KGB.
Internews’ five-year plan is to mobilise journos, techies, lawyers, artists, advocates, and “storytellers” so that “Together, we will build healthy information environments in more than 100 countries across the globe.” (p9). It runs a sister relationship with Internews Network US. Combined, the alliance claims to be “among the two or three largest, if not the largest organisation, working in the media, information and development sub-sector.” (p23).[1]
EJN Executive Director is journo James Fahn, who is also global director of the parent Internews Environmental Programs. He doubles as a journalism post-grad lecturer at University of California, Berkeley. His staff have a significant Australian input, with one assistant, Signi Livingstone-Peters, for example, previously doing PR for Australia’s left/authoritarian Academy of Science. Mr Fahn’s own journalism could benefit from fact-checking. Only last month he co-wrote about Pakistan (my emphasis),
How does a journalist cover events on the ground when a third of a country’s land territory is flooded? They say that journalists write the first draft of history, and there is no bigger story in the 21st century than the climate crisis … Members of Internews’ Earth Journalism Network (EJN) have been proving the power of local journalism.
This is stirring stuff, but it’s also undiluted hogwash for Fahn to claim Pakistan was a third under water. See below from the state-owned Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s ombudsman after the national broadcaster made the same claim last October:
As a result of your complaint, ABC Online has removed the reference “putting one-third of the country underwater” from the story … As you pointed out, it is suggested that somewhere between 10%-12% of Pakistan was flooded.We are satisfied that this amendment resolves your complaint. — Loren Ferrel, ABC Ombudsman’s Office.
This may be an increasingly critical need as other foreign funders with potential ulterior motives such as placing country propaganda in the media [as distinct from climate propaganda], are starting to provide funding to media outlets in low- and middle-income countries. (p71)
A case study in how EJN manipulates the media can be found in its briefings for South African journalists. It briefs them with a supposed fact sheet headed, A Journalist’s Guide to Covering Net Zero in South Africa… Getting better at reporting it.” This pathetic tipsheet can be contrasted with today’s reality in that benighted country. Here’s extracts from EJN:
The South African media landscape has plenty of room to improve coverage on South Africa’s journey to net zero in the context of climate change risks and opportunities.
Often, journalists fail to unpack the risks of inaction on climate change (like reducing emissions) or the solutions to fix it while focusing on the economic risks of a move away from coal in the short term…
After pages of such clap-trap, EJN provides its client journos with “suggested story themes”.
♦ What risks will South Africa face if it fails to transition to a low carbon economy by 2050? In contrast, what benefits will the country enjoy from aligning its climate commitments to its developmental agenda?
♦ How is the climate change bill poised to solidify South Africa’s commitment towards reaching net zero?
♦ How are big polluters in South Africa using the carbon market to offset their emissions elsewhere – and how effective are these measures in reducing their actual carbon footprint?
♦ Are domestic finance institutions aligning with the goals of the Paris Agreement and how can South Africa’s sectoral targets and carbon budgets assist in legislating this?
South Africa a decade ago became the world’s guinea pig for transitioning to renewables. From independence in 1994, ANC inherited an almost wholly coal-fired electricity system but which soon became uneconomic and dependent on Western aid. Then, in 2013-17, the World Bank halted funding of coal plants and fossil fuel extraction, forcing South Africa towards renewables. The promise-anything Ramaphosa government told the world in 2020 it was moving to net-zero by 2050. The World Bank last November helpfully loaned $US500 million to help South Africa decommission its coal plants. But with billions spent on 50 wind and solar projects since 2010, the country’s share of renewables has barely shifted, with wind now at 2 per cent, solar at 1.3 per cent, and coal still at 89 per cent. Meanwhile, GDP per capita has sunk 12-15 per cent since 2010.
