Global cooling!

We are often told that unusually hot weather indicates global warming so, logically, unusually cold weather must indicate global cooling.  Or am I missing something?

A state of emergency was in force across parts of Europe last night after the death toll in the worst snowfall for at least 30 years reached 21.

Tanks and troops were drafted in to rescue homeowners from neck-deep snow in Germany and Austria as the whiteout looked to continue past the weekend.

British skiers were among thousands facing long delays on their airport transfers to and from resorts in Austria due to road conditions, but travel industry sources said they had heard no reports of Britons snowed in or trapped.

In Switzerland, a 1,000ft-wide avalanche ploughed through the front of a hotel while diners were eating. Three people were injured but miraculously there were no deaths.

A brief break in the weather is allowing workers in southern Germany to try and clear heavy loads of snow from roofs and roads. Heavy snow has paralyzed parts of Europe in recent days, cutting off mountain villages, disrupting transport

Parts of Europe have been paralysed in recent days with the snow cutting off remote mountain villages and disrupting transport. Avalanche warnings were at critical levels.

The state of emergency was declared across much of southern Germany, with soldiers deployed to help trapped people. The army was also called in across Albania, Montenegro and Serbia.

‘Such quantities of snow above 800m altitude only happen once every 30 to 100 years,’ said Austrian meteorologist Alexander Radlherr. Austrian military helicopters on Friday rescued 66 German teenagers out of a mountain guest house where they had been trapped for several days.

The snow is up to 10ft (3m) deep in parts of the country, where seven people have died in the past week. Two hikers have also been missing since last Saturday.

The military used helicopters to blow snow off treetops to reduce the risk of trees falling on roads and train tracks.

Sweden and Norway were hit by similar problems, while three diners were injured when an avalanche came down the Schwägalp Pass in the Swiss Alps and crashed into the Hotel Santis.

One guest in the hotel restaurant said that initially he thought snow was falling from the roof. ‘There was a gigantic noise and the back area of the restaurant was engulfed in masses of snow,’ the guest told media.

In Germany’s southern state of Bavaria, a nine-year-old boy was killed by a tree which collapsed under the weight of snow. It was 40 minutes before he was found and emergency services were unable to revive him.

The blanket of snow is expected to remain into the middle of next week throughout central and northern Europe. In Britain, forecasters have warned of heavy frosts and snow after the recurrence of conditions which preceded the Beast from the East last winter.

Meteorological Office forecaster Sarah Kent said: ‘We’re not yet sure whether the winds are going to come from the Arctic or Siberia, but it could become very cold. ‘There’s definitely an increased risk of widespread hard frosts and, if any weather systems bump into that cold air, it increases the chance of snow.’   

SOURCE   





Which is it?! ‘Global warming’ causes more illegal immigration — BUT Illegal Immigration causes less ‘global warming’

As official Washington battles over the issue of illegal immigration and how to respond to, climate activists are promoting very confusing contradictions when it comes to immigration and climate change. See: Sen. Bernie Sanders declares biggest threat facing the US was climate change, not immigration – warns Earth may become “uninhabitable in the not-so-distant future.”

Image result for immigration climate change

A study by a UN IPCC lead author claimed that “global warming” will lead to “mass migration to the U.S.” by 2080 due to the alleged climate model-based predictions of reduced “crop yields in Mexico. The peer-reviewed study claimed that the massive climate caused influx of immigrants from Mexico, could equal many millions.  See:

Flashback 2010: LA Times breathlessly reporting on UN IPCC lead author Michael Oppenheimer PNAS immigration paper:
Climbing temperatures are expected to raise sea levels and increase droughts, floods, heat waves and wildfires. Now, scientists are predicting another consequence of climate change: mass migration to the United States. Between 1.4 million and 6.7 million Mexicans could migrate to the U.S. by 2080 as climate change reduces crop yields and agricultural production in Mexico, according to a study published online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The number could amount to 10% of the current population of Mexicans ages 15 to 65.

But wait, before we accept the claim that “global warming” will INCREASE mass illegal immigration to the U.S., the climate change narrative also claims that the influx of immigration to the U.S. will REDUCE “global warming.!” Climate activist Bill McKibben wrote in the LA Times in 2013 McKibben wrote: “It’s true that the typical person from a developing nation would produce more carbon once she adopted an American lifestyle but she also probably would have fewer children.” As a bonus, McKibben added that illegal immigrants  are more likely to “pull the [election] lever for climate deniers.” See:

LA Times 2013: Illegal Immigration Can Reduce Global Warming – The Los Angeles Times ran an editorial by Middlebury College Professor Bill McKibben arguing that allowing millions of illegal immigrants into America will reduce global warming…McKibben says that while the average American has a larger carbon footprint than a person living in the developing world, bringing more immigrants to America would likely reduce their tendency to have higher birthrates, thereby creating less carbon-producing people. “It’s true that the typical person from a developing nation would produce more carbon once she adopted an American lifestyle,” says McKibben, “but she also probably would have fewer children.” McKibben, who previously wrote a book arguing for Americans to have smaller families, says that “global warming is arguably the greatest danger we face,” that “immigrants, by definition, are full of hope,” and they are thus less likely to “pull the [election] lever for climate deniers, for people who want to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency, for the politicians who take huge quantities of cash from the Koch brothers and other oil barons.”

So, “global warming” will increase illegal immigration — but at the same time — increased illegal immigration will reduce “global warming.”Got that?!

SOURCE  (See the original for links) 





The Ecofascist 'Green New Deal'

Like FDR's New Deal, the plan expands government power while forcing taxpayers to foot the bill.   

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has been called “the new face of the Democratic Party.” Propped up by the Leftmedia, the Millennial socialist celebrity is pushing forward with the Left’s “Green New Deal” in the hopes that Americans will fall for what’s nothing more than a dangerous scam to destroy the country as we know it.

But you can’t put a new face on socialism, not matter what you call it.

Like FDR’s New Deal, the Green New Deal expands government power while forcing taxpayers to foot the bill. Except this time around, the plan will cost trillions of dollars, gut our economy, leave millions without jobs, destroy our energy independence, and fund social justice programs. Other than that, what’s not to like?

A little climate change doesn’t seem so bad compared to this spending splurge. But make no mistake: This is a disastrous plan, and we’d better start taking it seriously. As with any Democrat scheme, the devil’s in the details.

The Green New Deal would have serious implications for American energy production. Advocates claim that the U.S. would be required to eliminate nuclear power and natural gas. How important is that? As National Review’s Jim Geraghty notes, “Natural gas currently provides about 32 percent of America’s energy, and nuclear power produces another 10 percent.” Additionally, he says, “The ‘Green New Deal’ would also eliminate coal, which provides almost 18 percent of America’s energy, and liquid natural gas and oil, which generates another 28 percent.” Geraghty warns that all of this would require the U.S. to “replace about 88 percent of its current energy sources” in 11 years and would result in the loss of nearly six million energy jobs.

Still not convinced that the Green New Deal is bad for America?

Its proponents also want to reduce our military by half. This would affect our commitments around the world and would likely result in greater global conflict in a matter of a few years, not to mention putting more than a million military personnel out of work.

According to Reason’s Ronald Bailey, the deal also proposes, “All fossil fuel emissions should be ended by 2050. All new passenger automobiles for sale in 2030 should be zero emissions vehicles; all rail, vehicles, and aviation should be totally fossil-fuel free by 2050. Other parts of the Green New Deal include reforesting 40 million acres of public and private land by 2035, greatly expanding mass transit systems, upgrading local water supply and management infrastructure, expanding federal regulation of the waters of the U.S., and requiring that all materials be recyclable by 2040.”

Our nation is already more than $20 trillion in debt, and we’d easily double that number by implementing the Green New Deal. Asked how she’d pay for it, Ocasio-Cortez recently suggested — what else — raising the marginal income tax rate to 70% for the wealthy. But that in itself wouldn’t even make a dent in the costs.

Notice that there’s actually very little in the way of environmental conservation in this deal. It’s really all about realizing Barack Obama’s promise of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” But who’d want to live in an ecofascist nation where economic slavery empowers a totalitarian elite determined to enact socialism under the guise of environmental protection?

Investor’s Business Daily reminds us that the real problem isn’t climate change but “having enough people working and paying taxes to support all the retirees around the world and pay off hundreds of trillions of dollars of global debt. What is a problem is the nonstop fear-mongering, demands for more taxes, and dangerous socialist experiments in expanding government control of the economy, all in the name of warding off the threat of global warming.”

All the details of the Green New Deal speak for themselves. Ocasio-Cortez’s dream of using renewable energy “as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social, and racial justice in the United States of America” is a pipe dream we cannot afford to pursue.

SOURCE   





Don't Join The Media Freak Out Over Recent Jump In CO2 Emissions — It Won't Last

CO2 Emissions: For the first time in years, U.S. carbon dioxide output rose last year, a new report says. The jump has set off alarms in all the predictable media quarters. Relax. It's a great sign for the economy, and will mean nothing long term for the environment.

CO2, the main greenhouse gas that global warming advocates most fear, happens to be rising around the world right now. It has been for decades.

But in recent years the U.S. has been the big exception to that trend, with declining amounts of CO2 spewed into the air from its industry. The reason for this is that, thanks to fracking, companies and utilities around the country are replacing coal with natural gas.

At least, that is, until 2016. But in 2018, U.S. carbon dioxide output jumped by 3.4%,  according to Rhodium Group, a research firm.

It's not hard to understand why. Thanks to a booming economy set off by President Trump's new trade deals, tax cuts and deregulation, in the past two years the U.S. has seen manufacturing jobs surge.

CO2 Emissions Vs. Factory Jobs

Indeed, since Trump entered office, the number of manufacturing jobs has jumped by close to half a million. Once-moribund industrial areas around the country, many of which voted for Trump, are coming back to life. Minority unemployment rates are at or near record lows. Meanwhile, wages rose 3.2% last year, the fastest in a decade.

These are good things. This is prosperity.

All those people going back to work in refurbished factories in America's Heartland — you remember, the ones Hillary Clinton called "deplorables" — helped push emissions from manufacturing up 5.7% last year alone.

Transportation also contributed, of course, in the surging economy, with jet fuel (up 33.1%) and diesel fuel (up 3%) posting solid gains. A growing economy also means more electricity demand. Emissions in the electricity producing sector jumped 1.9%.

Then there's the irony of ironies: some of the increase in greenhouse gas emissions, which activists fear are causing runaway global warming, was due to an unusually cold winter last year. That's right: Businesses and homes used more fuel for heat than they have in years. Rhodium noted that CO2 from this winter effect rose 10% in 2018.

A Cold, Cold Winter

Are these bad things? No. Not at all.

First off, people need to heat their homes and businesses in winter. That's a given. Anyone who doubts that deserves the scorn and ridicule that surely would come their way for suggesting otherwise.

Second, those who have regained their jobs in factories across America should be cheered after living through years of steady, unremitting industrial decline. That some media outlets are now treating the very recent rise in CO2 output as some epic tragedy, please.

A healthy economy always produces more CO2 when its growing fast than otherwise. Our current growth rate is roughly 50% higher than it was under President Obama. If it didn't produce more CO2, that would be surprising.

"The boom in manufacturing is good news for American workers," said The Daily Caller, "however, major media outlets sounded the alarm on global warming." Both Washington Post and Bloomberg .

The Post was worst, claiming the "world has only about a decade to make the 'unprecedened changes necessary" to stave off climate disaster.

Of course, such predictions of doom are based on statistical models that have proven wrong repeatedly in the past. That's not science; it's little better than a Ouija Board. And yet, these prophets of climate doom would have us slash CO2 output and destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs just to satisfy the demands of the green socialist movement.

Nothing's Forever — Not Even CO2

By the way, those gains in CO2 won't go on forever. The next slump or slowdown will take care of that, by causing many companies to close and many people to lose their jobs. And fracking will continue to chip away at our CO2 emissions.

Meanwhile, around the world, countries are abandoning their restrictions on CO2 emissions that have impoverished them and angered voters. They're also throwing aside the idea of punitive carbon taxes. People want jobs. They want incomes. They want better lives. And taxing them and the businesses they work for so that they'll be poorer and pollute less creates resentment, even rage.

Just ask France's Gilets Jaunes, who have nearly paralyzed President Emmanuel Macron's administration over his proposal for higher energy taxes. It should be a warning to U.S. Democrats, who hope to parlay fear of a changing climate into total control of the U.S. government.

As Nancy Pelosi said earlier this month, on becoming House speaker again, "We must... face the existential threat of our time: the climate crisis — a crisis manifested in natural disasters of epic proportions." This is nonsense on steroids.

Capitalism Cleans Up

The truth is, the world is getting much cleaner, when measured by CO2 output per dollar of GDP.  So is the U.S. It's decarbonizing. And as the world population begins to decline later this century and new energy technologies come on line — everything from new battery technology to ultra-safe nuclear power designs — CO2 emissions won't be a problem, real or imagined.

The real problem? Having enough people working and paying taxes to support all the retirees around the world and pay off hundreds of trillions of dollars of global debt.

What is a problem is the nonstop fear-mongering, demands for more taxes, and dangerous socialist experiments in expanding government control of the economy, all in the name of warding off the threat of global warming.

So don't worry about this jump in CO2. It won't last. But the damage from bad green policies foisted on the economy will.

SOURCE   





The Incredible Shrinking Credibility of the Climate Movement

The climate movement has become utterly ridiculous; driven by corporatists and ideologues who refuse to acknowledge anything that doesn’t fit their template.

I’m sick to death of the climate movement, by which I refer not to the cause per se but, rather, those who advocate for it on ideological grounds. They’ve chosen to ignore the real progress made toward achieving their supposed goals, reject debate and antagonize everyone who might actually make a difference. They’ve become serious demagogues and just as unserious about the facts. They’ve not only lost all credibility, but have become utterly laughable.

I’m old enough now to have lived through several predictions of environmental doom. The purveyors of this “eve of destruction” theme come at us regularly, issue one forecast after another that is never realized and are seldom held to account. I’ve learned enough at this point to know they’ll always be with us.

No amount of facts, history or logic will change that; there’s just too much emotional investment and too many special interests involved. Human nature is human nature and it isn’t pretty. Nonetheless, the truth eventually outs as those who buy into the fear and the distortions invariably take things too far and illustrate the emperor has no clothes. That’s the tipping point and it looks like we’re about there.

A sure sign of this is the yellow jacket resistance to climate movement fuel taxes France just proposed. Ironically, it did so in the weeks leading up to the big elitist climate meeting in Poland that virtually no one took seriously, providing a sharp contrast between fantasy and reality.

The climate movement is built upon a foundation of fantasy and deliberate ignorance when it comes to reality, of course. The fantasy is a virtual font of failed predictions because it is based on models invariably adopting the worst case assumptions, which is the first indication there’s something more than science going on. There is also a whole lot of evidence to the contrary. Take, for example, this wonderful video by our friend and guest blogger, Greg Wrightstone, the author of Inconvenient Facts:



Greg’s book is filled with stuff like this and is one of several I’ve read on the subject. His is the most readable and the best illustrated. I highly recommend it. Subscribe to his YouTube channel, too. I just did.

Having said that, I don’t reject the possibility there is some human impact on climate change. I tend to hold to views of scientists such as Judith Curry who acknowledges there could well be, but doesn’t get hysterical about it, choosing, instead, to put things in the proper context. That means continued research, thoughtful discussion and a search for policies we can all agree upon.

Surely, one of those policies should be natural gas development. It is low cost, it involves much lower CO2 emissions than either coal or oil and it stimulates real economical development in the areas where it is produced and huge consumer savings in the areas where it is consumed. It has achieved more dramatic reductions in not only CO2 but all emissions, improving air quality dramatically. The U.S., simply because it has not stood in the way of fracking, has done more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than anyone, in fact, as the following chart (assembled from EIA data) demonstrates:



The data is incontrovertible; as natural gas production via fracking has soared, CO2 emissions have plummeted. Yet, the climate movement insists on ignoring it and exaggerating the threat of global warming. It is so thoroughly committed to the apocalyptic vision of a melting Earth that it insists on shutting down the speech of anyone who disagrees. It generates incredible amounts oh heat itself, in fact, putting out increasingly bizarre theories and predictions. Take, for instance, a story yesterday in the New York Times, entitled “Would Human Extinction Be A Tragedy?” Here’s the salient quote:

"There are stirrings of discussion these days in philosophical circles about the prospect of human extinction. This should not be surprising, given the increasingly threatening predations of climate change. In reflecting on this question, I want to suggest an answer to a single question, one that hardly covers the whole philosophical territory but is an important aspect of it. Would human extinction be a tragedy?"

This is the view of a professor of philosophy at Clemson University. Tuition and board at Clemson costs $50,516 per year, so don’t send your kids there. They’ll only learn to conform to a political correctness insisting not only that global warming is marauding threat but the Earth itself is worth more than the humans who inhabit it. Talk about self-hate! Todd May, the author of this claptrap, drivel that could only impress elitists worried about the masses threatening his own way of life, needs to get a grip.

Such is the nature of so much of the climate movement. It is impossible to take it seriously anymore. Enough with the endless spinning of doomsday scenarios based on little or nothing. Enough with the attempts to intimidate the speech of others and squelch it. Enough of the no-compromise, my way or no way, global warming politics. Enough of the corporatist schemes from the likes hedge funds types such as Nat Simons and Tom Steyer who but seek to add to their vast wealth and collections of houses by promoting green energy scams.

I’m sick to death of them. If they gave a damn about global warming, they’d be reasoning with us and admitting natural gas is part of the solution if one be needed. That they aren’t willing to do so tells me the climate movement isn’t about global warming at all. It’s about power, money and a substitute religion adopted by true believers. That and nothing more. Meanwhile, natural gas is reducing emissions across the board proving, yet again, that no good deed goes unpunished.

SOURCE   

***************************************

For more postings from me, see  DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC and AUSTRALIAN POLITICS. Home Pages are   here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  

Preserving the graphics:  Most graphics on this site are hotlinked from elsewhere.  But hotlinked graphics sometimes have only a short life -- as little as a week in some cases.  After that they no longer come up.  From January 2011 on, therefore, I have posted a monthly copy of everything on this blog to a separate site where I can host text and graphics together -- which should make the graphics available even if they are no longer coming up on this site.  See  here or here

*****************************************