JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Books

Attenborough’s climate facts fell off a cliff with the Walruses

Is this the tipping point for David Attenborough’s reputation?

Will anyone see David Attenborough the same way again after the Netflix debacle that is  “Climate Change: The Facts”?

The Attenborough subspecies may present itself as an impartial scientist but under scrutiny this is revealed to be a  chameleon-like illusion that hides the real intent, which appears to be to garner prizes, funds, fame and better dinner invitations. Evolutionarily, Attenborough may be seeking to increase his own status (and resources for kin) at the expense of taxpayers, donors and hapless walruses.

David Attenborough

David Attenborough, homo propagandis, wears the guise of environmental scientist while spruiking pagan fears, cherry picked evidence and lying by omission.

The facts turn out to be half-truths that fit the pattern of exploiting primal fears to create deep psychological spin. He says “we don’t know” but then shows the opposite — associating every kind of bad weather, fire, and storm with man-made emissions even though data shows that these were worse in the past or are caused by other factors. In probably his lowest career point, rumours are spreading that not only did thriving polar bears cause the falling walrus episode rather than coal power stations, but his crew may have killed walruses unwittingly by being there. Paul Homewood argues the team itself scared the walruses by flying drones near the herd and spooking them, or blocking their exit path. Attenborough’s team deny this, but the “trust me” answer doesn’t sit well with past behavior. They didn’t mention the presence of polar bears in the documentary, nor past walrus-on-the-rocks deaths, they blamed it all (improbably) on a lack of sea ice — as if walruses climb high cliffs to escape the open sea, and they won’t say when and where it was filmed. In short, there’s no trust left in the Attenborough-trust-bucket.

Let’s pause for one minutes silence to mark the death of a once great reputation.

For the record: Fires were worse, are falling, are caused by fuel loads, not temperatures, biofuels kill people and destroy forests. Storms have been ghastly forever, and don’t correlate with CO2. The Great Barrier Reef survived thousands of years of warmer weather, reseeds itself, have genes to cope with CO2 and warmth. Most of the reef wasn’t bleached, and it recovers fast  is adaptable, and fish cope with daily pH swings that are larger than anything humans might cause.

h/t the GWPF who have been so important in revealing this sociological phenomena. And The Australian.

Documentary film crew denies spooking walruses who fell to their deaths

[World Tribune] There was an incident in Russia in 2017 where polar bears were reported to have spooked a herd of walruses, causing them to fall off a cliff to their deaths. Crockford believes this is the event that was filmed by the documentary crew.

“The film crew have steadfastly refused to reveal precisely where and when they filmed the walrus deaths shown in this film in relation to the walrus deaths initiated by polar bears reported by The Siberian Times in the fall of 2017,” Crockford said.

David Attenborough orangutan’s are just one of the flaws in the great naturalist’s ‘alarmist’ new documentary

David Rose, The Daily Mail, UK

 The film’s message was so bleak it could have been made by Extinction Rebellion, the eco-anarchist protest group which has brought Central London to a standstill.

Watching it did fill me with horror, but not at the threat from global warming. It was at the way Sir David and the BBC presented a picture of the near future which was so much more frightening than is justified.

…it is a grotesque travesty of the truth to claim that ‘nothing’ has been done: for example, since 1990, UK emissions have fallen by 43 per cent, according to the Government’s Committee on Climate Change. Not only that, Government statistics say 56 per cent of our electricity came from low carbon sources in 2018, our last coal-fired power station will close in six years and the Government has pledged to ‘decarbonise’ electricity by 2030.

Above all, the Climate Change Act requires Britain to reduce its 1990 carbon emissions by no less than 80 per cent by the year 2050…

Rose explains how (among other propaganda) the documentary claims that Orangutans were being evicted from forests by land clearing to make soap and biscuits. Attenborough somehow forgets to mention that Borneo’s forests are also being razed to make palm oil as a biofuel for cars. What’s killing orangutans is not climate change but the climate change industry.

