C3

Time 2020-11-13 13:04:24

Web Name: C3

WebSite: http://www.c3headlines.com

ID:114598

Keywords:

,

Description:

Joe Basement Biden is the tip of the propaganda spear when it comes to stupidity and the pathetic anti-science hysteria being pushed by the Karens of the world. The most dangerous and contagious aspect of the Covid-19 is the viral fearmongering emanating from the bullhorn of MSM and major social media sites. And millions of supposedly smart and educated Americans have swallowed the proverbial hook-line-sinker of the propaganda bait.Yet, over the last three days we ve learned what the objective empirical data and science is now confirming what the skeptical, anti-hysteria scientists and medical professionals have been stating: 1. W.H.O.: The Lockdowns don t really work that well 2. CDC: The Facemasks don t really work that well Literally, W.H.O. and the CDC have inconveniently debunked the major liberal/left narratives that have caused some 8 months of unprecedented catastrophic pain for most Americans who are not in the top 5% of economic/wealth privilege.Instead of continuing to push the anti-science mandated policies that are found to be of questionable effectiveness in stopping Covid transmission and deaths - but have been certainly devastating in their societal impact on the quality of life - Democrats and liberals need to start embracing informed policy choices based on actual evidence and the real science.Maybe it s time for left-of-center Americans to finally break their addiction to the 24/7/365 fearmongering and hysteria of CNN and MSNBC and instead start reading what the top epidemiologists are finding, reporting, and suggesting as policies - targeted, precise pandemic measures. Thirty short slideshow videos that reveal stories and issues the mainstream media would like everyone to forget. They do so by totally ignoring the story or downplaying the issues that does not fit their MSM Biden-Harris narrative. Combined with the actions of Big-Tech social media sites, the censorship is massive.It s a constant case of gaslighting the masses in the buildup to the November 3, 2020 election, influenced by a palpable partisan bias and their absurd Trump Derangement Syndrome.These censorship efforts continue to be a gigantic, horrible disservice to the American public and has become an evil election interference/malfeasance that is multiple times greater in comparison to the Chinese and Russian election influence machinations. One has to wonder if Anthony Fauci et al should be considered as enemies of the state? Fauci s Covid flip-flopping and constantly being wrong since January has become a national disgrace. And the leaders of the CDC, NIH and FDA are sitting in that same Fauci boat named Fiasco, still pulling the oars in the opposite direction of what s best overall for Americans. Below are a sample of recent Tweets that confirms the obvious: American infectious disease experts are an embarrassment, if not a world laughingstock. (click on to enlarge)Out of touch, and well outside the boundaries of the U.S. mainstream moderate electorate, Democrat Joe Biden and his fringe left colleagues have been declaring that the world - as we know it - is soon going to end due to a global warming and a resulting climate change apocalypse.But is that a reasonable, rational pro-science expectation?Instead of focusing on the major reason of a natural rebound progression of global warming since the Little Ice Age, the anti-growth, anti-prosperity Democrats point to the smaller human related impact: fossil fuel emissions (CO2) from modern industrial/consumer activities.The Democrat Party s anti-growth, anti-prosperity, anti-CO2 platform has become a dominant party position ever since the June 1988 climate doomsday Congressional testimony of NASA s chief climate scientist, James Hansen.It was from that Congressional testimony that the doomsday prophecies of unprecedented global temperature change from CO2 became the lodestone of the party s faithful. So, how good have those doomsday global warming change prophecies been since June 1988 (32 years ago)? In a one-word summation: lousy.This first chart shows the temperature change plots of the IPCC s gold-standard global temperature dataset, along with the monthly cumulative growth of atmospheric CO2 levels (ppm) since June 1, 1988 through June 2020. Multiple periodicities of temperature change include 1-year (twelve month); 5-year (60 months); 10-year (120 months); 15-year (180 months); and, 20-year (240 months).For example, the chart s 15-year temperature change ending June 2020 is almost identical to the 15-year temperature change ending June 1988. Respectively, those changes were +0.13°C and +0.11°C.That tiny difference certainly confirms that over the past 30 years there has not been an extreme impact on longer-term temperature change despite some 850 billion tonnes of CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere since 1988.And the chart absolutely reflects an up/down pattern of temperature change for all periodicities, but clearly it does not demonstrate any significant relationship to the very substantial, monotonous linear growth of CO2 levels.To clear the clutter of multiple curves crisscrossing each other on the first chart, this next chart depicts the 36-month average (3-year average) of each temperature change curve found on the prior graph. (click on to enlarge)These plots also confirm an up/down pattern for all periodicities, plus confirms an absence of relation between the atmospheric CO2 level linear growth and temperature change.Based on this empirical evidence of rather stable cyclical temperature change, plus the evidence from the prior article that global warming acceleration/deceleration also follows a cyclical pattern, it can be fairly surmised that human CO2 emissions are having little, if any, climate significant impact on global temperatures.Although NASA s top climate scientist in 1988 predicted climate disaster was upon us due to intense global warming from CO2, after 30+ years it s time to admit he was wrong and it s time for the Democrats to stop pushing this anti-science, anti-prosperity, doomsday propaganda.As usual in climate science, it s just another case of those stubborn facts that are so inconvenient.Additional temperature charts here, here and here.Note: Plots, temperature change and 36-month average calculations done with Excel. Sources: global HadCrut dataset and NOAA s CO2 dataset (click chart to enlarge)The Trump administration remains steadfast in its reliance on the actual climate scientific evidence that refutes Biden s hyperbole of climate doomsday and anti-science prophecies that plague the left-wing Democrats.As the adjacent chart reveals, the empirical evidence is irrefutable: global warming trends indicate a situation normal as the global climate continues to have spurts of accelerate warming and deceleration towards rapid cooling. In contrast to Trump, Biden - and his Democrat cult of doomsday soothsayers - completely mislead the public with claims of global devastation within the next 9 to 12 years from civilization s continuing fossil fuel emissions due to energy production.Climate doomsday is not an empirically-based claim but an irrational belief without data.This charts plots the monthly observed warming/cooling trends - i.e. data - and the cumulative growth of the atmospheric CO2 levels (see green dots) since 1850.Clearly, the scientific evidence indicates the following:Prior to the 1950 s start of massive consumer/industrial fossil fuel CO2 emissions, global climate change warming/cooling took place over the short-term with great frequency and intensity.After 1950, despite the massive emissions, the great frequency/intensity of climate change continued with similar short-term patterns.Yet, neither period of large climate short-term swings resulted in longer-term significant climate change. The 120-month, 180-month, and the 240-month trends reveal a very insignificant and slow change up and down. Put in the context of the climate volatility of short-term periods, the long-term volatility borders on being exceptionally unnoticeable and boring.And after NASA s chief climate scientist claimed before Congress in 1988 that global temperatures would lead to tremendous climate destruction from CO2 emissions, the same climate change ups/downs simply continued as in the past (see 1988 arrow on chart) establishing that NASA experts were not so expert.The incredible growth of human CO2 emissions are demonstrably shown to be unrelated to short-term