Reading about ‘regenerative farming’ with no till and mob grazing etc it seems to me that the soil has likely been a big cause of the rise in CO2-its a huge biosphere-and likely could lock it all up again.
Whether we believe atmospheric co2 from fossil fuels to be a problem or not there is a lot to be said for locking up co2 in soil with all the soil good practice that entails
I’d be interested to hear more about some alternative farming techniques. Is it possible to feed the world without large amounts of fossil fuels? If so, what would it look like? (And yes, I know, fossil fuels are good, CO2 is good, slightly warmer weather is good, even if more CO2 doesn’t give us much warmer weather etc etc).
Josh,
If you have not already, do beef up on hydroponic methods to learn how unimportant soils can be. That gives a possible analysis showing the place of fertilizers that can be dissolved in water. Then to how fertilizers are manufactured and their costs. An answer to your question is that of course the world can be fed because it is being fed. How it is fed in the future is largely related to fertilizer costs and transport of inputs and outputs to the eating masses. If you think this can be done without fossil fuels, you have to ask yourself what current spending you are going to sacrifice to pay the huge cost of substitutes and how to convince billions of other eaters to sacrifice their standards of living as well. Geoff S
Yes, as it happens, massive oversupply of nuclear power could easily make hydrogen and ammonia during off peak periods. At sane cost.
The worlds so called energy crisis is artificial, the only energy crisis is in portable fuels – there is more nuclear energy available than we could possibly use in thousands of years.
Geoff, no disagreement on your points, but it is at least of academic interest to think about whether ~12 billion people can continue to be fed once fossil fuels become too expensive to extract, centuries from now.
A practical reason for such a discussion now, is potentially to show the impact on today’s ~8 billion if fossil fuels were to be foolishly abandoned as our elite scum are proposing.
Of course China and India have already made it clear that fossil fuels aren’t going to be eliminated, which means that there isn’t going to be anything close to Net Zero in 2050 or for a long time after that.
Well, we should hurry up and explore the Moon [and then Mars].
With space environment we could infinite energy roughly forever.
There is that big fusion reactor, called the sun.
Using nuclear power in space, is a lot better than on Earth.
And other ways, but those two should enough.
What we need to do is lower Earth launch cost, and exploring the Moon
[as called gateway to our solar] and exploring Mars- also said to be most Earth like planet. Is related to lower launch cost.
But the Moon might not be gateway to solar system and Mars might not be the most habitable planet- we need exploration, first to know if or if not.
The Animal Rights crowd has been screaming about how much water is used for agriculture for decades (ignoring how much is returned to the environment).
Essentially yiu cant feed teh world without fertiliser, lots of it and cheap. Mainly this means nitrogen. Ammonia can fix nitrogen using te Haber process which diesnt require fossil fules, but does require bags of energy. And hydrogen, both of which are readily available in natural gas.
The fact probably is that without ‘unnatural’ means we cannot support the existing population.
Elitists probably think that since they will be OK, this doesn’t matter.
My farmer neighbour sys that no matter how much fertiliser you apply its never as good as a field left for 30 years. But that would reduce productivity by at least 400%.
Tonyb,
What good practice is that? How is carbon implicated?
There is a wealth of uninformed hearsay about this topic.
It is best to speak to farmers who produce good yields.
Geoff S
Tonyb
Farming is a business that includes more than just growing the x. It needs infrastructure to harvest, store, package and transport x.
Having diverse crops/ livestock on the land may improve soil and yields but cost to market may increase significantly due to inefficiency in infrastructure
As with many things, not every method fits everywhere.
I once talked with a man, retired, from the Toledo Ohio area at a “continuing education credit” meeting. (He still wanted to maintain his OEPA certifications.)
Long story short, he’d warned Toledo (the county?) about encouraging no till farming in the watershed. Why? The effect it could have on Lake Eire.
With no till farming fertilizers etc. only go into the top 3 inches or so of the soil. With tilling they go into the top 6 inches or so.
What that means is that with a rain, heavy or not, more of those nutrients runoff into the receiving waters of Lake Eire with no till farming than without it.
Blue-Green algae blooms are a problem in Lake Eire’s western basin where Toledo draws it’s water.
No till is great for some areas, but not for all.
The Sea of Marmora is suffering from sewage and nutrient run-off from farming and surface oil and surfactant pollution . It is warming at three times the average rate.
Three quarters of the Earth’s surface is covered with water. We are not ruled by Gaia. Oceana is our goddess.
Let me point out once again that spills of oil and surfactant smooth the ocean surface and, by reducing evaporation and lowering albedo, warm the planet. By how much has not been examined.
A paper by Ruf and Evans which was intended to quantify microplastic pollution has much of the data needed to start examining this.
JF
Also explains Wigley’s blip.
Strativarius
October 23, 2022 2:50 am
Apparently, Australia’s BOM is letting its staff down
“Karoly said several BoM staff had expressed frustrations to him about the bureau’s muted climate change communications.
“This obviously has major impacts on the public’s understanding,” he said.“
“Bureau of Meteorology was ‘cowering in the corner’ on climate crisis, former staff claim”
David Karoly is an ivory tower university mathematician, and like so many self-proclaimed climate experts, he has no idea about the difficulties involved in trying to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables in a complex chaotic system like the climate. His views on what goes on inside a government agency should be ignored, along with most other things he says outside of mathematics.
tonyb
Editor
October 23, 2022 2:51 am
It was interesting to see the response by Porsche who basically let the eco nutters sit in the dark and cold.
My inclination would be to say if someone glues themselves to the tarmac or whatever or climbs a bridge, to just leave then to it until nature, in the form of weather, hunger or toilet breaks, force them to go home.
However I do wonder if there is a ‘duty of care’ in public spaces which mean that no matter how idiotic a protestor has been, and no matter the disruption they cause, there is a legal obligation to ensure they don’t come to harm?
There is however a legal obligation to not let them harm other people by falling on them and killing them
Personally given that they were well fastened, I’d have shot them with anaesthetic darts, and then cut them down and taken them straight to a place of detention.
They would have been better employed waiting for the natural change on population to swing in their direction. The British government can be relied on to zig when they should zag.
The EU gave freedom of movement and the right to live and work in the North. That would have acceleration the natural change in majority population
Unfortunately that did happen. The mainly protestant loyalist paramilitary groups were the first to buy weapons, sparked by fears that the British government would ignore their rights in favour of the majority Catholic population. This, in turn, caused the IRA and offshoots to start arming up as well.
The NY Slimes is so hypocritical….while they are seemingly promoting this eco-vandalism, they condemned those who protested against Covid vax mandates and those who protest against abortions and abortion clinics. All of these protestors believe they are saving lives – their own, and/or those of other people.
But the latter two examples are of somewhat limited scope with regards to those personally affected. Not everyone was forced to get the vax, and many people simply quit jobs that did have mandates (IMO mandating the shot was and still is wrong). Excluding men, women outside of childbearing age and those within childbearing age who are against abortion, that leaves a minority population that might be directly affected.
OTOH, everyone (and that would even include the Amish, though to a lesser degree, as many of them use LP gas for heating and lighting) would be affected by the lack of access to fossil fuels and products made from oil and gas.
Some people faced/will face a (hopefully) temporary hardship when losing a job over a vax mandate, and some women may learn a hard lesson on how babies are made (and how to avoid making them when you don’t want any).
But only with the removal of fossil fuels will there be mass starvation and mass unrest…in other words, for some people, they see vax mandates and abortion access as necessary. But for every human on this planet in the developed world, fossil fuels are essential and life-saving.
… there is a legal obligation to ensure they don’t come to harm?
It is a question of whether or not you (or the government) are your brother’s keeper. My view of an ideal government is not one that controls everything I do to keep me from harming myself, but rather, does things for people that they can’t do for themselves. That includes such things as national defense and conducting experiments about the danger of substances and telling the public what has been found that might be dangerous. It should be my prerogative to accept or reject what the government tells me. The only moral justification for government using the long arm of the law is when one person or group infringes on the rights of another.
alastair gray
October 23, 2022 3:03 am
In a previous post on Peter Stott I raised the issue of how exactly – rightly or wrongly- these guys calculate attribution. Ferdinand Engelbreen had some helpful comments
While one can demonstrate how muddled models or modelled muddles can be constructed to past match and predict properties such as Temperature with or without skill, by picking and choosing input parameters however Stott and his like claim that extreme weather events can be attributed to specific underlying causes as e.g. anthropogenic. Any idea of how they do that attribution
“Detection and attribution of climate change involves assessing the causes of observed changes in the climate system through systematic comparison of climate models and observations using various statistical methods. “
I forgot who it was (McIntyre?) that showed their statistical methods were invalid. That’s not even considering the unreliability of UN IPCC CliSciFi climate models.
No it was McKittrick but I think he was onto them for invalid attribution of global average conditions rather than one off events such as a hot week in England, heavy monson floods in the Indus valley or drought in Mesopotamia.
When an alarmist ass gets up on his hind legs and brays “proven anthropogenic link to this catastrophe” we should have the tools to hand to take him down.
I don’t remember exactly, but Ross showed that the algorithm (written in 1999) used to derive the statistical probabilities of adverse weather depended on a prior statistical test being true. That test is not met in these attribution studies and, therefore, the algorithm is invalid. Updates to the algorithm suffer the same flaw.
Yes I know how that hocus pocus works to predict a single global parameter such as temperature. ands Christie ad others make it clear that it is all bollox and it clear obvious that you can tune a model to do anything that you want.
However the alarmist mob claim that any extreme weather condition, hot ,cold flood drought or even excessive balminess, can be proven to be attributable to CO2 induced global warming.
That is bollox squared but I am interested in knowing what model gymnastics they perform to achieve that nefarious end
Typically they run a model with and without presumed human forcing and look for a difference that can be linked to the extreme event. The stronger that difference the greater the claimed attribution, which is usually expressed as a change in likelihood. Truly silly.
The big news is the Atlantic OSW developers are funding a huge study on the impact of all these projects. Surely no project EIA can be published until the results are in, which should take years. Here is the excerpt from my article:
“The Regional Wildlife Science Collaborative tells us that now is not the time to build any offshore wind in the Atlantic, because we lack the science to assess the impacts on wildlife.
Here is how they put it: “The four RWSC sectors are engaging with scientific experts in several taxa-based Subcommittees to develop an Integrated Science Plan for Wildlife, Habitat, and Offshore Wind Energy in the U.S. Atlantic, or “Science Plan” by mid-2023. The Science Plan will articulate data collection and analysis activities needed for IDENTIFYING, ASSESSING AND AVOIDING IMPACTS to the distribution, abundance, and behavior of wildlife due to offshore wind development. The Science Plan will also provide a roadmap for the four Sectors to fund those activities.” (Emphasis added) See https://rwsc.org/
This lack of impact science is especially true for severely endangered whales. In fact one of the referenced science Subcommittees is for marine mammals. Their Science Plan is due mid 2023. After that comes funding and finally the desperately needed research.
Duke is gearing up a similar research effort called “Wildlife and Offshore Wind”. Here is their explanation: “Wildlife and Offshore Wind (WOW) is a trans-disciplinary, highly integrated collaboration of diverse experts for the comprehensive evaluation of the potential effects of offshore wind energy development on marine wildlife. Our goal is to provide a long-term, adaptive roadmap for efficient and EFFECTIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS of offshore wind energy development on marine life, from siting through operation.” (Emphasis added.) See https://offshorewind.env.duke.edu/
Clearly no valid environmental impact assessment (EIA) will be possible, for any project, until this impact research has been done. Nor can any construction begin until a proper EIA is finalized. So we have years to go and much work to do before any decision can be make on the viability of any Atlantic OSW project.” (End of excerpt.)
In short one can argue procedure, which is a lot easier than arguing substance. They must wait for the science! My guess is they hope this huge study will eliminate endless NEPA delays. But if they try to hide the adverse impacts one can sue on that, including cross examination of their experts. I have even had some experience doing that.
But the Duke study organization assumes OSW projects will proliferate along the entire Atlantic coast of the U.S. The team’s remit appears to be setting up a scheme to facilitate wind development. The decision has already been made by the Federal government to build all of this uneconomic and system-harmful infrastructure, a huge waste of money and resources.
There are in fact 10-15 huge projects in the approval queue. The point of my article is that these two big studies could delay all of them by something like five years.
For example the draft federal EIA for Dominion’s giant 2,600 MW project (the first of two planned) was scheduled to be issued this December. Now we can argue they have to wait until these big studies are done, in Court if necessary. This is great news!
David, I’m paranoid both because people are after me and I worked at a fairly high level in the Department of Energy (DOE) and understand their approaches to projects and environmental assessments. Duke says the Department of Energy(DOE) and its Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is paying for:
“Our project team includes the newly-formed Regional Wildlife Science Collaborative for Offshore Wind (RWSC), whose mission is to collaboratively and effectively conduct and coordinate relevant, credible, and efficient regional monitoring and research of wildlife and marine ecosystems that supports the advancement of environmentally responsible and cost-efficient offshore wind power development activities in U.S. Atlantic waters. RWSC accomplishes this mission by engaging stakeholders throughout the region from four Sectors (federal agencies, states, environmental non-governmental organizations, and the offshore wind industry) to prioritize wildlife monitoring needs, align funding with those needs, and ensure that appropriate data and standards are in place.” Those qualifying statements don’t look good, but I’m not familiar with the status of the projects nor the decisionmaking processes.
As I said before, the Federal government has already decided to proceed with these projects. You can argue that the two studies must be completed before BOEM approves Dominion’s EA (EIS?) but that doesn’t mean they will. As has been said “this is a big effing deal.” I wish you luck, but these projects are on the government’s fast track.
Was the medieval warm period
a) Europe only
b) northern hemisphere only
c) world wide?
As this occurred approximately 800 years ago and Carbon Dioxide levels lag temperature by approximately the same, how much of the increase in levels is due to this lag?
Looking at the dates of the Roman Warm Period ending and the medieval one starting, should the Little Ice Age also have been a warming period?
You get the 800 years figure wrong. It applies to far longer cycles and does not mean CO2 would react to something happening 800 years ago. It takes a while for glaciers to retreat, new vegitation to take over and animals moving there. More life means primarilly more CO2 turnover. As a side effect it goes along with higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
The Minoan Warm Period, The Roman Warm Period, and the Medieval Warm Period were all world-wide events caused by the near absence of VEI4 and higher volcanic eruptions.and their dimming SO2 aerosol emissions.
Without their protective SO2 aerosols in the atmosphere, temperatures naturally rose because of the increased intensity of the Sun’s rays striking the Earth’s surface. CO2 was never a factor in the warming.
The higher temperatures of those eras caused droughts, famines, storms, etc., around the world, resulting in the demise of many earlier cultures.
Just a preview of what Net-Zero has in store for us!
The higher temperatures of those eras caused droughts, famines, storms, etc., around the world, resulting in the demise of many earlier cultures.
Sorry to disspaoint ypu, but teh general consensu was that the end of te mediaevakl waqrm perid waqs hat cuased huge famines, and population loss in a weakened population by the Black Death pandemic
All the great flowerings of Eurasian civilisation have taken place in warm periods.
You and Mosher provide evidence of how good people are at ‘reading between the lines’ when writers misspell words, ignore capitalization rules, or write incomplete sentences. 🙂
For the Minoan Warm Period, there are only 5 reported VEI4 and higher eruptions per century, with temperatures reportedly 4 Deg. C.higher than now. The Minoan civilization perished because of a long stretch of droughts (Wikipedia)
For the Roman Warm Period, there were only 8 such eruptions per century, temps about 2 Deg C. higher
For the Medieval Warm Period, there were 10 such eruptions, also about 2 Deg C. warmer. Cultures in Central America and our South West, and probably elsewhere, died our because of extended droughts. Also recall the Hunger Stones in Europe
For the Little Ice Age, circa 1250-1850, there were 24 eruptions per century, and it was much colder, with 38 eruptions larger than VEI4.
For the 20th century, there were 75 eruptions, 13 >VEI4, and temps were below the earlier warm periods.
It may well be that more people have starved to death because of extended droughts, than those that have frozen to death!.
There’s a page on Google that has collated all papers and links to them. You can look, read and decide for yourself.
Climate reconstructions of the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ 1000-1200 AD. Legend: MWP was warm (red), cold (blue), dry (yellow), wet (green), no trend or unclear (grey). In case data exists for both temperature and precipitation, the temperature symbol is plotted.
Most of the papers cover longer time frames than that summary
Tom Abbott
October 23, 2022 4:05 am
Last week a couple of posters voiced their unhappiness with unnamed Trump domestic or foreign policies.
Now is your chance to detail your complaints about Trump policies. Let’s hear what you have to say and see if there is any validity to your complaints.
I’m not shy.
I voted for Trump in 2020 despite his shortcomings
Trump fought the deep state and the deep state won
— trump supported massive government deficit spending in 2020 that led to high price inflation in 2021 and 2022
— Trump never challenged the CO2 endangerment finding or ever made a coherent statement about the abuse of climate science by government bureaucrat scientists
— He continued to lose the war in Afghanistan for four more years
— Attacked China with tariffs that did nothing to end their theft of intellectual property
— Promoted Covid scaremongering by letting two incompetent bureaucrats get a huge amount of face time on TV — Anthony “Grouchy” Fauci and Debby “The Jerk” Birx
— Failed to build a border wall with Mexico
— Failed to get more than 8% of the Keystone XK extension completed.
— Trump inspired the January 6 riot by repeatedly insisting he really won the 2020 election without ever presenting evidence to prove that claim. That riot hurt the reputation of Republicans, who would have been justified if they protested in front of state capitol buildings right after the election. January 6 was too late for a protest. States elect the president. There are 50 state elections, That’s where you protest.
— Worst of all, Trump lost an election to a corrupt politician who was an early dementia patient with no charisma, and the nation has been going downhill ever since.
On the other hand he beat The Skag. He was fine with domestic energy policy but really sucked with foreign policy. and other than being a twittering bombastic clown, he was just great….now, Traitor Joe, on the other hand…
No Russian expansionism?
Beginning of relocation of NATO from liberal western European countries to conservative Eastern European countries.
Abraham Accords?
Moving the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem?
Withdrawal form the phony Iran pact and IF no new giveaway if done by Brandon, Iran will soon be bankrupt.
Little Rocket Man under control?
Venezuela on the ropes?
China tariffs bringing manufacturing back to the US?
And don’t forget, when TRUMP! began the process of withdrawing from Afghanistan, EVERYONE in leadership positions in BOTH parties and ALL of the Pentagon fought that move. Then when Brandon ordered it, the Pentagon went along without a whimper.
