climatedepot--2020-08-03--Scientist Says Greater Quality Assurance Needed In Reef Science

Scientist Dr. Peter Ridd has become widely known in recent years for his outspoken views on the quality of science used to underpin new water quality controls on agriculture in the Great Barrier Reef catchment .
He has worked on the Great Barrier Reef since 1984 at the Australian Institute of Marine Science ( AIMS ) and at James Cook University ( JCU ) , with his research appearing in over 100 publications in international journals mostly relating to Great Barrier Reef and marine applications .
In 2018 , he was fired by James Cook University after stating that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are untrustworthy due to insufficient quality assurance protocols .
Last year , the Federal Circuit Court of Australia found Dr. Ridd ’ s sacking by JCU was unlawful and awarded him $ 1.2m .
But that decision was overturned on appealby the full bench of the Federal Circuit Court last week which found JCU had acted lawfully in dismissing Dr. Ridd .
The case has become a lightning rod for debate in Australia over freedom of intellectual inquiry and freedom of speech .
Yesterday , Dr. Ridd appeared before a public hearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the regulation of farm practices in Queensland impacting water quality outcomes in the Great Barrier Reef .
The regulations affect cattle grazing , cane farming , and dryland cropping business across 42.4 million hectares of Queensland and commit each industry to achieve minimum water quality targets by 2025 ( See map left ) .
The Queensland Department of Science and Energy in its submission told the inquiry a large evidence-base exists demonstrating the impact of water quality from the adjacent , predominately agriculture areas , on the Great Barrier Reef ( GBR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of peer-reviewed , published scientific papers that provide this supporting evidence have been periodically undertaken since 2003 with bipartisan support , as the underpinning evidence base for the joint Reef Water Quality Protection Plans , now Reef 2050 Water Quality Improvement Plan 2017-2022 developed in collaboration between the Australian and Queensland Governments.
” It adds that its reef science is proven , supported by rigorous processes including peer review , independent expert reviews , and audits .
“ The evidence is strong , the science robust , and the conclusions drawn from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In his submission to the inquiry , Dr. Ridd maintains there is a serious concern that much of the evidence claiming adverse effects of agriculture on the Great Barrier Reef “ is highly questionable.
” He believes a full audit of the evidence relating to the potential effect of agriculture on the GBR should be carried out by a group of independent scientists not attached to government institutions working on the GBR .
Dr. Ridd emphasizes his independence , stating in his submission he has not received any salary from the oil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tobacco interests , despite being often accused of having done so .
His submission states that while he worked at JCU and AIMS , all of his salary and research funding was directed through those institutions , and he did not receive anything but his regular institutional salary .
It notes that since his sacking from JCU in 2018 he is now working , without payment , to improve Quality Assurance systems in science .
Dr. Ridd , who is a physicist , said science should be based on a higher standard of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to experts who have spoken more broadly about similar concerns with existing scientific standards around the world .
This included Richard Horton , editor of The Lancet , who in 2015 wrote that : “ The case against science is straightforward : much of the scientific literature , perhaps half , may simply be untrue .
Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes , tiny effects , invalid exploratory analyses , and flagrant conflicts of interest , together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance , science has taken a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study in Britain suggested science is facing a “ reproducibility crisis ” where more than two-thirds of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist ’ s experiments .
Last year Australia ’ s Chief Scientist Professor Alan Finkel lamented the “ significant number of papers that are of poor quality , and should never have made it through to publication ” .
Dr. Ridd said the peer review system on its own is not adequate or effective .
‘ Dissent , skepticism , replication , testing , and checking ’ were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t happen anywhere near as much as they should , he said .
“ That is why I am suggesting we need some sort of extra quality assurance mechanism to check the reef science .
“ And , I ask , why would you not want to do that ?
” Scientific principles such as Newton ’ s Law of Motion were “ five-star science , ” “ something you can rely on with your life ” because they had been “ massively checked , tested and replicated.
” Peer review was closer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
There was a need to get the level of replication “ as high as we can.
” In his 36-year-career of work in the Great Barrier Reef , Dr. Ridd co-invented the first instruments capable of taking long-term measurements of sediment on the reef .
His submission states his group “ has done more measurements of sediment ( mud ) concentrations near reefs than any other group ” .
During 30 minutes of questions from Senators yesterday , he provided several examples of his concerns with the existing scientific consensus on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in detail in his submission , some of the concerns he discussed included : Coral growth rate data : Dr. Ridd said he has raised concerns with the Australian Institute of Marine Science ( AIMS ) about its claim there has been a halving of GBR coral cover since the 1960s .
He said this is “ the only bit of data ” that supposedly shows this halving of coral , but said AIMS has refused to release the original data so it can be scrutinized .
Sediment from farms on the reef @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there is no sediment out on the Great Barrier Reef .
I can take you to the GBR , I ’ d love to take you to the GBR , you name the reef , and we will go there and I will demonstrate there is no sediment from farms on the great barrier reef .
That is it , right , that is the data and that decides whether it is right or wrong.
” 2017 Scientific Consensus Statementdescribing agriculture as the main pollutant in the reef : “ In my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agriculture has any significant effect on the reef whatsoever , ” Dr. Ridd said .
He said agricultural pesticides were “ in such low concentrations ” that on 97 percent of the GBR “ they don ’ t even bother measuring it , because the concentrations are so low.
” He said concentrations of pesticides inshore and in the rivers and wetlands “ can undoubtedly get to high levels.
” However , he said , “ all the measurements except for one on the round top island on the mouth of the Pioneer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there have been no measurements on the GBR of pesticides that reach anywhere near a harmful level , so we know that pesticides are not damaging the coral.
” Fertilizer produces algal blooms : “ The farmers are accused of all the fertilizer-producing algal blooms , but what is ignored and you won ’ t see it in the consensus statement is that there are 100 times more nutrients that cycle across the seabed than comes down all the rivers in total , so it is a drop in the bucket the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Now that is not my work , that is by Miles Furness from the AIMS .
20 years of his life was devoted ultimately to that conclusion.
” Cyclone impacts : “ A cyclone like Yasi probably re-suspended 500 million cubic meters of mud , this is hundreds of times more than what is going to come down from the rivers… Cyclones kill more coral than anything else , they will resuspend a layer of sediment up to 30cm deep 100km across and 50km wide , they ’ re like bulldozers that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Questioned by Qld LNP Senator Gerard Rennick about “ muddy bottom reefs , ” Dr. Ridd said these are specifically to do with inshore reefs .
“ We have a huge number of measurements on the muddy reef , we know from the geological evidence that these have been muddy for thousands of years because the mud around them has been laid down by rivers over thousands of years… the scientists talk about these inshore reefs and they never tell the public we ’ re only talking about a very small fraction of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all.
” 40-50 percent coral loss across the entire reef : LNP Senator Susan McDonald said evidence given earlier in the morning referred to “ 40-50pc coral loss across the entire reef ” Dr. Ridd said that referred to a 2016-17 bleaching event .
“ In those surveys , they have largely done very shallow corals .
They have totally ignored the deep coral .
The last data I saw on that was about 33pc was lost in this very shallow area , 0-2 meters deep .
The coral goes down to 50m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coral show almost zero loss of coral from bleaching which is what you would expect , and therefore when you aggregated it there was probably an 8pc reduction if you look at the whole thing .
“ Now an 8pc reduction in coral still sounds serious , but when you consider there was a 250pc increase in coral between 2011 when a huge cyclone wiped out most of the southern area of the reef , and 2016 , an 8pc decrease is not much , it will recover from that within a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dying ?
Asked by Senator Rennick if , in his opinion as someone who had spent his life examining the GBR , coral on the GBR is dying , Dr. Ridd said he did not believe it was .
“ I don ’ t think there is any evidence that it is dying , ” he said .
“ I have a slight reservation about the direct effect of carbon dioxide on ocean acidification .
The slight change there is some evidence that they may cause some problems , that does concern me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coral calcification shows , if anything , an increase in coral calcification and there is no data that suggests the coral cover is reducing .
It fluctuates massively , and there has been a reduction in 2016-17 , but it is basically the same as it was when records began.
” ‘ I never accuse scientists of doing things for the wrong thing reason ’ Questioned by One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts as to what can drive distortions of science , Dr. Ridd went to lengths to explain his view that “ there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never accuse scientists of doing things for the wrong thing reason , I think they genuinely believe .
All of the marine scientists that I know who disagree with me , they believe , they are not doing it fraudulently or anything like that , but they come to what I believe are often the wrong conclusions , sometimes because they are very emotional about the reef , but essentially because there aren ’ t the proper quality assurance systems.
” Science driving regulations must be held to higher standards Dr. Ridd said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ farmers will pay for it , and then people in the city .
“ You know the fact is , the new regulations , even the old regulations , are putting costs up for the farmers , ” he said .
“ Alright , that is not my business , I am a scientist , I am just saying that before you go ahead and do that , you really just need to check the science to make sure it is fair dinkum and we have actually got it as correct as it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ in the minority ” on the question of whether or not the reef is being damaged by farms .
However , he said he was not in the minority when talking about quality assurance problems with science .
“ I am in the majority , I am with the mainstream , when we talk about there is a quality assurance problem in science , ” he said .
“ So what I am suggesting is that we need some sort of body which takes a piece of information , ie AIMS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subjects it to real scrutiny and actually does the experiments again and see whether we can get the same result and then we can have a look at that and see how we go .
“ And by having some sort of quality assurance system just like auditors in financial systems , what it would do is it would make the scientists be much more careful about the work they produce.
” ‘ Why do you keep going ?
’ Given his stances on reef science “ have come at enormous personal cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” , LNP Senator Susan McDonald asked Dr. Ridd , why did he keep going ?
“ Wouldn ’ t it be easier to go home ?
” she asked .
“ Because I get very grumpy when I see stuff that is wrong , ” he replied .
“ That is what made me 15 years ago start this quality assurance work , I could see stuff that is just not right .
“ My own work was being misquoted or ignored .
Not just mine , peers , my whole group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole , you know , our work has been totally ignored , you just go on and on and you don ’ t like to see that .
Eventually , you say something , and bad things happen .
“ Anyway… I just go on , I can ’ t say why.
” Dr. Ridd said he understood that being in the ‘ significant minority ’ would mean people would believe he was wrong .
“ And you know I have been wrong on so many things in my life , I am @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have written down in that report are wrong .
“ But the basic question ‘ is there enough quality assurance ’ , I am certain that is not wrong .
“ I am not asking you to believe everything that I have said on a scientific basis , but I think there is more than enough evidence to say we need to do a bit better checking than what it is going on .
“ That is really the most important thing [ about ] my submission.
” He told the senators that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reef science , it was essential it be truly independent .
“ Such an organization , if it was captured by the primary science organization , would be Caesar judging Caesar and would be an absolute disaster .
“ That is why I think if it is done it needs to be run through the audit office , you need to have people who understand what happens when the consensus group takes over and excludes the other group and great care would have to be taken .
“ But it would have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ careful about making statements and publishing results where there was a likelihood they haven ’ t been careful , as careful as they should have been .
”