climate swings of warming and cooling; and, if the emissions are truly impactful on long-term climate, it is an insignificant impact when compared to the natural ups/downs of climate change.Most importantly, neither the short-term or long-term trends substantiate Biden s belief that a climate doomsday tipping point is soon to happen and wreak havoc. Instead, what the data reveal is a climate that will naturally cycle through extreme points but returns to normal from the built-in negative feedback.Just another case of those stubborn facts.Additional temperature charts here, here and here.Note: Plots and slope calculations done with Excel. Sources: global HadCrut dataset and NOAA s CO2 dataset (click to enlarge)It is a known fact that during the Obama and Biden administration, global warming accelerated to a very high rate, which in turn resulted in the overall climate change accelerating.Since January 2017, the Trump administration has slashed regulations and introduced new energy policies that unleashed American firms to innovate and invest at a spectacular speed. The end result has not only produced an actual cooling trend for global warming, and thus a slowing of climate change, but Trump s policies have produced the long-sought energy independence and security that former President Jimmy Carter only dreamed of.This chart reflects the empirical evidence of the Trump successes. If only Democrats Obama and Biden had embraced smart and innovative energy/climate polices during their tenure, the world would have been that much further along in addressing global warming. Note: Source of HC4 global dataset plotted, from January 1850 thru June 2020. Excel used to calculate and plot slope and 10-yr moving average. (click on to enlarge)As the chart suggests, there are a large number of states that dealt with the Covid pandemic in a manner that caused excessive deaths.Once the coronavirus pandemic has finally passed, a federal commission should be established to investigate those state government politicians and health bureaucrats that completely failed their citizens during this crisis. The total ineptness shown by some state officials should be identified, named and shamed. At a minimum, one would hope that the constituents of the states that became needless Covid killing grounds should vote responsible politicians and their associated party out of office.This is doubly true since many of the same states and politicians allowed their major cities to be looted and burned-out during the recent BLM riots.Click on chart to enlarge. Notes: The death data plotted on adjacent chart is from the Covid Tracking Project and state population figures used to calculate the deaths per 100K is from Wikipedia. Why April 5 date? Out of convenience - that was the very first date that C3 had calculated the death/100k figure for all states, plus D.C. (click on to enlarge)Back around 2005-2010, the climate change experts and the mainstream media were going on and on about the Amazon devastation due to droughts.The implication was that the droughts were due to human caused climate change, and the droughts, in turn, would cause more climate change that would then cause the droughts to worsen - a prospective positive feedback loop prediction that did not bode good tidings for humans.But skeptics around the world challenged these conclusions for obvious reasons. Major regional droughts have always happened and they were not driven by human CO2 emission activity in the form of fossil fuel consumption. Plus, surprise, droughts have this habit of ending, which are then followed by periods of plentiful rain.The 2005 and 2010 Amazon droughts were no different.As it turns out, the skeptics were right again and the climate experts; and the expert/MSM coalition were again victims of their own failed prediction hubris.In a recent peer-reviewed study, nine scientists reconstructed the precipitation totals for the eastern equatorial Amazon basin of Brazil. The adjacent chart depicts their findings. Simply stated, there are periods of excess rainfall and there are subsequent periods of drought over the 230-year period. The dramatic precipitation fluctuations are part of the natural cycle and those droughts taking place in the 21st century are part of this natural pattern.From a review of the study: Examination of the precipitation record reveals, in the words of the authors, that it is dominated by interannual and subdecadal variability, not unlike the instrumental precipitation totals for the eastern Amazon study area. Focusing on such variability captured in the reconstruction, Granato-Souza et al. note the existence of two extended wet episodes, a mid-twentieth century period from 1942-1956 and an earlier late nineteenth century period between 1882 and 1903, and one exceptional extended dry episode that occurred during the years 1864 and 1881.....A longer-term perspective of the moisture regime clearly indicates there is no compelling support for that contention given that both wet and dry periods of greater duration and magnitude have naturally occurred throughout the record despite atmospheric CO2 concentrations being much lower than they are today. See prior articles on droughts and failed predictions. (click on image to enlarge)A warm water coral reef provides the latest evidence that coral bleaching events occur with some regularity, and that there is always a reef recovery, no matter how severe the bleaching.A team of 15 researchers analyzed extracted coral reef cores from the equatorial Pacific s Jarvis Island. The evidence they gathered indicates bleaching events were even taking place early in the 20th century, and that there appears to be a periodic 5-year repeat of the coral bleaching. Per a review of the peer-reviewed study: In contemplating the above findings, Barkley et al. say that their historical bleaching reconstruction reveals a coral reef community that has bleached frequently, and at times catastrophically, yet appears to have maintained a healthy state over time. ... Barkley et al. note that the record implies that the Jarvis coral community has bleached with varying degrees of severity every five years, on average ....while.... it was ranked among the healthiest of all ocean ecosystems, notwithstanding it has experienced repeated episodes of moderate to severe bleaching every five years. According to the authors, recurring bleaching events were also identified prior to the six decades of time focused on in their study (1960-2016). As noted, Barkley et al. report that two cores extend back to the turn of the 20th century, and the earliest stress bands appear in these cores in 1912, indicating that bleaching occurred on Jarvis over 100 years ago. And, it suggests rising atmospheric CO2 and rising ocean temperatures over the course of the past century have had no measurable impact on either the frequency or severity of El Niño warming events. Prior articles debunking predicted specie extinction myths (click on to enlarge)The Bad: At least as of May 5, 2020, the following states have proven to be rather inept in their containment of the lethal novel coronavirus: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Louisiana, District of Columbia, Michigan, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, Delaware, and Indiana.These will be known as the Dirty 13 states.The Ugly: Plus, a number of the above states have revealed themselves to be smitten with authoritarian dictatorial powers that is leading to unnecessary incitement of the populace.Coronavirus health policy mismanagement and Venezuela-style totalitarianism is not a real good combination look for any state in America. The Good: It should be noted that those states that never enacted stay-at-home orders have some very envious results with lower than expected per capita deaths. Our supposed experts essentially predicted that the opposite would happen.And those states that have already let their stay-at-home polices expire, either in late April or early May, have relatively good results when compared to the per capita deaths experienced in the Dirty 13 states.Colorado is the only state with a Democrat governor that has decided to let its stay-at-home order expire. At 14.8 deaths per 100K, it is the closest to the Dirty 13. But that 14.8 translates into a living statistic of 99,985.2 per 100K. Thus, anyone currently living in that state has a hypothetical 99.985% chance of not subcumming to the CoronaCCPvirus.In order for America s economy to survive and for getting people back to their prior quality of