I am in agreement that TRUMP! did not truly understand the federal government and did not act quickly enough to remove the obstacles to his plans.
Also, not appointing Rudy Giuliani as the AG was a BIG mistake. There never would have been a special council, and IF Rosenstein had appointed one before Giuliani was appointed, he would have closed it down due to it being outside the statute. The Rosenstein letter starting the whole crap NEVER mentioned a crime.
I am loath to talk politics on this site, but may I point out something you said, and maybe get you to think about it somewhat differently?
Trump did, indeed, announce withdrawal from Afghanistan. If you believe it was his decision, or that he was even asked for an opinion, well, what can I say.
The THEYS, however, were not going to allow Trump to take credit, and just smothered the story. When the predetermined time came to withdraw the troops, it happened on the exact date and time originally scheduled, with military attention to punctuality.
If you believe Biden made that decision, or that he was ever asked for his opinion on it, well, now you’re just being naive.
The only crime in that whole business, is the bit where nobody made clear to the Americans how many of their compatriots were in Afghanistan in their private capacity as privateers, but mostly I would like to know who assured them that America was not leaving. It was not Biden’s fault they listened to CNN, instead of taking note when a military order was made public by someone they disliked.
If you can wrap your head around this simple deceit, you will be fully armed with the intellectual skills needed to re-analyse those other rather bigoted and narrow-sighted ‘proofs’ you proffered as wisdoms?
Presidents are really just eye candy, a power-like friend, a human you can relate to. Or hate so much, you cannot see they are all just PR agents for massive mafia gangs.
One would think that, as a ‘climate sceptic’ you would be familiar with their modus operandi. Everyone you see on stage, is just a puppet, and they speak Puppet to us, and we call it News, because we have become their puppets.
Puppetmasters need to be named. Got any candidates? Got any proof they are Puppetmasters? We need more detall.
One thing we have too much of is conspiracy theories with no detail.
I think the disasterous withdrawal from Afghanistan was Joe Biden’s baby. He did exactly what an appeaser would do: Turn around and run away as fast as he can. Like he did in South Vietnam and in Iraq. Joe’s a runner.
Trump’s plan was for an orderly withdrawal of American troops such that the Taliban were not put in charge of Afghanistan but had to share the governing with the Afghan government, after the Taliban met certain conditions.
Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan would have remained under American control under Trump’s plan. Under Biden, Bagram Airbase is under Chicom control.
Trump had a good deal going, if all parties had lived up to the bargain, and all parties *were* living up to the bargain until Joe Biden intervened and turned everything on its head.
No American troops were killed in Afghanistan during the last 18 month of Trump’s term. Trump says that is because he threatened the Taliban leader with personal destruction if the Taliban killed any more Americans under his watch.
Trump gave the Taliban leader a picture of the Taliban leader’s house during a meeting. Trump wanted the Taliban leader to know that he knew where he lived. The Taliban leader apparently got the message.
Strength is what counts with these kinds of people. Trump was strong. Biden is a weak, fearful appeaser. Worst president evah!!!
I went to a local preschool fundraiser the other day. They had a puppet show for the kids. The one puppet was called John, one was called Dick and the other was Peter. They had strings to keep them upright while someone was screeching their dialogue.
What were the puppeteers name’s? C’mon, you demand me to fish names from the air, gimme some names! Are you keeping their names secret? Somebody help, a conspiracy!
Can you see how not examining your own beliefs may lead to confused thinking and aberrant logic? And totally blind to the strings stretching from one puppet to the other, forcing them into synchronised misanthropy. CAGW is one such string, don’t you think? Privatisation, covidiocy, privately owned central banks, three companies owning the majority share of the world’s arms manufacturing industry, six shareholders owning 99% of all news media, and Russia-Russia-Iran-Russia-Venezuela-Russia-Iran-Russia diddit!!! are a few others. Its not a conspiracy, my friend, it is a freakshow. Starring Veeeerrry respectable freaks. On strings…
Also, I have opened a FundMyPerversion account to buy some furniture moving trucks for those poor, backward Afghans, they obviously can’t get about on their own, or even flee an impending attack on their houses. Poor things. They would probably crumble in a shivering heap of abject fear at the sight of cold, hard Yankee steel.
P.S. Baal Gates is not a puppeteer, the strings below him have been made more visible than the ones above him, that’s all.
Trump got out of the silly Paris agreement , but he should have sent it to the Senate so it would have been shot down permanently. He always called CCAW a hoax, but he has never one to get into specifics. The control the EPA had because of CO2 was also shot down in courts because of his judicial appointments.
Trump just about halted hostilities in Afghanistan. The war was never winnable. He also didn’t get into any new wars.
It took him years to get funding for the wall even with Repubs holding both houses for two years. Blame them not Trump.
The tariffs were helping the US economy. They were trying to work on intellectual property in other ways. Btw bidens regime reversed both policies. Trump certainly knew they were the big threat and tried to act on it.
Trump was held back my uncountable lawsuits. The president does not have dictator powers.
Trump did not lose the election, it was stolen. There is plenty of evidence if you want to go look for it. He was easily ahead at midnight on election night, it was statically impossible for him to lose all those states, yet somehow they all went for Biden by 10-30k votes. He did not do enough to secure the election beforehand however.
January 6th is another issue, but not one I blame Trump for. It was not in his interest at all for anything like that to happen
There’s only one point that you make that I think is completely fair and accurate.
Trump never challenged the CO2 endangerment finding or ever made a coherent statement about the abuse of climate science by government bureaucrat scientists
There are a lot of points you make that are not fair criticisms of his policies, but are rather comments on his effectiveness in executing policy.
Trump fought the deep state and the deep state won
Attacked China with tariffs that did nothing to end their theft of intellectual property
Failed to build a border wall with Mexico
Failed to get more than 8% of the Keystone XK extension completed.
He continued to lose the war in Afghanistan for four more years
Then there’s stuff that is wrong or misleading.
trump supported massive government deficit spending in 2020 that led to high price inflation in 2021 and 2022
He can be faulted for pragmatically accepting that he had to go along with some “stimulus” or hand an issue to the Demonrats. But it pales in comparison to what Brandon did. It was not the main cause of today’s inflation by any means.
Promoted Covid scaremongering by letting two incompetent bureaucrats get a huge amount of face time on TV — Anthony “Grouchy” Fauci and Debby “The Jerk” Birx
Trump tried saying we shouldn’t worry and it would all go away. He quickly understood how that was being used to attack his administration. The Trump Show featuring Sideshow Tony and the Skarf Lady was political theater, not to hype but to try to tamp down the hysteria and jump through all the hoops that the Demonrats were trying to set up to claim that Trump failed. Don’t forget ventilators.
Jan 6 is certainly not about policy. So not relevant to what was supposed to be the topic of discussion. It’s another failure to execute that you and I rightly find disappointing. But really, it’s just stupid. Who cares?
I don’t know for sure that the Demonrats stole the election, although I know that nobody can be sure that they didn’. Nobody can know for sure because it was pretty much a perfect crime. Trump failed by not acting decisively and early enough to prevent the fraud. After the fact it was too late and he should have known it.
… repeatedly insisting he really won the 2020 election without ever presenting evidence to prove that claim.
I think that is a cheap shot. Trump didn’t have the means to personally do a thorough investigation, which would have required the resources of the DOJ, or a bi-partisan Congressional Investigative Committee with the power of subpoena and field agents to gather facts.
If a woman goes to the police with a complaint that she has been raped, the police don’t demand that she provide sufficient evidence to convict the assailant. They do the investigative work when there is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. All complaints were rejected as not having standing because of a lack of evidence — a Catch 22 situation.
There was, and still is, a cloud over the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. If the Democrats wanted their pick to be able to operate free of that cloud, they could have conducted a thorough investigation. From all appearances, the last thing that Biden or the DNC wanted was objective agents turning over logs in the swamp to see what might slither out from under.
Lack of evidence is not evidence against something. It is, more likely, that due diligence hasn’t been done. By not clearing that cloud, Democrats have allowed the situation to fester.
If you believe you lost an election due to election fraud but you can’t prove it, then you don’t stir up people by repeatedly making that claim. Only a fool would do that. Trump did that. On that subject, Trump was a fool. There is no doubt about that:
Due Diligence: There is enough evidence of election fraud to convince me the election was stolen. I can demonstrate that with high level statistics and polls. But I can’t change a single vote. So I would never claim I KNOW the election was stolen. But Trump did that.
I remember President Trump being asked in Europe: should the U.S. go to war if Lithuania (or another small NATO member) was attacked? His answer was not a resounding YES, OF COURSE. He would have handled Ukraine probably much worse than Joe Biden.
BTW, I agree that Ukraine was as corrupt as Russia at the dissolution of the Soviet Union. But Ukraine tried democratic reforms (which is why you can see the corruption). Russia never did.
“Due Diligence: There is enough evidence of election fraud to convince me the election was stolen. I can demonstrate that with high level statistics and polls. But I can’t change a single vote. So I would never claim I KNOW the election was stolen.”
We are on the same page here.
It is obvious from the numbers that there were enough questionable votes cast in the 2020 presidential election to swing the election either way. The reason we don’t know which way it was swayed is because, as you say, we don’t know which candidate benefited from those questionable votes.
If I were a betting man, I would bet Biden was the beneficiary. But we can’t prove it. So we will have to fix that questionable election with a future election, with the questionable votes eliminated from the count, if we can manage to do so.
If we don’t manage to do so, we will lose our freedoms to the scoundrels and traitors who are trying to rig our elections.
On the other hand, I routinely read MSM ‘news’ articles where the writer claims that Trump “lied.” There is no evidence of the level that would convince a jury that Trump knowingly “lied,” yet the MSM makes that claim.
I guess the question is, if one is convinced that they are right, but people don’t want to hear it, does one walk away and ignore it, or does the truth matter enough that someone like Trump thinks it is worthwhile to make a stink and agitate for acknowledgement and reform?
Once ballots have been separated from mailer envelopes, there’s no way to decide that the ballot is or is not legitimate, assuming that it was originally a government-printed blank ballot or printed by one of the contractors who printed the legitimate ballots.
Unless you somehow prove that none of the ballots were legitimate, you have no way to separate valid from invalid.
That’s why it’s a perfect crime. We can point to overwhelming statistical evidence and show video evidence of ballot stuffing as in 2000 Mules, but even in the face of that, we can’t identify the specific ballots that were illegally cast. Simple as that.
Trump seems to have anticipated the crime but apparently could not do anything to stop it. What actually has been done to change things this time around?
Mail-in ballots are just inherently insecure. It’s doubly so when for example my dead father is still on the rolls five years after his funeral and I’m told it’s none of my business to complain about it.
After Trump beat Hillary, one of the first things he tried to do was investigate the integrity of the voting process. (Checking things like registered voters were alive, eligible to vote, US citizens etc.) Certain states refused to cooperate. (California, New York etc.) The investigation went nowhere because of that.
Yes. Amazing and alarming that so many think that as President he had the power and authority to just “declare” this or that “be done”.
His first two years he was opposed by RINOs and Dems.
His last two years he was opposed by Dems and RINOs.
Six years after he beat Hillary, Dems and RINOs are continuing to oppose him, personally, even though he’s not in office.
“I’m not shy.
I voted for Trump in 2020 despite his shortcomings
Trump fought the deep state and the deep state won”
The Deep State has won a few battles, but they haven’t won the War yet.
“— trump supported massive government deficit spending in 2020 that led to high price inflation in 2021 and 2022”
Trump supported more spending because the Obama-Biden administration left the U.S. Military in a very bad condition. Trump’s Secretary of Defense came to him on Trump’s first day in office and told Trump that the U.S. military was critically short of ammunition. When your military is critically short of ammunition, a prudent person would increase military spending. That’s what Trump did. And keep in mind that Trump is not operating in a vacume. He had plenty of help in spending money. And this spending had a minimal effect on inflation. Inflation was 1.4 percent when Trump left office.
It’s the Trillions the Democrats spent when Joe Biden took over that has raised the inflation rate from the Trump-era figure os 1.8 percent to about 8.8 percent currently.
“— Trump never challenged the CO2 endangerment finding or ever made a coherent statement about the abuse of climate science by government bureaucrat scientists”
I’ll go along with that, but it doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have done so in a subsequent administration, which he fully expected to happen.
“— He continued to lose the war in Afghanistan for four more years”
Trump had Afghanistan under control, with a good peace plan going forward, and no American troops were killed in Afghanistan in the last 18 months of Trump’s administration. That’s pretty good wouldn’t you say? Trump maintained control of Afghanistan and didn’t get any American troops killed doing so. That would be called smart leadership in my book.
“— Attacked China with tariffs that did nothing to end their theft of intellectual property”
You say “attacked”? Whose side are you on? Trump did impose tariffs on the Chicoms. Trump said he was getting the Chicoms to pay him billions and billions of dollars, whereas the Chcoms had never paid one thin dime to any previous administration. Trump liked to brag that American farmers were getting billions and billions of Chicom dollars because of Trump’s efforts on their behalf.
And Trump saved the American steel industry and other industries with his restrictions on the Chicoms. I hear Biden is going to undo many of these. Well, the Chicoms paid north of $30 million to the Biden Crime Family, so they should expect some favorable treatment from Joe.
“— Promoted Covid scaremongering by letting two incompetent bureaucrats get a huge amount of face time on TV — Anthony “Grouchy” Fauci and Debby “The Jerk” Birx”
Hindsight is always 20/20, isn’t it. Trump didn’t know those experts from Adam, and he had to wait, like all of us, to finally figure out that what they were saying wasn’t necessarily the truth.
“— Failed to build a border wall with Mexico”
You’ve got to be kidding. Do you know how many Democrat lawsuits Trump had to wade through to get anything done? Something like 12 if memory serves. Trump wasn’t operating in a vacume. He had everything including the kitchen sink thrown in his path as obstacles. You are expecting too many miracles out of one man.
“— Failed to get more than 8% of the Keystone XK extension completed.”
More Democrat lawsuits thrown in the way.
“— Trump inspired the January 6 riot by repeatedly insisting he really won the 2020 election without ever presenting evidence to prove that claim. That riot hurt the reputation of Republicans, who would have been justified if they protested in front of state capitol buildings right after the election. January 6 was too late for a protest. States elect the president. There are 50 state elections, That’s where you protest.”
When all the investigations are completed, Trump, as usual, will be found to be pure as the driven snow. Trump promoted peaceful protests on the day of January 6, in a public speech. He wasn’t whipping up the crowd into a frenzy, as you imply.
Trump also offered Nancy Pelosi 15,000 National Guard troops to secure the Capitol Building three days prior to January 6, and Nancy Pelosi turned him down both times he made the suggestion.
Offering thousands of National Guard troops to protect the Capitol Building doen’t sound like a suggestion someone would make if they wanted to take over the Capitol Building.
The Republicans will start a REAL investigation of all these matters beginning in January. Then, the rest of the story will be told. Stay tuned.
“— Worst of all, Trump lost an election to a corrupt politician who was an early dementia patient with no charisma, and the nation has been going downhill ever since.”
““— Worst of all, Trump lost an election to a corrupt politician who was an early dementia patient with no charisma, and the nation has been going downhill ever since.””
Did he really lose? Or did those corrupt politicians steal the election?
Nobody has taken a serious look at such things as a county having more voters than registered voters etc.
It reflects poorly on the gullibility of roughly half the population that voted for an incompetent who is clearly dealing with dementia, and didn’t really campaign, because the MSM supported him.
Tom Abbott
October 23, 2022 4:14 am
I see where CNN is saying that our pets are part of the climate change “problem”.
I have a feeling CNN is going to get some negative feedback when they go attacking our pets (children).
If it weren’t for the airports, CNN would have no viewers at all. (Okay. Slight exaggeration there.)
–
–
The GEBs (Globalist Evil Bastards) have bought up many (most?) of the well-known traditional media outlets. They are money losers, but who cares when you have $billions?
–
The newspaper or magazine may be bleeding red ink, but it has some revenue to offset expenses. The GEBs now have their own personal propaganda machine to push ‘The Narrative’ and any pet views they hold.
–
I think it’s cheaper and easier for the GEBs to own the propaganda organs rather than buying space in all the major media outlets to push out their desired message. And if you don’t own the outlets, you can’t keep contrary views out.
–
So you’re losing $50 million or so per year. Who cares when you were spending that much or more on ads and opinion pieces? And now you have complete control.
–
–
Why the layoffs if you’re a GEB and don’t care about the money? Well, it’s stupid to throw away more money than you have to. When you’re just looking to push a narrative, you don’t need a huge staff to report on lost puppies and the Greenbaum’s vacation in the Bahamas.
–
You’re not reporting the news. You’re pushing propaganda. So, get rid of the news staff.
–
The right move would be to pare down to a core staff pushing out your desired narrative. Minimize expenses (losses) while pushing your propaganda.
–
Anyhow, that how I see the YSM (Yellow Stream Media) of today. The situation could change.
OK, it was 1994, and CNN offered it free to the airports. The airport CNN programming was specific to the airports.
There is a separate business, CNN Airport or some such name, that does pay the airports. That division/subsidiary/whatever is going to be axed, soon; not enough money to outbid competitors for the contracts.
–
Just guessing here, but I’d think the reason a separate division was set up was because the “ratings” would be different for the regular CNN vs the corralled airport audience. So CNN Airport could charge sponsors/advertisers a different rate for the airport audience, probably higher than CNN News was getting.
Also, the ‘specialized’ programming probably was to eliminate news of airplane crashes and other things you might not want air travelers thinking about.
Anyhow, sponsors or advertisers have probably determined that they are not getting their moneys worth and the the division probably can’t outbid competitors for the airport contracts now.
My WAG is that HGTV (Home & Garden TV) is probably going to be a winner in the airports.
–
–
Oh, per CNN versus CNN Airport, I suppose CNN Airport division was paying CNN News division for content. In the US, separate divisions of companies usually have to buy and sell to each other on the books and not just transfer product willy nilly.
So CNN News was being “paid” for being in airports in airports, but not exactly. It was an accounting practice more than anything.
Years ago, I heard CNN was being paid to be in airports and it stuck with me. Well, CNN News was being paid on an accounting technicality, But CNN Airport wasn’t. They were paying the airports.
–
That’s what I gathered on a brief search. I don’t care enough about CNN to look any deeper than I did.
–
– Thanks, Drake. It’s always good to question what you think you know. Two decades later, I have a more accurate picture of CNN News and airports.
