wattsupwiththat--2020-04-27--Wuhan #coronavirus/CoVid-19 Rumination #7

When ctm enabled the very first of my now several guest posts on this topic , it was partly because of my explicit analogies to climate change .
As we delved further in subsequent posts , the climate analogies became less obvious .
# 6 was all about technical CoViD-19 antibody testing specificity and thrombosis , with no climate analogies at all .
This # 7 rumination returns to the original climate analogy theme , concerning the possible CoViD-19 therapy Ivermectin .
( Much such stuff is now on various blogs , especially in Australia where it is a common @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some more basic research , which follows as # 7 .
Ivermectin is a semisynthetic derivative of a soil organism molecule originally found in Japan in 1981 .
So it is similar to many other ‘ naturally occurring ’ anti-somethings going back to Fleming ’ s penicillin blue mold in 1926 , then its better semisynthetic derivative amoxicillin in 1972 .
Ivermectin is primarily an antiparasitic , and the original FDA approved indication was against African River Blindness in 1988 .
It has long been WHO classed as one of the three “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ) and aspirin .
Old and off patent Ivermectin is now being toughted as a possible COVID-19 therapy .
There are two adamantly irreconcilable sides , just as with climate change .
On the one side , Antiviral Research 178:104787 ( 2020 ) just published in vitro results that Ivermectin reduced Wohan coronavirus expression 5000x in 48 hours .
Now that would be good news , since Ivermectin is another old generic drug with well-established safety profiles .
BUT , no reason given as to why an old anti-parasitic ( meaning against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ properties– just ‘ is ’ if to be believed .
No replication study is yet available .
And on the same side , a newly ‘ published ’ Thailand study from 2014-2017 suggests Ivermectin has antiviral ‘ nuclear transport inhibitory activity ’ .
This would be encouraging , EXCEPT for the incontrovertible fact that Wuhan did NOT emerge until about 12/1019 .
So any virus , or just this virus ?
‘ Junk ’ internet science is now on very public display .
Like with climate science .
Does Ivermectin work against CoViD-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most recent ‘ science ’ at www.sciencedirect.org/antiviral research/faq/covid suggests maybe yes , it does , for reasons we dunno– while ONLY citing the Antiviral Research article cited above , so circular reasoning like in climate science is on full display .
Now on the other side , the FDA just issued a warning ( see www .
FDA.gov/product safety information/faq/covid ) saying DO NOT use Ivermectin for CoVid-19—despite a decades long safety profile in humans and animals !
Now , that FDA false safety warning will surely discourage some properly designed clinical trials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the climate paleo hockey stick gang that got after Steve McIntyre , and then lost .

By Rud Istvan
When ctm enabled the very first of my now several guest posts on this topic, it was partly because of my explicit analogies to climate change. As we delved further in subsequent posts, the climate analogies became less obvious. #6 was all about technical CoViD-19 antibody testing specificity and thrombosis, with no climate analogies at all. This #7 rumination returns to the original climate analogy theme, concerning the possible CoViD-19 therapy Ivermectin. (Much such stuff is now on various blogs, especially in Australia where it is a common anti-parasitic sheep dip.) I did some more basic research, which follows as #7.
Ivermectin is a semisynthetic derivative of a soil organism molecule originally found in Japan in 1981. So it is similar to many other ‘naturally occurring’ anti-somethings going back to Fleming’s penicillin blue mold in 1926, then its better semisynthetic derivative amoxicillin in 1972. Ivermectin is primarily an antiparasitic, and the original FDA approved indication was against African River Blindness in 1988. It has long been WHO classed as one of the three “wonder drugs” along with penicillin(s) and aspirin.
Old and off patent Ivermectin is now being toughted as a possible COVID-19 therapy. There are two adamantly irreconcilable sides, just as with climate change.
On the one side, Antiviral Research 178:104787 (2020) just published in vitro results that Ivermectin reduced Wohan coronavirus expression 5000x in 48 hours. Now that would be good news, since Ivermectin is another old generic drug with well-established safety profiles. BUT, no reason given as to why an old anti-parasitic (meaning against eukaryotic organisms) drug also has antiviral properties– just ‘is’ if to be believed. No replication study is yet available.
And on the same side, a newly ‘published’ Thailand study from 2014-2017 suggests Ivermectin has antiviral ‘nuclear transport inhibitory activity’. This would be encouraging, EXCEPT for the incontrovertible fact that Wuhan did NOT emerge until about 12/1019. So any virus, or just this virus? ‘Junk’ internet science is now on very public display. Like with climate science.
Does Ivermectin work against CoViD-19? We dunno yet. But the most recent ‘science’ at www.sciencedirect.org/antiviral research/faq/covid suggests maybe yes, it does, for reasons we dunno– while ONLY citing the Antiviral Research article cited above, so circular reasoning like in climate science is on full display.
Now on the other side, the FDA just issued a warning (see www. FDA.gov/product safety information/faq/covid) saying DO NOT use Ivermectin for CoVid-19—despite a decades long safety profile in humans and animals!
Now, that FDA false safety warning will surely discourage some properly designed clinical trials to sort out the truth. Just like the climate paleo hockey stick gang that got after Steve McIntyre, and then lost.
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-27--Grist on Joe Biden’s Climate Podcast: “The whole thing sounds like a voicemail two of your grandpare

Grist on Joe Biden’s Climate Podcast: “The whole thing sounds like a voicemail two of your grandparents left you”

On Climate Change with Joe Inslee is Joe Biden ’ s effort to explain his climate policies .
Joe Biden has a podcast , and there ’ s an episode on climate change By Zoya Teirstein on Apr 27 , 2020 at 3:55 am The public rarely gets access to the real Joe Biden .
His team keeps the gaffe-prone 77-year-old on a tight leash on the campaign trail .
That strategy has paid off handsomely ; the former vice president is now the presumptive Democratic nominee for president .
But there is a way to get access to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brain , and it doesn ’ t require sneaking past the Secret Service .
Biden has taken a tip from the entire male population of Williamsburg , Brooklyn , and started his own podcast .
It ’ s called Here ’ s the Deal — possibly the most on-brand title of a podcast in the history of the genre .
Inslee plugs his endorsement again on the podcast .
“ I can ’ t wait to have an optimist back in the White House , ” he tells Biden .
The whole thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grandparents left you — wholesome , if a bit rambly .
Except in this case one of the grandparents is gearing up for what may be the most consequential election of our lifetimes .
“ Wash your hands , ” Inslee , sounding concerned , tells Biden toward the end of the episode .
“ I did !
” Biden assures him .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
On Climate Change with Joe Inslee is Joe Biden’s effort to explain his climate policies.
Joe Biden has a podcast, and there’s an episode on climate change
By Zoya Teirstein on Apr 27, 2020 at 3:55 am
The public rarely gets access to the real Joe Biden. His team keeps the gaffe-prone 77-year-old on a tight leash on the campaign trail. That strategy has paid off handsomely; the former vice president is now the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. But there is a way to get access to the inner workings of Uncle Joe’s brain, and it doesn’t require sneaking past the Secret Service.
Biden has taken a tip from the entire male population of Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and started his own podcast. It’s called Here’s the Deal — possibly the most on-brand title of a podcast in the history of the genre.
…
Inslee plugs his endorsement again on the podcast. “I can’t wait to have an optimist back in the White House,” he tells Biden. The whole thing sounds like a voicemail two of your grandparents left you — wholesome, if a bit rambly. Except in this case one of the grandparents is gearing up for what may be the most consequential election of our lifetimes. “Wash your hands,” Inslee, sounding concerned, tells Biden toward the end of the episode. “I did!” Biden assures him.
…


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-28--“Global public tells the United Nations: Take action on climate change and the environment”

The United Nations has moved on from conducting simple surveys which all too frequently reveal an embarrassing lack of concern about climate change .
Now they ask activists to hold conversations with their followers , and claim the reported outcome of those conversations is evidence of public support for climate action .
Global public tells the United Nations : Take action on climate change and the environment The United Nations is marking its 75th anniversary at a time of great upheaval , as COVID-19 continues to spread , exacting a heavy toll on lives , societies and economies in all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 , the UN75 initiative launched a global conversation , inviting people around the world to discuss their priorities for the future , obstacles to achieving them , and the role of global cooperation in overcoming these challenges .
As of March 2020 , over 13 million people in nearly all UN Member States had taken part in the initiative , with more than 40,000 completing the one-minute survey , and more than 330 dialogues held in 87 countries .
Respondents placed great emphasis on climate change and the environment , with protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three priorities .
Climate and the environment were also identified as one of the top three global trends , and widely discussed in the dialogues .
The vast majority of respondents agreed on the need for closer international cooperation to make progress in these and other areas .
COVID-19 has revealed the vulnerability of global systems to protect the environment , health and economy .
There is an increasing recognition of how multiple economic , social and institutional drivers exacerbate environment risks , impacting on human health and increasing the burden on health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( UNEP ) , as the authoritative voice on the environment within the UN system , is well placed to help its member countries rise to the challenge of delivering a better future .
UNEP will celebrate its own anniversary in 2022 , having been at the heart of the environmental movement since the Stockholm Conference in 1972 .
UNEP is also working with partners to implement the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda , particularly in areas that have a direct link to the environment such as hazardous waste , governance , wildlife conservation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out what UNEP is doing to achieve the Goals .
For instance , a key UNEP report is the annual Emissions Gap Report , the most recent issue of which says we must cut global emissions 7.6 per cent every year of the next decade if we are to limit temperature rise per the Paris Agreement to 1.5°C .
A just-released international survey by Ipsos MORI Public opinion on the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic says : “ Seven in ten consider climate change as serious a crisis as COVID-19 , and a similar proportion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if it doesn ’ t act on climate change now .
Two thirds globally support a green economic recovery from the crisis.
” Over the course of 2020 , the UN75 team will gather public perspectives on global challenges and solutions on how to tackle them through a one-minute survey ( in 53 languages ) and dialogues – now the bulk of which will be online online – organized by partners across the world .
Nature is in crisis , threatened by biodiversity and habitat loss , global heating and toxic pollution .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Addressing the current coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) pandemic and protecting ourselves against future global threats requires sound management of hazardous medical and chemical waste ; strong and global stewardship of nature and biodiversity ; and a clear commitment to “ building back better ” , creating green jobs and facilitating the transition to carbon neutral economies .
Humanity depends on action now for a resilient and sustainable future .
For more information , please contact Lisa Laskaridis lisa.laskaridis @ un.org

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The United Nations has moved on from conducting simple surveys which all too frequently reveal an embarrassing lack of concern about climate change. Now they ask activists to hold conversations with their followers, and claim the reported outcome of those conversations is evidence of public support for climate action.
Global public tells the United Nations: Take action on climate change and the environment
The United Nations is marking its 75th anniversary at a time of great upheaval, as COVID-19 continues to spread, exacting a heavy toll on lives, societies and economies in all regions of the world.
In January 2020, the UN75 initiative launched a global conversation, inviting people around the world to discuss their priorities for the future, obstacles to achieving them, and the role of global cooperation in overcoming these challenges.
As of March 2020, over 13 million people in nearly all UN Member States had taken part in the initiative, with more than 40,000 completing the one-minute survey, and more than 330 dialogues held in 87 countries.
Respondents placed great emphasis on climate change and the environment, with protection of the environment one of the top three priorities. Climate and the environment were also identified as one of the top three global trends, and widely discussed in the dialogues. The vast majority of respondents agreed on the need for closer international cooperation to make progress in these and other areas.
COVID-19 has revealed the vulnerability of global systems to protect the environment, health and economy. There is an increasing recognition of how multiple economic, social and institutional drivers exacerbate environment risks, impacting on human health and increasing the burden on health services.
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), as the authoritative voice on the environment within the UN system, is well placed to help its member countries rise to the challenge of delivering a better future. UNEP will celebrate its own anniversary in 2022, having been at the heart of the environmental movement since the Stockholm Conference in 1972.
UNEP is also working with partners to implement the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, particularly in areas that have a direct link to the environment such as hazardous waste, governance, wildlife conservation, climate change and ecosystems. Find out what UNEP is doing to achieve the Goals.
For instance, a key UNEP report is the annual Emissions Gap Report, the most recent issue of which says we must cut global emissions 7.6 per cent every year of the next decade if we are to limit temperature rise per the Paris Agreement to 1.5°C.
A just-released international survey by Ipsos MORI Public opinion on the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic says: “Seven in ten consider climate change as serious a crisis as COVID-19, and a similar proportion feel their government will be failing them if it doesn’t act on climate change now. Two thirds globally support a green economic recovery from the crisis.”
Over the course of 2020, the UN75 team will gather public perspectives on global challenges and solutions on how to tackle them through a one-minute survey (in 53 languages) and dialogues – now the bulk of which will be online online – organized by partners across the world.
Nature is in crisis, threatened by biodiversity and habitat loss, global heating and toxic pollution. Failure to act is failing humanity. Addressing the current coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and protecting ourselves against future global threats requires sound management of hazardous medical and chemical waste; strong and global stewardship of nature and biodiversity; and a clear commitment to “building back better”, creating green jobs and facilitating the transition to carbon neutral economies. Humanity depends on action now for a resilient and sustainable future.
For more information, please contact Lisa Laskaridis lisa.laskaridis@un.org


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-30--Coronavirus shutdown forces research project to miss critical start of Arctic ice melt

The worldwide coronavirus lockdown has meant that the MOSAiC research project , which deliberately froze the icebreaker Polarstern into the Arctic Sea ice last fall , will miss taking scientific measurements during several critical weeks of the melt season ( one of the main reasons for the project ) .
According to a report in the High North News ( 28 April 2020 ) , at 27 April the Polarstern was between Svalbard and the North Pole ( map above ) .
In mid-May , the ship will break out of the ice and proceed south to waters off Svalbard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) to meet up with two German icebreakers for a high-seas exchange of crew and restock provisions , the only option available after the coronovirus lockdown in Svalbard meant the original plans had to be scuttled .
And while waiting for the upcoming research upheaval and breaking free of the ice , the crew of the Polarstern recently reported a visit from a polar bear wandering the ice hunting for seals .
From a report in NATURE ( 24 April 2020 , see image above ) , ” Coronavirus shutdown forces research ship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( my bold ) : When scientists were planning MOSAiC — an epic research expedition that would remain trapped in Arctic sea ice for one year — they considered the North Pole ’ s hazards .
They worried about hypothermia , isolation , crushing ice and polar bears .
They had dozens of contingency plans .
But no one anticipated a pandemic .
… “ The idea of leaving the camp and floe was certainly not something we would have considered in the original rotation plan , ” Fong says .
“ But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I think it ’ s an important compromise that recognizes that the human dimension to the work we do is very , very important.
” The pandemic also means coordinators are using meticulous precautions to ensure that no one carries the virus to the ship .
The next rotation of scientists will arrive in Hamburg , Germany , on 1 May and go to Bremerhaven by private bus .
There , they will be tested for the virus before going into individual quarantine .
Assuming everyone is negative , they will undergo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two weeks , they will travel to Svalbard on two German research vessels and board Polarstern before it returns to the research camp .
Although scientists plan to leave the research station mostly intact , certain measurements will have to stop .
The remotely operated vehicle that dives into the ocean twice a week will be pulled out of the water .
The tethered balloon that monitors the atmosphere will be packed away .
And the scientists ’ continuous collecting of ice and snow samples across the floe will stop .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can with these constraints , ” says Matthew Shupe , an atmospheric and oceanic scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder and co-leader of MOSAiC .
“ But in the end , it ’ s a bummer.
” That is especially true , given that the gap will probably hit during a crucial time : when the ice begins to melt .
Every spring , melting exposes dark ocean water , which absorbs more sunlight than does the ice .
That warms the ocean further and spurs more melt in a vicious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in detail .
It ’ s also when life in the Arctic flourishes .
As sunlight penetrates farther into the ice and upper ocean , sea-ice algae and phytoplankton form massive blooms that provide meals for the rest of the Arctic food web .
It has never been studied before in the central Arctic .
Now scientists might miss it .
The High North News report says the Polarstern will likely reposition closer to the North Pole when it returns after resupply and staff exchange ( my bold ) : “ While the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 2019 and in late February happened as planned , an aerial transfer of staff and resupply out of Svalbard had to be canceled as Norwegian authorities have placed the archipelago on lockdown due to the pandemic .
In early April project leaders had considered chartering an icebreaker or moving a planned resupply mission of the icebreaker Odin from mid-June to mid-May .
However , none of these options turned out to be feasible in light of the travel restrictions .
“ The current situation also means [ that ] the international icebreakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expedition are also prohibited from making any staff transfers , ” explain officials from the Alfred-Wegener-Institute ( AWI ) , the lead German government-funded research organization behind the expedition .
“ The massive restrictions on global travel hindered the third team exchange , which had been planned as an aerial transfer in early April , using the Spitsbergen archipelago as a base of operations.
” … Fortunately the drift corridor of the Polarstern has already taken the vessel in the direction of Svalbard and it is currently located between the North Pole and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ logistical operation , this position is advantageous .
Some instruments on the MOSAiC ice floe will continue recording autonomously until Polarstern returns , while others will be dismantled , ” explains the AWI .
The project leaders may also use the Polarstern ’ s departure from the ice as an opportunity to relocate the ice camp closer to the North Pole .
This possibility has always been part of the planning scenarios in case the ship drifted faster than anticipated and will not have an impact on the scientific research being conducted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we will set up the Ice Camp again farther north , and continue our observations in a region where the Central Arctic is still covered with ice in the summer .
We ’ re thrilled with the tremendous amount of data we ’ ve been able to gather over the past seven months , ” states expedition leader Prof Markus Rex from the AWI .
Other reports of the coronavirus-lockdown-disruption of this research project are found here , here and here .
On a lighter note , on 23 April 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ice for the crew exchange mid-May , the Polarstern crew had a visit from a polar bear ( below ) : This past week [ 23 April 2020 according to one of the photos ] we had the first polar bear sighting of leg 3 .
In the early morning hours , a curious male polar bear walked through the Central Observatory , checked out a few installations , played with a rubber fender , and continued on to about 800 meters from the ship .
There it sat near a small crack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , likely waiting for a seal to surface .
It caused no damage and , given that no one was outside working at the time , led to very minor disruptions in our work .
[ my bold ] ‘ The polar bear viewed from the bridge of Polarstern .
Here , it is standing behind Met City near a small lead , likely waiting for a seal .
Photo by Steven Fons .
‘