What David Attenborough’s climate change show didn’t tell you

Ross Clark, The Spectator

What I won’t let go is this growing practice …  of trying to link every adverse weather event to climate change. In this, Attenborough’s documentary was a masterclass.

If you are going to present a film called Climate Change: the Facts the very least you should be doing is, well, presenting the facts. Well here they are, in two of the areas which made up such a hefty part of the film: wildfires and hurricanes. Are wildfires increasing?

Michael Mann says wildfires are tripling. Clark points out the US EPA data says “not”:

…the US Environment Protection Agency (EPA) [data] shows no upwards trend in the number of wildfires in the US over the past 30 years. Take another way of measuring wildfires – the acreage burned, in figure two of this data  – and there is an upwards trend since the 1980s.

It is little wonder that terrified kids are skipping school to protest against climate change. Never mind climate change denial, a worse problem is the constant exaggeration of the subject.

Read more at both The Daily Mail and The Spectator.

Image MikeDixson

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 10.0/10 (34 votes cast)

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.7/10 (16 votes cast)

Earliest recorded snow event in Western Australian history

Remember when climate modelers told us fossil fuels cause longer snow seasons?

No neither do I.

Albany, snowboarding, earliest snow, WA, 2019.

Albany, snowboarding, earliest snow, WA, 2019.

It is the earliest recorded snow event in a calendar year in the state’s history. Statistically, we can tell how anomalous this is by the behaviour of the local wildlife – seen snowboarding in shorts on the driveway in Albany. (Even going across the road). It’s possible this is the longest snowboard ride in the state’s history too. Though technically it is hail-boarding.

See snowboarding in Albany Western Australia

For foreign readers, WA (Western Aust) doesn’t have a snow season. Last regular snow was probably circa 20,000BC.

The ABC reports:

BOM forecaster Matt Boterhoven said snow was an extremely rare occurrence in April.

“It’s exceptional. We’ve only recorded once, in the last 100 years, snow as early as this on top of the Stirling Ranges,” he said.

“It’s related to a very strong cold air mass moving over the south-west of the state, so when conditions get below freezing and there’s precipitation, snow can form on top of Stirling Ranges.”

Mr Boterhoven predicted further snow flurries were possible into Saturday morning — something which came to pass overnight.

ABC on facebook

We all know this is weather not climate. We also know that if this was the earliest heatwave of the season it would be “proof of climate change” on the ABC.

Bluff Knoll, where the snow is, is a five hour drive from Perth. In WA snow is so rare we have “snow chasers”. Reportedly “dozens” of people are headed there to see the snow. Dozens!

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (66 votes cast)

Burn oil so we can eat more chocolate

The fake scare of the season — “climate change is impacting chocolate production”.

Chocolate is produced from the beans that grow on cocoa trees. These plants can only grow in a fairly narrow range of conditions, which makes them vulnerable to changes in the environment.

Unfortunately, climate change is threatening some of these key growing regions. According to the IPCC, rising temperatures and a relative reduction in rainfall could make areas like West Africa less suitable for cocoa production in the future. Changes to the climate are also pushing cocoa-growing regions to higher altitudes in some parts of the world, which can make some crops unsustainable.

We can see just how hard cocoa crops have been hit by record heat and 500 billion tons of carbon.

Since 1989 humans have put out more than 50% of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions since homo sapiens went sapien. There is an undeniable trend here.

Happy Easter to everyone.

h/t Dave B

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.7/10 (54 votes cast)

Kenney wins landslide in Alberta against carbon tax: vows War Room against energy activists

Yet another big win against carbon taxes: Abbott, Trump, Ford and now Kenney

Alberta, Canada

Provinces of Canada.

The first pledge was to get rid of the carbon tax. The victory was a scorching 63 to 24 seats, or 55% to 32%.

Alberta is a conservative province of Canada with 4 million people. It’s wealthy from oil, gas and agriculture. (It’s not that different to Queensland and WA.). Jason Kenney is on a mission to get the province back from environmental zealots: fergoodnesssake, he even vowed to set up a ‘War Room’ against energy activists.

The greens were the main target and the people said “Yes”.

