committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-01--Urban business exodus propelled by virus, unrest, high costs

I opened my June 2 column “ Pandemic the Final Push to Telework , ” noting that many big cities just can ’ t seem to catch a break .
First , as I discuss in my 2019 book “ Reinventing Ourselves : How Technology is Rapidly and Radically Transforming Humanity , ” many metropolitan centers were already losing large tax-paying headquarter companies and employees through a digital wave of workplace and workforce transitions away from traditional big office — big city — operating structures made possible by internet connectivity .
Survival necessities , in combination with newly realized remote-working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cause more and more corporations to dramatically downsize central city offices , or relocate them altogether .
This telework trend then became turbocharged by coronavirus-forced business and buyer shutdowns .
Resulting social distancing requirements coupled with ever-increasing city real estate costs during a severe economic downturn has forced large and small companies to either cut operating costs or perish .
Many corporations over the past decade have already been challenged to squeeze the maximum number of employees possible into their facilities .
Social distancing safety concerns are making this increasingly difficult , necessitating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanded , dramatically restructured , or abandoned .
And it just got worse .
A new pandemic of protests , riots , and lootings is certain to propel an accelerated flight of fright exodus of small businesses and affluent residents from turbulent social disorder that is tragically being allowed to rage out of control in many of our nation ’ s major urban centers .
Daniel Henninger has written a highly insightful article about this alarming political and moral crisis in his June 18 Wall Street Journal piece , “ The Coming Urban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same city centers that have experienced nonstop street marches and significant lootings following outrage over the Minneapolis murder of George Floyd , were the ones already losing population : New York ( as always ) , Philadelphia , Chicago , Cleveland , Milwaukee , St Louis , Minneapolis , Seattle , Los Angeles , Portland , Ore. , on and on .
This trend , he argues , reflects an ambivalence — at best — on the part of modern urban progressive governance toward maintaining civil order as well as political incompetence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of growing crime and chaos , politically progressive and impotent state and municipal leaders are acquiescing to radically incompressible demands to defund the police .
In New York , with blocks of stores boarded up and cherry bombs exploding nightly everywhere , the city council has agreed to cut the city ’ s police budget by $ 1 billion , or one-sixth .
Nevertheless , even that may not be appeasement enough .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo issued a plaintive request to the daily street protests : “ You don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You won.
” Cuomo then even more lamely capitulated , pleading “ What reform do you want ?
What do you want ?
” The net result in many cities over the last three months since the coronavirus pandemic has led to a sense on the part of residents of irresolvable chaos , stress and threat .
This helplessly futile perception is buttressed by urban-based media that as Henninger notes have “ become bizarrely invested in apocalyptic story lines , picking at scab after scab and problem after problem.
” He adds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political beliefs are going to get out because they are watching city after city reach a tipping point of social disorder and political disorganization.
” Meanwhile , previously undervalued suburbs and exurbs , distant from city centers , are gaining residents .
Henninger warns of a great reordering of America ’ s population as more and more distrustful people determine that it is time to separate themselves and their families from dangers and moral decline of high-density urban life .
He believes that many are deciding that the cost-benefits that they once valued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anymore , “ with incentives mounting to move out.
” Henninger characterized a familiar storyline of recent years that gave rise to great economic and political power of urban centers such as New York , Los Angeles , San Francisco and Washington as young , politically progressive workers in the knowledge and service industries poured in .
This insurgence of influence increased tension and division between urban sophisticates on the forward edge of everything and the stodgy suburbs and conservative rural communities .
An unhappy consequence , Henninger predicts , is that now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , these cities will increasingly become more divided between upscale progressive singles who are able to afford the political incompetence and residents of inner-city neighborhoods that will fall further behind .
As I have previously written on numerous accounts , there is no clear way to reverse transformative demographic trends that are dramatically and irreversibly changing the economic , social and political landscapes of great American cities .
While not total solutions , protections from crime and disorder are fundamental prerequisites for all good outcomes .

I opened my June 2 column “Pandemic the Final Push to Telework,” noting that many big cities just can’t seem to catch a break.
First, as I discuss in my 2019 book “Reinventing Ourselves: How Technology is Rapidly and Radically Transforming Humanity,” many metropolitan centers were already losing large tax-paying headquarter companies and employees through a digital wave of workplace and workforce transitions away from traditional big office — big city — operating structures made possible by internet connectivity. Survival necessities, in combination with newly realized remote-working employer and employee benefits, continue to cause more and more corporations to dramatically downsize central city offices, or relocate them altogether.
This telework trend then became turbocharged by coronavirus-forced business and buyer shutdowns. Resulting social distancing requirements coupled with ever-increasing city real estate costs during a severe economic downturn has forced large and small companies to either cut operating costs or perish. Many corporations over the past decade have already been challenged to squeeze the maximum number of employees possible into their facilities. Social distancing safety concerns are making this increasingly difficult, necessitating that the spaces they provide be either expanded, dramatically restructured, or abandoned.
And it just got worse. A new pandemic of protests, riots, and lootings is certain to propel an accelerated flight of fright exodus of small businesses and affluent residents from turbulent social disorder that is tragically being allowed to rage out of control in many of our nation’s major urban centers.
Daniel Henninger has written a highly insightful article about this alarming political and moral crisis in his June 18 Wall Street Journal piece, “The Coming Urban Exodus.”
Henninger observes that many of the same city centers that have experienced nonstop street marches and significant lootings following outrage over the Minneapolis murder of George Floyd, were the ones already losing population: New York (as always), Philadelphia, Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, St Louis, Minneapolis, Seattle, Los Angeles, Portland, Ore., on and on. This trend, he argues, reflects an ambivalence — at best — on the part of modern urban progressive governance toward maintaining civil order as well as political incompetence and intellectual incoherence.
At a time of growing crime and chaos, politically progressive and impotent state and municipal leaders are acquiescing to radically incompressible demands to defund the police.
In New York, with blocks of stores boarded up and cherry bombs exploding nightly everywhere, the city council has agreed to cut the city’s police budget by $1 billion, or one-sixth. Nevertheless, even that may not be appeasement enough. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued a plaintive request to the daily street protests: “You don’t need to protest. You won. You won.”
Cuomo then even more lamely capitulated, pleading “What reform do you want? What do you want?”
The net result in many cities over the last three months since the coronavirus pandemic has led to a sense on the part of residents of irresolvable chaos, stress and threat. This helplessly futile perception is buttressed by urban-based media that as Henninger notes have “become bizarrely invested in apocalyptic story lines, picking at scab after scab and problem after problem.”
He adds, “People with all sorts of political beliefs are going to get out because they are watching city after city reach a tipping point of social disorder and political disorganization.”
Meanwhile, previously undervalued suburbs and exurbs, distant from city centers, are gaining residents.
Henninger warns of a great reordering of America’s population as more and more distrustful people determine that it is time to separate themselves and their families from dangers and moral decline of high-density urban life. He believes that many are deciding that the cost-benefits that they once valued just aren’t working for them anymore, “with incentives mounting to move out.”
Henninger characterized a familiar storyline of recent years that gave rise to great economic and political power of urban centers such as New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington as young, politically progressive workers in the knowledge and service industries poured in. This insurgence of influence increased tension and division between urban sophisticates on the forward edge of everything and the stodgy suburbs and conservative rural communities.
An unhappy consequence, Henninger predicts, is that now as young families and well-off retirees leave, these cities will increasingly become more divided between upscale progressive singles who are able to afford the political incompetence and residents of inner-city neighborhoods that will fall further behind.
As I have previously written on numerous accounts, there is no clear way to reverse transformative demographic trends that are dramatically and irreversibly changing the economic, social and political landscapes of great American cities. While not total solutions, protections from crime and disorder are fundamental prerequisites for all good outcomes.
This article originally appeared at NewsMax


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-02--Climate dogma is worse than you think