A propaganda outlet that has lost the trust of the audience is useless.
I think these moves are an attempt to regain believability.
Sort of like a lot of the Dems running in the midterms are pretending they didn’t vote for whatever Pelosi and Brandon wanted.
Here in Ohio, Tim Ryan is running for the Senate. For years years as a Congressman he’s voted with Pelosi almost 100% of time. In one of his ads he even claims he agreed with Trump on some issues. I saw some of his signs yesterday. He even has his name on a red background!!
(For those not in the US, blue is the color used by Dems and red is the color used by Republicans. The media started that years ago.)
Rottweilers are better. My pups provide CO2, methane, and organic fertilizer. They also rid the yard of pests like skunks, raccoons, opossums, and leftists looking for handouts.
By focusing on just gas prices the larger effect of high fuel prices gets obscured for many in the general public. Nearly everything you buy has been transported on a truck and that goes for the raw materials and materials needed to produce it, and even the materials needed to package it or prepare it for shipping.
In our food chain the farmers are paying much higher fuel and fertilizer prices. This increases the cost of the whole cycle from field prep, to planting, to harvest, Then the cost of transports to the elevators and processors where energy prices are also increased. For example a large amount of the soyabeans brought to the elevators/processors have to dried before the processing can even begin. And then there is the transport from the processors to the distribution centers and from there to the retailers.
Virtually every step of the way fuel and energy prices effect the price of everything we buy and consume.
Fuel is by far the largest operating expense in the trucking industry. On average today as I write this the cost of a gallon of #2 low Sulphur Diesel is $1.67 more than it was a year ago at $5.224 per gallon. The big truck I drive has tanks of 240 gallon capacity but the furthest I run it down is to about where it takes 190 gallons to fill up. That is over $992.00 to top of my tanks when I drive it down that far. Some other big trucks have 300 gallon tanks.
Now what I wrote above may be preaching to the choir but there is another aspect that even the informed bunch here may not be aware of.
The company I work for, like all the others, is having trouble procuring new trucks and trailers. The supply chain and labor disruptions have effected those manufacturers also. And that goes for spare parts. There are trucks sitting idle for months awaiting parts.
One reason I have been with the company I drive for over 16 years now is the equipment and maintenance is outstanding. They regularly buy new equipment. I just saw the first few 2023 model Volvos arrive at our garage to be put into the fleet. New model year trucks start coming off the line in July!
New Trailers have been dribbling in.
I drive a 2015 Freightliner because I want to. I was offered a new truck 3 years ago but turned it down because I hate the proximity warning crap they started putting on all big trucks late in 2015 and mine has none of that stuff. Besides I am nearing the end of my driving career and the truck I’m driving, which I got into when it was brand new, has about 632,000 miles on it. It will probably last me until the time I’m forced to hang up the keys.
They need to do something about this. A shortage would affect all sorts of people detrimentally.
Tom Abbott
October 23, 2022 4:36 am
Here’s a good example of seeing what you want to see:
Tucker Carlson, a prominent conservative host on Fox News Channel is what I would call an appeaser of those who he fears, like Vladimir Putin.
Carlson has convinced himself that the Ukrainian government is the most corrupt government on Earth and is unworthy of support, thus giving Tucker permission not to support the defense of innocent men, women and children. This way he can justify trashing the Ukraine war effort and satisfying his need to appease Putin.
Tucker has even convinced himself that the United States was the entity involved in damaging gas pipelines from Russia. Tucker scoffs at accusations that the Russians might have damaged their own pipeline. And even though an investigation by Sweden has claimed the damage to at least one of the pipelines was from the inside out, not the outside in, which implies that Russia sent explosives down the inside of the pipeline and set off the explosion, the claim has fallen on deaf ears with Tucker.
This Swedish investigation didn’t deter Tucker Carlson from declaring last night unequivically that the United States is the culprit in the pipeline bombing, all without any evidence to back up his claim.
Tucker believes what he wants to believe, in the face of contrary evidence, because that fits his appeaser view of the situation.
So you see, even smart guys can go off on a tangent depending on what they want to believe. They get a concept in their head, and then they try to fit all they see to that concept and if it doesn’t fit, then they ignore what doesn’t fit. Like Tucker is doing. Tucker is brainwashing himself. A lot of people do this.
I generally agree with Tucker because he generally knows what he is talking about and disagree with you because you have no idea what you are talking about.
The US or some other Ukraine ally is a likely culprit in the pipeline terrorism. If Putin wanted to shut off Gazprom natural gas exports to the EU, he could have ordered that to happen. There is no logical reason to sabotage a pipeline that benefits a Russian company, that pays taxes to the Russian government, which help fund their war effort.
I suppose you never cared about the eight-year genocide in Ukraine, from 2014 through early 2022 ? During which the Ukraine military murdered 11,000 Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians in the Donbas region.
By signing the 1948 Genocide Convention, Russia (ALONG WITH EVERY OTHER NATION THAT SIGNED) was one of many nations obligated to stop genocides that take place anywhere in the world. Every UN member who signed the 1948 genocide convention was obligated to stop that Ukraine genocide. But no one acted until the Russians stopped the genocide in 2022, when it was escalating, using their military. Russia annexed the region, which was not what the Donbas Ukrainians wanted. About one third of them wanted to be an independent nation, but they were never allowed to vote on that by the Kiev government, EVEN THOUGH THEY WOULD HAVE LOST THE VOTE.
Russia decided to take over Donbas and they did
Ukraine lost the battle.
But Ukraine, with the help of the US and other nations’ monetary and military aid, is continuing to fight and die for no logical reason.
As Ukrainians continue to fight, more Ukrainian infrastructure is destroyed and more Ukrainians die. Who benefits from this proxy war? Not Ukraine. Not Russia. Not the US. There are no winners. Unfortunately, the biggest loser is Ukraine, losing in slow motion as no other nation in the world tries to broker a cease fire and peace agreement.
It seems like the US and other western nations prefer a proxy war against Russia and could not care less about the destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure and the deaths of Ukrainian soldiers.
Interesting. The information and photo’s to date indicate that a 50m stretch of pipeline was affected with at least 4 major breaches, one may be up to 8m long. The photo’s released appear to show the edges of the pipeline being bent inwards, which would support the earlier statement from both the Swedish and Danish investigators that the explosions occurred in the water outside the pipelines. Why are the Swedes now backtracking on their earlier statement and the evidence shown in the released photographs? As far as I’m aware there is still no clear evidence as to who did it or, really, how it was done – although the extensive damage does appear to point to something of a military nature, not commercial explosives.
The fact the Swede’s pulled out the investigation, the Danish refuse to release the results, and no one’s screaming Russia, Russia, Russia suggests that something stinks.
America hated that pipeline existed at all as it potentially drew Germany closer to Russia so it’s destruction potentially serves America well – forcing Germany to rely on alternative suppliers and, if that’s America, lot’s of profit.
Were it to be publicly revealed that America blew it up, driving many German businesses to bankruptcy (and they are dropping like flies already), western support for Ukraine would evaporate.
That’s not to say America did it, the Ukrainian’s could have done it, but again, if that were to be revealed they would also probably cause European support for the conflict to dwindle rather rapidly.
Were it to be publicly revealed that America blew it up, driving many German businesses to bankruptcy (and they are dropping like flies already), western support for Ukraine would evaporate.
Which is exactly why the Russians blew it up.
It wasn’t moving any gas, so it had no economic value, but it had massive propganda value for exactly the reasons you so cogently describe.
Putin cant fight a war, but he and the KGB/FSB have been the worlds best liars and false flaggers since 1918.
Neither Putin nor the FSB are that old. Why push an account that is pure speculation? There is no clear evidence pointing in any direction at this point.
US and other Ukraine allies already hated the US How would Russia blowing up a pipeline that benefitted Gazprom help Russia? There was some gas moving through the Nordstream 1 pipeline. That’s how the leak was discovered.
Putin could have permanently cut off all gas flowing through Nordstream 1 by simply ordering Gazprom to do that. No explosives were necessary. Your theory makes no sense.
“As far as I’m aware there is still no clear evidence as to who did it or, really, how it was done”
That would be my position, too. But Tucker is claiming he knows the truth, when he could not possibly know the truth from the information currently available. Tucker is seeing what he wants to see. It’s a common human trait.
Appeasers are that way because they allow fear to cloud their thinking and so they don’t see the situation clearly.
11,000 Russian speaking Ukrainians were murdered by the Ukrainian miliary, who lost 3000 soldiers in the 2014 to 2022 Donbas Civil War. If you dismiss this reality, we can’t take you seriously.
Who promised that NATO would not be enlarged after the Cold War? Who ignored the Minski Accords? Who ignored Putin’s warnings. Don’t tell me – it was that old believable US government. And you believe it for Climate Warming?
Who promised that he wouldn’t invade ukraine if they gave their nukes back? Who promised that he wouldnt kill over 50,000 Ukrainian civilians to achieve zero miltary gains?
There is a wrong person here, but it aint uncle sam.
If you believe Russian propaganda, you are less astute that I thought
Obama and Biden failed to defend Crimea. That’s the way appeasers operate.
Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt about it. Saddam used weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt about it.
Saddam was given numerous chances to allow weapons inspections in, in lieu of war, and Saddam thumbed his nose at them.
Saddam, himself, acively promoted the idea that he had an active WMD program among Saddam’s own generals. After the war, Saddam’s generals were surprised to learn Saddam had no WMD on hand.
If Saddam’s generals are convinced Saddam had WMD, why should it be a surprise that every intelligence agency on the planet believed Saddam had an active WMD program?
Saddam had his chance to come clean with the international community on his WMD programs. He made the wrong choice, and it cost him his life.
I fully supported the Iraq war. Unfortunately, Obama and Biden got involved in it and screwed everything up, as per usual.
With the Nordstream pipeline, as with the climate change claims, one should follow the evidence not the fanciful speculation, spurious finger-pointing or vested interest.
Ok James, picked it up from a different site – methane hydrates, right? Except that gas was still moving through at least one of the Nordstream 1 strings, I believe. Also why Nordstream and not one of the older pipelines under the Black Sea also operated by Gazprom, who actually have a rather extensive series of undersea pipelines and an awful lot of experience managing them successfully over many years. Unfortunately I’m not sure I can agree with you that it makes more sense – especially when the limited data we’ve seen indicates that the pipelines were breached from the outside, not the inside. Of course, things may change…
Please let’s not trot out the same rubbish over and over – “Who promised that NATO would not be enlarged after the Cold War?” Nobody did that – Germany made a draft proposal to that effect, which was agreed to in principle by Russia but completely rejected by USA. It never made it to the final agreement, it was never ratified or agreed and, most importantly to those waving around copies of the draft proposal they’ve found on the web, it was never signed.
I remember President Trump being asked in Europe: should the U.S. go to war if Lithuania(?) (a small NATO member) was attacked? His answer was not a resounding YES, OF COURSE. He would have handled Ukraine probably much worse than Joe Biden.
BTW, I agree that Ukraine was as corrupt as Russia at the dissolution of the Soviet Union. But Ukraine tried democratic reforms (which is why you can see the corruption). Russia never did.
Have you seen what American political families have dealings in Ukraine? Bidens, Pelosis, Romney’s and more. If there is a more corrupt government it might be the US
“Tucker Carlson, a prominent conservative host on Fox News Channel is what I would call an appeaser of those who he fears, like Vladimir Putin”
in my opinion Tucker Carlson is generally right about Ukraine, and you are generally wrong. While it is very likely the US or another Ukraine ally blew up the Nordstream pipelines, Carlson should not claim it had to be the US.
There was a genocide of Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians since 2014. It had accelerated in early 2022 just before Russia invaded Ukraine to stop that genocide. As a signer of the 1948 Genocide Convention, Russia (and every other signer) was obligated to stop genocides anywhere in the world by any means necessary. Doing so is not a violation of international law. Rusia, the US, UK and others watched the Ukraine genocide for eight years and did nothing. Russia decided to stop the genocide after it accelerated in early 2022. And that is exactly what they did in the Donbas region of Ukraine.
The Kiev government did not like that — they apparently wanted to keep murdering Russian speaking Ukrainians — 11,000 in eight years was not enough. By fighting back against Russians in the Donbas region, the Ukrainian military forced the Russians to retaliate. Stopping the Donbas genocide does not mean the Russians are obligated remain in Donbas as sitting ducks while Ukrainians shoot missiles and shells at them and blow up the Russian bridge to Crimea.
Ukrainian military murdered 11,000 Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians Russia stopped that genocide. That does not mean Russia is the bad guy and Ukraine is the good guy.
In reply to Mr. Abbott, I posted a long, serious comment defending Tucker Carlson. It showed up on my computer as being posted antlater it was “disappeared’
I later posted another long serious comment defending Tucker Carlson. That comment also showed up on my computer screen as being posted and later “disappeared”.
I have to conclude that I have been censored by the Moderator. There is no other logical reason for two serious comments on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine to “disappear” in the span of a few hours
It is sad that this website practices leftist style censorship.
I can only wonder how long this comment will last before it “disappears”.
Suppose there is a sustained baseline of human emissions of water vapor from evaporative cooling systems for power generation, industrial processing, refrigeration, and air conditioning systems.
1) What is the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) of a doubling of such emissions to a new level, sustained by continued operation of those additional heat rejection systems to serve a growing population or to more fully serve the existing population?
The consensus answer is zero C, is it not? These massive emissions of water vapor are considered harmless in respect to the radiative warming effect. There is no claim of feedback-amplified warming attributed to these emissions and driving the climate condition to a tipping point.
I agree with this consensus answer. This is not because of the trivially true explanation, “it just precipitates out.” It is because the observed intensity of precipitation, especially in convective weather, is a demonstration of the heat engine performance of the atmosphere to amplify the water vapor rejection rate. For example, a one-inch-per-hour rate of rainfall in a typical thunderstorm is 8760/40 = 219 times the global average annual precipitation of about 40 inches. And the energy transformation involved in this example is about 17,600 W/m^2, as the latent heat of water vapor is converted to work and motion to turn the atmosphere over bottom to top in the convective cell.
In other words, the consensus answer of zero C is correct, in my view, because the atmosphere performs far more powerfully as the working fluid of its own heat engine operation than as a static radiative blanket. The static GHG warming effect of the emissions of water vapor does not control the outcome. And it is understood that for this reason, water vapor cannot be accumulated in the atmosphere to harmful effect on the planet.
2) Why then, if zero C is the correct answer, should any credit be given to water vapor feedback in modeling or otherwise estimating the climate response to emissions of non-condensing GHGs?
Troposphere water vapor content is determined by its temperature
Global warming causes the troposphere to hold more water vapor
The only debate is over how much more water vapor, and what variable(s) would limit the positive feedback. My vote is for more water vapor causing more clouds, limiting the water vapor positive feedback, and preventing runaway global warming.
Not only that but warmer air rises more due to convection, transporting heat to above the vast majority of any GH gases. Where it radiates gaily to outer space.
Then it turns to ice and falls as snow hail or rain.
This is an effect assumed not to exist in climate models, because convection is simply too hard to model
It really doesn’t matter what assumptions are in the climate computer games. They are going to predict dangerous man made global warming because that is what “management” pays the “scientists” for. They start with a conclusion.
Being that oceans are 70% of the surface area of the planet I’m not convinced mankind’s air conditioners would make a dent in the evaporative abilities of those oceans.
Most of that happens in the tropics. Most of the infrastructure changes that might shift the balance of evapo-transpiration takes place in the mid-latitudes, where most people live.
… from evaporative cooling systems for power generation, industrial processing, refrigeration, and air conditioning systems.
Not only that, but reservoirs for hydroelectric power/flood control, and pivotal irrigation in semi-arid and arid locations produce significant increases in the potential evapo-transpiration rate. Most of that build out happened in the 1950s to 1970s. Perhaps that helps explain the recent 19-year and currently 8-year hiatus in warming.
Robert B
October 23, 2022 4:51 am
A little off topic, but inspired by comment on this blog asking how many women were burnt for heresy by the Catholic Church. There are huge differences in estimates of the numbers tried and executed, but documented executions by the Spanish Inquisition were less than 1000 with only a few percent being women.
I don’t want to defend it as it was different times, but the bad behaviour has been exaggerated. For example, 9 million women were burnt at the stake for being witches was taught for a while until it was outed as completely made up. It was heretical (punishment was a stern talking to) to accuse someone of being a witch in Catholic teachings. Canon since the 9th C. Only protestant Christians executed witches, never burning them, and the numbers documented were orders of magnitude less than estimates by leftwing academics.
Such propaganda is used to promote regime change, the French revolution being a good example. Meant to be the beginning of the age of reason and science but caused the Reign of Terror, killing many including the father of chemistry.
I googled to find out how many women were executed in that one year and found one blog written by an academic who started by writing many paragraphs on how harsh the times were, using many individual examples of harsh punishments. He eventually pointed out that at least 40 000 were executed in the Reign of Terror.
The worst happened at Nantes where an estimated 4000 women and children were executed by being placed on barges in the Loire and sunk.
Just highlighting that history is full of social justice warriors that are worse than what they were supposed to cure.
I know, I got the reference. In turn it begs the question as to how many Monty Python fans are disappointed by the use of only the most obvious clips? Why aren’t you using the fish-slapping sketch, the ministry of silly walks, australian philosophy or any one of hundreds of sketches other than the same few obvious ones?
OK so not 100% serious on this, but do watch more Monty Python, you’ll really enjoy it.
I know it’s only Monty Python but the skit is based on an historical fallacy. People were accused of being a witch in early medieval times, otherwise they wouldn’t have bothered making it canon law not to. It wasn’t until the Reformation that it took off.
And there were no coconuts in England at the time.
Blame the ‘Malleus Maleficarum’ for that – my dad had a copy and I read it once; absolutely hilarious, self-contradicting and, frankly, perverted.
Also I believe that the police cars may have been an anachronism and there is no historical precedents for siege engines shaped like a giant bunny.
“The top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Cologne condemned the book as recommending unethical and illegal procedures, as well as being inconsistent with Catholic doctrines of demonology.”
That tells you what the Catholic Church thought, not that single book.
At least the bunny-like seige engine is plausible.
Despite what the Catholic Church had to say about it, it became an absolute hit, a best seller and has sold in huge numbers, especially in Germany which, coincidentally, is where the greatest number of witch trials took place.
strativarius
October 23, 2022 5:13 am
Charting recent human progress
1954: “It is not too much to expect that our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter, will know of great periodic regional famines in the world only as matters of history, will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours” – Lewis Strauss, chairman of the United States Atomic Energy Commission.