Conservatives win big victory in Alberta, Canada

The right-leaning United Conservative Party (UCP) has taken power in the oil-rich Canadian province of Alberta, routing the left-leaning NDP.

It was a landslide victory:

Canadian Flag

…Kenney defeated center-left incumbent Rachel Notley, 55, whose New Democratic Party snapped four decades of conservative rule in 2015. His UCP won 63 seats in the provincial legislature, against 24 for Notley’s NDP,

He’s vowed to get stalled pipelines built, scrap the province’s carbon tax, and create a “war room” to hit back at anti-oil-sands campaigners. He also pledged to cut corporate taxes and balance the province’s books in his first term.

– Kevin Orland, Bloomberg

The Rachel Notley New Democratic government was a one term wonder in Alberta:

The United Conservative Party’s win will mark a sharp turn in the province’s environmental policy. The NDP introduced a number of stringent climate measures in 2015 that included the province’s first ever economy-wide carbon tax. Kenney has promised to repeal that tax as one of his first policy moves after taking power.

 

First order of business to get rid of the carbon tax

After it’s gone, Trudeau will force a federal one on Alberta, and Kenney will oppose that in court:

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.0/10 (76 votes cast)

Australia to pay $25b to foreigners so we get better weather

In a nutshell, if the Labor Party wins (and that’s looking likely) Australia will pay $25b, maybe $35b to foreigners for paper certificates that claim to have reduced a tiny amount of beneficial gas. This is hard earned money leaving the country so that our foreign minister and PM can sit at better tables at UN Gala Dinners. The paper certificates have a long history of fraud, are often based on good intentions of Chinese or Russian businessman saying they will put out more CO2 but can stop if we pay up. It’s so stupid sometimes people even create pollution just to get paid to clean it up. They’re unauditable, worthless, and based on scientificy assertions that are also unaudited and worthless. It’s a double layered scam.

Welcome to pagan Australia, obedient fool serf for namecalling rulers of Europe, giant banks, and multinational corporations.

A witchdoctor calls PM “cave-dweller“:

This is mature policy debate in the lucky country.

Richard Ferguson, The Australian

Bill Shorten has angrily dismissed claims his carbon reduction policy could cost business $25 billion as “nonsense” and labelled Scott Morrison a “climate-denying cave dweller.”

 But wait — why’s that number wrong?

“The $25 billion figure is a lie. It’s using… You can make any number work for you if you pump in the assumptions you want to.”

Exactly Mr Shorten. Just like climate models. You can make any number you want. Assume humidity rises 10km up then ignore 28 million weather balloons that say the opposite. Go Bill, Go.

Economic models = climate models = useless.

Mr Scare Campaign tells people not to run scare campaigns

Today’s comic relief: Mr Shorten says we’re all going to die from floods and droughts but warns that Scott Morrison is running a scare campaign:

Sir Mediscare hath spoken.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (82 votes cast)

Facebook finds truth by “Groupthink” — may the deepest pockets win the info war

In a flash of insight, or possibly rank capitulation, Facebook has announced last week that it will “fight misinformation” with censorship.  Seems Facebook thinks Facebook-users are too stupid to figure out the misinformation themselves. Besides, fighting misinformation with the truth is especially hard if the misinformation is true:

Facebook crackdown on groups spreading misinformation

Barbara Ortutay and Rachel Lerman, The Australian

Facebook says it is rolling out a wide range of updates aimed at combating the spread of false and harmful information on the social media site – stepping up the company’s fight against misinformation and hate speech as it faces growing outside pressure.

 And it’s not even transparent censorship but the the most weaselly hidden kind:

The updates will limit the visibility of links…

How does Facebook define misinformation?  Wait til you hear this: Groupthink = truth?

…limit the visibility of links found to be significantly more prominent on Facebook than across the web as a whole, suggesting they may be clickbait or misleading.

So that pretty much rules out Facebook spreading the word of whistleblowers, rebels, new theories, suppressed ideas, oppressed people and anything controversial, interesting or not completely predictable. Facebook seems to want to transform itself into a mumsie discussion board of old news and approved memes with all the thrill of an in-flight safety lecture.

Thus Facebook will become a mirror of the permitted, official, authorized web. Expect their ratings to adjust accordingly.

Facebook’s VP of integrity (?) points out that ‘striking a balance between protecting people’s privacy and public safety is “something societies have been grappling for centuries.”’ But that’s the point. It took centuries but we worked out the worst kind of lies are the ones told by the rulers, and the only antidote to those is free speech.

In an information war the deepest pockets are in the Treasury’s pants.

If authorities say evil people cause storms and kill children, and mobs start to bay for their blood the answer is not censorship but broadcasting the other point of view. And may the best man win…

Facebook’s solution is some kind of automated groupthink algorithm (like that won’t be gamed) and teams of tens of thousands of moderators with “at least 80 hours training” who are paid “above industry standard”.

The story was published on April 7 in The Australian.

h/t Bowman with more to come

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (56 votes cast)

Midweek Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 7.8/10 (16 votes cast)

We need to protect our health system from Climate-change-doctors

Doctors are at it again trying to scare people about “climate change”. But all around the world, in every study in every city humans die more from the cold than they do from the heat (and by six to 20 times more). That’s thousands of lives and it happens every single year. Don’t these doctors know anything?

...

Attributable fraction of deaths: Heat, cold and temperature variability together resulted in 42,414 deaths during the study period, accounting for about 6.0% of all deaths. Most of attributable deaths were due to cold (61.4%), and noticeably, contribution from temperature variability [TV] (28.0%) was greater than that from heat (10.6%). Cheng et al.

The awful truth that incompetent self-serving doctors forgot to mention was that cooler room temperatures allow viruses to survive longer, which is just one of many reasons the Flu Season is always worse in winter.

Break my heart, if “climate change” is real the only thing the docs have to worry about is whether they’ll earn less money in winter.

Here’s the headline:

 Health system needs to be protected from climate change: doctors

Here’s the real news: The health system needs to be protected from climate-change-doctors. We can’t afford to have medico’s who don’t understand the scientific process, who think “models” provide real evidence, or who will use their positions of trust to falsely scare people for the sake of their own financial gain or political and religious infatuation. We can’t afford to have doctors who don’t understand what the error bars mean on rare events or that correlation is not causation. Who would put their life in the hands of gullible fools who follow groupthink or who get their medical knowledge from watching the ABC?

At the very least, we expect these docs would do a basic competent literature search on the topics they profess to lecture us on. Even a freshman doctor straight out of med school should know deaths are higher in winter.

That said, there are many skeptical doctors around. Many of my top supporters are GP’s and Specialists.

 What incompetent doctors are saying in the media:

 “With heatwaves more people will die and get sick from things like respiratory illnesses, strokes and things like that, as well as dehydration.”

Higher temperatures also provide vectors for disease, especially mosquito-bourne illnesses, with the insects travelling further south than usual.

That was on top of more frequent natural disasters putting a strain on the health system, he said.

“With heatwaves more people will die and get sick from things like respiratory illnesses, strokes and things like that, as well as dehydration.”

Shame we didn’t have more competent journalists to ask them real questions.

 It’s not the extremes that pose the biggest risk, it’s “moderate cold”:

Dang statistics tell a different story.

Mortality due to heatwaves, cold temperatures, Sydney, Sweden, Tokyo, New york, South Korea, Canada.

Note the big killer “moderate cold”  |  Click to enlarge

 

Heatwave deaths in Australia are trending down

Heatwave deaths, graph, Australia.

 Posts on health and mortality:

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.7/10 (46 votes cast)

Justice! Prof Peter Ridd wins on all counts against James Cook Uni

Peter Ridd, James Cook University trial.

Professor Peter Ridd

Brilliant. There is still some free speech in Australia, as long as you are willing to risk your career, 12 months out of action and a huge legal case. Peter Ridd wins on all counts.

Presumably James Cook will have to reinstate him, and he is now free to talk about the failure of replication in science and how our institutions may not be trusted. How many taxpayer dollars were fritzed defending the indefensible? Will Ridd get compensation? Will JCU staff get punished or sacked for  their war against science?