Climate dogma is worse than you think

It should be no surprise to any reader of CFACT essays that what our youth are being taught about energy is totally wrong .
In one of the great ironies of history , a frantic global movement to eliminate fossil fuels – the foundation of modern life – has achieved comprehensive power throughout the developed world at the very moment when the supply of these resources , especially in the United States , has exploded .
America has more recoverable energy supplies than any nation – by far .
We have more oil and natural gas than all the OPEC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran COMBINED .
Thanks to the shale oil and gas revolution due to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing we likely have many , many centuries of reserves .
Contrary to false media reports , no documented environmental problems have ever resulted from these revolutionary technologies .
Sadly , school children are the target of propaganda about saving the planet with alternative energy sources , and many Americans believe the Green fairytale that things were better in the past than they are now .
In fact anyone who thinks that we can get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from “ clean , renewable ” sources like wind , solar and biofuels is living in a world of make believe .
For many centuries mankind relied on what is now called “ renewable energy ” , windmills , wood , water and sun .
The notion that green energy is in its infancy is really laughable .
Chris Horner at the Competitive Enterprise Institute liked to say you can build windmills with steel , but you can ’ t build steel with windmills .
Fossil fuels have vastly improved human life across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abject poverty .
But now that energy is more abundant than ever , it has come under severe and unrelenting assault .
Europe has started deindustrializing .
The governments of many of the most developed countries in the world have mandated as rapid a new transition as possible from carbon rich energy to zero carbon .
The inherent limitations of wind and solar power are nothing less than the physical laws of the universe .
We are therefore facing a regression to the limited energy horizon of preindustrial societies .
Never before have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it backward to scarcer , more expensive , and less efficient energy .
Green energy policies assume centralized control of the sources , production , and consumption of energy , and that means centralized control over all economic activity and consumer choice .
In contrast , those who have gained the most from the economic growth brought on by inexpensive fossil fuel energy have not been the wealthiest of a century ago but the poorest .
For the first time the economy performed for the People instead of mainly the Privileged .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the industrial revolution brought on by inexpensive energy .
Most green energy policies undermine human progress .
They are regressive , disproportionately hurting low and middle income families by driving energy prices higher , thus eroding their standard of living .
Many cultural historians contend , and I agree , that present day radical environmentalism is the successor to the failed Marxist socialist ideology .
Among them Paul Johnson in his September 18 , 2008 Forbes article , The Nonsense of Global Warming said , “ the idea that human beings have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system of the Earth through their industrial activities and the burning of fossil fuels …………..like Marxism , is a political theory of actions demanding compliance with its rules.
” Every Policy prescription for addressing climate change calls for more government control .
When the EPA asserted power over carbon dioxide-a benign natural gas and ubiquitous byproduct of human activity- the late Charles Krauthammer said it had seized the commanding heights of the economy and society .
He wrote in the Washington Post that “ Global warming is a creed , a faith , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with science.
” In space scientist Robert Zubrin ’ s excellent book Merchants of Despair , he explained that what must be limited by the anti-human forces aligned against us , is not resources , “ but the right to use those resources , …therefore human aspirations must be crushed , and authorities must be constituted that are capable of doing the crushing.
” Whether promoted as planned austerity or more glaringly as international governance without nation states , the activities and political leaders of the climate crusade imagine “ planetary management ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the green movements mantras on fossil fuel : “ keep them in the ground ” .
Doomsday predictions of running out of food , water energy and other resources necessary for human survival , are a regular feature of human history in the battle of good versus evil .
Global warming would seem like just another one .
But it is not .
It ’ s infiltration into our cultural , financial , academic , media , legal and religious institutions is unprecedented .
This is dogma much worse than we have ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” is assumed to be a moral good .
It is not .
It is in fact the increase in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere that has resulted in our living longer , healthier and freer lives than our ancestors did only a century ago .
We must all take it seriously and resist what is truly impending tyranny .
Both Aldous Huxley in his book Brave New World and George Orwell in his book 1984 for saw what its happening .
I will address their prescience in an article next week at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ essay and Steve Moore and Kathleen Hartnett White ’ s amazing book , Fueling Freedom , from which portions of this book were based , is to wake up the nation to the fact that debates over climate and energy have no basis in science or in mankind ’ s well being .
Their ultimate goal is to destroy free society as we know it and to enslave us in a dystopian nightmare .
Portions of this article were excerpted directly from the book Fueling Freedom with permission of the authors Steve Moore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommended as the best treatise on American energy yet written .

It should be no surprise to any reader of CFACT essays that what our youth are being taught about energy is totally wrong. In one of the great ironies of history, a frantic global movement to eliminate fossil fuels – the foundation of modern life – has achieved comprehensive power throughout the developed world at the very moment when the supply of these resources, especially in the United States, has exploded.
America has more recoverable energy supplies than any nation – by far. We have more oil and natural gas than all the OPEC nations along with Russia, China and Iran COMBINED. Thanks to the shale oil and gas revolution due to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing we likely have many, many centuries of reserves. Contrary to false media reports, no documented environmental problems have ever resulted from these revolutionary technologies.
Sadly, school children are the target of propaganda about saving the planet with alternative energy sources, and many Americans believe the Green fairytale that things were better in the past than they are now. In fact anyone who thinks that we can get the power we need for our modern society from “clean, renewable” sources like wind, solar and biofuels is living in a world of make believe. For many centuries mankind relied on what is now called “renewable energy”, windmills, wood, water and sun. The notion that green energy is in its infancy is really laughable. Chris Horner at the Competitive Enterprise Institute liked to say you can build windmills with steel, but you can’t build steel with windmills.
Fossil fuels have vastly improved human life across the world, releasing whole populations from abject poverty. But now that energy is more abundant than ever, it has come under severe and unrelenting assault. Europe has started deindustrializing. The governments of many of the most developed countries in the world have mandated as rapid a new transition as possible from carbon rich energy to zero carbon. The inherent limitations of wind and solar power are nothing less than the physical laws of the universe. We are therefore facing a regression to the limited energy horizon of preindustrial societies.
Never before have the rulers of a society intentionally driven it backward to scarcer, more expensive, and less efficient energy. Green energy policies assume centralized control of the sources, production, and consumption of energy, and that means centralized control over all economic activity and consumer choice. In contrast, those who have gained the most from the economic growth brought on by inexpensive fossil fuel energy have not been the wealthiest of a century ago but the poorest. For the first time the economy performed for the People instead of mainly the Privileged. The average worker and most impoverished have benefitted from the industrial revolution brought on by inexpensive energy. Most green energy policies undermine human progress. They are regressive, disproportionately hurting low and middle income families by driving energy prices higher, thus eroding their standard of living.
Many cultural historians contend, and I agree, that present day radical environmentalism is the successor to the failed Marxist socialist ideology. Among them Paul Johnson in his September 18, 2008 Forbes article, The Nonsense of Global Warming said, “the idea that human beings have changed and are changing the basic climate system of the Earth through their industrial activities and the burning of fossil fuels …………..like Marxism, is a political theory of actions demanding compliance with its rules.” Every Policy prescription for addressing climate change calls for more government control.
When the EPA asserted power over carbon dioxide-a benign natural gas and ubiquitous byproduct of human activity- the late Charles Krauthammer said it had seized the commanding heights of the economy and society. He wrote in the Washington Post that “Global warming is a creed, a faith, a dogma that has little to do with science.”
In space scientist Robert Zubrin’s excellent book Merchants of Despair, he explained that what must be limited by the anti-human forces aligned against us, is not resources, “but the right to use those resources,…therefore human aspirations must be crushed, and authorities must be constituted that are capable of doing the crushing.”
Whether promoted as planned austerity or more glaringly as international governance without nation states, the activities and political leaders of the climate crusade imagine “planetary management”. This is evidenced by one of the green movements mantras on fossil fuel: “keep them in the ground”.
Doomsday predictions of running out of food, water energy and other resources necessary for human survival, are a regular feature of human history in the battle of good versus evil. Global warming would seem like just another one. But it is not. It’s infiltration into our cultural, financial , academic, media, legal and religious institutions is unprecedented. This is dogma much worse than we have ever experienced.
Shrinking our “carbon footprint” is assumed to be a moral good. It is not. It is in fact the increase in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere that has resulted in our living longer, healthier and freer lives than our ancestors did only a century ago. We must all take it seriously and resist what is truly impending tyranny. Both Aldous Huxley in his book Brave New World and George Orwell in his book 1984 for saw what its happening. I will address their prescience in an article next week at CFACT.
The primary purpose of this essay and Steve Moore and Kathleen Hartnett White’s amazing book, Fueling Freedom, from which portions of this book were based, is to wake up the nation to the fact that debates over climate and energy have no basis in science or in mankind’s well being. Their ultimate goal is to destroy free society as we know it and to enslave us in a dystopian nightmare.
Portions of this article were excerpted directly from the book Fueling Freedom with permission of the authors Steve Moore and Kathleen White. The book is recommended as the best treatise on American energy yet written.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-02--Current extremes of non-extremes

Current extremes of non-extremes

The problem with looking at the weather so much is that when you hear comments that run counter to what you see , it brings up the old admonition , Who are you Going to Believe , Me or your Lying Eyes ?
Of course , bringing this up can rain hell from above with the atmospheric authoritarians .
But at the end of June , I want to bring a few things up about the extremes of NON EXTREMES .
1 ) GLOBALLY Tropical cyclone activity is well below normal just a tad over 50 % ( Total Ace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 61.3 ) 2 ) This is tongue in cheek , but suppose I want to show people how tranquil the weather is ( not a good idea if you are trying to get business or attract attention ) I would bring up that with no named tropical cyclones on the planet right now ( midday Monday ) and no likely strong feature the next several days , we are tying the all-time record for LEAST amount of classified tropical cyclones for the date , which of course is 0 ( and has occurred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now here is something a bit more serious .
The massive shutdown this early in the prime region for most ACE/basin , the Northwest Pacific ( currently less than 20 % of average ) is something that is a precursor in many seasons to the big Atlantic basin hurricane season .
When that area is down , the Indian Ocean ( which is well above average ) and the Atlantic make up for it .
But if we are going to think globally about how bad things are right now , there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack where it means that the forecast ideas we have had now since early March , appear to have merit .
Remember that if we turn out right , chances are other areas are well below average The Northeast Pacific is less than 10 % of average now !
4 ) Tornadoes are way below average .
Look at the chart .
When I look at the 1926 tri-state tornado : So is Hail !
In fact , it looks like it is at a record low !
But do you see what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and warm , which can get played up as a sign of some kind of atmospheric apocalypse ( any extreme counts , never let a good weather event go to waste.. not to be confused with never let a good piece of cheesecake go to your waist ) usually has some kind of compensating opposite event .
One can say both are extremes , but the average is not really normal , its an average.Look at the hail chart again .
See the average ?
Most of those years are above or below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But do you see what is going on here ?
Noteworthy cold and warm , which can get played up as a sign of some kind of atmospheric apocalypse ( any extreme counts , never let a good weather event go to waste.. not to be confused with never let a good piece of cheesecake go to your waist ) usually has some kind of compensating opposite event .
One can say both are extremes , but the average is not really normal , its an average.Look at the hail chart again .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ years are above or below and not by a small amount .
Nature swings to extremes and back , because weather and climate are nature ’ s , not mans , but nature ’ s way of getting rid of an imbalance she never can , because of the inherent traits of the system .
That is normal for such swings to happen , just like its normal for nature to test limits .
We see it now , we did not before .
That ’ s a good thing for weather nuts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing is going on , Which of course means that since there is something happening somewhere ( take the extreme heat in Siberia or the heatwave building in the lakes or Ontario ) .
If you are a weather nut you can always find something to gawk at , or if you are a climate extremist , something to alarm people over .
The problem is most people are not aware of that .
Finally , Arctic temperatures continue to exhibit the traits of oceanic induced increases in water vapor .
This leads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the relationship between water vapor and dew point , greater limits on how far the temperature can fall in the coldest area .
It is much more pronounced in the winter when its coldest in the arctic , than the summer , when the combination of melting ice ( which cools the air , as opposed to the freezing process , which releases heat ) and while Water Vapor has increased , it has not yet increased enough to force the issue with summer .

The problem with looking at the weather so much is that when you hear comments that run counter to what you see, it brings up the old admonition, Who are you Going to Believe, Me or your Lying Eyes? Of course, bringing this up can rain hell from above with the atmospheric authoritarians. But at the end of June, I want to bring a few things up about the extremes of NON EXTREMES.
1) GLOBALLY Tropical cyclone activity is well below normal just a tad over 50% (Total Ace is 33.2 Average thru the date is 61.3)
2) This is tongue in cheek, but suppose I want to show people how tranquil the weather is (not a good idea if you are trying to get business or attract attention) I would bring up that with no named tropical cyclones on the planet right now (midday Monday) and no likely strong feature the next several days, we are tying the all-time record for LEAST amount of classified tropical cyclones for the date, which of course is 0 (and has occurred many times ha ha)
3) Now here is something a bit more serious. The massive shutdown this early in the prime region for most ACE/basin, the Northwest Pacific (currently less than 20% of average) is something that is a precursor in many seasons to the big Atlantic basin hurricane season. When that area is down, the Indian Ocean (which is well above average) and the Atlantic make up for it. But if we are going to think globally about how bad things are right now, there is not much to say, except the lack where it means that the forecast ideas we have had now since early March, appear to have merit. Remember that if we turn out right, chances are other areas are well below average The Northeast Pacific is less than 10% of average now!
4) Tornadoes are way below average. Look at the chart.
If not for the one day in April it would be at record lows. BTW that day was interesting, for there was one swath that produced over 50% of the 183 with 2 other parent cells to its southeast another 25%. If not for the one day in April it would be at record lows. BTW that day was interesting, for there was one swath that produced over 50% of the 183 with 2 other parent cells to its southeast another 25%.
When I look at the 1926 tri-state tornado:
I have to wonder if under scrutiny with today’s ability to see smaller tornadoes around the large singular one, if there would have been many more tornadoes reported rather than the single path. This was the US deadliest tornado. But back to the main point, Tornadoes are way below average. I have to wonder if under scrutiny with today’s ability to see smaller tornadoes around the large singular one, if there would have been many more tornadoes reported rather than the single path. This was the US deadliest tornado. But back to the main point, Tornadoes are way below average.
So is Hail! In fact, it looks like it is at a record low!
The swap is that wind reports are above average. The swap is that wind reports are above average.
The reason for the lack is that too much cold air banked NW/SE through the nation at the height of the tornado season suppresses activity. You can see that here chances are what instability is there. They do not reach the levels that produces the hail or tornadoes. Yet that threshold may be less for strong wind gusts in downdrafts. The reason for the lack is that too much cold air banked NW/SE through the nation at the height of the tornado season suppresses activity. You can see that here chances are what instability is there. They do not reach the levels that produces the hail or tornadoes. Yet that threshold may be less for strong wind gusts in downdrafts.
This looks like another abnormally low year, 2013.. This looks like another abnormally low year, 2013..
when cold air is banked up SW/NE over the west and plains hyper years result, like 2011. when cold air is banked up SW/NE over the west and plains hyper years result, like 2011.
Too much warm air like 2012 and its a weak season: Too much warm air like 2012 and its a weak season:
But do you see what is going on here? Noteworthy cold and warm, which can get played up as a sign of some kind of atmospheric apocalypse (any extreme counts, never let a good weather event go to waste.. not to be confused with never let a good piece of cheesecake go to your waist) usually has some kind of compensating opposite event. One can say both are extremes, but the average is not really normal, its an average.Look at the hail chart again. See the average? Most of those years are above or below and not by a small amount. But do you see what is going on here? Noteworthy cold and warm, which can get played up as a sign of some kind of atmospheric apocalypse (any extreme counts, never let a good weather event go to waste.. not to be confused with never let a good piece of cheesecake go to your waist) usually has some kind of compensating opposite event. One can say both are extremes, but the average is not really normal, its an average.Look at the hail chart again. See the average? Most of those years are above or below and not by a small amount.
Nature swings to extremes and back, because weather and climate are nature’s, not mans, but nature’s way of getting rid of an imbalance she never can, because of the inherent traits of the system. That is normal for such swings to happen, just like its normal for nature to test limits. We see it now, we did not before. That’s a good thing for weather nuts, since how boring is it if nothing is going on, Which of course means that since there is something happening somewhere (take the extreme heat in Siberia or the heatwave building in the lakes or Ontario). If you are a weather nut you can always find something to gawk at, or if you are a climate extremist, something to alarm people over. The problem is most people are not aware of that.
Finally, Arctic temperatures continue to exhibit the traits of oceanic induced increases in water vapor. This leads to higher dewpoints, which means given the relationship between water vapor and dew point, greater limits on how far the temperature can fall in the coldest area. It is much more pronounced in the winter when its coldest in the arctic, than the summer, when the combination of melting ice (which cools the air, as opposed to the freezing process, which releases heat) and while Water Vapor has increased, it has not yet increased enough to force the issue with summer.
So when if monster hurricanes come a calling, or a heatwave starts a boiling, or tornado is a brawling, rest assured that someplace, somewhere, nature has a counter going on. I like telling you about it cause its all part of the gift of weather. Beware when you don’t see a countering point. So when if monster hurricanes come a calling, or a heatwave starts a boiling, or tornado is a brawling, rest assured that someplace, somewhere, nature has a counter going on. I like telling you about it cause its all part of the gift of weather. Beware when you don’t see a countering point.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-02--Dem climate plan turns reality upside down

It is with good fortune that I had just re-read the 1949 dystopian novel “ 1984 ” by George Orwell , when I received a copy of the Democratic party ’ s climate action plan titled The Congressional Action Plan for a Clean Energy Economy and a Healthy , Resilient and Just America .
In the novel , the party in power ( there was but one party ) effectively forced the public to believe the equivalent of “ what is right is actually wrong ” .
They taught three premises which became the nations slogans , War is Peace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Strength .
Absurd as you may think these slogans to be , they are no less absurd than the ideas presented in the Democrat ’ s climate plan which include : • None Carbon Dioxide , though it is the breathe of life , is a pollutant • None The burning of fossil fuels will destroy the planet and must be eliminated • None Renewable energy such as wind and solar power can support our way of life • None Wind and solar power will improve human health and save 62,000 premature deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon dioxide emissions • None Wind turbines and solar farms will improve the economy by creating millions of jobs To believe otherwise , among alarmists , is to be called a “ denier ” and warrant career destruction and being shunned by the public .
It is equivalent to Orwell ’ s “ thought crimes ” described in his book “ 1984.
” There is no single goal of the Democrat ’ s plan that has any chance of being achieved which will allow some to breathe a sigh of relief .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they gain the Whitehouse on November 3 the plan will be put into motion and serious economic damage will quickly be incurred .
Irrefutable physical facts relating to any attempt to shift our energy production from fossil fuels to wind and solar must quickly increase our energy costs .
The reason is simple .
Due to the recognized lack of consistent availability of wind and solar to produce energy for our community electric grids , they must be backed up with additional dependable fossil fuel power .
This energy must be equal or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ produced by wind or solar running on standby 100 % of the time ready to be placed on the grid within seconds of the failure of the wind or sun to cooperate .
Thus their plan will not only dramatically increase the costs of all electric utilities , but it will actually increase the volume of the very carbon dioxide emissions the democrat plan hopes to reduce .
They talk of batteries as the backup for wind and solar but such batteries are on no ones drawing boards save perhaps Elon Musk ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Las Vegas plans to use 62,000 Tesla batteries at a cost $ 6000 each and no doubt they could take over for a few hours but certainly not a few days .
A good deal of the Democratic plan is aimed at public health .
They are enforcing the idea that the impending warming of the earth will create physical and mental health problems which their plan will attempt to avert .
In fact their plan itself creates alarm where there should be none and can have a real negative impact on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
At the community level the plan wishes to establish disaster relief programs preparing for the effects of warming .
It ignores in entirety that the Earth has not been warming for he past 20 years and that the increase in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is barely more than a tenth of one percent .
The Democrats are taking alarmism through legislation to a new and unfortunate level for the nation as a whole .
They control the Congress and if they gain the Whitehouse there is little doubt they will endeavor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let ’ s hope they do not succeed .

It is with good fortune that I had just re-read the 1949 dystopian novel “1984” by George Orwell, when I received a copy of the Democratic party’s climate action plan titled The Congressional Action Plan for a Clean Energy Economy and a Healthy, Resilient and Just America.
In the novel, the party in power (there was but one party) effectively forced the public to believe the equivalent of “what is right is actually wrong”. They taught three premises which became the nations slogans, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength.
Absurd as you may think these slogans to be, they are no less absurd than the ideas presented in the Democrat’s climate plan which include:
Carbon Dioxide, though it is the breathe of life, is a pollutant
The burning of fossil fuels will destroy the planet and must be eliminated
Renewable energy such as wind and solar power can support our way of life
Wind and solar power will improve human health and save 62,000 premature deaths in the next 3 decades by eliminating carbon dioxide emissions
Wind turbines and solar farms will improve the economy by creating millions of jobs
To believe otherwise, among alarmists, is to be called a “denier” and warrant career destruction and being shunned by the public. It is equivalent to Orwell’s “thought crimes” described in his book “1984.”
There is no single goal of the Democrat’s plan that has any chance of being achieved which will allow some to breathe a sigh of relief. However, there is no question that if they gain the Whitehouse on November 3 the plan will be put into motion and serious economic damage will quickly be incurred.
Irrefutable physical facts relating to any attempt to shift our energy production from fossil fuels to wind and solar must quickly increase our energy costs. The reason is simple. Due to the recognized lack of consistent availability of wind and solar to produce energy for our community electric grids, they must be backed up with additional dependable fossil fuel power. This energy must be equal or greater than the energy that can be produced by wind or solar running on standby 100% of the time ready to be placed on the grid within seconds of the failure of the wind or sun to cooperate. Thus their plan will not only dramatically increase the costs of all electric utilities, but it will actually increase the volume of the very carbon dioxide emissions the democrat plan hopes to reduce.
They talk of batteries as the backup for wind and solar but such batteries are on no ones drawing boards save perhaps Elon Musk’s Teslas. A solar farm outside of Las Vegas plans to use 62,000 Tesla batteries at a cost $6000 each and no doubt they could take over for a few hours but certainly not a few days.
A good deal of the Democratic plan is aimed at public health. They are enforcing the idea that the impending warming of the earth will create physical and mental health problems which their plan will attempt to avert. In fact their plan itself creates alarm where there should be none and can have a real negative impact on human health brought on by unwarranted fear.
At the community level the plan wishes to establish disaster relief programs preparing for the effects of warming. It ignores in entirety that the Earth has not been warming for he past 20 years and that the increase in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is barely more than a tenth of one percent.
The Democrats are taking alarmism through legislation to a new and unfortunate level for the nation as a whole. They control the Congress and if they gain the Whitehouse there is little doubt they will endeavor to implement this technically insane plan. Let’s hope they do not succeed.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-03--Lake Erie wind turbines lethal threat to migratory birds

The steady improvement in the water quality of the Great Lakes represents one of the real environmental success stories of recent decades .
But the giant inland seas ’ ecosystem now faces a new threat , this one coming from advocates of renewable energy .
For over a decade , the Lake Erie Energy Development Corp. ( LEEDCo ) , a non-profit , has sought approval for its Icebreaker Wind project that would eventually place hundreds of turbines with spinning blades on the lake .
It would be the first such facility on fresh water in the United States .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ turbines will help combat climate change , but opponents point out that it is situated on a north-south flyway for millions of birds that migrate over Lake Erie every spring and fall .
Indeed , Lake Erie is a renowned passageway for migratory birds that migrate between nesting grounds in Canada and winter homes in Central and South America .
Conservationists are also worried about the threat Icebreaker poses to waterfowl that flock to the lake in winter .
Andy Jones , chair of ornithology at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Lake Erie has served as a stopover for as many as a quarter of North America ’ s red-breasted mergansers , a diving duck , and for delicate songbirds such as wood thrush and cerulean warbler .
He adds that the turbines wouldn ’ t just be a hazard , they would be an attraction .
When the lake is frozen in winter , waterfowl would be drawn to the open water created by the heat-generating turbines , he explains .
The warbler population is already in trouble , he told the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declining .
Let ’ s not add another threat on top of that.
” The Ohio Power Siting Board gave its approval for LEEDCo to go ahead with a pilot project that would allow six turbines in a north-northwest line to go up eight to ten miles offshore from Cleveland .
But as concerns mount over the project ’ s impact on birds , the board now says Icebreaker must conduct radar studies of bird and bat traffic over the proposed site before and after construction .
What ’ s more , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the months-long migration period , unless and until studies conclude that is unnecessary .
Lawsuits against Icebreaker have already been filed , and one of the project ’ s developers , Norway ’ s Fred Olsen Renewables , is reported to be losing interest .
Meanwhile , Canadian officials are keeping a close eye on Icebreaker ’ s six-turbine pilot project .
Canada banned wind turbines on Lake Ontario in 2011 pending the outcome of Icebreaker .
If Icebreaker ultimately gets the green light for hundreds of turbines on Lake Erie , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go up on Lake Ontario .
Birds are by no means the only avian creatures threatened by wind power .
In a new study , “ Relating Bat Passage Rates to Wind Turbine Fatalities , ” Shawn Smallwood and Douglas Bell report that the estimated 1.7 to 3.7 million bats killed by wind turbines in the U.S. each year could be greatly understating the carnage .
They note that many injured bats can recover enough to fly away from the collision sites before dying from their wounds .
Additionally , scavengers can quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humans and dogs can recover them .
Smallwood and Bell estimate that the real kill rate may be 4 to 7 times than conventional estimates .
“ At this rate , the extinction clock for North American bats may not be 50 years off , but only a decade or two away , ” writes Kenneth Richard in notrickszone.com ( June 25 ) .

