Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow.
So there was at least one higher temperature recorded in England in August 2003. Seventeen more years of increasing ’emissions’, which are supposed to be so dire according to a popular climate theory, haven’t made any difference to the peak figure so far. In fact July 2020 was noticeably cooler than average, but now a southerly wind has blown in some Saharan heat for a few days, most strongly to the near-continent regions. Not before time! – – – The UK has seen its hottest day in August for 17 years, as temperatures reached more than 36C (96.8F) in south-east England, reports BBC News.
Crowds headed to the coast to enjoy the weather, but people have been urged to adhere to social distancing.
Warm weather will continue over the weekend for much of the UK, according to the Met Office.
The highest temperatures are expected in England and Wales, with fresher weather forecast for Scotland and NI.
A band of rain will move across Scotland and Northern Ireland on Friday afternoon, the Met Office tweeted.
As of 15:00 BST on Friday, the mercury reached 36.4C at London’s Heathrow Airport, making it the hottest August day since 2003, BBC Weather said.
Earlier, a high of 26.4C was recorded in Wales (Usk), 23.5C in Scotland (Charterhall, Scottish Borders), and 20.9C in Northern Ireland (Katesbridge).
The sweltering temperatures come just one week after the UK recorded a yearly high of 37.8C at Heathrow.
The scandal from the Swamp: Too rich to get a cheap drug?
Poor countries all over the world are using Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and it appears to be very useful.
The new HCQTrial suggests that despite the billion dollar budgets and expert staff, people in wealthier countries are dying from Coronavirus at far higher rates than people are in lands where HCQ is being used. And the effect of HCQ apparently holds even after researchers correct for patients being older, heavier, with higher blood pressure, living in high density apartment towers, or with getting tested more.
If word ever gets out that the Politico-Academic-Corporate-Swamp buried useful drugs because they were unprofitable and out of patent, there will be hell to pay.
The HCQTrial was done anonymously by @CovidAnalysis – who say they are PhD researchers, scientists.
You can find our research in journals like Science and Nature. For examples of why we can’t be more specific search for “raoult death threats” or “simone gold fired”. We have little interest in adding to our publication lists, being in the news, or being on TV (we have done all of these things before but feel there are more important things in […]Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
From The Daily Caller Chris White Tech Reporter August 06, 2020 12:44 PM ET Sen. Kamala Harris of California and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York are teaming up on a proposal requiring lawmakers who introduce climate bills to consider the impact such legislation will have on black people and poor communities. The two Democrats […]
Sen. Kamala Harris of California and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York are teaming up on a proposal requiring lawmakers who introduce climate bills to consider the impact such legislation will have on black people and poor communities.
The two Democrats introduced the Climate Equity Act Thursday that would, if passed, require Congress to score future climate bills based on how much they may negatively impact poor and minority communities, The Washington Post reported. The two Democrats initially unveiled a draft of the bill in 2019, when Harris began her unsuccessful run for president, media reports show.
“COVID-19 has laid bare the realities of systemic racial, health, economic, and environmental injustices that persist in our country,” Harris said in a statement to the Post. “The environment we live in cannot be disentangled from the rest of our lives.”
The bill comes as reports indicate former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is considering Harris to be his running mate.
Biden pledged early during the presidential campaign to pick a female running mate.
The bill “is a really big deal,” Kerene Tayloe, director of federal legislative affairs at WE ACT for Environmental Justice, told the Post, referring to the scoring system.
“Nothing like that has ever existed,” Tayloe added. The New York-based environmental group helped Ocasio-Cortez and Harris craft the legislation.
Harris backed the Green New Deal in 2019, which sought to aggressively cut carbon emissions over the next decade. The resolution, crafted by Ocasio-Cortez, called for “10-year national mobilizations” toward addressing climate change.
A fact sheet published alongside the proposal said the plan would “mobilize every aspect of American society on a scale not seen since World War 2.”
Ocasio-Cortez’s GND would reportedly phase out fossil fuel usage within 12 years. Studies show the plan would come with a hefty price.
Americans could be forced to pay up to $93 trillion to implement the Green New Deal over a decade, the conservative-leaning American Action Forum (AAF) noted in a study in February 2019.
Republicans in the Senate torpedoed the legislation in March 2019, while Democratic lawmakers called the vote a dog-and-pony show. The GOP defeated the proposal 57-0, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell calling the bill a socialistic ploy designed to kill the economy.
“There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking,” Harris said during a September 2019 CNN town hall, although she did not embrace a fracking ban in her climate plan.
Biden has similarly declined to endorse an outright ban on fracking, though he did promise during a CNN debate in March that he would stop new fracking projects.
The German Research Foundation is back, again in favor of diversity of scientific opinion! Image: Galileo fails to change Catholic Church doctrine.
After widespread criticism, the German Research Foundation (DFG) has decided to reverse its July 30th decision to take down a dissident climate science statement from prominent German satirist Dieter Nuhr (background here).
What follows is DFG’s new statement in English (my emphasis added) expressing its regrets and announcing that Mr. Nuhr’s statement has been put back:
The DFG expressly regrets that the statement by Dieter Nuhr was taken hastily from the website of the online campaign #forknowledge. Mr. Nuhr is a person who stands at the heart of our society and is committed to science and rational discourse. Even if his pointed satirical nature may be irritating for some people, an institution like the DFG in particular is committed to the freedom of thought based on the Enlightenment. We have therefore reinstated his statement. The discussion about his statement exemplifies the developments that currently characterize many public discussions about science.
“A culture of debate has developed in various sectors of our society, in which it is often not the objective and stronger argument that counts, in which less is listened to and inquired about, but rather increasingly judged and condemned hastily. Instead of joint dialogue, increasingly polarized and divisive debates are taking the place of mutual dialogue. Particularly in the case of central issues such as climate change or the coronavirus pandemic, this hinders the really necessary discussion of scientific topics and the constructive exchange between science and society. Scientists who make their findings public and describe political options for action are increasingly the target of unobjective attacks and personal defamation. This also applies to social movements that advocate science and publicly call for scientific findings to be made more of a basis for decisions and actions.”
“These developments are not beneficial to society and are all the more worrying as science plays a central role in meeting current challenges, with which it is currently strongly perceived and valued in society. For its part, it is dependent on a critical, OPEN and constructive culture of communication.”
“The DFG would like to take these observations as an opportunity to initiate an intensive debate on the current debate culture surrounding science. The DFG stands for diversity of opinion and freedom of expression as well as for a differentiated culture of discussion. It will continue to do everything in its power to achieve this in the future – together with other figures from science, media, politics and other areas of society, both in Germany and abroad.”
What follows below is Nuhr’s original statement which the DFG “hastily took down” when it caved to public pressure from activists and ideologues. There’s nothing wrong with this statement:
Knowledge does not mean you are 100% sure, but that you have enough facts to have a reasoned opinion. But many people are offended when scientists change their mind: That is normal! Science is just THAT the opinion changes when the facts change. This is because science is not a doctrine of salvation, not a religion that proclaims absolute truths. And those who constantly shout, “Follow science!” have obviously not understood this. Science does not know everything, but it is the only reasonable knowledge base we have. That is why it is so important.”
Now after public outrage across Germany, Nuhr’s statement has been reinstated. A big victory for open science!
Joe Biden’s energy plan calls for outlawing reliable fossil fuel electricity and mandating unreliable solar and wind electricity. This will not stop CO2 emissions from rising but it will hinder America.
Anthony Watts speaks with Alex Epstein, founder and president of the Center for Industrial Progress and author of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. We talk about Joe Biden’s energy plan, which calls for outlawing reliable fossil fuel electricity and mandating unreliable solar and wind electricity. This will not stop CO2 emissions from rising but it will destroy American industry, impoverish American consumers, and jeopardize American security.
1. Energy schemes around the world based on “unreliables”—solar and wind—have been driving up electricity costs, harming economies, destroying domestic industries, and harming consumers. Germans pay 3X US electricity prices to get just 1/3 of their electricity from solar and wind.
2. Instead of learning from the failures of unreliable energy schemes, the Biden Plan seeks to do far worse by outlawing reliable fossil fuel electricity and forcing Americans to pay over $4 trillion–$15,000 a household–for a solar and wind-based grid that can’t possibly work.
3. Joe Biden says that forcing Americans to rely on unreliable solar and wind will create jobs. But making electricity unreliable and unaffordable doesn’t create jobs, it destroys them. Just ask the UK aluminum industry, which “green energy” schemes is driving out of business.
4. Joe Biden says that forcing Americans to rely on unreliable solar and wind will help middle-class Americans. But the cost of energy drives the cost of everything. Skyrocketing energy costs will drive skyrocketing food, housing, healthcare, and transportation costs.
5. America is already too reliant on unreliable solar and wind. That’s why utilities are already blacking out many of their industrial customers. And why grids in TX and the Northeast are warning of blackouts for everyone if policies don’t change. Biden’s Plan will guarantee blackouts.
6. Joe Biden’s support of a ban on fracking, which is required to produce over 60% of American oil and 75% of American natural gas, would destroy millions of jobs and once again make us dangerously dependent on the Middle East and Russia. Do we want to be at the mercy of the likes of Vladimir Putin?
7. Joe Biden’s plan to force Americans to use unreliable solar and wind won’t stop global CO2 levels from rising, because China and others won’t be stupid enough to follow suit. The only thing it will bring about is an economic and security crisis in America.
8. If Joe Biden and other Democrats want to lower global CO2 emissions, they should stop demonizing and criminalizing reliable, non-carbon nuclear energy and lower-carbon natural gas. Instead, the Biden Plan continues the overregulation of nuclear and supports banning natural gas.