Spandex jackets, one for everyone etc (h/t Donald Fagen)
2022: People in England, Scotland and Wales could be in for three hour power cuts this winter if it can’t import enough gas and electric imports from other parts of Europe, the British National Grid has warned.
Growing up in the 60s the world was a really optimistic place and we certainly didn’t worry about the weather.
I do feel sorry for the children of today and angry at what is being done to them – often sidelining their parents as unprogressives.
We should all make a note on the calendar to remind us in several years of their statement. Just like countless other predictions over the last 50 years, I’m confident it will be a big goose egg. A lot of brazen predictions. No success. Astrologists have a better record.
A trend in the literature of increasing awareness of the direct human modification of landscape properties beyond mere albedo:
Very few GCMs incorporate such factors, and even those that do are only beginning to scratch the surface of these effects.
NorESM2-LM incorporates basics of human perturbation to cloud nucleation process. Incorporating the basics of this reduces ECS from NorESM1 at 2.8K to 2.54K in NorESM2-LM. Only barely scratching the surface.
ECS can only reduce further by incorporating the vast array to human land surface perturbation to energy budgets, by modifying sensible/latent flux ratios, cloud nucleation (mineral dust, biological cloud mediation effects), atmospheric humidity, water cycling, and atmospheric dynamics.
It turns out humanity really does impact surface energy budgets, where irrigation of 3 million km2 appears to be important. Now what of the remaining 47 million km2 desiccated by humanity to date???
Water cycles are the biggest source of uncertainty in GCMs, and yet nobody has computed the direct changes to the water cycle, only the feedbacks to trace gases???
But, aren’t we told – repeatedly – that “The science is settled”?
By people whose jobs, careers and pensions may depend on their ability to say just that?
I have it on good authority that they are going to release the report on the Kennedy assassination tomorrow — along with all the evidence on unexplained UFOs.
H/T CD Marshal for this gem. Anyone care to deconstruct “Tom the activist with a science degree?”
“Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere have resulted in the warming of the troposphere and cooling of the stratosphere which is caused by two mechanisms.”
I don’t have a lot of problems with it. He got the method of heating the troposphere wrong by blaming it on IR absorption. Perhaps that is because he never had a planet surface in his fake planet to blame it on.
But he introduced an interesting thought that I think is correct. The non-CO2 atmosphere can introduce rotation and vibration states in CO2 as IR radiation does. He claims through collisions, the same mechanism that transfers rotation and vibration energy to the non-CO2 atmosphere. Made me think that blackbody radiation from the non-CO2 atmosphere could also excite those states in CO2. If true wonder if there are any consequences.
GoatGuy
October 23, 2022 10:06 am
I just want to say… whomever is creating your art is a genius … seriously so. I have really come to be awed by the last few weeks’ worth of delightfully surreal paintings that have festooned your usual excellent articles. Please keep this creator! (I used to trawl through about every 3 or 4 days, now it is daily … to see what masterpieces have arrived!)
The short version is this: He predicts a vicious wave of covid-19, with cases already rising in parts of Europe. The coming re-emergence of SARS-CoV-2 will escalate quickly, he contends, and make all other waves pale in comparison. It will, he believes, be driven by the vaccinated, or more accurately, by the misdirected and scientifically dubious policy of repeated mass vaccination. Vanden Bossche has long asserted that the global covid vaccination program, unprecedented in human history, would put enormous pressure on the virus to mutate; his warning has repeatedly been proven true. While the unvaccinated gained long-lasting, adaptable natural immunity from covid infection, the vaccinated harbor a confused and mostly unhelpful array of old-variant anti-spike antibodies; Vanden Bossche believes these so complicate the immune response that more serious disease from new variants will result. In the vaccinated, the SARS-CoV-2 virus, he predicts, will imminently turn a corner from more contagious to more virulent. “The losses will be huge,” Vanden Bossche told me… WORRYING COVID-19 DEVELOPMENTS WITH MICHAEL PALMER, M.D. + SUCHARIT BHADKI, M.D. FRIDAY ROUNDTABLE 21Oct2022 https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/shows/chd-friday-roundtable/MvyQZ3qN8H
Dr. Bhakdi: 32:00 minutes – There will be more Covid problems this winter due to immune depression plus whatever harm the spike does directly. 51:00 – Why this explosion of cancer? 57:20 – Do NOT Covid-19 inject children. “They’re going to kill your children.”
Dr. Palmer:
42:30 – Discusses more ways to for the spike to kill the vaxxed. 50:00 – Big Pharma should have known better, and he believes they did know better. “Nobody can be this stupid”. 54:00 (w/ Dr Merle Nass) At this stage with all the existing vaccine harm, one can no longer plead stupidity. 55:00 By the end of 2020 it was clear that there was no need for any Covid-19 vaccination. Do not use a new vaccine technology for a rush vaxx.
Looks bad for this winter…
Multiple studies have shown that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is a highly toxic and inflammatory protein, capable of causing pathologies in its hosts.
The presence of spike protein has been strongly linked with long COVID and post-vaccine symptoms. Studies have shown that spike proteins are often present in symptomatic patients, sometimes even months after infectionsor vaccinations.
The numbers of long COVID and post-vaccine cases have been climbing in the United States, increasingly posing as a healthcare problem. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that around 7 percent of Americans are currently experiencing long COVID symptoms, which would be over 15 million people. Some people with long COVID have been so debilitated that they cannot go to work, the same has been reported in people experiencing post-vaccine symptoms.
Over 880,000 adverse events have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database for possible post-COVID vaccine symptoms.
However, statisticians argue that the number of people suffering from post-vaccine syndromes is much higher.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE · The premise behind COVID shot mandates and vaccine passports was that by taking the shot, you would protect others, as it would prevent infection and spread of COVID-19 · In early October 2022, during a COVID hearing in the European Parliament, Dutch member Rob Roos questioned Pfizer’s president of international developed markets, Janine Small, about whether Pfizer had in fact tested and confirmed that their mRNA jab would prevent transmission prior to its rollout · Small admitted that Pfizer never tested whether their jab would prevent transmission because they had to “move at the speed of science to understand what is happening in the market … and we had to do everything at risk” · We’ve known for well over two years that the shots were never tested for transmission interruption. In October 2020, Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, highlighted that trials were not designed to reveal whether the vaccines would prevent transmission. Yet everyone in government and media insisted they would do just that · It was never about science or protecting others. It was always about following a predetermined narrative that sought to get experimental mRNA technology into as many people as possible
PHARMACEUTICAL MURDER WITH REMDESIVIR Published on April 14, 2022
In a warning published early last year, the FDA stated that remdesivir could cause liver injury, allergic reactions, sudden changes in blood pressure and heart rate, low blood oxygen level, fever, shortness of breath, wheezing, swelling around the lips and eyes, nausea, sweating and shivering. Why these reactions?
During the pandemic, hospitals became hell holes killing more COVID patients than they helped with deadly treatments like remdesivir, which, believe it or not, seems to be a synthetic form of snake venom. Thus many have thought that it wasn’t the virus killing people as much as the treatment, specifically Remdesivir poisoning.
Is it absurd that a pharmaceutical company would use snake venom proteins in a drug? Researchers in Brazil do not think so bragging about a molecule present in the venom of jararacussu pit viper would prevent coronavirus’ ability to multiply. It means that scientists could whip up an anti-Covid drug-using snake venom.
“It seems to boil down to an enzyme found in rattlesnake venom,” according to Floyd Chilton, Professor & Director of the Precision Nutrition and Wellness initiative at the University of Arizona. He got blood samples from about 130 patients in a New York ICU and discovered an enzyme found in the highest concentration of it that has ever been found in humans.
“This enzyme is a humanized version, part of the same family as the active ingredient in snake venom, so this enzyme has been around a hundred million years. In simple terms, this enzyme related to snake venom found in humans is likely causing tremendous damage leading to multiple organ failure and death.”
“Could this explain why some people who are very healthy and have no known underlying health conditions die from COVID-19?” asked a reporter. “It could,” Chilton answered. Though he did not finger the source of the venom as remdesivir, it seems like the most likely candidate.
U.S. public health anointed remdesivir the standard-of-practice for patients severely ill with stage-two inflammatory COVID in the ICUs all over America. It is well-known that remdesivir can destroy kidney function in as little as five days. This supposed antiviral agent is being used after the high-viral-load stage-one phase of COVID is over. How many ICU patients have been killed by remdesivir?
“Dr. Paul Marik, one of the best ICU doctors in America, testifies about the dangers of remdesivir and the corruption in our medical system for prescribing it. Though it is deadly, doctors are being incentivized to use it on patients. Remdesivir killed more than 50% of the animals during its clinical trials. Yet the FDA still approved it.” The FDA is an abomination that should be canceled!
Today, October 25th, is Saint Crispin’s Day, and is the feast day of the Christian saints Crispin and Crispinian, twins who were martyred c. 286. In modern times, the feast day is best known with reference to the St Crispin’s Day Speech in Shakespeare’s play Henry V. A scene in the play recounts the Battle of Agincourt, which took place on Saint Crispin’s Day in 1415, in which the greatly outnumbered English army defeated a larger French force. [excerpt] This story shall the good man teach his son; And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by, From this day to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be rememberèd— We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile, This day shall gentle his condition; And gentlemen in England now a-bed Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here, And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day. – William Shakespeare, Henry V
DO YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND YOUR (VERY LOW) RISK OF DYING FROM COVID? Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola October 25, 2022 STORY AT-A-GLANCE · Polls taken in 2020 and 2021 revealed Americans were wildly confused and misinformed about their true risk of dying from COVID · Based on a new preprint analysis by professor John Ioannidis, there’s no reason for anyone to live in fear anymore, regardless of your age, as your risk of dying from COVID is — and always was — minuscule across the board · Before the COVID jabs were rolled out, if you were 19 or younger, your risk of dying of COVID was 0.0003%; only 3 per 1 million infected with COVID at this age ended up dying. Between ages 60 and 69, the infection fatality rate was 0.501%, i.e., 1 out of 200 infected died · Emerging evidence suggests the shots are causing immune deficiency in some people, thereby actually raising their risk of dying from SARS-CoV-2 infection, even with the now-milder strains · The real-world risk of dying from COVID-19 based on published data from the Irish census bureau and the central statistics office for 2020 and 2021 is as follows: For people under 70, the death rate was 0.014%; under 50 years of age, it was 0.002%, which equates to a 1 in 50,000 risk, or about the same as dying from fire or smoke inhalation. Under 25 years of age, the mortality rate was 0.00018%, or 1 in 500,000 risk of dying from COVID.
Months ago I wrote the President of Western U and told him he was killing his kids with the vaxxes. It was like talking to a rock – a really dumb rock.
THE GREAT RESET: PLANNING THE THEFT OF CANADA? Oct2022 https://fcpp.org/2022/10/02/the-great-reset-planning-the-theft-of-canada/
“He explained that Canada’s present economic model was seriously flawed and had to be replaced… The government would have to take more control over people’s lives and enforce an austere lifestyle.”
I will try Clyde. Excess Winter deaths in the UK are typically not reported until late in the year, because they need the data from the four months April to July 2023. I can probably find it from total monthly deaths. Some of this data used to be easy-to-find from government sources, but not so much anymore.
England’s 2020 total death data is much greater than Canada’s. Probably not due to the virus – probably caused by very high fuel costs.
I recall reading about devastating drought in the UK a couple of months ago.
Now A month’s-worth of rain in a DAY brings Britain to a standstill DM. Weather forecasts for the next ten days say lots more rain expected.
If every weather event is proof of climate change,
it is a real pity that the weather did not get the memo and co-operate. 😉
Is there a link to recent work by Vuckevic,eg
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/MVfiles.htm
Have we lost him?
Don’t know. From the WayBack Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20180816022824/http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/MVfiles.htm?showpage=true
I hope not. 😟 As of October 17, 2022 at 2:15AM PDT, Vuk was alive and well enough to write this:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/10/16/the-real-existential-threat-to-people-and-planet/#comment-3621722
Reading about ‘regenerative farming’ with no till and mob grazing etc it seems to me that the soil has likely been a big cause of the rise in CO2-its a huge biosphere-and likely could lock it all up again.
Whether we believe atmospheric co2 from fossil fuels to be a problem or not there is a lot to be said for locking up co2 in soil with all the soil good practice that entails
I’d be interested to hear more about some alternative farming techniques. Is it possible to feed the world without large amounts of fossil fuels? If so, what would it look like? (And yes, I know, fossil fuels are good, CO2 is good, slightly warmer weather is good, even if more CO2 doesn’t give us much warmer weather etc etc).
Josh,
If you have not already, do beef up on hydroponic methods to learn how unimportant soils can be. That gives a possible analysis showing the place of fertilizers that can be dissolved in water. Then to how fertilizers are manufactured and their costs. An answer to your question is that of course the world can be fed because it is being fed. How it is fed in the future is largely related to fertilizer costs and transport of inputs and outputs to the eating masses. If you think this can be done without fossil fuels, you have to ask yourself what current spending you are going to sacrifice to pay the huge cost of substitutes and how to convince billions of other eaters to sacrifice their standards of living as well. Geoff S
Thanks.
For centuries our golden goose has been fossil fuels, until we find an equal or better solution why kill it?
Yes, as it happens, massive oversupply of nuclear power could easily make hydrogen and ammonia during off peak periods. At sane cost.
The worlds so called energy crisis is artificial, the only energy crisis is in portable fuels – there is more nuclear energy available than we could possibly use in thousands of years.
Geoff, no disagreement on your points, but it is at least of academic interest to think about whether ~12 billion people can continue to be fed once fossil fuels become too expensive to extract, centuries from now.
A practical reason for such a discussion now, is potentially to show the impact on today’s ~8 billion if fossil fuels were to be foolishly abandoned as our elite scum are proposing.
Of course China and India have already made it clear that fossil fuels aren’t going to be eliminated, which means that there isn’t going to be anything close to Net Zero in 2050 or for a long time after that.
Well, we should hurry up and explore the Moon [and then Mars].
With space environment we could infinite energy roughly forever.
There is that big fusion reactor, called the sun.
Using nuclear power in space, is a lot better than on Earth.
And other ways, but those two should enough.
What we need to do is lower Earth launch cost, and exploring the Moon
[as called gateway to our solar] and exploring Mars- also said to be most Earth like planet. Is related to lower launch cost.
But the Moon might not be gateway to solar system and Mars might not be the most habitable planet- we need exploration, first to know if or if not.
A few hundred years from now there won’t be even 8 billion people if the birth rate continues to fall.
The Animal Rights crowd has been screaming about how much water is used for agriculture for decades (ignoring how much is returned to the environment).
Essentially yiu cant feed teh world without fertiliser, lots of it and cheap. Mainly this means nitrogen. Ammonia can fix nitrogen using te Haber process which diesnt require fossil fules, but does require bags of energy. And hydrogen, both of which are readily available in natural gas.
The fact probably is that without ‘unnatural’ means we cannot support the existing population.
Elitists probably think that since they will be OK, this doesn’t matter.
My farmer neighbour sys that no matter how much fertiliser you apply its never as good as a field left for 30 years. But that would reduce productivity by at least 400%.
It’s good for winter wheat and a few things but if you want 80 bushel of the acre soy beans or 140 bushel to the acre corn it ain’t gonna cut it.
Tonyb,
What good practice is that? How is carbon implicated?
There is a wealth of uninformed hearsay about this topic.
It is best to speak to farmers who produce good yields.
Geoff S
Some of those farmers do practice the methods I cite. It’s not suitable for everywhere but certainly has a place in the great scheme of things.
Tonyb
Farming is a business that includes more than just growing the x. It needs infrastructure to harvest, store, package and transport x.
Having diverse crops/ livestock on the land may improve soil and yields but cost to market may increase significantly due to inefficiency in infrastructure
As with many things, not every method fits everywhere.
I once talked with a man, retired, from the Toledo Ohio area at a “continuing education credit” meeting. (He still wanted to maintain his OEPA certifications.)
Long story short, he’d warned Toledo (the county?) about encouraging no till farming in the watershed. Why? The effect it could have on Lake Eire.
With no till farming fertilizers etc. only go into the top 3 inches or so of the soil. With tilling they go into the top 6 inches or so.
What that means is that with a rain, heavy or not, more of those nutrients runoff into the receiving waters of Lake Eire with no till farming than without it.
Blue-Green algae blooms are a problem in Lake Eire’s western basin where Toledo draws it’s water.
No till is great for some areas, but not for all.
The Sea of Marmora is suffering from sewage and nutrient run-off from farming and surface oil and surfactant pollution . It is warming at three times the average rate.
JF
Three quarters of the Earth’s surface is covered with water. We are not ruled by Gaia. Oceana is our goddess.
Let me point out once again that spills of oil and surfactant smooth the ocean surface and, by reducing evaporation and lowering albedo, warm the planet. By how much has not been examined.
A paper by Ruf and Evans which was intended to quantify microplastic pollution has much of the data needed to start examining this.
JF
Also explains Wigley’s blip.
Apparently, Australia’s BOM is letting its staff down
“Karoly said several BoM staff had expressed frustrations to him about the bureau’s muted climate change communications.
“This obviously has major impacts on the public’s understanding,” he said.“
“Bureau of Meteorology was ‘cowering in the corner’ on climate crisis, former staff claim”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/bureau-of-meteorology-was-cowering-in-the-corner-on-climate-crisis-former-staff-claim
I wonder if Australians agree with them?
Maybe current staff have realised just how much some former staff have made a complete fool/ass of themselves !
And don’t wish to follow down the road to ignominy and irrelevance..
I once wondered what a manifestation of Ouroboros might look like.
The post-modern world seems to fit the bill. It’s the noble way to reduce the populations – for the greater good; to save the planet.
Trigger warning: The greater good means you are unimportant
The greater good means you are unimportant
_____________________________________
Yeah, but you will be happy.
And own nothing…
Australians couldn’t give a Castlemaine XXXX about climate change
David Karoly is an ivory tower university mathematician, and like so many self-proclaimed climate experts, he has no idea about the difficulties involved in trying to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables in a complex chaotic system like the climate. His views on what goes on inside a government agency should be ignored, along with most other things he says outside of mathematics.
It was interesting to see the response by Porsche who basically let the eco nutters sit in the dark and cold.
My inclination would be to say if someone glues themselves to the tarmac or whatever or climbs a bridge, to just leave then to it until nature, in the form of weather, hunger or toilet breaks, force them to go home.
However I do wonder if there is a ‘duty of care’ in public spaces which mean that no matter how idiotic a protestor has been, and no matter the disruption they cause, there is a legal obligation to ensure they don’t come to harm?
Needing to take a nature break is not coming to any harm. All of us do it every day.
If you are on top of a bridge certain toilet motions could be very difficult!
I don’t think so, when you have to go you have to go. Period!
Yes I agree but if it was you who put yourself in that situation on purpose and not by accident?
Isn’t there also a duty of care to show them the harm they do themselves because they are misguided?
Look out below!
Certain motions might be a hazard to those below.
… simply uncomfortable in the long run. Not difficult. Two year old toddlers can do it.
Hell … Joe biden can do it. How difficult can it be?
It is very important for one’s health, to have AT LEAST two of those per day, even if ‘the position’ must be maintained until success is accomplished.
I don’t think there is a legal obligation to ensure they don’t come to any harm
I’d leave them to stew in their own juices
There is however a legal obligation to not let them harm other people by falling on them and killing them
Personally given that they were well fastened, I’d have shot them with anaesthetic darts, and then cut them down and taken them straight to a place of detention.
Anesthetic darts are dangerous: You can’t control the dosage based on weight and health conditions.
Thank you for that image.
JF
At other extreme, is more violent action by climate activists being promoted?
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2022/10/22/insurrection-new-york-times-promotes-sabotage-guerrilla-warfare-end
How to lose support for your cause in one easy lesson.
Start blowing sh*t up.
This is a lesson from history. The IRA mounted decades of attacks on British soil and were roundly hated for it.
They would have been better employed waiting for the natural change on population to swing in their direction. The British government can be relied on to zig when they should zag.
The EU gave freedom of movement and the right to live and work in the North. That would have acceleration the natural change in majority population
Unfortunately that did happen. The mainly protestant loyalist paramilitary groups were the first to buy weapons, sparked by fears that the British government would ignore their rights in favour of the majority Catholic population. This, in turn, caused the IRA and offshoots to start arming up as well.
The NY Slimes is so hypocritical….while they are seemingly promoting this eco-vandalism, they condemned those who protested against Covid vax mandates and those who protest against abortions and abortion clinics. All of these protestors believe they are saving lives – their own, and/or those of other people.
But the latter two examples are of somewhat limited scope with regards to those personally affected. Not everyone was forced to get the vax, and many people simply quit jobs that did have mandates (IMO mandating the shot was and still is wrong). Excluding men, women outside of childbearing age and those within childbearing age who are against abortion, that leaves a minority population that might be directly affected.
OTOH, everyone (and that would even include the Amish, though to a lesser degree, as many of them use LP gas for heating and lighting) would be affected by the lack of access to fossil fuels and products made from oil and gas.
Some people faced/will face a (hopefully) temporary hardship when losing a job over a vax mandate, and some women may learn a hard lesson on how babies are made (and how to avoid making them when you don’t want any).
But only with the removal of fossil fuels will there be mass starvation and mass unrest…in other words, for some people, they see vax mandates and abortion access as necessary. But for every human on this planet in the developed world, fossil fuels are essential and life-saving.
NYT is the echo chamber of the Democrat Party
Harm is done to the victims of these dangerous antics….
…to go home and keep using fossil fuels, of course! The hypocrite nut jobs are hilarious with their hypocrisy.
It is a question of whether or not you (or the government) are your brother’s keeper. My view of an ideal government is not one that controls everything I do to keep me from harming myself, but rather, does things for people that they can’t do for themselves. That includes such things as national defense and conducting experiments about the danger of substances and telling the public what has been found that might be dangerous. It should be my prerogative to accept or reject what the government tells me. The only moral justification for government using the long arm of the law is when one person or group infringes on the rights of another.
In a previous post on Peter Stott I raised the issue of how exactly – rightly or wrongly- these guys calculate attribution. Ferdinand Engelbreen had some helpful comments
While one can demonstrate how muddled models or modelled muddles can be constructed to past match and predict properties such as Temperature with or without skill, by picking and choosing input parameters however Stott and his like claim that extreme weather events can be attributed to specific underlying causes as e.g. anthropogenic. Any idea of how they do that attribution
“Detection and attribution of climate change involves assessing the causes of observed changes in the climate system through systematic comparison of climate models and observations using various statistical methods. “
https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/3/
Think of a number….
I forgot who it was (McIntyre?) that showed their statistical methods were invalid. That’s not even considering the unreliability of UN IPCC CliSciFi climate models.
No it was McKittrick but I think he was onto them for invalid attribution of global average conditions rather than one off events such as a hot week in England, heavy monson floods in the Indus valley or drought in Mesopotamia.
When an alarmist ass gets up on his hind legs and brays “proven anthropogenic link to this catastrophe” we should have the tools to hand to take him down.
I don’t remember exactly, but Ross showed that the algorithm (written in 1999) used to derive the statistical probabilities of adverse weather depended on a prior statistical test being true. That test is not met in these attribution studies and, therefore, the algorithm is invalid. Updates to the algorithm suffer the same flaw.
Is “cut him off at the knees” anywhere near what you have in mind?
Yes I know how that hocus pocus works to predict a single global parameter such as temperature. ands Christie ad others make it clear that it is all bollox and it clear obvious that you can tune a model to do anything that you want.
However the alarmist mob claim that any extreme weather condition, hot ,cold flood drought or even excessive balminess, can be proven to be attributable to CO2 induced global warming.
That is bollox squared but I am interested in knowing what model gymnastics they perform to achieve that nefarious end
Typically they run a model with and without presumed human forcing and look for a difference that can be linked to the extreme event. The stronger that difference the greater the claimed attribution, which is usually expressed as a change in likelihood. Truly silly.
Besides the models being junk, they ignore that no two models agree at local scales.
Truly criminal.
Just curious about models .. when you run a model twice, let’s say without presumed human forcing, will there be no difference?
CFACT just posted my reply to Dominion: “Dominion’s silly denial of the great threat to whales” at https://www.cfact.org/2022/10/22/dominions-silly-denial-of-the-great-threat-to-whales/
The big news is the Atlantic OSW developers are funding a huge study on the impact of all these projects. Surely no project EIA can be published until the results are in, which should take years. Here is the excerpt from my article:
“The Regional Wildlife Science Collaborative tells us that now is not the time to build any offshore wind in the Atlantic, because we lack the science to assess the impacts on wildlife.
Here is how they put it: “The four RWSC sectors are engaging with scientific experts in several taxa-based Subcommittees to develop an Integrated Science Plan for Wildlife, Habitat, and Offshore Wind Energy in the U.S. Atlantic, or “Science Plan” by mid-2023. The Science Plan will articulate data collection and analysis activities needed for IDENTIFYING, ASSESSING AND AVOIDING IMPACTS to the distribution, abundance, and behavior of wildlife due to offshore wind development. The Science Plan will also provide a roadmap for the four Sectors to fund those activities.” (Emphasis added) See https://rwsc.org/
This lack of impact science is especially true for severely endangered whales. In fact one of the referenced science Subcommittees is for marine mammals. Their Science Plan is due mid 2023. After that comes funding and finally the desperately needed research.
Duke is gearing up a similar research effort called “Wildlife and Offshore Wind”. Here is their explanation: “Wildlife and Offshore Wind (WOW) is a trans-disciplinary, highly integrated collaboration of diverse experts for the comprehensive evaluation of the potential effects of offshore wind energy development on marine wildlife. Our goal is to provide a long-term, adaptive roadmap for efficient and EFFECTIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS of offshore wind energy development on marine life, from siting through operation.” (Emphasis added.) See https://offshorewind.env.duke.edu/
Clearly no valid environmental impact assessment (EIA) will be possible, for any project, until this impact research has been done. Nor can any construction begin until a proper EIA is finalized. So we have years to go and much work to do before any decision can be make on the viability of any Atlantic OSW project.” (End of excerpt.)
In short one can argue procedure, which is a lot easier than arguing substance. They must wait for the science! My guess is they hope this huge study will eliminate endless NEPA delays. But if they try to hide the adverse impacts one can sue on that, including cross examination of their experts. I have even had some experience doing that.
They may have just shot themselves.
But the Duke study organization assumes OSW projects will proliferate along the entire Atlantic coast of the U.S. The team’s remit appears to be setting up a scheme to facilitate wind development. The decision has already been made by the Federal government to build all of this uneconomic and system-harmful infrastructure, a huge waste of money and resources.
There are in fact 10-15 huge projects in the approval queue. The point of my article is that these two big studies could delay all of them by something like five years.
For example the draft federal EIA for Dominion’s giant 2,600 MW project (the first of two planned) was scheduled to be issued this December. Now we can argue they have to wait until these big studies are done, in Court if necessary. This is great news!
David, I’m paranoid both because people are after me and I worked at a fairly high level in the Department of Energy (DOE) and understand their approaches to projects and environmental assessments. Duke says the Department of Energy(DOE) and its Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is paying for:
“Our project team includes the newly-formed Regional Wildlife Science Collaborative for Offshore Wind (RWSC), whose mission is to collaboratively and effectively conduct and coordinate relevant, credible, and efficient regional monitoring and research of wildlife and marine ecosystems that supports the advancement of environmentally responsible and cost-efficient offshore wind power development activities in U.S. Atlantic waters. RWSC accomplishes this mission by engaging stakeholders throughout the region from four Sectors (federal agencies, states, environmental non-governmental organizations, and the offshore wind industry) to prioritize wildlife monitoring needs, align funding with those needs, and ensure that appropriate data and standards are in place.” Those qualifying statements don’t look good, but I’m not familiar with the status of the projects nor the decisionmaking processes.
As I said before, the Federal government has already decided to proceed with these projects. You can argue that the two studies must be completed before BOEM approves Dominion’s EA (EIS?) but that doesn’t mean they will. As has been said “this is a big effing deal.” I wish you luck, but these projects are on the government’s fast track.
The Regional Wildlife Science Collaborative website is gone! Just get an error message at https://rwsc.org/
Something I said?
Was the medieval warm period
a) Europe only
b) northern hemisphere only
c) world wide?
As this occurred approximately 800 years ago and Carbon Dioxide levels lag temperature by approximately the same, how much of the increase in levels is due to this lag?
Looking at the dates of the Roman Warm Period ending and the medieval one starting, should the Little Ice Age also have been a warming period?
c)
You get the 800 years figure wrong. It applies to far longer cycles and does not mean CO2 would react to something happening 800 years ago. It takes a while for glaciers to retreat, new vegitation to take over and animals moving there. More life means primarilly more CO2 turnover. As a side effect it goes along with higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
…how much of the increase in levels is due to this lag?
___________________________________________
You’re the only other person I’ve seen bring that obvious question up.
No, I’ve raised the question several times on different forums including WUWT
Does it matter?
Even were it confined to Europe only, the continent prospered and people weren’t dying of heatstroke, thus proving that warming isn’t catastrophic.
There you go again, bringing Reality into a discussion.
Please take a look at CO2 Science (Craig & Sherwood Idso) for your answer
John Collis:
The Minoan Warm Period, The Roman Warm Period, and the Medieval Warm Period were all world-wide events caused by the near absence of VEI4 and higher volcanic eruptions.and their dimming SO2 aerosol emissions.
Without their protective SO2 aerosols in the atmosphere, temperatures naturally rose because of the increased intensity of the Sun’s rays striking the Earth’s surface. CO2 was never a factor in the warming.
The higher temperatures of those eras caused droughts, famines, storms, etc., around the world, resulting in the demise of many earlier cultures.
Just a preview of what Net-Zero has in store for us!
Sorry to disspaoint ypu, but teh general consensu was that the end of te mediaevakl waqrm perid waqs hat cuased huge famines, and population loss in a weakened population by the Black Death pandemic
All the great flowerings of Eurasian civilisation have taken place in warm periods.
It is the cold we should fear.
Leo is 100% correct even typing with his knees or whaktieverj 😉
You and Mosher provide evidence of how good people are at ‘reading between the lines’ when writers misspell words, ignore capitalization rules, or write incomplete sentences. 🙂
Simple solution: proof reading before posting!
Nah… that takes another quarter minute or so..
Leo Smith:
The general “consensus” is WRONG!
It is all about volcanism.
For the Minoan Warm Period, there are only 5 reported VEI4 and higher eruptions per century, with temperatures reportedly 4 Deg. C.higher than now. The Minoan civilization perished because of a long stretch of droughts (Wikipedia)
For the Roman Warm Period, there were only 8 such eruptions per century, temps about 2 Deg C. higher
For the Medieval Warm Period, there were 10 such eruptions, also about 2 Deg C. warmer. Cultures in Central America and our South West, and probably elsewhere, died our because of extended droughts. Also recall the Hunger Stones in Europe
For the Little Ice Age, circa 1250-1850, there were 24 eruptions per century, and it was much colder, with 38 eruptions larger than VEI4.
For the 20th century, there were 75 eruptions, 13 >VEI4, and temps were below the earlier warm periods.
It may well be that more people have starved to death because of extended droughts, than those that have frozen to death!.
Is this an example of that dreaded “All-Aboutism” we hear of so often on the liberal news networks?
Curious… by whom, and where, were these various eruptions ‘noted’.?
There’s a page on Google that has collated all papers and links to them. You can look, read and decide for yourself.
Climate reconstructions of the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ 1000-1200 AD. Legend: MWP was warm (red), cold (blue), dry (yellow), wet (green), no trend or unclear (grey). In case data exists for both temperature and precipitation, the temperature symbol is plotted.
Medieval Warm Period
Most of the papers cover longer time frames than that summary
Last week a couple of posters voiced their unhappiness with unnamed Trump domestic or foreign policies.
Now is your chance to detail your complaints about Trump policies. Let’s hear what you have to say and see if there is any validity to your complaints.
Don’t be shy.
I ask my favorite liberal, “What did Trump do that you didn’t like?” And I don’t get a coherent answer.
Do you ever get a coherent answer on any subject from a liberal?
“Want another drink?”
“Sure. If you’re paying!”
Auto
We MUST list the ‘warts’, too. He did NOT take the necessary actions (allotted to him in the Constitution) to GUT the corrupt Agencies.
I’m not shy.
I voted for Trump in 2020 despite his shortcomings
Trump fought the deep state and the deep state won
— trump supported massive government deficit spending in 2020 that led to high price inflation in 2021 and 2022
— Trump never challenged the CO2 endangerment finding or ever made a coherent statement about the abuse of climate science by government bureaucrat scientists
— He continued to lose the war in Afghanistan for four more years
— Attacked China with tariffs that did nothing to end their theft of intellectual property
— Promoted Covid scaremongering by letting two incompetent bureaucrats get a huge amount of face time on TV — Anthony “Grouchy” Fauci and Debby “The Jerk” Birx
— Failed to build a border wall with Mexico
— Failed to get more than 8% of the Keystone XK extension completed.
— Trump inspired the January 6 riot by repeatedly insisting he really won the 2020 election without ever presenting evidence to prove that claim. That riot hurt the reputation of Republicans, who would have been justified if they protested in front of state capitol buildings right after the election. January 6 was too late for a protest. States elect the president. There are 50 state elections, That’s where you protest.
— Worst of all, Trump lost an election to a corrupt politician who was an early dementia patient with no charisma, and the nation has been going downhill ever since.
On the other hand he beat The Skag. He was fine with domestic energy policy but really sucked with foreign policy. and other than being a twittering bombastic clown, he was just great….now, Traitor Joe, on the other hand…
Really sucked at foreign policy?
No Russian expansionism?
Beginning of relocation of NATO from liberal western European countries to conservative Eastern European countries.
Abraham Accords?
Moving the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem?
Withdrawal form the phony Iran pact and IF no new giveaway if done by Brandon, Iran will soon be bankrupt.
Little Rocket Man under control?
Venezuela on the ropes?
China tariffs bringing manufacturing back to the US?
And don’t forget, when TRUMP! began the process of withdrawing from Afghanistan, EVERYONE in leadership positions in BOTH parties and ALL of the Pentagon fought that move. Then when Brandon ordered it, the Pentagon went along without a whimper.
I am in agreement that TRUMP! did not truly understand the federal government and did not act quickly enough to remove the obstacles to his plans.
Also, not appointing Rudy Giuliani as the AG was a BIG mistake. There never would have been a special council, and IF Rosenstein had appointed one before Giuliani was appointed, he would have closed it down due to it being outside the statute. The Rosenstein letter starting the whole crap NEVER mentioned a crime.
Plus withdrawing from the Paris Agreement.
I am loath to talk politics on this site, but may I point out something you said, and maybe get you to think about it somewhat differently?
Trump did, indeed, announce withdrawal from Afghanistan. If you believe it was his decision, or that he was even asked for an opinion, well, what can I say.
The THEYS, however, were not going to allow Trump to take credit, and just smothered the story. When the predetermined time came to withdraw the troops, it happened on the exact date and time originally scheduled, with military attention to punctuality.
If you believe Biden made that decision, or that he was ever asked for his opinion on it, well, now you’re just being naive.
The only crime in that whole business, is the bit where nobody made clear to the Americans how many of their compatriots were in Afghanistan in their private capacity as privateers, but mostly I would like to know who assured them that America was not leaving. It was not Biden’s fault they listened to CNN, instead of taking note when a military order was made public by someone they disliked.
If you can wrap your head around this simple deceit, you will be fully armed with the intellectual skills needed to re-analyse those other rather bigoted and narrow-sighted ‘proofs’ you proffered as wisdoms?
Presidents are really just eye candy, a power-like friend, a human you can relate to. Or hate so much, you cannot see they are all just PR agents for massive mafia gangs.
One would think that, as a ‘climate sceptic’ you would be familiar with their modus operandi. Everyone you see on stage, is just a puppet, and they speak Puppet to us, and we call it News, because we have become their puppets.
Puppetmasters need to be named. Got any candidates? Got any proof they are Puppetmasters? We need more detall.
One thing we have too much of is conspiracy theories with no detail.
I think the disasterous withdrawal from Afghanistan was Joe Biden’s baby. He did exactly what an appeaser would do: Turn around and run away as fast as he can. Like he did in South Vietnam and in Iraq. Joe’s a runner.
Trump’s plan was for an orderly withdrawal of American troops such that the Taliban were not put in charge of Afghanistan but had to share the governing with the Afghan government, after the Taliban met certain conditions.
Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan would have remained under American control under Trump’s plan. Under Biden, Bagram Airbase is under Chicom control.