life standard, any state with a per capita death rate less than 20.0/100K ought to seriously consider ending their stay-at-home policy and get on with a 99.985% or better chance of life. Note: May 5, 2020 deaths for each state were from this source. Below is the full list of U.S. states, and a large sample of European countries and territories, ranked by the number of coronavirus deaths per 100 thousand. The dataset for this table was pulled from www.worldometer.com, including the populations to calculate the deaths per 100k. (Data as of mid-afternoon April 23.)As can be seen, quite a few U.S. states have achieved a low death count ranking, with many doing a better job than European counterparts.At the bottom of the table, those countries and states that achieved a worse ranking than the overall position of the U.S. are highlighted in green and blue colors.Note that every single U.S. state (and D.C.) at the bottom (highlighted in blue) are states with Democrat governors with major metropolitan centers controlled by Democrat mayors. As this evidence would suggest, inept polices by Democrat politicians have serious consequences for quality of life, especially during emergency periods.When examining the U.S data more closely, there are 38 states that have less than 10 deaths per 100k (as of April 23, 2020). The average for those 38 states comes in at 3.7 deaths per 100k, which is quite respectable compared to many of the larger European countries.Although these rankings will change over the next few weeks, one can already ascertain an appropriate strategy for dealing with the next pandemic, at least for the U.S. All those states that have a ranking over 10 for the 2020 coronavirus would be put in a lock-down, including a travel quarantine when the pandemic occurs. There would need to be a strict adherence to Federal pandemic policies and plans by these states so that they do not endanger the lives of those who live in other states. The lock-down and quarantine would be implemented as soon as the CDC identifies a pandemic situation.By following such a pandemic policy, states with good governance would better be able to avoid, for example, the sad situation that Indiana has found itself in due to bordering two terribly mismanaged Democrat controlled states, Michigan and Illinois. Due to its unfortunate geographical position, Indiana is the only Republican controlled state to exceed the 10 deaths per 100k mark. Are U.S. weekly total deaths increasing due to coronavirus? The answer is that they are doing the opposite since the peak of the flu season, which may surprise a lot of peopleWeekly U.S. flu deaths are also showing a decline after this season s flu peakAnd weekly pneumonia deaths were also on the decline from the flu peak. But in the very last week on the chart they jumped significantly. One reason for this outcome may be the result of coronavirus infection deaths also being coded with associated pneumonia. Or actual COVID-19 deaths being inaccurately labeled as pneumonia deaths. These mortality statistics are heavily revised each week by the CDC as more complete information is submitted to CDC by the states. The adjacent chart is a plot of this dataset from the U.S. CDC. Click on chart to enlarge.(The very latest week of statistics was not included in the chart since it included a datapoint of only 27,500 total deaths for the week - that would be a record extreme low since 2013.)The adjacent chart is a plot of dataset from this CDC website page. Do the facts regarding the COVID-19 virus support the claim that Trump is responsible for excess virus infections and deaths in the U.S.?Not in the least. The claims are a mere combination of political lies and self-serving propaganda, per the empirical evidence, as of the morning of April 19, 2020 from Worldometer.com.Using the coronavirus and population data from that site, the adjacent table was constructed to identify the documented death and case characteristics for the 15 well established Western European countries versus the U.S.While each individual country is much smaller than the U.S., the total of the 15 countries is similar in population size to that of America.When the aggregate of European deaths and cases are compared to the U.S. totals, it is readily apparent that the overall results lean slightly in Trump s favor.And that result is also seen in the per capita comparisons.If Trump is to be held to perfect 20/20 hindsight by his critics, then that hindsight should be applied in a relative manner regarding the performance of the Western European country core.As with every major issue that has confronted the nation over 3+ years, the never-ending obsession and hatred of Trump, by both Democrat and press elites, has completely derailed any chance of a rational and constructive collaboration on COVID-19 solutions.Americans are suffering terribly at this time. History will show that the Democrats and the MSM truly have become enemies to the public interest and well being. Enemies to the point of taking the side of the lone perpetrator of the world s coronavirus outbreak, against the U.S. (click on to enlarge)As this blog has pointed out multiple times, over the last 10+ years, computer simulation models are essentially worthless for policymaker decision making.Mountains of evidence exist that models can t predict squat, which is a simple concept that seems not to be grasped by way too many policymakers and about 100% of the MSM press. Model prediction failure is true, whether the issue is climate change or the COVID-19 pandemic or other policy issue.Why then are computer simulation models used?Their effectiveness lies not in prediction success but rather as convincing propaganda by scientists and media in order to induce fear and irrational hysteria.And there is no doubt the past four weeks of the CoronaHysteria has established, yet again, that computer models are proven to be terrible tools for predictions but great for propaganda purposes.Adding to the misery of bad modeling output is the successful promulgation of the propaganda by the country s self-anointed elites, thus insuring stressful mayhem for the public coupled with vast unintended consequences.Such as closing down an entire nation s economy that produces massive, record setting unemployment numbers and psychological wreckage in just a few short weeks.And unfortunately, the elites blind faith in consensus expertise leads to all sorts of proclamations and statements that are, more often than not, proven to be wrong, divisive, and exceptionally stupid to say in a group larger than two, let alone on a widely disseminated public forum that cable news provides.One recent example of this level of elite stupidity is the following nugget of wisdom that MSNBC journalist, Andrea Mitchell, seems to be pushing:MSNBC s Andrea Mitchell and the Washington Post s Philip Rucker decided on Monday to place the blame for the current pandemic on President Trump and conservative red states ...that there were a number of people in red states early on who didn t heed the warnings to socially distance because they believed the President s false comments. Per the above chart, it is obvious that the red-state rubes are not spreading the coronaCCPvirus to the blue states - that is an alternate reality fantasy. Instead, it is the direct opposite: the liberal/progressive states are the epicenter of disease and spreading it to the rest of the country. (New Yorkers fleeing to Florida, Puerto Rico and other locales comes to mind.)For some, this empirical evidence suggests that the worst 9 states and the District of Columbia should be strictly quarantined, including the red-state of Louisiana that so foolishly allowed their famous and popular New Orleans Mardi Gras festival to proceed during the month of February. (Possibly the good red citizens of Louisiana should be forgiven since accountability rests with the Democrat idiocracy there - the state s governor and the mayor of New Orleans).Maybe the key to blockading the coronavirus progression across the country is the total train/plane/car/bus travel curtailment for these virus-laden states - not the economically damaging state/local social distancing business closures.And what about the effectiveness of those now infamous social distancing polices?Well, the table below reveals the dates of key social distancing policies (ie, stay at home orders, school closings, non-essential business closings) enacted by each state in the best 10 and worst 10. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to realize that the date enactment of strict isolation policies is not well correlated with death outcomes per 100k population of the states. Let it be said though, one significant advantage that red states have, besides their greater well of common sense, is the benefit of natural social distancing. Living farther apart is rewarded during a pandemic - no authoritarian social distancing policies required. Note: Red states are those likely to vote Trump2020. Blues states are those likely to vote Biden2020. Michigan is considered by many to be a swing state and thus gets the purple color. Dataset for the deaths/100k calculations comes from this site. Implementation (or not) dates of social distancing policies for each state can be found at this site. Computer simulations/models are a valuable tool for researchers investigating the impact of different policy scenario assumptions. Output from computer models is not evidence since it represents speculation based on assumptions. Computer modeling is not science. It is sophisticated crystal-balling utilized for business, for games of chance, for elections, and other endeavors, including science. (click on to enlarge)It is a sacrosanct belief of end-of-world cultists that the global warming since the onset of the large growth in consumer/industrial CO2 emissions would bring in its wake devastating and extreme severe-weather events. But that has not been the case as a new peer-reviewed study discovered.Researchers investigated the frequency of severe thunderstorms and hail events to determine if the significant regional warming across the Tibetan Plateau (TP) area had generated more such events.From a review of the study.... despite considerable warming over the period 1960-2012, Zou et al. determined that there has been a statistically significant decline of 3.1 storms days per decade across the TP. Hail days, on the other hand, showed a slight increasing trend of 5.8% per decade from 1955-1980, but thereafter declined by a much larger 18.3% per decade over the period 1980-2012.....Consequently, they conclude that their results imply that global warming is likely to cause a decrease in the conditions required for severe thunderstorm and hail formation in the TP over the next century. For those who keep abreast of climate empirical science, this is not a one-off study. The scientific literature overflows with studies refuting the doomer-alarmist predictions that an increased frequency and intensity of severe climate change weather events would develop - after 30+ years, it has simply not happened.While this list is not comprehensive in any way, shape or form, it is indicative of the existing severe weather research available that refutes the spurious claims.Additional severe weather charts. (click on to enlarge)Fortunately for those who believe in empirical science, the facts are indisputable. The earth is not at risk of rapid global warming that would set off a soon-to-be climate emergency or climate crisis tipping point.We live in an era where cult-like beliefs have caused a great number of people to accept what resembles a prophecy about the world ending within 12 years, from a global warming tipping point for the climate.This fear-mongering myth takes the form that humanity is causing - due to fossil fuel emissions - a rapid acceleration of global temperatures that will wreak havoc and destruction as the tipping point is reached. But is there actual empirical evidence that this doomer prophecy is playing out with a soon-to-be ending to civilization?The included chart is a plot of the IPCC s gold-standard empirical global temperature data representing how fast/slow global temperatures are moving - it s a climate warming speedometer, so to speak.A breakdown of the chart:A.) There are 5 per century warming/cooling trends plotted for different time spans, for each month since the 1850s. B.) The most volatile of the 5 is the one-year (12-mth) acceleration/deceleration trend in blue; the least volatile is the twenty-year (240-mth) cyan trend. C.) The 12-mth speedometer of global warming reveals three definitive periods that approximated or exceeded a warming rate of 60°C per century, each prior to the 1950s - and none after. (see red squares)D.) The 12-mth also has the most extreme per century cooling rates (-60°C) indicated by the blue squares - those two occasions were before the 1980s.E.) Regarding the fairly consistent 240-mth (twenty year) moving temperature trend, the vertical cyan dashed lines mark three specific December months - December 1927, 1945 and 2019. The two former pre-1950 earlier periods have a per century warming rate that exceeded the December 2019 20-year warming rate.The point of this chart?It demonstrably proves, using the IPCC s own gold-standard of global warming data, that the speed of warming has not rapidly increased, and better yet for humanity, exhibits nothing to indicate that a climate emergency tipping point will soon occur, if ever.It demonstrably provides evidence that warming and cooling trends are in constant up/down flux since the record of historical observed temperatures commenced.Yes, the shorter time periods, especially the 1-year per century trend, exhibits an extreme, even scary volatility that reaches some very alarming per century warming rates but that s been the case forever regardless of greenhouse gases. And in all cases of extreme warming trend rates, the temperature trends eventually return to lower rates that even include global cooling trends. Importantly, these warming trend patterns have taken place during both relative stable CO2 emissions and rapidly increasing CO2 greenhouse emissions since 1950, with the recent concomitant sharp rise in atmospheric CO2 levels, as the table below indicates.This is good news for the world s masses since it s quite evident that the very foundation of the climate doomsday prophecy has no factual or evidentiary basis. The world, as we know it, will be very much the same twelve years from now unless Earth is impacted by an asteroid or a massive meteorite.Note: Excel was used to calculate trends and plot chart from the HadCRUT 4.6 land/sea monthly temperature dataset for the month ending December 2019. Excel used to calculate CO2 related percentage changes from the 2019 BP Energy Statistical Review (CO2 emissions XLSX tab) and NOAA s atmospheric CO2 level data.Additional global and regional and historical temperature charts. (click on to enlarge)In the real world, climate model simulations have been self-debunking over recent decades due to the constant prediction failures. And the latest embarrassing example of model prediction failure is very relevant to the doomsday Arctic meltdown myth that the anti-science climate emergency cult pushes.A new peer-reviewed study by a group of researchers set out to determine the accuracy of top-tier climate model predictions of Arctic warming rates versus the actual Arctic warming rate. Their research involved the output of the same 36 climate models used for the UN s IPCC work.This chart is a snapshot of their work, which visually portrays the computer climate model simulations over a 138-year period, from 1880 to 2017, and how they consistently overestimate how fast the Arctic is warming since around 1950.Per the study s findings: ...the model-estimated rate of secular warming (the solid red line) increased quite sharply across the 138-year period, rising from a value of around 0 °C per decade at the beginning of the record to a value of 0.35 °C per decade at the end. Observations, in contrast, started off with a higher warming rate than that of the models (a rate of 0.13 °C per decade; the solid black line), but dipped below the rate of warming predicted by the models around the middle of the record, thereafter experiencing a lower rate of warming relative to the models through the end of the record. By the end of the record, the model-predicted secular rate of warming was 67% higher than that determined from observations (0.21 °C). Thus, the figure shows an increasing disparity between modelled and observed warming rates that starts around the middle of the record and grows to 0.14 °C per decade by the mid-2010s. Huang et al. state the obvious, that anthropogenically induced secular warming has been overestimated by the CMIP5 GCMs during the most recent warming period, and the overestimation is aggravated with time. What is more, given the error bars shown on the figure, in the very near future the observed warming rate will likely soon fall outside the significance levels of the ensemble model mean, removing any remaining credibility left in the model projections of future Arctic warming. Based on the well documented abundance of failures of even the most sophisticated climate models, it should now be considered criminal malfeasance or malpractice that any politician or bureaucrat utilizes said models for setting policies. While doomsday climate-crisis cultists propagandize using the untenable and unreliable model projections, those that represent the public should be employing more sober analysis and commonsense for policy development and implementation, if any.A terse synopsis: Climate models can t predict squat.Prior peer-reviewed and climate model articles. The virtue-signaling corporate juggernaut that is Amazon sometimes acts in a very anti-consumer manner.For example, trying to request that a missing Amazon order package be re-shipped since it was never delivered, contrary to what Amazon reports, is made rather difficult by the giant online retailer. Especially since they no longer provide a url link on their web site to address the non-delivery issue when Amazon reports the package as being delivered. Instead, try the below method to get that replacement package sent, per this web page.What to Do When Your Amazon Order Shows as Delivered but is Actually MissingUPDATE AS OF NOVEMBER 2019! As of November 2019 here is what you have to do if your order shows as delivered but never arrived: Call Amazon at 888-280-4331 You will be asked to let Amazon verify your account by having Amazon text the number they have associated with your account (while you are on the phone) and once you have verified it, the automated system will guide you through some options, one of which is “about an order”, followed by “are you calling about an item?” Answer ‘yes’ to this, and then the system asks you about the item, and gives you the option to say that it never arrived. At this point the system will offer you a refund or a replacement.You can also try using the Amazon Customer Service Chatbot if you prefer not to use the phone, although we have not tested it recently. The doomsday climate change alarmists keep having their science-denying chops busted and it has happened again.A new study on the climate change impact on sea coral habitat is very inconvenient for the cult of anti-empirical science deniers.For way too long, these deniers have completely ignored the actual science being conducted to determine if the combination of global warming and seawater acidification from fossil fuel emissions would lead to the harm and devastation of sea coral. The new study again confirms what the science deniers simply do not want to hear. Red Sea corals are robust enough to adapt to changing climate conditions in their environment.From the review of the new peer-reviewed study by Bellworthy, J., Menoud, M., Krueger, T., Meibim, A. and Fine, M. 2019. In a recent study on the combined effects of so-called ocean acidification and warming on corals, Bellworthy et al. (2019) exposed mature colonies of the [Red Sea] reef-building coral Stylophora pistillata to extreme seawater conditions of pH 0.4 units lower and temperatures 5°C warmer than they are today..... Notably, they add that under the experimental conditions S. pistillata planulae were resistant in terms of their settlement, physiology and survival, even when parents were exposed to severe ocean acidification and warming during the gamete maturation, fertilization and brooding period ..... And because that resistance was evident to even the most extreme predictions of future ocean acidification and warming (Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5), it would appear a solid bet that these corals will be around for centuries to come. Additional peer-reviewed science articles prior sea/ocean postings. This NASA climate model chart certainly confirms why expert computer climate simulations are held in such contempt and ridiculed; and also why they should not be utilized for policy work performed by politicians and bureaucrats.The failure of climate models at what they were originally intended to accomplish has forced the major climate research agencies into a constant state of both upgrading their wildly expensive climate models and correcting past actual temperature measurements. This particular model was instrumental in starting the egregious and shrill propaganda war against economic growth and prosperity way back in 1988. It s creation has led to the point where today teenage doomsday cult personalities are provided top-level platforms to fear-rant - by those who should know better - to rail against the bountiful wonders of modern civilization.This NASA model has had a long history being wrong, and when correct at specific periods, it s due more to blind luck of the natural temporary El Niño global warming phenomenon, which is not sustainable over lengthy time spans. The model chart presents three simulated global temperature scenarios that portray the end result of growing greenhouse gas emissions, with the focus on fossil fuel CO2 emissions. The scenarios developed by NASA include:Scenario A : The business-as-usual (BAU) scenario that represented total emissions growing without any constraints.Scenario B : Representing the reduction of total emissions by moderate amounts.Scenario C : Representing a scenario that had global emissions being maintained in the future at year 2000 levels.As the observed NASA and HadCRUT global temperature plots on the chart reveal, the observed temperatures are not anywhere close to NASA s BAU scenario A . Yet, as can be seen below, it s continued to be business-as-usual for a very long time, at least since the 1988 introduction of this model to the public. Sources: 2019 BP Energy Statistical Review NOAA CO2 ppm levelsThis December 2019 article lays out the essentials of past greenhouse gas growth and the continuing growth of CO2, which shows no signs of a permanent global curtailment.In summary, this NASA/GISS model was never an effective tool for climate change prediction, let alone establishing a realistic national or global policymaker climate strategy. And over the decades since 1988, all the later generations of climate models have been no better as they also way over estimate the warming impact of greenhouse emissions.Prior climate model postings. Additional climate model charts. Over the last three decades, advocates of climate change alarmism have claimed that the trace greenhouse gas CO2 is the rapid global warming control knob that humans can use to tweak the world s climate, thus allowing for a deceleration of the supposed harmful warming.But after some 30+ years, the empirical evidence for that claim still remains missing in action (M.I.A.).The adjacent chart of lower atmosphere temperature trend plots and atmospheric CO2 s constant growth completely refutes the concept that warming rates (acceleration/deceleration) can be controlled by a magical bureaucrat s CO2 knob.As it is blindingly obvious, atmospheric temperatures rates are constantly changing, going from a state of acceleration, to a deceleration state, and then back to acceleration, without any regard to CO2 levels.Without any regard to CO2 levels?The pale yellow boxes near the bottom of the chart the relationship between atmospheric CO2 levels and the various plotted per century temperature trends. Those correlations barely climb out of the basement, with two even exhibiting a negative correlation.The hypothesis that CO2 is currently a strong influencer on the world s warming is essentially factless.Clearly, whether it s a reduction in human emissions or using technology to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, there will be no changing the natural planetary phenomenon of the constant change in temperature warming and cooling rates.Simply stated, there is no control knob for humans to utilize to slow or speed up global warming.Once the public comes to realize the fake CO2 doomsday science being pushed by the establishment does not offer a solution, the sooner we can move to adaption strategies for coping with any negative outcomes from a warmer world (and also take advantage of the massive benefits from global warming).Note: Excel was used to average the monthly global temperatures from the UAH and RSS satellite datasets; Excel was used to calculate the per century trends in the plots; Excel was used to plot the atmospheric CO2 levels from this dataset; Excel used to chart all data and to calculate the moving per century slope trends. (click to enlarge)As numerous C3 articles on past warming has pointed out, our modern global warming is not so unprecedented as the scientifically illiterate alarmist doomers claim - here s looking at you, Greta Thunberg, know-nothing Hollywood celebrities, and mainstream mocking bird journalists. As this chart indicates, in the very distant past, temperatures were indeed at times warmer or match what we are currently experiencing. Per the peer-reviewed study, across a span of 2,500 years researchers were able to reconstruct the bottom waters of a fjord. The findings: Asteman et al. first note that the reconstructed temperature range (2.7-7.8 °C) is within the present-day annual variability, documented from instrumental temperature measurements in the fjord s deepest basin since 1890. Next, they point out that the Gulmar Fjord winter bottom water temperature record shows both centennial and multidecadal variability and has a striking resemblance to climate periods historically known in northern Europe over the last 2500 years. Those periods include the Roman Warm Period (RWP), Dark Ages Cold Period (DACP), Medieval Warm Period (MWP), Little Ice Age (LIA) and Current Warm Period (CWP).According to Asteman et al., temperatures during the RWP (prior to ~ AD 450) were approximately 2.5 °C higher than the 1961-1999 mean, encompassing a temperature range of 5.4-7.9 °C. During the DACP (~ AD 450-850), temperatures were more variable but stayed in the range of 4-8 °C. The MWP, which the authors say occurred around AD 850-1350, coincided with a grand solar maximum with water temperatures ranging between 5.4 and 7.6 °C. Thereafter, temperatures cooled once again during the LIA, with bottom water temperature averaging 2-3 °C lower than the instrumental 1961-1999 temperature mean and hovering between a range of 2.9 to 6.6 °C.Finally, at the end of the record, temperatures warmed up again. However, Asteman et al. report that the contemporary warming of the 20th century does not stand out in the 2500-year perspective and is of the same magnitude as the Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Climate Anomaly. Of course, all that past warming was due to normal climatic oscillations and fluctuations within various cycles. This past warming had nothing to do with CO2 and other emitted greenhouse gases.And just as occurred in the past, it is highly likely that a major portion of the warming since the Little Ice Age is also natural.Additional historical temperature charts. (click to enlarge)Empirical evidence is the bane of all climate change doomers since it contradicts what they ve been told as being true.In a nutshell, the doomer contention is that a civilization doomsday will happen within the next 12 years because of climate change.The principal foundation of their alarmist catastrophic scenarios is the never tested, never proven hypothesis that human CO2 emissions will cause incredible, tipping point global warming, thus leaving planet Earth uninhabitable.However, fortunately for the world and its inhabitants, there is absolutely zero empirical evidence supporting the claimed soon-to-be doomsday from growing CO2 emissions.The adjacent chart plots 3 evidence lines of significant importance. The black line with white dots is a plot of total CO2 emissions for the prior 12 years. The very first white dot represents total 12-year emissions ending in 1958. The next white dot represents the cumulative emissions for the 12 years ending 1959, and so on. The last dot represents total emissions for the 12 years ending 2018.The gray dotted line with the black squares is the plot of atmospheric CO2 changes over 12 months. For example, the first black square on the left represents the total change in atmospheric CO2 levels from November 30, 1958 through November 1959. Each progressive black square represents the 12-month change for the given period ending in November until the last square is reached for the 12-month period ending November 2019.And the pale orange line with red circles is the plot of HadCrut global temperature changes over the preceding 12 months, all periods (red circles) ending in November.From a visual interpretation of the chart, there appears to be a cause and effect relationship between past human CO2 emissions and the subsequent change in levels of atmospheric CO2. The r2 for said relationship is +0.49, which suggests there is statistical evidence that at least a portion of the higher atmospheric CO2 levels is due to the many years of human fossil fuel emissions.In contrast, it is visually obvious that there is no cause and effect relationship between past cumulative CO2 emissions and subsequent global temperature changes. In fact, the r2 of +0.002 indicates that past CO2 changes have essentially zero influence on global temperature changes.(click to enlarge)This second chart shows the trend lines of the plotted datasets from the prior chart.The trend line for temperature change is essentially flat, while the trend lines for both CO2 emission tonnes and atmospheric CO2 levels are significantly upward sloping.Conclusion: It would be reasonable to assume from the available evidence that as human CO2 emissions increase, the atmospheric CO2 levels will likely follow suit. But the empirical evidence for the claim that growing CO2 emissions will cause huge warming changes is non-existent, even after decades of gigantic output of human CO2 emissions. The doomers fear that increasing human CO2 emissions will result in rapid changes in global warming and thus a climate doomsday is not only unlikely, it is scientifically illiterate without any empirical merit.Additional global temperature charts.Note: Each of the 3 dataset plots contain 61 datapoints since the first full year (1959) of CO2 data collection from the Mauna Loa, Hawaii measurement station. Excel was used to calculate all 12-month changes and to calculation moving 12-year total of CO2 emissions; Excel also used for charts of datapoints and their respective linear trends and r2. Source of HadCrut 4.6 global temperature anomalies; source of CO2 atmospheric CO2 levels (ppm); source of CO2 emissions in metric tonnes. And the relationship between the 12-month temperature changes and the the 12-month changes in atmospheric CO2 levels (ppm) has a r2 of +0.01 - might as well be zero. Those stubborn facts can be so hurtful...for doomers and alarmists. Over the last 11 years, C3 has written multiple posts regarding the never-ending stream of failed climate predictions. And we are especially fond of sharing with readers the debunking of doomsday-type predictions that fail miserably due to their being non-reality based.Four of the more recent videos debunking doomsday and existential threat predictions can be seen below.The people embracing the doomsday nonsense are often those gullible enough to elevate their green feelings to a religion status that requires exhibiting their devotion in a pagan-like manner, as the video below on the left indicates.The most vulnerable to the false prophets of green disaster cultism are the many young persons who do not yet possess the critical thinking faculties to see through the doomsday sham. But one father offers a likely very effective technique to deprogram a teenage child involved in this mentally abusive cult (see the video below on the right). (click on image to enlarge)Amazingly, the impact has been zilch on each continent s and hemisphere s hottest and coldest temperature extremes.Based on the doomsday hysteria, one would expect every continent to be reaching an unprecedented, new extreme hot temperature record every single year.But alas, per the empirical records through the end of 2019, there has been no individual continental hottest temperature record surpassed since 1982 - maybe matched since then, but not surpassed. Way back in 1982, the continent of Antarctica set a new hottest record temperature of +67.2°F.And the world s 1913 single hottest temperature ever of 134.0°F has yet to be broken or even matched.As far as the coldest temperature record, the last time a new record was set took place during 1983, again on the continent of Antarctica. That 1983 coldest low reached a -128.6°F.So, after another decade of hysterical screaming by doomsday alarmists about unprecedented warming, the experts confirm - using empirical evidence - that the world is not burning up due to the hundreds of billions of tonnes of evil fossil fuel CO2 emissions released into the atmosphere. Nor has all that CO2 caused even lower extremes of cold temperatures.It s another case of those stubborn facts debunking the very fake narrative of a climate change doomsday existential threat.Note: Global temperature extremes by geological continent can be located here and here. (The WMO lists both Israel and Greenland as part of Europe, which is purely a political decision, not based on the actual geology of continents. Geologically, Greenland is part of the North American continent and Israel sits on the western portion of the Asian continent.) Recent days have again provided ample evidence of government officials and politicians lying to the public, whether it be the released Afghan Papers ; the deranged Democrats fact-less, no-crime Trump impeachment fraud; or another failed climate-porn UN Climate Conference that just concluded in Madrid. The incessant lying by the establishment elites and their bureaucrat cronies has not been without massive blowback by the voting public, though. Last week s absolute massive and stunning UK conservative landslide electoral vote over the elitist left and socialists was a direct refutation of the policies of the wealthy and powerful overlords that the masses are objecting to.But no matter the how many times the establishment elites hugely lose in elections across the world, today s Democrats seem unable to learn one of the lessons why the public keeps spanking them: STOP LYING!This video simply demonstrates that Democrats running for 2020 election are still going to lie to the public by using climate-porn fearmongering. They are peddling fake future disasters in order to fool the public.Democrats continue to use this tactic to not only enrich their wealthy white privileged donors who invest in green energy scams; but to justify progressives demand for greater taxes for spending programs; to make energy more costly for the lower and middle class; and to enable greater government bureaucrat control over the populace with more regulations. All the terrible policies that voters do not want - and Democrats won t talk about - are masked by this anti-scientific climate doomsday propaganda that they glibly spread. Greta and her UN climate change alarmist friends are currently attending the UN s Madrid Climate conference, which seems to be experiencing some unplanned difficulties.As in past years, this conclave s purpose is to frighten mainstream journalists with stories of pending doom caused by fossil fuel CO2 emissions. Of course, they always state that doom is just around the corner. After decades of these disaster prognostications never coming true, one would think journalists would finally learn that they are being played.Not yet it would appear (one is always reminded of the maxim that journalists are not the sharpest blades in the drawer).Recently we had another example of the failed doomerism religion, and it comes with the end of the 2019 hurricane season, which the UN, Greta, and journalists do not want the public to be aware of.As this article lays out, the doomer-cult scary predictions of increased frequency and increased intensity of hurricanes simply has not happened. And the adjacent charts reveal the indisputable empirical evidence, much to the angst of Greta and friends. Additional failed predictions and severe event charts. The world s gold-standard USCRN climate station measurement system has now recorded 3 straight years of declining temperatures, based on 12-month averages ending in November.And the 12-month period ending November 2019 is actually below (-0.06°F) the very first 12-month period ending November 2006 (+1.03°F).Conclusion: Global warming appears to be on hiatus in the U.S., again. Because the FBI and DOJ relied on the proven bogus and laughable Steele dossier, in their approval submission to the FISA court for surveillance on Trump campaign associates, the entire chain of FBI command in the Obama administration has been referred for further investigation and analysis. (click on to watch) It s not just the FBI that exhibited extraordinary difficulties with the truth, but maybe more importantly for the American public, an entire class of mainstream press journalists, reporters, pundits and other experts either gladly lied to protect the anti-Trump narrative, and/or were badly duped due to their amazing combination of stupidity, laziness, and gullibility.The below have been identified in this posting (archived copy) as being useful idiot collaborators in one of the biggest political hoaxes in political history. These people should not be trusted with anything that they say or publish - if you do, very good chance you are reading fake news.@shaneharris Washington Post journalist@JonahDispatch Former author/pundit for National Review@BradMossEsq Lawyer@KenDilanianNBC NBC journalist@JonathanLanday Reuters national security correspondent@renato_mariotti CNN analyst@jimsciutto CNN anchor@NatashaBertrand Politico national security correspondent @JuliaEAinsley NBC correspondent@ddale8 CNN reporter@JRubinBlogger Blogger/pundit Washington Post@evanperez CNN senior justice correspondent@NormEisen Obama s WH ethics czar Government funded science (and climate change science) is awash in falsehoods that are constantly being propagandized to the detriment of the public. There is even a weekly publication that exposes the latest fake science that has mislead and misinformed.Unfortunately, this growing fakery is being found across just about every governmental institution. The result has severely damaged the credibility and trustworthiness of all, whether implicated or not. The latest example is the expose of the cornucopia of FBI s actions/errors that mislead the all-important FISA court, as documented by the DOJ IG Horowitz.Below, WSJ journalist Kimberley Strassel lays out the damning information in an epic Twitter thread regarding the FBI s Russia, Russia, Russia investigative corruption. The source for all these tweets can be found here.At this point in time, why anyone would trust any of the mainstream establishment institutions beggars belief. As skeptics have exposed in the climate science arena, institutional claims cannot be trusted, which necessitates their being checked at least in a triple fashion, if not more. And as anti-Trump debacle is proving, our skepticism should extend to all claiming authority and/or moral superiority. Lesson learned: they re all incessant, remorseless liars.Note: The DOJ was unable to establish the FBI motive for significantly misleading the FISA court, yet. There was no smoking gun email, text message or voice recording that the IG discovered in the course of his investigation. On the overhand, the DOJ s Durham investigation of potential criminal activities will likely be better positioned to find such motivation since Durham has both subpoena and grand jury powers that the IG lacked. Climate doomers claim that the entire globe is being roasted by the ever increasing blanket of human CO2 emissions in the atmosphere.Yet there are large regions and areas of the world that somehow have escaped this warming oven deathtrap, and are even doing the contrary, cooling.This is happening despite the CAGW hypothesis determinations that the mainstream press, Hollywood celebrities and left-of-center politicians fully hype without any regard to climate reality and empirical evidence.In fact, the latest empirical evidence indicates that multiple nations in the northern hemisphere - the supposed regional canary in the CAGW mine - have not warmed over the last 20+ years. The adjacent chart reveals that only 2 of 6 climate stations in Finland have experienced warming during the month of October since 1994. If CO2 induced global warming is indeed as powerful and all encompassing as doomers claim, then the near-Arctic climate reality of Finland is impossible.And unfortunately for the climate change alarmists, Finland is no exception. This article plots a total of 3 other higher latitude nations in the northern hemisphere that reveal the same climate reality: more cooling than warming.Out of total of 30 climate stations stretched across Ireland, Sweden, Norway (and Finland), only one third (33.3%) exhibited a significant global warming trend. The remaining climate station measurement records show either a stable or cooling trend.Think about it: If 66% of the climate stations have no impactful warming over the last 2 decades, why would alarmists state categorically the opposite? And adding to the climate reality misery of doomers being factually wrong, there is the continuing growth of northern hemisphere snowfall extent that debunks the alarmist predictions that snow would disappear (remember the doomer scientist claim that snowfalls are a thing of the past ?).This Rutgers University fall season snow extent chart for the northern hemisphere states the obvious: climate doomers are liars, seemingly intent on creating false public fears.Additional regional and modern temperature charts. A scientist explains in a slow and rational manner that shouldn t even trigger the likes of teenager doomer-brat Greta Thunberg. Link to video and link to transcript. No, it was not. And another alarmist doomsday claim bites the dust.As with everything in climate change, nothing is unprecedented. The warm and dry Europe summers over the last two years are no exception.Per this article, scientists examined evidence using dendroclimatology techniques and concluded that the Medieval Warming Period produced similar high temperatures and droughts in northern Germany some 1,000 years ago. And the result was most definitely not a climate doomsday eventAs it happens, the High Middle Ages took place 1,000 years ago during this time of a milder and warmer climate. The better climate was key to producing a more robust civilization with impressive population gains, coupled with greater agriculture opportunity and capabilities that helped stimulate economic markets and trade. Of course, nothing lasts forever in nature, and as the climate made its move into the cooling period known as the Little Ice Age, the great societal gains of the Climate Optimum either stagnated or were vastly decreased across a wide swath of Europe.These same scientists also investigated the doomsday claim that Germany s wonderful forests would be devastated by today s warming and drier conditions.Their findings contradicted the alarmist claims. The authors prove once again that our forests are growing much faster today than in the past, because agriculture (also traffic industry) provides them with a lot of fixed nitrogen (ammonium salts). The modestly increased CO2 content of today’s air also allows the trees to open the stomata of the leaves for a shorter period of time, thus limiting water losses. In other words, our industrial civilization is considerably HELPING the forest by supplying it with building materials and even water indirectly. Does a high level of CO2 harm or decrease your mental performance? Nope.A 2019 study by researchers conclude that the brain s critical levels of cognition and decision making are not impaired when the human body is subjected to much higher levels of CO2 than found in Earth s atmosphere. It is well-established that rising levels of atmospheric CO2 pose no direct threat to human health...the ten U.S. researchers tested the mental acuity of 22 astronaut-like male and female subjects to four different CO2 concentrations (600, 1200, 2500 and 5000 ppm), subjecting them to standardized decision making and cognition tests...According to the authors, there were no clear dose-response patterns for performance on either [the] Strategic Management Simulation or Cognition evaluations...Consequently, when considering the full range of CO2 values examined, they conclude that performance across tests did not differ between baseline (600 ppm) and the higher concentrations. Timing is everything in the political world, and especially when you are already a failed U.S. Senator with an approval rating of 18%. What does one do in such circumstances?Of course, if one finds himself in such an unenviable position, one forms a stop climate change doomsday Mod Squad in the U.S. Senate that is fashioned to curry the favor of The Squad socialist crazies -i.e. AOC and others. Surprise! That s just what the infamous GOP s Mitt Pierre Delecto Romney has done.Unfortunately for Romney, real scientists keep releasing more scientific research and empirical evidence that refutes the climate change doomsday scenarios that Pierre and his tax spend senatorial comrades believe in.Case in point is the recent debunking of the alarmist propaganda disaster scenario where Pacific islands will be submerged by rising sea.Here is a review of multiple peer-reviewed island studies that provide the doomsday shredding analyses. This is not a one-off. The scientific literature is filled with studies debunking all the doomsday scenarios; and the new research keeps growing in this realm, much to the chagrin and bad timing of many a political has-been.p.s. If you re thinking of giving money to the GOP s senate campaign organization, don t. Give to individual candidates but not to an organization that condones the likes of Pierre Delecto. Well, probably not a lot, since these 11,000+ scientists signed onto a fake science editorial. It was essentially a press release letter-to-the-editor type of article that could have been written by any climate doomsday acolyte, such as Al Gore or Greta Thurnberg. The MSM presented the press release as a study but there was no peer-reviewed science or empirical evidence presented in the journal.And the signatories of this letter simply went to a web site and seemingly just had to click a button to register their approval of the letter. No vetting of the signatories whatsoever.Rebel News TV has a great video describing the non-scientific article and the Canadian mainstream media reaction to it. During the analysis, the Rebel TV commentator starts a 13-minute review of some of the 400 Canadian scientists who put their signature on the dotted line for all to see.Do ya think these Canadian scientists possess a portfolio of sophisticated research and expertise in climate science? Watch and see for yourself.Kinda cool that an occupational-therapist can sign a press release and immediately become a scientist.Fake news and science in one jumbo package that the mainstream press heartily swallowed and gleefully regurgitated.Full video on YouTube. After 10 years of being on Twitter, I finally submitted a tweet that Twitter refused to publish. Is Twitter censorship even being applied to an account that has a minuscule following?Earlier, I had read articles about the Facebook and Twitter censorship in regards to the fake Ukranian whistleblower Eric Ciaramella. Being the proverbial skeptic, decided to test the claim on Twitter censorship by submitting a rather mundane tweet that included the adjacent image via a Bit.ly link. Attempted to submit the tweet multiple times with no luck. Apparently, Twitter would not allow the posting that included a screen capture having the text Eric Ciaramella in the image.Then Twitter would not accept any tweet I tried submitting.I then opened up a different browser and was able to sign into Twitter. But I was still unable to post a new tweet.At least Twitter censorship seems to be a real thing when it comes to protecting the Democrats narrative.For those bloggers seeking a censorship-free alternative to Twitter, sign up for Gab.com account. For any blog post that you submit to your Twitter account, you can do the same by using Gab s Dissenter extension or use Gab s new privacy browser. Today s lesson: When government is involved, consumers always pay more for less.Why would this be a surprise to consumers regarding energy? There are multiple examples in the past where government intervention and subsidies have made costs soar - think health care and higher education for example. In 2013, a German economist predicted that the economic value of solar would drop by a whopping 50% when it became just 15% of electricity and that the value of wind would decline 40% once it rose to 30% of electricity.Six years later, the evidence that solar and wind are increasing electricity prices in the real world, often without reducing emissions, is piling up.In 2017, The Los Angeles Times reported that California’s electricity prices had risen sharply, and hinted it might have to do with the deployment of renewables.In 2018, I reported that renewables had contributed to electricity prices rising 50% in Germany and five times more in California than in the rest of the US despite generating just 17% of the state’s electricity.And in April, a research institute at the University of Chicago led by a former Obama administration economist found solar and wind were making electricity significantly more expensive across the United States.The cost to consumers of renewables has been staggeringly high. Read the full article.

TAGS: 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

C3Headlines reports on the global warming facts and climate change evidence. It helps readers determine what is global warming and how the empirical evidence stands up against the catastrophic global warming hoax.

Hot Websites