Thanks to Peter for fighting on when so many would have given up, and thanks to everyone who helped fund the case!

UPDATE: In reply, the Provost of James Cook Uni says Ridd was never gagged or silenced, nor sacked for his scientific views. Which would be great if it were so. But there’s a pattern here — how many skeptical scientists do they employ? Is that zero? We all know they went to great lengths to blackball, evict, and practically erase skeptical Prof Bob Carter too. If there are any skeptical scientists left at JCU, they are probably too afraid to speak out. Which is rather the point. Without some mea culpa, and a change of management, or some encouragement for skeptics to speak we have to assume that all research from JCU is tainted — we don’t know what the researchers won’t say or which results they daren’t mention.We don’t know what experiments they won’t dare do. 

Read The full legal Judgement (see especially from 2.12 onwards).


Dear All,

Excellent news.

My lawyers have told me that the judge handed down his decision and we seem to have won on all counts.

It all happened very quickly and we had no warning , and because I live almost a thousand miles from the court, I was not able to be there. I have still not seen the written judgement and will update you all when I have that information.

Needless to say, I have to thank all 2500 of you, and all the bloggers, and the IPA and my legal team who donated much of their time free for this success. But mostly I want to thank my dearest Cheryl, who quite by chance has been my bestest friend for exactly 40 years today. It just shows what a team effort can achieve.

The next chapter of this saga must now be written by the JCU Council which is the governing body of JCU. What will they do about the VC and SDVC who were responsible for bringing the university into disrepute, not just in North Queensland, but also around the world. JCU crushed dissent, crushed academic freedom and tried to crush my spirit with their appalling behaviour. They only failed because I had your support. But if the JCU council does not act, they will be complicit in this disgraceful episode.

Attention must now focus on the JCU council.

I will update you shortly when I have more information, but for now I certainly have a spring in my step.

kind regards

Peter

From Peter Ridd’s GoFundMe page

From the Australian:

“The Court rules that the 17 findings made by the University, the two speech directions, the five confidentiality directions, the no satire direction, the censure and the final censure given by the University and the termination of employment of Professor Ridd by the University were all unlawful,” Judge Vasta said.

A penalty hearing will be set for a later date.

h/t TdeF, crosspatch, Bill in Oz, Another Ian

The Peter Ridd story:

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (123 votes cast)

Solar Power hits the death spiral vertical rise in Australia

Solar PanelsSolar installations are rapidly accelerating in Australia, surging in the last quarter by an extraordinary 482MW. This is partly due to rapidly rising electricity costs, but in the last quarter, especially amplified by an extra $2250 subsidy in Victoria which adds to current subsidies like the SRES (RET) which already cover around half the cost of installation.

This is obviously a market destroying practice but will be hailed as evidence that solar power is “surging” due to “falling prices” and “increasing demand”. More fake news.

In the land of the Renewable-Crash-Test-Dummy we’re hitting the death spiral. Every installation costs non-solar owners more (with the tally at $200pa and rising fast) and there are fewer non-solar owners left to pay. Obviously, the whole market has to be changed to ensure that solar owners pay a fair share of networking and backup costs.

If solar power was cheap, useful or competitive, it wouldn’t need the subsidies. Instead, the nation keeps adding more useless infrastructure and wondering why the price of electricity is rising.

Solar panel installations, Australia, Graph.

Solar panel installations, Australia, Graph.

Data: Australian PV Institute

The tally of solar stupidity

Solar is inefficient, wilderness destroying, money-hungry, useless, grid wrecking equipment

Without subsidies the German Solar industry lost 80,000 jobs in a bloodbath. Last year China cut solar subsidies to reduce the price of electricity and PV projects dropped 43%, and solar stocks plummeted. Spain added a solar tax to recover some of the costs and the lost 65,000 renewable jobs. In Japan fifty solar PV companies went broke in 2017 as subsidies ended. Meanwhile in Australia, we’re we are so stupid we are putting subsidizing solar panels on top of subsidized irrigated farmland, and when we aren’t destroying farmland we destroy trees instead. Taxpayers even gave $300m to a Saudi billionaire for a solar plant that made a bare 2% of old dying coal plant’s power.