Trump had a good deal going, if all parties had lived up to the bargain, and all parties *were* living up to the bargain until Joe Biden intervened and turned everything on its head.
No American troops were killed in Afghanistan during the last 18 month of Trump’s term. Trump says that is because he threatened the Taliban leader with personal destruction if the Taliban killed any more Americans under his watch.
Trump gave the Taliban leader a picture of the Taliban leader’s house during a meeting. Trump wanted the Taliban leader to know that he knew where he lived. The Taliban leader apparently got the message.
Strength is what counts with these kinds of people. Trump was strong. Biden is a weak, fearful appeaser. Worst president evah!!!
I went to a local preschool fundraiser the other day. They had a puppet show for the kids. The one puppet was called John, one was called Dick and the other was Peter. They had strings to keep them upright while someone was screeching their dialogue.
What were the puppeteers name’s? C’mon, you demand me to fish names from the air, gimme some names! Are you keeping their names secret? Somebody help, a conspiracy!
Can you see how not examining your own beliefs may lead to confused thinking and aberrant logic? And totally blind to the strings stretching from one puppet to the other, forcing them into synchronised misanthropy. CAGW is one such string, don’t you think? Privatisation, covidiocy, privately owned central banks, three companies owning the majority share of the world’s arms manufacturing industry, six shareholders owning 99% of all news media, and Russia-Russia-Iran-Russia-Venezuela-Russia-Iran-Russia diddit!!! are a few others. Its not a conspiracy, my friend, it is a freakshow. Starring Veeeerrry respectable freaks. On strings…
Also, I have opened a FundMyPerversion account to buy some furniture moving trucks for those poor, backward Afghans, they obviously can’t get about on their own, or even flee an impending attack on their houses. Poor things. They would probably crumble in a shivering heap of abject fear at the sight of cold, hard Yankee steel.
P.S. Baal Gates is not a puppeteer, the strings below him have been made more visible than the ones above him, that’s all.
“I am in agreement that TRUMP! did not truly understand the federal government and did not act quickly enough to remove the obstacles to his plans.”
Trump himself said he was too naive about how wide and deep the political swamp was in Washington DC.
He said he really had not spent much time in Washington DC before he was elected, but now he says he knows all the actors, good and bad.
There are good actors in DC?
I was just listing areas I thought were not a success. after Trump was elected. Beating Shrillary did delay our misery for four years.
Trump got out of the silly Paris agreement , but he should have sent it to the Senate so it would have been shot down permanently. He always called CCAW a hoax, but he has never one to get into specifics. The control the EPA had because of CO2 was also shot down in courts because of his judicial appointments.
Trump just about halted hostilities in Afghanistan. The war was never winnable. He also didn’t get into any new wars.
It took him years to get funding for the wall even with Repubs holding both houses for two years. Blame them not Trump.
The tariffs were helping the US economy. They were trying to work on intellectual property in other ways. Btw bidens regime reversed both policies. Trump certainly knew they were the big threat and tried to act on it.
Trump was held back my uncountable lawsuits. The president does not have dictator powers.
Trump did not lose the election, it was stolen. There is plenty of evidence if you want to go look for it. He was easily ahead at midnight on election night, it was statically impossible for him to lose all those states, yet somehow they all went for Biden by 10-30k votes. He did not do enough to secure the election beforehand however.
January 6th is another issue, but not one I blame Trump for. It was not in his interest at all for anything like that to happen
“Trump got out of the silly Paris agreement”
That Paris agreement was voluntary with no punishment for failure. I believe the US was actually the only nation meeting its climate pledges.
Trump did not lose the election, it was stolen. There is plenty of evidence if you want to go look for it.
____________________________________
From 2016 to 2020 Wisconsin population went up 120,000 and the vote total for president
2016 vote total 2,976,150
2020 vote total 3,298,041
went up 320,000.
There’s only one point that you make that I think is completely fair and accurate.
There are a lot of points you make that are not fair criticisms of his policies, but are rather comments on his effectiveness in executing policy.
Then there’s stuff that is wrong or misleading.
He can be faulted for pragmatically accepting that he had to go along with some “stimulus” or hand an issue to the Demonrats. But it pales in comparison to what Brandon did. It was not the main cause of today’s inflation by any means.
Trump tried saying we shouldn’t worry and it would all go away. He quickly understood how that was being used to attack his administration. The Trump Show featuring Sideshow Tony and the Skarf Lady was political theater, not to hype but to try to tamp down the hysteria and jump through all the hoops that the Demonrats were trying to set up to claim that Trump failed. Don’t forget ventilators.
Jan 6 is certainly not about policy. So not relevant to what was supposed to be the topic of discussion. It’s another failure to execute that you and I rightly find disappointing. But really, it’s just stupid. Who cares?
I don’t know for sure that the Demonrats stole the election, although I know that nobody can be sure that they didn’. Nobody can know for sure because it was pretty much a perfect crime. Trump failed by not acting decisively and early enough to prevent the fraud. After the fact it was too late and he should have known it.
I think that is a cheap shot. Trump didn’t have the means to personally do a thorough investigation, which would have required the resources of the DOJ, or a bi-partisan Congressional Investigative Committee with the power of subpoena and field agents to gather facts.
If a woman goes to the police with a complaint that she has been raped, the police don’t demand that she provide sufficient evidence to convict the assailant. They do the investigative work when there is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. All complaints were rejected as not having standing because of a lack of evidence — a Catch 22 situation.
There was, and still is, a cloud over the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. If the Democrats wanted their pick to be able to operate free of that cloud, they could have conducted a thorough investigation. From all appearances, the last thing that Biden or the DNC wanted was objective agents turning over logs in the swamp to see what might slither out from under.
Lack of evidence is not evidence against something. It is, more likely, that due diligence hasn’t been done. By not clearing that cloud, Democrats have allowed the situation to fester.
Besides that, Trump WON the (real) vote!
If you believe you lost an election due to election fraud but you can’t prove it, then you don’t stir up people by repeatedly making that claim. Only a fool would do that. Trump did that. On that subject, Trump was a fool. There is no doubt about that:
Due Diligence: There is enough evidence of election fraud to convince me the election was stolen. I can demonstrate that with high level statistics and polls. But I can’t change a single vote. So I would never claim I KNOW the election was stolen. But Trump did that.
I remember President Trump being asked in Europe: should the U.S. go to war if Lithuania (or another small NATO member) was attacked? His answer was not a resounding YES, OF COURSE. He would have handled Ukraine probably much worse than Joe Biden.
BTW, I agree that Ukraine was as corrupt as Russia at the dissolution of the Soviet Union. But Ukraine tried democratic reforms (which is why you can see the corruption). Russia never did.
You are correct on that. It’s baffling that Trump made a giant stink AFTER it was too late and not before.
And why will 2022 be any different?
“Due Diligence: There is enough evidence of election fraud to convince me the election was stolen. I can demonstrate that with high level statistics and polls. But I can’t change a single vote. So I would never claim I KNOW the election was stolen.”
We are on the same page here.
It is obvious from the numbers that there were enough questionable votes cast in the 2020 presidential election to swing the election either way. The reason we don’t know which way it was swayed is because, as you say, we don’t know which candidate benefited from those questionable votes.
If I were a betting man, I would bet Biden was the beneficiary. But we can’t prove it. So we will have to fix that questionable election with a future election, with the questionable votes eliminated from the count, if we can manage to do so.
If we don’t manage to do so, we will lose our freedoms to the scoundrels and traitors who are trying to rig our elections.
On the other hand, I routinely read MSM ‘news’ articles where the writer claims that Trump “lied.” There is no evidence of the level that would convince a jury that Trump knowingly “lied,” yet the MSM makes that claim.
I guess the question is, if one is convinced that they are right, but people don’t want to hear it, does one walk away and ignore it, or does the truth matter enough that someone like Trump thinks it is worthwhile to make a stink and agitate for acknowledgement and reform?
Once ballots have been separated from mailer envelopes, there’s no way to decide that the ballot is or is not legitimate, assuming that it was originally a government-printed blank ballot or printed by one of the contractors who printed the legitimate ballots.
Unless you somehow prove that none of the ballots were legitimate, you have no way to separate valid from invalid.
That’s why it’s a perfect crime. We can point to overwhelming statistical evidence and show video evidence of ballot stuffing as in 2000 Mules, but even in the face of that, we can’t identify the specific ballots that were illegally cast. Simple as that.
Trump seems to have anticipated the crime but apparently could not do anything to stop it. What actually has been done to change things this time around?
Mail-in ballots are just inherently insecure. It’s doubly so when for example my dead father is still on the rolls five years after his funeral and I’m told it’s none of my business to complain about it.
After Trump beat Hillary, one of the first things he tried to do was investigate the integrity of the voting process. (Checking things like registered voters were alive, eligible to vote, US citizens etc.) Certain states refused to cooperate. (California, New York etc.) The investigation went nowhere because of that.
Trump had a lot of Swamp to wade through.
Yes. Amazing and alarming that so many think that as President he had the power and authority to just “declare” this or that “be done”.
His first two years he was opposed by RINOs and Dems.
His last two years he was opposed by Dems and RINOs.
Six years after he beat Hillary, Dems and RINOs are continuing to oppose him, personally, even though he’s not in office.
And, there are still a lot of alligators, and in recent years, an increasing population of pythons.
Amazing how many persons are ignoring/dismissing the truly valid Evidence of Vote Fraud that is ‘on record’ by Mike Lindell, and several others.
“I’m not shy.
I voted for Trump in 2020 despite his shortcomings
Trump fought the deep state and the deep state won”
The Deep State has won a few battles, but they haven’t won the War yet.
“— trump supported massive government deficit spending in 2020 that led to high price inflation in 2021 and 2022”
Trump supported more spending because the Obama-Biden administration left the U.S. Military in a very bad condition. Trump’s Secretary of Defense came to him on Trump’s first day in office and told Trump that the U.S. military was critically short of ammunition. When your military is critically short of ammunition, a prudent person would increase military spending. That’s what Trump did. And keep in mind that Trump is not operating in a vacume. He had plenty of help in spending money. And this spending had a minimal effect on inflation. Inflation was 1.4 percent when Trump left office.
It’s the Trillions the Democrats spent when Joe Biden took over that has raised the inflation rate from the Trump-era figure os 1.8 percent to about 8.8 percent currently.
“— Trump never challenged the CO2 endangerment finding or ever made a coherent statement about the abuse of climate science by government bureaucrat scientists”
I’ll go along with that, but it doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have done so in a subsequent administration, which he fully expected to happen.
“— He continued to lose the war in Afghanistan for four more years”
Trump had Afghanistan under control, with a good peace plan going forward, and no American troops were killed in Afghanistan in the last 18 months of Trump’s administration. That’s pretty good wouldn’t you say? Trump maintained control of Afghanistan and didn’t get any American troops killed doing so. That would be called smart leadership in my book.
“— Attacked China with tariffs that did nothing to end their theft of intellectual property”
You say “attacked”? Whose side are you on? Trump did impose tariffs on the Chicoms. Trump said he was getting the Chicoms to pay him billions and billions of dollars, whereas the Chcoms had never paid one thin dime to any previous administration. Trump liked to brag that American farmers were getting billions and billions of Chicom dollars because of Trump’s efforts on their behalf.
And Trump saved the American steel industry and other industries with his restrictions on the Chicoms. I hear Biden is going to undo many of these. Well, the Chicoms paid north of $30 million to the Biden Crime Family, so they should expect some favorable treatment from Joe.
“— Promoted Covid scaremongering by letting two incompetent bureaucrats get a huge amount of face time on TV — Anthony “Grouchy” Fauci and Debby “The Jerk” Birx”
Hindsight is always 20/20, isn’t it. Trump didn’t know those experts from Adam, and he had to wait, like all of us, to finally figure out that what they were saying wasn’t necessarily the truth.
“— Failed to build a border wall with Mexico”
You’ve got to be kidding. Do you know how many Democrat lawsuits Trump had to wade through to get anything done? Something like 12 if memory serves. Trump wasn’t operating in a vacume. He had everything including the kitchen sink thrown in his path as obstacles. You are expecting too many miracles out of one man.
“— Failed to get more than 8% of the Keystone XK extension completed.”
More Democrat lawsuits thrown in the way.
“— Trump inspired the January 6 riot by repeatedly insisting he really won the 2020 election without ever presenting evidence to prove that claim. That riot hurt the reputation of Republicans, who would have been justified if they protested in front of state capitol buildings right after the election. January 6 was too late for a protest. States elect the president. There are 50 state elections, That’s where you protest.”
When all the investigations are completed, Trump, as usual, will be found to be pure as the driven snow. Trump promoted peaceful protests on the day of January 6, in a public speech. He wasn’t whipping up the crowd into a frenzy, as you imply.
Trump also offered Nancy Pelosi 15,000 National Guard troops to secure the Capitol Building three days prior to January 6, and Nancy Pelosi turned him down both times he made the suggestion.
Offering thousands of National Guard troops to protect the Capitol Building doen’t sound like a suggestion someone would make if they wanted to take over the Capitol Building.
The Republicans will start a REAL investigation of all these matters beginning in January. Then, the rest of the story will be told. Stay tuned.
“— Worst of all, Trump lost an election to a corrupt politician who was an early dementia patient with no charisma, and the nation has been going downhill ever since.”
That’s not Trump’s fault.
““— Worst of all, Trump lost an election to a corrupt politician who was an early dementia patient with no charisma, and the nation has been going downhill ever since.””
Did he really lose? Or did those corrupt politicians steal the election?
Nobody has taken a serious look at such things as a county having more voters than registered voters etc.
It reflects poorly on the gullibility of roughly half the population that voted for an incompetent who is clearly dealing with dementia, and didn’t really campaign, because the MSM supported him.
I see where CNN is saying that our pets are part of the climate change “problem”.
I have a feeling CNN is going to get some negative feedback when they go attacking our pets (children).
CNN obviously knows nothing about methane.
Take heart! CNN just announced another round of layoffs coming.
If it weren’t for the airports, CNN would have no viewers at all. (Okay. Slight exaggeration there.)
–
–
The GEBs (Globalist Evil Bastards) have bought up many (most?) of the well-known traditional media outlets. They are money losers, but who cares when you have $billions?
–
The newspaper or magazine may be bleeding red ink, but it has some revenue to offset expenses. The GEBs now have their own personal propaganda machine to push ‘The Narrative’ and any pet views they hold.
–
I think it’s cheaper and easier for the GEBs to own the propaganda organs rather than buying space in all the major media outlets to push out their desired message. And if you don’t own the outlets, you can’t keep contrary views out.
–
So you’re losing $50 million or so per year. Who cares when you were spending that much or more on ads and opinion pieces? And now you have complete control.
–
–
Why the layoffs if you’re a GEB and don’t care about the money? Well, it’s stupid to throw away more money than you have to. When you’re just looking to push a narrative, you don’t need a huge staff to report on lost puppies and the Greenbaum’s vacation in the Bahamas.
–
You’re not reporting the news. You’re pushing propaganda. So, get rid of the news staff.
–
The right move would be to pare down to a core staff pushing out your desired narrative. Minimize expenses (losses) while pushing your propaganda.
–
Anyhow, that how I see the YSM (Yellow Stream Media) of today. The situation could change.
CNN PAYS the airports to play their crap.
I’d always heard it was the other way around, arranged by the Clinton’s in the ’80s.
Dangit! Now I have to go look that up.
OK, it was 1994, and CNN offered it free to the airports. The airport CNN programming was specific to the airports.
There is a separate business, CNN Airport or some such name, that does pay the airports. That division/subsidiary/whatever is going to be axed, soon; not enough money to outbid competitors for the contracts.
–
Just guessing here, but I’d think the reason a separate division was set up was because the “ratings” would be different for the regular CNN vs the corralled airport audience. So CNN Airport could charge sponsors/advertisers a different rate for the airport audience, probably higher than CNN News was getting.
Also, the ‘specialized’ programming probably was to eliminate news of airplane crashes and other things you might not want air travelers thinking about.
Anyhow, sponsors or advertisers have probably determined that they are not getting their moneys worth and the the division probably can’t outbid competitors for the airport contracts now.
My WAG is that HGTV (Home & Garden TV) is probably going to be a winner in the airports.
–
–
Oh, per CNN versus CNN Airport, I suppose CNN Airport division was paying CNN News division for content. In the US, separate divisions of companies usually have to buy and sell to each other on the books and not just transfer product willy nilly.
So CNN News was being “paid” for being in airports in airports, but not exactly. It was an accounting practice more than anything.
Years ago, I heard CNN was being paid to be in airports and it stuck with me. Well, CNN News was being paid on an accounting technicality, But CNN Airport wasn’t. They were paying the airports.
–
That’s what I gathered on a brief search. I don’t care enough about CNN to look any deeper than I did.
–
–
Thanks, Drake. It’s always good to question what you think you know. Two decades later, I have a more accurate picture of CNN News and airports.
A propaganda outlet that has lost the trust of the audience is useless.
I think these moves are an attempt to regain believability.
Sort of like a lot of the Dems running in the midterms are pretending they didn’t vote for whatever Pelosi and Brandon wanted.
Here in Ohio, Tim Ryan is running for the Senate. For years years as a Congressman he’s voted with Pelosi almost 100% of time. In one of his ads he even claims he agreed with Trump on some issues. I saw some of his signs yesterday. He even has his name on a red background!!
(For those not in the US, blue is the color used by Dems and red is the color used by Republicans. The media started that years ago.)
I don’t know if we will ever know how many tax dollars are used to prop up, in some devious way, the msm.
CNN are correct.
In its lifetime, a pet Labrador emits the equivalent CO2 of not 1, but 2 Toyota Landcruisers
Diesels or petrol or petrol/LPG?
Yes
In other words, Labradors are good for the crops.
Rottweilers are better. My pups provide CO2, methane, and organic fertilizer. They also rid the yard of pests like skunks, raccoons, opossums, and leftists looking for handouts.
Good looking dogs! 🙂
The one in front is a puppy – 135 lbs. of aggressive chewing.
He hasn’t met a leftist yet so I have to find one so he can get the scent.
“He hasn’t met a leftist yet so I have to find one so he can get the scent. Please! Where do you reside?
There’s plenty of leftists in my town. I just don’t associate with them.
Sorry to get your hopes up.
Is that per decade, or over the lifetime of both?
Over the lifetime of the dogs and the land cruiser
Dogs are lucky to make a dozen years. I had an IH Scout that I drove for 45 years and put about 1/2 million miles on.
or anything else.
