climatechangedispatch--2020-07-24--Roman Warm Period Was 3.6°F Warmer Than Today, New Study Shows

Written by Jonathan Chadwick on .
Posted in Latest news The Mediterranean Sea was 3.6°F ( 2°C ) hotter during the Roman Empire than other average temperatures at the time , a new study claims .
The Empire coincided with a 500-year period , from AD 1 to AD 500 , which was the warmest period of the last 2,000 years in the almost completely land-locked sea .
The climate later progressed towards colder and arid conditions that coincided with the historical fall of the Empire , scientists claim .
Spanish and Italian researchers recorded ratios of magnesium to calcite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an indicator of seawater temperatures , in the Sicily Channel .
They say the warmer period may have also coincided with the shift from the Roman Republic to the great Empire founded by Octavius Augustus in 27 BC .
The study offers ‘ critical information ’ to identify past interactions between climate changes and the evolution of human societies and ‘ their adaptive strategies ’ .
It meets requests from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) to assess the impact of historically warmer conditions between 2.7°F and 3.6°F ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the historical warming of the Med during the Roman Empire is linked to intense solar activity , which contrasts with the modern threat of greenhouse gases .
‘ For the first time , we can state the Roman period was the warmest period of time of the last 2,000 years , and these conditions lasted for 500 years , ’ said Professor Isabel Cacho at the Department of Earth and Ocean Dynamics , University of Barcelona .
The Mediterranean is a semi-closed sea , meaning it is surrounded by land and almost only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and is a climate change ‘ hot spot ’ according to a previous paper .
Situated between North Africa and European climates , the sea occupies a ‘ transitional zone ’ , combining the arid zone of the subtropical high and humid northwesterly air flows .
This makes it extremely vulnerable to modern and past climate changes , such as changes in precipitation change and average surface air temperature and is of ‘ particular interest ’ to researchers .
Home to many civilizations over the years , the Med , or Mare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roman civilizations , has become a model to study the periods of climate variation .
Reconstructing previous millennia of sea surface temperatures and how it evolved is challenging , due to the difficulty retrieving good resolution marine records .
However , the study of the fossil archives remains the only valid tool to reconstruct past environmental and climatic changes as far back as 2,000 years ago , they say .
Turning to another method , experts analyzed the ratios of magnesium to calcite taken from samples of single-celled protists called foraminifera , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In particular , the species Globigerinoides ruber , present in marine sediments , is an indicator of seawater temperatures .
Researchers took the skeletonized G. ruber sampled from a depth of 1,500 feet ( 475m ) located in the northwestern part of the Sicily Channel .
It was recovered during a 2014 oceanographic expedition onboard the RV CNR-Urania research vessel .
These unicellular organisms , part of the marine zooplankton , have a specific habitat limited to the surface layers of the water column .
‘ Therefore , the chemical analysis of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evolution of the temperature of the surface water mass over time , ’ said Professor Cacho .
Compared to the subsequent period of the Roman Empire , the Mediterranean was characterized by a colder phase from around 500 BC to 200 BC .
This corresponds with the beginning of the so-called ‘ sub-Atlantic phase ’ characterized by a cool climate and rainy winters , which were favorable for Greek and Roman civilizations to grow crops .
The cool and humid climate of the sub-Atlantic phase lasted until around 100 BC and covered the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , in 400 BC , cultural changes were synchronized across the Mediterranean region and more ‘ homogeneous ’ temperature conditions across the Med regions were established .
A distinct warming phase , running from AD 1 to AD 500 , then coincided with the Roman Period and covered the whole Roman Empire archaeological period .
‘ This pronounced warming during the Roman Period is almost consistent with other marine records from the Atlantic Ocean , ’ the team say in their research paper , published in Scientific Reports .
This climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ‘ Roman Climatic Optimum ’ characterized by prosperity and expansion of the Empire , giving warmth and sunlight to crops .
Roman Climatic Optimum , a phase of warm stable temperatures across much of the Mediterranean heartland , covers the whole phase of origin and expansion of the Roman Empire .
The greatest time of the Roman Empire coincided with the warmest period of the last 2,000 years in the Mediterranean .
After the Roman Period , a general cooling trend developed in the region with several minor oscillations in temperature .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ arid conditions and this could have marked the decline of the golden period of the Roman Empire after AD 500 .
These new records correlated with data from other areas of the Mediterranean – the Alboran Sea , Menorca basin , and the Aegean Sea .
‘ We hypothesize the potential link between this Roman Climatic Optimum and the expansion and subsequent decline of the Roman Empire.
’ The study provides high resolution and precision data on how the temperatures evolved over the last 2,000 years in the Mediterranean area .
It also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different during the Roman Empire in the Mediterranean area and is focused on the reconstruction of the sea surface temperature over the last 5,000 years .

Written by Jonathan Chadwick on Jul 24, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The Mediterranean Sea was 3.6°F (2°C) hotter during the Roman Empire than other average temperatures at the time, a new study claims.
The Empire coincided with a 500-year period, from AD 1 to AD 500, which was the warmest period of the last 2,000 years in the almost completely land-locked sea.
The climate later progressed towards colder and arid conditions that coincided with the historical fall of the Empire, scientists claim.
Spanish and Italian researchers recorded ratios of magnesium to calcite taken from skeletonized amoebas in marine sediments, an indicator of seawater temperatures, in the Sicily Channel.
They say the warmer period may have also coincided with the shift from the Roman Republic to the great Empire founded by Octavius Augustus in 27 BC.
The study offers ‘critical information’ to identify past interactions between climate changes and the evolution of human societies and ‘their adaptive strategies’.
It meets requests from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess the impact of historically warmer conditions between 2.7°F and 3.6°F (1.5°C to 2°C).
However, the historical warming of the Med during the Roman Empire is linked to intense solar activity, which contrasts with the modern threat of greenhouse gases.
‘For the first time, we can state the Roman period was the warmest period of time of the last 2,000 years, and these conditions lasted for 500 years,’ said Professor Isabel Cacho at the Department of Earth and Ocean Dynamics, University of Barcelona.
The Mediterranean is a semi-closed sea, meaning it is surrounded by land and almost only connected to oceans by a narrow outlet, and is a climate change ‘hot spot’ according to a previous paper.
Situated between North Africa and European climates, the sea occupies a ‘transitional zone’, combining the arid zone of the subtropical high and humid northwesterly air flows.
This makes it extremely vulnerable to modern and past climate changes, such as changes in precipitation change and average surface air temperature and is of ‘particular interest’ to researchers.
Home to many civilizations over the years, the Med, or Mare Nostrum as it was known by ancient Roman civilizations, has become a model to study the periods of climate variation.
Reconstructing previous millennia of sea surface temperatures and how it evolved is challenging, due to the difficulty retrieving good resolution marine records.
However, the study of the fossil archives remains the only valid tool to reconstruct past environmental and climatic changes as far back as 2,000 years ago, they say.
Turning to another method, experts analyzed the ratios of magnesium to calcite taken from samples of single-celled protists called foraminifera, which is found in all marine environments.
In particular, the species Globigerinoides ruber, present in marine sediments, is an indicator of seawater temperatures.
Researchers took the skeletonized G. ruber sampled from a depth of 1,500 feet (475m) located in the northwestern part of the Sicily Channel.
It was recovered during a 2014 oceanographic expedition onboard the RV CNR-Urania research vessel.
These unicellular organisms, part of the marine zooplankton, have a specific habitat limited to the surface layers of the water column.
‘Therefore, the chemical analysis of its carbonated skeleton allows us to reconstruct the evolution of the temperature of the surface water mass over time,’ said Professor Cacho.
Compared to the subsequent period of the Roman Empire, the Mediterranean was characterized by a colder phase from around 500 BC to 200 BC.
This corresponds with the beginning of the so-called ‘sub-Atlantic phase’ characterized by a cool climate and rainy winters, which were favorable for Greek and Roman civilizations to grow crops.
The cool and humid climate of the sub-Atlantic phase lasted until around 100 BC and covered the entire period of the monarchy in Rome.
However, in 400 BC, cultural changes were synchronized across the Mediterranean region and more ‘homogeneous’ temperature conditions across the Med regions were established.
A distinct warming phase, running from AD 1 to AD 500, then coincided with the Roman Period and covered the whole Roman Empire archaeological period.
‘This pronounced warming during the Roman Period is almost consistent with other marine records from the Atlantic Ocean,’ the team say in their research paper, published in Scientific Reports.
This climate phase corresponds to what is known as the ‘Roman Climatic Optimum’ characterized by prosperity and expansion of the Empire, giving warmth and sunlight to crops.
Roman Climatic Optimum, a phase of warm stable temperatures across much of the Mediterranean heartland, covers the whole phase of origin and expansion of the Roman Empire.
The greatest time of the Roman Empire coincided with the warmest period of the last 2,000 years in the Mediterranean.
After the Roman Period, a general cooling trend developed in the region with several minor oscillations in temperature.
The climate then transitioned from wet to arid conditions and this could have marked the decline of the golden period of the Roman Empire after AD 500.
These new records correlated with data from other areas of the Mediterranean – the Alboran Sea, Menorca basin, and the Aegean Sea.
‘We hypothesize the potential link between this Roman Climatic Optimum and the expansion and subsequent decline of the Roman Empire.’
The study provides high resolution and precision data on how the temperatures evolved over the last 2,000 years in the Mediterranean area.
It also identifies a warming phase that’s different during the Roman Empire in the Mediterranean area and is focused on the reconstruction of the sea surface temperature over the last 5,000 years.
Read rest at Daily Mail
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-24--European Parliament Rejects Recovery Plan Over Climate-Funding Cuts

Written by Florence Schulz on .
Posted in Latest news The European Parliament rejected on Thursday ( 23 July ) the hard-won decisions of the EU Council .
MEPs criticized , among other things , cuts to climate programs and voiced fear that billions of euros could fall into the wrong hands .
The Parliament rejected the Council ’ s decision on the multiannual budget ( MFF ) and recovery plan by a clear majority .
MEPs called the compromise too unambitious and criticized the cuts in climate-related funding .
Some Green MEPs expressed their disappointment in advance of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a “ turning away from the Green Deal , ” wrote German Michael Bloss .
“ The European Union must cut back its support program for CO2-free steel .
The program for investments in the future has been cut by €30.3 billion to now €5.6 billion .
The fund to support coal regions purrs together from €40 billion to €10 billion , ” he complained .
In a resolution drafted by the group leaders on Wednesday ( 22 July ) , the Parliament said , among other things , “ we believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the transition of coal-dependent regions run counter to the Green Deal agenda.
” This refers in particular to the Just Transition Fund ( JTF ) , which the Commission had wanted to increase from €7.5 billion to €40 billion as part of the EU ’ s coronavirus aid , but which was cut back to €17.5 billion during the negotiations between member state leaders .
[ … ] German MEP Delara Burkhardt ( S & D ) sees the proposal for the recovery fund as a stumbling block .
Although climate protection is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Resilience Facility ” ( RRF ) , for which the Council allotted €672.5 billion , the proposal is not a complete success .
The annex to the draft lists seven priorities , which the member states can weight differently .
These include investments that “ effectively contribute to the green and digital transitions.
” Burkhardt fears that member states “ choose the combination of criteria fulfillment in such a way that they would not have to meet any ecological conditions at all .
This is especially possible if they instead fully focus on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called for Parliament and the European Court of Auditors to be given a right of veto over the approval of national investment plans .
In the past , the Court of Auditors had already denounced the inspection methods of the Commission on several occasions .
In a statement issued in early July , financial supervisors noted that the EU ’ s climate change spending to date had been overestimated , while negative effects of spending , for example in agriculture , had not been sufficiently taken into account .
On Wednesday , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even in the previous proposal for the JTF , it said , “ the link between performance and financing is relatively weak.
” This “ poses a significant risk that the JTF will not help to end the strong dependence of some regions on carbon-intensive activities , ” it said .

Written by Florence Schulz on Jul 24, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The European Parliament rejected on Thursday (23 July) the hard-won decisions of the EU Council.
MEPs criticized, among other things, cuts to climate programs and voiced fear that billions of euros could fall into the wrong hands.
The Parliament rejected the Council’s decision on the multiannual budget (MFF) and recovery plan by a clear majority. MEPs called the compromise too unambitious and criticized the cuts in climate-related funding.
Some Green MEPs expressed their disappointment in advance of the debate.
The national leaders’ agreement was a “turning away from the Green Deal,” wrote German Michael Bloss.
“The European Union must cut back its support program for CO2-free steel. The program for investments in the future has been cut by €30.3 billion to now €5.6 billion. The fund to support coal regions purrs together from €40 billion to €10 billion,” he complained.
In a resolution drafted by the group leaders on Wednesday (22 July), the Parliament said, among other things, “we believe that the proposed cuts in programs for the transition of coal-dependent regions run counter to the Green Deal agenda.”
This refers in particular to the Just Transition Fund (JTF), which the Commission had wanted to increase from €7.5 billion to €40 billion as part of the EU’s coronavirus aid, but which was cut back to €17.5 billion during the negotiations between member state leaders. […]
Stumbling block in the recovery fund
German MEP Delara Burkhardt (S&D) sees the proposal for the recovery fund as a stumbling block.
Although climate protection is anchored in the so-called “Recovery and Resilience Facility” (RRF), for which the Council allotted €672.5 billion, the proposal is not a complete success.
The annex to the draft lists seven priorities, which the member states can weight differently. These include investments that “effectively contribute to the green and digital transitions.”
Burkhardt fears that member states “choose the combination of criteria fulfillment in such a way that they would not have to meet any ecological conditions at all. This is especially possible if they instead fully focus on digital transformation.”
Court of Auditors warns against lax controls
Green MEP Rasmus Andresen called for Parliament and the European Court of Auditors to be given a right of veto over the approval of national investment plans.
In the past, the Court of Auditors had already denounced the inspection methods of the Commission on several occasions.
In a statement issued in early July, financial supervisors noted that the EU’s climate change spending to date had been overestimated, while negative effects of spending, for example in agriculture, had not been sufficiently taken into account.
On Wednesday, the Court of Auditors made further progress. Even in the previous proposal for the JTF, it said, “the link between performance and financing is relatively weak.”
This “poses a significant risk that the JTF will not help to end the strong dependence of some regions on carbon-intensive activities,” it said.
Read more at EurActiv
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-24--Greenpeace Cofounder: ‘There Is No Climate Catastrophe – It’s A Lie’

Written by 21Wire on .
Posted in Latest news host Alex Epstein ( pictured ) discusses the alleged ‘ climate catastrophe ’ with Dr. Patrick Moore , ecologist and co-founder of Greenpeace .
Incredibly , Moore completely eviscerates the concept of “ climate catastrophism , ” and dismantles the claim that man-made CO2 levels are warming the planet beyond a tipping point of human survival .
Moore makes a number of strong arguments that debunk the IPCC ’ s increasingly problematic pseudo-scientific and anti-human narrative which is being parroted by climate change activists and the likes of Greta Thunberg .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ catastrophe movement .
• None Why Moore believes human beings would not only survive but survive better at far higher average temperatures ( which would be concentrated toward the poles ) .
• None Why Moore believes that contrary to being in a Sixth Extinction , we are actually at an unprecedented time of biodiversity with no end in sight .
• None The commonality among the opposition to plastics , GMOs , nuclear energy , and fossil fuels .
• None Moore ’ s unrefuted theory that human beings actually saved life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CO2 levels .

Written by 21Wire on Jul 24, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Power Hour host Alex Epstein (pictured) discusses the alleged ‘climate catastrophe’ with Dr. Patrick Moore, ecologist and co-founder of Greenpeace.
Incredibly, Moore completely eviscerates the concept of “climate catastrophism,” and dismantles the claim that man-made CO2 levels are warming the planet beyond a tipping point of human survival.
Moore makes a number of strong arguments that debunk the IPCC’s increasingly problematic pseudo-scientific and anti-human narrative which is being parroted by climate change activists and the likes of Greta Thunberg.
He explains:
Why Moore left Greenpeace.
The beginnings of the climate catastrophe movement.
Why Moore believes human beings would not only survive but survive better at far higher average temperatures (which would be concentrated toward the poles).
Why Moore believes that contrary to being in a Sixth Extinction, we are actually at an unprecedented time of biodiversity with no end in sight.
Why Moore believes “ocean acidification” claims are totally meritless.
The commonality among the opposition to plastics, GMOs, nuclear energy, and fossil fuels.
Moore’s unrefuted theory that human beings actually saved life on Earth from a terminal decline in CO2 levels.
Watch this highly informative interview:
Read more at 21Wire
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-24--Trump’s DOI Approves Alaska’s Natural Gas Pipeline Project

Written by Penny Starr on .
Posted in Latest news The Department of the Interior ( DOI ) announced Thursday that it has approved the logistics for the Alaska Liquified Natural Gas Pipeline Project .
The announcement from the agency made sure to address how the project is both good for the U.S. economy and safe for the environment .
“ With this approval , the Trump Administration is keeping its commitment to work with local governments and partners , ” Casey Hammond , principal deputy assistant secretary for land and minerals management , said in the DOI announcement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy to enter the market through modern , efficient technology and create opportunities for Americans.
” “ The project includes the potential to supply Denali National Park and Preserve and nearby communities with natural gas , ” Robert Wallace , assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and Parks , said .
“ Careful environmental management will ensure park resources , including wildlife , wetlands , vegetation , and noise/soundscapes will be protected during and after construction.
” “ The NPS ( National Parks Service ) is issuing a right-of-way for the approximately six-mile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ area of the Denali National Park and Preserve ( DNPP ) , ” the announcement said .
“ The route selected through the park is near the existing transportation corridor ( the Parks Highway and Alaska Railroad extend across this area of the park ) , which limits impacts to park viewsheds and overall acreage of wetlands , and reduces the need for additional roads and their associated impacts.
” The announcement said that nine federal agencies collaborated in the project , including the Bureau of Land Management ( BLM ) , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Engineers , the U.S. Coast Guard , the U.S. Department of Energy , the U.S. Department of Transportation , the Environmental Protection Agency , the U.S .
Fish and Wildlife Service , and the National Marine Fisheries Service .
Environmentalists have opposed the project , as Courthouse News Service reported last month : The Chickaloon Traditional Village Council and environmental organizations filed a formal request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Monday , asking the agency to rehear the application for the LNG Alaska project .
If built , the project will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the state to the south , where it can be shipped to customers in Asia .
The Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club said the commission failed to consider climate change and endangered species , including polar bears , Cook Inlet beluga whales and North Pacific right whales .
“ It makes no sense to fuel climate change to export American fuel to Asia , ” said Kristen Monsell , a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity .
“ This risky project would be a disaster for Alaska @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Courthouse News Service reported the project comes with a $ 43 billion price tag .

Written by Penny Starr on Jul 24, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The Department of the Interior (DOI) announced Thursday that it has approved the logistics for the Alaska Liquified Natural Gas Pipeline Project.
The announcement from the agency made sure to address how the project is both good for the U.S. economy and safe for the environment.
“With this approval, the Trump Administration is keeping its commitment to work with local governments and partners,” Casey Hammond, principal deputy assistant secretary for land and minerals management, said in the DOI announcement. “This project will enable more Alaska-produced energy to enter the market through modern, efficient technology and create opportunities for Americans.”
“The project includes the potential to supply Denali National Park and Preserve and nearby communities with natural gas,” Robert Wallace, assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and Parks, said. “Careful environmental management will ensure park resources, including wildlife, wetlands, vegetation, and noise/soundscapes will be protected during and after construction.”
“The NPS (National Parks Service) is issuing a right-of-way for the approximately six-mile portion of the pipeline within a non-wilderness area of the Denali National Park and Preserve (DNPP),” the announcement said.
“The route selected through the park is near the existing transportation corridor (the Parks Highway and Alaska Railroad extend across this area of the park), which limits impacts to park viewsheds and overall acreage of wetlands, and reduces the need for additional roads and their associated impacts.”
The announcement said that nine federal agencies collaborated in the project, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the NPS, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Environmentalists have opposed the project, as Courthouse News Service reported last month:
The Chickaloon Traditional Village Council and environmental organizations filed a formal request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Monday, asking the agency to rehear the application for the LNG Alaska project. If built, the project will send natural gas from the northern part of the state to the south, where it can be shipped to customers in Asia. The Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club said the commission failed to consider climate change and endangered species, including polar bears, Cook Inlet beluga whales and North Pacific right whales. “It makes no sense to fuel climate change to export American fuel to Asia,” said Kristen Monsell, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “This risky project would be a disaster for Alaska, our climate and its endangered wildlife.”
Courthouse News Service reported the project comes with a $43 billion price tag.
Read more at Breitbart
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-24--NYTimes Doubles Down On Fake Guatemala Crop Failures

Written by James Taylor on .
Posted in Latest news In an article published this morning and sitting atop Google News searches for “ climate change , ” the New York Times claims climate change is the primary reason people are leaving Guatemala and unlawfully entering the United States .
According to the Times ’ article , titled “ The Great Climate Migration , ” drought and extreme weather events are making it impossible for Guatemala farmers to continue making a living .
In reality , objective crop data shows farms in Guatemala are doing better than ever .
Climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to flee their failing nation-state , even with rampant crime , corruption , gang activity , and violence .
The author of the Times article , Abrahm Lustgarten , writes , “ Last summer , I went to Central America to learn how people like Jorge will respond to changes in their climates .
I followed the decisions of people in rural Guatemala and their routes to the region ’ s biggest cities , then north through Mexico to Texas .
I found an astonishing need for food and witnessed the ways competition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cultural and moral boundaries.
” If Guatemalans are lacking food , it is certainly not because of climate change or crop failures .
According to official crop data compiled by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization ( FAO ) , as shown in the graph below , Guatemalan crop production is continuing a history of long-term growth .
Guatemala crop yields per acre are currently : • double what they were in 1970 – 50 years of global warming ago • 50 % higher than they were in 1980 • 10 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1990 and 2000 None of this good news matters to the New York Times when they have a refugee causation myth to create and a climate myth to perpetuate .
According to the Times article , “ it almost never rained ” for Guatemala farmers for five years between 2014 and 2019 .
Moreover , “ under a relentless confluence of drought , flood , bankruptcy , and starvation , they [ Guatemala farmers ] , too , have begun to leave .
Almost everyone here experiences some degree of uncertainty about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Half the children are chronically hungry , and many are short for their age , with weak bones and bloated bellies.
” This is how the Times describes a period of longstanding growth in Guatemala crop production .
And again , even if this misery exists , the Guatemala crop data shows the reason is a corrupt , violent political state rather than climate change .

Written by James Taylor on Jul 24, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
In an article published this morning and sitting atop Google News searches for “climate change,” the New York Times claims climate change is the primary reason people are leaving Guatemala and unlawfully entering the United States.
According to the Times’ article, titled “The Great Climate Migration,” drought and extreme weather events are making it impossible for Guatemala farmers to continue making a living.
In reality, objective crop data shows farms in Guatemala are doing better than ever. Climate change is reducing the pressure on Guatemalans to flee their failing nation-state, even with rampant crime, corruption, gang activity, and violence.
The author of the Times article, Abrahm Lustgarten, writes,
“Last summer, I went to Central America to learn how people like Jorge will respond to changes in their climates. I followed the decisions of people in rural Guatemala and their routes to the region’s biggest cities, then north through Mexico to Texas. I found an astonishing need for food and witnessed the ways competition and poverty among the displaced broke down cultural and moral boundaries.”
If Guatemalans are lacking food, it is certainly not because of climate change or crop failures.
According to official crop data compiled by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), as shown in the graph below, Guatemalan crop production is continuing a history of long-term growth.
Guatemala crop yields per acre are currently:
double what they were in 1970 – 50 years of global warming ago
50% higher than they were in 1980
10% to 20% higher than they were in 1990 and 2000
enjoying eight straight
None of this good news matters to the New York Times when they have a refugee causation myth to create and a climate myth to perpetuate.
According to the Times article, “it almost never rained” for Guatemala farmers for five years between 2014 and 2019.
Moreover, “under a relentless confluence of drought, flood, bankruptcy, and starvation, they [Guatemala farmers], too, have begun to leave. Almost everyone here experiences some degree of uncertainty about where their next meal will come from. Half the children are chronically hungry, and many are short for their age, with weak bones and bloated bellies.”
This is how the Times describes a period of longstanding growth in Guatemala crop production.
And again, even if this misery exists, the Guatemala crop data shows the reason is a corrupt, violent political state rather than climate change.
Read more at Climate Realism
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--Latest Fake News: Climate Change Harming India’s Marriage Prospects

Written by James Taylor on .
Posted in Latest news Among the top results today in a Google News search for “ climate crisis ” is an article published by The News Minute claiming climate change is causing a marriage crisis in India .
The theory is that climate change is reducing crop output , which makes farmers less desirable for arranged marriages .
However , assuming greater crop output results in better marriage prospects for Indian farmers , the objective scientific evidence shows Indian bachelor farmers have never had it better .
The News Minute article , titled “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate crisis looms , ” claims interviews with more than 1,000 farmers in India reveal global warming is causing poor crop production and a resultant lack of marriage prospects for bachelor farmers .
Based on these subjective bachelor farmer complaints , The News Minute claims , “ they are becoming ever less attractive grooms due to mounting uncertainties in farm incomes.
” “ Increasing temperatures , changes in rainfall trends , and more extreme natural hazards are negatively affecting incomes from agriculture .
Climate change is leading to loss of crops , reductions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even the complete devastation of entire crops , ” The News Minute claims .
As a result , “ this precarity is affecting marriage patterns .
Worsening climatic conditions , we found , are leading to a marriage crisis … because of the increasing uncertainty of farmers ’ incomes , most parents no longer want farmers as their son-in-law.
” Curiously , The News Minute does not provide any objective data on Indian crop production to support its asserted marriage crisis .
Fortunately for people who believe in facts and science , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization ( FAO ) keeps meticulous records of each country ’ s agricultural production .
So , one would expect FAO to report dramatic recent declines in Indian crop production , given the News Minute ’ s claims .
Let ’ s take a look at the FAO data for overall cereal production ( the Big Three of rice , corn , and wheat ) in India : Rice is the primary crop in the Andhra area of India .
Let ’ s take a look at FAO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we know why The News Minute did not provide any data or facts to support its theory – because there are no facts or data to support its theory .
The reality is rice production and overall cereal production are improving consistently and dramatically throughout India ( and globally ) as the Earth continues its modest warming .
Indeed , new records are being set every year .
The News Minute story is similar to a plethora of media articles about farmers in various countries allegedly no longer being able to make a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news reporters go searching for farmers who are not doing very well .
Even in a time when crop production sets new records virtually every year , some farmers will not do well because they have been unlucky or they not very good farmers .
Or , in this case , many bachelors remain bachelors because they are unpleasant people , or are unattractive in other ways , rather than because of global warming .
Rather than acknowledge their own shortcomings or other non-climate factors that cause their failures , it is easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global warming .
And for an activist news media that seeks to create a fictitious climate crisis , it is easy and convenient for them to play along with the clearly false climate-change narrative .

Written by James Taylor on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Among the top results today in a Google News search for “climate crisis” is an article published by The News Minute claiming climate change is causing a marriage crisis in India.
The theory is that climate change is reducing crop output, which makes farmers less desirable for arranged marriages.
However, assuming greater crop output results in better marriage prospects for Indian farmers, the objective scientific evidence shows Indian bachelor farmers have never had it better.
The News Minute article, titled “Marriage crisis for farmers in Andhra as climate crisis looms,” claims interviews with more than 1,000 farmers in India reveal global warming is causing poor crop production and a resultant lack of marriage prospects for bachelor farmers.
Based on these subjective bachelor farmer complaints, The News Minute claims, “they are becoming ever less attractive grooms due to mounting uncertainties in farm incomes.”
“Increasing temperatures, changes in rainfall trends, and more extreme natural hazards are negatively affecting incomes from agriculture. Climate change is leading to loss of crops, reductions in productivity, depletion of biodiversity, even the complete devastation of entire crops,” The News Minute claims.
As a result, “this precarity is affecting marriage patterns. Worsening climatic conditions, we found, are leading to a marriage crisis … because of the increasing uncertainty of farmers’ incomes, most parents no longer want farmers as their son-in-law.”
Curiously, The News Minute does not provide any objective data on Indian crop production to support its asserted marriage crisis.
Fortunately for people who believe in facts and science, and unfortunately for The News Minute, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) keeps meticulous records of each country’s agricultural production.
So, one would expect FAO to report dramatic recent declines in Indian crop production, given the News Minute’s claims.
Let’s take a look at the FAO data for overall cereal production (the Big Three of rice, corn, and wheat) in India:
Rice is the primary crop in the Andhra area of India. Let’s take a look at FAO data for Indian rice production:
Now we know why The News Minute did not provide any data or facts to support its theory – because there are no facts or data to support its theory.
The reality is rice production and overall cereal production are improving consistently and dramatically throughout India (and globally) as the Earth continues its modest warming. Indeed, new records are being set every year.
The News Minute story is similar to a plethora of media articles about farmers in various countries allegedly no longer being able to make a living because of global warming.
So-called news reporters go searching for farmers who are not doing very well. Even in a time when crop production sets new records virtually every year, some farmers will not do well because they have been unlucky or they not very good farmers.
Or, in this case, many bachelors remain bachelors because they are unpleasant people, or are unattractive in other ways, rather than because of global warming.
Rather than acknowledge their own shortcomings or other non-climate factors that cause their failures, it is easy and convenient for unsuccessful farmers to blame global warming.
And for an activist news media that seeks to create a fictitious climate crisis, it is easy and convenient for them to play along with the clearly false climate-change narrative.
Read more at Climate Realism
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--Enviros Ask Supreme Court To Block Border Wall. Again

Written by Matthew Vadum on .
Posted in Latest news Environmentalists asked the Supreme Court to stop the Trump administration from building parts of the U.S.-Mexico border wall after a federal appeals court determined in June that tapping $ 2.5 billion in military funding for the project was unlawful .
The motion , part of complex litigation , filed with the high court July 22 in Trump v. Sierra Club , asks to lift a stay imposed by the court on July 26 , 2019 .
That order froze a permanent injunction granted by the trial court against the use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s appeal of that ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit was dealt with .
In other words , the Supreme Court ’ s ruling a year ago allowed the Trump administration to use the disputed funds for wall construction .
Environmentalists are fighting President Donald Trump ’ s efforts to use funding from the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2019 to build the wall along the Mexican border in California , New Mexico , and Arizona .
Providing border security and cracking down on illegal immigration was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 campaign for the presidency .
A federal appeals court ruled against the government last month in the long-running dispute .
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled June 26 that the Trump administration ’ s attempt to transfer $ 2.5 billion in military pay and pension funds for border wall construction was unlawful .
The ruling , which affirmed a U.S. District Court decision , came in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU ) on behalf of the Sierra Club and Southern Border Communities Coalition ( SBCC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost in every lower court but is still rushing to complete the president ’ s border wall before the Supreme Court can review the merits of this case .
If the administration succeeds , there will be no border wall construction left to stop by the time the Supreme Court hears this case , ” Dror Ladin , a staff attorney with the ACLU ’ s National Security Project , told The Hill newspaper .
Officials at the U.S. Department of Justice didn ’ t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 26 decision , the appeals court concluded that the financial “ transfers were not authorized and that plaintiffs have a cause of action , ” and affirmed the decision of the district court .
“ These funds were appropriated for other purposes , and the transfer amounted to ‘ drawing funds from the Treasury without authorization by statute and thus violating the Appropriations Clause , ’ ” the appeals court stated , referencing case law .
“ Therefore , the transfer of funds here was unlawful.
” The interests of the members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communities Coalition and of compliance with the environmental regulatory process trump national security concerns , the court ruled .
The Sierra Club alleged that government actions “ will cause particularized and concrete injuries to its members , and SBCC has shown that it has suffered a concrete injury itself , ” the appeals court noted .

Written by Matthew Vadum on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Environmentalists asked the Supreme Court to stop the Trump administration from building parts of the U.S.-Mexico border wall after a federal appeals court determined in June that tapping $2.5 billion in military funding for the project was unlawful.
The motion, part of complex litigation, filed with the high court July 22 in Trump v. Sierra Club, asks to lift a stay imposed by the court on July 26, 2019.
That order froze a permanent injunction granted by the trial court against the use of the funds until the government’s appeal of that ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit was dealt with.
In other words, the Supreme Court’s ruling a year ago allowed the Trump administration to use the disputed funds for wall construction.
Environmentalists are fighting President Donald Trump’s efforts to use funding from the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2019 to build the wall along the Mexican border in California, New Mexico, and Arizona.
Providing border security and cracking down on illegal immigration was Trump’s signature promise during his 2016 campaign for the presidency.
A federal appeals court ruled against the government last month in the long-running dispute. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled June 26 that the Trump administration’s attempt to transfer $2.5 billion in military pay and pension funds for border wall construction was unlawful.
The ruling, which affirmed a U.S. District Court decision, came in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of the Sierra Club and Southern Border Communities Coalition (SBCC).
“The Trump administration has lost in every lower court but is still rushing to complete the president’s border wall before the Supreme Court can review the merits of this case. If the administration succeeds, there will be no border wall construction left to stop by the time the Supreme Court hears this case,” Dror Ladin, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s National Security Project, told The Hill newspaper.
Officials at the U.S. Department of Justice didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.
In the June 26 decision, the appeals court concluded that the financial “transfers were not authorized and that plaintiffs have a cause of action,” and affirmed the decision of the district court.
“These funds were appropriated for other purposes, and the transfer amounted to ‘drawing funds from the Treasury without authorization by statute and thus violating the Appropriations Clause,’” the appeals court stated, referencing case law. “Therefore, the transfer of funds here was unlawful.”
The interests of the members of the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition and of compliance with the environmental regulatory process trump national security concerns, the court ruled.
The Sierra Club alleged that government actions “will cause particularized and concrete injuries to its members, and SBCC has shown that it has suffered a concrete injury itself,” the appeals court noted.
Read rest at The Epoch Times
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--Why You Shouldn’t Worry About Climate Change

Written by Ed Walbroehl , guest post on .
Posted in Latest news For the past five years , I ’ ve been watching and listening to this debate on global warming/climate change .
I told myself that when I retire ( which I did ) , I was going to take a hard look into this very controversial issue to try and understand what it ’ s all about .
I spent months reading articles , books , watching interviews on TV with scientists , along with the many online videos from people in all fields of climate science @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate .
I have corresponded with two Apollo astronauts who are knowledgeable on the subject .
What I learned was encouraging .
1 ) The Earth has been warming since the last Ice Age ended .
No surprise there .
2 ) CO2 is not a pollutant like some suggest but rather a life-sustaining gas that all life depends on .
3 ) The Earth ’ s temperature has risen slightly over the years but did so before CO2 rose and after the Little Ice Age ended .
4 ) As CO2 levels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the greening of our planet .
5 ) As the Earth has warmed , sea levels have risen slightly due to some ice melt and the ocean waters expanding ( which is to be expected ) .
6 ) Once CO2 in the atmosphere drops to 150 ppm , life starts to die .
7 ) There have been several times in Earth ’ s history of warming and cooling and much higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere before humans .
8 ) I could not find any evidence of severe weather increasing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hurricanes , droughts , or floods but rather the opposite .
9 ) From all I have read , many scientists say we are now entering a long , downward slide into a global cooling cycle that is not good for humans or the food products we depend on .
Of course , my research led me to some questions of my own .
Here are just a few .
1 ) What should the ideal concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere be and why ?
2 ) When climate change alarmists hold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they avoid mentioning the past cycles of Earth ’ s warming and cooling ?
3 ) Why do people who believe humans don ’ t contribute much in the way of CO2 get threatened with funding cuts or can only apply for grants that don ’ t allow for the study of natural climate cycles ?
4 ) More people die from colder climates ( Lancet Journal ) .
So wouldn ’ t we want a warmer climate ?
5 ) If climate science is settled as some think , then why do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why did the Earth ’ s temperature stop rising , remain flat , or even cool in the past even when CO2 kept rising ?
7 ) Former EPA Administrator Lisa P Jackson became the first federal official to declare CO2 a pollutant .
If CO2 is a pollutant , why does OSHA say an employee in the workplace can be exposed to CO2 levels of 5,000 ppm during an 8-hour workday ?
8 ) Why all the alarmism ?
Is it really about climate or is it about money , or power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why does the U.N. IPCC alter final reports by leaving out scientists who state : “ No study to date has positively attributed all or part [ of the climate change observed to date ] to anthropogenic [ man-made ] causes ” .
( “ The Science of Climate Change , 1995″ IPCC Report ) These are just a few questions people should think about .
Ed Walbroehl spent 47 years in aviation , which included studying the weather as part of flight training , while his radar training in the U.S. Air @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Climate has now become his main interest .

Written by Ed Walbroehl, guest post on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
For the past five years, I’ve been watching and listening to this debate on global warming/climate change.
I told myself that when I retire (which I did), I was going to take a hard look into this very controversial issue to try and understand what it’s all about.
I spent months reading articles, books, watching interviews on TV with scientists, along with the many online videos from people in all fields of climate science, and visiting many websites about the climate.
I have corresponded with two Apollo astronauts who are knowledgeable on the subject. What I learned was encouraging.
1) The Earth has been warming since the last Ice Age ended. No surprise there.
2) CO2 is not a pollutant like some suggest but rather a life-sustaining gas that all life depends on.
3) The Earth’s temperature has risen slightly over the years but did so before CO2 rose and after the Little Ice Age ended.
4) As CO2 levels have risen so has food production and the greening of our planet.
5) As the Earth has warmed, sea levels have risen slightly due to some ice melt and the ocean waters expanding (which is to be expected).
6) Once CO2 in the atmosphere drops to 150 ppm, life starts to die.
7) There have been several times in Earth’s history of warming and cooling and much higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere before humans.
8) I could not find any evidence of severe weather increasing in intensity or frequency for tornados, hurricanes, droughts, or floods but rather the opposite.
9) From all I have read, many scientists say we are now entering a long, downward slide into a global cooling cycle that is not good for humans or the food products we depend on.
Of course, my research led me to some questions of my own. Here are just a few.
1) What should the ideal concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere be and why?
2) When climate change alarmists hold meetings and town halls, why do they avoid mentioning the past cycles of Earth’s warming and cooling?
3) Why do people who believe humans don’t contribute much in the way of CO2 get threatened with funding cuts or can only apply for grants that don’t allow for the study of natural climate cycles?
4) More people die from colder climates (Lancet Journal). So wouldn’t we want a warmer climate?
5) If climate science is settled as some think, then why do end-of-the-world deadlines keep changing?
6) Why did the Earth’s temperature stop rising, remain flat, or even cool in the past even when CO2 kept rising?
7) Former EPA Administrator Lisa P Jackson became the first federal official to declare CO2 a pollutant. If CO2 is a pollutant, why does OSHA say an employee in the workplace can be exposed to CO2 levels of 5,000 ppm during an 8-hour workday?
8) Why all the alarmism? Is it really about climate or is it about money, or power, or both?
9) And why does the U.N. IPCC alter final reports by leaving out scientists who state: “No study to date has positively attributed all or part [of the climate change observed to date] to anthropogenic [man-made] causes”. (“The Science of Climate Change, 1995″ IPCC Report)
These are just a few questions people should think about.
Ed Walbroehl spent 47 years in aviation, which included studying the weather as part of flight training, while his radar training in the U.S. Air Force that got him interested in weather. Climate has now become his main interest.
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--Distinguishing Truth From Green Propaganda

Written by Mark Hendrickson , Ph.D. on .
Posted in Latest news Radical environmentalism sees truth as a threat to its objectives .
Propaganda ( whether outright lies , exaggerations , or distortions ) in pursuit of green goals is justified .
Perhaps the most famous example of green propaganda has been the persistent claim that 97 % of climate scientists agree that man-made climate change endangers the planet .
Studies sporting the 97 % figure were debunked in 2014 .
In one such study , four independent reviewers found that only 0.3 percent of 11,994 abstracts cited actually stated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of global warming .
But forget about a measly 97 % !
In November 2019 , the green propaganda machine upped the ante .
Now , they claimed , there is a 100 % scientific consensus that humans are the main drivers of climate change .
100 percent ?
!
?
What about the “ 350 [ peer-reviewed ] papers published since 2017 [ that ] subvert the claim that post-1850s warming has been unusual ” and dozens of additional articles in 2019 found “ that there ’ s nothing alarming or catastrophic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tactic of green propaganda has been simply to fudge actual temperature records .
Environmentalist and computer model expert Tony Heller has documented many of those shenanigans in a series of eye-opening videos .
( Here is another link .
And another . )
Interestingly , the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration , the official keeper of temperature records for the United States was , according to The Wall Street Journal , explicitly exempted from the Data Quality Act – the federal law that requires sound science in policymaking .
Another fertile field for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” process .
First , many scientists believe that the peer review process itself is broken .
Some describe it as “ a form of censorship ” – a gatekeeper to keep out dissenters .
Others assert , “ peer review is known to engender bias , incompetence…ineffectiveness , and corruption.
” Dr. John Ioannidis , who has been so on-target with his critiques of data gathering and modeling in connection with COVID-19 , maintains that the “ hotter ” a field of scientific research is ( “ hotter ” meaning more popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the research findings are to be true.
” And what field of scientific research has been hotter than climate change for the last 30 years ?
Second , as we have learned from Climategate emails and other sources , peer review in climate science has been highly incestuous , with key figures in the alarmist camp arranging to review each other ’ s work while shielding their work from review by other scientists .
Third , the late IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri haughtily asserted that IPCC uses only peer-reviewed science .
Not so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate bible ” ( the 2007 report that garnered a Nobel Peace Prize for IPCC ) cited 5,587 non-peer-reviewed sources such as “ press releases , newspaper and magazine clippings , working papers , student theses , discussion papers , and literature published by green advocacy groups.
” A common propaganda technique is to tell only one side of the story .
Thus , green propaganda hyped the record-warm temperature of 64.94 degrees F. ( 18.3 C. ) in Antarctica in February this year .
While hyping a record summertime high in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a blind eye to the record wintertime low in the Northern Hemisphere that had happened a month earlier – specifically , a temperature reading of minus 86.8 degrees F. ( -66C ) in Greenland .
Similarly , when the mercury in the Siberian town of Verkhoyansk touched 100 degrees F. on June 20 , the green propaganda machine went into overdrive .
( That temperature was less than one degree above the previous record high set in 1988 . )
They failed to mention that such heat north of the Arctic Circle was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ degrees F. in Fort Yukon , Alaska way back on June 27 , 1915 .
Oh , by the way , I didn ’ t see any green reports that the people of Verkhoyansk woke up to snow on the ground on July 5 .
Wild temperature gyrations are a fact of life there due to peculiar topography and other natural factors .
Did you catch the BBC report about the Antarctic glacier Thwaites melting rapidly ?
That ’ s true , but the report failed to mention that active volcanoes beneath the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SUVs will not keep Thwaites from melting .
Last September , 250 news organizations around the world openly proclaimed a coordinated campaign to convince their readers and viewers of the urgent need for political action to address catastrophic climate change at the UN ’ s climate summit that month .
Any pretense of journalistic impartiality was explicitly disavowed .
The media outlets openly and proudly announced themselves as advocates ( propagandists ) for their favored viewpoint .
Variety magazine even featured an article entitled , “ Is Hollywood Doing Enough to Fight the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entertainment industry should be in the vanguard of public brainwashing .
Meanwhile , some green zealots are insisting that the green propaganda aimed at children here and abroad over the last few decades needs to be ramped up .
One British greenie wrote , “ Teachers…will have to help young people critique and rethink…deeply ingrained assumptions , attitudes , and expectations that run throughout history , and now endanger much of life on Earth.
” I ’ ll leave you with a question : Do you really know the truth about climate change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so many times that you just assume what they say is true ?

Written by Mark Hendrickson, Ph.D. on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Radical environmentalism sees truth as a threat to its objectives. Propaganda (whether outright lies, exaggerations, or distortions) in pursuit of green goals is justified.
Perhaps the most famous example of green propaganda has been the persistent claim that 97% of climate scientists agree that man-made climate change endangers the planet.
Studies sporting the 97% figure were debunked in 2014. In one such study, four independent reviewers found that only 0.3 percent of 11,994 abstracts cited actually stated that human activity is the primary cause of global warming.
But forget about a measly 97%! In November 2019, the green propaganda machine upped the ante.
Now, they claimed, there is a 100% scientific consensus that humans are the main drivers of climate change. 100 percent?!?
What about the “350 [peer-reviewed] papers published since 2017 [that] subvert the claim that post-1850s warming has been unusual” and dozens of additional articles in 2019 found “that there’s nothing alarming or catastrophic about our climate”?
Another commonplace tactic of green propaganda has been simply to fudge actual temperature records.
Environmentalist and computer model expert Tony Heller has documented many of those shenanigans in a series of eye-opening videos. (Here is another link. And another.)
Interestingly, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the official keeper of temperature records for the United States was, according to The Wall Street Journal, explicitly exempted from the Data Quality Act – the federal law that requires sound science in policymaking.
Another fertile field for green propaganda shenanigans is the “peer-review” process. First, many scientists believe that the peer review process itself is broken.
Some describe it as “a form of censorship” – a gatekeeper to keep out dissenters. Others assert, “peer review is known to engender bias, incompetence…ineffectiveness, and corruption.”
Dr. John Ioannidis, who has been so on-target with his critiques of data gathering and modeling in connection with COVID-19, maintains that the “hotter” a field of scientific research is (“hotter” meaning more popular and active) “the less likely the research findings are to be true.”
And what field of scientific research has been hotter than climate change for the last 30 years?
Second, as we have learned from Climategate emails and other sources, peer review in climate science has been highly incestuous, with key figures in the alarmist camp arranging to review each other’s work while shielding their work from review by other scientists.
Third, the late IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri haughtily asserted that IPCC uses only peer-reviewed science. Not so.
The IPCC’s much-ballyhooed “climate bible” (the 2007 report that garnered a Nobel Peace Prize for IPCC) cited 5,587 non-peer-reviewed sources such as “press releases, newspaper and magazine clippings, working papers, student theses, discussion papers, and literature published by green advocacy groups.”
A common propaganda technique is to tell only one side of the story. Thus, green propaganda hyped the record-warm temperature of 64.94 degrees F. (18.3 C.) in Antarctica in February this year.
While hyping a record summertime high in the southern hemisphere, the green propagandists turned a blind eye to the record wintertime low in the Northern Hemisphere that had happened a month earlier – specifically, a temperature reading of minus 86.8 degrees F. (-66C) in Greenland.
Similarly, when the mercury in the Siberian town of Verkhoyansk touched 100 degrees F. on June 20, the green propaganda machine went into overdrive. (That temperature was less than one degree above the previous record high set in 1988.)
They failed to mention that such heat north of the Arctic Circle was not unprecedented. The temperature reached 100 degrees F. in Fort Yukon, Alaska way back on June 27, 1915.
Oh, by the way, I didn’t see any green reports that the people of Verkhoyansk woke up to snow on the ground on July 5. Wild temperature gyrations are a fact of life there due to peculiar topography and other natural factors.
Did you catch the BBC report about the Antarctic glacier Thwaites melting rapidly? That’s true, but the report failed to mention that active volcanoes beneath the glacier are causing the melting. Banning SUVs will not keep Thwaites from melting.
Last September, 250 news organizations around the world openly proclaimed a coordinated campaign to convince their readers and viewers of the urgent need for political action to address catastrophic climate change at the UN’s climate summit that month.
Any pretense of journalistic impartiality was explicitly disavowed. The media outlets openly and proudly announced themselves as advocates (propagandists) for their favored viewpoint.
Variety magazine even featured an article entitled, “Is Hollywood Doing Enough to Fight the Climate Crisis,” as if the entertainment industry should be in the vanguard of public brainwashing.
Meanwhile, some green zealots are insisting that the green propaganda aimed at children here and abroad over the last few decades needs to be ramped up.
One British greenie wrote, “Teachers…will have to help young people critique and rethink…deeply ingrained assumptions, attitudes, and expectations that run throughout history, and now endanger much of life on Earth.”
I’ll leave you with a question: Do you really know the truth about climate change, or have you heard green propaganda so many times that you just assume what they say is true?
Read more at CFACT
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--UK’s Transport Secretary Makes U-Turn On Green Traffic Policy

Written by Steve Bird on .
Posted in Latest news Grant Shapps , the Transport Secretary , has been forced to lobby against his anti-car policy in his own constituency after barriers meant to aid social distancing turned a village high street into a “ ghost town.
” Shopkeepers in Welwyn say businesses already struggling after the lockdown could be forced to close because visitor numbers plummeted when roads were transformed and a one-way system was introduced .
More than 1,300 people have signed a petition calling on Hertfordshire County Council to use “ common sense ” after the measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high street in the country.
” The restrictions were introduced in May as part of the Transport Secretary ’ s “ new era for cycling and walking , ” announced at a Downing Street coronavirus briefing at height of the lockdown .
Mr. Shapps invited local authorities to bid for £250 million of emergency funding to introduce greener traffic measures to relieve pressure on public transport during the pandemic .
But an email from his parliamentary office , seen by The Telegraph , reveals how , just weeks later , he contacted the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and barriers were “ not suited to the old layout of Welwyn , ” a village already suffering low visitor numbers .
It adds the barriers , meant to allow pedestrians to stay two meters apart , seemed an over-reaction because they were “ outside , so have reduced transmission risks ” and the two-meter rule was being reviewed by the Government .
Mr. Shapps ’ scheme , intended to create a “ cycling revolution , ” has met widespread opposition as councils introduce road closures , new cycle lanes , and wider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The extent of grassroots Conservative opposition to the scheme within his Welwyn Hatfield constituency will prove embarrassing for the minister .
Shopkeepers believe the new one-way system has meant local residents who used to drive to shop in the village are now diverted onto a bypass , making a short trip to supermarkets or bigger towns more attractive and convenient .

Written by Steve Bird on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Grant Shapps, the Transport Secretary, has been forced to lobby against his anti-car policy in his own constituency after barriers meant to aid social distancing turned a village high street into a “ghost town.”
Shopkeepers in Welwyn say businesses already struggling after the lockdown could be forced to close because visitor numbers plummeted when roads were transformed and a one-way system was introduced.
More than 1,300 people have signed a petition calling on Hertfordshire County Council to use “common sense” after the measures deterred shoppers and created “another dead high street in the country.”
The restrictions were introduced in May as part of the Transport Secretary’s “new era for cycling and walking,” announced at a Downing Street coronavirus briefing at height of the lockdown.
Mr. Shapps invited local authorities to bid for £250 million of emergency funding to introduce greener traffic measures to relieve pressure on public transport during the pandemic.
But an email from his parliamentary office, seen by The Telegraph, reveals how, just weeks later, he contacted the council to complain that the one-way system and barriers were “not suited to the old layout of Welwyn,” a village already suffering low visitor numbers.
It adds the barriers, meant to allow pedestrians to stay two meters apart, seemed an over-reaction because they were “outside, so have reduced transmission risks” and the two-meter rule was being reviewed by the Government.
Mr. Shapps’ scheme, intended to create a “cycling revolution,” has met widespread opposition as councils introduce road closures, new cycle lanes, and wider pavements, often without public consultation.
The extent of grassroots Conservative opposition to the scheme within his Welwyn Hatfield constituency will prove embarrassing for the minister.
Shopkeepers believe the new one-way system has meant local residents who used to drive to shop in the village are now diverted onto a bypass, making a short trip to supermarkets or bigger towns more attractive and convenient.
Read rest at Telegraph
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--Reports Of The Polar Bears’ Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Written by Ross Clark on .
Posted in Latest news Wouldn ’ t it be nice if we could debate climate change for five minutes without hearing about polar bears or being subjected to footage of them perched precariously on a melting ice floe ?
But that is a little too much to expect .
Polar bears have become the pin-ups of climate change , the poor creatures who are supposed to jolt us out of thinking about abstract concepts and make us weep that our own selfishness is condemning these magnificent animals to a painful and hungry end .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ BBC jumped on the opportunity for more polar bear coverage when a paper appeared in the journal Nature Climate Change , predicting that a high carbon emissions scenario ‘ will jeopardize the persistence of all but a few high-Arctic subpopulations by 2100.
’ The paper uses a new predictive model by Peter Molnar of the University of Toronto .
A BBC report , as usual , upgraded the claims made in the paper in order to state : ‘ Polar bears will be wiped out by the end of the century unless more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a study predicts.
’ Except that the paper doesn ’ t quite say that .
The high-emissions scenario used in the study isn ’ t what would happen if the world continued on its current trajectory of fossil fuel use .
Instead , it uses a worst-case scenario called ‘ RCP8.5 ’ dreamed up in 2014 , which envisages that coal-burning will globally increase fivefold between now and 2100 .
This could be a challenge , because it would mean burning through more coal than , according to some estimates , exists on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely peaked in 2013 .
Even Nature Climate Changes ’ mother journal Nature published a think piece in January calling for scientists and campaigners to stop using RCP8.5 as a ‘ business as usual ’ scenario , on the grounds that it is highly improbable .
But even if we were to jack up carbon emissions to the level envisaged by RCP8.5 , and Arctic sea ice was to melt in accordance with the models , would it really mean the end of most polar bear populations ?
Given that polar bears feed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sea ice , this may seem a reasonable claim .
Yet the relationship between sea ice and the polar bear population isn ’ t quite so simple .
A lot of the assumptions about polar bears and sea ice have been made on the back of the animals ’ decline in the Western Hudson Bay area of Canada .
Compared with the 1980s , sea ice there now breaks up on average two weeks earlier and refreezes a week later .
As a result , polar bears are spending five months on land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – rather than four as before .
Their estimated numbers fell by 22 percent between 1987 and 2004 , although this has leveled off since then .
Polar bear numbers have also been falling in Canada ’ s Southern Beaufort Sea .
Yet it is a very different story in the Barents Sea , which lies to the north of Scandinavia and European Russia .
There , the retreat of seasonal sea ice has been far more dramatic — it now hangs around , on average , 21 weeks less than it did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers are stable .
On Svalbard , their numbers have increased by 40 percent — and the females seem to be in better physical condition now than they were 15 years ago .
It is a different story , too , in the Chukchi Sea , which lies to the north of Alaska and Russia ’ s far east .
There , sea ice forms for 41 days fewer than it did 40 years ago — yet the polar bear population seems to be stable , with no decline in the bears ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off northwestern Greenland , has lost 53 days ’ of sea ice in recent decades , yet the estimated number of polar bears more than doubled between 1997 and 2013 .
All of which seems to indicate that polar bears , like many other creatures , have proved rather adaptable to changes in their environment .
The assumption that they can only catch seals through sea ice , and will inevitably decline if their opportunities to do this disappear , seems simply to be wrong .
Somehow or other , most populations of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The end of polar bears has been predicted many times before .
Indeed , one of the authors of the Nature Climate Change paper , Steven Armstrup , claimed in 2007 that the decline of sea ice would lead to a two-thirds reduction in polar bear numbers by the middle of this century .
The failure of overall polar bear populations to follow this downward trend , in spite of a decline in sea ice , was documented in a book The Polar Bear Catastrophe that Never Happened by [ zoologist ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follows a familiar story for those who refuse to toe the line on climate change : shortly after the publication last year she was relieved of the post of Adjunct Assistant Professor at Victoria University , which she had held for 15 years .
The Denial by Ross Clark will be published by Lume Books in September .

Written by Ross Clark on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could debate climate change for five minutes without hearing about polar bears or being subjected to footage of them perched precariously on a melting ice floe?
But that is a little too much to expect.
Polar bears have become the pin-ups of climate change, the poor creatures who are supposed to jolt us out of thinking about abstract concepts and make us weep that our own selfishness is condemning these magnificent animals to a painful and hungry end.
Needless to say, the Guardian and BBC jumped on the opportunity for more polar bear coverage when a paper appeared in the journal Nature Climate Change, predicting that a high carbon emissions scenario ‘will jeopardize the persistence of all but a few high-Arctic subpopulations by 2100.’
The paper uses a new predictive model by Peter Molnar of the University of Toronto.
A BBC report, as usual, upgraded the claims made in the paper in order to state: ‘Polar bears will be wiped out by the end of the century unless more is done to tackle climate change, a study predicts.’
Except that the paper doesn’t quite say that. The high-emissions scenario used in the study isn’t what would happen if the world continued on its current trajectory of fossil fuel use.
Instead, it uses a worst-case scenario called ‘RCP8.5’ dreamed up in 2014, which envisages that coal-burning will globally increase fivefold between now and 2100.
This could be a challenge, because it would mean burning through more coal than, according to some estimates, exists on Earth. In fact, global coal-burning likely peaked in 2013.
Even Nature Climate Changes’ mother journal Nature published a think piece in January calling for scientists and campaigners to stop using RCP8.5 as a ‘business as usual’ scenario, on the grounds that it is highly improbable.
But even if we were to jack up carbon emissions to the level envisaged by RCP8.5, and Arctic sea ice was to melt in accordance with the models, would it really mean the end of most polar bear populations?
Given that polar bears feed on seals they catch by punching through sea ice, this may seem a reasonable claim. Yet the relationship between sea ice and the polar bear population isn’t quite so simple.
A lot of the assumptions about polar bears and sea ice have been made on the back of the animals’ decline in the Western Hudson Bay area of Canada.
Compared with the 1980s, sea ice there now breaks up on average two weeks earlier and refreezes a week later.
As a result, polar bears are spending five months on land — where they struggle to find food – rather than four as before.
Their estimated numbers fell by 22 percent between 1987 and 2004, although this has leveled off since then. Polar bear numbers have also been falling in Canada’s Southern Beaufort Sea.
Yet it is a very different story in the Barents Sea, which lies to the north of Scandinavia and European Russia.
There, the retreat of seasonal sea ice has been far more dramatic — it now hangs around, on average, 21 weeks less than it did 40 years ago. Yet polar bear numbers are stable.
On Svalbard, their numbers have increased by 40 percent — and the females seem to be in better physical condition now than they were 15 years ago.
It is a different story, too, in the Chukchi Sea, which lies to the north of Alaska and Russia’s far east.
There, sea ice forms for 41 days fewer than it did 40 years ago — yet the polar bear population seems to be stable, with no decline in the bears’ physical condition.
The Kane Basin, off northwestern Greenland, has lost 53 days’ of sea ice in recent decades, yet the estimated number of polar bears more than doubled between 1997 and 2013.
All of which seems to indicate that polar bears, like many other creatures, have proved rather adaptable to changes in their environment.
The assumption that they can only catch seals through sea ice, and will inevitably decline if their opportunities to do this disappear, seems simply to be wrong. Somehow or other, most populations of polar bears are finding enough to eat.
The end of polar bears has been predicted many times before. Indeed, one of the authors of the Nature Climate Change paper, Steven Armstrup, claimed in 2007 that the decline of sea ice would lead to a two-thirds reduction in polar bear numbers by the middle of this century.
The failure of overall polar bear populations to follow this downward trend, in spite of a decline in sea ice, was documented in a book The Polar Bear Catastrophe that Never Happened by [zoologist] Susan Crockford.
What happened to her follows a familiar story for those who refuse to toe the line on climate change: shortly after the publication last year she was relieved of the post of Adjunct Assistant Professor at Victoria University, which she had held for 15 years.
The Denial by Ross Clark will be published by Lume Books in September.
Read more at Spectator
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-07-27--Rich Green Activists Keep Poor Countries In The Dark

Written by Donna Laframboise on .
Posted in Latest news Michael Shellenberger ’ s best-seller , Apocalypse Never : Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All , deserves to be read by many kinds of people .
Near the top of that list are those well-intentioned members of the public who , because they cherish nature and love wild animals , donate money regularly to environmental charities .
Shellenberger has been involved with green causes and organizations for decades .
In 2008 , Time magazine named him a Hero of the Environment .
His perspective is informed .
His views may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20-something , but he ’ s a grownup now – with observations and conclusions other grownups need to hear .
This book is engaging .
It ’ s also honest .
Within its pages , we learn that many activist groups have lost their way .
They ’ re now harming rather than helping .
Indeed , they ’ ve become a new breed of colonial overseers– imposing their will on Third-World populations who lack the means to defend themselves .
Shellenberger says that , where the Amazon rain forest is concerned , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and philanthropies have made the situation worse.
” Brazil isn ’ t a rich country .
It ’ s still struggling to raise much of its population out of grueling poverty .
Soybean farming is crucially important since it increases incomes and funds schools .
But Greenpeace has long insisted it knows better than Brazil ’ s democratically elected government what policies Brazil should follow .
Shellenberger says Greenpeace pressured European companies to stop buying Brazilian soy products by falsely claiming they posed a danger to the rain forest .
A 2006 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , repeatedly refers to an invasion of the Amazon by soy farmers .
Shellenberger cites an expert on the ground who explains that Greenpeace ’ s extremism , its disrespectful tone , and its disregard for economic realities , has wholly alienated Brazilian farmers .
The lengthy interview from which those comments are taken , explains further : There are only three percent of the lands in the Amazon outside of protected areas good for soy .
Soy isn ’ t going to run over the Amazon because [ the farmers ] don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rocks , too many hills .
Too much rain and the water table is too high .
Elsewhere , Shellenberger reminds us that the history of wildlife sanctuaries and national parks is a history in which indigenous peoples have been driven from their traditional homelands – exiled from them – because activists and governments prioritized the welfare of animals over the welfare of human beings .
He quotes Sarah Sawyer , a primatologist who has studied gorillas in Cameroon : Activist groups such as Extinction Rebellion insist economic activity per se is killing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factory-made consumer goods produced in countries such as Indonesia .
In their words , “ Fashion = Ecocide.
” Around the world , for hundreds of years , young women have been voting with their feet .
They have moved to cities from the countryside not because urban areas are utopian but because they offer many more opportunities for a better life…Moving to the city gives women more freedom in who they marry .
Demonizing the factory jobs these women currently perform inflicts real harm .
The last thing economically vulnerable people in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chopping down their ladder to prosperity .
Rather than supporting economic developments that will make poverty history , Shellenberger says environmentalists too often support ideas that will make poverty permanent .
Behind buzzwords such as sustainability , we frequently find opposition to rudimentary progress – the kind that raises living standards and funds health care .
One can not finish Apocalypse Never without concluding that environmental activists from rich countries , who imagine they have the right to dictate terms to people in poor countries , have become a serious problem across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rivers , based in affluent Berkeley , California , lied about the sentiments of the local community concerning a proposed hydroelectric dam in Uganda .
Rather than opposing the dam , people supported it – a phenomenon Shellenberger has witnessed firsthand in the Congo and Rwanda .
In his words , locals “ were ecstatic at the prospects of getting electricity.
” Nevertheless , he says , International Rivers has “ helped stop 217 dams from being built , mostly in poor countries.
” Anyone who does anything in the real world makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations .
Green activists have made plenty .
It ’ s time these were acknowledged , so that course corrections can occur .

Written by Donna Laframboise on Jul 27, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Michael Shellenberger’s best-seller, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, deserves to be read by many kinds of people.
Near the top of that list are those well-intentioned members of the public who, because they cherish nature and love wild animals, donate money regularly to environmental charities.
Shellenberger has been involved with green causes and organizations for decades. In 2008, Time magazine named him a Hero of the Environment. His perspective is informed.
His views may once have been those of a naïve 20-something, but he’s a grownup now – with observations and conclusions other grownups need to hear.
This book is engaging. It’s also honest. Within its pages, we learn that many activist groups have lost their way. They’re now harming rather than helping.
Indeed, they’ve become a new breed of colonial overseers– imposing their will on Third-World populations who lack the means to defend themselves.
Shellenberger says that, where the Amazon rain forest is concerned, “many environmental NGOs, European governments, and philanthropies have made the situation worse.”
Brazil isn’t a rich country. It’s still struggling to raise much of its population out of grueling poverty. Soybean farming is crucially important since it increases incomes and funds schools.
But Greenpeace has long insisted it knows better than Brazil’s democratically elected government what policies Brazil should follow.
Shellenberger says Greenpeace pressured European companies to stop buying Brazilian soy products by falsely claiming they posed a danger to the rain forest.
A 2006 Greenpeace report, Eating Up the Amazon, repeatedly refers to an invasion of the Amazon by soy farmers.
Shellenberger cites an expert on the ground who explains that Greenpeace’s extremism, its disrespectful tone, and its disregard for economic realities, has wholly alienated Brazilian farmers.
The lengthy interview from which those comments are taken, explains further:
There are only three percent of the lands in the Amazon outside of protected areas good for soy. Soy isn’t going to run over the Amazon because [the farmers] don’t want it. Too many rocks, too many hills. Too much rain and the water table is too high.
Elsewhere, Shellenberger reminds us that the history of wildlife sanctuaries and national parks is a history in which indigenous peoples have been driven from their traditional homelands – exiled from them – because activists and governments prioritized the welfare of animals over the welfare of human beings.
He quotes Sarah Sawyer, a primatologist who has studied gorillas in Cameroon:
at my field site we were called ‘conservation’…in a very derogatory way. And it hurt. ‘We don’t want conservation here,’ they would say…the local people felt like conservation was simply a way to rob them of their resources.
Activist groups such as Extinction Rebellion insist economic activity per se is killing the planet. Among their targets are factory-made consumer goods produced in countries such as Indonesia. In their words, “Fashion = Ecocide.”
But Shellenberger offers an alternative perspective:
Around the world, for hundreds of years, young women have been voting with their feet. They have moved to cities from the countryside not because urban areas are utopian but because they offer many more opportunities for a better life…Moving to the city gives women more freedom in who they marry.
Demonizing the factory jobs these women currently perform inflicts real harm. The last thing economically vulnerable people in poor countries need is rich climate activists chopping down their ladder to prosperity.
Rather than supporting economic developments that will make poverty history, Shellenberger says environmentalists too often support ideas that will make poverty permanent.
Behind buzzwords such as sustainability, we frequently find opposition to rudimentary progress – the kind that raises living standards and funds health care.
One cannot finish Apocalypse Never without concluding that environmental activists from rich countries, who imagine they have the right to dictate terms to people in poor countries, have become a serious problem across the developing world.
Shellenberger reports that International Rivers, based in affluent Berkeley, California, lied about the sentiments of the local community concerning a proposed hydroelectric dam in Uganda.
Rather than opposing the dam, people supported it – a phenomenon Shellenberger has witnessed firsthand in the Congo and Rwanda.
In his words, locals “were ecstatic at the prospects of getting electricity.” Nevertheless, he says, International Rivers has “helped stop 217 dams from being built, mostly in poor countries.”
Anyone who does anything in the real world makes mistakes. Governments. Corporations. Charitable organizations.
Green activists have made plenty. It’s time these were acknowledged, so that course corrections can occur.
Read more at Big Pic News
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print