The steady improvement in the water quality of the Great Lakes represents one of the real environmental success stories of recent decades. But the giant inland seas’ ecosystem now faces a new threat, this one coming from advocates of renewable energy.
For over a decade, the Lake Erie Energy Development Corp. (LEEDCo), a non-profit, has sought approval for its Icebreaker Wind project that would eventually place hundreds of turbines with spinning blades on the lake. It would be the first such facility on fresh water in the United States.
The project’s developers say the turbines will help combat climate change, but opponents point out that it is situated on a north-south flyway for millions of birds that migrate over Lake Erie every spring and fall. Indeed, Lake Erie is a renowned passageway for migratory birds that migrate between nesting grounds in Canada and winter homes in Central and South America. Conservationists are also worried about the threat Icebreaker poses to waterfowl that flock to the lake in winter.
Ecosystem Already Declining
Andy Jones, chair of ornithology at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History told the Washington Post (June 21) that Lake Erie has served as a stopover for as many as a quarter of North America’s red-breasted mergansers, a diving duck, and for delicate songbirds such as wood thrush and cerulean warbler. He adds that the turbines wouldn’t just be a hazard, they would be an attraction. When the lake is frozen in winter, waterfowl would be drawn to the open water created by the heat-generating turbines, he explains.
The warbler population is already in trouble, he told the Post. “The whole ecosystem is declining. Let’s not add another threat on top of that.”
The Ohio Power Siting Board gave its approval for LEEDCo to go ahead with a pilot project that would allow six turbines in a north-northwest line to go up eight to ten miles offshore from Cleveland. But as concerns mount over the project’s impact on birds, the board now says Icebreaker must conduct radar studies of bird and bat traffic over the proposed site before and after construction. What’s more, it wants nighttime operations of the turbines suspended during the months-long migration period, unless and until studies conclude that is unnecessary.
Lawsuits against Icebreaker have already been filed, and one of the project’s developers, Norway’s Fred Olsen Renewables, is reported to be losing interest. Meanwhile, Canadian officials are keeping a close eye on Icebreaker’s six-turbine pilot project. Canada banned wind turbines on Lake Ontario in 2011 pending the outcome of Icebreaker. If Icebreaker ultimately gets the green light for hundreds of turbines on Lake Erie, Canadian authorities could allow hundreds more to go up on Lake Ontario.
Undercounting Wind Turbine Bat Fatalities
Birds are by no means the only avian creatures threatened by wind power. In a new study, “Relating Bat Passage Rates to Wind Turbine Fatalities,” Shawn Smallwood and Douglas Bell report that the estimated 1.7 to 3.7 million bats killed by wind turbines in the U.S. each year could be greatly understating the carnage. They note that many injured bats can recover enough to fly away from the collision sites before dying from their wounds. Additionally, scavengers can quickly collect the injured and dead bats before humans and dogs can recover them. Smallwood and Bell estimate that the real kill rate may be 4 to 7 times than conventional estimates.
“At this rate, the extinction clock for North American bats may not be 50 years off, but only a decade or two away,” writes Kenneth Richard in notrickszone.com (June 25).


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-03--From “seed” to shining “sea”: can new crops grow on oceans?

Could America ’ s “ amber waves of grain ” soon be seen in the Atlantic and Pacific ?
Ok , maybe growing whole fields of wheat on an ocean might not be possible , but researchers are looking into creating crops that may be able to thrive with ocean saltwater as opposed to fresh water .
To many farmers , salty soil is the enemy .
As populations increase and the demand for food increases with it , farmers around the world are looking for ways to increase production and use farmable land as efficiently as they can .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also rapidly increasing , which is putting a strain on the water supply in many parts of the world .
But to the scientists at companies like Agrisea , the answer is not necessarily in the land ; it is in the ocean .
There are certain plants , such as the black mangrove , that have adapted to thrive in saltwater conditions .
The researchers are trying to take the processes these plants use in surviving and adapting the genes of certain crops so that they can also be grown in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ method involves first isolating stem cells from crops like rice , then using CRISPR gene editing technology to insert a DNA sequence specialised to the plant .
The sequence targets one of eight different genes , each chosen because the only place in nature where all eight are “ switched on ” is in plants that have naturally adapted saltwater tolerance .
The sequence alters how the gene expresses , then stem cells are grown into a full plant that produces its own seeds armed with the newly edited gene .
Follow the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ genes , and the Agrisea team says you ’ ll have a plant that can grow in the salty sea without fertiliser , freshwater , or pesticides.
” In addition to changing the plants so they can thrive in the ocean , some companies are experimenting with changing the farmland by bringing the ocean to the plants .
Seawater Solutions , a company based out of Scotland , is creating saltwater marshes in several places where farmland near coasts has been damaged or degraded .
“ …Nyberg ’ s Scotland-based company Seawater Solutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with naturally salt-tolerant herbs like samphire and sea blite , then floods the area by removing seawalls or pumping in water from the ocean to create an artificial salt marsh .
In this new wetland ecosystem , crops grow without fertilisers , pesticides , or freshwater .
They also hold soil in place , preventing erosion , and feed on nitrates and carbon , both of which over-accumulate in waters near human populations… ” To read more about this issue , you can read the full story in Wired UK .

Could America’s “amber waves of grain” soon be seen in the Atlantic and Pacific?
Ok, maybe growing whole fields of wheat on an ocean might not be possible, but researchers are looking into creating crops that may be able to thrive with ocean saltwater as opposed to fresh water.
To many farmers, salty soil is the enemy. As populations increase and the demand for food increases with it, farmers around the world are looking for ways to increase production and use farmable land as efficiently as they can. This means the demand for fresh water is also rapidly increasing, which is putting a strain on the water supply in many parts of the world.
But to the scientists at companies like Agrisea, the answer is not necessarily in the land; it is in the ocean.
There are certain plants, such as the black mangrove, that have adapted to thrive in saltwater conditions. The researchers are trying to take the processes these plants use in surviving and adapting the genes of certain crops so that they can also be grown in saltwater.
As reported in Wired UK:
“Agrisea’s proposed method involves first isolating stem cells from crops like rice, then using CRISPR gene editing technology to insert a DNA sequence specialised to the plant. The sequence targets one of eight different genes, each chosen because the only place in nature where all eight are “switched on” is in plants that have naturally adapted saltwater tolerance. The sequence alters how the gene expresses, then stem cells are grown into a full plant that produces its own seeds armed with the newly edited gene. Follow the same process for editing the remaining seven genes, and the Agrisea team says you’ll have a plant that can grow in the salty sea without fertiliser, freshwater, or pesticides.”
In addition to changing the plants so they can thrive in the ocean, some companies are experimenting with changing the farmland by bringing the ocean to the plants.
Seawater Solutions, a company based out of Scotland, is creating saltwater marshes in several places where farmland near coasts has been damaged or degraded.
“…Nyberg’s Scotland-based company Seawater Solutions takes degraded coastal farmland, seeds it with naturally salt-tolerant herbs like samphire and sea blite, then floods the area by removing seawalls or pumping in water from the ocean to create an artificial salt marsh. In this new wetland ecosystem, crops grow without fertilisers, pesticides, or freshwater. They also hold soil in place, preventing erosion, and feed on nitrates and carbon, both of which over-accumulate in waters near human populations…”
To read more about this issue, you can read the full story in Wired UK.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-03--New Dem climate plan disaster