By focusing on just gas prices the larger effect of high fuel prices gets obscured for many in the general public. Nearly everything you buy has been transported on a truck and that goes for the raw materials and materials needed to produce it, and even the materials needed to package it or prepare it for shipping.
In our food chain the farmers are paying much higher fuel and fertilizer prices. This increases the cost of the whole cycle from field prep, to planting, to harvest, Then the cost of transports to the elevators and processors where energy prices are also increased. For example a large amount of the soyabeans brought to the elevators/processors have to dried before the processing can even begin. And then there is the transport from the processors to the distribution centers and from there to the retailers.
Virtually every step of the way fuel and energy prices effect the price of everything we buy and consume.
Fuel is by far the largest operating expense in the trucking industry. On average today as I write this the cost of a gallon of #2 low Sulphur Diesel is $1.67 more than it was a year ago at $5.224 per gallon. The big truck I drive has tanks of 240 gallon capacity but the furthest I run it down is to about where it takes 190 gallons to fill up. That is over $992.00 to top of my tanks when I drive it down that far. Some other big trucks have 300 gallon tanks.
Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update – U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
Now what I wrote above may be preaching to the choir but there is another aspect that even the informed bunch here may not be aware of.
The company I work for, like all the others, is having trouble procuring new trucks and trailers. The supply chain and labor disruptions have effected those manufacturers also. And that goes for spare parts. There are trucks sitting idle for months awaiting parts.
One reason I have been with the company I drive for over 16 years now is the equipment and maintenance is outstanding. They regularly buy new equipment. I just saw the first few 2023 model Volvos arrive at our garage to be put into the fleet. New model year trucks start coming off the line in July!
New Trailers have been dribbling in.
I drive a 2015 Freightliner because I want to. I was offered a new truck 3 years ago but turned it down because I hate the proximity warning crap they started putting on all big trucks late in 2015 and mine has none of that stuff. Besides I am nearing the end of my driving career and the truck I’m driving, which I got into when it was brand new, has about 632,000 miles on it. It will probably last me until the time I’m forced to hang up the keys.
Since the price increases of gas, out delivery fee for appliances has gone from $48 to $58 and now $68. Yes, we use our own trucks.
Diesel shortage?
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/biden-economy-us-25-days-diesel-supply-lack-diesel-cripple-economy/
They need to do something about this. A shortage would affect all sorts of people detrimentally.
Here’s a good example of seeing what you want to see:
Tucker Carlson, a prominent conservative host on Fox News Channel is what I would call an appeaser of those who he fears, like Vladimir Putin.
Carlson has convinced himself that the Ukrainian government is the most corrupt government on Earth and is unworthy of support, thus giving Tucker permission not to support the defense of innocent men, women and children. This way he can justify trashing the Ukraine war effort and satisfying his need to appease Putin.
Tucker has even convinced himself that the United States was the entity involved in damaging gas pipelines from Russia. Tucker scoffs at accusations that the Russians might have damaged their own pipeline. And even though an investigation by Sweden has claimed the damage to at least one of the pipelines was from the inside out, not the outside in, which implies that Russia sent explosives down the inside of the pipeline and set off the explosion, the claim has fallen on deaf ears with Tucker.
This Swedish investigation didn’t deter Tucker Carlson from declaring last night unequivically that the United States is the culprit in the pipeline bombing, all without any evidence to back up his claim.
Tucker believes what he wants to believe, in the face of contrary evidence, because that fits his appeaser view of the situation.
So you see, even smart guys can go off on a tangent depending on what they want to believe. They get a concept in their head, and then they try to fit all they see to that concept and if it doesn’t fit, then they ignore what doesn’t fit. Like Tucker is doing. Tucker is brainwashing himself. A lot of people do this.
I generally agree with Tucker because he generally knows what he is talking about and disagree with you because you have no idea what you are talking about.
The US or some other Ukraine ally is a likely culprit in the pipeline terrorism. If Putin wanted to shut off Gazprom natural gas exports to the EU, he could have ordered that to happen. There is no logical reason to sabotage a pipeline that benefits a Russian company, that pays taxes to the Russian government, which help fund their war effort.
I suppose you never cared about the eight-year genocide in Ukraine, from 2014 through early 2022 ? During which the Ukraine military murdered 11,000 Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians in the Donbas region.
By signing the 1948 Genocide Convention, Russia (ALONG WITH EVERY OTHER NATION THAT SIGNED) was one of many nations obligated to stop genocides that take place anywhere in the world. Every UN member who signed the 1948 genocide convention was obligated to stop that Ukraine genocide. But no one acted until the Russians stopped the genocide in 2022, when it was escalating, using their military. Russia annexed the region, which was not what the Donbas Ukrainians wanted. About one third of them wanted to be an independent nation, but they were never allowed to vote on that by the Kiev government, EVEN THOUGH THEY WOULD HAVE LOST THE VOTE.
Russia decided to take over Donbas and they did
Ukraine lost the battle.
But Ukraine, with the help of the US and other nations’ monetary and military aid, is continuing to fight and die for no logical reason.
As Ukrainians continue to fight, more Ukrainian infrastructure is destroyed and more Ukrainians die. Who benefits from this proxy war? Not Ukraine. Not Russia. Not the US. There are no winners. Unfortunately, the biggest loser is Ukraine, losing in slow motion as no other nation in the world tries to broker a cease fire and peace agreement.
It seems like the US and other western nations prefer a proxy war against Russia and could not care less about the destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure and the deaths of Ukrainian soldiers.
Interesting. The information and photo’s to date indicate that a 50m stretch of pipeline was affected with at least 4 major breaches, one may be up to 8m long. The photo’s released appear to show the edges of the pipeline being bent inwards, which would support the earlier statement from both the Swedish and Danish investigators that the explosions occurred in the water outside the pipelines. Why are the Swedes now backtracking on their earlier statement and the evidence shown in the released photographs? As far as I’m aware there is still no clear evidence as to who did it or, really, how it was done – although the extensive damage does appear to point to something of a military nature, not commercial explosives.
The fact the Swede’s pulled out the investigation, the Danish refuse to release the results, and no one’s screaming Russia, Russia, Russia suggests that something stinks.
America hated that pipeline existed at all as it potentially drew Germany closer to Russia so it’s destruction potentially serves America well – forcing Germany to rely on alternative suppliers and, if that’s America, lot’s of profit.
Were it to be publicly revealed that America blew it up, driving many German businesses to bankruptcy (and they are dropping like flies already), western support for Ukraine would evaporate.
That’s not to say America did it, the Ukrainian’s could have done it, but again, if that were to be revealed they would also probably cause European support for the conflict to dwindle rather rapidly.
Which is exactly why the Russians blew it up.
It wasn’t moving any gas, so it had no economic value, but it had massive propganda value for exactly the reasons you so cogently describe.
Putin cant fight a war, but he and the KGB/FSB have been the worlds best liars and false flaggers since 1918.
Neither Putin nor the FSB are that old. Why push an account that is pure speculation? There is no clear evidence pointing in any direction at this point.
Which is exactly why the Russians blew it up.
US and other Ukraine allies already hated the US
How would Russia blowing up a pipeline that benefitted Gazprom help Russia? There was some gas moving through the Nordstream 1 pipeline. That’s how the leak was discovered.
Putin could have permanently cut off all gas flowing through Nordstream 1 by simply ordering Gazprom to do that. No explosives were necessary.
Your theory makes no sense.
NOTHING but idiotic politics “forced” Germany to depend on natural gas for generation of electricity.
Before the Climate Change scam, they had enough reliable electrical generation in nuclear and coal without need of imports.
They went to gas generation to provide highly variable output to “stabilize” the grid due to erratic “renewable” output.
US had motive and capability
Other Ukraine allies had motive but not capability
Russia had no motive
“As far as I’m aware there is still no clear evidence as to who did it or, really, how it was done”
That would be my position, too. But Tucker is claiming he knows the truth, when he could not possibly know the truth from the information currently available. Tucker is seeing what he wants to see. It’s a common human trait.
Appeasers are that way because they allow fear to cloud their thinking and so they don’t see the situation clearly.
Yea. It’s a shame Tucker didn’t report on the last 8 years of Zelensky attacking eastern Ukraine and killing 14,000 (allegedly) people there.
As you indicate, poor journalism.
Anything alleged by Russia is instantly dismissable.
11,000 Russian speaking Ukrainians were murdered by the Ukrainian miliary, who lost 3000 soldiers in the 2014 to 2022 Donbas Civil War. If you dismiss this reality, we can’t take you seriously.
War in Donbas (2014–2022) – Wikipedia
Ahh, the Ukie Nazis…
Who promised that NATO would not be enlarged after the Cold War? Who ignored the Minski Accords? Who ignored Putin’s warnings. Don’t tell me – it was that old believable US government. And you believe it for Climate Warming?
Who promised that he wouldn’t invade ukraine if they gave their nukes back? Who promised that he wouldnt kill over 50,000 Ukrainian civilians to achieve zero miltary gains?
There is a wrong person here, but it aint uncle sam.
If you believe Russian propaganda, you are less astute that I thought
Who promised to defend Ukraine in the 1990s
and then failed to defend Ukraine in 2014 (Crimea)
The U.S.
Who viciously attacked Iraq based on the false claim of
weapons of mass destruction
The U.S.
Obama and Biden failed to defend Crimea. That’s the way appeasers operate.
Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt about it. Saddam used weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt about it.
Saddam was given numerous chances to allow weapons inspections in, in lieu of war, and Saddam thumbed his nose at them.
Saddam, himself, acively promoted the idea that he had an active WMD program among Saddam’s own generals. After the war, Saddam’s generals were surprised to learn Saddam had no WMD on hand.
If Saddam’s generals are convinced Saddam had WMD, why should it be a surprise that every intelligence agency on the planet believed Saddam had an active WMD program?
Saddam had his chance to come clean with the international community on his WMD programs. He made the wrong choice, and it cost him his life.
I fully supported the Iraq war. Unfortunately, Obama and Biden got involved in it and screwed everything up, as per usual.
With the Nordstream pipeline, as with the climate change claims, one should follow the evidence not the fanciful speculation, spurious finger-pointing or vested interest.
A different tale……makes more sense:
https://thelawdogfiles.com/2022/09/nordstream.html
James, can you provide a synopsis, I can’t get to the site. Is it based on actual evidence, or more speculation?
Ok James, picked it up from a different site – methane hydrates, right? Except that gas was still moving through at least one of the Nordstream 1 strings, I believe. Also why Nordstream and not one of the older pipelines under the Black Sea also operated by Gazprom, who actually have a rather extensive series of undersea pipelines and an awful lot of experience managing them successfully over many years. Unfortunately I’m not sure I can agree with you that it makes more sense – especially when the limited data we’ve seen indicates that the pipelines were breached from the outside, not the inside. Of course, things may change…
Please let’s not trot out the same rubbish over and over – “Who promised that NATO would not be enlarged after the Cold War?” Nobody did that – Germany made a draft proposal to that effect, which was agreed to in principle by Russia but completely rejected by USA. It never made it to the final agreement, it was never ratified or agreed and, most importantly to those waving around copies of the draft proposal they’ve found on the web, it was never signed.
I remember President Trump being asked in Europe: should the U.S. go to war if Lithuania(?) (a small NATO member) was attacked? His answer was not a resounding YES, OF COURSE. He would have handled Ukraine probably much worse than Joe Biden.
BTW, I agree that Ukraine was as corrupt as Russia at the dissolution of the Soviet Union. But Ukraine tried democratic reforms (which is why you can see the corruption). Russia never did.
No, I don’t believe a word Joe Biden says.
But that doesn’t make him a pipeline bomber, either.
Evidence, is what we need. Just like Human-caused Climate Change, we need evidence.
Currently, there is insufficient evidence to come to a conclusion on either subject.
Have you seen what American political families have dealings in Ukraine? Bidens, Pelosis, Romney’s and more. If there is a more corrupt government it might be the US
You might have a point, Matt.
In January, Republicans should investigate every single bit of this corruption.
“Tucker Carlson, a prominent conservative host on Fox News Channel is what I would call an appeaser of those who he fears, like Vladimir Putin”
in my opinion Tucker Carlson is generally right about Ukraine, and you are generally wrong. While it is very likely the US or another Ukraine ally blew up the Nordstream pipelines, Carlson should not claim it had to be the US.
There was a genocide of Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians since 2014. It had accelerated in early 2022 just before Russia invaded Ukraine to stop that genocide. As a signer of the 1948 Genocide Convention, Russia (and every other signer) was obligated to stop genocides anywhere in the world by any means necessary. Doing so is not a violation of international law. Rusia, the US, UK and others watched the Ukraine genocide for eight years and did nothing. Russia decided to stop the genocide after it accelerated in early 2022. And that is exactly what they did in the Donbas region of Ukraine.
The Kiev government did not like that — they apparently wanted to keep murdering Russian speaking Ukrainians — 11,000 in eight years was not enough. By fighting back against Russians in the Donbas region, the Ukrainian military forced the Russians to retaliate. Stopping the Donbas genocide does not mean the Russians are obligated remain in Donbas as sitting ducks while Ukrainians shoot missiles and shells at them and blow up the Russian bridge to Crimea.
Ukrainian military murdered 11,000 Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians
Russia stopped that genocide.
That does not mean Russia is the bad guy and Ukraine is the good guy.
In reply to Mr. Abbott, I posted a long, serious comment defending Tucker Carlson. It showed up on my computer as being posted antlater it was “disappeared’
I later posted another long serious comment defending Tucker Carlson.
That comment also showed up on my computer screen as being posted and later “disappeared”.
I have to conclude that I have been censored by the Moderator.
There is no other logical reason for two serious comments on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine to “disappear” in the span of a few hours
It is sad that this website practices leftist style censorship.
I can only wonder how long this comment will last before it “disappears”.
I haven’t seen your defense of Tucker Carlson so far. I’m not quite to the end of the comments.
I expected somebody to try to defend Tucker. I’ll look forward to your post. If it ever shows up. 🙂
Sincere thought questions:
Suppose there is a sustained baseline of human emissions of water vapor from evaporative cooling systems for power generation, industrial processing, refrigeration, and air conditioning systems.
1) What is the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) of a doubling of such emissions to a new level, sustained by continued operation of those additional heat rejection systems to serve a growing population or to more fully serve the existing population?
The consensus answer is zero C, is it not? These massive emissions of water vapor are considered harmless in respect to the radiative warming effect. There is no claim of feedback-amplified warming attributed to these emissions and driving the climate condition to a tipping point.
I agree with this consensus answer. This is not because of the trivially true explanation, “it just precipitates out.” It is because the observed intensity of precipitation, especially in convective weather, is a demonstration of the heat engine performance of the atmosphere to amplify the water vapor rejection rate. For example, a one-inch-per-hour rate of rainfall in a typical thunderstorm is 8760/40 = 219 times the global average annual precipitation of about 40 inches. And the energy transformation involved in this example is about 17,600 W/m^2, as the latent heat of water vapor is converted to work and motion to turn the atmosphere over bottom to top in the convective cell.
In other words, the consensus answer of zero C is correct, in my view, because the atmosphere performs far more powerfully as the working fluid of its own heat engine operation than as a static radiative blanket. The static GHG warming effect of the emissions of water vapor does not control the outcome. And it is understood that for this reason, water vapor cannot be accumulated in the atmosphere to harmful effect on the planet.
2) Why then, if zero C is the correct answer, should any credit be given to water vapor feedback in modeling or otherwise estimating the climate response to emissions of non-condensing GHGs?
Troposphere water vapor content is determined by its temperature
Global warming causes the troposphere to hold more water vapor
The only debate is over how much more water vapor, and what variable(s) would limit the positive feedback. My vote is for more water vapor causing more clouds, limiting the water vapor positive feedback, and preventing runaway global warming.
Not only that but warmer air rises more due to convection, transporting heat to above the vast majority of any GH gases. Where it radiates gaily to outer space.
Then it turns to ice and falls as snow hail or rain.
This is an effect assumed not to exist in climate models, because convection is simply too hard to model
It really doesn’t matter what assumptions are in the climate computer games. They are going to predict dangerous man made global warming because that is what “management” pays the “scientists” for. They start with a conclusion.
“They start with a conclusion.” That!
Being that oceans are 70% of the surface area of the planet I’m not convinced mankind’s air conditioners would make a dent in the evaporative abilities of those oceans.
Most of that happens in the tropics. Most of the infrastructure changes that might shift the balance of evapo-transpiration takes place in the mid-latitudes, where most people live.
Exactly. Its is total bollocks.
Not only that, but reservoirs for hydroelectric power/flood control, and pivotal irrigation in semi-arid and arid locations produce significant increases in the potential evapo-transpiration rate. Most of that build out happened in the 1950s to 1970s. Perhaps that helps explain the recent 19-year and currently 8-year hiatus in warming.
A little off topic, but inspired by comment on this blog asking how many women were burnt for heresy by the Catholic Church. There are huge differences in estimates of the numbers tried and executed, but documented executions by the Spanish Inquisition were less than 1000 with only a few percent being women.
I don’t want to defend it as it was different times, but the bad behaviour has been exaggerated. For example, 9 million women were burnt at the stake for being witches was taught for a while until it was outed as completely made up. It was heretical (punishment was a stern talking to) to accuse someone of being a witch in Catholic teachings. Canon since the 9th C. Only protestant Christians executed witches, never burning them, and the numbers documented were orders of magnitude less than estimates by leftwing academics.
Such propaganda is used to promote regime change, the French revolution being a good example. Meant to be the beginning of the age of reason and science but caused the Reign of Terror, killing many including the father of chemistry.
I googled to find out how many women were executed in that one year and found one blog written by an academic who started by writing many paragraphs on how harsh the times were, using many individual examples of harsh punishments. He eventually pointed out that at least 40 000 were executed in the Reign of Terror.
The worst happened at Nantes where an estimated 4000 women and children were executed by being placed on barges in the Loire and sunk.
Just highlighting that history is full of social justice warriors that are worse than what they were supposed to cure.
“A little off topic, […]”
Robert, it’s an open thread. 😉
But just as importantly, how many ducks were executed because they didn’t float, thus disproving that alleged witches were not in fact witches?
You do not ‘execute’ a duck, you cook it; preferably with an orange sauce.
I know, I got the reference. In turn it begs the question as to how many Monty Python fans are disappointed by the use of only the most obvious clips? Why aren’t you using the fish-slapping sketch, the ministry of silly walks, australian philosophy or any one of hundreds of sketches other than the same few obvious ones?
