Welcome to Sott.net
Wed, 20 Oct 2021
The World for People who Think

Earth Changes
Map

Bug

Honeybees under attack on all fronts

Image
© Nature Picture Library/Rex
Vital for our food production, honeybee populations are now in crisis.

The world's honeybees appear to be dying off in horrifying numbers, and now consensus is starting to emerge on the reason why: it seems there is no one cause. Infections, lack of food, pesticides and breeding - none catastrophic on their own - are having a synergistic effect, pushing bee survival to a lethal tipping point. A somewhat anti-climactic conclusion it may be, but appreciating this complexity - and realising there will be no magic bullet - may be the key to saving the insects.

A third of our food relies on bees for pollination. Both the US and UK report losing a third of their bees last year. Other European countries have seen major die-offs too: Italy, for example, said it lost nearly half its bees last year. The deaths are now spreading to Asia, with reports in India and suspected cases in China.

But while individual "sub-lethal stresses" such as infections are implicated, we know little about how they add together. The situation should become clearer in the next few years as the US government, the EU and others are pouring money into bee research. The UK, for example, has doubled its annual research budget, allocating £400,000 a year for the next five years.

Frog

White Alligator is One of Rarest in World

Image
© BARCROFT
White alligator: Out of the 5 million American alligator population there are thought to be only 12 leucistic gators

A white alligator, one of only 12 of its kind anywhere in the world, has been brought in from the swamps of Louisiana.

With its piercing blue eyes and pale skin this rare Alligator stands out like a sore thumb.

Weighing over 500 pounds, 22 year old male Bouya Blan is one of only 12 white alligators in the world.

The 500lb, 22-year-old male alligator, Bouya Blan, whose name means white fog, is kept at the Gatorland theme park in Florida.

He is one of four giant leucistic alligators kept at the park.

Igloo

NASA: Solar cycle may cause "dangerous" global cooling in a few years time

Today, the Space and Science Research Center, (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida announces that it has confirmed the recent web announcement of NASA solar physicists that there are substantial changes occurring in the sun's surface. The SSRC has further researched these changes and has concluded they will bring about the next climate change to one of a long lasting cold era.

Today, Director of the SSRC, John Casey has reaffirmed earlier research he led that independently discovered the sun's changes are the result of a family of cycles that bring about climate shifts from cold climate to warm and back again.

"We today confirm the recent announcement by NASA that there are historic and important changes taking place on the sun's surface. This will have only one outcome - a new climate change is coming that will bring an extended period of deep cold to the planet. This is not however a unique event for the planet although it is critically important news to this and the next generations. It is but the normal sequence of alternating climate changes that has been going on for thousands of years. Further according to our research, this series of solar cycles are so predictable that they can be used to roughly forecast the next series of climate changes many decades in advance. I have verified the accuracy of these cycles' behavior over the last 1,100 years relative to temperatures on Earth, to well over 90%."

Comment: Take this story with a grain of salt. It is however interesting that NASA did release predictions of a lack of solar activity and it is currently happening.


Sun

Long Range Solar Forecast - Off the Bottom of the Charts

Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries.

Sun conveyor belt
© NASA
The sun's "Great Conveyor Belt" in profile.
The Sun's Great Conveyor Belt has slowed to a record-low crawl, according to research by NASA solar physicist David Hathaway. "It's off the bottom of the charts," he says. "This has important repercussions for future solar activity."

The Great Conveyor Belt is a massive circulating current of fire (hot plasma) within the Sun. It has two branches, north and south, each taking about 40 years to perform one complete circuit. Researchers believe the turning of the belt controls the sunspot cycle, and that's why the slowdown is important.

"Normally, the conveyor belt moves about 1 meter per second - walking pace," says Hathaway. "That's how it has been since the late 19th century." In recent years, however, the belt has decelerated to 0.75 m/s in the north and 0.35 m/s in the south. "We've never seen speeds so low."

Comment: As noted in an earlier comment, it appears we do not need to wait for Solar Cycle 25 to see solar activity off the bottom of the charts. It is here already in Solar Cycle 24.

Solar Cycle 24 sunspot activity (near zero) check here (Link1) (Link2) (Link3) (Link4).


Bell

"Apocalyptic Climate Predictions" Mislead the Public, Say Experts

Met Office scientists fear distorted climate change claims could undermine efforts to tackle carbon emissions.

Ice berg
© unknown
Experts at Britain's top climate research centre have launched a blistering attack on scientific colleagues and journalists who exaggerate the effects of global warming.

The Met Office Hadley Centre, one of the most prestigious research facilities in the world, says recent "apocalyptic predictions" about Arctic ice melt and soaring temperatures are as bad as claims that global warming does not exist. Such statements, however well-intentioned, distort the science and could undermine efforts to tackle carbon emissions, it says.

In an article published on the Guardian website, Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, calls on scientists and journalists to stop misleading the public with "claim and counter-claim".

Comment: This is a rather lengthy commentary separate from the article itself. It is intended as such to let the reader read the above article as it is written. Then we are going to attempt to practice a little perspicacity, seeing if we can really see what is actually being said through another pair of eyes.

This is a great article. It appears on the face of it to be a call for reasonableness in the climate research field, a rebuke of both scientists and the media for promoting alarmism and the hystericization of the public.

Well think again. Let's take another look at the entire article, top to bottom.
Title: 'Apocalyptic climate predictions' mislead the public, say experts
Right off the bat we are lead to believe that experts are calling for some reasonableness in this issue and it must be very important as the public is being misled.
Summary: Met Office scientists fear distorted climate change claims could undermine efforts to tackle carbon emissions
We are given a hint about what this article is really about.

The undermining of the agenda to control carbon emissions!
Article: Experts at Britain's top climate research centre have launched a blistering attack on scientific colleagues and journalists who exaggerate the effects of global warming.
Notice we get the 'Experts' are speaking meme once again and not only are they experts but from a top climate research centre.

Was it really a blistering attack? No. It was 'Dr. Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met office,' speaking and trying to salvage damage to the 'global warming' and 'carbon emissions control' effort.
The Met Office Hadley Centre, one of the most prestigious research facilities in the world, says recent "apocalyptic predictions" about Arctic ice melt and soaring temperatures are as bad as claims that global warming does not exist. Such statements, however well-intentioned, distort the science and could undermine efforts to tackle carbon emissions, it says.
Again, emphasis on the elite nature and authority of who is speaking, 'most prestigious research facilities in the world'! And once again, why they are speaking, which is to shore up the image of the 'carbon emissions control' effort.
In an article published on the Guardian website, Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, calls on scientists and journalists to stop misleading the public with "claim and counter-claim".

She writes: "Having to rein in extraordinary claims that the latest extreme [event] is all due to climate change is at best hugely frustrating and at worse enormously distracting. Overplaying natural variations in the weather as climate change is just as much a distortion of science as underplaying them to claim that climate change has stopped or is not happening."
The undertone here is that radicalism on both sides of the 'Global Warming' science issue is not doing anyone a service, but especially it is doing a great disservice to the promoters of global warming and the promoters of the control of carbon emissions. It is nice that Dr. Vicky Pope at least includes her side in the rebuke. But I think the reader can get the flavor of where this article is going even in the subtle backhanded way that it accomplishes it.
She adds: "Both undermine the basic facts that the implications of climate change are profound and will be severe if greenhouse gas emissions are not cut drastically."
Did you grasp that? Radicalism on both sides undermines the foundation of one side of the equation. It undermines the global warming cause. It undermines the efforts to 'control carbon emissions'.

But that is the pro-Global-Warming alarmist side to begin with!

Nothing alarming here!

The implications are profound if super human drastic efforts are not undertaken immediately!
Dr Peter Stott, a climate researcher at the Met Office, said a common misrepresentation was to take a few years data and extrapolate to what would happen if it continues. "You just can't do that. You have to look at the long-term trend and then at the natural variability on top." Dramatic predictions of accelerating temperature rise and sea ice decline, based on a few readings, could backfire when natural variability swings the other way and the trends seem to reverse, he says. "It just confuses people."
Duh!

And why has it taken so many years for the Met and the global warming camp to come out with this? It is the very process of 'Dramatic Predictions' in the global warming camp that brought us Kyoto, that created the political wind and mind signal that man made carbon emissions are going to doom the planet.

But that is the point of this article and Vicky Pope's concern, is it not? To preserve the radical predictions of global warming and to preserve the mind signal that is being broadcast to all, that it is man made carbon emissions which will doom us all.
Pope says there is little evidence to support claims that Arctic ice has reached a tipping point and could disappear within a decade or so, as some reports have suggested. Summer ice extent in the Arctic, formed by frozen sea water, has collapsed in recent years, with ice extent in September last year 34% lower than the average since satellite measurements began in 1979.
So why didn't Pope speak up when the 'sea ice is melting tipping point' alarmism was foisted on the public tens of thousands of times in multiple waves in the past 4 years? Search Google arctic ice "tipping point".

The Tipping Point Broadcast

Dec 16, 2008
Oct 28, 2008
August 2008
Apr 24, 2008
Dec 12, 2007
Sep 28, 2007
March 2007
May 15, 2006
Sep 16, 2005

And is this really just "as some reports have suggested"? Really? Some reports? What kind of idiots does Pope and the media giant creating this article think the readers are?

Do you feel the signal coming through?

Notice how even though Vicky Pope mentions the sea ice drama, this article then turns around and makes sure the reader knows that sea ice has collapsed in recent years and this past September it was 34% lower than average.

Let's not promote alarmism, but by the way you should be alarmed!

Isn't that a little backhanded? Write an article pronouncing that scientists and media need to stop presenting skewed views and then skew the view in the article that says "play nice".
"The record-breaking losses in the past couple of years could easily be due to natural fluctuations in the weather, with summer ice increasing again over the next few years," she says.

"It is easy for scientists to grab attention by linking climate change to the latest extreme weather event or apocalyptic prediction. But in doing so, the public perception of climate change can be distorted. The reality is that extreme events arise when natural variations in the weather and climate combine with long-term climate change."
Distorted?

How about "the record breaking losses"? Does Dr. Vicky Pope mention that the record breaking losses in the past two years were accompanied by record rapid recoveries of sea ice extent? Nope! But she finds it necessary to throw a skewness in to the signal being broadcast to the public. Is this a psychological technique of some kind? Or is it just hypocrisy?
"This message is more difficult to get heard. Scientists and journalists need to find ways to help to make this clear without the wider audience switching off."
It seems that the problem in the global warming camp is that too many people in the wider audience are switching on, waking up, and that is her problem and a threat to the global warming camp.
The criticism reflects mounting concern at the Met Office that the global warming debate risks being hijacked by people on both sides who push their own agendas and interests. It comes ahead of a key year of political discussions on climate, which climax in December with high-level political negotiations in Copenhagen, when officials will try to hammer out a successor to the Kyoto protocol.
Now the issue of global warming is cast by the media author as the "global warming debate", and the global warming debate is being hijacked by people on both sides who push their own agendas and interests. In literal terms this means the "human caused global warming" due to the "human caused carbon emissions" is a fact that cannot be disputed, that cannot be examined and called into question. That is what the 'Met Office' and Vicky Pope and the media author of this article are saying is at risk. What else is at risk of being hijacked? The science on the threat of global cooling? The science on the threat of climatic catastrophe due to a quiet sun leading to lower ozone levels, negative ocean oscillators and shifting transporters of water vapor to the poles?

What is it that is at the risk of being hijacked? In literal terms "the risk of being hijacked" refers to one thing only; the risk is to the suggestive signal being broadcast to the global populace of "human caused global warming" being due to the "human caused carbon emissions". That is all that the Met and Vicky Pope are talking about.

And this article just shows how those in the positions of power and influence maintain the state of hystericization of the public, in anyway they can, not least through backhanded psychological manipulation.

By the way, where was the voice of Vicky Pope asking for calm and reason in the media and amongst scientists when various global media representatives called for meteorologists to be stripped of their credentials for being critical of "global warming"? Where was Vicky Pope when various global media mouthpieces likened global warming critical analysis to "Holocaust Denial" and called for Nuremberg style trials to bring critics up on charges of crimes against humanity? And where is Vicky Pope's call for reasonableness when James Hansen goes on one of his many tirades calling for petroleum executives to be brought up on charges?

Enforcing the Global Warming Signal

Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Nazi Style Silencing of Global Warming Skeptics - Strip Them of Their Credentials
Life Is Convenient When You Define 'Truth'
As Predicted: Global Warming Skeptics Linked With Holocaust Denial
CBS 'Global Warming Special' Host Likened Warming Skeptics to Holocaust Deniers
Witch Hunt: Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist
Search "global warming" "holocaust deniers" 43,800 hits
Search "global warming" "crimes against humanity" 118,000 hits

As long as the media serves the enforcement of the signal, as long as it serves the agenda that Vicky Pope broadcasts, it is good. At least as long as they can get away with it.

Perhaps the Met Office and Dr. Vicky Pope are just trying to cover their hind ends for the latest faux pas from the global warming promoters at RealClimate. Read the Steig Paper links for more practice with your perspicacity skills.

The Steig Paper

That famous consensus on global warming
Pro-Global Warming Study Receives Worldwide Headlines; Discovery of Error in Study Garners Op-Ed in One Paper
West Antarctica warming data flawed and manipulated
All's Fair in Love, War, and Science

This article and the behaviors displayed by its author and the behavior displayed by Dr. Vicky Pope are excellent examples of what Andrew M. Lobaczewski calls ponerization.
Lobaczewski writes: The psychological features of each such crisis are unique to the culture and the time, but one common denominator that exists at the beginning of all such "bad times" is an exacerbation of society's hysterical condition. The emotionalism dominating in individual, collective, and political life, combined with the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning, lead to individual and national egotism. The mania for taking offense at the drop of a hat provokes constant retaliation, taking advantage of hyperirritability and hypocriticality on the part of others. It is this feature, this hystericization of society, that enables pathological plotters, snake charmers, and other primitive deviants to act as essential factors in the processes of the origination of evil on a macro-social scale.
Here is a final quote from Vicky Pope from her original article that this article we are examining refers to:
When climate scientists like me explain to people what we do for a living we are increasingly asked whether we "believe in climate change". Quite simply it is not a matter of belief. Our concerns about climate change arise from the scientific evidence that humanity's activities are leading to changes in our climate. The scientific evidence is overwhelming.
No bias here? No reinforcing of the "global warming is caused by man" broadcast signal here? No hystericization of society here? No alarmist hysteria here? Is this person, Vicky Pope, really this blind to her own manipulations? Chastising the media and scientists for being dramatic and apocalyptic and then broadcasting the signal that man is the cause, the evidence is overwhelming. Notice how she unequivocally speaks for everyone through the subliminal doublespeak - "scientists like me" - "Our concerns". And the tone is emphatic, there can be no other view, the evidence is indisputable. There can be no dissent.

The global warming agenda has certainly created a mass hystericization of society. The question is who created it and why are there so many examples of it in our current day? We have the "the terrorists are out to get us" hystericization. We have the "Iraq has WMDs" hystericization of society. We have the "Iran are terrorists" and the "Palestinians are terrorists" hystericization of society. We have the "Global Warming - CO2" hystericization of society. We have the "Worldwide Depression" hystericization of society. The one thing it does accomplish is to provide cover for the pathologicals to act while the masses are distracted and traumatized.

Whether Vicky Pope knows it or not, she is part of the problem or at the least, a tool of its implementation. The global warming and carbon emissions control issues long long ago abandoned true science and joined the likes of "the terrorists are out to get us" hystericization.

See Related stories:

The Collapse of Climate Policy and the Sustainability of Climate Science
UK Met Office Issues 'Blistering Attack on Scientific Colleagues' For 'Apocalyptic Climate Predictions'


Target

Scientists threatened for 'climate denial'

Scientists who questioned mankind's impact on climate change have received death threats and claim to have been shunned by the scientific community.

They say the debate on global warming has been "hijacked" by a powerful alliance of politicians, scientists and environmentalists who have stifled all questioning about the true environmental impact of carbon dioxide emissions.

Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.

One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would not live to see further global warming.

Magnify

Global warming is not our fault ... it's nature

Dr. Jim Buckee says he feels like a heretic, persecuted for his views and treated like an outcast. His crime? Being a climate change sceptic.

Next week the former chief executive of the oil and gas firm Talisman, who has a PhD in astrophysics from the University of Oxford, will try to convince others that climate change has nothing to do with human activity. During a lecture at the University of Aberdeen he will argue that, far from warming, the Earth is set to enter a 20-year cooling period.

Dr Buckee believes human behaviour has no effect on the climate and the vast sums spent by governments trying to promote renewable energy to cut greenhouse gas emissions are being wasted. Far from being a key cause of climate change, he says, carbon dioxide emissions have little or no impact. His views are contrary to those held by governments, the Royal Society - an independent science body - the Met Office and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.


Igloo

Heavy snow causes 6,000 traffic accidents, 24 deaths in Moscow

snow in Moscow
© RIA Novosti, Mikhail Fomichev
Heavy wet snowfalls over the weekend caused traffic congestion and reduced visibility all over Moscow.
Heavy snowfalls in Moscow and the surrounding Moscow Region caused more than 6,000 traffic accidents over the weekend, which resulted in 24 deaths, local traffic police said on Monday.

According to Moscow's traffic police department, a total of 4,200 car accidents were registered on Saturday and Sunday in the capital, in which four people were killed and 78 injured.

In the Moscow Region over the same period, 20 people were killed and 86 injured in about 2,000 traffic accidents.

"All major deadly accidents on Saturday were caused by severe traffic violations," said Svetlana Landa, a spokeswoman for the Moscow Region's traffic police department.

Propaganda

Thermageddon, the BBC and a giant snake

Listeners to BBC World Service's Science in Action program got a nasty surprise last week. In the midst of a discussion about the large snake fossil, a scientist dropped this bombshell:
"The Planet has heated and cooled repeatedly throughout its history. What we're doing is the rate at which we're heating the planet is many orders of magnitude faster than any natural process - and is moving too fast for natural systems to respond."
Listen here

Hearing this, I did what any normal person would do: grab all the bags of frozen peas I could find in the ice compartment of my refridgerator, and hunker down behind the sofa to wait for Thermageddon.

Comment: Well perhaps Dr. Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the UK Met Office can be consulted to handle this one. She just recently chastised big media and scientists for promoting this kind of blathering nonsense.

But don't hold your breath.


Sun

The Collapse of Climate Policy and the Sustainability of Climate Science

statue Hans Brinker
© unknown

The political consensus surrounding climate policy is collapsing. If you are not aware of this fact you will be very soon. The collapse is not due to the cold winter in places you may live or see on the news. It is not due to years without an increase in global temperature. It is not due to the overturning of the scientific consensus on the role of human activity in the global climate system.

It is due to the fact that policy makers and their political advisors (some trained as scientists) can no longer avoid the reality that targets for stabilization such as 450 ppm (or even less realistic targets) are simply not achievable with the approach to climate change that has been at the focus of policy for over a decade. Policies that are obviously fictional and fantasy are frequently subject to a rapid collapse.

The current shrillness that has been put on display by many politically-active climate scientists and the feeding-frenzy among their skeptical political opposition can be explained as a result of this looming collapse, though many will confuse the shrillness and feeding-frenzy as a cause of the collapse. Let me explain.

Comment: It is true that climate policy is in collapse. But it doesn't all just boil down to political realities as the author seems to want paint it.
Climate politics is collapsing because of political realities, and not real or perceived changes in how people see the science.
Baloney!

This is just the political machine going into action to try and control the damage caused by bad science. The promotion of bad science by those who have the power to direct the minds of the public in concert with global media are directly responsible for the hystericization of society and the collapse of anything that can vaguely be called climate policy.

It is obvious that the author of this article, Roger Pielke, Jr., is in total agreement with the promoted science based on carbon (CO2) emissions being the driver of climate. It is not the science that has a problem. It is not the perception of the science as being based on bad data or bad models or biased assumptions. The state of collapse as Pielke puts it, is because of political realities.

There are two problems with what Pielke says.

The first problem is that the science is bad. The models that global warming are based on do not sufficiently take into account things like El Niño-Southern Oscillation, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, solar radiation cycles, volcanism and even cosmic forces as related in other scientific disciplines such as impact science (comets and asteroids). Why are these things continually ignored and hidden in favor of CO2 as the critical tripwire to runaway climate catastrophe? These other forces have much better data correlating them to climatic warming and cooling cycles and even climate catastrophe.

Instead of looking at these other research disciplines and trying to bring them together and increase our knowledge and understanding of nature it was decided that carbon emissions (CO2) was the driver, correlator, cause of the heating and cooling of the earth's biosphere. A trace gas comprising less than .04% (four one-hundredths of one percent) of the atmosphere was decided on as the controller of the balance between heating and cooling of the earth.

As Roger Pielke, Jr. says, the problem is not the science or how it is perceived. Everyone knows the CO2 foundation for the theory of global warming is sound. Once again - Baloney! Literally thousands of scientists and tenured climate researchers say differently and it is because of the horrible way that the science is selectively ignored and selectively promoted. There is no consensus. There never has been a consensus.

The second problem with Pielke's statement that it is only political realities that are the problem with climate policy is Pielke's overlooking of the role of ponerization in the area of climate science. The hystericization of the public by the global warming promoters in concert with global media has become so incestuous and so overt that it has reached into the depths of science where researchers that never endorsed the political policy yet were not affected by it can no longer stay on the sidelines and maintain their own sanity when their own knowledge is in direct conflict with the reality that is being imposed on the mindset of the world.

From Andrew M. Lobaczewski's Political Ponerology 'A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes'
The psychological features of each such crisis are unique to the culture and the time, but one common denominator that exists at the beginning of all such "bad times" is an exacerbation of society's hysterical condition. The emotionalism dominating in individual, collective, and political life, combined with the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning, lead to individual and national egotism. The mania for taking offense at the drop of a hat provokes constant retaliation, taking advantage of hyperirritability and hypocriticality on the part of others. It is this feature, this hystericization of society, that enables pathological plotters, snake charmers, and other primitive deviants to act as essential factors in the processes of the origination of evil on a macro-social scale.
The mind signal continuously sent out by the global enforcement machine kept pounding away until it created its own personal little army of fascists, comparing skeptics to holocaust deniers if they did not believe in and worship the signal of the global influencers. Fascists calling for career climate researchers and career meteorologists to lose their jobs and certification because they are not in confluence with the global signal that is being broadcast. Fascists calling for scientists not towing the line to be brought up on charges of crimes against humanity.

Enforcing the Global Warming Signal

Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Nazi Style Silencing of Global Warming Skeptics - Strip Them of Their Credentials
Life Is Convenient When You Define 'Truth'
As Predicted: Global Warming Skeptics Linked With Holocaust Denial
CBS 'Global Warming Special' Host Likened Warming Skeptics to Holocaust Deniers
Witch Hunt: Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist
Search "global warming" "holocaust deniers" 43,800 hits
Search "global warming" "crimes against humanity" 118,000 hits

Is this purely just political realities that is creating this so called collapse of climate policy?

The relationship between some of the so called prestigious scientific institutions and global media is outright deviant. A case in point is the Hadley Center and Vicki Pope in her recent psychologically manipulative attempt to retune the global mind signal and incite even more hysteria in the public over the 'man-made global warming catastrophe.' It is a total disgrace and reveals the depth of the pathology that is endemic at all upper levels of society that are in positions to influence the public mind.

So why is this going on? Is it on purpose that CO2 and carbon emissions were chosen by the global influence machine? Is it all just another distraction to keep us from asking what is going on and to keep us from looking for the answers?

When the answers are already canned and ready to be spoon fed to the masses, no one will look anywhere else.

See related story and commentary on the latest manipulation by Dr. Vicky Pope and the UK Met office:

"Apocalyptic Climate Predictions" Mislead the Public, Say Experts