Last year the lowest-income section of the population suffered grievously from 205 days of rolling, without-notice blackouts in blocks of four hours and without notice. This year’s outages have denied grid power to most homes and businesses for up to ten hours a day, all this while diesel for business’s generators is becoming unaffordable. To May 9, South Africans have spent 27 per cent of the year without power, compared to 9.5 per cent during 2022. The ANC, now at electoral risk, is reconsidering coal investments.
Such is the South African “just and equitable transition” to renewables, “leaving no one behind” as EJN rhapsodises.[2]
EJN money really talks. When EJN offered grants to 20 Third World reporters to attend Egypt’s COP27 Summit last year, it had to turn away 500 applicants. “For each new powerful climate-related story that is produced, many others never actually get reported,” EJN lamented. “Investing in local news may not seem like the most obvious solution to the climate crisis, but it is a key piece of the puzzle. Without independent information, both the dangers of and the solutions to the climate crisis may never be fully understood.”
EJN’s sophisticated influencers train environmental reporters, particularly from the Third World, and provide them with prefabricated stories. This remit includes genuine environmental stories such as illegal logging, fresh water needs and ocean pollution, but the main focus is to spread anti-fossil-fuel messaging. For example, it cites one Pakistani journo client doing a project, “Transforming journalism into activism and policy change”. (p33).
It finances the journos to attend workshops and gives them and their editors money for writing, producing and distributing stories favourable to leftist narratives. Money to editors is tagged “to shore up their environmental coverage.” (p7).
Other cash handouts have bankrolled 500+ Fellowships financing journos to report at UN and NGO conferences. Currently, for example, EJN is offering 25 environment journos in the Mekong region a three-day workshop junket to Chiang Mai, Thailand to schmooz with NGOs and a chance for 16 of them afterwards to pitch a story for a $US1500 EJN grant.
EJN boasts of “training” 15,000 journaliststhus directly generating 15,000-plus stories plus a tail of further stories from its acolytes. Close to 11,000 journos have put up their hand for EJN money, nearly 1000 of them successfully. It doesn’t cite the money total but mentions it’s given out more than $US3 million in “sub-grants” alone. It knows that stories with high-quality graphics are the most persuasive, and has helped set up ten regional platforms to help journos bolster their stories with illustrations.
An EJN graphic says 1.83 per cent of its 15,000 journos are Australian-registered, which suggests quite a large number in our small pool. An odd detail is that the Australian cohort breaks down into 53 per cent women, 15 per cent men and 32 per cent who “consider themselves of another gender”. Such a high representation of multi-genders among Australian environmental journos, although commendably inclusive, seems so unusual that I checked the ratio in other regions, with the following results: Germany – a whopping 53 per cent claiming “another gender”, with only 8 per cent “men” and 40 per cent “women”; France had 50per cent “another gender”, 40 per cent “women” and 10 per cent “men”. In the US, a much lower 11 per cent were “another gender” compared with 60 per cent “women” and 29 per cent “men”.[3]
Looking at the EJN payment handouts is one thing; but how successful is all this in seducing journalists to idolise renewables? EJN has helpfully posted an impact study on-line, showing that once it bankrolls journalists, close to 80 per cent go on to improve their earnings and careers (e.g. freelance fees/job-promotions). EJN quizzed four media outlets after handing them cash, but only one said it was financially sustainable; the other three merely said they’d become a bit more sustainable. (These Third World groups tend to be precarious).
EJN money definitely helped journos pitch better climate stories to their bosses and score a higher success rate on pitches, along with prizes from like-minded green sponsors for their stories. The journos chorused that EJN money had helped them achieve their goals of persuading readers – in their words, “policy and action related to climate change, biodiversity and the environment”.[4] Some used the money to complete expensive projects like anti-corruption investigations, which led to worthwhile reactions by governments.
In one case study, a Filipino journo “Jhesset E” — got a string of EJN grants and workshops for stories. Those included one that “supported partnerships between non-governmental organizations and journalists to cover climate change” and another “about reporting on climate change through a gender lens”. This involved her interviewing women suffering after storms and floods etc which, of course, were attributed – sans evidence – to “climate change”.
The blockbuster case study involved an EJN client journo from Bangadesh identified as “Illius S”, who was talent-spotted at a three-day EJN workshop on “climate justice” and other non-sequiturs:
His passion for climate reporting took off from there … Following the workshop, Illius received several fellowships and story grants from EJN, which he credited with helping him make the transition to working as a full-time climate journalist.
The enthused Illius came good with a story about climate change causing the cultural loss of babies’ names in Bengal’s coastal villages. According to Illius, babies used to be named after parents’ income source, e.g. “Probal” (coral) and “Shukti” (oyster). But climate change had poisoned the corals and oysters so the villagers’ jobs ended and so did the babies’ names. “Using this unique perspective, Illius has continued to be a prolific climate journalist in Bangladesh,” said the EJN proudly.
However, the EJN’s and Internews’ commendable impact study later by scrutineer Dr Cathy Shuttconcluded in essence that (a) Illius’ super-story of climate baby-names was tripe, and (b) Illius wasn’t even a coherent journo and (c) he seemed to be criminalising the half-starved villagers for poaching and smuggling sea critters.[5] P142-3. Eschewing tact, Shutt found
This report certainly has huge areas to improve further…Thus, in this report, the use of ‘climate change’ make no sense and adds no value.
The critique gobsmacked the EJN gurus, who in response blustered about climate change and ocean “acidification” definitely hurting poor little molluscs. The reviewers suggested EJN actually look up some science, because “there is no evidence of such cases in Bangladesh.” Again, EJN blustered but the reviewers opened a new front by saying that despite Illius bewailing climate causing seafront job losses, “it turns out that employment opportunities accelerated in the region for many reasons” including lucrative street trading in drugs.
In a delightful conclusion, the reviewers found that the basic story of climate wiping out names of Bangladeshi babies was not just tripe but, according to Illius, had been pushed by a lecturer at the original EJN workshop. That same lecturer, when asked, claimed he said the opposite. A literature search then suggested the baby names were religious-based not vocational.[6]
Illius had claimed to EJN that his story had galvanised local authorities and been picked up by the national Bangladeshi media. This was also fact-checked by Dr Shutt, who concluded it was doubtful. His story supposedly appeared in a national outlet called the Business Standard ,which few had heard of and wasn’t mentioned even in a list of 504 national rags. While the Business Standard’s Facebook page had 162,145 followers, Illius’ story earned only six ‘likes’. EJN responded that Business Standard was a “new” outlet.
The world of journalism seethes with well-funded third-party institutions operating night and day to ensure journos stay on-message about alleged climate perils. EJN is just one story in a much larger saga of the way truth is sold down the river when journos are bought and paid for.
Tony Thomas’s new book from Connor Court is Anthem of the Unwoke – Yep! The other lot’s gone bonkers. For a copy ($35 including postage), email tthomas061@gmail.com
[1][1] Internews Europe, a UK-based charity with 48 staff, budgeted for pds18.3m spending ($A34m) last year. It puts about 30% of its energies into EJN and the environment.
[3] Another possibility is that the EJN data is nonsense – which doesn’t inspire confidence in EJN.
[4] “This trend is especially significant when compared to respondents from the Asia-Pacific region, 85% of whom stated that their financial opportunities have improved.” P25
[5] Dr Shutt: “In short, a livelihood group was empathised at the beginning of the story and vilified at the end for maintaining a livelihood which is declared illegal for more than two decades, even before the climate change discourse surfaced and popularised in public and policy domain… I found this claim very inappropriate from the ethical standard of journalism and moral bearing. This is very well recognised that people who collect oysters on the coast are extremely poor and do not have much choice. Therefore, in no professional standard, it sounds appropriate to make such vulnerable group victim of one’s novel work. I think this is our moral duty to protect our informants and vulnerable people.” (EJN Editor’s note: There has been much internal discussion over who the reporter was referring to when using words like “smuggler,” and we did not have time to verify whether it was gang leaders or the poor, marginalized collectors.)
[6] Keeping my local angle going, the study remarked, “The Cultural Atlas (IES, 2020) also recognises this fact for Bangladesh immigrants in Australia.”
Here is the question. If the information on the Hunter Biden Laptop was exposed so all could see, would it have changed the result of the election?
One can argue no and that’s fine. But it does open the argument up for the other side of the issue.
Now let’s look at what is being hidden today. Suppose this was all on a laptop that if equally exposed by an objective scientific community who’s thumb was not on the scale, , the public could look at and absorb
This is the correlation of co2 to temperature:
A steady rise since the 1950s in co2 and an overall rise in temps but two noticeable deviations from the correlation.
Now look at total solar irradiance and increased water vapor:
Why is water vapor so crucial? IT IS A BETTER CLIMATE METRIC THAN TEMPERATURE, AS IT CORRELATES TO TEMPERATURE. We see this in the Saturday mixing ratios. Notice how tiny the increase is to correlate to a 10 degree rise when its -40, vs higher temperatures.
This means that relatively small increases will make the biggest differences in temperatures where its coldest and driest, which is exactly what we are seeing in the distorted warming pattern of today. So why are we not quantifying this the same way we quantify co2, which has no such linkage?
Contributing to the increase in WV may be the underwater volcanic activity that we know little about and chose to ignore anyway.
Are not the geothermal and solar aspects correlated better than the man-made aspect? Yet the man-made aspect is assumed to be the cause?
what s more circling back to that steady rise in co2, why for the first 30 years or so there was no response in the ocean.
but then the response occurred when the geothermal activity increased.
CO2 rose the entire period but the oceans only warmed when the geothermal increases occurred. If no oceanic warming, the amount of warming in the air would be much less. 1) Less water vapor put into the air to affect temps and 2). less outgoing long-wave radiation since the earth would be cooler. CO2 absorbs outgoing, not incoming, radiation so whatever it does can not occur without OLR. Its “feedback” only penetrates the top MM or do of the ocean, while some sunlight does go down much further, and of course, since we know next to nothing about the actual input of heat from the earth’s core, that may be tipping the scale. At least the correlation would make one suspect it is possible.
Now what if all this was on a laptop that was hidden from you? And all you saw was what people in control wanted you to see? Would it affect the outcome of your thought?
The common linkage is something I wrote about in this blog. That is deception distortion, delusion.
You can write all you want on individual aspects of any issue today. But it dances around the issue of what is behind all of it, A common thread of those 3 things and the willingness to hide the whole picture for a cause that seeks to destroy our freedoms. What was on that laptop was in the hands of authorities and was purposely hidden for a purpose. All the covid data was hidden for a purpose. Data on every single major aspect of American life has been hidden or not given an equal voice. I realized after the Super Nino of 2015 and the obvious direct linkage to temperature step up due to water vapor release, that this had very little to do with science anymore. ( BTW as I forecasted back in April,
now that the left is waking up to the fact this is a strong El Nino, they are jumping on the rise coming. which anyone with common sense should then say, well if El Ninos are natural and you can plainly see the step-up function with the strong event, how is the bulk of the warming, not natural? l).
Can you understand what is going on here? The relentless push against looking at other long-standing natural drivers in an effort to diminish nature and attribute control to an authority that seems to fancy themselves as knowing better. Is the linkage to Hunter Bidens Laptop far-fetched? Not in motive.
Would America be better off with policies that encouraged energy growth from the sources that have led to our prosperity than where we are headed now? Then link both your answers to the fact that crucial aspects are hidden from you to shape your thought.
Joe Bastardi is a pioneer in extreme weather and long-range forecasting.
He is the author of “The Climate Chronicles: Inconvenient Revelations You Won’t Hear From Al Gore — and Others” which you can purchase at the CFACT bookstore. His new book The Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate war can be found here. phonyclimatewar.com
Widespread recovery has led to the highest coral cover recorded by the Long-Term Monitoring Program in the Northern and Central Great Barrier Reef …
Q3. These perimeter surveys under estimate coral cover, claiming it to be less than 40%, when coral cover is often more than 90% at the crest of the same reef.
