Sunday, July 04, 2021

Climate scientists say building collapse is a 'wake-up call' about the potential impact of rising seas

Nice try but no cigar. Looking at the facts, there is no way to claim the Florida collapse was due to rising seas. For a start, the base of the building is 7' above sea-level. Tony Heller has the pictures. So the alarmists just say that it *potentially* could be due to global warming

As rescue and recovery teams dig through the rubble of the collapsed condo building in Surfside, Florida, scientists and engineers are starting to consider what could have possibly caused the deadly tragedy.

Among a long list of hypotheses: climate change. Sea level rise, higher storm surges and more frequent high-tide flooding are deteriorating coastal infrastructure above and below ground.

Officials are still very early in their investigation into what caused the collapse, and initial signs point to potential issues at the base of the building, perhaps in its foundation, columns or underground parking garage. But some engineers are considering whether increasing exposure to saltwater could have played a role in weakening the building's foundation or internal support system.

At the very least, experts say even the possibility should be a wake-up call to vulnerable communities across the United States: Climate change isn't a far-future threat; it's happening now, and with potentially deadly consequences.


BBC deletes exam revision guide that listed the UPSIDE of climate change -- after fury from environmental activists

The BBC has deleted its Bitesize revision guide's list of 'positive impacts' of climate change after caving to fury from environmental activists.

The broadcaster faced furious backlash from environmental activists after sharing an online GCSE revision guide that listed the creation of shipping routes due to melting ice and lower heating bills thanks to warmer winters among a list of 'benefits'.

Campaigners called the BBC Bitesize material for GCSE geography students an ‘absolute disgrace’.

The BBC said it decided to remove the list of ‘positive’ effects because it did not follow the national curriculum.

The guide now shows only the negative impacts of global warming, such as rising sea levels, droughts and greater risk of flooding.

Other ‘benefits’ of climate change listed in bullet points included the claims that warmer temperatures lead to ‘healthier outdoor lifestyles’, there would be ‘new tourist destinations’, ‘oil becoming available in Alaska and Siberia’ as the ice melts, and some animals and plants may ‘flourish’.

The page was first highlighted on Thursday by Guardian journalist George Monbiot to his near-half a million Twitter followers after he was tipped off by a teacher.

GCSE revision tips that saw the positives in pollution

1. Warmer temperatures and increased CO2 levels, leading to more vigorous plant growth.

2. Some animals and plants could benefit and flourish. The guide failed to note that polar bears, right, are struggling to survive.

3. New shipping routes, such as the Northwest Passage, would become available.

4. More resources, for example oil, becoming available in places such as Siberia as ice melts.

5. Energy consumption decreasing due to a warmer climate.

6. Longer growing season leading to higher yields in farming areas.

7. Frozen regions, such as Canada and Siberia, could be farmed to grow crops.

8. New tourist destinations becoming available.

9. Warmer temperatures could lead to healthier outdoor lifestyles.

The lifelong environmental activist branded it ‘an absolute disgrace’, arguing the web page read like ‘fossil fuel propaganda’ and would leave schoolchildren thinking global warming was ‘pretty good’.

It prompted fury among climate experts, campaigners and teachers who said the arguments were ‘flat wrong’ and did not reflect what was on the current syllabus.

Others called for a change to Government guidance, as they claimed it was not the BBC's fault.

One person wrote online: 'And once again the BBC is taking the flak for a government decision. The national curriculum requires that positives must be taught as well as negatives, even for things like catastrophic climate change. BBC Bitesize follows the curriculum.'

Exam board Eduqas said the suggestions were not within its GCSE geography specifications, adding that while it asked students to explore opposing attitudes to climate change it did not ‘advocate a positive viewpoint’.

Stuart Lock, the chief executive of a group of schools in Bedfordshire, was among the education experts to speak out before the BBC revision guide was amended.

He tweeted: ‘I think this is flat wrong, doesn’t align with the national curriculum or exam specs, and needs reconsidering. Climate change isn’t a “both sides” argument.’

