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 models appear to have been retuned lately so that some of the coolest model runs barely include reality. It probably avoids more awkward questions.
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.
“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.
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?
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”.
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”.
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.
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.
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…
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?
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?
U.S. Capitol Police officerBrian 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?
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.”
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.
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.
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.”
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.
“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
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.
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
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.
Project Veritas do great work, catching candid admissions in private of the real power games and corruption going on.
“Look what we did. We [CNN] got Trump out”
CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester, admits on tape, in a private discussion that what they do is propaganda, and he 100% believes if it weren’t for CNN, “I don’t know that Trump would have got voted out”. “I really don’t think so”.
He was focused on getting Trump out of office, it wasn’t just a political leaning, it was his raison d’etre: “I came to CNN because I wanted to be a part of that. “
So CNN is the place political lobbyists go to get paid to push election outcomes towards the President they personally want.
Climate change is coming next. “It’s going to be the next Covid. They’ll be able to milk that for quite a bit.”
UPDATE: Twitter sees their competition exposed, and a way for Twitter to put itself at the center of the global news debate, … and ..O… immediately cancels and bans Project Veritas. Protecting CNN and or Biden is more important than growing its own audience?
Clearly Twitter is a political machine with similar goals to CNN. They all benefit from Big-Government. None of them serve their audiences, and they don’t want the audience to know that. Evidently they have other masters…
James O’Keefe, the founder of the investigative journalism organization Project Veritas, has been permanently blacklisted by Twitter, just as his organization releases bombshell undercover footage showing senior CNN employees admitting to using “propaganda.” @Project_Veritas, the organization’s official account, has also been suspended.
In a comment to Breitbart News, a Twitter spokeswoman said the suspension was permanent. This comes directly after O’Keefe and Project Veritas publicly embarrassed the far-left news network CNN.
In a statement, O’Keefe vowed to sue Twitter: “I am suing Twitter for defamation because they said I, James O’Keefe, ‘operated fake accounts. This is false, this is defamatory, and they will pay. Section 230 may have protected them before, but it will not protect them from me. The complaint will be filed Monday.”
Power, Profit and Ideology all point in the same direction. Convenient, eh?
Wrapped in so few words — ponder the vainglorious conceit embodied in such a headline. One, that Guardian “staff” are the judge and jury of a complex science, that they can prophesy the future climate, choose which experts are right, and feel that they know more than the Nobel Prize winning physicists, atmospheric chemists and professors of climate who disagree. Two, that “the media” are supposed to save the world from their own decreed emergency by making policy pronouncements, silencing opponents, and overriding elected officials. Three, that they unfailingly know what’s best for the stupid voting masses.
What the media needs is to eat humble pie and start doing their jobs.
If they were only smart enough to recognize their own failings they might start investigating the issues of the day with an open mind, serious questions, and report the smartest arguments made by the most informed commentators on all sides of the issues that matter.
These are our Upperclass wannabee rulers
How stupid must they think the rest of humanity. Oh, if only the unwashed had the vision of the self-annointed Genius Guardian rulers. Did any of these writers even pass double maths in high school?
Not for the Guardian writers the tough road of appealing to voters, listening to other points of view, studying the numbers, the costs or the physics. Instead, they want the seductive easy road to being rulers. This is the cry from the 120-IQ’ers, smarter than average, but too stupid to know how little they know. Too arrogant to listen to maths nerds or engineers. And too bigoted and intolerant to listen to the workers and consider their point of view.
The Guardian editors are the mediocre wordsmiths who were fooled by a fashion trend. Now, those who have forgotten what “the media” is even supposed to do, think they can tell the rest of their profession how to do their jobs.
Glory be! Lordy — The Guardian speaks for Planet Earth itself:
Ahead of Earth Day, the Guardian is partnering with newsrooms around the world in a joint initiative calling on journalists to treat the climate crisis like the emergency [we Arts grads think] it is.
When the world shut down last year, there was one big beneficiary: the planet.
If only The Guardian writers knew High school science — they’d know megafires can only occur where there is too much fuel, not where there is too much desert.
We are in an emergency. California is on the brink of drought, prompting fears of a new wave of devastating megafires later this year. Rising temperatures could soon make the planet’s tropical regions unlivable for humans.
And they might understand that temperatures in the tropics are limited by the giant evaporative air conditioner that keeps tropical oceans at 30 – 32C. The tropics won’t get hotter in a warming world, the warm humid conditions will just spread further into the temperate zones. More coral reef, more rainforest! The tragedy…
The only thing they “investigate” is whether other people are following their own decrees on Planet-management:
Yet a Guardian investigation recently found that only a small number of major countries have been pumping rescue funds into a low-carbon future.
Maybe people aren’t buying the Guardian dictats because the “low-carbon” future The Guardian imagines is a barren impoverished wasteland of futile hopium which benefits no one but the self-serving corporates which offer these expensive solutions to problems that don’t exist? Could be…
Yet they imagine they are “setting trends in language”. Spin doctors unite:
Two years ago, the Guardian announced it was changing the language it uses to talk about the environment, eschewing terms like “climate change” for the more appropriately urgent “climate emergency”. Today, we are joined by others in the news industry, organizations that recognize that a global catastrophe is already here, and that without immediate action, it will get unimaginably worse.