Solar panels waste so much land, the UK government had to hide their own comparisons of the land needed for solar compared to nuclear power. Even with subsidies solar farms collapse sometimes because the maintenance costs were too high, including unspecified hail damage, and shonky bubble-market faulty installations which sometimes cause house fires. If the shonky installation doesn’t burn the house down, the batteries might insteadRooftop solar is destroying baseload profitability, raising the prices of all other cheaper generators and causing voltage and frequency surges, and is expected to cause blackouts. Adding intermittent power causes supply squeezes that allow giant corporations to scam a billion dollars in price spikes for a single day’s electricity. For people who really hate the environment solar PV is probably the most expensive and useless way to reduce CO2 - in 2018 all 2 million solar panels cut Australian total CO2 emissions by a pathetic 1%.

Solar Panels are essentially useless most hours of the day, most days of the year, and sometimes the entire Eastern Seaboard of solar panels are only working at half speed even at midday. When they are working together they force the grid voltage as high as 253 Volts, making other equipment prone to breaking and even more costly to run. The dangerous voltages triggers some solar panels to cut themselves off, right at the peak time of day when they are actually working. Solar electricity is so unnecessary that when an eclipse wiped out California’s massive solar input, the price of electricity got cheaper.

Australian subsidies are so large, unfair and pointless, in sunny Queensland the state government won’t even tell us how large they are.

 All my posts on solar are spread under the , and

h/t Dave B, and for long advice from ROM (whom we miss greatly!) and TdeF and Robber.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (91 votes cast)

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.7/10 (26 votes cast)

Climate change bad: causes “longer growing seasons” but blamed for allergies

It’s a disaster: More plants, more crops, more flowers!

Pollen, flowers, allergy, photo, free-photos.

Between 1995 and 2011, fewer freeze-free days meant 11 to 27 days added to pollen season for most of the United States, research shows. The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, which does an annual survey of allergy season, noticed that it’s been growing each year.

It’s a spurious correlation: quick, build a wind farm!

The number of allergy sufferers has grown, research shows. One in 10 Americans struggled with hay fever in 1970, and 3 in 10 did by 2000. Asthma, which can be made worse by exposure to pollen, has become more common too, with higher rates among kids, low-income households and African Americans.

Warming cycles have always happened, and when times are good, plants have to ramp up the competition — it’s in their genes. Allergy cycles, we can bet, probably didn’t happen so often to paleolithic people who didn’t have access to Ventolin-trees or Epipen-plants.

Could it be that what causes asthma is not more pollen, but changes to breastfeeding, pollution, glyconutrients, diets, antihistamines, histamines, Vitamin D, parasites, cleaningbaby wipes, cesarean sections, less farming, less farm dust, less dirt, and adding preservatives, antacids and antibiotics and other things that kill off our gut flora?

Image: Free-photos

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (72 votes cast)

In Australia Climate obedience must be 100%

Stating the bleeding obvious about climate science earns headlines

Tony Abbott merely states what no real scientist could argue with. Things are not quite as settled in climate science as people say. For this tiny deviation from the permitted line he is isolated and depicted in a headline as “questioning science” when he’s really just questioning propaganda lines.

The editors of both AAP and The Australian could have chosen a different headline: Abbott declares “we only have one planet”. But in headline-world, which is often the only line people will read, Abbott is made out to be saying something risky. Imagine, I am Spartacus, if every single conservative politician said “of course — Climate science isn’t perfect.” But almost none of them have the balls.

Abbott questions climate change science

AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATED PRESS, The Australian

Tony Abbott has questioned the “so-called settled” science about climate change, a month after dropping his view that Australia should pull out of the Paris climate agreement.
skeptical scientists

The former prime minister insisted he was a realist when asked about his position on climate change during his election campaign launch in Manly on Friday.

“The so-called settled science is not quite as settled as people say, and that’s my position,” he told reporters.

“Nevertheless we have only got one planet; we should do what we reasonably can to rest lightly upon it.”

Despite this questioning, Mr Abbott said he does believe climate change happens and that mankind makes a contribution.

“We should do what we reasonably can to reduce emissions,” he said.

“What we shouldn’t do though, is turn our economy upside down in what turns out to be a futile green gesture.”

It’s hard to believe with statements so banal and ordinary are worth a mention, let alone a headline. But such is the paralyzing grip of fashion and religion in Australia.

The climate science tally of failure:

The IPCC’s top scientists can’t predict the climate on a local, regional, or continental scale, 98% of Climate Models cannot explain why global warming slowed for years, models get the core assumptions wrong – the hot spot is still missing, (that’s the only fingerprint they said mattered, right up until they couldn’t find it). They can’t explain the pause, the cause or the long term historic climate movements either. Measurements of satellites, cloud cover changes, 3,000 ocean buoys6,000 boreholes, a thousand tide gauges, and 28 million weather balloons looking at temperature or humidity can’t find the warming that the models predict. In the oceans, the warming isn’t statistically significantsea-levels started rising too early, aren’t rising fast enough, aren’t accelerating, nor are warming anywhere near as much as they predicted. Antarctica was supposed to be warming faster than almost anywhere but they were totally wrong. The vast Southern Ocean is cooling not warming. The only part of Antarctica that’s warming sits on top of a volcano chain they prefer not to tell you about.

Some scientists are behaving badly: hiding data, declines, history, adjustments and methodsThousands of other scientists are protesting all over the internet. Tony Abbott is merely saying what most engineers and geologists, and half of the worlds meteorologists, and climate scientists would say.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (135 votes cast)

Green fans, born to be scammed. Finally, jail for a $54m fake green energy ponzi schemer

There are crooks in every field, but some fields are ripe for the picking.

If you wanted to run a scam would you a/ try to fool hard-nosed money changers in a mature industry that makes a real product or b/ pick the latest touchy feely fashionable trope and offer their fans, who are not good with cause, effect or numbers, a chance to feel great and get rich too?

From 2005 to 2009 a few US graduates straight out of college promised to turn biochar into energy and save the world as well. They raised $54m, gave $17m to the early investors and then promised 484% returns to later investors. The Clinton Foundation loved them, but they never made even a kilo of biochar. Not long after that the US SEC figured the scam out and shut them down. That was 2009. Then it only took 10 years to get one sentenced to 30 months jail.

If only the media had been more skeptical:

NBC Philadelphia:  30 months in prison for $54m Green Scam

[Amanda] Knorr co-founded a company called Mantria Corp., which with the help of a slick-talking Colorado “wealth advisor” raised millions for a supposed clean energy product called “biochar.”Their pitch about producing biochar, however, turned out to be completely baked, according to prosecutors, and eventually proved to be a giant Ponzi scheme.

Knorr was also sentenced to five years’ parole and ordered to pay $54 million in restitution. She so far has paid $10,000 through wage garnishments, according to prosecutors.

The Clinton Global Initiative, run by Bill and Hillary Clinton, link to Mantria on its website, ambiguously  praise the “committment” and value it at “$600,000″?” Did they fund it, or are we just meant to think they did?  There are many details and plans of how carbon sequestration would enrich the soils of Africa and cool the world on that site, but there’s only one progress report: This commitment was reported unfulfilled.

Biggest scam, my foot.

It’s being called the biggest scam involving clean energy, which it would be except for all the bigger scams, like wind farm rackets in Scotland who were paid £328m to do nothing, and the £1.8 billion consumers paid on giant interconnectors so that the wind farms could make a profit, or the $2 billion Russian and Ukrainian fake carbon credit scam. The Chinese hydrofluorocarbon factory scam, and the $5b VAT Tax fraud and the $100 billion plus dollars invested in scientists in the hope we might understand what causes climate change. And that’s just for starters…


 

From the Indictment Charges for “Green Energy” Ponzi Scheme (2015)

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (78 votes cast)