Corals around the outside/perimeter of reefs are particularly susceptible to cyclone damage.
The official surveys of coral cover are somewhat misleading because the survey is done of just one habitat type, the reef perimeter. Most of the coral is at the reef crest. The survey of John Brewer reef followed the track shown by the yellow, orange and green lines.
Q4. The number and intensity of cyclones has been decreasing since at least the 1970s. Something the Bureau of Meteorology is unable to acknowledge. Why?
Q5. When will the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) reconcile results from aerial surveys that report severe bleaching (30-60%) with underwater survey results that reported no (0%) bleaching – at the same coral reefs at the same time?
For example, aerial surveys of John Brewer Reef in March 2022 reported 60% bleaching. Coincidentally, at the same time this reef was being surveyed underwater. The results published online in August 2022 found no coral bleaching at this reef (o%).
It is impossible to reconcile 60% bleaching based on the official aerial survey with 0% bleaching based on the official underwater survey for John Brewer Reef, with both surveys undertaken in March 2022.
This map was being promoted through March and April 2022 as showing the Great Barrier Reef suffering from mass coral bleaching with the impression that most of the coral was going to die.
There never were any photographs from the aerial surveys, and the results have since been removed, without explanation.
I visited John Brewer reef in April 2022 after it made worldwide headlines as the centre of mass coral bleaching. I found a coral wonderland, with one of the underwater photographs from that visit featured at the top of this blog post. At the reef crest coral cover exceeded 100%, with corals growing onto of each other. Meanwhile, the official underwater survey stated coral cover to be just 21.8%.
To be clear, John Brewer Reef, that was being reported around the world as stark white, was, in reality, the most beautiful coral reef with over 100% coral cover at the crest, and an abundance of fish and other marine life including a friendly white tipped reef shark.
I also made a documentary film, entitled ‘Bleached Colourful – Part 1’ it shows the corals at John Brewer reef in April 2022 from both under-the-water and from an aerial drone survey.
Me/Jennifer Marohasy photographed by a drone hovering at 5 metres.
Me/Jennifer Marohasy photographed by a drone hovering 20 metres above John Brewer Reef.
Me/Jennifer Marohasy photographed by a drone hovering at 40 metres above John Brewer Reef.
Me/Jennifer Marohasy photographed by a drone hovering 120 metres above John Brewer Reef in early April 2022. This is the maximum legal limit for flying a drone in Australia.
The official aerial surveys are by Neal Cantin and/or Terry Hughes looking out an airplane window while flying at an altitude of 150 metres.
The film runs for just on 24 minutes, and explains how the official underwater perimeter surveys are undertaken, which is by Manta tow. It also shows how different the aerial perspective is, and includes a segment with Terry Hughes being interviewed by Fran Kelly explaining the political significance of his work/the aerial surveys. David Mills, writing in the Courier Mail, is referring to a more recent ‘Snapshot report’ about the Great Barrier Reef that concludes: ABOUT TEMPERATURES While sea temperatures in spring were the hottest on record, summer sea temperatures were at or slightly above average. Data on sea temperatures are theoretically available from approximately 80 Great Barrier Reef sites, 16 Coral Sea sites, 7 sites in Northwest Western Australia, 8 Queensland regional ports, 13 sites in the Solitary Islands, 4 sites in PNG and 10 sites in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. Data are obtained from in-situ data loggers deployed on the reef. Data loggers instantaneously record sea temperatures every 30 minutes and are exchanged and downloaded approximately every 12 months. Except not one of these temperature series are ever shown by the Australian Institute of Marine Science so we can see the actual temperature data as a continuous time series – unadjusted. ABOUT CORAL BLEACHING Minor bleaching was seen in all three regions (northern, central and southern), however there was no mass coral bleaching. I was recently diving off Cairns and there was absolutely no bleaching. Ace underwater photographer Stuart Ireland is continually filming above and below the water and he can report that the reef is in magnificent condition. He regularly posts video at https://www.calypsoproductions.com.au/reef-today/ ABOUT CYCLONES No cyclones entered the Marine Park. Large swells from TC Gabrielle which tracked outside the Reef in February may have caused some damage to some reefs on the outer edge. ABOUT STARFISH Crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks continue on reefs in the southern region, particularly in the Swains reefs. The Swain Reefs include about 400 individual reefs covering an area of 16,900 square kilometres (4 million acres), that is about 120 nautical miles off shore (about 220 kms). The Swain Reefs have historically sustained high numbers of these starfish, and regular outbreaks, probably for thousands of years. Natural predators of crown-of-thorns star fish include the giant Triton snail and Titan Trigger fish. They gobble up the star fish, that are native to the Great Barrier Reef. Triton snails are particularly efficient at devouring crown-of-thorns starfish never mind the sharp spines, as shown in this video courtesy of the Australian Academy of Sciences. I have been diving and snorkelling the Great Barrier Reef for more than 50 years, and one of my favourite fish is the Titan Trigger Fish, that I recently photographed lying across a bed of soft corals at Saxon Reef off Cairns.
Can you see the Trigger fish lying across the soft corals? I took that photograph on about 1st April 2023.
The Trigger fish that I swam with at Saxon reef, off Cairns.
I’ve seen these fish, that have large teeth, flip crown-of-thorns starfish onto their backs before eating out their soft underbelly, as shown in this YouTube.
Me getting ready for the first snorkel of the day off the back of the live aboard Reef Encounter, Saxon Reef, off Cairns on April 1, 2023. The water was warm and crystal clear. I did about a dozen snorkels, each more than one hour over three days at about six reefs. I saw lots of fish and coral, no crown-of-thorns or bleaching.
How gorgeous is this turtle, filmed with my TG6 Olympus underwater camera, free diving to about 7 metres.
Just down about 7 metres, straight-off the back of the boat. Filmed with my TG6 Olympus underwater camera. It doesn’t have to be complicated.No Scuba or lights for this photograph, even though it was at depth.
I’m hoping to be on Outsiders with Rowan, Rita and James tomorrow morning talking about all of this.
And just three more pictures, from John Brewer last April. It is unbelievable that this reef was making newspaper headlines around the world as badly bleached at the same time I was seeing with my own eyes all this beauty.
This last underwater photograph was taken by another legend, Leonard Lim. And he is the best Scuba buddy. Photograph taken at John Brewer reef early April 2022.
The most common coral colour, at reefs around the world, is beige.
Julia Hartley-Brewer clashes with meteorologist Jim Dale over global warming after reports that the world is more likely than not to be 1.5C warmer in the next five years.
Julia Hartley-Brewer clashes with meteorologist Jim Dale over global warming after reports that the world is more likely than not to be 1.5C warmer in the next five years.
Jim Dale said: “It will take time, it will not be a straight line, but you’ve been warned.”
Julia Hartley-Brewer said: “We’ve been warned again and again, pretty much every few years. I think New York and Miami are supposed to be under water. Julia: Can we all just relax on the basis we are all going to hell in a handcart and you lot can stop nagging us to stop turning our heating off?”
What we don’t know is that this regulation will come at the expense of the developing countries that are the basis of the supply chain of EV battery materials. California’s actions support exploitation of cheap, disposable workforces in other countries and environmental degradation at countries outside the California “air bubble”.
What we don’t know is that this regulation will come at the expense of the developing countries that are the basis of the supply chain of EV battery materials. California’s actions support exploitation of cheap, disposable workforces in other countries and environmental degradation at countries outside the California “air bubble”.
According to most recent data, there were approximately 1.8 million diesel trucks in California in 2021. Of these, around 1.5 million were heavy-duty trucks, while the remaining 300,000 were medium-duty trucks. Most diesel trucks were owned by businesses, with only a small percentage owned by individuals.
California is home to the largest diesel truck market in the United States. These trucks are used for a variety of purposes, including transportation of goods and services, construction, and agriculture. While diesel trucks are an essential part of the state’s economy, they also contribute significantly to air pollution.
In these developing countries, these mining operations exploit child labor, and are responsible for the most egregious human rights’ violations of vulnerable minority populations. These operations are also directly destroying the planet through environmental degradation.
I’m sure that neither Governor Newsom nor CARB had a chance to view the 2006 movie “Blood Diamond” starring Leonardo DiCaprio that portrays many of the similar atrocities now occurring in pursuit of the “Blood Minerals” i.e., those exotic minerals and metals to support the “green” movement within wealthy countries.
Newsom and CARB lack some energy literacy which may be the reasons they avoid conversations about the ugly side of “green” mandates and regulations. They should read the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations”, and decide for themselves if they wish to financially support the environmental degradation and humanity atrocities among folks with yellow, brown, and black skin occurring in developing countries, so that the wealthy countries can go green.
It is surprising the Newsom and CARB members support subsidies to procure EV’s and build more wind and solar when those subsidies are providing financial incentives to the developing countries mining for those “green” materials that promotes further exploitations of poor people in developing countries. I personally thought that Newsom and CARB had higher moral and ethical standards that would stop them from exploiting the poor in developing countries.
A battery in an electric car, like an average Tesla, is made of about 750-1,000 pounds of minerals, that had to be mined and processed into a battery that merely stores electricity.
EVs are environmental rapists. Mining and refining the minerals needed to make EV batteries is also an environmental disaster, inflicting environmental degradation on local landscapes in developing countries with minimal environmental regulations.
The EV battery needs for large diesel trucks with extended mileage ranges may be 3 to 4 times greater than that of a small Tesla EV.
Here is a summary of the minerals needed for a Tesla EV battery and the projected humongous needs of the minerals to support 1.8 million Diesel Truck EV’s:
Minerals needed for a Tesla EV battery
Minerals needed for a large Truck EV (at least 3 times larger than a Tesla
Minerals to support the needs for 1.8 million Truck EV’s
Lithium
25 lbs.
75 lbs.
135,000,000 lbs.
Nickel
60 lbs.
180 lbs.
324,000,000 lbs.
Manganese
44 lbs.
132 lbs.
237,600,000 lbs.
Cobalt
30 lbs.
90 lbs.
162,000,000 lbs.
Copper
200 lbs.
600 lbs.
1,080,000,000 lbs.
Aluminum, steel, and plastic
400 lbs.
1200 lbs.
2,160,000,000 lbs.
Approximate weight of Tesla EV battery = 1,000 lbs.
Approximate weight of Truck EV battery = more than 3,000 lbs.
Almost 2 Billion pounds of just minerals, plus the aluminum, steel and plastic !
50 years after the oil embargo crisis of 1973, there is no American policy for energy independence. America continues to INCREASE its energy dependence on China for “green”, and on OPEC and Russia for oil. Today, with LESS energy independence than 1973, America is more vulnerable to another embargo than we were 50 years ago!
China and Russia thank California Governor Newsom and the California Air Resources Board for their continued support of world domination by the countries that controls the minerals and fossil fuels!
Ronald Stein is an engineer, senior policy advisor on energy literacy for CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”
Long-term expansion of Mediterranean forests and increase in precipitation as well as an enhanced East Asian summer monsoon associated with the increase and northward migration of the Atlantic moisture source. Paradoxically, the glacial was warmer and wetter than the preceding interglacial. Credit: André Bahr
Approximately 700,000 years ago, a “warm ice age” permanently changed the climate cycles on Earth. Contemporaneous with this exceptionally warm and moist period, the polar glaciers greatly expanded. A European research team including Earth scientists from Heidelberg University used recently acquired geological data in combination with computer simulations to identify this seemingly paradoxical connection.
According to the researchers, this profound change in the Earth’s climate was responsible for the change in the climate cycles, thus representing a critical step in the later climate evolution of our planet. Their study is published in the journal Nature Communications.
Geological ice ages—called glacial periods—are characterized by the development of large ice sheets in the Northern Hemisphere. In the past 700,000 years, phases shifted between distinct glacial and warm periods about every 100,000 years. Before then, however, the Earth’s climate was governed by 40,000-year cycles with shorter and weaker glacial periods. The change in the climate cycles occurred in the Middle Pleistocene Transition period, which began approximately 1.2 million years ago and ended about 670,000 years ago.
“The mechanisms responsible for this critical change in the global climate rhythm remain largely unknown. They cannot be attributed to variations in the orbital parameters governing the Earth’s climate,” explains Associate Professor Dr. André Bahr of the Institute of Earth Sciences at Heidelberg University. “But the recently identified ‘warm ice age,’ which caused the accumulation of excess continental ice, did play a critical role.”
For their investigations, the researchers used new climate records from a drill core off Portugal and loess records from the Chinese Plateau. The data was then fed into computer simulations. The models show a long-term warming and wetting trend in both subtropical regions for the past 800,000 to 670,000 years.
Contemporaneous with this last ice age in the Middle Pleistocene Transition period, the sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic and tropical North Pacific were warmer than in the preceding interglacial, the phase between the two ice ages. This led to higher moisture production and rainfall in Southwest Europe, the expansion of Mediterranean forests, and an enhanced summer monsoon in East Asia. The moisture also reached the polar regions where it contributed to the expansion of the Northern Eurasian ice sheets.
“They persisted for some time and heralded in the phase of sustained and far-reaching ice-age glaciation that lasted until the late Pleistocene. Such expansion of the continental glaciers was necessary to trigger the shift from the 40,000-year cycles to the 100,000-year cycles we experience today, which was critical for the Earth’s later climate evolution,” states André Bahr.
More information: María Fernanda Sánchez Goñi et al, Moist and warm conditions in Eurasia during the last glacial of the Middle Pleistocene Transition, Nature Communications (2023). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-38337-4
Since the preindustrial era, about 144 ppm of CO2 has been added to the atmosphere. But by 1893, only 13 ppm had been added. If you subtract the 1893 addition from the 2023 addition of industrial era atmospheric CO2, you get 131 ppm of industrial era atmospheric CO2 added between 1895 and 2023.
First, USA Today acknowledges that the graph in the tweet is correct and April 1895 was warmer than April 2023.
Next, USA Today erroneously disputes my observation about the “1,000% increase in industrial era atmospheric CO2.”
But the pre-industrial era atmospheric CO2 level is estimated as 280 parts per million (ppm). By 1895, it is estimated to be about 293 ppm and now it is about 424 ppm.
Since the preindustrial era, about 144 ppm of CO2 has been added to the atmosphere. But by 1893, only 13 ppm had been added. If you subtract the 1893 addition from the 2023 addition of industrial era atmospheric CO2, you get 131 ppm of industrial era atmospheric CO2 added between 1895 and 2023. As 131 ppm is roughly 10 times 13 ppm, industrial era atmospheric CO2 has increased 1,000% from 1895 to 2023.
While NOAA’s statement that industrial era atmospheric CO2 has increased 50% over pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 is correct, that is not relevant to the point in question — i.e., since 1895, industrial era atmospheric CO2 has increased 1,000% yet April 2023 was cooler than April 1895.
The rest of USA Today‘s argument over my interpretation of the April 1895 to April 2023 comparison is just that — i.e., argument — not a “fact check.”
The emissions-driven global warming narrative is that every emission warms the planet. But that certainly was not the case as between April 1895 and April 2023, now is it?
TalkTV
You must be logged in to post a comment.