OK so not 100% serious on this, but do watch more Monty Python, you’ll really enjoy it.
I have the full collection of Flying Circus + movies DVDs + vinyl albums.
My Easter religious observance every year is watching “Life Of Brian”
And eating a piece of halibut that’s fit for Jehovah.
Looooxury!
I know it’s only Monty Python but the skit is based on an historical fallacy. People were accused of being a witch in early medieval times, otherwise they wouldn’t have bothered making it canon law not to. It wasn’t until the Reformation that it took off.
And there were no coconuts in England at the time.
Blame the ‘Malleus Maleficarum’ for that – my dad had a copy and I read it once; absolutely hilarious, self-contradicting and, frankly, perverted.
Also I believe that the police cars may have been an anachronism and there is no historical precedents for siege engines shaped like a giant bunny.
“The top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Cologne condemned the book as recommending unethical and illegal procedures, as well as being inconsistent with Catholic doctrines of demonology.”
That tells you what the Catholic Church thought, not that single book.
At least the bunny-like seige engine is plausible.
Despite what the Catholic Church had to say about it, it became an absolute hit, a best seller and has sold in huge numbers, especially in Germany which, coincidentally, is where the greatest number of witch trials took place.
Charting recent human progress
1954: “It is not too much to expect that our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter, will know of great periodic regional famines in the world only as matters of history, will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours” – Lewis Strauss, chairman of the United States Atomic Energy Commission.
Spandex jackets, one for everyone etc (h/t Donald Fagen)
2022: People in England, Scotland and Wales could be in for three hour power cuts this winter if it can’t import enough gas and electric imports from other parts of Europe, the British National Grid has warned.
Growing up in the 60s the world was a really optimistic place and we certainly didn’t worry about the weather.
I do feel sorry for the children of today and angry at what is being done to them – often sidelining their parents as unprogressives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ueivjr3f8xg
What a miserable world this will be if they prevail.
Tony has a good one today:
Heatwave Of October 23, 1927 | Real Climate Science
The Red Cross declared 1927 the worst year in it’s history due to the large number of natural disasters that year.
BTW, atmospheric CO2 concentration in 1927 stood at about 280 ppm.
From the November, 2022 Unscientific American:
Antarctica’s Collapse Could Begin Even Sooner Than Anticipated
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antarcticas-collapse-could-begin-even-sooner-than-anticipated/
“Hastening” by how many millenia?
Their models indicate next Saturday, but they are cautiously conservative.
We should all make a note on the calendar to remind us in several years of their statement. Just like countless other predictions over the last 50 years, I’m confident it will be a big goose egg. A lot of brazen predictions. No success. Astrologists have a better record.
Anyone would think that as antarctic ice pushes out into the warm southern ocean, it melts smoothly and uniformly….
Based on the ubiquitous indemnification: “could“
exactly!
A trend in the literature of increasing awareness of the direct human modification of landscape properties beyond mere albedo:
Very few GCMs incorporate such factors, and even those that do are only beginning to scratch the surface of these effects.
NorESM2-LM incorporates basics of human perturbation to cloud nucleation process. Incorporating the basics of this reduces ECS from NorESM1 at 2.8K to 2.54K in NorESM2-LM. Only barely scratching the surface.
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/9591/2020/
ECS can only reduce further by incorporating the vast array to human land surface perturbation to energy budgets, by modifying sensible/latent flux ratios, cloud nucleation (mineral dust, biological cloud mediation effects), atmospheric humidity, water cycling, and atmospheric dynamics.
It turns out humanity really does impact surface energy budgets, where irrigation of 3 million km2 appears to be important. Now what of the remaining 47 million km2 desiccated by humanity to date???
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2022EF002859
Soil carbon loss reduces soil moisture? What a shocker. Could this have anything to do with evapotranspiration process and latent flux???
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/eint/26/1/EI-D-22-0003.1.xml
Massive disruptions of the water cycle directly by humanity change land-ocean temperature contrasts and atmospheric dynamics??
https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.12880
Water cycles are the biggest source of uncertainty in GCMs, and yet nobody has computed the direct changes to the water cycle, only the feedbacks to trace gases???
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311340976_The_role_of_water_and_vegetation_in_the_distribution_of_solar_energy_and_local_climate_a_review
Vast changes to vegetation and soils impacts energy budgets and large scale circulations?
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-14861-4_4
JCM
Thanks.
But, aren’t we told – repeatedly – that “The science is settled”?
By people whose jobs, careers and pensions may depend on their ability to say just that?
The F-a-d word does seem indicated . . . .
Auto
the machine is large and well oiled.
Corporate and banking Mafia, basically…
How many studies have proposed that were entering a colder period similar to that of the 60s and 70s? Do you guys know any good ones?
we’re*
Let’s face it: The US Govt. is best known for secrecy and lies…
I have it on good authority that they are going to release the report on the Kennedy assassination tomorrow — along with all the evidence on unexplained UFOs.
H/T CD Marshal for this gem. Anyone care to deconstruct “Tom the activist with a science degree?”
“Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere have resulted in the warming of the troposphere and cooling of the stratosphere which is caused by two mechanisms.”
https://www.tomplesier.com/news/1026213_stratospheric-cooling-and-tropospheric-warming
I don’t have a lot of problems with it. He got the method of heating the troposphere wrong by blaming it on IR absorption. Perhaps that is because he never had a planet surface in his fake planet to blame it on.
But he introduced an interesting thought that I think is correct. The non-CO2 atmosphere can introduce rotation and vibration states in CO2 as IR radiation does. He claims through collisions, the same mechanism that transfers rotation and vibration energy to the non-CO2 atmosphere. Made me think that blackbody radiation from the non-CO2 atmosphere could also excite those states in CO2. If true wonder if there are any consequences.
I just want to say… whomever is creating your art is a genius … seriously so. I have really come to be awed by the last few weeks’ worth of delightfully surreal paintings that have festooned your usual excellent articles. Please keep this creator! (I used to trawl through about every 3 or 4 days, now it is daily … to see what masterpieces have arrived!)
THE VAXXED ARE IN GREAT DANGER THIS WINTER – I WARNED YOU ON 21MAR2020 AND 8JAN2021
Dr. Roger Hodgkinson estimated 20 million dead from the Covid-19 jab worldwide and 2 billion adverse reactions to date, AND IT’S NOT OVER.
https://gloria.tv/post/9gFxV6Shy9eR1yxNcSiaQwrFm
Three experts say this winter that Covid-19-related illnesses could be worse than ever.
The toxic Covid-19 “vaccines” greatly reduce your immunity, making you susceptible to all forms of illness – bacterial, viral, and cancers – which are exploding.
The vaxxed are in danger this winter – I warned you on 21Mar2020 and 8Jan2021. See my https://correctpredictions.ca/
Regrets, Allan MacRae
IS GEERT RIGHT? LET’S HOPE NOT.
Rather than control the pandemic, vaccines now appear instead to be contributing to it—with alarming implications, Vanden Bossche warns.
Mary Beth Pfeiffer 21Oct2022
https://rescue.substack.com/p/is-geert-right-lets-hope-not?utm_campaign=post_embed
The short version is this: He predicts a vicious wave of covid-19, with cases already rising in parts of Europe. The coming re-emergence of SARS-CoV-2 will escalate quickly, he contends, and make all other waves pale in comparison. It will, he believes, be driven by the vaccinated, or more accurately, by the misdirected and scientifically dubious policy of repeated mass vaccination.
Vanden Bossche has long asserted that the global covid vaccination program, unprecedented in human history, would put enormous pressure on the virus to mutate; his warning has repeatedly been proven true. While the unvaccinated gained long-lasting, adaptable natural immunity from covid infection, the vaccinated harbor a confused and mostly unhelpful array of old-variant anti-spike antibodies; Vanden Bossche believes these so complicate the immune response that more serious disease from new variants will result. In the vaccinated, the SARS-CoV-2 virus, he predicts, will imminently turn a corner from more contagious to more virulent. “The losses will be huge,” Vanden Bossche told me…
WORRYING COVID-19 DEVELOPMENTS WITH MICHAEL PALMER, M.D. + SUCHARIT BHADKI, M.D.
FRIDAY ROUNDTABLE 21Oct2022
https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/shows/chd-friday-roundtable/MvyQZ3qN8H
Dr. Bhakdi:
32:00 minutes – There will be more Covid problems this winter due to immune depression plus whatever harm the spike does directly.
51:00 – Why this explosion of cancer?
57:20 – Do NOT Covid-19 inject children. “They’re going to kill your children.”
Dr. Palmer:
42:30 – Discusses more ways to for the spike to kill the vaxxed.
50:00 – Big Pharma should have known better, and he believes they did know better. “Nobody can be this stupid”.
54:00 (w/ Dr Merle Nass) At this stage with all the existing vaccine harm, one can no longer plead stupidity.
55:00 By the end of 2020 it was clear that there was no need for any Covid-19 vaccination. Do not use a new vaccine technology for a rush vaxx.
Looks bad for this winter…
SPIKE PROTEIN DISRUPTING IMMUNITY IN MILLIONS AFTER COVID INFECTION OR VACCINATION: Here’s How It’s Being Treated
The spike proteins cause inflammation, turn of type 1 interferon response, and reduce autophagy among other things, all of which adds up to a dysregulated immune system
Marina Zhang Oct 23 2022
Spike Protein Disrupting Immunity in Millions After COVID Infection or Vaccination: Here’s How It’s Being Treated (theepochtimes.com)
Multiple studies have shown that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is a highly toxic and inflammatory protein, capable of causing pathologies in its hosts.
The presence of spike protein has been strongly linked with long COVID and post-vaccine symptoms. Studies have shown that spike proteins are often present in symptomatic patients, sometimes even months after infections or vaccinations.
The numbers of long COVID and post-vaccine cases have been climbing in the United States, increasingly posing as a healthcare problem.
Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that around 7 percent of Americans are currently experiencing long COVID symptoms, which would be over 15 million people. Some people with long COVID have been so debilitated that they cannot go to work, the same has been reported in people experiencing post-vaccine symptoms.
Over 880,000 adverse events have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database for possible post-COVID vaccine symptoms.
However, statisticians argue that the number of people suffering from post-vaccine syndromes is much higher.
I knew Covid-19 lockdowns were a scam in Feb2020 and published on 21Mar2020.
The truth is finally being admitted – by Pfizer!
‘SPEED OF SCIENCE’ — A SCANDAL BEYOND YOUR WILDEST NIGHTMARE
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola October 24, 2022
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
· The premise behind COVID shot mandates and vaccine passports was that by taking the shot, you would protect others, as it would prevent infection and spread of COVID-19
· In early October 2022, during a COVID hearing in the European Parliament, Dutch member Rob Roos questioned Pfizer’s president of international developed markets, Janine Small, about whether Pfizer had in fact tested and confirmed that their mRNA jab would prevent transmission prior to its rollout
· Small admitted that Pfizer never tested whether their jab would prevent transmission because they had to “move at the speed of science to understand what is happening in the market … and we had to do everything at risk”
· We’ve known for well over two years that the shots were never tested for transmission interruption. In October 2020, Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, highlighted that trials were not designed to reveal whether the vaccines would prevent transmission. Yet everyone in government and media insisted they would do just that
· It was never about science or protecting others. It was always about following a predetermined narrative that sought to get experimental mRNA technology into as many people as possible
PHARMACEUTICAL MURDER WITH REMDESIVIR
Published on April 14, 2022
In a warning published early last year, the FDA stated that remdesivir could cause liver injury, allergic reactions, sudden changes in blood pressure and heart rate, low blood oxygen level, fever, shortness of breath, wheezing, swelling around the lips and eyes, nausea, sweating and shivering. Why these reactions?
During the pandemic, hospitals became hell holes killing more COVID patients than they helped with deadly treatments like remdesivir, which, believe it or not, seems to be a synthetic form of snake venom. Thus many have thought that it wasn’t the virus killing people as much as the treatment, specifically Remdesivir poisoning.
Is it absurd that a pharmaceutical company would use snake venom proteins in a drug? Researchers in Brazil do not think so bragging about a molecule present in the venom of jararacussu pit viper would prevent coronavirus’ ability to multiply. It means that scientists could whip up an anti-Covid drug-using snake venom.
“It seems to boil down to an enzyme found in rattlesnake venom,” according to Floyd Chilton, Professor & Director of the Precision Nutrition and Wellness initiative at the University of Arizona. He got blood samples from about 130 patients in a New York ICU and discovered an enzyme found in the highest concentration of it that has ever been found in humans.
“This enzyme is a humanized version, part of the same family as the active ingredient in snake venom, so this enzyme has been around a hundred million years. In simple terms, this enzyme related to snake venom found in humans is likely causing tremendous damage leading to multiple organ failure and death.”
“Could this explain why some people who are very healthy and have no known underlying health conditions die from COVID-19?” asked a reporter. “It could,” Chilton answered. Though he did not finger the source of the venom as remdesivir, it seems like the most likely candidate.
U.S. public health anointed remdesivir the standard-of-practice for patients severely ill with stage-two inflammatory COVID in the ICUs all over America. It is well-known that remdesivir can destroy kidney function in as little as five days. This supposed antiviral agent is being used after the high-viral-load stage-one phase of COVID is over. How many ICU patients have been killed by remdesivir?
“Dr. Paul Marik, one of the best ICU doctors in America, testifies about the dangers of remdesivir and the corruption in our medical system for prescribing it. Though it is deadly, doctors are being incentivized to use it on patients. Remdesivir killed more than 50% of the animals during its clinical trials. Yet the FDA still approved it.” The FDA is an abomination that should be canceled!
Today, October 25th, is Saint Crispin’s Day, and is the feast day of the Christian saints Crispin and Crispinian, twins who were martyred c. 286.
In modern times, the feast day is best known with reference to the St Crispin’s Day Speech in Shakespeare’s play Henry V. A scene in the play recounts the Battle of Agincourt, which took place on Saint Crispin’s Day in 1415, in which the greatly outnumbered English army defeated a larger French force.
[excerpt]
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be rememberèd—
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were
not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any
speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s
day.
– William Shakespeare, Henry V
DO YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND YOUR (VERY LOW) RISK OF DYING FROM COVID?
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola October 25, 2022
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
· Polls taken in 2020 and 2021 revealed Americans were wildly confused and misinformed about their true risk of dying from COVID
· Based on a new preprint analysis by professor John Ioannidis, there’s no reason for anyone to live in fear anymore, regardless of your age, as your risk of dying from COVID is — and always was — minuscule across the board
· Before the COVID jabs were rolled out, if you were 19 or younger, your risk of dying of COVID was 0.0003%; only 3 per 1 million infected with COVID at this age ended up dying. Between ages 60 and 69, the infection fatality rate was 0.501%, i.e., 1 out of 200 infected died
· Emerging evidence suggests the shots are causing immune deficiency in some people, thereby actually raising their risk of dying from SARS-CoV-2 infection, even with the now-milder strains
· The real-world risk of dying from COVID-19 based on published data from the Irish census bureau and the central statistics office for 2020 and 2021 is as follows: For people under 70, the death rate was 0.014%; under 50 years of age, it was 0.002%, which equates to a 1 in 50,000 risk, or about the same as dying from fire or smoke inhalation. Under 25 years of age, the mortality rate was 0.00018%, or 1 in 500,000 risk of dying from COVID.
Dr. Palmer was one of the courageous Professors at the University of Waterloo who refused to go along with the mandates.
https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/~mannr/Open-letter-UW-vaccine-mandates.html
Thank you Sommer for this excellent information.
Months ago I wrote the President of Western U and told him he was killing his kids with the vaxxes. It was like talking to a rock – a really dumb rock.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/william-brooks-to-defend-academic-freedom-a-canadian-professor-calls-for-dangerous-universities_4812511.html?utm_source=OP_article_free&src_src=OP_article_free&utm_campaign=opinion-2022-10-26-ca&src_cmp=opinion-2022-10-26-ca&utm_medium=email&est=ykS4tcO2t3WizoPBu2dGKXMCNPrzsFVhsur6b7J5jXQprs7QU5v4abd1Eo3oezUX7g%3D%3D
(19) Rachel Emmanuel on Twitter: “Asked again about her views on WEF, Premier Danielle Smith says she finds it distasteful when “billionaires brag about how much control they have over political leaders.” Smith says like federal Tory leader Pierre Poilievre, she won’t be attending any WEF events. #abpoli https://t.co/GjtWFhVHnV” / Twitter
Premier @ABDanielleSmith
drops the hammer on a mainstream media reporter who asks why she finds the WEF “distasteful.” Government bailout-brained journalists just can’t comprehend why Smith won’t be going to Davos.
THE GREAT RESET: PLANNING THE THEFT OF CANADA? Oct2022
https://fcpp.org/2022/10/02/the-great-reset-planning-the-theft-of-canada/
“He explained that Canada’s present economic model was seriously flawed and had to be replaced… The government would have to take more control over people’s lives and enforce an austere lifestyle.”
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith slams the World Economic Forum, and says that she is pulling Alberta out of dealings with them and firing the medical tyrants that brought Alberta in line with them in the first place.
Please follow-up on this next Spring. I’d be interested in seeing how your prognostication turns out.
I will try Clyde. Excess Winter deaths in the UK are typically not reported until late in the year, because they need the data from the four months April to July 2023. I can probably find it from total monthly deaths. Some of this data used to be easy-to-find from government sources, but not so much anymore.
England’s 2020 total death data is much greater than Canada’s. Probably not due to the virus – probably caused by very high fuel costs.
Ay, there’s the rub:
SMALL-AREA ASSESSMENT OF TEMPERATURE-RELATED MORTALITY RISKS IN ENGLAND AND WALES: A CASE TIME SERIES ANALYSIS
A new Lancet study by Gasparrini et al (July 2022) ominously reports that from 2000 to 2019 in England and Wales there were an average of 791 heat-related excess deaths and 60,753 cold-related excess deaths each year. That’s an excess death ratio of about 85 to 1 for cold temperatures.
High Heating Costs Spur a Run on ‘Warm Banks’ in UK – Bloomberg
Diesel Shortage?
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/biden-economy-us-25-days-diesel-supply-lack-diesel-cripple-economy/
I recall reading about devastating drought in the UK a couple of months ago.
Now A month’s-worth of rain in a DAY brings Britain to a standstill DM. Weather forecasts for the next ten days say lots more rain expected.
If every weather event is proof of climate change,
it is a real pity that the weather did not get the memo and co-operate. 😉