climatedepot--2020-08-03--Critics Rebut Computer Modelling Exercise On Offshore Wind Costs

Remember when Imperial College London and UK newspapers recently announced that “ offshore wind power is now so cheap it could pay money back to consumers ” ?
The Global Warming Policy Forum is today publishing a critique of the new paper behind the headlines which claims that computer modelling of offshore wind subsidy auction bids around Europe provides sound evidence of falling capital costs .
The paper neglects much more reliable empirical data in the public domain and in audited accounts that suggests that offshore wind costs are still high and unlikely to fall .
The paper , published @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by analysts at Imperial College London ’ s Centre for Environmental Policy , jointly with institutions in Denmark , Belgium , the Netherlands and Germany .
The authors of the GWPF critique , Professor Gordon Hughes , Dr Capell Aris , and Dr John Constable , were the authors of the GWPF ’ s ground-breaking study of the disconnection between actual offshore wind costs and the very low bid prices being made in subsidy auctions .
Professor Hughes and his co-authors write in their comment : The topic of wind power costs and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and important area of serious concern .
Jansen et al ’ s paper is a retrograde step both methodologically and in its conclusions , and government can not take comfort from its optimistic assertions .
On the contrary , government should note that if enthusiasts for the offshore wind industry can do no better than Jansen et al .
( 2020 ) then there is clearly a serious problem with the underlying cost trends of this sector.
” This paper from Imperial College London is yet another example of the way that elaborate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard data and misleads the public in thinking they will be paid back money on their energy bills.
” The post Critics Rebut Computer Modelling Exercise On Offshore Wind Costs appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

Thank you for being patient. We are doing some work on the site and will be back shortly.


climatedepot--2020-08-03--There aren’t enough batteries to electrify all cars – switch to plan B?

But Plan B includes putting heavy batteries in already heavy trucks , making them too heavy for hauling goods — or reducing their payloads .
But at least the fact that there aren ’ t going to be anywhere near enough batteries to replace all fuel-powered vehicles with expensive EVs is out in the open , leaving climate obsessives with yet another headache .
Wade through the usual paranoid propaganda to see how big the problem is .
– – – We need to change our transportation system , and we need to do it quickly , claims The Conversation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of fossil fuels , contributing 16 percent of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions , which warm up the Earth ’ s atmosphere and cause changes to the climate .
It also pollutes the air , threatening health and costing taxpayers billions of dollars annually .
At the same time , electric vehicles are getting cheaper , and vehicle range and the availability of charging stations are improving .
This is exciting for many because it seems to suggest an easy and convenient answer to the problem of transportation emissions : if everyone swapped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we could all keep driving , safe in the knowledge that we are no longer killing the planet by doing so—and all while enjoying a new car that is quiet , cheap to power and fun to drive .
Everybody wins , right ?
Unfortunately , it ’ s unlikely to be that simple .
Electric vehicles still produce air pollution and greenhouse gasses from their brakes , tires , the electricity that powers them and the factories that build them .
Even if we can address ( or ignore ) these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stumbling block facing personal electric vehicles as a solution for climate change .
In 2019 , the world produced about 160 gigawatt hours ( GWh ) of lithium-ion batteries .
That ’ s enough for a little more than three million standard-range Tesla Model 3s—and only if we use those batteries for cars , and don ’ t build any smart-phones , laptops or grid storage facilities .


climatedepot--2020-08-03--Top court forces Ireland to strengthen climate plans

Climate virtue signalling comes back to bite vote-chasing politicians , who expected they could dump many of the potentially unpopular decisions on taxes and spending arising from their 2015 law onto a later government .
They now have to lay out plans for the next 30 years , long after their mandate to govern .
– – – Judges ruled the government ’ s national mitigation plan fell “ well short ” of what was needed to meet Ireland ’ s climate commitments , ordering a more ambitious strategy , as Climate Home News reports .
The Irish government has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on climate change , following a ruling by the country ’ s top judges .
In a judgment published today [ 31/07/2020 ] , the supreme court said Ireland ’ s existing emission cutting plans fell “ well short ” of what was required to meet its climate commitments and must be replaced with a more ambitious strategy .
Ireland is obliged to cut its emissions by 80 % by 2050 compared to 1990 levels , under its Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 .
In 2017 it published a National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meet that goal .
But Friends of the Irish Environment ( FIE ) , which brought the legal case dubbed Climate Case Ireland , argued that the plan was not “ fit for purpose ” because it was not designed to achieve substantial emissions reductions in either the short or medium term .
Citing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , the NGO said developed countries like Ireland should be cutting emissions 25-40 % from 1990 levels by 2020 .
Today ’ s judgment overturns a decision by the high court last September @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Irish government has not denied the importance of tackling climate change .
But in court its lawyers had contended that the state is not obliged to respond to climate change in any particular way and said even a 25 % reduction in emissions by 2020 would cause an “ extreme alteration ” to Irish society .
FIE appealed the high court decision before a socially distanced panel of seven supreme court judges in June .
Their final judgment states that the National Mitigation Plan should cover the full period remaining to 2050 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is intended to happen in later years may understandably be less complete , a compliant plan must be sufficiently specific as to policy over the whole period to 2050 .
”


climatedepot--2020-08-03--Mines, Minerals, And ‘Green Energy’: A Reality Check

As policymakers have shifted focus from pandemic challenges to economic recovery , infrastructure plans are once more being actively discussed , including those relating to energy .
Green energy advocates are doubling down on pressure to continue , or even increase , the use of wind , solar power , and electric cars .
Left out of the discussion is any serious consideration of the broad environmental and supply-chain implications of renewable energy .
As I explored in a previous paper , “ The New Energy Economy : An Exercise in Magical Thinking , ” [ 1 ] many enthusiasts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it comes to the physics of fueling society , not least the magical belief that “ clean-tech ” energy can echo the velocity of the progress of digital technologies .
It can not .
This paper turns to a different reality : all energy-producing machinery must be fabricated from materials extracted from the earth .
No energy system , in short , is actually “ renewable , ” since all machines require the continual mining and processing of millions of tons of primary materials and the disposal of hardware that inevitably wears out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entail , on average , a 10-fold increase in the quantities of materials extracted and processed to produce the same amount of energy .
This means that any significant expansion of today ’ s modest level of green energy—currently less than 4 % of the country ’ s total consumption ( versus 56 % from oil and gas ) —will create an unprecedented increase in global mining for needed minerals , radically exacerbate existing environmental and labor challenges in emerging markets ( where many mines are located ) , and dramatically increase U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s energy supply chain .
As recently as 1990 , the U.S. was the world ’ s number-one producer of minerals .
Today , it is in seventh place .
Even though the nation has vast mineral reserves worth trillions of dollars , America is now 100 % dependent on imports for some 17 key minerals , and , for another 29 , over half of domestic needs are imported .
Among the material realities of green energy : • Building wind turbines and solar panels to generate electricity , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on average , more than 10 times the quantity of materials , compared with building machines using hydrocarbons to deliver the same amount of energy to society .
• A single electric car contains more cobalt than 1,000 smartphone batteries ; the blades on a single wind turbine have more plastic than five million smartphones ; a solar array that can power one data center uses more glass than 50 million phones .
• Replacing hydrocarbons with green machines under current plans—never mind aspirations for far greater expansion—will vastly increase the mining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , a single electric car battery weighing 1,000 pounds requires extracting and processing some 500,000 pounds of materials .
Averaged over a battery ’ s life , each mile of driving an electric car “ consumes ” five pounds of earth .
Using an internal combustion engine consumes about 0.2 pounds of liquids per mile .
• Oil , natural gas , and coal are needed to produce the concrete , steel , plastics , and purified minerals used to build green machines .
The energy equivalent of 100 barrels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fabricate a single battery that can store the equivalent of one barrel of oil .
• By 2050 , with current plans , the quantity of worn-out solar panels—much of it nonrecyclable—will constitute double the tonnage of all today ’ s global plastic waste , along with over three million tons per year of unrecyclable plastics from worn-out wind turbine blades .
By 2030 , more than 10 million tons per year of batteries will become garbage .


climatedepot--2020-08-03--Trump Recovers Taxpayer Cash On Bankrupt Obama-Backed Solar Plant

The Department of Energy reached a settlement Thursday to recover $ 200 million in taxpayer funds from a loan the Obama administration distributed in 2011 to finance a $ 1 billion solar power plant that was deemed obsolete before it could officially go online .
The settlement between DOE and Tonopah Solar Energy must now be approved by a bankruptcy court , the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported .
The DOE provided a $ 737 million loan to Tonopah in September 2011 for the purposes of financing the $ 1.1 billion Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project in Nevada .
The agency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 2013 before the project experienced problems requiring improvements , rendering the Crescent Dunes obsolete by 2015 , Bloomberg reported in January .
Thursday ’ s settlement will allow the DOE to recoup a portion of the $ 424 million Tonopah owes .
The plant experienced an outage in 2016 , forcing a shutdown lasting from October 2016 to July 2017 , the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board reported in January .
Another outage occurred in April 2019 and is ongoing .
Both problems were a result of issues with the facility ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Board noted .
“ This project has consistently faced technical failures that have proven difficult to overcome .
The Department ’ s decision was made after years of exhausting options within our authority to get the project back on track , given the significant taxpayer investment the prior Administration committed to this project , ” Shaylyn Hynes told the DCNF .
DOE officials sent a default notice in September before Crescent ’ s only customer , NV Energy , terminated its purchase agreement .
SolarReserve , the developer behind Crescent , sued for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The developer told a federal court in November that “ the plant is moribund—neither generating energy nor revenue ” and had a debt of more than $ 440 million with “ assets of much less value , ” TheWSJ Editorial Board reported .


climatedepot--2020-08-03--Climate Activist James Murdoch Steps Down From News Corp

James Murdoch has announced he is stepping down from the board of News Corp , citing editorial differences over the content published by its media platforms , which include The Wall Street Journal , The New York Post and News UK .
‘ My resignation is due to disagreements over certain editorial content published by the Company ’ s news outlets and certain other strategic decisions , ’ he said in a statement on Friday .
James , 47 , the younger son of Australian-born media mogul and News Corp executive chairman Rupert Murdoch , had been on the board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not go into detail about his differences with the media company however , James , who is the more liberal member of the Murdoch family , has been publicly critical of its news platforms in the past .
… James has spoken out against his father ’ s company on a number of occasions , with him and his wife Kathryn slamming the family business for promoting climate change ‘ denials ’ during the Australian bushfire crisis in January .
The pair released a statement saying they were ‘ disappointed ’ by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other News Corp outlets .
‘ Kathryn and James ’ s views on climate are well established and their frustration with some of the News Corp and Fox coverage of the topic is also well known .
‘ They are particularly disappointed with the ongoing denial among the news outlets in Australia given obvious evidence to the contrary , ’ their statement read .
The ‘ denials ’ were about allegations arsonists and not climate change was to blame for the destructive wildfires .
His comments were perceived as ‘ unprecedented ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the family since he rarely speaks publicly about his role in the business .
… He found himself out of work when Fox merged with Disney early last year , but also $ 2billion richer thanks to his shares in the company .
This seems to have caused some friction between father and son and when asked if he had recently spoken to his former boss , James said : ‘ There are periods of time when we do not.
’ He was similarly laconic when asked if he had ever watched Succession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on his family ’ s empire .
‘ Not even a peek .
Why would I ?
’ asked Murdoch .
He did note things were great post-Fox , saying : ‘ I just feel very lucky to have the opportunity at this point to make a clean break , and literally have an empty slate .
James is known as the more liberal Murdoch brother , while older brother Lachlan ’ s views seem to be more aligned with those of his conservative father .


climatedepot--2020-08-03--First Time In 70 Years No Pacific Typhoon Forms In July – Not a single typhoon formed – ‘the first t

First Time In 70 Years No Pacific Typhoon Forms In July – Not a single typhoon formed – ‘the first time this has occurred since 1951’

First Time In 70 Years No Pacific Typhoon Forms In July… Alarmists Alarmed Typhoon Trend Falling !
Global warming alarmists like to claim that tropical storms will intensify and become more frequent unless people stop using fossil fuels .
And recently these alarmists have had our attention steered to the Atlantic basin , where tropical storms this year have seen quite an active season thus far .
Another reason the focus has been on the Atlantic is because very little has been happening in terms of Pacific typhoons , and the alarmists don ’ t want to talk about that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first July to have seen no typhoons formed in the Pacific at all since statistics on this began in 1951 , according to the data from the Japan Meteorological Agency ( JMA ) .
Data source : JMA , here and here .
Normally between 3 to 4 typhoons form in the Pacific in July .
Up to 8 have formed in the past , e.g .
on 2017 and 1971 .
But this year July failed to see a single typhoon form – the first time this has occurred since 1951 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ trend .
Global warming alarmists say storms are getting and will be more frequent , and stronger .
So let ’ s look at the data here as well .
The following chart shows the number of typhoons formed in the Pacific each year from January to July , since 1951 : Data source : JMA , here and here .
Contrary to what global warming alarmists say , the trend has been downward !
The year 2020 has been the second quietest on record – so far .
Now we look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year : Data source : JMA , here and here .
Once again the global warming alarmists are shown to be wrong .
In fact , it ’ s probably the other way around : A warmer planet leads to less storm activity .
But this is not the message the purveyors of fear want us to hear .


climatedepot--2020-08-03--Biden’s Green Dreams Are About Controlling You, Not The Climate – His Green New Deal will NOT improv

Biden’s Green Dreams Are About Controlling You, Not The Climate – His Green New Deal will NOT improve the environment; ‘it will only decrease your standard of living’

The New York Times recently ran an opinion column commanding readers to “ Stop Using Toilet Paper.
” It advocated for using something reusable or upgrading your toilet so it shoots streams of targeted water .
It seems nothing environmental extremists do can be too intrusive .
`` A Biden administration would move to ban fracking , the oil production technology that has liberated Americans and our gas prices from the shackles of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries , or OPEC , cartel .
In no time , American drivers would be facing European-style gas prices and sweating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saudi Arabia moved to threaten the global oil supply . ''
`` A green push is a political agenda .
It ’ s not about controlling the climate .
It ’ s about controlling you .
You can see this for yourself in the prescriptive lifestyle climate activists demand : Don ’ t eat meat .
You don ’ t need a car .
Avoid air conditioning .
Wash in cold water .
Dry your clothes on a clothesline .
As Al Gore asked at the end of his 2007 movie , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ready to change the way you live ?
” While you ’ re changing the way you live , China , India , and soon Africa will be emitting greenhouse gases like there ’ s no tomorrow to raise their national standards of living . ''
Steve Milloy : `` None of what the Joe Biden green team has in store will improve the environment ; it will only make your life poorer and harder . ''
In his $ 2 trillion climate change proposal this month , Joe Biden promised , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to entirely decarbonize America if elected president .
As the candidate touted false promises of a green paradise , however , he failed to describe what his nonsense agenda would require Americans to sacrifice .
Before detailing what decarbonizing the United States would really mean for Americans , let ’ s get a couple of points straight .
First , every single part of life depends on fossil fuels .
From wind turbines and solar panels , to electric cars and bicycles , to organic foods , the job you have , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fossil fuels .
Furthermore , there is no substitute for fossil fuels , nor is any magic substitute technology on the horizon .
Second , decarbonizing America is not about averting climate change or improving the weather .
Regardless of climate science views , simple math shows there is nothing Americans , neither as individuals nor as a nation , can do to materially or meaningfully alter atmospheric greenhouse gas levels over the next century .
Climate activists know this because they , too , can do the simple math .
A green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not about controlling the climate .
It ’ s about controlling you .
You can see this for yourself in the prescriptive lifestyle climate activists demand : Don ’ t eat meat .
You don ’ t need a car .
Avoid air conditioning .
Wash in cold water .
Dry your clothes on a clothesline .
As Al Gore asked at the end of his 2007 movie , “ An Inconvenient Truth , ” “ Are you ready to change the way you live ?
” While you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , India , and soon Africa will be emitting greenhouse gases like there ’ s no tomorrow to raise their national standards of living .
So while this is happening , how will the life of the average American change under Biden ’ s plan ?
The automobile has given people freedom to go anywhere , anytime .
If you run out of gas , you currently can quickly fill your tank and keep going wherever — to work , to the store , to see family and friends , or to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ price at your convenience .
Yet the Biden climate agenda wants you out of your affordable and convenient gas car and , at best , into a more expensive , smaller , much less convenient electric car .
Where will you be able to go ?
The climate agenda calls for limiting car traffic in cities .
It also calls for less road-building and more roadless areas .
Furthermore , a Biden administration would move to ban fracking , the oil production technology that has liberated Americans and our gas prices from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Exporting Countries , or OPEC , cartel .
In no time , American drivers would be facing European-style gas prices and sweating every time Iran , Russia , or Saudi Arabia moved to threaten the global oil supply .
The Biden climate agenda would urge you , instead of driving , to live in a dense urban area and rely on public transportation .
That might be very inconvenient when , like now , a viral epidemic hits .
Home will also be less of a refuge .
The Biden climate agenda has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in , their very existence .
It might be your new dream home , but the extremists who will run the Biden administration will consider it to be “ sprawl.
” They intend to enact policies that make living in the suburbs unpalatable and either force people to move back into the aforementioned dense urban areas , or enable more city-dwellers to move to the suburbs .
That would , of course , make suburbs just extensions of dense urban areas .
Don ’ t think about going on vacation .
You can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retirement on a stay-cation at home , visiting the world virtually through your computer .
There ’ s only one way for airlines and cruise ships to cut emissions , and that ’ s to do less flying and cruising .
The New York Times recently ran an opinion column commanding readers to “ Stop Using Toilet Paper.
” It advocated for using something reusable or upgrading your toilet so it shoots streams of targeted water .
It seems nothing environmental extremists do can be too intrusive .
Of course , these activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toilets ) wasteful , so it ’ s not clear what one is supposed to do .
During the 2019 CNN climate town hall , then-Democratic presidential candidate and possible Biden vice presidential pick Kamala Harris talked about what kind of trash bag ( not plastic ) you should use in your kitchen .
This is just a small sample of what Biden ’ s green team has in store for us .
None of this will improve the environment ; it will only decrease your standard of living .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Masks as magical thinking: Many ‘claim to believe in science. In reality, they believe in scientists

Masks as magical thinking: Many ‘claim to believe in science. In reality, they believe in scientists. There is a very big difference’

The history of mankind is , for the most part , that of ignorant pagans dutifully agreeing with whatever a group of priests told them was true .
The priests would attribute divine wisdom and power to a force of nature and claim to speak for it .
“ The rain god is angry , ” the priests would admonish the people , “ so give us the crops you grew.
” The people would nod their heads knowingly and obey When plague strikes , the people were particularly attentive to their priests to hear how to please the gods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no different .
Today , however , they call their priests “ scientists ” and one of their gods “ government.
” The priests/scientists have stated that we have been greedy and created too much carbon dioxide .
To save ourselves from the plague , the gods/government command that we wear a mask .
The common man claims to believe in science .
In reality , he believes in scientists .
There is a very big difference .
If he believed in science , then he would critically weigh the theories and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of producible facts and repeatable experiments .
The common man does not do this .
He simply takes the words of the priest/scientists as truth , especially when the words are blessed by the gods/government .
Science is not ignorant superstition , but the common man ’ s belief in science is .
Believe I am wrong ?
Ask someone to explain the scientific principle .
The majority will not be able .
For those who do know the scientific principle , ask them if and how they applied it to the matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great deal of sputtering and righteous indignation .
They heard it on the news or read it on the Internet .
“ Everyone knows it ’ s true , ” they will declare to you with religious certainty .
“ The scientists all agree.
” Believing in science does not mean accepting anything a scientist says .
Quite the opposite .
The scientific principle means being skeptical .
A scientist has to prove that he is correct .
By the way , and this is important , computer models are not proof .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ general population wearing cloth masks in public , with no training in how to properly clean and handle such masks , has in any way decreased , let alone prevented , the spread of the Wuhan virus .
I defy anyone to prove me wrong .
More importantly , I defy anyone who is so adamant that people wear masks for safety to tell me that they reviewed any such proof before they became so adamant .
I have seen articles quoting scientists and doctors .
I have heard anecdotal evidence .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of public masks and against it .
I have read scientific papers that show correlation by country between public mask policies and lower infection rates .
I have read papers that show no such correlation .
I also know that correlation is not the same as causation .
What I have not seen is proof .
The common man ’ s zealotry for masks does not come from rigorous scientific analysis .
Instead , it comes from baser forces .
For the most part it seems to come from a sincere desire to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subset , it comes from a desire to feel better about themselves by doing something they believe is right or important .
For an even smaller subset , it is about being perceived by others as a better person .
The English word for the latter is “ sanctimonious ” , or in the vernacular , “ Karen.
” The common man ’ s belief that masks are effective is based in magical thinking .
More specifically , it is cargo cult thinking .
“ Cargo cult ” is a term used to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the Second World War .
The natives called all the manufactured goods the Americans brought “ cargo.
” The cargo came on planes .
When the Americans abruptly left the islands , the natives mimicked the behavior of the ground crews on the runway in the belief that their actions would magically make the airplanes come back with more cargo .
The common man has seen doctors and nurses .
He has seen that doctors and nurses wear masks when working with patients .
What he has not seen is the training @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those masks to assure that they are sterile and thereby effective .
The common man is wearing the same dirty mask in public for days , touching it and adjusting it with his unsterilized hands and laying it on the counter or shoving it in his pocket when he is done .
He might as well climb into a tree and wave palm leaves to have planes bring him cola and chocolate .
Everyone is entitled to their own personal beliefs .
I only ask that people be self-aware enough to distinguish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If I am about to fall off a ledge , by all means , lecture me on the law of gravity .
On the other hand , if I am about to walk down the sidewalk without a mask , please keep your personal beliefs to yourself .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--PETER HITCHENS: Face masks turn us into voiceless submissives – and it’s not science forcing us to w

PETER HITCHENS: Face masks turn us into voiceless submissives – and it’s not science forcing us to wear them, it’s politics – Lockdowns are ‘the biggest state takeover of life & work ever attempted by non-Communists’

This is Peter Hitchens ’ Mail on Sunday This is Peter Hitchens ’ Mail on Sunday In the name of Covid , the State has already thrust itself into every corner of our existence .
It has come between husbands and wives at the ends of their lives .
It has forbidden the old to embrace their grandchildren .
It has denied us funerals and weddings , locked the churches , silenced the ancient monastic music of cathedral choirs and prevented the free worship of God for the first time in 800 years , and banned us ( unless we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public meetings .
It has ordered us to stay at home , scolded or fined us for sunbathing , going on country rambles or even entering our front gardens .
It has forced millions of us to stop working , sabotaged the educations – at school and university – of untold numbers of young people and has become our boss and paymaster in the biggest state takeover of life and work ever attempted by non-Communists .
Soon we will discover that it has also wrecked an already wobbly economy and separated untold numbers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought were safe .
Soon , too , it will also separate us from our savings , through punishing tax and savage inflation , to pay for the disaster it has caused .
Now it presumes to tell us what to wear .
And what it wants us to wear is a soggy cloth muzzle , a face-nappy that turns its wearer from a normal human into a mumbling , mouthless submissive .
And this , it seems , is popular .
Is there nothing the modern British people will not put up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is now so high that six months from now there will be reports of dolphins and whales floundering about in an ocean made sticky by millions of gallons of hand-sanitiser , as they choke on congealed clumps of used muzzles .
These items are set to become the new plastic bags .
Why is this frenzy taking place ?
Here is a clue .
On July 12 , Deborah Cohen , the medical correspondent of BBC2 ’ s Newsnight , revealed an astonishing thing .
The World Health Organisation ( WHO ) had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from ‘ don ’ t wear them ’ to ‘ do wear them ’ .
But the key fact was that it had not done so because of scientific information – the evidence had not backed the wearing of face coverings – but because of political lobbying .
She revealed on Twitter that : ‘ We had been told by various sources [ that the ] WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying.
’ She said the BBC had then put this to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
In March , the WHO had said : ‘ There is currently no evidence that wearing a mask ( whether medical or other types ) by healthy persons in the wider community setting , including universal community masking , can protect them from infection with respiratory viruses , including Covid-19.
’ The American TV news channel CNN reported on March 31 that Mike Ryan , executive director of the WHO health emergencies programme , had said at a briefing in Geneva : ‘ There is no specific evidence to suggest that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population has any potential benefit .
‘ In fact , there ’ s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly.
’ A few weeks ago , the WHO changed its advice to say it ‘ advises that governments should encourage the general public to wear masks where there is widespread transmission and physical distancing is difficult , such as on public transport , in shops or in other confined or crowded environments.
’ Earlier that same month , England ’ s chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that wearing face masks would do little to combat the outbreak .
While noting that if someone was infected , they might reduce the danger of spreading the disease by covering their faces , Prof Whitty said wearing a face mask had almost no effect on reducing the risk of contracting the illness .
He stated : ‘ In terms of wearing a mask , our advice is clear : that wearing a mask if you don ’ t have an infection reduces the risk almost not at all .
So we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March , the Advertising Standards Authority banned two firms ’ advertisements for masks , saying that the adverts were ‘ misleading , irresponsible and likely to cause fear without justifiable reason ’ .
At about the same time , Dr Jenny Harries , a Deputy Chief Medical Officer , warned that people could be putting themselves more at risk from contracting Covid by wearing muzzles .
She said masks could ‘ actually trap the virus ’ , and cause the person wearing it to breathe it in .
She explained : ‘ For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down a street , it is not a good idea.
’ On April 3 , the other Deputy Chief Medical Officer , Professor Jonathan Van-Tam , said he did not believe healthy people wearing them would reduce the spread of the disease in the UK .
The British Government has also zig-zagged .
As recently as June 24 , in a series of official pamphlets for reopening shops and services , the Department for Business and Enterprise said repeatedly : ‘ The evidence of the benefit of using a face covering to protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to be small.
’ This was true at the time and it is still true .
The evidence is indeed weak .
There is plenty of research showing that the case for muzzles is poor , especially a survey done for the dental profession four years ago , which quietly vanished from the internet after mask opponents began to cite it .
The scientific papers in favour of muzzling are full of weak , hesitant words such as ‘ probably , ‘ could ’ and ‘ may ’ – which can equally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ , ‘ could not ’ or ‘ may not ’ .
There has not been any great discovery in the past few days .
Generally , the main way of discovering if something works is the Randomised Control Trial ( RCT ) , in which the proposed treatment or method is tested directly and thoroughly .
This hasn ’ t been done with muzzles , probably because it would be a bit difficult and possibly because muzzle zealots fear the results would not help their case .
Amazingly , the chief spokesman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should surely support proper rigour , has dismissed such RCTs .
Venki Ramakrishnan , president of the Royal Society , sneered at ‘ inappropriate ’ RCTs as ‘ methodological fetishism ’ .
He did this while advocating more compulsory muzzle-wearing when he appeared on Radio 4 ’ s Today programme on July 7 – as the political lobbying for muzzles intensified .
All that has changed is the politics .
Why are they changing ?
Interestingly , Health Secretary Matt Hancock ’ s muzzle edict was the first action by the London Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nicola Sturgeon ’ s extremely Left-wing Edinburgh administration .
There are many signs that it has not been thought through , at least by scientists .
Why are we more likely to spread Covid in a shop than we are to do so in a pub or restaurant ?
The question can not be answered .
What evidence there is certainly suggests that the risk of transmission is greater if we linger longer , but the Government does not dare close down the catering trade again , because it would be wildly unpopular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point of bankruptcy – and such an action would shut them .
The truth is that the muzzle policy is all about power and fear .
The Government began its wild , disproportionate shutdown of the country by spreading fear of a devastating plague that would destroy the NHS and kill untold thousands .
Now , as many people find that Covid-19 is , in fact , nothing of the kind , new ways have to be found to keep up the alarm levels .
One was exposed on Friday by the superb @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Medicine .
Puzzled by the way that Covid death figures in England continued to pour in , while they had all but ceased in Scotland , they looked at the figures from Public Health England ( PHE ) .
And they found , in their own devastating words ‘ It seems that PHE regularly looks for people on the NHS database who have ever tested positive , and simply checks to see if they are still alive or not .
‘ PHE does not appear to consider how long ago the Covid test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been successfully treated in hospital and discharged to the community .
Anyone who has tested Covid positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE Covid death figures .
‘ By this PHE definition , no one with Covid in England is allowed to ever recover from their illness .
A patient who has tested positive , but been successfully treated and discharged from hospital , will still be counted as a Covid death even if they had a heart attack or were run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ This problem would be avoided by having a simple cut-off , where those who tested positive more than 28 days ago were no longer counted as Covid deaths .
Scotland does this .
That is why its figures are lower .
Findings are now also pouring in which suggest that a horribly high number of the excess deaths during the last few months were not caused by Covid , but by people failing to seek treatment for heart attacks , strokes and cancer .
Despite the propagandists of the BBC , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never to mention the legions of dissenting scientists who dispute the Government ’ s policy , people are beginning to wonder , in increasing numbers , if they might have been taken for a ride .
This Government has no great authority .
It is a Cabinet of undistinguished , inexperienced unknowns , headed by an exhausted and empty Prime Minister whose sparkle , such as it was , is fast fading .
In a few weeks ’ time , the Government faces the onset of what may be the worst economic crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fear levels up to maintain its authority .
One way of doing this is the ceaseless promotion of an alleged ‘ second wave ’ of Covid , for which there is no evidence .
Another is to undertake a ferocious testing policy .
This is now happening in Leicester where testers go from door to door to discover people who are ‘ infected ’ with Covid , even if they have no symptoms ( which is usually the case ) and are perfectly healthy .
Then they can raise the alarm and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the populace is even better .
People such as me , who think Ministers ’ response to the virus is wildly out of proportion , have until now been able to live amid the propaganda , trying to stay sane .
But the muzzle is a badge of subservience and submission .
Anyone who dons it publicly is agreeing to the Government ’ s crazy assessment of the level of danger .
Societies in which citizens are discouraged from speaking out against the regime , as this has become , are pretty disgraceful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compelled to endorse the opinion of the state are a serious step further down the path to totalitarianism .
It is even worse than that .
Look at the muzzled multitudes , their wide eyes peering out anxiously from above the hideous gag which obscures half their faces and turns them from normal human beings into mouthless , obedient submissives .
The psychological effect of these garments , on those who wear them , is huge .
And it also has another nasty result for society as a whole .
Dissenters , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made to stand out from the surrendered majority , who then become quite keen on pressuring the non-conformists to do as they are told , and on informing against them .
I predicted the same outcome during the House Arrest period in April , and was mocked for it , but it came true .
When all this began , I felt fear .
But it was not fear of the disease , which was clearly overstated from the start .
It was fear of exactly what is happening to us , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberty and the transformation of one of the freest countries on Earth into a regimented , conformist society , under perpetual surveillance , in which a subservient people scurries about beneath the stern gaze of authority .
It is my view that , if you don that muzzle , you are giving your assent to that change .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--New Climate Summary: Meat, Livestock Have Little Climate Impact – ‘All livestock combined account fo

New Climate Summary: Meat, Livestock Have Little Climate Impact – ‘All livestock combined account for less than 4% of U.S. emissions’

American ranchers and U.S. meat consumption have virtually no impact on greenhouse gas emissions or climate , reports a compelling new climate summary .
The new climate summary , “ Climate at a Glance : Livestock and Methane , ” documents that cattle and beef account for just 2 % of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions .
All livestock combined account for less than 4 % of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions .
Climate activists , many of whom are vegans for other reasons , often claim that ranchers , livestock , and meat production are a leading cause of rising greenhouse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , EPA data show crop production accounts for more greenhouse gas emissions than total livestock production .
The Climate at a Glance portal provides more than two dozen concise , compelling summaries of topics related to climate change .
Bullet-points at the top of each summary provide an easily understandable summary of the topic .
A Short Summary section under the bullet-points provides a concise , supporting explanation with links to scientific evidence .
Most summaries also include a compelling visual graphic .
The post New Climate Summary : Meat , Livestock Have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Snow In Alps Down To 2300 Meters Elevation – In August! July In Germany Comes In Cool

It ’ s been a rather cool summer in much of Europe so far .
And just before some hot weather is about to sweep across Central Europe starting tomorrow , winter made a brief comeback – at the peak of summer – in the Alps !
“ At high altitudes of the Alps , precipitation turned into snow overnight , ” reported Wetteronline.de here .
“ In some areas , the snowfall line dropped to an altitude of around 2300 metres.
” Wetteronline.de also noted that on Germany ’ s highest mountain , Zugspitze , “ about 30 centimetres @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at minus 2 degrees.
” “ Employees of the Zugspitzbahn were in continuous operation to clear paths and the visitor platforms from the summer snow masses.
” Meanwhile Germany ’ s DWD national weather service recently issued what I ’ d call a press release that is designed especially for stupid and lazy journalists who won ’ t bother fact-checking .
In its preliminary report on July weather in Germany , the DWD announced that the mid summer month this year was “ rather warm ” .
According to the DWD , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 17.7°C , which was “ 0.8°C above the value for the internationally valid reference period 1961 to 1990.
” But what the DWD fails to tell us is that the 1961-1990 period was a cold one .
And not only that , the World Meteorological Organization ( WMO ) no longer uses the 1961-1990 reference period .
Instead it uses the 1981-2010 period to calculate the means .
The DWD does mention that July 2020 was 0.3°C too cold compared with the valid reference period 1981 to 2010 .
So at the DWD @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their eyes “ rather warm ” .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Ornithologists Call For Allegedly Racist Bird Names To Be Changed – Some names ‘represent colonialis

Ornithologists Call For Allegedly Racist Bird Names To Be Changed – Some names ‘represent colonialism, racism and inequality’

A Tuesday op-ed in The Washington Post by two ornithologists argued that bird names derived from problematic historical figures should be changed .
Gabriel Foley and Jordan Rutter , two ornithologists who started the website “ Bird Names for Birds , ” maintained that the many bird names that include eponymous references to such people “ cast long , dark shadows over our beloved birds and represent colonialism , racism and inequality.
” “ It is long overdue that we acknowledge the problem of such names , and it is long overdue that we should change them , ” they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John James Audubon , after whom several birds were named and whose monumental 19th-century book “ The Birds of America ” is widely considered one of the most important ornithological works ever written .
“ Surely , most of us might think , this is an entirely fitting honor for someone who did so much for our understanding of the environment , ” they wrote , but reminded readers that even “ Audubon ’ s story has a dark side.
” Pinpointing how he once scoured the battlefield after the 1836 Battle of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mexicans to send to a phrenologist , they wrote , “ For Audubon , this might have been just another way of practicing science — but his actions hardly align with modern values , and his scientific contributions do not excuse him from judgment.
” The two then go on to list other birds who were named for people they don ’ t like , such as Bachman ’ s sparrow , who was named for a pro-slavery reverend ; McCown ’ s longspur , who shares a name with a Confederate general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was named for a doctor that performed anatomical studies on Native Americans killed in battle ; Bendire ’ s thrasher , named for a U.S. major who fought Native Americans ; and Townsend ’ s warbler , a bird whose namesake dug up Native Americans to study their skulls .
Foley and Rutter conclude by likening such bird names to Confederate statues , writing : The controversy over such names , which is now exciting passions within the bird community , mirrors similar conflicts over monuments to Confederates and colonialists now raging in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ names serve as verbal statues : They are a memorial both to the colonial system that wove the fabric of systemic racism through every aspect of our lives — including the birds we see every day — and to the individuals who intentionally and directly perpetuated that system .
They urge their readers to reject “ the colonial monument that eponyms represent ” in favor of “ inclusion and diversity in our community [ . ]
” “ We can not subjectively decide — especially if the adjudicators are White — that some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ associated with less abhorrent pasts than others .
We must remove all eponymous names .
The stench of colonialism has saturated each of its participants , and the honor inherent within their names must be revoked , ” they wrote , adding , “ A bird ’ s beauty should not be marred by the baggage of an eponym.
” The Daily Wire is one of America ’ s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news , opinion , and entertainment .
Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming @ @ @


climatedepot--2020-08-05--BBC: Satellites find new colonies of Emperor penguins in Antarctica – ‘It’s good news because there

BBC: Satellites find new colonies of Emperor penguins in Antarctica – ‘It’s good news because there are now more penguins than we thought’