Thus verily and Lo! The Guardian hath forecast doom and the richest most bountiful time in human history “is a catastrophe”. An Emergency!
With more food available to the human species than has ever been made and fewer people per capita dying of natural disasters than at any point in the last hundred thousand years, the only “emergency” is the destruction of English and history.
The real question here is why even a slice of the population pay to read this arrogant voodoo. And it might be that it fills a spiritual void, giving the rich and listless “a purpose” and a cheap way to salve their guilt. Or it might just be that The Guardian is selling a fashionable social drink people use to pump themselves up the pecking order.
The ABC is just a Lifestyle Magazine for the Upperclass, paid for by everyone else.
For twenty years the media EcoRulers told people they will destroy the Earth if they use disposable coffee cups and nappies. Their whole identity as a Good Person depended on doing the right thing. And “every little bit matters” — etcetera, and ad nauseum.
Who would have guessed that asking people to save the Planet with every purchase would cause anxiety, a perpetual sense of failure, and long term stress?
And it never mattered anyway — the point was not the environment, but the political power. So now that hapless fans are being struck down with “Climate Distress” — it’s time to forgive them.
Here’s the ABC Agony Aunt column letting all of them off the hook:
While researching how to reduce her carbon footprint a few years back, Brisbane woman Zara Monteith quickly fell down an anxiety-inducing rabbit hole, with each search opening her eyes to a different environmental problem to try to solve.
Despite doing everything she could, Zara felt like nothing she did to reduce her consumption or environmental impact made a difference.
She saw a psychologist and said “I just can’t do anything”. And the psychologists said ‘I feel the same way.'”
Now is not the time to mention that “every little bit helps”. The new approach is “nevermind“.
No-one is perfect
First up, recognise that you’re not always going to be able to make the environmental choice and be the perfect Instagrammable eco-warrior.
For some families disposable nappies are necessary, for some products styrofoam containers are unavoidable and on some days the air conditioner is going to run for much longer than the climate (or your wallet) would like.
Plan B is “cry”:
Dr Burke says emotion-focused coping means addressing the uncomfortable feelings like guilt or hopelessness.
She says this can be done by “moving” the stress hormones out of your body through actions.
“That might be things like having a cry —
So if you have to use disposable diapers, you can. Whole generations were raised on cloth nappies, but we can’t expect EcoWorriers to do that. Just like using your own mug rather than a styrofoam-dolphin-killing cup. It’s all too hard.
What matters is just that Ecoworriers are saying the right thing, they’re in the right Team, even if they can’t adopt all the symbolic tokens. No one really cared about the plants, the poor or the dolphins, they just wanted to look like they cared.
Basic facts, details, accuracy, buried under the weight of propaganda.
Here’s a lost fact: most of the world likes fossil fuels and wants even more of it.
The world is using more fossil fuels than ever.
And this is not exactly a new trend — starting in 1765 or so. Yet despite that, nine out of ten Australians speak as though they have been trained by a renewable energy ad bureau. And in a sense they have.
A few years ago, 88% of Australians would say that fossil fuels are in decline around the world and we must invest in “alternatives”. So nine out of ten people are just wrong. Despite all that connectivity (or possibly because of it) nine out of ten people know something that is not true and has never been true during their entire lives.
Lowy institute polls show how strong the effect of propaganda is. Vale the ABC, undoing science education, and destroying the national debate every day of the week.
89% of Australians think fossil fuels are in decline. Graph. Lowy Poll
On the plus side, the more wrong the reporting, the more the real story rattles the cage. When people get red-pilled they don’t just learn that fossil fuels are still popular and important, they also learn they can’t trust the media, that consensus means nothing, and that opinion polls are often junk. There is a lot of upside here for the truth-tellers.
Would you like contradictions with that?
In question two of the same survey, eighty percent of the population say that fossil fuels cause climate change and we should reduce them. This factoid has been used to scare politicians into signing up all to all kinds of bad deals and silly laws. Yet in questions 3 and 4 we find out that two thirds of the population also agrees that we should continue to export fossil fuels to developing nations. And half the population say we have an abundant supply and should not just export them, but use them too. Evidently most people think fossil fuels are good for the economy — both ours and the third worlds.
Assuming the people who disagreed with the first two questions were the same people who agreed with using more fossil fuels (as would be consistent) that still means one third of Australians will simultaneously say they believe fossil fuels are declining and causing climate change but we should export them and use them anyway.
Jobs trumps “climate change” every time
So what do the contradictions mean? Mostly that the media is telling porkies, but also that people are telling pollsters what they think they want to hear. On top of all that, the bigger truth is that people value the economy and jobs more than the imaginary threat of climate change (which is consistent with nearly every other survey done anywhere).
Let the Red-pilling begin.
h/t Simon.
REFERENCES
Global Energy Use, OWID: https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels
EIA: US Government https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
Recent Comments