New Dem climate plan disaster

On Tuesday , Nancy Pelosi ’ s House Democrats unveiled a terrible climate plan modeled after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ’ s “ Green New Deal.
” It ’ s a terrible plan , one that would devastate the economy and sacrifice vast areas of unspoiled natural land to industrial wind and solar .
Ironically , Michael Shellenberger also posted a dramatic apology this week on behalf of environmentalists ( like him ) that have been misleading the public about climate change .
His post has been mysteriously appearing and disappearing at Forbes .
He then posted a second hard-hitting piece at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dirty ecological footprint that could be a consequence of ramping up renewable energy use along the lines the Democratic plan imposes .
It would mean rough times for the energy poor and devastation for endangered species , particularly birds : ” University of Chicago economists found that “ consumers in the twenty-nine states paid $ 125.2 billion more for electricity ” because of them… “ Birds have evolved over hundreds of years to fly certain paths to migrate , ” said New Hampshire-based environmentalist Lisa Linowes .
“ You can ’ t throw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expect them to adapt .
It ’ s not happening… ” The rapidly spinning blades of wind turbines act like an apex predator that big birds never evolved to deal with .
And because big birds have much lower reproductive rates than small birds , their deaths have a far greater impact on the overall population of the species .
Dr. Jay Lehr addresses the Democrat climate plan at CFACT.org and spotlights a disturbing new trend ; morphing everything on the left-wing wish list into a “ health crisis.
” A good deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health .
They are enforcing the idea that the impending warming of the earth will create physical and mental health problems which their plan will attempt to avert .
In fact their plan itself creates alarm where there should be none and can have a real negative impact on human health brought on by unwarranted fear .
As Jay Lehr sums it up : The Democrats are taking alarmism through legislation to a new and unfortunate level for the nation as a whole .
They control the Congress and if they gain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they will endeavor to implement this technically insane plan .

On Tuesday, Nancy Pelosi’s House Democrats unveiled a terrible climate plan modeled after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal.” It’s a terrible plan, one that would devastate the economy and sacrifice vast areas of unspoiled natural land to industrial wind and solar.
Ironically, Michael Shellenberger also posted a dramatic apology this week on behalf of environmentalists (like him) that have been misleading the public about climate change. His post has been mysteriously appearing and disappearing at Forbes. He then posted a second hard-hitting piece at Forbes that details the tremendous cost and dirty ecological footprint that could be a consequence of ramping up renewable energy use along the lines the Democratic plan imposes. It would mean rough times for the energy poor and devastation for endangered species, particularly birds:”
University of Chicago economists found that “consumers in the twenty-nine states paid $125.2 billion more for electricity” because of them…“Birds have evolved over hundreds of years to fly certain paths to migrate,” said New Hampshire-based environmentalist Lisa Linowes. “You can’t throw a turbine up in the way and expect them to adapt. It’s not happening…” The rapidly spinning blades of wind turbines act like an apex predator that big birds never evolved to deal with. And because big birds have much lower reproductive rates than small birds, their deaths have a far greater impact on the overall population of the species.
Dr. Jay Lehr addresses the Democrat climate plan at CFACT.org and spotlights a disturbing new trend; morphing everything on the left-wing wish list into a “health crisis.”
A good deal of the Democratic plan is aimed at public health. They are enforcing the idea that the impending warming of the earth will create physical and mental health problems which their plan will attempt to avert. In fact their plan itself creates alarm where there should be none and can have a real negative impact on human health brought on by unwarranted fear.
As Jay Lehr sums it up:
The Democrats are taking alarmism through legislation to a new and unfortunate level for the nation as a whole. They control the Congress and if they gain the White House there is little doubt they will endeavor to implement this technically insane plan.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-05--Review: Rex Fleming calls carbon dioxide fear a “False Alarm”

This summer there are two new books and an older one newly relevant today with the same title : False Alarm .
Though physician Dr. Marc Siegal wrote False Alarm : The Truth about the Epidemic of Fear back in 2008 , right now Amazon Kindle has the book in heavy promotion .
Kindle boasts , “ More relevant than ever as the Coronavirus COVID 19 pandemic sweeps the globe , False Alarm reminds readers to look closely at the facts as the media covers the pandemic news and spread of the virus , as well as reinforces the notion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tactics….
” The two new books , however , address fear generated by politicians and doomsayers over “ manmade global warming ” for which carbon dioxide ( and the burning of fossil fuels that releases it into the atmosphere ) is cast as the chief culprit .
Due out on July 14th is “ skeptical environmentalist ” Bjorn Lomborg ’ s False Alarm : How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions , Hurts the Poor , and Fails to Fix the Planet .
[ We plan to review this book very soon .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Rex J. Fleming ’ s False Alarm : The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change .
Fleming , who holds a Ph.D. in atmospheric science from the University of Michigan , promises that his tome ( replete with mathematical formulae ) will present “ in layman ’ s terms ” the proof that the United Nations ’ claim that carbon dioxide is the primary cause of climate change is a dangerous myth .
In this book , Fleming dissects the case against CO and shows how cosmic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real cause of both beneficent warming and devastating cooling to the planet .
He also cautions that all signs point to a new wave of cold weather ahead .
The book contains a concise history of the highly politicized effort to tag increasing atmospheric CO ( and thus fossil fuels ) as a villain that must be vanquished .
The lure of big money , research grants , and favorable media coverage has led “ scientists ” to blame just about every human ailment on “ manmade global warming ” and curiously ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to demand a carbon-free society in the near future .
Fleming lauds the work of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change , which has countered the politicized Summaries for Policymakers ( and increasingly the interior content ) of the reports from the United Nations ’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change .
He castigates Al Gore and others who have profited from fear mongering on the alleged climate crisis , and expresses hope that society might realize that real climate change may soon arrive with the beginning of a new ice age ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s magnetic field ) .
Fleming offers three proofs that CO is not a culprit but rather a vital weapon against a colder , drier planet .
First , CO levels have had no correlation to climate change during prior ice ages or intervening warm periods – including the 35-year cooling in the 20th Century .
Second , every single computer-generated climate model has predicted much more warming than has occurred .
Third , Fleming offers proof that CO does not contribute any net heating to the atmospheric column despite the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contribute to a thermal blanket at the Earth ’ s surface .
In his chapter on “ Creation of the Universe , ” Fleming explains that supernovas generated by dying O-type stars are a major source of cosmic rays and thus a key source of climate change .
On the other hand , CO concentrations have ranged from 370 parts per million ( ppm ) to 40,000 ppm during different ice ages .
Fleming then notes that renowned scientist Svante Arrhenius postulated in 1896 that a doubling of CO resulting from industrial emissions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ temperature over a period of 3,000 years , a time frame chosen largely because he surmised the oceans would absorb most of the extra CO .
A few years later Knut Angstrom proposed that adding CO does not produce more heat because the wavelengths of infrared absorption for CO were already saturated and strong enough to absorb all of the radiation at those wavelengths .
Angstrom , however , had not discovered all of the relevant wavelengths , and thus both scientists saw only parts of the larger story .
About the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the energy intensity and frequency ( or wavelength ) of radiation .
His hypothesis that the energy emitted by a resonator could only take on discrete values , or quanta , was a first step towards a new quantum theory .
The Planck function , which expresses the intensity of radiation , is the key to showing why CO has NO ROLE in climate change .
But these facts did not matter to the emerging enviro-politicians and their fawning media , who have run with the long-disproven claim that increasing CO will melt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and bring about the end of all life ( while in reality using this ruse to seek huge profits and globalist praise ) .
Never mind that the cooling between 1940 and 1975 can not fit into the CO theory .
The only real point of correlation is that the last ice age ended about the same time the Industrial Revolution ( and thus the increased use of fossil fuels ) began .
But proving a negative [ that CO was not the cause ] was insufficient to explain why the Earth had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s theory provides that explanation .
He builds on the fact that a strong solar magnetic field provides a barrier that keeps cosmic rays from entering the Earth ’ s atmosphere , whereas a weak solar magnetic field allows the penetration of cosmic rays that greatly increase cloud cover that cools the planet .
The solar magnetic field , he explains , is generated by the solar dynamo in part due to the angular momentum of the Sun ’ s differential rotation .
This accounts for sunspot variability .
Longer term , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solar system barycenter adds to orbital angular momentum so that both contribute to the variability of the Sun ’ s magnetic field intensity .
Fleming provides a multitude of mathematical formulae and other documentation that will be of interest mostly to scientists and mathematicians .
But he also closes with a stark warning that the Modern Warming may soon come to an end .
Humanity , he pleads , should be preparing for a very long , very cold era that could have already begun .
A colder Earth grows fewer crops , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and forces relocation or massive efforts to protect people from freezing .
Addressing those concerns should be one of our highest priorities today and into the future .
But will we be ready ?

This summer there are two new books and an older one newly relevant today with the same title: False Alarm.
Though physician Dr. Marc Siegal wrote False Alarm: The Truth about the Epidemic of Fear back in 2008, right now Amazon Kindle has the book in heavy promotion. Kindle boasts, “More relevant than ever as the Coronavirus COVID 19 pandemic sweeps the globe, False Alarm reminds readers to look closely at the facts as the media covers the pandemic news and spread of the virus, as well as reinforces the notion that we must arm ourselves against fear tactics….”
The two new books, however, address fear generated by politicians and doomsayers over “manmade global warming” for which carbon dioxide (and the burning of fossil fuels that releases it into the atmosphere) is cast as the chief culprit.
Due out on July 14th is “skeptical environmentalist” Bjorn Lomborg’s False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet. [We plan to review this book very soon.]
This review, however, focuses on Rex J. Fleming’s False Alarm: The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change. Fleming, who holds a Ph.D. in atmospheric science from the University of Michigan, promises that his tome (replete with mathematical formulae) will present “in layman’s terms” the proof that the United Nations’ claim that carbon dioxide is the primary cause of climate change is a dangerous myth.
In this book, Fleming dissects the case against CO 2 and shows how cosmic rays emitted by the Sun are the real cause of both beneficent warming and devastating cooling to the planet. He also cautions that all signs point to a new wave of cold weather ahead.
The book contains a concise history of the highly politicized effort to tag increasing atmospheric CO 2 (and thus fossil fuels) as a villain that must be vanquished. The lure of big money, research grants, and favorable media coverage has led “scientists” to blame just about every human ailment on “manmade global warming” and curiously (given that humans are carbon based) to demand a carbon-free society in the near future.
Fleming lauds the work of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, which has countered the politicized Summaries for Policymakers (and increasingly the interior content) of the reports from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
He castigates Al Gore and others who have profited from fear mongering on the alleged climate crisis, and expresses hope that society might realize that real climate change may soon arrive with the beginning of a new ice age (thanks to a weakening of the Sun’s magnetic field).
Fleming offers three proofs that CO 2 is not a culprit but rather a vital weapon against a colder, drier planet. First, CO 2 levels have had no correlation to climate change during prior ice ages or intervening warm periods – including the 35-year cooling in the 20th Century.
Second, every single computer-generated climate model has predicted much more warming than has occurred. Third, Fleming offers proof that CO 2 does not contribute any net heating to the atmospheric column despite the fact that both CO 2 and water vapor do contribute to a thermal blanket at the Earth’s surface.
In his chapter on “Creation of the Universe,” Fleming explains that supernovas generated by dying O-type stars are a major source of cosmic rays and thus a key source of climate change. On the other hand, CO 2 concentrations have ranged from 370 parts per million (ppm) to 40,000 ppm during different ice ages.
Fleming then notes that renowned scientist Svante Arrhenius postulated in 1896 that a doubling of CO 2 resulting from industrial emissions would lead to dramatic increases in global temperature over a period of 3,000 years, a time frame chosen largely because he surmised the oceans would absorb most of the extra CO 2 .
A few years later Knut Angstrom proposed that adding CO 2 does not produce more heat because the wavelengths of infrared absorption for CO 2 were already saturated and strong enough to absorb all of the radiation at those wavelengths. Angstrom, however, had not discovered all of the relevant wavelengths, and thus both scientists saw only parts of the larger story.
About the same time Max Planck discovered the relationship between the energy intensity and frequency (or wavelength) of radiation. His hypothesis that the energy emitted by a resonator could only take on discrete values, or quanta, was a first step towards a new quantum theory. The Planck function, which expresses the intensity of radiation, is the key to showing why CO 2 has NO ROLE in climate change.
But these facts did not matter to the emerging enviro-politicians and their fawning media, who have run with the long-disproven claim that increasing CO 2 will melt the glaciers, cause massive flooding, and bring about the end of all life (while in reality using this ruse to seek huge profits and globalist praise). Never mind that the cooling between 1940 and 1975 cannot fit into the CO 2 theory. The only real point of correlation is that the last ice age ended about the same time the Industrial Revolution (and thus the increased use of fossil fuels) began.
But proving a negative [that CO 2 was not the cause] was insufficient to explain why the Earth had been warming since about 1850. Svensmark’s theory provides that explanation. He builds on the fact that a strong solar magnetic field provides a barrier that keeps cosmic rays from entering the Earth’s atmosphere, whereas a weak solar magnetic field allows the penetration of cosmic rays that greatly increase cloud cover that cools the planet.
The solar magnetic field, he explains, is generated by the solar dynamo in part due to the angular momentum of the Sun’s differential rotation. This accounts for sunspot variability. Longer term, the Sun’s travel about the solar system barycenter adds to orbital angular momentum so that both contribute to the variability of the Sun’s magnetic field intensity.
Fleming provides a multitude of mathematical formulae and other documentation that will be of interest mostly to scientists and mathematicians. But he also closes with a stark warning that the Modern Warming may soon come to an end.
Humanity, he pleads, should be preparing for a very long, very cold era that could have already begun. A colder Earth grows fewer crops, has far less available fresh water, and forces relocation or massive efforts to protect people from freezing. Addressing those concerns should be one of our highest priorities today and into the future.
But will we be ready?


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-07-05--Can COVID-19 be treated with low-dose radiation?

A new paper published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation asserts that low-level nuclear radiation might be much less dangerous than previously thought .
At the same time , other researchers are renewing interest in applying low-dose radiation therapy – studied as early as 1905 as a tool to fight pneumonia – in the ongoing fight to contain and control deadly and disruptive outbreaks of the virus known as COVID 19 .
Yet , still other research recommits many in the medical field to fighting ANY use of radiation therapy as too dangerous to risk .
According to authors Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent reviews of seminal research conducted following the end of World War II have uncovered serious flaws in the “ linear no-threshold ” assumption that all nuclear radiation is dangerous no matter low the level of exposure .
Dr. Calabrese , a UMass – Amherst professor of toxicology , has for two decades focused his research on understanding the nature of the radiation dose response in the low-dose zone .
His observations are leading to a major transformation in improving drug discovery and development and in the efficiency of the clinical trial , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk assessment and environmental regulation for radiation and chemicals .
In a 2013 paper , Dr. Calabrese partnered with Dr. Guaray Dhawan to review the historical use of radiotherapy for fighting pneumonia and determine if low-dose radiation might still be a valuable pneumonia killer .
They found a 1905 study by noted University of Pennsylvania professor John Herr Muller and D. L. Edsall of five pneumonia patients who benefited from X-ray treatments .
A decade later A. W. and W. A. Quimby successfully treated 12 cases of unresolved pneumonia , stating that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quicker to an X-ray exposure than the non-resolved following pneumonia.
” In 1924 German researchers Heidenhain and Fried reported that they had used X-rays to treat 243 cases of acute and subacute pyrogenic infections .
The X-ray treatments blocked or reduced all types of inflammation , regardless of location in the body and whatever the cause .
Fried reported that patients with high fever , severe dyspnea , and cyanosis typically reported improved breathing with six hours of being irradiated .
American researcher Eugene Powell championed X-ray therapy for treating pneumonia at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in May 1936 .
Later , Powell blew off a double-blind trial because his patients who were receiving the X-ray treatment were relieved of respiratory and circulatory distress in less than 3 hours .
Until now , the latest use of radiotherapy to treat pneumonia came in 1943 , when A. Oppenheimer reported using X-ray treatment to control coughing in recovering pneumonia patients .
He later extended the application to patients suffering through acute pneumonia .
X-ray treatments proved effective against a broad range of pneumococcal pneumonia strains/types , offering a distinct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But with the arrival a few years later of sulfonamides , and later penicillin , X-ray therapy never became a component of systemwide public health measures to treat pneumonia .
Upon reading these positive reports , Dr. Calabrese weighed the lack of any new research on using radiotherapy to help pneumonia patients since 1946 against the findings of highly protective effects on about 850 patients along with rapid resolution of the disease .
X-ray treatments had prevented considerable human suffering , reduced health care costs and the burden on families , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether work , school , or other activities .
Yet the question remained as to how to reactivate a well-established , yet 65-year-old hypothesis , with contemporary research questions , methods , and technologies that still may hold public health potential .
Calabrese and Dhawan proposed a focused clinical research program to assess the use of X-ray therapy for pneumonia as an adjunct treatment for high-risk patients .
Seven years later , X-ray therapy has found a new target – the high-risk patients infected with COVID 19 , of which up to 20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of death .
Standing in the way of this research , should believers in the precautionary principle take control of the science , is the belief , expressed in a new report by Richard Bramhall and Pete Wilkinson , which was produced by the Low-Level Radiation Campaign for Children With Cancer UK .
The authors assert that even tiny doses of radiation can have devastating effects on the human body , particularly by causing cancer and birth defects .
This , they believe , makes a strong case for a basic rethink on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But Calabrese says that the claims that any dose of radiation is dangerous are now known to be based on scientific studies that were deceptive , flawed , or even fraudulent .
Dr. Paunio , former chair of the Finnish Radiological Protection Board , explained that support for the linear no-threshold assumption was bolstered by began with a study that followed the life histories of the Hibakusha – survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs .
According to Dr. Paunio , another team of Japanese researchers recently found major flaws in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Their error was extraordinary .
They failed to account for the effects of secondary radiation exposures and fallout .
This means that the rather low numbers of cancers observed in the Hibakusha were actually caused by quite high exposures to radiation .
Calabrese and Paunio should be thrilled at the Number of major clinical trials already under way to determine the value of low-dose radiation in fighting the COVID 19 pandemic .
Radiation ’ s track record with pneumonia may prove helpful to the 15 to 20 percent of those infected with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effects that can lead to pneumonia , acute respiratory distress syndrome , and death .
Just a few weeks ago , James Conca , writing in Forbes , confirmed the Calabrese-Paunio research , noting the early 20th Century success using low doses of radiation to treat the deadly inflammation of pneumonia , particularly viral pneumonia like that caused by COVID-19 , and agreeing that radiation may have a role in mitigating today ’ s pandemic .
Conca reported that several medical institutions are set to start radiation therapies for COVID-19 .
Dr. James @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is moving to begin a national trial within the next few months on this treatment using low-dose radiation to the lungs .
Trials are already underway at at Emory University and in Italy and Spain .
At least five other trials are recruiting patients , and the U.S. FDA has been urged to conduct a low-dose radiation trial at the Hines VA Medical Center in Chicago .
Just remember , as Calabrese and Dhawan said in 2013 , radiotherapy had been broadly accepted by the radiological community starting in the second decade of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the treatment of a wide range of inflammatory and infectious diseases such as gas gangrene , carbuncles , sinusitis , arthritis , and inner ear infections .