Satellite observations have found a raft of new Emperor penguin breeding sites in the Antarctic .
The locations were identified from the way the birds ’ poo , or guano , had stained large patches of sea-ice .
The discovery lifts the global Emperor population by 5-10 % , to perhaps as many as 278,500 breeding pairs .
It ’ s a welcome development given that this iconic species is likely to come under severe pressure this century as the White Continent warms .
The Emperors ’ whole life cycle is centred around the availability of sea-ice , and if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – as the climate models project – then the animals ’ numbers will be hit hard .
One forecast suggested the global population could crash by a half or more under certain conditions come 2100 .
The satellites ’ infrared imagery threw up eight such breeding sites and confirmed the existence of three others that had been mooted in the era before high-resolution space pictures .
The new identifications take the number of known active breeding sites from 50 to 61 .
Two of the new locations are in the Antarctic Peninsula region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the continent and six in the East .
“ It ’ s good news because there are now more penguins than we thought , ” said BAS remote-sensing specialist Dr Peter Fretwell .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Watch: Andrew Revkin interviews Michael Shellenberger on CSPAN about his climate conversion & new bo

Watch: Andrew Revkin interviews Michael Shellenberger on CSPAN about his climate conversion & new book ‘Apocalypse Never’

Michael Shellenberger , founder and president of Environmental Progress , offered his thoughts on what he calls “ apocalyptic ” @ @ @ @ @ on how to address environmental issues of today and into the future .
He was @ @ @ @ @ author and Columbia University ’ s diirector of the Earth Institute Initiative on Communication and @ @


climatedepot--2020-08-05--‘Experts say’ name heatwaves like hurricanes – Seek shelter, a ‘Category 2’ heatwave is heading your

‘Experts say’ name heatwaves like hurricanes – Seek shelter, a ‘Category 2’ heatwave is heading your way

Want to save lives ?
Name heat waves like hurricanes , experts say .
Excerpts : Now , as triple-digit heat waves set records around the country and around the world , a group of health experts , climate scientists , and policymakers are trying to give them names and rankings , just like hurricanes .
In doing so , they hope to remind the public that extreme temperatures aren ’ t just an excuse to go to the beach — they can also be fatal .
The World Health Organization estimates that between 1998 and 2017 , more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extreme heat .
One catastrophic heat wave in Europe in 2003 killed tens of thousands in Italy and Spain .
In the U.S. alone , over 600 people succumb to extreme heat every year , outstripping the deaths from hurricanes , floods , or tornadoes in most years .
And with climate change , sweltering temperatures are becoming all the more common .
“ It ’ s this pervasive , pernicious , climate-induced threat that is little known , ” said Kathy Baughman-McLeod , director of the Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it the ‘ silent killer.
’ ” Baughman-McLeod is one of the leaders of the Extreme Heat Resilience Alliance , a brand-new initiative formed by city governments , non-governmental organizations , and scientists .
By naming and providing severity rankings for predicted heat waves before they strike , the alliance hopes to spark public awareness and encourage local cities and states to take preventative measures — setting up air-conditioned cooling centers , for example , and sending search-and-rescue teams to check on elderly and vulnerable populations .
Bob Ward , the policy director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics , has been arguing for naming heat waves in the United Kingdom since last year .
He thinks that it might push the U.K. government to upgrade buildings to be more resilient to heat and encourage individuals to check in on friends and family .
“ People should be thinking about their elderly relatives and neighbors and looking out for them , ” he said .
“ People tend to do that in cold weather , but they ’ re less likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s this view that hot weather is somehow lovely for everyone.
” Simon Mason , a senior research scientist at the International Research Institute for Climate and Society at Columbia University , said that while hurricanes can be easily categorized according to their wind speeds , extreme heat is more complicated .
For example , he explained , temperatures in the triple-digits may be tolerable in Arizona , where humidity is low , while 90-degree temperatures on the East Coast with high humidity could be deadly .
Heat wave severity can also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to experiencing .
“ You ’ ve got people in San Francisco , and at 90 degrees they ’ re passing out , ” said Baughman-McLeod , alluding to the city ’ s notoriously cool and foggy weather .
“ But for people in Bakersfield ” — a city north of Los Angeles — “ 90 feels like 75.
” The most important thing , according to Mason , is designing policies around the names and categories of heat waves — telling the public and cities how to react to a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example .
“ Unless we design management and strategies around this naming convention , we ’ ll be missing the main point of doing this , ” he said .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Trump signs the Great American Outdoors Act into law – ‘Provides $900 million annually in oil & gas

Trump signs the Great American Outdoors Act into law – ‘Provides $900 million annually in oil & gas revenues for Land and Water Conservation Fund’

The property-grabbing feds get mandatory funding - The Great American Outdoors Act basically contained two provisions .
One would permanently fund the Land & Water Conservation Fund to the tune of $ 900 million per year ( the primary use of this fund is for land acquisition ) .
The second provision establishes the National Parks and Public Lands Legacy Restoration Fund .
You see , the feds can ’ t take care of the lands they already own , so this new fund would authorize up to $ 9.5 billion over the next five years to catch-up on back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One of the few Senators to talk sense on this legislation was Senator Mike Lee ( R-Utah ) who said , “ This Act is an expensive , shortsighted mistake .
It spends money we don ’ t have to buy more federal land when the federal government is already failing to take care of the land it already owns.
” 'Trump and the libs want to spend more money to purchase private property and increase the size of the federal estate' President Trump on Tuesday signed a major piece of conservation legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek to tout conservation accomplishments ahead of the elections in November .
Trump signed the Great American Outdoors Act , which would provide $ 900 million annually in oil and gas revenues for the Land and Water Conservation Fund ( LWCF ) , which helps secure land for trails and parks .
The legislation would also provide billions of dollars over five years to address a maintenance backlog at national parks .
Trump ’ s support for the legislation is a reversal of his previous desire to slash the LWCF .
In his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump proposed slashing the LWCF ’ s funding by nearly 97 percent .
The Trump administration ’ s budget proposals from past years had also suggested significant cuts to the LWCF .
Announcing his reversal to support the LWCF funding in March , Trump credited two senators , Cory Gardner ( R-Colo. ) and Steve Daines ( R-Mont . )
, who are up for reelection this fall and both in races considered toss-ups .
Holding either or both of those seats could be key to Republicans ’ hopes of keeping their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it into law , it will be HISTORIC for our beautiful public lands .
ALL thanks to @ SenCoryGardner and @ SteveDaines , two GREAT Conservative Leaders !
” Trump tweeted in March .
Asked how the lawmakers convinced Trump to support the measures , Gardner told reporters in June that he and Daines had made the argument in a meeting earlier this year with Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) .
“ We spoke for probably over an hour or so in this meeting with the president about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they worked , how they were funded , ” Gardner said…MORE Here is the White House release on the bill : President Donald J. Trump Is Conserving and Restoring the Majesty of America ’ s Public Lands “ We ’ re preserving our land .
We ’ re making our land better and cleaner and safer.
” President Donald J. Trump PRESERVING AMERICA ’ S LAND : President Donald J. Trump is taking historic action to invest in America ’ s national parks and public lands .
• Today , President Trump signed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the single largest investment in America ’ s national parks and public lands in history .
• This legislation marks the most significant conservation accomplishment since the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt .
• The act renews our national parks and protects local lands , while also serving as a jobs and infrastructure package that will create over 100,000 additional infrastructure-related jobs .
• The legislation will provide $ 900 million a year in permanent funding to the Land and Water Conservation Fund ( LWCF ) , and will allocate $ 9.5 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infrastructure in our national parks and public lands .
• This legislation won the support of more than 850 conservation groups , as well as 43 sportsmen and sportswomen groups .
IMPROVING OUR NATIONAL PARKS : The President ’ s action will improve national parks and public lands for the American people , while greatly benefitting our Nation ’ s economy .
• Americans who have turned to our national parks for activities during the pandemic are finding them in need of investment .
• Estimates place the national deferred maintenance backlog across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billion .
• The President ’ s action will help bring much-needed maintenance to our national parks and public lands , which play an important role in America ’ s economy .
• Last year , over 327 million people visited our national parks , generating more than $ 41 billion for the American economy .
• America ’ s outdoor recreation economy accounted for 2.2 percent of GDP and 5.2 million jobs in 2017 .
• The LWCF and public lands contribute almost $ 60 billion to the American economy and support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to a recent economic analysis , every $ 1 million invested in the LWCF supports between 16 and 30 jobs…MORE Note that nowhere in the news story or the Trump release do the words “ land acquisition ” appear .
For some of my previous posts on this shameful positioning by the Republicans go here and here .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Why Progressive Activists Want to Silence the Truth About Climate Change – Interview with skeptical

Why Progressive Activists Want to Silence the Truth About Climate Change – Interview with skeptical climate statistician Dr. Caleb Rossiter