From Polar Bear Science
Posted on April 28, 2020 |
The worldwide coronavirus lockdown has meant that the MOSAiC research project, which deliberately froze the icebreaker Polarstern into the Arctic Sea ice last fall, will miss taking scientific measurements during several critical weeks of the melt season (one of the main reasons for the project).
According to a report in the High North News (28 April 2020), at 27 April the Polarstern was between Svalbard and the North Pole (map above). In mid-May, the ship will break out of the ice and proceed south to waters off Svalbard (expected to take about a week) to meet up with two German icebreakers for a high-seas exchange of crew and restock provisions, the only option available after the coronovirus lockdown in Svalbard meant the original plans had to be scuttled. And while waiting for the upcoming research upheaval and breaking free of the ice, the crew of the Polarstern recently reported a visit from a polar bear wandering the ice hunting for seals.
From a report in NATURE (24 April 2020, see image above),”Coronavirus shutdown forces research ship to break out of Arctic ice” (my bold):
When scientists were planning MOSAiC — an epic research expedition that would remain trapped in Arctic sea ice for one year — they considered the North Pole’s hazards. They worried about hypothermia, isolation, crushing ice and polar bears. They had dozens of contingency plans. But no one anticipated a pandemic. … “The idea of leaving the camp and floe was certainly not something we would have considered in the original rotation plan,” Fong says. “But given what we’re encountering now, I think it’s an important compromise that recognizes that the human dimension to the work we do is very, very important.” The pandemic also means coordinators are using meticulous precautions to ensure that no one carries the virus to the ship. The next rotation of scientists will arrive in Hamburg, Germany, on 1 May and go to Bremerhaven by private bus. There, they will be tested for the virus before going into individual quarantine. Assuming everyone is negative, they will undergo safety training in group isolation. After two weeks, they will travel to Svalbard on two German research vessels and board Polarstern before it returns to the research camp. Although scientists plan to leave the research station mostly intact, certain measurements will have to stop. The remotely operated vehicle that dives into the ocean twice a week will be pulled out of the water. The tethered balloon that monitors the atmosphere will be packed away. And the scientists’ continuous collecting of ice and snow samples across the floe will stop. “We’re going to do the best we can with these constraints,” says Matthew Shupe, an atmospheric and oceanic scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder and co-leader of MOSAiC. “But in the end, it’s a bummer.” That is especially true, given that the gap will probably hit during a crucial time: when the ice begins to melt. Every spring, melting exposes dark ocean water, which absorbs more sunlight than does the ice. That warms the ocean further and spurs more melt in a vicious cycle that scientists are eager to study in detail. It’s also when life in the Arctic flourishes. As sunlight penetrates farther into the ice and upper ocean, sea-ice algae and phytoplankton form massive blooms that provide meals for the rest of the Arctic food web. It has never been studied before in the central Arctic. Now scientists might miss it.
The High North News report says the Polarstern will likely reposition closer to the North Pole when it returns after resupply and staff exchange (my bold):
“While the first two crew exchanges at the end of 2019 and in late February happened as planned, an aerial transfer of staff and resupply out of Svalbard had to be canceled as Norwegian authorities have placed the archipelago on lockdown due to the pandemic. In early April project leaders had considered chartering an icebreaker or moving a planned resupply mission of the icebreaker Odin from mid-June to mid-May. However, none of these options turned out to be feasible in light of the travel restrictions. “The current situation also means [that] the international icebreakers that were originally meant to resupply the expedition are also prohibited from making any staff transfers,” explain officials from the Alfred-Wegener-Institute (AWI), the lead German government-funded research organization behind the expedition. “The massive restrictions on global travel hindered the third team exchange, which had been planned as an aerial transfer in early April, using the Spitsbergen archipelago as a base of operations.” …
Fortunately the drift corridor of the Polarstern has already taken the vessel in the direction of Svalbard and it is currently located between the North Pole and Fram Strait. “For the upcoming logistical operation, this position is advantageous. Some instruments on the MOSAiC ice floe will continue recording autonomously until Polarstern returns, while others will be dismantled,” explains the AWI. The project leaders may also use the Polarstern’s departure from the ice as an opportunity to relocate the ice camp closer to the North Pole. This possibility has always been part of the planning scenarios in case the ship drifted faster than anticipated and will not have an impact on the scientific research being conducted. “If we drift too far south, we will set up the Ice Camp again farther north, and continue our observations in a region where the Central Arctic is still covered with ice in the summer. We’re thrilled with the tremendous amount of data we’ve been able to gather over the past seven months,” states expedition leader Prof Markus Rex from the AWI.
Other reports of the coronavirus-lockdown-disruption of this research project are found here, here and here.
On a lighter note, on 23 April 2020, while waiting to break out of the ice for the crew exchange mid-May, the Polarstern crew had a visit from a polar bear (below):
This past week [23 April 2020 according to one of the photos] we had the first polar bear sighting of leg 3. In the early morning hours, a curious male polar bear walked through the Central Observatory, checked out a few installations, played with a rubber fender, and continued on to about 800 meters from the ship. There it sat near a small crack in the ice for almost two hours, likely waiting for a seal to surface. It caused no damage and, given that no one was outside working at the time, led to very minor disruptions in our work. [my bold]
‘The polar bear viewed from the bridge of Polarstern. Here, it is standing behind Met City near a small lead, likely waiting for a seal. Photo by Steven Fons. ‘
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-29--Apparent Paradoxes in the relationship of Climate ‘Concerns, Skepticism, Activism, and Priority’, ex

Apparent Paradoxes in the relationship of Climate ‘Concerns, Skepticism, Activism, and Priority’, explained by Religiosity

Explores the contrast between Allied and Core belief in the culture of climate catastrophe , and the relationships of these plus religiosity to Climate Change Activism ( XR and Children ’ s Strikes for Climate ) .
Post 2 of 3 .
The opening post of this series demonstrated a strong correlation across nations between religiosity , and the responses per nation to unconstrained questions from a 2019 YouGov survey on attitudes to climate-change , which questions are aligned to Catastrophic Climate Change Culture ( CCCC ) .
Chart 1 below was shown towards the end of the prior post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of ‘ a great deal ’ responses to two climate survey questions : “ How much of an impact , if any , do you believe climate change will have on your life ?
” ( blue series ) , and “ how much power , if any , do you think each of the following have to combat climate change ?
” sub-option , “ International bodies ( e.g .
the United Nations ) ” ( pink series ) .
I term the effect causing these trends ‘ Allied Belief ’ ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surface alliance between CCCC and religion , makes religious adherents feel comfortable with climate catastrophe narratives , as long as there are no reality constraints , thereby disabling their Innate Skepticism of CCCC .
As religiosity rises within nations ( going left to right ) , ISk about CCCC narratives falls , and so belief in said narratives rises .
The pink series is muted , as it ’ s only needed to show lower gradient for less emotive / existential / personal questions .
Note : ISk is an instinctive mechanism that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ Chart is simplified Chart 2 in SI datafile ] .
So , if we think of what we might call ‘ standard belief ’ in a culture , especially strong expressions of this such as we ’ re very familiar with from ardent religious adherents , or indeed regarding the case in point , those similarly committed to catastrophic climate culture , how would that look on the above chart and how does it differ from ABel ?
We can start with the fact that adherence of this kind doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a direct commitment , essentially to core cultural narratives ( from which we can label it Core Belief , CBel ) and one that survives clashes with reality issues .
So , now it ’ s time to look at reality-constrained survey questions .
The orange series in Chart 2 plots results from a reality-constrained question , in fact the enormous 2015 UN ‘ My World ’ poll having ~10 million participants from many nations .
In this case , constraint arises from having to rank 6 global threats out of 17 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being ‘ action on climate change ’ .
Note : the orange scale , the percentage vote-share for action on climate change from this poll , is smaller than the blue .
Nations correspond vertically ; in this chart ( and above too ) Taiwan and Hong-Kong are dropped as the UN poll doesn ’ t cover them , leaving 22 nations .
[ Chart is Chart 2yxA in SI datafile ] .
So , there ’ s apparent paradoxes here !
Those nations expressing the highest concerns about climate-change ( and inclusive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fix it ) , also express the lowest desire for ‘ climate-change action ’ .
And oppositely at the LHS .
However , this fits fine with the underlying cultural mechanics .
Also , it looks like there ’ s structure in the wide variability about the orange trend .
Before saying more about these things though , we must continue to pursue CBel… The orange series represents belief in a weakly-constrained circumstance ( so I term that Constrained Belief , ConBel ) .
There ’ s much variety in how surveys questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for commonly used issue lists : How many issues ?
How many to select out of them ?
Are they all genuinely felt concerns ?
How closely felt ( e.g .
national versus international , for the former , country relevant ? )
.
The SI ( especially Footnote 4 ) provides detail .
This will produce a range of constraint strengths .
For a choice of X out of Y issues , constraint is stronger as X reduces relative to Y ( so say , 1 out of 12 much stronger than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the winning issue ( s ) has to be higher .
National issues are stronger than global ones ( closer to reality for most participants ) .
To find CBel , all we have to do is increase the constraint strength to ‘ ultimate ’ as it were .
If people still believe in action on climate change above all other reality issues however strong , this indicates a direct belief in the narratives of catastrophe and salvation , which in their own terms and contrary to mainstream science , do outbid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t measure this , because there ’ s no survey with a consistent method of full constraint across many nations ( that I ’ m aware of ) .
But we can estimate it , and we can also box the estimate in via nearby measurements .
Hence I add a series ( red ) to Chart 2 , which represents those still choosing climate-change in a strongly-constrained ( but not fully ) survey over 16 of the 22 nations ( most I can get ) .
And I add some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few European nations ( red crosses ) , that are fully constrained .
This gives Chart 3 below , on which I also place an estimate of CBel ( bold-orange ) .
Note : for clarity only the trend of the red series is shown .
The orange series above , on expanded RH Y axis , is also reduced to just its trend .
[ For full details , data , r/r2/p , survey-sources , see Chart 3yxA of datafile and Section 3 of expanded post ] .
A very straightforward estimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UN Poll vote-share for action on climate-change ( orange series in Chart 2 ) by 6 ; the reasonable assumption of evenly distributed votes on the selected issues means this is how many would have chosen that option as their top priority .
While being asked to make that top single-choice directly is a different context , which may skew the estimate somewhat , it is below the red trend and with ~proportional gradient as we expect , plus the red actual measurements ( crosses ) at the LHS , do straddle the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a little high there , however I take the bold-orange trend as my CBel going forward .
On a single chart we now have ABel ( with muted-pink showing how it tracks when weaker ) , and CBel ( equivalent to full strength ConBel , with muted-red plus orange showing how it tracks when weaker ) .
It ’ s worth noting that as core believers will be affirmative to all climate-change issues / concerns , the ABel trends are actually inclusive of CBel too , albeit the latter is very much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , back to that apparent paradox noted above .
A reality-constraint has two effects on climate-change attitudes .
Firstly , the issue is forced down to Earth so to speak , robbing a great deal of the emotive power in climate catastrophe narratives .
At the same time , cost and consequence is introduced wrt all the other important issues that are needful in our societies , in turn challenging existing personal value-sets that are set within the context of those societies .
Although the UN poll constrains pretty weakly , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CCCC narrative is enough to dissolve the subconscious reassurance in religious folks that this cause is truly allied to their values , to their faith .
Presumably , they don ’ t subconsciously feel the oft-proclaimed alliance any longer .
Hence their ISk , which had been disabled by this reassurance , springs into action .
As religious adherents have strongly focused cultural values to defend , which are now challenged by the societal consequences / costs , their ISk comes in big .
Subconsciously biased communicators for or against climate-change issues / @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at various places on Chart 3 trendlines .
This increases confusion about what publics actually think , and cultures can take advantage of confusion .
I ’ d be surprised though if communicators have any inkling about the global role of religiosity ; no doubt they ’ ll see what they want to regarding motivations both ‘ good ’ and ‘ bad ’ .
However , a huge problem for CCCC adherents within irreligious nations , is that innate skepticism of any narratives that veer too much towards the existential / emotive , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ huge .
Yet cultures don ’ t work rationally and propagate / amplify such narratives at every opportunity , turning off a big majority of people even as they also gain adherents .
Similarly , any real-world strong constraint such as the sacrifice of petrol cars or gas heating , is likely only to achieve CBel levels of support at best .
Though all trendlines change with time too ( CCCC is growing ) even the more modest sacrifices won ’ t likely get support beyond the strongly-constrained ( red ) trendline– if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ realized , which may not necessarily be the case .
[ Note : the huge new reality-constraint of COVID-19 will highly likely squeeze the thick orange line down still further wrt other priorities ; minimal fervent believers only , albeit this effect could evaporate after a year or two .
Cultures are typically very robust to such damage , and may even find ways to turn adverse conditions into advantage longer-term ] .
This leads to enormous frustration for core believers within irreligious countries , but far less for those in religious countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( albeit being from ABel , it ’ s ephemeral ) .
So regarding Climate Activism , we expect this to occur most in nations at the LHS of Chart 3 , where core believers are defending their existential culture from the great majority of non-believers ; and for cultures as for armies sometimes , attack ( aggressive proselytization , civil disobedience ) is a good form of defense .
In very religious countries , there ’ s far less apparent need to rail against society , and less core believers to start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , we expect proportionally high activism at left , to low at right .
As explained in the SI , for any route attempting to demonstrate that climate activism conforms to this pattern , available data seems far-from-ideal .
I went with the route of sampling Extinction Rebellion and Children ’ s Strike Weekly presence across nations , from their respective websites .
I split the XR data into tiers , with Tier 3 the highest presence ( > 0.5 groups per million population ) , Tier 2 next lowest ( > @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Tier 0 with zero presence .
[ For how / why / details , see SI expanded post Section 5 and Footnote 6 ] .
These Tiers mapped onto the main ABel / CBel trends in Chart 4 below , do show the highest XR presence Tier ( dark-green ) at the leftmost side , and the second-most presence Tier ( mid-green ) covering the next few nations to the left .
Excepting Qatar , which happens to have 1 XR group and a very low population , a lucky T2-score @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is far lower , figures in pale green show fractions of the presence in Italy , the least represented nation in Tier 2 .
Given the rough data , this is at least consistent with motivational expectations from above .
Implications for youth , and Children ’ s Strike conformance to expectation The top-ten ranking of Children ’ s Strike Weekly ( CSW ) events ( as a ratio of national population ) per nation , is mapped onto Chart 4 .
See the numbers trailing the nation name-labels ( 1=highest ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the leftmost nations , matching the section 4 expectation , albeit nations are ordered differently within the top-ten .
The data is likely too rough to expect exact correspondence ( of CSW to XR rank per nation , or of either to the exact trend prediction ) .
However despite this , it ’ s noticeable that Spain and Italy seem rather far rightwards / religious to achieve CSW scores of 4 and 5 respectively , which brings us to an issue specific to youth .
In Western nations where religion is receding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rankers ) , young adults are considerably less religious than older adults .
While there are very few surveys involving children , this rule presumably extends downwards in age , given this is where young adults recently came from .
So at the national level , children will behave as though they come from a nation rather to the left on Chart 4 of their actual home nation .
Which is to say , as a group having more CBel and more climate activism , yet simultaneously less ABel so more skepticism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ side of this is , as noted within this previous post , children are primed to pick up cultural templates ( as provided by CCCC ) , but may not have developed a balancing ISk ( yet , or ever ) .
So , children ’ s CBel may be even more amplified .
The religiosity gap separating children and adults can also be different per nation , which will explain at least some CSW ranking changes relative to XR , also to any data reflecting mainly adult attitudes .
Based upon projection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Spain does indeed have an unusually big gap .
This would explain Spain ’ s high CSW ranking .
However , the same doesn ’ t hold for Italy , unless a similar strength effect for children hasn ’ t yet surfaced as they mature to adults .
[ See SI Footnote 7 and datafile for CSW details / data / source , plus Footnote 8 for religiosity gap ] .
As noted in Section 2 , variability about the UN poll ConBel / CBel trend ( all orange series in Chart 2/3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ( opposite direction ) ABel trend ( blue ) .
To investigate this further ( is it noise ?
something systemic ?
something to do with individual faiths ? )
, I created Chart 5 below .
This adds many more nations from the UN poll ( but not covered by the main Climate Survey ) .
The Y scale happens to match estimated CBel .
The chart is split into 4 main religio-regional blocks , a ) to d ) , within which further subdivisions ( religio-regional groups ) are color-coded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ c ) , so I ’ ve assisted the eye with line connections for a couple of groups .
Note : greyed-out nations are too unique or too far from any others to associate in a religio-regional group .
[ See Chart 5yx in SI datafile for full data ] .
This representation helps show the regional rather than Faith-related nature of our evolution away from religion , albeit some regions / Faiths essentially correspond .
Hence , we will see regionality in attitudes to climate-change that result from the interaction of religion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ main trend is so large it can ’ t be contained , so to speak , by some of the less sizeable Faiths or regions .
Meaning that looking exclusively inside either , the main trend may not just appear weak , but non-existent or reversed .
However , it ’ s clear from this depiction [ and a comparative Faiths only color-coding , see SI datafile Chart 4yx ] that the variability isn ’ t caused by Faiths or regionality either .
So , where does it from ?
It turns out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming from GDP-per-Capita ranking ( GDPpCR ) .
9 of 13 ( not greyed out ) nations forming the bottom-most band of the trend are below low ( high number ) GDPpCR thresholds per group [ and for a ) and b ) , per block too ] .
There ’ s also some highest ( low number ) GDPpCR nations per group on the uppermost edge , plus an upper threshold in block a ) .
[ SI Footnote 10 has detail on the GDPpC aspect ] .
Likely , the remaining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a given religiosity , the publics of less-wealthy nations ( lower GDPpCR ) , are even less disposed to transfer any serious cultural allegiance from their religious faith to CCCC .
This is opposite to what one would expect if these publics were clamoring for more climate-change $ from richer nations , albeit some governments may be .
The more pressured financial circumstances will sharpen reality-constraints still further , leading to still more ISk and less conversions into Core Belief .
Such cultural mechanisms easily outbid a dream of filtered down $ .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ towards the top-left in Charts 4 & 5 , is the national Electric Vehicle sales ranking .
The next post covers cultural expectations for these figures .
Affirmative Public attitudes to Climate-Change are cultural not rational The positions of nations on the various trendlines shown here represent the most affirmative attitudes to climate-change issues , and are all due to cultural not rational responses .
Even the secondary GDPpCR angle that causes variation about the ConBel / CBel trend , is only the exacerbation of a cultural factor .
These positions aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or the potential exposure of particular nations to any actual climate impacts .
Knowing only national religiosity , allows a reasonable prediction of these CC affirmative attitudes , albeit for reality-constrained questions GDP-per-capita also sharpens the prediction .
Prediction isn ’ t a goal in itself , but if verified and accurate , valuably confirms what ’ s actually happening .
For the religious ( so mainly as revealed in religious nations ) , CCCC appears to be perceived as potentially competitive ; their deep values aren ’ t shifting to it despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to disable their Innate Skepticism .
Within irreligious nations , CCCC appears to be partially filling the recent cultural vacuum .
All this leads to apparent paradoxes .
In highly religious nations , the most climate concern lives simultaneously with the least priority , each dependent only upon the survey question types ; maximum activism occurs within those nations having the most skepticism and so the least concern about climate-change in unconstrained questions .
Yet as explained above , these paradoxical attitudes do follow the logic of cultural mechanisms .
Table 1 below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ Strongly-Framed ’ questions , i.e .
reality-constrained questions where the constraint is better than ‘ very weak ’ , or unconstrained questions where the emotive / existential / personal alignment to CCCC is better than ‘ very weak ’ .
The final post shows that even affirmatives to Weakly-Framed climate survey questions , such as those encountered in the first post of this series , produce cultural not rational responses , albeit non-linear wrt religiosity .
It also looks at elite attitudes and consequent policy penetration , plus further at the influence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ findings across the whole series .
There are 3 posts in this series , all of which have the same style of Supplementary Information , which consist : 1 ) an expanded post , 2 ) a footnotes file , and 3 ) an Excel datafile .
The text below is a streamlined post version , geared to get the concepts across more readily and uncluttered regarding side-issues , detail on methodology , intricate depth , path my exploration took etc .
For folks who want more , the expanded post is ~4700 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ file , also having various external references , relates to the expanded post ( though a couple are pointed at below ) .
Likewise , all the chart IDs within the Excel datafile are numbered for the expanded post .
However , all sources / data for the charts below can easily be found ( I provided SI IDs in the text ) .
The datafile includes various extra charts too .

From Dr. Judith Curry’s Blog, Climate Etc.
Posted on April 27, 2020 by curryja
by Andy West
Explores the contrast between Allied and Core belief in the culture of climate catastrophe, and the relationships of these plus religiosity to Climate Change Activism (XR and Children’s Strikes for Climate). Post 2 of 3.
Introduction
The opening post of this series demonstrated a strong correlation across nations between religiosity, and the responses per nation to unconstrained questions from a 2019 YouGov survey on attitudes to climate-change, which questions are aligned to Catastrophic Climate Change Culture (CCCC). Chart 1 below was shown towards the end of the prior post. Y axis values show the percentage of ‘a great deal’ responses to two climate survey questions: “How much of an impact, if any, do you believe climate change will have on your life?” (blue series), and “how much power, if any, do you think each of the following have to combat climate change?” sub-option, “International bodies (e.g. the United Nations)” (pink series).
I term the effect causing these trends ‘Allied Belief’ (ABel). They occur because the surface alliance between CCCC and religion, makes religious adherents feel comfortable with climate catastrophe narratives, as long as there are no reality constraints, thereby disabling their Innate Skepticism of CCCC. As religiosity rises within nations (going left to right), ISk about CCCC narratives falls, and so belief in said narratives rises. The pink series is muted, as it’s only needed to show lower gradient for less emotive / existential / personal questions. Note: ISk is an instinctive mechanism that is very different to rational skepticism. [Chart is simplified Chart 2 in SI datafile].
Constrained Belief and Core Belief
So, if we think of what we might call ‘standard belief’ in a culture, especially strong expressions of this such as we’re very familiar with from ardent religious adherents, or indeed regarding the case in point, those similarly committed to catastrophic climate culture, how would that look on the above chart and how does it differ from ABel? We can start with the fact that adherence of this kind doesn’t primarily occur via alliance; it’s a direct commitment, essentially to core cultural narratives (from which we can label it Core Belief, CBel) and one that survives clashes with reality issues. So, now it’s time to look at reality-constrained survey questions.
The orange series in Chart 2 plots results from a reality-constrained question, in fact the enormous 2015 UN ‘My World’ poll having ~10 million participants from many nations. In this case, constraint arises from having to rank 6 global threats out of 17 as the most important, with one being ‘action on climate change’. Note: the orange scale, the percentage vote-share for action on climate change from this poll, is smaller than the blue. Nations correspond vertically; in this chart (and above too) Taiwan and Hong-Kong are dropped as the UN poll doesn’t cover them, leaving 22 nations. [Chart is Chart 2yxA in SI datafile].
So, there’s apparent paradoxes here! Those nations expressing the highest concerns about climate-change (and inclusive of more faith in the UN to fix it), also express the lowest desire for ‘climate-change action’. And oppositely at the LHS. However, this fits fine with the underlying cultural mechanics. Also, it looks like there’s structure in the wide variability about the orange trend. Before saying more about these things though, we must continue to pursue CBel…
The orange series represents belief in a weakly-constrained circumstance (so I term that Constrained Belief, ConBel). There’s much variety in how surveys questions can constrain. For instance, even for commonly used issue lists: How many issues? How many to select out of them? Are they all genuinely felt concerns? How closely felt (e.g. national versus international, for the former, country relevant?). The SI (especially Footnote 4) provides detail. This will produce a range of constraint strengths. For a choice of X out of Y issues, constraint is stronger as X reduces relative to Y (so say, 1 out of 12 much stronger than 3 out of 12), commitment to the winning issue(s) has to be higher. National issues are stronger than global ones (closer to reality for most participants).
To find CBel, all we have to do is increase the constraint strength to ‘ultimate’ as it were. If people still believe in action on climate change above all other reality issues however strong, this indicates a direct belief in the narratives of catastrophe and salvation, which in their own terms and contrary to mainstream science, do outbid everything else. The snag is we can’t measure this, because there’s no survey with a consistent method of full constraint across many nations (that I’m aware of). But we can estimate it, and we can also box the estimate in via nearby measurements.
Hence I add a series (red) to Chart 2, which represents those still choosing climate-change in a strongly-constrained (but not fully) survey over 16 of the 22 nations (most I can get). And I add some spot-points for much smaller surveys on a few European nations (red crosses), that are fully constrained. This gives Chart 3 below, on which I also place an estimate of CBel (bold-orange). Note: for clarity only the trend of the red series is shown. The orange series above, on expanded RH Y axis, is also reduced to just its trend. [For full details, data, r/r2/p, survey-sources, see Chart 3yxA of datafile and Section 3 of expanded post].
A very straightforward estimate of CBel is obtained by dividing the UN Poll vote-share for action on climate-change (orange series in Chart 2) by 6; the reasonable assumption of evenly distributed votes on the selected issues means this is how many would have chosen that option as their top priority. While being asked to make that top single-choice directly is a different context, which may skew the estimate somewhat, it is below the red trend and with ~proportional gradient as we expect, plus the red actual measurements (crosses) at the LHS, do straddle the estimate. The latter hint the estimate is a little high there, however I take the bold-orange trend as my CBel going forward.
On a single chart we now have ABel (with muted-pink showing how it tracks when weaker), and CBel (equivalent to full strength ConBel, with muted-red plus orange showing how it tracks when weaker). It’s worth noting that as core believers will be affirmative to all climate-change issues / concerns, the ABel trends are actually inclusive of CBel too, albeit the latter is very much smaller across most of the chart.
ConBel / CBel underlying mechanism
So, back to that apparent paradox noted above. A reality-constraint has two effects on climate-change attitudes. Firstly, the issue is forced down to Earth so to speak, robbing a great deal of the emotive power in climate catastrophe narratives. At the same time, cost and consequence is introduced wrt all the other important issues that are needful in our societies, in turn challenging existing personal value-sets that are set within the context of those societies.
Although the UN poll constrains pretty weakly, the loss of emotive power / alignment to CCCC narrative is enough to dissolve the subconscious reassurance in religious folks that this cause is truly allied to their values, to their faith. Presumably, they don’t subconsciously feel the oft-proclaimed alliance any longer. Hence their ISk, which had been disabled by this reassurance, springs into action. As religious adherents have strongly focused cultural values to defend, which are now challenged by the societal consequences / costs, their ISk comes in big.
Real-world implications: Policy and Climate Activism
Subconsciously biased communicators for or against climate-change issues / support, can find comfort and claims at various places on Chart 3 trendlines. This increases confusion about what publics actually think, and cultures can take advantage of confusion. I’d be surprised though if communicators have any inkling about the global role of religiosity; no doubt they’ll see what they want to regarding motivations both ‘good’ and ‘bad’. However, a huge problem for CCCC adherents within irreligious nations, is that innate skepticism of any narratives that veer too much towards the existential / emotive, especially with any personal angle, is huge. Yet cultures don’t work rationally and propagate / amplify such narratives at every opportunity, turning off a big majority of people even as they also gain adherents. Similarly, any real-world strong constraint such as the sacrifice of petrol cars or gas heating, is likely only to achieve CBel levels of support at best. Though all trendlines change with time too (CCCC is growing) even the more modest sacrifices won’t likely get support beyond the strongly-constrained (red) trendline– if the real-world clashes are properly communicated / realized, which may not necessarily be the case.
[Note: the huge new reality-constraint of COVID-19 will highly likely squeeze the thick orange line down still further wrt other priorities; minimal fervent believers only, albeit this effect could evaporate after a year or two. Cultures are typically very robust to such damage, and may even find ways to turn adverse conditions into advantage longer-term].
This leads to enormous frustration for core believers within irreligious countries, but far less for those in religious countries where support will often seem very high (albeit being from ABel, it’s ephemeral). So regarding Climate Activism, we expect this to occur most in nations at the LHS of Chart 3, where core believers are defending their existential culture from the great majority of non-believers; and for cultures as for armies sometimes, attack (aggressive proselytization, civil disobedience) is a good form of defense. In very religious countries, there’s far less apparent need to rail against society, and less core believers to start with in order to maintain activism. So, we expect proportionally high activism at left, to low at right.
As explained in the SI, for any route attempting to demonstrate that climate activism conforms to this pattern, available data seems far-from-ideal. I went with the route of sampling Extinction Rebellion and Children’s Strike Weekly presence across nations, from their respective websites.
Extinction Rebellion conformance to expectation
I split the XR data into tiers, with Tier 3 the highest presence (>0.5 groups per million population), Tier 2 next lowest (>0.1 groups/M), Tier 1 non-zero, and Tier 0 with zero presence. [For how / why / details, see SI expanded post Section 5 and Footnote 6]. These Tiers mapped onto the main ABel / CBel trends in Chart 4 below, do show the highest XR presence Tier (dark-green) at the leftmost side, and the second-most presence Tier (mid-green) covering the next few nations to the left. Excepting Qatar, which happens to have 1 XR group and a very low population, a lucky T2-score. The XR presence for Tier 1 is far lower, figures in pale green show fractions of the presence in Italy, the least represented nation in Tier 2. Given the rough data, this is at least consistent with motivational expectations from above.
Implications for youth, and Children’s Strike conformance to expectation
The top-ten ranking of Children’s Strike Weekly (CSW) events (as a ratio of national population) per nation, is mapped onto Chart 4. See the numbers trailing the nation name-labels (1=highest). Once again, this ranking picks out the leftmost nations, matching the section 4 expectation, albeit nations are ordered differently within the top-ten. The data is likely too rough to expect exact correspondence (of CSW to XR rank per nation, or of either to the exact trend prediction). However despite this, it’s noticeable that Spain and Italy seem rather far rightwards / religious to achieve CSW scores of 4 and 5 respectively, which brings us to an issue specific to youth.
In Western nations where religion is receding (occurs in all the top-ten CSW rankers), young adults are considerably less religious than older adults. While there are very few surveys involving children, this rule presumably extends downwards in age, given this is where young adults recently came from. So at the national level, children will behave as though they come from a nation rather to the left on Chart 4 of their actual home nation. Which is to say, as a group having more CBel and more climate activism, yet simultaneously less ABel so more skepticism. However, an issue with the ABel side of this is, as noted within this previous post, children are primed to pick up cultural templates (as provided by CCCC), but may not have developed a balancing ISk (yet, or ever). So, children’s CBel may be even more amplified.
The religiosity gap separating children and adults can also be different per nation, which will explain at least some CSW ranking changes relative to XR, also to any data reflecting mainly adult attitudes. Based upon projection from young / older adult data, Spain does indeed have an unusually big gap. This would explain Spain’s high CSW ranking. However, the same doesn’t hold for Italy, unless a similar strength effect for children hasn’t yet surfaced as they mature to adults. [See SI Footnote 7 and datafile for CSW details / data / source, plus Footnote 8 for religiosity gap].
The variability within ConBel / estimated CBel: GDP-per-Capita
As noted in Section 2, variability about the UN poll ConBel / CBel trend (all orange series in Chart 2/3), is significantly larger than for the (opposite direction) ABel trend (blue). To investigate this further (is it noise? something systemic? something to do with individual faiths?), I created Chart 5 below. This adds many more nations from the UN poll (but not covered by the main Climate Survey). The Y scale happens to match estimated CBel.
The chart is split into 4 main religio-regional blocks, a) to d), within which further subdivisions (religio-regional groups) are color-coded. Several of the latter overlap inside c), so I’ve assisted the eye with line connections for a couple of groups. Note: greyed-out nations are too unique or too far from any others to associate in a religio-regional group. [See Chart 5yx in SI datafile for full data].
This representation helps show the regional rather than Faith-related nature of our evolution away from religion, albeit some regions / Faiths essentially correspond. Hence, we will see regionality in attitudes to climate-change that result from the interaction of religion and CCCC. The variability about the main trend is so large it can’t be contained, so to speak, by some of the less sizeable Faiths or regions. Meaning that looking exclusively inside either, the main trend may not just appear weak, but non-existent or reversed. However, it’s clear from this depiction [and a comparative Faiths only color-coding, see SI datafile Chart 4yx] that the variability isn’t caused by Faiths or regionality either. So, where does it from?
It turns out that a lot of the variability is coming from GDP-per-Capita ranking (GDPpCR). 9 of 13 (not greyed out) nations forming the bottom-most band of the trend are below low (high number) GDPpCR thresholds per group [and for a) and b), per block too]. There’s also some highest (low number) GDPpCR nations per group on the uppermost edge, plus an upper threshold in block a). [SI Footnote 10 has detail on the GDPpC aspect]. Likely, the remaining variability is noise.
So, for a given religiosity, the publics of less-wealthy nations (lower GDPpCR), are even less disposed to transfer any serious cultural allegiance from their religious faith to CCCC. This is opposite to what one would expect if these publics were clamoring for more climate-change $ from richer nations, albeit some governments may be. The more pressured financial circumstances will sharpen reality-constraints still further, leading to still more ISk and less conversions into Core Belief. Such cultural mechanisms easily outbid a dream of filtered down $.
The number trailing the name-label of nations towards the top-left in Charts 4 & 5, is the national Electric Vehicle sales ranking. The next post covers cultural expectations for these figures.
Affirmative Public attitudes to Climate-Change are cultural not rational
The positions of nations on the various trendlines shown here represent the most affirmative attitudes to climate-change issues, and are all due to cultural not rational responses. Even the secondary GDPpCR angle that causes variation about the ConBel / CBel trend, is only the exacerbation of a cultural factor. These positions aren’t due to climate science or policies or the potential exposure of particular nations to any actual climate impacts. Knowing only national religiosity, allows a reasonable prediction of these CC affirmative attitudes, albeit for reality-constrained questions GDP-per-capita also sharpens the prediction. Prediction isn’t a goal in itself, but if verified and accurate, valuably confirms what’s actually happening.
For the religious (so mainly as revealed in religious nations), CCCC appears to be perceived as potentially competitive; their deep values aren’t shifting to it despite a cozier surface alliance clearly strong enough to disable their Innate Skepticism. Within irreligious nations, CCCC appears to be partially filling the recent cultural vacuum. All this leads to apparent paradoxes. In highly religious nations, the most climate concern lives simultaneously with the least priority, each dependent only upon the survey question types; maximum activism occurs within those nations having the most skepticism and so the least concern about climate-change in unconstrained questions. Yet as explained above, these paradoxical attitudes do follow the logic of cultural mechanisms.
Table 1 below summarizes the overall pattern of responses to ‘Strongly-Framed’ questions, i.e. reality-constrained questions where the constraint is better than ‘very weak’, or unconstrained questions where the emotive / existential / personal alignment to CCCC is better than ‘very weak’.
The final post shows that even affirmatives to Weakly-Framed climate survey questions, such as those encountered in the first post of this series, produce cultural not rational responses, albeit non-linear wrt religiosity. It also looks at elite attitudes and consequent policy penetration, plus further at the influence of youth, before summarizing the provisional findings across the whole series.
Admin notes
There are 3 posts in this series, all of which have the same style of Supplementary Information, which consist: 1) an expanded post, 2) a footnotes file, and 3) an Excel datafile. The text below is a streamlined post version, geared to get the concepts across more readily and uncluttered regarding side-issues, detail on methodology, intricate depth, path my exploration took etc. For folks who want more, the expanded post is ~4700 words. Be aware that the footnotes file, also having various external references, relates to the expanded post (though a couple are pointed at below). Likewise, all the chart IDs within the Excel datafile are numbered for the expanded post. However, all sources / data for the charts below can easily be found (I provided SI IDs in the text). The datafile includes various extra charts too.
Footnotes [Footnotes ]
Data File [Datafile ]
Extended post [ Extended Post]
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-30--Meeting the terawatt challenge

Meeting the terawatt challenge

Robert Bryce ’ s latest book lays out a powerful case for treating electricity as a human right In his latest seminal book , A Question of Power : Electricity and the Wealth of Nations , Austin , Texas-based energy analyst and futurist Robert Bryce declares that “ electricity has become a human right.
” It ’ s not an “ endowed by our Creator ” human right , nor one enunciated by a constitution or UN charter .
It ’ s not akin to freedom of religion or speech .
It ’ s not some entitlement we get for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundamental right of access to this all-empowering energy source ; a right for all human lives to be improved and blessed the way ours have been ; a right to never be denied access to sufficient , reliable , affordable electricity , on a phony claim that letting you have it would hurt the environment or climate .
Try to imagine your home , school , healthcare , business , community or world – your life – without this amazing energy source , and you will wholeheartedly agree with Bryce .
In chapter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Terawatt Challenge.
” It ’ s a term coined by the late Nobel Laureate Richard Smalley , who posited that , if we can provide sufficient electricity to all peoples of the world , we can largely eliminate the massive problems of poverty , polluted environments , unsafe water and food insecurity .
Bryce solemnly notes that our world is still far from that goal .
But we can get there .
Bryce traces the history of harnessed electricity , from Benjamin Franklin through Tesla , Edison and Westinghouse – to the much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Julian Sprague , who developed electric elevator motors ( enabling skyscrapers ) and the nation ’ s first electric rail system .
He illustrates how Franklin Roosevelt brought affordable electricity to rural America and oversaw construction of massive dams that provided cheap electricity to every corner of America .
It was FDR , Bryce notes , who in 1932 proclaimed that “ Electricity is no longer a luxury ; it is a definite necessity.
” Bryce then hits us with the horrific reality that roughly 3.3 billion people ( 45 % of humanity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where annual per capita electricity consumption is less than 1,000 kilowatt-hours per year ( kWh/yr ) – about what his home refrigerator uses .
These people barely survive in Unplugged countries .
Another 2.7 billion people ( 37 % ) scrape by in Low-Watt countries .
Only 19 % of all people on Planet Earth live in “ High-Watt ” nations ( more than 4,000 kWh/yr ) – the bottom threshold , says Dr. Alan Pasternak , the key dividing line below which countries can not improve their Human Development Index .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sufficiency for the Unplugged – and even the Low-Watt – nations is the lack of societal integrity , capital investment and affordable energy .
Yet , to ensure that all humanity can reach its full potential – to liberate women from endless drudgery , enabling them to develop their innate skills and talents – requires that the human right to electricity be recognized and made reality .
How do we reach this lofty but essential goal ?
An essential component of societal integrity is that governments enforce the rule of law .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factions share political and economic power .
In the poorest countries elites organize society for their own benefit at the expense of the vast mass of people .
Capital – and energy – are much easier to obtain in a free society .
To illustrate the magnitude of the gap between Unplugged and High-Watt nations , Bryce chronicles the meteoric rise of the Giant Five – Alphabet ( Google ) , Amazon , Apple , Facebook and Microsoft – each of which consumes more electricity each year than many entire countries .
Financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also have giant electricity appetites , as does the marijuana industry .
These businesses all know from experience the cost that electricity blackouts impose on them – and their customers .
Both weather and sabotage threaten the integrity of the electric grid , but the greater threat is the folly of those who believe that wind and solar alone can provide sufficient electric energy for a high-tech society , let alone the world ’ s billions .
Bryce chronicles how four factors – cost , storage , scale , and land use – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and power systems .
Electricity prices are soaring in countries like Germany , which panicked after Fukushima and began shuttering its nuclear power plants .
A third of German businesses , including automotive , see high electricity costs as threats to their viability , Bryce notes .
Rising electricity costs following enactment of Ontario ’ s Green Energy Act led to political defeat for the Liberal Party and the rescission of 758 renewable energy contracts .
Even in California , civil rights leaders have filed a lawsuit , decrying how the state ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low-income consumers ; it is now working its way through the legal system .
Bryce ’ s reporting suggests that the elitists who are pushing renewable energy – like despots in broken ( Low-Watt or Unplugged ) countries – ignore the poor and middle class and treat rural areas as if they were uninhabited or just irrelevant , as they pursue unattainable goals that heavily burden taxpayers while threatening electricity reliability .
Meeting California ’ s 80 % renewable mandate , for example , will require massive increases in costly electric storage because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electricity generation .
Green energy growth today can not even keep up with the annual increase in global electricity demand , let alone replace all conventional power .
But the final nail in the renewables coffin is land use .
Bryce cites multiple studies showing that an all-wind grid would mean turbine farms would cover a tenth of the nation ’ s total land .
Frustrated by the indifference of urban elites to the real-world impacts on human health and wildlife , rural counties are fighting wind farms with renewed vengeance .
Giant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vanishing ecosystems and “ clean ” energy that is actually highly polluting .
Mining for metals and minerals to build wind and solar systems would also be monumental .
Despite opposition by environmentalists , developing nations are rapidly turning to nuclear as a fuel for the future .
But , Bryce notes , it takes national commitments akin to the New Deal to provide both the political stability and financial backing to construct and operate large nuclear power plants economically .
High-Watt countries have imposed exorbitant permitting and regulatory costs on themselves and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this greatly limits the prospects for nuclear energy .
Thanks to fracking , natural gas has become abundant and cheap .
It must be a major part of the world ’ s electricity generation future .
Yet governments in High-Watt countries are already banning fracking , blocking new pipelines , and even demanding that citizens mothball their gas-burning appliances .
Despite all the attacks on affordable , reliable fuels , Bryce is optimistic about the world ’ s ability and willingness to meet the Terawatt Challenge and provide electricity to a hungry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indeed , in little over a century , a fifth of the world has gone from no electricity to High-Watt usage and another three-eighths is somewhat electrified – and their environments are better for it .
The humanist response to the Terawatt Challenge , Bryce asserts , is to empower the billions who are living in the dark to come into the bright light of modernity , progress , and better , longer , healthier lives .
This will require societal integrity , massive infusions of capital , and the right choices of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world will take time .
But it can – and must – be done .
Government regulation of these entities has become increasingly bloated and corrupt , Bryce notes .
We must significantly change our standards for both fossil fuel and nuclear power plants , to acknowledge technological improvements , the falsity of many environmentalist claims , and the fact that not having more of those power plants imposes enormous costs on lands , wildlife , human health and human rights .
Duggan Flanakin is director of policy research for the Committee For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ author of many articles on energy , climate change and environmentalism .

Robert Bryce’s latest book lays out a powerful case for treating electricity as a human right
Duggan Flanakin
In his latest seminal book, A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nations, Austin, Texas-based energy analyst and futurist Robert Bryce declares that “electricity has become a human right.”
It’s not an “endowed by our Creator” human right, nor one enunciated by a constitution or UN charter. It’s not akin to freedom of religion or speech. It’s not some entitlement we get for free. But it is definitely a fundamental right of access to this all-empowering energy source; a right for all human lives to be improved and blessed the way ours have been; a right to never be denied access to sufficient, reliable, affordable electricity, on a phony claim that letting you have it would hurt the environment or climate.
Try to imagine your home, school, healthcare, business, community or world – your life – without this amazing energy source, and you will wholeheartedly agree with Bryce.
In chapter 16, Bryce speaks of “the Terawatt Challenge.” It’s a term coined by the late Nobel Laureate Richard Smalley, who posited that, if we can provide sufficient electricity to all peoples of the world, we can largely eliminate the massive problems of poverty, polluted environments, unsafe water and food insecurity. Bryce solemnly notes that our world is still far from that goal. But we can get there.
Bryce traces the history of harnessed electricity, from Benjamin Franklin through Tesla, Edison and Westinghouse – to the much less well known but equally important Frank Julian Sprague, who developed electric elevator motors (enabling skyscrapers) and the nation’s first electric rail system. He illustrates how Franklin Roosevelt brought affordable electricity to rural America and oversaw construction of massive dams that provided cheap electricity to every corner of America. It was FDR, Bryce notes, who in 1932 proclaimed that “Electricity is no longer a luxury; it is a definite necessity.”
Bryce then hits us with the horrific reality that roughly 3.3 billion people (45% of humanity!) still live today in places where annual per capita electricity consumption is less than 1,000 kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/yr) – about what his home refrigerator uses. These people barely survive in Unplugged countries.
Another 2.7 billion people (37%) scrape by in Low-Watt countries. Only 19% of all people on Planet Earth live in “High-Watt” nations (more than 4,000 kWh/yr) – the bottom threshold, says Dr. Alan Pasternak, the key dividing line below which countries cannot improve their Human Development Index.
A major barrier, therefore, to electricity sufficiency for the Unplugged – and even the Low-Watt – nations is the lack of societal integrity, capital investment and affordable energy. Yet, to ensure that all humanity can reach its full potential – to liberate women from endless drudgery, enabling them to develop their innate skills and talents – requires that the human right to electricity be recognized and made reality.
How do we reach this lofty but essential goal? An essential component of societal integrity is that governments enforce the rule of law. The freest and wealthiest countries are those where factions share political and economic power. In the poorest countries elites organize society for their own benefit at the expense of the vast mass of people. Capital – and energy – are much easier to obtain in a free society.
To illustrate the magnitude of the gap between Unplugged and High-Watt nations, Bryce chronicles the meteoric rise of the Giant Five – Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft – each of which consumes more electricity each year than many entire countries. Financial services, from Visa to Bitcoin, also have giant electricity appetites, as does the marijuana industry.
These businesses all know from experience the cost that electricity blackouts impose on them – and their customers. Both weather and sabotage threaten the integrity of the electric grid, but the greater threat is the folly of those who believe that wind and solar alone can provide sufficient electric energy for a high-tech society, let alone the world’s billions.
Bryce chronicles how four factors – cost, storage, scale, and land use – prevent renewables from taking over our energy and power systems. Electricity prices are soaring in countries like Germany, which panicked after Fukushima and began shuttering its nuclear power plants. A third of German businesses, including automotive, see high electricity costs as threats to their viability, Bryce notes.
Rising electricity costs following enactment of Ontario’s Green Energy Act led to political defeat for the Liberal Party and the rescission of 758 renewable energy contracts. Even in California, civil rights leaders have filed a lawsuit, decrying how the state’s climate policies discriminate against minority and low-income consumers; it is now working its way through the legal system.
Bryce’s reporting suggests that the elitists who are pushing renewable energy – like despots in broken (Low-Watt or Unplugged) countries – ignore the poor and middle class and treat rural areas as if they were uninhabited or just irrelevant, as they pursue unattainable goals that heavily burden taxpayers while threatening electricity reliability.
Meeting California’s 80% renewable mandate, for example, will require massive increases in costly electric storage because of seasonal variation in wind and solar electricity generation. Green energy growth today cannot even keep up with the annual increase in global electricity demand, let alone replace all conventional power. But the final nail in the renewables coffin is land use.
Bryce cites multiple studies showing that an all-wind grid would mean turbine farms would cover a tenth of the nation’s total land. Frustrated by the indifference of urban elites to the real-world impacts on human health and wildlife, rural counties are fighting wind farms with renewed vengeance. Giant solar arrays also present a choice between vanishing ecosystems and “clean” energy that is actually highly polluting. Mining for metals and minerals to build wind and solar systems would also be monumental.
Despite opposition by environmentalists, developing nations are rapidly turning to nuclear as a fuel for the future. But, Bryce notes, it takes national commitments akin to the New Deal to provide both the political stability and financial backing to construct and operate large nuclear power plants economically. High-Watt countries have imposed exorbitant permitting and regulatory costs on themselves and poor countries; together with antinuclear zeal, this greatly limits the prospects for nuclear energy.
Thanks to fracking, natural gas has become abundant and cheap. It must be a major part of the world’s electricity generation future. Yet governments in High-Watt countries are already banning fracking, blocking new pipelines, and even demanding that citizens mothball their gas-burning appliances.
Despite all the attacks on affordable, reliable fuels, Bryce is optimistic about the world’s ability and willingness to meet the Terawatt Challenge and provide electricity to a hungry world, without wrecking the biosphere. Indeed, in little over a century, a fifth of the world has gone from no electricity to High-Watt usage and another three-eighths is somewhat electrified – and their environments are better for it.
The humanist response to the Terawatt Challenge, Bryce asserts, is to empower the billions who are living in the dark to come into the bright light of modernity, progress, and better, longer, healthier lives. This will require societal integrity, massive infusions of capital, and the right choices of fuels. Bryce admits that electrifying the world will take time. But it can – and must – be done.
Government regulation of these entities has become increasingly bloated and corrupt, Bryce notes. We must significantly change our standards for both fossil fuel and nuclear power plants, to acknowledge technological improvements, the falsity of many environmentalist claims, and the fact that not having more of those power plants imposes enormous costs on lands, wildlife, human health and human rights.
Duggan Flanakin is director of policy research for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of many articles on energy, climate change and environmentalism.
5 1 vote Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-30--8 PM (ET) LIVE: Is the Coronavirus Lockdown the Future Environmentalists Want?

Live Video Zoom Webinar by The Heartland Institute and CFACT TODAY at 8 p.m .
ET ARLINGTON HEIGHTS , IL @ @ @ @ @ ) – Join Heartland Institute President James Taylor and Marc Morano , executive editor of @ @ @ @ @ as they discuss the social and economic impacts of the lockdown and how the left @ @ @ @ @ dress rehearsal for a Green New Deal .
CLICK HERE to register for the Zoom @ @ @ @ @ is a 36-year-old national nonprofit organization headquartered in Arlington Heights , Illinois .
Its mission @ @ @ @ @ , and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems .

Live Video Zoom Webinar by The Heartland Institute and CFACT
TODAY at 8 p.m. ET
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (April 30, 2020) – Join Heartland Institute President James Taylor and Marc Morano, executive editor of CFACT’s ClimateDepot.com, as they discuss the social and economic impacts of the lockdown and how the left is using it as a dress rehearsal for a Green New Deal.
CLICK HERE to register for the Zoom webinar.
The Heartland Institute is a 36-year-old national nonprofit organization headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems.
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-05-01--Al Jazeera Climate Change Misanthropy: “Will coronavirus help nature reclaim the Earth?”

Yet another green celebrating the retreat of humans in the face of a deadly epidemic .
The Green Read : Will coronavirus help nature reclaim the Earth ?
There are signs of wildlife flourishing in the absence of humans , but COVID-19 has also slowed conservation efforts .
In these times when we need to seek out positives to counter the gloom , there are many good things happening in the natural world .
In the space wrought open by COVID-19 , a quiet has descended on parts of our planet previously drowned out by normal life thundering on .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that rely on the daily whirl to survive but it is happening , so let us drink it in .
In our cities , the thrum of traffic and construction and planes passing overhead has given way to the boisterous dawn chorus .
This daily symphony of birdsong is more audible than it has been in decades in urban areas this northern spring .
Even the ocean depths are quieter with fewer ships at sea , and marine biologists are taking this rare opportunity to study the impact the lack of churning , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Worldwide emissions are down and the air we breathe is cleaner .
Wildlife in river and estuary , field and hedgerow and even on the urban fringe , is making hay in the absence of the human hordes and their vehicles .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Yet another green celebrating the retreat of humans in the face of a deadly epidemic.
The Green Read: Will coronavirus help nature reclaim the Earth?
There are signs of wildlife flourishing in the absence of humans, but COVID-19 has also slowed conservation efforts.
by Nick Clark 30 Apr 2020
In these times when we need to seek out positives to counter the gloom, there are many good things happening in the natural world. In the space wrought open by COVID-19, a quiet has descended on parts of our planet previously drowned out by normal life thundering on.
It is of small comfort to businesses that rely on the daily whirl to survive but it is happening, so let us drink it in.
In our cities, the thrum of traffic and construction and planes passing overhead has given way to the boisterous dawn chorus. This daily symphony of birdsong is more audible than it has been in decades in urban areas this northern spring.
Even the ocean depths are quieter with fewer ships at sea, and marine biologists are taking this rare opportunity to study the impact the lack of churning, droning propellers will have on ocean life.
Worldwide emissions are down and the air we breathe is cleaner. Wildlife in river and estuary, field and hedgerow and even on the urban fringe, is making hay in the absence of the human hordes and their vehicles.
…