A new paper published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation asserts that low-level nuclear radiation might be much less dangerous than previously thought. At the same time, other researchers are renewing interest in applying low-dose radiation therapy – studied as early as 1905 as a tool to fight pneumonia – in the ongoing fight to contain and control deadly and disruptive outbreaks of the virus known as COVID 19. Yet, still other research recommits many in the medical field to fighting ANY use of radiation therapy as too dangerous to risk.
According to authors Dr. Edward Calabrese and Dr. Mikko Paunio, recent reviews of seminal research conducted following the end of World War II have uncovered serious flaws in the “linear no-threshold” assumption that all nuclear radiation is dangerous no matter low the level of exposure.
Dr. Calabrese, a UMass – Amherst professor of toxicology, has for two decades focused his research on understanding the nature of the radiation dose response in the low-dose zone. His observations are leading to a major transformation in improving drug discovery and development and in the efficiency of the clinical trial, as well as the scientific foundations for risk assessment and environmental regulation for radiation and chemicals.
In a 2013 paper, Dr. Calabrese partnered with Dr. Guaray Dhawan to review the historical use of radiotherapy for fighting pneumonia and determine if low-dose radiation might still be a valuable pneumonia killer. They found a 1905 study by noted University of Pennsylvania professor John Herr Muller and D. L. Edsall of five pneumonia patients who benefited from X-ray treatments.
A decade later A. W. and W. A. Quimby successfully treated 12 cases of unresolved pneumonia, stating that “no pathological process in the body responds quicker to an X-ray exposure than the non-resolved following pneumonia.”
In 1924 German researchers Heidenhain and Fried reported that they had used X-rays to treat 243 cases of acute and subacute pyrogenic infections. The X-ray treatments blocked or reduced all types of inflammation, regardless of location in the body and whatever the cause. Fried reported that patients with high fever, severe dyspnea, and cyanosis typically reported improved breathing with six hours of being irradiated.
American researcher Eugene Powell championed X-ray therapy for treating pneumonia at the Medical Association meeting in Houston, Texas, in May 1936. Later, Powell blew off a double-blind trial because his patients who were receiving the X-ray treatment were relieved of respiratory and circulatory distress in less than 3 hours.
Until now, the latest use of radiotherapy to treat pneumonia came in 1943, when A. Oppenheimer reported using X-ray treatment to control coughing in recovering pneumonia patients. He later extended the application to patients suffering through acute pneumonia.
X-ray treatments proved effective against a broad range of pneumococcal pneumonia strains/types, offering a distinct advantage over the use of serum therapy. But with the arrival a few years later of sulfonamides, and later penicillin, X-ray therapy never became a component of systemwide public health measures to treat pneumonia.
Upon reading these positive reports, Dr. Calabrese weighed the lack of any new research on using radiotherapy to help pneumonia patients since 1946 against the findings of highly protective effects on about 850 patients along with rapid resolution of the disease. X-ray treatments had prevented considerable human suffering, reduced health care costs and the burden on families, and accelerated a return to normal living, whether work, school, or other activities.
Yet the question remained as to how to reactivate a well-established, yet 65-year-old hypothesis, with contemporary research questions, methods, and technologies that still may hold public health potential. Calabrese and Dhawan proposed a focused clinical research program to assess the use of X-ray therapy for pneumonia as an adjunct treatment for high-risk patients. Seven years later, X-ray therapy has found a new target – the high-risk patients infected with COVID 19, of which up to 20 percent develop pneumonia and are at risk of death.
Standing in the way of this research, should believers in the precautionary principle take control of the science, is the belief, expressed in a new report by Richard Bramhall and Pete Wilkinson, which was produced by the Low-Level Radiation Campaign for Children With Cancer UK. The authors assert that even tiny doses of radiation can have devastating effects on the human body, particularly by causing cancer and birth defects. This, they believe, makes a strong case for a basic rethink on so-called “safe” radiation doses.
But Calabrese states the claims that any dose of radiation is dangerous are now known to be based on scientific studies that were deceptive, flawed, or even fraudulent. Dr. Paunio, former chair of the Finnish Radiological Protection Board, explained that support for the linear no-threshold assumption was bolstered by began with a study that followed the life histories of the Hibakusha – survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs.
According to Dr. Paunio, another team of Japanese researchers recently found major flaws in the older research. As he explained, “Their error was extraordinary. They failed to account for the effects of secondary radiation exposures and fallout. This means that the rather low numbers of cancers observed in the Hibakusha were actually caused by quite high exposures to radiation.
Calabrese and Paunio should be thrilled at the Number of major clinical trials already under way to determine the value of low-dose radiation in fighting the COVID 19 pandemic. Radiation’s track record with pneumonia may prove helpful to the 15 to 20 percent of those infected with COVID 19 who otherwise develop severe inflammatory effects that can lead to pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and death.
Just a few weeks ago, James Conca, writing in Forbes, confirmed the Calabrese-Paunio research, noting the early 20th Century success using low doses of radiation to treat the deadly inflammation of pneumonia, particularly viral pneumonia like that caused by COVID-19, and agreeing that radiation may have a role in mitigating today’s pandemic. Conca reported that several medical institutions are set to start radiation therapies for COVID-19.
Dr. James Welsh at Loyola University Medical Center, is moving to begin a national trial within the next few months on this treatment using low-dose radiation to the lungs. Trials are already underway at at Emory University and in Italy and Spain. At least five other trials are recruiting patients, and the U.S. FDA has been urged to conduct a low-dose radiation trial at the Hines VA Medical Center in Chicago.
Just remember, as Calabrese and Dhawan said in 2013, radiotherapy had been broadly accepted by the radiological community starting in the second decade of the 20th century, with notable successes in the treatment of a wide range of inflammatory and infectious diseases such as gas gangrene, carbuncles, sinusitis, arthritis, and inner ear infections.