Climate activists continue to sound the alarm over carbon dioxide emissions and climate change .
Caleb Rossiter , the executive director of CO2 Coalition , an organization of climate scientists and experts who research and report the facts of climate change , joins the show to explain just how worried we really should or should not be about the planet ’ s warming .
Rossiter also explains “ a long campaign to … cancel climate voices in the mainstream media , ” including his own .
Virginia Allen : I am joined by Caleb Rossiter , the executive director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much for being on the show .
Rossiter : Virginia , it ’ s a real pleasure to be talking to you from lovely upstate New York where I ’ m on a bit of a vacation .
Allen : Oh , that ’ s good .
Good for you .
Well , I ’ m sorry to make you work on your vacation , but I ’ m glad that you ’ re allowing us to pull you in and speak with you today .
I want to start by just hearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You all have come under some fire recently from the left and we ’ re going to get into that in just a moment .
But first , can you just tell us a little bit about what CO2 Coalition does ?
Rossiter : Sure .
The CO2 Coalition was founded in 2015 by Dr. Will Happer of Princeton University , a physicist , a very noteworthy American physicist who recently served as President [ Donald ] Trump ’ s science adviser on the National Security Council , which explains how I ended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of years .
There are 55 climate scientists and energy economists , experts in their field who over the years noticed with alarm that climate science and energy economics had become very politicized .
And there were claims that it was all settled and because of the terrible changes in atmospheric warmth leading to hurricanes and sea level rise and glaciers melting , we had to get rid of the fossil fuels that power over 80 % of the world economy .
These climate scientists and energy economists felt that was incorrect based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physics and economics and came together .
So , they ’ ve been a prominent source in Congress of sort of scientific and economic expertise .
We publish reports , we comment on other people ’ s reports , and we do a lot of public speaking and congressional education .
Allen : We hear so much about climate change and , like you say , it has become so politicized .
How did we get to that point ?
Where , for one , it seems like often the facts are overlooked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pushing an agenda .
And then to what extent is climate change something that we actually need to be concerned about ?
Rossiter : One of the first things we always ask people , particularly members of Congress who say , “ Is climate change real ?
” And we ask them to tell us , “ What do you mean by climate change ?
” As academics , we want to know what it is we ’ re supposed to be looking at .
The climate of the world , meaning the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , changes dramatically over the course of fairly regular course .
Let ’ s just take a short-term period in sort of geological history .
Every 100,000 years , there ’ s a terribly powerful cycle that drives temperature up and down about 8 degrees Celsius , about 15 degrees Fahrenheit over the entire world on average .
That ’ s when you get , for example , where I ’ m sitting right today in Ithaca , New York , 18,000 years ago or so it was under a mile of ice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maximum .
Those occur every 100,000 years in some very powerful cycle going up and going down those 15 degrees based on , you might call it the geometry of the Earth ’ s movement around the sun .
The ellipse we travel in changes its shape slightly and regularly and that brings more sunlight to bear .
So there are these powerful climate changes over long periods .
In short periods , temperature goes up and down a degree or two all the time .
So at the moment , because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen to be at this stage of humanity at the top of the temperature range .
And that temperature wobbles up there a bit every few 100 years in some chaotic , some regular ways .
And it ’ s about to , I ’ m sorry to say , go down for the next glacial maximum .
But don ’ t worry , it ’ ll take 80,000 years to get us cool .
So , in that period that we are in now , there has been a slight natural warming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world came out of something called the Little Ice Age .
Now , none of this is controversial or outside any sort of scientific consensus .
It ’ s just the way that the temperatures work when they wobble around a little bit .
At about 1950—when about half of the warming from 1900 till today of about 1 degree average around the world—in 1950 , there was enough carbon dioxide pumped out by industrialization after World War II to finally make a difference to temperature .
Because carbon dioxide is a warming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least half of that , which is a reasonable estimate , has come because of the addition of carbon dioxide , a very minor trace warming gas to the big warming gases like water vapor that is naturally causing about 97 % of our greenhouse effect .
So the worry is that either this 1 degree rise that ’ s at least a quarter natural in the last 100 years or 50 % natural if all the warming since 1950 is natural is going to cause rapid increases in the rate of sea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and droughts , hurricanes , floods , things that harm people .
That is climate change .
Now , the data to date that the U.N. has put out and analyzed do not support that .
The rates of all those variables per decade , the rate of sea level rise that was always coming up from the Little Ice Age is the same as it was 1920 to 1950 , droughts , floods , and all that .
So the climate change debate has strangely morphed into a debate over my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modeling and climate statistics at American University .
The debate today really is driven by , do you believe the computer models , mathematical models that project , if we keep producing carbon dioxide , temperature will rise dramatically and will cause increased floods , storms , and hurricanes ?
That ’ s where this whole debate that you and I are talking about comes in because our coalition has experts in these matters who write on these matters and Facebook has started to censor them on these matters .
Allen : Let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bit .
You mentioned Facebook , what role is Facebook playing in actually censoring information about CO2 emissions and climate change , and specifically your organization ?
Rossiter : Because the mainstream media—from about USA Today and Washington Post to CNN on over to the left—have been sort of cancel cultured over the last 15 years with tremendous pressure from advertisers and groups to eliminate critical voices about the wildest climate change claims from their airwaves and from their newspapers , we have relied not only on direct publication and meeting with members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also social media .
It ’ s our samizdat , as dissidence in the Soviet Union called their underground method of transmitting information during the communist era where people can pass information .
Social media is fantastic .
We use Facebook and Twitter to broadcast and publicize and advertise to reach people directly with our arguments and our studies that we can ’ t get written about in anything to the left of Fox News and The Washington Times .
Allen : I want to touch on this letter that was written .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the left and a couple of weeks ago , a group of 19 left-wing leaders and climate activists , including Stacey Abrams , sent a letter to Fox asking that they remove the CO2 Coalition Facebook page .
And I quote from their letter , “ Facebook is allowing the spread of climate misinformation to flourish unchecked across the globe .
Instead of heeding the advice of independent scientists and approved fact-checkers from climate Facebook , Facebook sided with fossil fuel lobbyists , by allowing the CO2 Coalition to take advantage of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Were you surprised by this letter ?
Rossiter : Well , there ’ s virtually not one word in that sentence that ’ s accurate , but I ’ m not going to have time to explain that , but I ’ ll tell you what happened .
There ’ s a long campaign to , as I said , cancel climate voices in the mainstream media .
A leader of that campaign was named Eric Michelman .
He ’ s a tech millionaire , billionaire , whatever , he would be who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been on this tear for at least 15 years of funding organizations that try to silence dissent on climate .
And Mr. Michelman founded something in 2015 or 16 called Climate Feedback , which Facebook accepted as an independent fact-checker through a sort of left-leaning international fact-checking network run by the group that runs PolitiFact and somehow put them in charge of deciding what was false and misleading on this issue .
Last September , the former president of the American Association of State Climatologists , Patrick Michaels , and I , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article in the Washington Examiner just describing what climate models are and how they work .
And they ’ re really just tools , not oracles , as we know from the COVID modeling escapades .
And people have elevated climate models of far over what mathematicians would tell you is worth listening to in terms of policy .
So , we make those points .
We were censored on Facebook by the Science Feedback group that Facebook had given the power to , labeled false , which means you can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advertise it , and boost it , all the ways that we reach our audiences .
Dr. Michaels and I immediately responded with a detailed scientific letter citing all sorts of peer-reviewed research to indicate that the models were running hot and were quite poor guides for policy and Facebook removed it .
I think they were a little scared of Sen. [ Ted ] Cruz who had been jumping on them the day before because Climate Feedback … is part of a passel called Science Feedback that includes Health Feedback , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activists on Facebook for making claims about the medical aspects of abortion and Sen. Cruz had intervened .
So , we fortunately were left alone for a while .
And then Dr. Michaels had a very successful video appearance on “ Life , Liberty & Levin ” maybe three years ago that had 3 million views .
Well , about a month ago , Climate Feedback went back and unearthed that and decided to censor that .
So , again , we complained , we cited the science , and it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because we ’ re successful in … challenging the underpinnings of climate alarm , which are the models that are quite weak , Climate Feedback came after us .
And so did this group led by Stacey Abrams and Tom Steyer and all the environmental groups , frankly , who have always refused to debate us and just spread alarm on their webpage .
It ’ s like the Union of Concerned Scientists or the Sierra Club .
These are huge organizations and they ’ re picking on us and we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would add one thing .
Recently , Michael Shellenberger , a noted environmentalist , and Roger Pielke Jr. , a very prominent climate statistician , who are not part of our coalition at all , have published articles that have been equally critical of the climate consensus of alarm .
And Michael Moore ’ s new film , although he believes in climate catastrophe , he said , “ The new renewables aren ’ t ready for prime time and will not make any difference in carbon emissions.
” All of these have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So maybe we were the warm-up act for them to learn how to do it .
And they come after anything that is popular and makes people say , “ Huh , maybe we don ’ t have such a climate emergency going on that would justify getting rid of our affordable , reliable energy.
” Allen : To me , this just so underscores truly how political this issue is that at CO2 Coalition , you have all of these well , well-educated experts in this field .
And then you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying , “ No , we know better than these experts.
” This is your world .
This is where you study .
You know the facts , you know the science .
I would like to say it ’ s shocking , I guess , unfortunately though , we ’ ve seen this trend so frequently that maybe now it really isn ’ t that surprising .
Rossiter : Well , it is politicized .
You have to remember , I mean , I ’ m a Democrat .
I was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staffer for many years on Capitol Hill .
I come to this completely from the mathematics and the statistics of having been a professor in this area and learned by my work I had to do to teach it that , of course , it ’ s a very complex area .
And the so-called science is not settled in these thousands of areas that relate to climate , let alone is the economic settled .
You have a longtime effort to suppress that point of view .
Many of our members—professor Dick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the atmospheric physicist who keeps the satellite record for the United States government—these folks were on the [ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ] , the U.N. body , and around 2001 they ’ d been appointed by the United States , began to see that it was being politically exaggerated from its very fine , peer-reviewed studies up through its report language , up to its press release .
By the time the secretary-general talks about something that says , “ We see the same rate of sea level rise since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s become climate change caused by carbon dioxide is wiping out our cities .
So , there ’ s just been systematic exaggeration of the science .
We point that out and that is very threatening to people who are trying to create the consensus to pass the Green New Deal , which , as someone who ’ s worked in African Energy , I can tell you is the “ Green New Death ” because Africa needs cheap , reliable energy to raise its life expectancy .
And that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ farms and solar panels .
Allen : I want to circle back and ask you , one of the issues that we are hearing a lot of policy debate around is a carbon tax .
And you kind of hear both sides of the debate on this in the news .
Essentially , this would be a tax on companies that produce high levels of greenhouse gases .
Can you explain what a carbon tax would accomplish and whether or not it actually makes sense ?
Rossiter : The purpose of a carbon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using their resources for your heating in your house , from a natural gas-powered electrical generating plant or in your automobile with gasoline .
Raise it so high that you will be willing to pay a higher price and buy the renewable so-called energy coming out of a solar-powered electrical plant or a wind-powered grid that you can plug your vehicle into .
The reason is those so-called renewables , which are not at all .
They have to be mined in Africa , transformed , shipped , set up , and then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years—the wind turbines and the solar panels and all of that uses fossil fuel , of course .
They ’ re very expensive because they ’ re intermittent .
You can ’ t really get rid of your fossil fuel plant if you have wind-powered electricity because when the wind dies down or the sun goes down for solar , you got to have the fossil fuel grid there to keep it going .
It ’ s very expensive .
It doesn ’ t work yet .
They don ’ t have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the power is intermittent , which would be wonderful .
So you have to raise the price of carbon dioxide-fueled and since fossil-fueled power very high to get people to change their behavior and instead buy the renewable .
That ’ s essentially what the purpose of the tax is , is to make it as expensive as the renewable so you stop using it .
Allen : And right now , for you all at CO2 Coalition , where are you all really focused and zeroed in on right now as it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and research and discussion around this issue ?
Rossiter : Sure .
We focus on two things .
Our climate scientists write about the reasons to revisit the 2009 endangerment finding that found that the greenhouse gases were endangering our society ’ s health by creating storms , floods , droughts , things of that nature .
Nothing could be further than the truth .
The carbon dioxide by chance happens to be a strong plant food that is boosted in the carbon dioxide era of fossil fuels , plant productivity about 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come .
And we ’ d like to see that that finding—which is the basis of all these federal laws to consider carbon dioxide dangerous and raise prices on energy fourfold—we ’ d like to see that reversed scientifically , meaning have the [ Environmental Protection Agency ] look at it again .
On the economic side , we write about the cost of renewable energy .
We published something last year called “ The Social Cost of Carbon ” that shows that it ’ s four times as expensive to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost with the mandates that all cities and states buy a certain amount of this expensive energy .
And we ’ re about to publish something on the so-called fossil fuel subsidies , which proponents of renewable say are so big that it reduces the price of fossil fuel unfairly .
And it turns out , of course , with all the taxes we put on fossil fuels , there ’ s a net negative subsidy to fossil fuels .
For renewables , who are having trouble for prime time , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subsidized .
Natural gas , because of horizontal fracturing starting about 2010 , is pouring out of the ground essentially free to utilities that want to provide electricity and heat from it .
It ’ s saving up to 11,000 lives a year , according to the National Institutes of Health , by keeping the price of heating down in places like Ohio and Wisconsin and New England .
The natural gas fracking miracle for our economy is having tremendously positive health effects and yet it ’ s considered an endangering gas as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a coal plant and carbon monoxide out of your pipe , all of which are being treated in modern science with catalytic converters that virtually eliminate the pollution .
So , as real pollution has gone down , Virginia , ironically , concern about so-called carbon pollution , which is not a pollutant—it doesn ’ t hurt you to breathe in and out carbon dioxide—concern about carbon pollution , which is a propaganda term , has gone up .
Allen : So interesting .
Where can our listeners find these pieces as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rossiter : We have a website called co2coalition.org .
And on it , you will see articles of the day , interesting , sort of scientifically-based , but readable articles we find .
And right below them , you ’ ll see all our publications .
So all the publications I mentioned both short and long will be listed there .
They can always contact me at the CO2 Coalition .
I love to talk .
I miss being a professor .
I love to talk with people about the complex and interesting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d call the great carbon dioxide experiment , which is the massive increase in use of fossil fuels since about 1950 .
It ’ s increased the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere from three one-hundredths of 1 % to four one-hundredths of 1 % .
And it ’ s having effects on the oceans , the land , and the air .
And we were happy to provide the latest research and talk about it in a manner that the average citizen can understand .
Allen : That ’ s wonderful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we also encourage everyone to follow you on Facebook .
The Facebook is still there .
Rossiter : Now that is for sure .
I think Facebook ’ s in a very tough spot .
It ’ s a private company that can do whatever it wants , but … it turns this censoring function over that was supposed to be used just to stop hate speech and incitement of violence and horrible things like that , which I support .
Now , it ’ s being used as a tool to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publish studies and have comments on other people ’ s studies .
It ’ s really a mania to cancel a debate on what is probably the most important public policy issue of the coming election .
Are you in favor of raising energy prices or reducing them because of your fears or lack of fears about carbon dioxide ?
Allen : Absolutely .
Well , we will be sure to put those links both for the website and the Facebook page , so we can continue to support you and show that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So Caleb , thank you so much for your time .
We really appreciate it .
Rossiter : Thank you so much , but you could have saved time by going over and interviewing Kevin Dayaratna of your wonderful organization .
He too has labored in these fields , particularly the carbon tax and economic issues , and I ’ ve found him open and brilliant , and you ought to interview him next time .
Allen : Yeah .
No , we are very , very grateful and very thankful to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] , but also very much so appreciate your perspective .
Rossiter : OK .
Thank you .
The post Why Progressive Activists Want to Silence the Truth About Climate Changeappeared first on The Daily Signal .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--Salman Rushdie Warns That Left-wing ‘Cancel Culture’ Is A Threat To Literature And Freedom Of Speech

Salman Rushdie has warned that Left-wing ‘ cancel culture ’ is a threat to literature and freedom of speech .
Responding to the idea that authors should write only ‘ what they know ’ or risk being ‘ cancelled ’ , the Booker Prize winner said he could not accept that ‘ there are areas in which censorship is acceptable ’ .
He added : ‘ I ’ ve always seen democracy as a public square in which everyone is arguing… The ability to have the argument is what I would call freedom because in countries that are authoritarian the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to shut down that argument.
’ The Anglo-Indian author has long been a staunch defender of free speech and his own life was under threat for many years after Iran ’ s spiritual leader Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against him in 1989 , following the publication of his novel The Satanic Verses .
Most recently he joined more than 150 signatories of an open letter in US magazine Harper ’ s , objecting to ‘ cancel culture ’ .
The post Salman Rushdie Warns That Left-wing ‘ Cancel Culture ’ Is A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .


climatedepot--2020-08-05--After Purging Mainstream Media, Climate Extremists Attempt To Censor Social Media

Without the protection of free thought and discussion , scientific work can not proceed .
We need to share ideas , opinions , and perspectives to allow for the uncovering of truth , not suppress it .
As America ’ s political middle ground gives way to sharp left-right divisions and even violence , there are winners and losers in the war on ideas .
What in the recent past would have been considered up for debate , now shifts firmly into the “ settled science ” category by those who are intolerant of differing viewpoints .
In 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control social media networks , of which a mere handful now have a stranglehold on the national conversation .
Because these firms are primarily located in the ultra-liberal San Francisco Bay Area , their hiring pool has long consisted primarily of left-leaning employees .
With the inevitable temptation to use this incredible power to influence public sentiment and elections , leftists have had the inside advantage , leaving conservatives , moderates and others shut out of the debate almost entirely .
Twitter , for example , is facing a public relations nightmare over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had access to the disturbingly-named “ God Mode , ” which allows almost total control over user accounts and content .
As there was no internal oversight over such a powerful access level , this led to a major security breach affecting celebrities and political leaders .
No stranger to accusations of unfair control over user speech is Facebook , a platform originally designed to bring people together .
It has recently come under fire for suppressing debate over so-called “ climate change ” .
The dispute is over the ability of one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expression via the Menlo Park-based company ’ s Orwellian Oversight Board and moderation team .
Reeling from the 2016 election ’ s outcome and aftermath , Facebook began site reforms to regulate user content .
That opened a Pandora ’ s box of criticism and scrutiny over censorship and the outright de-platforming of voices .
A central target of that debate has become the suppression of voices that challenge left-leaning scientists ’ prevailing opinions .
When it comes to climate change , Facebook has cared little for honest discussion and debate , instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It has already banned site users from seeing and sharing factual content created by credentialed climate scientists .
Even worse , in a recent open letter to former Denmark Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt , who now co-chairs the company ’ s Oversight Board , leftist zealots want Facebook to go a step further .
They claim that “ the integrity of the Oversight Board ” is at risk unless they begin this troubled process again for opinion pieces that challenge the “ progressive ” climate change orthodoxy .
“ When you were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that climate change was fact , not opinion , and needs to be treated as such , ” wrote its signers , which included the Sierra Club , 350.org , and the Center for American Progress .
“ In your current role as an overseer of Facebook ’ s dangerous misinformation practice , our plea is grave : please , Ms. Thorning-Schmidt , take action now.
” Meanwhile , many of these same groups have endorsed legislators like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-NY ) , who proclaims that “ the world is going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we don ’ t address climate change.
” Despite sophomoric and outlandish assertions , they seemingly want to force a new Facebook policy that will prevent the public from ever countering radical viewpoints .
To say that energy science is settled law is not only untrue , it ’ s downright dangerous .
On June 29th , for example , Biomass supplier Enviva revealed that a sizable portion of their product wasn ’ t carbon neutral as previously believed .
This finding runs counter to the European Union ’ s longstanding belief that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon emissions .
Now , regulators must reassess their polices for a source that accounts for over 60 percent of their clean energy needs .
But we would have never learned that if public scepticism were banned .
Without the protection of free thought and discussion , scientific work can not proceed .
We need to share ideas , opinions , and perspectives to allow for the uncovering of truth , not suppress it .
Perhaps the Sierra Club doesn ’ t want a debate because other groups within their school of thought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , the process of making EVs , which some have found can actually be highly destructive to the environment .
Sierra Club has preached EVs for years and finds dissenting arguments “ dangerous.
” When the debate is shut down , the public fails to hear about the horrendous misuse of child labor at cobalt mines in the Congo and other disturbing details .
The post After Purging Mainstream Media , Climate Extremists Attempt To Censor Social Media appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .