|
|
What grows on a wind “farm” ? Debt-cows
On Wednesday nearly all the wind generators in the country failed. About 4,000 turbines across five states of Australia were hit by some kind of simultaneous fuel crisis. At one point all the wind power in our national grid was only making 3% of Australia’s electricity, and that was the best part of the day. At its worst, all those turbines produced about 1.2% of the power we needed. It was that bad.
Across the nation, something like $15 to $20 billion dollars of infrastructure ground to a halt.
Welcome to the clean green energy future:
 The black line in this image is the total power generation across the day, and that equates equally to power consumption across the day. The green colour rolling along the bottom is wind generation, all of it, across the day. Who pays for the battery back up for these dysfunctional non-farms? As Rafe Champion would say — it was a “choke point” all day.
It would be nice to believe this incident was due to all the old failing wind towers that used to be reliable workhorses. If only. Then there would be hope we could fix things. But these were mostly new towers, and this is as good as it gets.
We could double the money and build Snowy 2.0 power storage, state interconnectors, and batteries. Otherwise we just have to pay off the Sun, the Moon and the Southern Oscillation.
Or, of course, we could back up 99% of the entire grid with fossil fuels (and some Hydro), which we do. But then the wind farms are completely superfluous, except to make the Greens feel good, and the Renewables Industry rich.
 … TonyfromOz estimates we get a day like this once a year, but there are a lot of 6-hour-type squeezes when all 4,000 plus turbines make even less. A battery just isn’t going to cover that…
Who pays for the back up? We the People.
As TonyfromOz says: compare the productivity of a 50 year old coal plant
Let’s look at the ancient old clunker Liddell, now coughing its last, after 50 years of operation. Only two of its four Units are in operation, and both of them are operating at much reduced Capacity. Liddell delivered more power across the day than did EVERY wind plant in the Country, in fact nine percent more power across the whole 24 hour recording period.
So, on this day, every single wind plant in Australia cannot match the delivery from HALF of the oldest coal fired plant in the Country.
We’ve spent something in the order of $20 Billion dollars to get an 8GW generator that doesn’t work most of the time. Liddell, if they fixed it, and it could run in a free and fair market, would still be profitable.
BTW — The graphs come from Anero.id, a site set up by one man — Andrew Miskelly — that provides an essential service our well funded AEMO and the entire Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure can’t manage to provide. Amazing what one determined bright guy can do.
For more information see TonyfromOz: Daily power for Tuesday 28th April: All day wind power was generating between 1 and 3% of the total Grid requirements.
References and estimates below
Keep reading →
9.6 out of 10 based on 104 ratings
…
8.6 out of 10 based on 15 ratings
This might be one of the most incompetent studies of 2o21
Hanigan, Dear and Woodward have done a “unique”, first of, *groundbreaking study* that finally shows climate change is having a detrimental effect on our health (so they say). With great effort to ignore almost every variable that mattered, they found the seasonal ratio of deaths in Australia has changed:
”More people die in winter than summer, but climate change may see this reverse
In our study published today, we show some of the first evidence climate change has had observable impacts on Australians’ health between 1968 and 2018.
We found long-term heating is associated with changed seasonal balance of deaths in Australia, with relatively more deaths in summer months and relatively fewer deaths in winter months over recent decades.
Our findings can be explained by the gradual global warming associated with climate change. Over the 51 years of our study, annual average temperatures increased by more than 1°C in Australia. The last decade (2011 to 2020) was the hottest in the country’s recorded history.
The other interpretation is that it got warmer and deaths in winter declined more than deaths in summer did.
Basically if climate change does anything, it’s saving us from even more deaths in cold weather. Three cheers for fossil fuels.
The climate trend is unequivocal: The hotter it got the longer we lived
Looks like climate change saves lives even in hot sunny Australia:
But Hanigan et al miss the obvious and work pretty hard to find that the slope of the summer deaths (diamonds) below is rising slightly faster than the winter deaths (squares). Panic now. That’s how bad climate change is (and that how overfunded our universities are.)
 … Here’s another awkward fact: Heatwave deaths in Australia peaked around World War I?
 Australian heatwave deaths peaked around World War I. Source: PerilAUS Even in the deadly decade of 2000 to 2009, heatwave deaths were less than 0.5% of total deaths. That scary last column is not the big killer you might think.
“Our research is unique
“Globally, our study is one of very few that directly shows the health impacts of climate change.
Instead their study directly shows what a waste of money higher education is:
In our study, we used Australian mortality records that have been collected with remarkable consistency of detail and quality over the last half century. And by focusing on the ratio of summer to winter deaths within each year, we avoid possible confounding associated with, say, improvements to health care.
So they avoided the confounding factor of “improvements in health care” but completely forgot that people predominantly died of different things in 1968 — like especially heart failure and influenza, both more common in winter. Lately, the increase in deaths due to Alzheimers and dementia spread those fatal events across the year. This one factor alone probably explains the minor trend they found.
They haven’t found a climate change effect at all, it’s just the effect of a changing pattern of diseases:
 Many more people die of cardiovascular deaths in winter rather than summer. Barnett et al 2008 Ischemic heart disease is surprisingly more of a winter disease. There’s less sun, less vitamin D, room temperatures are colder, blood pressure goes up, and inflammation is more likely and makes everything worse. Nothing kills as many people as moderate cold.
For a second, the researchers even have to admit that more climate change might save more lives (and we can’t have that!):
In one study on the topic, the authors found Australia may initially experience a net reduction in temperature-related deaths. That is, increased deaths from heat during summer would be offset by fewer deaths in winter, as winters become more mild.
What do you know: models arrive to rescue the doomer narrative:
However, they predict this pattern would reverse by mid-century under the business-as-usual emissions scenario.
Just one more irrelevant discovery:
We found the speed of change in the ratio of summer to winter deaths was fastest in the hottest years within each decade.
So on long term rising trends for both temperatures and deaths, what’s the bet that the last years of each decade are more likely to be both hotter and more deadly? Shock me.
This paper is more evidence that it takes ineptitude to have a good career in science these days. Being sensible is a handicap.
Who gave them their grant money?
Related:
h/t Eric Worrall, WUWT.
REFERENCES
Barnett et al (2008) The seasonality in heart failure deaths and total cardiovascular deaths, Aust and NZ Journal of Public Health, vol 32, no 5.
Ivan C. Hanigan , Keith B.G. Dear, Alistair Woodward (2021) Increased ratio of summer to winter deaths due to climate warming in Australia, 1968–2018, 26 April 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.13107 PDF
ABS: https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/0/b066d450abaaa4c7ca256dea000539dc
9.8 out of 10 based on 50 ratings
Who voted for Superannuation funds to decide energy policy?
And you thought we elected a government to manage our National energy policy?
Businesses must adopt Paris emissions targets even if the government fails to do so, big investors say.
The Guardian
So even if voters don’t want “climate action”, by default, it’s sneaking in the back door, unless they pay attention.
The “big investors” in this case being a small team of activists running a club that some Superannuation corporates have joined, though it’s not clear why. Perhaps they joined to “look Woke” or perhaps they are feeding the crocodile for fear of being targeted?
The Australian Council of Superannuation Investors (ACSI) is not trying to persuade funds or investors to go Green with reason, instead they seem to operate by Cancel Culture principles on a corporate scale. Their aim, apparently, is to bully Directors of your Superfund into themselves bullying the companies they invest in. In a Saul Alinsky fashion they effectively threaten Directors that they might be personally isolated and targeted if they are not seen to be supportive enough of the Woke religion (ie, climate, slavery, femo-glass-ceiling stuff). Somehow ACSI may “recommend members vote against the re-election of directors”?
In Australia the government forces everyone to put money into “Superannuation” (like the 401K in the US). ASCI gets some of that forced money from the Superfunds as membership fees, then, in turn, demands companies use your money to achieve something you wouldn’t have voted for or invested in yourself. It’s big bucks. ASCI has a “membership” of 36 Superannuation funds: together they manage over one Trillion dollars worth, or as they say… they “own on average 10% of every ASX200 company”. Last year ASCI creamed off nearly $4m in fees for themselves from superfunds in order to put greenie-woke pressure on superfunds. See how this works?
SBS leaked the news with glowing praise last night that ACSI was going to target (and bully) Directors of companies that were more concerned with making profits for you — rather than with meeting the Paris agreement. The shame!
This week ASCI has a “new climate policy” thus appointing themselves rulers and Science Geniuses.
If the media exposed this power-grab and activism, people en masse might pull their funds out and Superfunds which indulged in these pointless “fashionable” councils for misusing your money would abandon them.
Cliona O’Dowd, The Australian
 Louise Davidson, ASCI. “Instead of just asking people to report and to talk to us about what they’re doing, we’re now saying governance for this sits with the board, and we will hold the board accountable if we don’t believe that the company is doing as much as they need to on climate.
Banks put on notice over climate risks
“Climate change risks are deeply embedded in the financial system and impact all sectors and asset classes. For long-term investors, this poses a serious challenge to long-term value creation across investment portfolios.”
ACSI’s “active and constructive engagement” with the top 200 listed companies had led to improvements in company practices, she said, as she cautioned that more needed to be done.
“Not all companies have listened to investor expectations … In order to increase the focus on climate-related risks in the companies they invest, ACSI may recommend members vote against the re-election of directors.”
One of the mysteries is why any fund would be a part of ASCI? What do they get? According to ASCI, they get lectures, and the opportunity to join their board and lecture other people, but not much else.
Is membership of this group just driven by spineless fear or is it an advertising strategy?
Time to vote with your dollars
If your fund is listed here, it would be helpful if you wrote to them to ask why they are members of a group that specifically says its aims are “not on returning a profit to shareholders”? Does your superannuation fund support you or the Religion of Woke? If they don’t give a satisfactory answer let them know you plan on finding another fund, and on spreading the word. If you get a response, please share it with us.
 Members of ASCI
Who is this energy and climate genius — CEO Louise Davidson?
She knows a lot about generating electricity and making profits (not):
Appointed as the investor group’s chief executive in April 2015, Ms Davidson has more than 20 years’ experience in the financial services and superannuation industry.
She joined ACSI from Cbus, where she managed their Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) investments.
Who’s happy to hide their role as corporate bully?
Ms Davidson says ACSI often gets described as “social activists”, but the intent is not to act against companies. She says it is to engage and help them become more successful and profitable.
Since the whole point of ASCI is “not profitability” and they don’t agitate against Directors who run unprofitable entities but against Directors who aren’t yet evangelistic about the Woke Religion, it’s clear she is happy to mislead and misinform with a straight face.
It’s just another way to take power out of your hands.
But all’s fair in love and war, and they are taking advantage of sleeping investors who think they can give their money to other people without paying attention. Parasites wouldn’t get away with this if the media cared, the politicians were brave and investors were able to invest in funds that “chose cheap profitable energy” over Voodoo and fads.
Time to pay attention.
ASCI 2020 Annual Review
9.8 out of 10 based on 71 ratings
…
10 out of 10 based on 5 ratings
The CCP is still not being honest about bioweapons research in China. How stupid does the West have to be?
 The The Mail on Sunday has documents showing that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was working with the Chinese military on a big project to study animal viruses that started in 2012.
The title of the project was ‘the discovery of animal-delivered pathogens carried by wild animals’. The man in charge was Xu Jianguo. In 2019 he was heard bragging at a conference that “‘a giant network of infectious disease prevention and control is taking shape’.” He was part of the first expert group called in to deal with Covid in January 2020 and was the one who denied human transmissibility. In mid-January he said that the “epidemic is limited and will end if there are no new cases next week”.
Well that was helpful.
The group had five leaders — one was Professor Shi Zhengli who works in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is known as the “bat woman” for her work hunting in caves for bat viruses. Only last month she denied that there was any military involvement. But one of the other leaders was Cao Wuchun, who was high up in the army and an advisor on “Bioterrorism”. He studied in Cambridge and now works in the Academy of Military Medical Sciences of the People’s Liberation Army. His name is on the project reports. Perhaps Prof Shi didn’t read them and they only met on the phone?
How scientists at Wuhan lab helped Chinese army in secret project to find animal viruses
by Ian Birrell, Daily Mail
They found plenty of new viruses:
One review of his virus-hunting project admitted ‘a large number of new viruses have been discovered, causing great concern in the international virology community’.
It added that if pathogens spread to humans and livestock, they could cause new infectious diseases ‘posing a great threat to human health and life safety and may cause major economic losses, even affect social stability’.
An update in 2018 said that the scientific teams – who published many of their findings in international journals – had found four new pathogens and ten new bacteria while ‘more than 1,640 new viruses were discovered using metagenomics technology’. Such research is based on extraction of genetic material from samples such as those collected by Prof Shi from bat faeces and blood in the cave networks of southern China.
It’s almost like someone knew a bad virus was about to leak out?
Prof Shi also admitted that eight more unidentified SARS viruses had been collected in the mine. The institute took its database of virus samples offline in September 2019, just a few weeks before Covid cases exploded in Wuhan.
And there was that order to destroy all the samples at the WIV on Jan 2nd 2020. Why would China do that if the virus was a natural agent?
This is not how good global citizens behave
In recent years, China’s military has ramped up its hiring of scientists after President Xi Jinping said this was a key element in the nation’s march for global supremacy.
Lianchao Han, a dissident who used to work for the Chinese government, said Cao’s involvement raised suspicions that military researchers who are experts in coronaviruses might also be involved in bio-defence operations.
‘Many have been working with Western research institutes for years to steal our know-hows but China still refuses to share critical information a year after the pandemic has killed over three million.’
 Image by Reinhold Möller. The CCP is hardly being a good global citizen, stealing IP but not even answering honest questions when lives are at stake.
The Daily Mail says the US State Department was worried about the “Gain of Function” experiments, and has claimed that researchers at the WIV got sick with something like Covid in the weeks before the outbreak started in Wuhan.
Back last May I wrote about how genetic fingerprints in the sequence showed it was almost certainly a synthetic virus. Prof Shi Zhengli supposedly found a bat-virus in a cave in 2013 that is a close relative of SARS2. But inexplicably, she forgot to register this deadly pathogen until Jan 27th 2020, seven long years later. The first Nature paper on it magically appeared just six days after that. “So much for peer review”. The only copy of this supposedly natural “missing link” virus called RaTG13 appears to be on her computer, not in a vial. It’s almost like someone stayed up late one night altering the letters in the viral code and in the rush, forgot to add in a realistic amount of background non-coding noise. The sequence has been showered with fantastical background radiation that only altered coding parts of the gene and not the usual random smattering across the full length of the non-coding parts too.
Odds of that are almost ten million to one.
Must be bad luck.
Right now, the West is spending billions installing uncompetitive energy sources, and researching how to get reliable energy from unreliable, low energy density sources, when there is plenty of energy available but a screaming need to get very advanced in biomedical research.
h/t A friend in Switzerland.
Other posts on bioweapon-like SARS viruses
9.8 out of 10 based on 66 ratings
Here’s the next iconic graph in the climate non-debate.
It’s just another day in the continuing failure of climate models. In 68 simulations the climate experts repeatedly discover how a fantasy Earth was warmed twice as fast as the real Earth has.
The skillless failure of these models is obvious but it works as modern art.
The angry birds of confirmation bias lifted off in 1998 and haven’t landed on anything real for twenty years.
We paid researchers to find a crisis and we got what we paid for:
 The latest model predictions versus what really happened. | Roy Spencer UAH Many thanks to the great legendary Roy Spencer for his exemplary work at Royspencer.com
The Black line is the ERSST — The Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature data (the floating ARGO buoys, Hadley, and other acronyms.)
The models appear to have been retuned lately so that some of the coolest model runs barely include reality. It probably avoids more awkward questions.
9.9 out of 10 based on 78 ratings
…
10 out of 10 based on 9 ratings
PRE NOTE: Obviously Australian emissions of free aerial fertilizer are a net benefit to the world, and we should be paid for them, not charged. But in this world of witchcraft, and lacking a billionaire celebrity who can win elections and face down the media mob — this post is about the obvious, immediately doable ways to reduce the burden of being the worlds Global Patsy. Read it in that spirit. Even within a game with stupid rules, it’s time to go on the attack..
Suddenly the Australian government uses the magic term “Per Capita” and baffles the commentariat
While the rest of the world revels in their glorious fantasy future carbon “targets” the Australian government has finally realized that the measurement units “per country” suited the European overlords, and it was time to reframe the debate.
I have been saying for years, years and years, that Australia has been the Star Global Patsy, doing more per capita than any other nation despite being the fastest growing, furthest, remotest, sparsest and most dependent economy on coal. This is despite most nations of Earth not even pretending to meet their targets. In a quiet moment, even believers in the Paris agreement agreed the obedient sods downunder were going to be hurt more by the Paris agreement than nearly anywhere else on Earth apart from OPEC and Russia. Heck, many years, we are the worlds largest coal exporter, and coal powers most of our electricity. To make it harder on ourselves the chief commodity we are disadvantaging happens to be our second largest export industry. On top of that, we’ve had the fastest population growth in the West, adding a staggering 50% more people since 1990. Is it not beyond obvious, that if a global CO2 agreement was needed, Australia is so unique it would occupy a dot all by itself in an orbit past the end of the graph?
Finally, the Australian Government is catching on — pointing out how well we’ve done, how we met our targets when most others have failed. And also — finally — trumpeting that our emissions cuts per capita are huge. Which they are. Far too large.
Since 1990 — Every Australian has cut CO2 emissions by 46%
 Emissions per capita (grey line) are exceptional, but emissions per GDP dollar (orange line) are even better. How to confuse a journalist
This week Scott Morrison flummoxed a room full of journalists and business types by mentioning that since 2005 we’ve already achieved a 36% cut in emissions. Adam Morton of The Guardian described this as “new” and said it was received with raised eyebrows across the room. It had no precedent in the global debate, he proclaimed, apparently astonished and quite confused:
“No explanation has been offered as to why this is a valid way to count emissions cuts – it has no precedent in the global debate. In the words of one analyst, it is a “Trumpian misrepresentation” of what the data actually says.”
That bad eh? But the real situation wouldn’t have surprised any of them if they’d been halfway competent, read what skeptics have said for years, or even done their own research. After all, the Greenhouse Office has been publishing these per capita graphs quarterly, forever. It’s not like it was a secret.
Is a per capita value “valid” asks Adam Morton?
What other method could possibly be better — asks Jo?
In a thirty year debate about doing our “fair share” what could be fairer than per person measures? Indeed, for years the Green Blob has been accusing Australia of being the “second worst in the world” per capita, and they still are. So if it’s OK to criticize us per capita — why was it not OK for the government to brag about our cuts — per capita?
The hard numbers: Australian emissions have been cut 46% per capita, while the population grew 50% larger and the GDP grew 135%.
- National inventory emissions per capita were 19.9 t CO2-e per person in the year to September 2020.
This represents a 46.2 per cent decline in national inventory emissions per capita from 37.0 t CO2-e
in the year to September 1990. Over the period from 1989-90 to September 2020, Australia’s population grew strongly from 17.0
million to around 25.7 million13,14. This reflects growth of 50.2 per cent.
- Australia’s real GDP (chain volume measures) also experienced significant growth over this period,
expanding from $0.8 trillion in 1990 to around $1.9 trillion in the year to September 2020. This
represents a growth of 135.3 per cent.
— Quarterly update of Australia’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Sept 2020
Morrison and co are not even using the Blakers et al graph below. In 2018 and 2019 Australians were installing renewable energy, faster than any place on Earth. Why don’t Australians know this?
 Per capita, Australia (all shades of red) blitzed the field for installing renewables
Australia is more dependent on mining and resources than most other developed nations:
Fully fifty percent of Australian exports are from mining. These are the most energy intensive exports on Earth, and the world needs these resources. Someone has to dig them up somewhere around the world, yet Australians’ get lumbered with all the emissions accrued in getting these minerals out of the ground?
Australia is not falling behind even by the normal EU-biased way of accounting
The idea that Australia lags behind is a nonsense-stick to beat good people with.
The usual way of comparing emissions reductions is per country, not per capita. This suits the EU. Even so Australia has set a similar target compared to everywhere else, which only goes to show how bad our negotiators were. A long time ago, in the first Kyoto agreement John Howard’s team negotiated an 8% increase in emissions for Australia which made some allowance for our rapidly growing population, distances, and energy dependent export industries. Since then, Australian politicians have only managed to weekly, meekly, “join the pack” at our great disadvantage, and at the same time get harangued for not doing even more.
We don’t need to reduce CO2 at all, but if a government feels (because it is weak) that it has to pretend to go along with the global fashions, at least give Australians credit for “achieving” and negotiate properly. Put Australia first eh?
Our CO2 emissions are irrelevant in so many ways. We emit almost nothing compared to China. Global levels don’t seem to be controlled by our emissions anyway. It’s probably phytoplankton and ocean currents doing most of the emissions, not your car.
The world would be a better place, and Australians would be $18 billion dollars richer ten years from now, if we just spent a couple of million dollars doing goddamn due diligence checking the IPCC version of “science”.
Who audits the IPCC? No one.
UPDATE: Why we should remove “export” emissions from our tally:
Commenters are wondering what the point is of “export emissions” — this means the emissions we send into the sky in order to dig up the iron ore or the coal that other nations use. Because the Australian economy does so much of this heavy lifting for other nations, we are the Worlds Quarry, it’s not fair to count those emissions as our per capita emissions, instead of theirs. We are one of the worlds highest emitters per capita, because other nations have economies based on making t-shirts or software.
Chad asks whether our coal burnt overseas is counted in our emissions. (It isn’t)
But it’s a good question, and here’s my reply in comments below:
We count the emissions emitted to dig the stuff out, and for the transport (those bulk carriers fill up in our ports). So that includes emissions from 2km long trains hauling megatons of rock across hundreds of km. It includes all those 100T huge diesel trucks carrying rock out of deep holes. It includes flying a workforce 2,000 km from home to office etc. It includes building the gas rigs and towing them 2,000 km, plus manufacturing the machines/trucks/trains and also constructing buildings in remote locations and then airconditioning those buildings in 45C heat. Not to mention that fully 10% of the electricity in NSW and VIC is used in one smelter in each state. These are major consumers of fossil fuels. etc etc.
Once the coal arrives in China, theoretically, the burning of it, is “their CO2”.
REFERENCES
Australia’s 2030 Emission Reduction Target
Australia’s Low Technology Roadmap (a magic pick-the-winners wish list).
Scott Morrisons Address to the Business Council of Australia, 19th April, 2021.
Quarterly Update of Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory: Australia’s National Greenhouse Accounts, Department of Environment. Sept 2020. PDF
9.8 out of 10 based on 61 ratings
The Sequel is out– Absolute Interference is the followup to the Absolute Proof video is out. There’s new information in here, more details, cross checks, and missing pieces. The vote rigging appears to have happened across every state and county. The software is opaque, no one can check it. We’re told the machines are not connected to the internet but they are. The Democrats were worried about the electronic voting machines a year ago but now, it’s just a conspiracy theory. US intelligence agencies say that cyber attacks from foreign entities are happening regularly. In Dr Franks analysis of Ohio (a state thought to be okay) there was an improbable 100% registration in all 88 counties, and the same voting proportions in each age bracket in every single county. In other news, it looks like poll workers may have had phones built by a Chinese electronics company that acted as a wifi hot spots sending messages back to China.
“Proves we had foreign interference in our election”.
It’s history in the making — the highest stakes, most aggressive political battle since the cold war, but this time the US is losing. Things can still be turned around, but will they?
_______________
In January, every day the media rang Mike Lindell right up until Feb 5th when his video with the evidence AbsoluteProof came out. Then the phones stopped ringing. They wanted the evidence but when it came it was banned by Vimeo, Youtube, and when 50,000 people a minute were coming in, Facebook put a big sign over the footage, saying it contained “nudity and profanity”.
If this video disappears, search “Absolute Interference” on Bitchute to find another.
7 mins Mike Flynn: One of the things we are certain of, is that these machines are connected. Everyone tells us that these machines are not connected to the internet. But they are..
Vote flipping and rigging was widespread, across the states and counties. All machines in New Hampshire started election day with 300 votes for Biden. There may have been as many as 35,000 votes added in Arizona.
The FBI and CISA gave alerts out warning that Iran was interfering in the election.
“We might be buying the best 21st Century military in the world when the battlefront is Election Security. “
The new analysis by Dr Douglas Frank
38 minutes: Mike Lindell interviews Dr Douglas Frank who describes how someone with an algorithm used the Census data, and changed votes to the point, where every state has 100% registration, and the ratio of registered voters to ballots cast at each age brackets was the same across the state.
He focused on Ohio and thought it would be good, but was shocked to find repeated patterns of voter behaviour across the state in all 88 counties. Not only did almost every possible voter register to vote, the same proportion of each age bracket voted in every county.
The registrations almost exactly match the population census in 2020 but in normal years only
Red Flag #1 100% Registration
 Everybody registered to vote in 2020. 100%. Around 50 mins Red Flag #2: The exact same proportion voted at every age bracket across 88 counties.
Notice also how the bumps in the registration exactly, precisely match the bumps in the ballots.
 … 60 minutes: People ask Frank, if they were cheating in Ohio as well then why didnt they win that too? But they didn’t need to win in every single state, and he argues that in some states they just ran out of “spare registered voters” to flip. The votes were so strongly pro Trump that there were not enough spare voters to make up the difference.
He repeats the count that in their estimates Donald Trump won around 80 million votes.
Mike Lindell argues that we were blessed that Trump won with such a huge margin that it exposed how much cheating was going on as they were caught unprepared and off guard.
1:10 Anonymous insider ” a well orchestrated poll theft” by a Chinese state company in 14 US states
Poll workers got in touch with him and they were very uncomfortable with the phone that they had. It was a 4G wifi hotspot. The manufacturer appears to be AT&T, but it was in fact Alcatel, which is expected to be a European company, but the parent company is TCL, the operating system is KaiOS, Google invested $22 million dollars with this. TCL is one of China’s largest electronic giants. They’ve been caught scandalously incorporating backdoors into their TV’s and weather forecast aps.
He built a Raspberry Pi detector to pick up Wifi signals and found that TCL had access to over 150 servers in 14 states. This was the Local Area Network to connect the signals detected in the international flip signals.
“China chose Biden, not the American people.”
Mike Lindell seems very confident — he will be releasing new evidence — dumping it — across the next six weeks. He is sure the Supreme Court will consider it this time. (I’m not so confident, but that’s part of the problem, if hundreds of thousands of Americans were sure (like they should be) the energy, the outrage, the protests, and the demands on the Supreme Court could make it happen. If the mainstream media were showing the footage in this documentary — the masses would be in the streets. But Mike Lindell and everyone concerned about election fraud is up against the media blackout, the tech-giants block, the incumbent government, the corruption in the intelligence agencies and the whole Deep State inertia.
It’s still possible that good Americans can win the day, but it’s going to take real action and effort to make that happen.
It’s easy to be a cynic and say it’ll never work, the whole system is corrupt (it is). But that’s what the corrupt want you to say. “I give up”.
Spread the word instead… the good guys in this battle need all the help they can get.
h/t Peter C and Pointman
REFERENCES
Frank: frankspeech.com
One Bitchute copy: https://www.bitchute.com/video/MnVDK53Oa6FP/
Pointman: https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2021/04/19/emergency-post/
9.9 out of 10 based on 77 ratings
…
9.6 out of 10 based on 12 ratings
China has become the Wild West of bio-research
 … The ZMan spots a repeat cycle of knowledge-hauls as China siphons off Western intellectual property, often with the help of the West.
First China hauled (and we gave) the factories, then it was the hi tech industry, now it’s biomedical ingenuity. The pattern repeats. China offered cheap labor for manufacturers and the tech industry with few annoying environmental burdens. Now China offers money and freedom from ethical quandaries for researchers who want to clone, create bioweapons, or hybrid human-animal cells.
The question for the West is, if environmental or ethical standards matter at home, shouldn’t they matter overseas too? If we aren’t happy to buy shirts made by slaves at home, why are foreign slave shirts OK? If we aren’t keen to fund bioweapons research in our own lands, why was it OK to help do that in China? (Thank Anthony Fauci).
China makes it so easy for Western Scientists to collaborate:
There is no doubt that most Western governments operate biological research facilities. The fact that China is doing the same is no surprise. The difference is Western governments have to worry about whistleblowers who will spill the beans on anything illegal. They also have to worry about anything unethical. The Chinese, in contrast, arrests whistleblowers and harvest their organs. Scandal is not a concern for the ChiComs.
Again, bioethics are not a concern for China. What matters most to the Chinese is acquiring as much technology as possible as quickly and cheaply as possible. This is why China has become the wild west of bio-research. Western researchers know they can do whatever they want in China. They will be free of Western ethics and get all the money they need. They just have to share their work with their new masters.
The West was ripe for plucking:
What the Chinese have figured out is they can use the same methods on the Western scientific community as they used to lure Western manufacturers. The promise of cheap labor and loose environmental laws, along with subsidies from the Chinese government, lured business from the West. Sure, it often meant that local Chinese firms pirated the products they were making for Western companies, but that was just a cost of doing business in China. It was still good business.
The tech industry fell for the same deal. They were initially lured to China in order to build out the infrastructure. They got access to a pool of smart engineers, who worked for pennies on the dollar, relative to American engineers. They also got the sweet contracts from the government. The tech companies also got to learn the finer points of population control from the Chinese. This was good business for the Chinese, who were able to accelerate their tech sector.
Do those cumbersome Western Ethics matter? As ZMan says — we’re going to find out:
Maybe Covid was the wake-up China needed to put some limits on this research. Maybe it was just viewed as the cost of becoming the dominant player in the field. Maybe that cost will be regular pandemics of man-made viruses leaking from Chinese labs.
Most important, what we are seeing is what happens when a society decides that the value of everything is what someone will pay for it. In America, everything has a price, so nothing has value. The elites are happy to trade technology to China, because the only thing that matters is short term profit. From the Chinese perspective, the American empire is not a competitor. It is just a big candy store that she can systematically pick clean until it finally collapses. This is the war China knows it can win.
 Image by Chris Feser UPDATE: How timely —
Researcher Sentenced to 33 Months in Prison for Stealing Trade Secrets to Sell in China
April 20th, 2021, Epoch Times
Zhou Yu, 51, pleaded guilty in December 2020 to stealing at least five trade secrets relating to exosome research from the Nationwide Children’s Hospital’s Research Institute in Columbus, Ohio, where he had worked for 10 years until 2017. Exosomes are small sacs of fluid released from cells that have increasingly been used in the research, identification, and treatment of a range of diseases, including liver fibrosis and liver cancer.
Zhou’s co-conspirator was his wife, Chen Li, 48, who also worked as a researcher at another lab in the institute. She was sentenced in February to 30 months in prison for her role in the scheme after also pleading guilty.
“Zhou and his wife executed a scheme over the course of several years to set up businesses in China, steal American research, and profit from doing so,” acting U.S. attorney Vipal J. Patel for the Southern District of Ohio said in a statement.
Zhou’s case is among dozens of prosecutions brought by the department in recent years targeting Chinese state-sanctioned theft…
h/t David
Image: China Dragon Flag by Chris Feser
9.8 out of 10 based on 57 ratings
Could we halve the death rate if we just exercised 25 minutes each day?
 .. A lot of people were asked how much they exercised a couple of years ago. In follow up, about 50,000 went on to catch Covid last year. They were sorted into three levels of exercisers — the 7% most active consistently got 150 mins of week of something akin to “brisk walking” or more. The slowest moving 15% qualified as true couch potatoes — doing less than 10 minutes of exercise a week.
Sadly for the least active, they were 2.3 times more likely to need to go to hospital, 1.7 times more likely to be sent to the ICU and 2.5 times more likely to end up in the morgue.
These are pretty stark figures — making sedentary behaviour more risky than obesity, smoking, diabetes and high blood pressure. Which all seems a bit surprising given how many hours of data collection and TV commentary has been spent on all the smaller risks. How did we manage to miss one of the most important variables there is?
Exercise is “one heck of an anti-viral”
If these results are correct, it suggests most of our medical priorities are barking up expensive trees when they could be achieving so much more just by convincing most of the population to switch off the screen and go for daily walks. The real story is probably not quite this stark, but there is plenty of information to confirm the trend is real even if the slope is not as certain.
Obviously, there’s a gaping hole in public medicine which doesn’t include exercise in most surveys, admission forms, adverts, or advisories. Public policy hasn’t been tasked to ensure quarantined populations got 150 minutes of vigorous exercise each week. We get reports every night on the minutae of vaccination timetables, but the information that exercise might save your life or keep you out of hospital is a once a year kind of thing.
The problem with solving medical issues by telling people to walk the dog for half an hour is that no one gets rich. If they did, we would get the “National Exercise” report nightly — “…exercise figures across three states were up 4.2% this week, with most of the increase in golf, but less so in swimming”.
Opposition leaders would demand to know why the government hadn’t set a Zero-lost-minutes-Target where no person misses out on their 150 minutes. They’d petition for pedometers in 58 languages to be provided free to at-risk and marginal postcodes. We all know the drill, but all we’re seeing is the Black Hole of inaction.
The media, of course, could change all that. Where are they?
The Sydney Morning Herald is telling us to exercise the day we get the vaccine.
Past research on vaccinations, such as influenza and HPV, has shown that exercise – even training shortly before injection – can both boost their effectiveness and reduce the risk of side effects.
The catches and caveats
It’s an observational study, not a randomized “cause and effect” study. People were also not recorded exercising — they were just asked how much they did. And as the famous saying goes, recollections may vary.
 Cartoon by Steve Hunter Only 7% of people managed to consistently do the recommended 150+ minutes a week. So this study compares the top 7% with the bottom 15% and bundled three quarters of the population into the middle group. Most of the figures on that middle group are fairly useless, as they include people who did as little as 11 minutes a week of exercise with people who did 149 minutes a week.
The most intractable problem is that people who were sick or weakened for all kinds of reasons probably did less exercise too. Sallis et al controlled for all the known risk factors as much as possible, but there is still that nagging issue that to some extent exercise is a proxy for good health.
The three highest factors in Covid deaths: Age, Organ Transplant, Sitting still for too long.
In other news, men have 1.7 times the risk of dying from Covid compared to women. Where are those activists?
 Three highest risks of death in covid. Age, Organ Transplant. Sitting still for too long. | Click to enlarge We might not halve the death rate if we just exercised 25 minutes each day. But who wouldn’t want to stop 10, 20 or 30% dying?
h/t David E
REFERENCE
Sallis et al (2021) Physical inactivity is associated with a higher risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes: a study in 48 440 adult patients, British Journal of Sports Medicine, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2021-104080
Walking cartoon: wikimedia
9.4 out of 10 based on 42 ratings
 Capitol Police Officer, Brian Sicknick Things worth knowing: All the claims that violent Trump fan insurgents killed a police officer are and always were, wrong.
A medical examiner has finally issued a report on the sad fate of Officer Brian Sicknick who was working at Capitol Hill on Jan 6th.
by Jack Phillips, Epoch Times.
U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick suffered two strokes and died of natural causes a day after the Jan. 6 Capitol breach, the D.C. Medical Examiner’s office confirmed on April 19, ending speculation that he was beaten to death by Trump supporters.
Francisco J. Diaz, chief medical examiner for Washington, told The Washington Post that Sicknick died Jan. 7 after suffering two strokes, and didn’t suffer from an allergic reaction after being sprayed with chemical irritants as he engaged with the crowd, Diaz said.
The examiner said he found no evidence of internal or external injuries, but he added that “all that transpired played a role in his condition.” Diaz didn’t elaborate, citing privacy laws.
Why did it take so long for this to be reported?
Will the ABC-CNN-MSNBC etc tell their audiences? Will they admit they were wrong? Will they repeat this news as many times as they have repeated that he was killed by Trump supporters? Will they mention he was a Trump supporter? Will they say also that his immediate family asked right from the beginning that his death not be used as a political football, and that his family always suspected his death was natural?
10 out of 10 based on 74 ratings
…
9.5 out of 10 based on 13 ratings
Hands up who thinks Good Civilizations are driven by fear, censorship and by dividing their citizens by the color of their skin?
 Here’s someone brave enough to say the obvious and call out the Bolshevik intolerance, tribal hate and a spreading fear that now grips much of the intellectual “upper class” of The West. Bravo to Andrew Gutmann.
The background to this is that Bari Weiss, formerly of the New York Times, wrote last month about the crippling fear of Brearly School parents where children are taught to be ashamed of their race, and are afraid to speak up in class. Despite paying $54,000 a year in fees, the parents feel so powerless and in fear of the new orthodoxy that they have to meet in secret to strategize. They can’t zoom or email lest they lose their jobs, and their social circles. And since the school is a prep school for Harvard and so forth, even if they are willing to speak up, they are afraid of what would happen to their children if they did. Indeed, sometimes their children beg them not to say anything, even though the situation is intolerable.
‘If You Publish My Name It Would Ruin My Life’
“The school can ask you to leave for any reason,” said one mother at Brentwood, another Los Angeles prep school. “Then you’ll be blacklisted from all the private schools and you’ll be known as a racist, which is worse than being called a murderer.”
One private school parent, born in a Communist nation, tells me: “I came to this country escaping the very same fear of retaliation that now my own child feels.”
— Bari Weiss, The Miseducation of America’s Elites
Finally, one parent has broken the spell, pulled their children out, and was brave and articulate enough to put his name to his reply and send it to all 600 or so families in the school.
April 13, 2021
Dear Fellow Brearley Parents,
Our family recently made the decision not to reenroll our daughter at Brearley …
It cannot be stated strongly enough that Brearley’s obsession with race must stop. It should be abundantly clear to any thinking parent that Brearley has completely lost its way. The administration and the Board of Trustees have displayed a cowardly and appalling lack of leadership by appeasing an anti-intellectual, illiberal mob, and then allowing the school to be captured by that same mob. What follows are my own personal views on Brearley’s antiracism initiatives, but these are just a handful of the criticisms that I know other parents have expressed.
I object to the view that I should be judged by the color of my skin. I cannot tolerate a school that not only judges my daughter by the color of her skin, but encourages and instructs her to prejudge others by theirs. By viewing every element of education, every aspect of history, and every facet of society through the lens of skin color and race, we are desecrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and utterly violating the movement for which such civil rights leaders believed, fought, and died.
I object to the charge of systemic racism in this country, and at our school. Systemic racism, properly understood, is segregated schools and separate lunch counters. It is the interning of Japanese and the exterminating of Jews. Systemic racism is unequivocally not a small number of isolated incidences over a period of decades. Ask any girl, of any race, if they have ever experienced insults from friends, have ever felt slighted by teachers or have ever suffered the occasional injustice from a school at which they have spent up to 13 years of their life, and you are bound to hear grievances, some petty, some not. We have not had systemic racism against Blacks in this country since the civil rights reforms of the 1960s, a period of more than 50 years. To state otherwise is a flat-out misrepresentation of our country’s history and adds no understanding to any of today’s societal issues. If anything, longstanding and widespread policies such as affirmative action, point in precisely the opposite direction.
I object to a definition of systemic racism, apparently supported by Brearley, that any educational, professional, or societal outcome where Blacks are underrepresented is prima facie evidence of the aforementioned systemic racism, or of white supremacy and oppression. Facile and unsupported beliefs such as these are the polar opposite to the intellectual and scientific truth for which Brearley claims to stand. Furthermore, I call bullshit on Brearley’s oft-stated assertion that the school welcomes and encourages the truly difficult and uncomfortable conversations regarding race and the roots of racial discrepancies.
The soft racism of systematically low expectations:
I object to the idea that Blacks are unable to succeed in this country without aid from government or from whites. Brearley, by adopting critical race theory, is advocating the abhorrent viewpoint that Blacks should forever be regarded as helpless victims, and are incapable of success regardless of their skills, talents, or hard work. What Brearley is teaching our children is precisely the true and correct definition of racism.
Turn their own words against the cult:
I object to Brearley’s vacuous, inappropriate, and fanatical use of words such as “equity,” “diversity” and “inclusiveness.” If Brearley’s administration was truly concerned about so-called “equity,” it would be discussing the cessation of admissions preferences for legacies, siblings, and those families with especially deep pockets. If the administration was genuinely serious about “diversity,” it would not insist on the indoctrination of its students, and their families, to a single mindset, most reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Instead, the school would foster an environment of intellectual openness and freedom of thought. And if Brearley really cared about “inclusiveness,” the school would return to the concepts encapsulated in the motto “One Brearley,” instead of teaching the extraordinarily divisive idea that there are only, and always, two groups in this country: victims and oppressors.
Read it all, pass it around, share.
h/t Charles
9.8 out of 10 based on 112 ratings
It’s Woke Culture versus the Workers
The Australian Labor party was formed by the workers unions in 1890. But now, when polled, more than half of the members of one trade union say they are losing support for the Labor Party because it is too focussed on inner city Woke Ideals like climate change and gender issues. For a quarter of members the betrayal was so bad they won’t even vote Labor.
Joe Hildebrand, News.com
Working-class Australians — the very foundation of the Labor Party — are abandoning the ALP in droves because they think the party has been overrun by “woke ideals” and “white-collar university educated yuppies”.
Private research commissioned by the NSW Electrical Trades Union – which was itself just taken over by the Left this week – has found a quarter of union members surveyed no longer vote Labor and a further 35 per cent reported decreasing support for the party.
Incredibly, almost one in five said the Liberal party better represented working people.
They surveyed 1500 people from the Electrical Trades Union in areas around Sydney
“…the perception of Labor as captive to trendy inner-city issues is killing the party.”
“Support for the Labor Party among ETU NSW members has markedly declined in recent years – around 60 per cent of survey respondents report a decrease in their support with 25 per cent indicating they no longer vote Labor,” the report said.
“Nearly a fifth of respondents now see the Liberal Party as the major party that best represents working people like them.”
The survey found 42 per cent of union members saw “gender issues” as the biggest distraction to what government should really be focusing on, followed by climate change at 34 per cent.
One participant said, “I feel betrayed or cheated by the Labor Party. They’ve made a big push for carbon neutrality, catering to leftists in inner city Melbourne or Sydney. F**k you, we’ll vote Pauline Hanson or Clive Palmer.”
…another said, “The Liberals might be coming for our rights, but Labor are coming for our jobs.”
h/t Analytic
9.8 out of 10 based on 73 ratings
,,,
8.4 out of 10 based on 22 ratings
Hard-nosed journalists have all agreed that “Climate Emergency” is this year’s hottest, not-so-new trend. All the coolest, uninvestigative reporters have signed a pledge to parrot the same term. They all want to join the same club, and this is the new “token for entry”. How sweet. It’s a pledge to use hyperbole, destroy English and bore the public by repeating the same approved propaganda measure.
It won’t work for more than five minutes. The public learnt to ignore global warming and then climate change. Now they will get to ignore the emergency that isn’t an emergency.
But it will make it harder for actual ecological emergencies to get any air time at all. “Congrats” o environmental ones.
It’s a cheap trick. Journalists are milking the “shock” value out of the word “emergency” til it becomes an empty, nihilist cliche. Like borrowing money from the future, there are only so many rounds of “Exploiting-the-language” one team can play before they run out of Reader Capital, and then run out of readers.
 Deaths due to Natural disasters,. All 400 media outlets are cheerleading in synch:
- Scientific American,
- Columbia Journalism Review,
- The Nation,
- The Guardian,
- Noticias Telemundo,
- Al Jazeera,
- Asahi Shimbun, and
- La Repubblica, etc etc etc
Making us all wonder how many different media corporations ultimately control them?
“We Are Living in a Climate Emergency, and We’re Going to Say So,” declares the headline of a Scientific American commentary. [pompously]
“The media’s response to Covid-19 provides a useful model,” the statement advises, noting how media were able to control the narrative and compel Americans to comply with safety mandates by referring to the pandemic as an “emergency.”
The Gods are back! The media think they “controlled people” to get them to stay home. It’s almost like they think just using the word “emergency” is what did it. If only they thought of that before?
Marc Morano warned us the climate dictators were going to try to recover after Covid stole all their news airspace away from them.
***
Some bright spark in media marketing thinks that the only difference between Covid and Climate Change is that we just didn’t sell the climate problem the same way. Most journalists apparently only see the world as verbal word games.
A must-read book that shows how the Green New Deal is dangerous, impractical, misguided, and guaranteed to fail with disastrous results for the American people.”—Sean Hannity
9.9 out of 10 based on 86 ratings
On January 1st, Germany shut 11 coal fired plants with about 4.7GW of generating power — supposedly as a part of the Big Phaseout. But eight days later the wind wasn’t blowing and according to Pierre Goslin the system got so unstable that the managers had to turn back on some of the coal power.This on-off-cycle repeated so many times that one large plant — Heyden –was restarted six times in the next eight weeks.
The Federal Network Agency have reclassified the four of the big plants as “system relevant” which means they have to hang around on standby ready to rescue the grid at any time. So the largest efficient and cheap generators on the grid will be paid to sit around waiting for the unreliable expensive energy to fail.
By P Gosselin on 13. April 2021
The Federal Network Agency has now confirmed that it has reclassified the Heyden, Datteln, Walsum 9 and Westfalen power plants, which had already been shut down, as system-relevant and that they now must remain on standby as reserve power plants. The owners will therefore be required to continue operation in the short term.
Never mind that this sporadic operation of these coal plants is horribly inefficient and costly, as you will find out below.
Coal plant shutdowns have increased grid frequency instability
By Blackout News
Who pays, … the consumer:
The Federal Network Agency adds, “The costs for the provision in the grid reserve, as well as for the conversion to a rotating phase shifter, are borne by the power grid customers, as these measures serve the safe and reliable network operation.” It is thus clear that these costs must also be financed through the electricity price.
See NoTricksZone, and also WattsUp. Thanks RicDre.
APOLOGIES: Moderation is going to be very slow tonight. Sorry for the inconvenience. Hopefully we can fix that soon.
10 out of 10 based on 91 ratings
|
JoNova A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX
|
Recent Comments