Extinction Rebellion’s south-east group said: ‘GCSE students, young people, those facing future disasters, deserve better than to be judged on questions which warp and distort the truth.’

Yesterday the BBC said: ‘We have reviewed the page and have amended the content to be in line with current curricula.’

In 2018, the Corporation accepted failures over its coverage of climate change after a series of apologies and censures for not challenging sceptics during interviews.

In a briefing note sent to staff, it stated: ‘To achieve impartiality, you do not need to include outright deniers of climate change in BBC coverage, in the same way you would not have someone denying that Manchester United won 2-0 last Saturday. The referee has spoken.’


Climate Activists Get So Woke They Cancel Themselves

A group of student climate activists is disbanding this week after arriving at the conclusion that they are too racist to continue carrying out their mission.

School Strike 4 Climate Auckland (SS4C AKL)—a New Zealand chapter affiliated with Greta Thunberg's climate justice movement among students—decided its disbandment was "well overdue" after getting what was apparently a very convincing woke education on how BIPOC—Black, Indigenous, and People of Color—communities are "disproportionally affected by climate change."

In a lengthy post on the group's Facebook page, leaders explained that the organization "has been a racist, white-dominated space" that has "avoided, ignored, and tokenised BIPOC voices and demands."

In addition, SS4C AKL leaders say the "urgent need to decolonise the organization has been put off for far too long" and their organization "delayed paying financial reparations for the work BIPOC groups/individuals within and alongside the group have done for this organisation in the past."

The decision to disband was made "under the suggestion and guidance of the BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Colour) members of our group, as well as individual BIPOC activists and organizations."

Some in the New Zealand climate movement are not patting SS4C AKL on the back for their supposedly brave decision. "Disbanding is not taking accountability, it’s quitting,” said one fellow climate warrior. "Acknowledging you have a problem or made a mistake without taking a step towards resolving it is meaningless."


Poll: viewers of conservative media more likely to get the facts right on climate change

From April 29 to May 3, Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute, a national free-market think tank, conducted a nationwide survey of 2,000 likely voters.

From April 29 to May 3, Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute, a national free-market think tank, conducted a nationwide survey of 2,000 likely voters. Included in the poll was a series of questions asking likely voters how they receive news and information, as well as several questions about climate-change-related topics. The following results from the survey illustrate likely voters’ views on these important issues, as well as how those views are correlated with news media preferences.

Some of The Heartland Institute’s key findings from an analysis of the survey include:

There is a strong correlation between a likely voter’s favorite television news outlet and his or her understanding of basic facts about climate change.

Compared to viewers of Fox News, “another” cable news outlet, and those who don’t watch television news, viewers of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC are substantially more likely to believe that if CO2 emissions continue to increase at recent rates, humans will “become completely or nearly extinct due to climate change” within the next 100 years.

For example, 58% of MSNBC viewers and more than half of viewers of ABC, CBS, and NBC said they think humanity could become extinct or nearly extinct within a century.

About one-quarter of CNN and MSNBC viewers believe humanity could become extinct within 50 years due to climate change.
Viewers of CNN and MSNBC are substantially more likely to overestimate the amount of global warming that has occurred since the late 1800s compared to viewers of Fox News or “another” outlet. 65% percent of CNN viewers and 67% of MSNBC viewers overestimated warming by at least 40%, and three in 10 CNN and MSNBC viewers overestimated warming by more than double the real figure.

Viewers of ABC, CBS, and NBC were also substantially more likely to overestimate global warming. Six in 10 viewers of these networks overestimated warming trends.

Respondents who don’t watch cable news and viewers of Fox News or “another” outlet (such as The Blaze TV or Newsmax) were more likely to correctly estimate the amount of warming that has occurred since the late 1800s. More than four in 10 of the respondents in these three categories answered correctly, compared to about three in 10 viewers of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC.

55% of likely voters believe climate change is primarily caused by human beings, compared to 45% who believe long-term planetary trends are the main cause.




No comments: