Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

From CLIMATE, HISTORY AND THE MODERN WORLD, Second Edition by H.H. Lamb:

CLIMATE DEFINED

By climate we mean the total experience of the weather at any place over some specific period of time.

By international convention the period to which climate statistics relate is now normally thirty years, e.g. at the time of writing 1941–70, although we shall see arguments for preferring different periods for different purposes, particularly somewhat longer periods, such as fifty or a hundred years, and for preferring (as our grandfathers did) the decades that correspond to our linguistic usage based on our system of numbers, e.g. 1940–9…1970–9, and so on.

Climate was sometimes wrongly defined in the past as just ‘average weather’: the statistics required to specify a climate comprise not only averages but the extremes and the frequencies of every occurrence that may be of interest.

The Classical Greek word κ κκμ κ originally referred to a zone of the Earth between two specific latitudes, being associated with the inclination of the sun; and hence it came to be associated with the warmth and weather conditions prevailing there.

This association was still embodied in the word ‘clime’ when first used in English in the sixteenth century and for long after.

It was commonly used to refer not only to the prevailing climate as we mean it but to the terrestrial environment, vegetation, etc., that goes with that.

Climate has been too much taken for granted in recent times.

Since some time in the late nineteenth century it has been usual to suppose that for all practical decisions climate can be taken as constant, however obvious the year-to-year fluctuations may be.

The latter seemed best treated as random in their occurrence, although a few shadowy cycles might play a part in them and perhaps be of some limited use in forecasting, e.g. to indicate which was likely to be the finest European summer in a decade or to predict the years of high or low level of the great east African Lake Victoria.

Anyway, such forecasts often failed.

It was known that ice ages had occurred in the distant, ‘geological’ past; but the climate in Roman times seemed to be not too much different from now, and it was assumed that this must be true of all the centuries in between.

As we shall see in later chapters, those centuries in fact brought a succession of changes in Europe and elsewhere which included a long period of evidently genial warmth in the high Middle Ages followed by the development world-wide of a colder climate, especially in and around the seventeenth century, with probably the greatest spread of ice since the last major ice age.

Such a sequence can hardly have been withstood by the primitive human economies of those times without effects on their history.

EXCEPT THERE ISN'T A "CLIMATE EMERGENCY" …

THAT IS A TERM OF HYSTERIA INVENTED BY A SCARED LITTLE GIRL FROM SWEDEN WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT THE EARTH'S CLIMATE, WHICH IS TO SAY, ITS WEATHER, IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING, SOMETIMES GETTING WARMER, SOMETIMES GETTING MUCH COLDER …

MARKETWATCH

"‘Climate emergency’: Another dictionary says Greta Thunberg’s movement is rewriting our language"


By Rachel Koning Beals

Published: Nov 20, 2019 4:26 p.m. ET

Perhaps we can credit the message and social-media machinations from teen environmental activist Greta Thunberg, or deep-pocketed investments like this just-revealed solar play from Bill Gates.

Either way, Oxford Dictionaries says its word of the year for 2019 reflects a new urgency rippling through the social, business and political lexicon:


‘climate emergency’

The publisher’s annual selection reflects the ethos, mood or preoccupations of the passing year, and has lasting potential as a term of cultural significance, Oxford explained in a release Wednesday.

Oxford, in fact, had shortlisted only climate-related language for its annual release this time around, including: climate action; climate crisis; climate denial; eco-anxiety; ecocide; extinction; flight shame; global heating; net-zero; and plant-based.

“This has been a fascinating year for the word ‘climate,’ and we see that reflected especially in the way that English speakers have combined it with other words."

"We are clearly struggling to articulate our climate anxiety,” said Casper Grathwohl, president of Oxford Dictionaries.

Usage of the phrase “climate emergency” by September was more than 100 times as common as it had been the previous year.

The phrase surpassed all of other types of emergency (health, hospital, family, etc.,) to become the most written-about emergency by a huge margin, with over three times the usage frequency of health, the second-ranking word.

Statistically speaking, this represents a new trend in the use of the word emergency, Oxford said.

Oxford isn’t the only reference book to recognize the topic’s expanding usage.

U.K.-based Collins Dictionary declared “climate strike” as its winner.

It noticed a hundredfold increase in its use in 2019 tied in large part to the notoriety of Thunberg and her inspired school and workplace walkouts around the globe.


https://www.marketwatch.com/story/clima ... latestnews
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 21, 2019 at 7:52 pm

Paul Plante says :

And your statement “(O)ne may choose to address a child as an adult, but it is silly to believe they will comprehend the intricacies of the history of all of mankind, with the mixing of all of our policies with regards to the resources of this planet, and how we conduct ourselves, in order to survive and progress as a species,” actually goes to the heart of this matter from the perspective of an American citizen concerned about due process of law here, because on September 18, 2019, the Democrats in OUR United States House of Representatives chose to treat this 16-year old girl from Sweden not only as an adult, but further, as an expert witness and climate expert, as we can see from this blog entry from the Union of Concerned Scientists blog site entitled “I’m a Scientist and Greta Thunberg’s Speech to Congress Inspires Me” by Brenda Ekwurzel, senior climate scientist on September 20, 2019, as follows:

I was honored to meet Greta Thunberg, the 16-year old climate activist who started weekly climate strikes and the hashtag #FridaysForFuture, which have in turn inspired many young people to strike in their hometowns.

Moments before Greta’s powerful speech to members of Congress on September 18, 2019 in the largest room on Capitol Hill, the Ways and Means Committee room, she was preparing in a small room.

end quotes

The “powerful” speech of course was little Greta saying: “I’m instead attaching my testimony – it is the IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8th 2018.”

end quotes

And what was “powerful” about that speech was the sheer ease with which little Greta was able to slip that collection of political horse**** known as the IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8th 2018, to OUR Congress with no questions whatsoever being raised as to why OUR Congress should be accepting that contrived document as “science” upon which to base OUR future public policy.

Now, the way these things should work in a true democracy is that Greta would submit her written testimony, which she has clearly done in the form of this IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8th 2018, which is not “science,” and then WE, the AMERICAN PEOPLE would have an opportunity to have our experts review that testimony word for word and line by line, and the question the witness, in this case, little Greta, who should be treated as an adult and held to the same standards as any other witness testifying to Congress, especially these days as we hear about all these Republicans being convicted of lying to Congress.

But in this case, by design, we are being denied that opportunity to question this load of horse**** called the IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8th 2018, which little Greta dumped on OUR Congress on September 18, 2019, which is not only un-democratic, but un-American, as well.

Thus, we Americans concerned about OUR future as a nation owe a continuing debt of gratitude to the Cape Charles Mirror, which is the only venue I have found where a common citizen without political clout like myself can stand up and say, “wait a minute here, and quit trying to jam this un-scientific horse**** down our throats just because little rich Swedish girl Greta Thunberg told you to!”

As to the un-scientific horse**** little Greta successfully slipped to the Democrats in OUR Congress on September 18, 2019 without a word of question being uttered, let’s start the review with Chapter 1, Executive Summary, as follows:

Human-induced warming reached approximately 1°C (likely between 0.8°C and 1.2°C) above pre-industrial levels in 2017, increasing at 0.2°C (likely between 0.1°C and 0.3°C) per decade (high confidence).

end quotes

Now, given the actual history of climate on this planet going back over the last several thousand years, that sentence, which was written by lawyers, not scientists, that sentence is horse****, because it actually is cooler now than it was during “pre-industrial” levels, when CO2 was lower, and temperatures were higher than they are now, which takes us then to this statement which shows us how these lawyers weasel their way around that reality, to wit:

Unless otherwise specified, warming is expressed relative to the period 1850–1900, used as an approximation of pre-industrial temperatures in AR5.

end quotes

HOG**** science, people – that is what little Greta is peddling here.

The question is why are the Democrats in Congress buying it?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-199386
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 24, 2019 at 7:35 pm

Paul Plante says :

MJM, first of all, as a fellow American citizen, let me extend my appreciation of the fact that you took time to try and wade through all of what I have written above about this BULL**** IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018 and then dumped on OUR Congress on September 18, 2019 by little rich Swedish girl Greta Thunberg – I know that it is tedious reading, having read through the document several times, word for word for word for word for word, ad infinitum, by design of course, to bury us in BULL****, so we won’t have the endurance to stomach reading another word, and hence, will never make it to the end where it states thusly, to wit:

Chapter 5 – Executive Summary

This chapter takes sustainable development as the starting point and focus for analysis.

It considers the broad and multifaceted bi-directional interplay between sustainable development, including its focus on eradicating poverty and reducing inequality in their multidimensional aspects, and climate actions in a 1.5°C warmer world.

end quotes

So, MJM, we American people have a BAMBOOZLE going on here, plain and simple, and that is really what this discussion should be about – not Greta, who is the equivalent of a child being used as a drug mule here.

Her purpose was fulfilled when she dumped that BULL**** IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018, on OUR Congress on September 18, 2019.

Exit little rich Swedish girl Greta Thunberg stage right.

Had Greta never appeared before OUR Congress, by invitation, she indeed would be a non-entity, other than a lost, emotionally-disturbed little girl urging our American children to stay home from school so they can be stupid.

But she did, and history was changed as a result, which brings us to today and this BAMBOOZLE being foisted off on us by the Democrats, which BAMBOOZLE is happening in OUR national capital of Washington, D.C., where we are being this following horse****, to wit:

“Months ago, the House passed the Climate Action Now Act to take this crisis seriously,” NDC Climate Change Task Force Co-Chair Susan Wild (PA-07) said.

end quotes

Except, MJM, THERE IS NO “CLIMATE CRISIS” mentioned anywhere in the BULL**** IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018 and then dumped on OUR Congress on September 18, 2019 by little rich Swedish girl Greta Thunberg.

Not a single word, in fact.

So besides from out of her ***, where is NDC Climate Change Task Force Co-Chair Susan Wild (PA-07) getting this “crisis” language from?

Besides nothing that I have found, what scientific basis does she have to justify her HYSTERIA MONGERING here with this wild and crazy talk about a “climate crisis?”

Are you for being lied to, MJM, by members of our House of Representatives?

How about this:

“As our country continues to experience dangerous wildfires, flooding, and extreme weather events, we need bold leadership on climate.”

“Instead, President Trump has abdicated our role as a world leader in combating the climate crisis to side with polluters,” NDC Climate Change Task Force Co-Chair Sean Casten (IL-06) said.

end quotes

Combatting the climate crisis, MJM?

Here is exactly how NDC Climate Change Task Force Co-Chair Sean Casten (IL-06) plans to do it:

Chapter 5 – Executive Summary

Without societal transformation and rapid implementation of ambitious greenhouse gas reduction measures, pathways to limiting warming to 1.5°C and achieving sustainable development will be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to achieve (high confidence).

end quotes

Societal transformation, MJM – that is what this is all about, and a CONTRIVED CLIMATE CRISIS is the excuse needed to make it happen, as we are all made to feel panic so we cannot think straight.

That is what this BULL**** game is about – a POWER GRAB, as we can see by returning to the BULL**** IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018 and then dumped on OUR Congress on September 18, 2019 by little rich Swedish girl Greta Thunberg, in Chapter 5 – Executive Summary, as follows:

Compared to current conditions, 1.5°C of global warming would nonetheless pose heightened risks to eradicating poverty, reducing inequalities and ensuring human and ecosystem well-being (medium evidence, high agreement).

end quotes

How about no evidence at all, because there is none – that is an otherwise empty statement intended to make it clear to the Democrats in OUR House of Representatives, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, that yes, this really is about “eradicating world poverty,” which is an endeavor loaded to the gills with opportunities for the kinds of graft the Democrats just love to get their hands on.

So this is LBJ’s “WAR ON POVERTY” on steroids, as well as nation-building on a global scale, all in the name of fighting an imaginary “climate crisis” cooked up by this IPCC crowd to shake loose gobs of money from WE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, to make everybody else in the world as rich as the Democrats in this country are, which takes us back to Chapter 5, as follows:

Many strategies for sustainable development enable transformational adaptation for a 1.5°C warmer world, provided attention is paid to reducing poverty in all its forms and to promoting equity and participation in decision-making (medium evidence, high agreement).

end quotes

Ah, yes, MJM, what a laudable goal for the Democrats to pursue – reducing poverty in all its forms!

And wouldn’t a great place for the Democrats to start that process be right here, given that back in the 1960s, the Democrats declared a WAR ON POVERTY that they still haven’t won yet?

And going back to the BULL**** IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018 and then dumped on OUR Congress on September 18, 2019 by little rich Swedish girl Greta Thunberg one last time, we have this to consider, to wit:

Social justice and equity are core aspects of climate-resilient development pathways for transformational social change.

end quotes

Which is more HORSE****, MJM – an excuse to create a “social democratic” world government to provide “social justice,” as follows:

Addressing challenges and widening opportunities between and within countries and communities would be necessary to achieve sustainable development and limit warming to 1.5°C, without making the poor and disadvantaged worse off (high confidence).

Identifying and navigating inclusive and socially acceptable pathways towards low-carbon, climate-resilient futures is a challenging yet important endeavour, fraught with moral, practical and political difficulties and inevitable trade-offs (very high confidence). {5.5.2, 5.5.3.3, Box 5.3}

It entails deliberation and problem-solving processes to negotiate societal values, well-being, risks and resilience and to determine what is desirable and fair, and to whom (medium evidence, high agreement).

The fundamental societal and systemic changes to achieve sustainable development, eradicate poverty and reduce inequalities while limiting warming to 1.5°C would require meeting a set of institutional, social, cultural, economic and technological conditions (high confidence).

Re-examining individual and collective values could help spur urgent, ambitious and cooperative change (medium evidence, high agreement). {5.5.3, 5.6.5}

end quotes

Are you for Greta Thunberg re-examining your individual values, MJM, to see if they are societally acceptable to her?

And should OUR Congress be lying to us about a climate crisis that does not have a scientific basis in fact?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-200193
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR December 1, 2019

Opinion: On NOAA, Contrived Science and the IPCC


Special Opinion by Paul Plante.

For those unfamiliar with the term “IPCC,” it stands for the “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” which is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations supposedly dedicated to providing the world with an objective, scientific view of climate change, its natural, political and economic impacts and risks, and possible response options, and I use the word supposedly on purpose, because the horse**** coming into Our House of Representatives on September 18, 2019 in the form of the IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018 is anything but an objective, scientific view of climate change, because first of all, the IPCC itself is not objective; it has a definite agenda, and more to the point, the IPCC does not carry out original research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena itself, rather, it assesses published literature including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources, so in a word, it does not know what the **** it is talking about, and that is a fact.

As to the underlying agenda, we can see it at least strongly hinted at, if not clearly stated in the following from the REMARKS BY THE MINISTER OF WATER AND CLIMATE HONOURABLE OPPAH. C.Z. MUCHINGURI-KASHIRI (MP) AT COP 23, to wit:

The Zimbabwe Government views climate change as a serious issue and a matter that needs urgent attention.

end quotes

At the same time, we have this concerning Zimbabwe from the Reuters article “Zimbabwe fires 211 striking doctors as economy worsens” on November 8, 2019, as follows:

HARARE (Reuters) – Zimbabwe on Friday fired more than 200 public sector doctors who have been on strike for more than two months demanding better pay to protect them from soaring inflation.

Other public workers say they cannot go to work because they have no money.

Police on Wednesday blocked a handful of public sector workers from marching to government offices with a petition demanding better pay.

Junior and middle level doctors from state hospitals have been on strike since Sept. 3.

They want their pay indexed to the U.S. dollar to stop their earnings being eroded by triple-digit inflation.

Patients are being turned away from hospitals because there are no doctors to treat them.

The board plans to call in 516 of the government’s 1,601 doctors for disciplinary hearings.

Tawanda Zvakada, spokesman for Zimbabwe Hospital Doctors Association, said he could not immediately comment.

The government said last month it had doubled doctors’ salaries.

They said that was inadequate, as it would only increase their monthly salary to about 2,000 Zimbabwe dollars ($130).

Zimbabweans are bearing the brunt of the worst economic crisis in a decade, with shortages of foreign currency, fuel, power and medicines.

The crisis has been worsened by a drought that has left more than half of the population in need of food aid and forced the government to scramble for scarce dollars to import grain.

Mnangagwa has asked for patience while his government tries to fix the economy.

But hope has dimmed that he can end years of economic troubles that were a hallmark of the rule of the late Robert Mugabe, who was ousted in an army coup two years ago.

end quotes

So, they need money and lots of it, and as a result, we now have a contrived climate crisis to shake that money loose, as we see by going back to those remarks by the MINISTER OF WATER AND CLIMATE HONOURABLE OPPAH. C.Z. MUCHINGURI-KASHIRI of Zimbabwe, as follows:

My country has ratified the Paris Agreement and now a Party to this crucial treaty.

We view the Paris Agreement as a stepping stone towards tangible action in addressing the climate change challenge facing the world today.

end quotes

Except as we are going to see from the real science, there is not a “climate change challenge” facing the world today, which takes us back to his remarks as follows:

We need to move with speed to finalise the development of the rulebook for implementation of this Agreement.

Access to climate finance remains a challenge to Zimbabwe and most of the developing world as the Green Climate Fund which is the main funding mechanism of the UNFCCC, remains slow in processing applications and the disbursement of resources.

Our GCF Readiness Proposal was approved more than a year ago, but up to date, GCF has not released the funds.

We need to see a change in the way these funds are handled and simplification of the GCF projects approval and funds disbursement processes.

end quotes

Yes, it is all about getting access to the money, people, and that money is supposed to flow from us to them, which is a great deal for Zimbabwe, and a real lousy deal for us.

Getting back to the IPCC, it was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and was later endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly with membership open to all members of the WMO and UN.

With respect to the IPCC having an agenda, it produces reports that contribute to the work of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the main international treaty on climate change, which is about “social justice and equity” as core aspects of climate-resilient development pathways for transformational social change per Chapter 5 of the IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SR 1.5, which was released on October 8, 2018.

Now, contrast that with this statement from the propaganda concerning the IPCC:

The objective of the UNFCCC is to “stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human-induced) interference with the climate system”.

end quotes

Except the term “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” is more bull****, as we can see by examining the real science, not this bogus “science” contrived by this IPCC crowd, which is the purpose of this essay.

With respect to that contrived science, which is based on thin air, we have as follows this hysteria-mongering from AP NEWS entitled “‘We’re all in big trouble’: Climate panel sees a dire future” by the hysteria mongerer Seth Borenstein on September 25, 2019, as follows:

NEW YORK (AP) — Earth is in more hot water than ever before, and so are we, an expert United Nations climate panel warned in a grim new report Wednesday.

Sea levels are rising at an ever-faster rate as ice and snow shrink, and oceans are getting more acidic and losing oxygen, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in a report issued as world leaders met at the United Nations.

It warned that if steps aren’t taken to reduce emissions and slow global warming, seas will rise 3 feet by the end of the century, with many fewer fish, less snow and ice, stronger and wetter hurricanes and other, nastier weather systems.

“The oceans and the icy parts of the world are in big trouble, and that means we’re all in big trouble, too,” said one of the report’s lead authors, Michael Oppenheimer, professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton University.

“The changes are accelerating.”

The dire effects will be felt on both land and sea, harming people, plants, animals, food, societies, infrastructure and the global economy.

“The world’s oceans and cryosphere have been taking the heat for climate change for decades.”

“The consequences for nature and humanity are sweeping and severe,” said Ko Barrett, vice chair of the IPCC and a deputy assistant administrator for research at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

end quotes

Except that is not true, as we clearly see by consulting the real science this IPCC crowd is attempting to bury under a huge mountain of bull**** from the IPCC, to wit:

From CLIMATE, HISTORY AND THE MODERN WORLD, Second Edition by H.H. Lamb:

COOLING IN THE ARCTIC

The cooling of the Arctic since 1950–60 has been most marked in the very same regions which experienced the strongest warming in the earlier decades of the present century, namely the central Arctic and northernmost parts of the two great continents remote from the world’s oceans but also in the Norwegian—East Greenland Sea.

In some places, e.g. the Franz Josef Land archipelago near 80°N 50–60°E, the long-term average temperature fell by 3–4°C and the ten-year average winter temperatures became 6–10°C colder in the 1960s as compared with the preceding decades.

It is clear from Icelandic oceanographic surveys that changes in the ocean currents have been involved.

Indeed a greatly (in the extreme case, ten times) increased flow of the cold East Greenland Current, bringing polar water southwards, has in several years (especially 1968 and 1969, but also 1965, 1975 and 1979) brought more Arctic sea ice to the coasts of Iceland than for fifty years (fig. 97): in April–May 1968 and 1969 the island was half surrounded by the ice, as had not occurred since 1888.

Such ice years have always been dreaded in Iceland’s history because of the depression of summer temperatures and the effects on farm production.

In the 1950s the mean temperature of the summer half year in Iceland had been 7.7°C and the average hay yields were 4.3 tonnes/hectare (with the use of 2.8 kg of nitrogen fertilizer); in the late 1960s with mean temperature 6.8°C the average hay yield was only 3.0 tonnes/hectare (despite the use of 4.8 kg of fertilizer).

The temperature level was dangerously close to the point at which the grass virtually ceases to grow.

The country’s crop of potatoes was similarly reduced.

The 1960s also saw the abandonment of attempts at grain growing in Iceland which had been resumed in the warmer decades of this century after a lapse of some hundreds of years.

At the same time the changes in the ocean have produced changes in the spawning grounds and seasonal range of migration of fish stocks — a not much publicized aspect of the international wrangles and ‘cod wars’ of recent times.

With the fall by over 1°C in the mean sea surface temperatures off west Greenland from the peak years in the 1920s and 1950s, the cod fishery there declined by the early 1970s to a tiny fraction of what it had been in those times.

The Greenland cod migrated to Iceland waters, and for a few years (1967–71) offset the declining stocks there; but since 1974 the spawning stocks in Iceland waters have been only a tenth of what they were in the late 1950s and the total stocks have fallen by almost a half, the decline being probably attributable to combined effects of the change in water climate and over-fishing.

Similarly, herring stocks have moved from Iceland waters to the wider reaches of the Norwegian Sea farther east, south and north and to the North Sea, while a southward shift of the southern limit of cod seems to have led to increased catches in the North Sea since about 1963.

An interruption of the colder regime introduced by the 1960s affected Europe and Iceland, part of east Asia and the eastern United States in the early-mid 1970s and was perhaps too hurriedly hailed as a reversal of the trend.

Most of Europe and parts of the other regions named experienced between 1971 and 1977 four to seven mild winters in a row, largely thanks to repetitive occurrences of anticyclones in positions which gave them southerly or southwesterly winds.

One or two of these winters produced extreme phenomena such as the roses still blooming in the parks in Copenhagen in late January.

But much of the remaining areas of the northern hemisphere, in Asia and Africa and including the polar region and the two great oceans as well as eastern Canada, had a straight run of colder than usual winters in the same years.

As the pattern depended so largely on the positions of stationary (‘blocking’) features in the wind circulation in middle latitudes, no great surprise should have been caused when conditions were reversed again in many of these regions in the immediately following years later in the decade.

By the end of the decade in Iceland, as in other regions of the Arctic fringe, it had to be concluded that the colder regime which set in in the 1960s seems to be continuing; and after notably cold years in 1979 and 1980 the widely debated expectation of global warming setting in as a result of the impact of the man-made increase of carbon dioxide on the world climate is being called in question in these countries.

end quotes

That, people, is the real science that is being buried by the contrived science of this IPCC crowd, with aid and assistance from the NOAA in this country.

This essay asks the essential existential question as to why that is – why is this IPCC crowd lying to us, and why is the United States House of Representatives foisting those lies on us as if they were the truth?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... -the-ipcc/
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius October 8th 2018

Chapter 4

Executive Summary

Limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels would require transformative systemic change, integrated with sustainable development.

Such change would require the upscaling and acceleration of the implementation of far-reaching, multilevel and cross-sectoral climate mitigation and addressing barriers.

Such systemic change would need to be linked to complementary adaptation actions, including transformational adaptation, especially for pathways that temporarily overshoot 1.5°C,

Current national pledges on mitigation and adaptation are not enough to stay below the Paris Agreement temperature limits and achieve its adaptation goals.

While transitions in energy efficiency, carbon intensity of fuels, electrification and land-use change are underway in various countries, limiting warming to 1.5°C will require a greater scale and pace of change to transform energy, land, urban and industrial systems globally.

To strengthen the global response, almost all countries would need to significantly raise their level of ambition.

Implementation of this raised ambition would require enhanced institutional capabilities in all countries, including building the capability to utilize indigenous and local knowledge.

In developing countries and for poor and vulnerable people, implementing the response would require financial, technological and other forms of support to build capacity, for which additional local, national and international resources would need to be mobilized.

However, public, financial, institutional and innovation capabilities currently fall short of implementing far-reaching measures at scale in all countries.


THE NEW YORK TIMES

"John Kerry Launches Star-Studded Climate Coalition"


Lisa Friedman

1 DECEMBER 2019

WASHINGTON — John Kerry, the former senator and secretary of state, has formed a new bipartisan coalition of world leaders, military brass and Hollywood celebrities to push for public action to combat climate change.

The name, World War Zero, is supposed to evoke both the national security threat posed by the earth’s warming and the type of wartime mobilization that Mr. Kerry argued would be needed to stop the rise in carbon emissions before 2050.

The star-studded group is supposed to win over those skeptical of the policies that would be needed to accomplish that.


Former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are part of the effort.

Moderate Republican lawmakers like Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former governor of California, and John Kasich, the former governor of Ohio, are on the list.

Stars like Leonardo DiCaprio, Sting and Ashton Kutcher round out the roster of more than 60 founding members.

Their goal is to hold more than 10 million “climate conversations” in the coming year with Americans across the political spectrum.

With a starting budget of $500,000, Mr. Kerry said, he and other coalition members intend to hold town meetings across the country starting in January.

Members will head to battleground states key to the 2020 election, but also to military bases where climate discussions are rare and to economically depressed areas that members say could benefit from clean energy jobs.

“We’re going to try to reach millions of people, Americans and people in other parts of the world, in order to mobilize an army of people who are going to demand action now on climate change sufficient to meet the challenge,” Mr. Kerry said in an interview.


The launch of the new group on Sunday comes as diplomats gather in Madrid on Monday for global climate negotiations aimed at strengthening the 2015 Paris Agreement, from which President Trump has vowed to withdraw next year.

Earlier this week the United Nations found that the world’s richest countries, responsible for emitting more than three-fourths of planet-warming pollution, are not doing enough to keep Earth’s temperature from rising to dangerously high levels.

Net carbon emissions from the two largest polluters, the United States and China, are expanding.

Sarah Matthews, a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign, said in a statement that the administration “continues to advance realistic solutions to reduce emissions while unleashing American energy like never before.”

Asked to comment on the new bipartisan group, she also criticized efforts to force the United States to cut emissions, arguing “the largest emitters like China and India won’t do the same.”

Mr. Schwarzenegger in an interview this week dismissed as “bogus” the Trump administration’s argument that China must do more to curb emissions before the United States acts.

“I always say to myself, what is happening here?"

"America never ever in its history has said, ‘Let some other country do something first.’"

"We should lead,” he said.

Mr. Kerry said while individual members might personally promote specific climate policy proposals, like a tax on carbon dioxide pollution, or the Green New Deal, the coalition is not aimed at promoting any particular plan.

“We’re not going to be divided going down a rabbit hole for one plan or another,” he said.

The Green New Deal envisions addressing climate change and income inequality in tandem, with a federal job guarantee and federal mandates like ensuring the country’s power and electricity systems run entirely on renewable energy by 2030.


The Sunrise Movement, a climate activist group that promotes the Green New Deal, has been critical of global warming efforts that do not embrace that vision, but its leaders held their fire on Mr. Kerry’s group.

Some members of Mr. Kerry’s coalition hold positions that many in the environmental movement oppose, like support for natural gas as a transition fuel from coal.

Combustion of natural gas emits about half as much carbon dioxide as coal and 30 percent less than oil, and its expansion is widely credited for helping the United States curb emissions in the past decade.

It also produces methane, a fast-acting greenhouse gas with enormous short-term impacts on the climate.

United Nations scientists have said the world needs to cut carbon emissions in half by 2030, and must eliminate them by 2050 to limit warming to relatively safe levels.

To do that, the United States would need to phase out all fossil fuels, including gas, as rapidly as possible.


Mr. Kasich said in an interview that he believed in finding a consensus among Americans to tackle climate change, and saw a solution in both putting a price on carbon and increasing the research, development and deployment of renewable energy.

He also said natural gas would continue to play a part, especially gas produced by hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” which has brought jobs to his state.

“If I’ve got to sign up to be an anti-fracker, count me out,” Mr. Kasich said.

Katie Eder, founder of The Future Coalition, a network for youth-led organizations that helped organize climate strikes around the country in September, supports the Green New Deal and is a member of Mr. Kerry’s coalition.

She said people who cared about climate change needed to look past their differences.

“While I may be disagreeing with some of the things that other folks involved in World War Zero believe, that doesn’t mean we can’t work together,” she said.

“Collaboration is our key to survival.”


For more climate news sign up for the Climate Fwd: newsletter or follow @NYTClimate on Twitter.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topsto ... li=BBnb7Kz
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

AFP

"'Do it for our children,' parents plead at UN climate meet"


5 Dec 2019

Parents from around the globe Thursday said governments locked in negotiations at UN talks in Madrid must beat back the threat of global warming to "give our children the future that they deserve".

"Our children are being handed a broken world on the verge of climate chaos and ecological breakdown," they said in an open declaration from 222 associations in 27 countries.


"As parents, seeing this is agonising."

The plea comes the day before young climate strikers led by Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg plan to march through the Spanish capital under the Friday for Futures banner.

The student-led movement -- sparked by Thunberg's solo protests last year outside Sweden's parliament -- saw millions pour into the streets worldwide ahead of a UN climate summit in September.

"Many of the delegates at COP25 are also parents and we appeal to these delegates in particular," the declaration said.

"Addressing the climate crisis is not the responsibility of our children –- it’s our job as adults and parents to act."

The 12-day UN talks, under way since Monday, are mired in the small print of the 2015 Paris climate treaty's "rule book".

Despite a crescendo of public alarm, the world's major carbon polluters have shown little or no willingness to improve on emissions reduction pledges that, collectively, are not deep enough to prevent catastrophic warming, scientists say.

"Every person in the negotiations has a responsibility to act to ensure our children’s rights are safeguarded, and to disregard vested corporate interests," said Isabella Prata, a mother of two, from Parents for Future Brazil.

- 'Letting down humanity' -

Protecting future generations is a recurring leitmotif at the talks, echoed by leaders and frontline diplomats alike.

On Monday, as 40 heads of state took turns working similar themes, Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen at one point held up a stuffed polar bear.

"All of you, just like me, are so-called decision-makers, and probably have children or grandchildren who you love," he said in a scolding tone.

"Think about those children when you take a decision on behalf of your country," he said.

"Because our children will later think about us -- about what we did, or what we did not do."

Costa Rica's President Carlos Alvarado made it even more personal.

"I have a six-year-old kid," he told a gathering of leaders from climate-vulnerable nations.

"If we are not courageous enough to take action in these weeks, we will not only be failing me and my kid, we will be letting down humanity."

The Paris Agreement calls for capping global warming at "well below" two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, but the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change keep rising.


Scientists reported this week in Madrid that CO2 emissions will rise just over 0.5 percent in 2019, to about 42 billion tonnes per year -- the equivalent of five million tonnes per hour.

Earth's average surface temperature, which has already gone up more than 1C, is on track to rise another two or three degrees, even if nations keep their Paris treaty promises.

"At our current rate of emissions, we are dangerously close to reaching tipping points which could unravel human civilisation within our own and our children’s lifetimes," the declaration said.

"We are at a turning point in the story of our species, and you, the delegates of this influential UN climate summit, have an opportunity to choose what happens next."


"We know that you can and we trust that you will."

In August, Thunberg -- who refuses to fly -- set sail from England to New York, and from there continued overland towards Santiago, where the UN climate conference was to be held.

But the annual meet was transferred to Madrid because of social unrest in the Chilean capital, so Thunberg did a U-turn from the US west coast, arriving Tuesday in Lisbon.

https://www.afp.com/en/news/826/do-it-o ... oc-1mt7182
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR December 3, 2019 at 10:27 pm

Paul Plante says :

So, contrived science, people, where the word “contrived” is taken to mean “having an unnatural or false appearance or quality: artificial, labored, as in a contrived plot,” and here I am focusing in on this hysterical and frankly, quite stupid statement from the IPCC in the AP NEWS article entitled “‘We’re all in big trouble’: Climate panel sees a dire future” by the hysteria mongerer Seth Borenstein on September 25, 2019, as follows:

It warned that if steps aren’t taken to reduce emissions and slow global warming, seas will rise 3 feet by the end of the century, with many fewer fish, less snow and ice, stronger and wetter hurricanes and other, nastier weather systems.

end quotes

Wetter hurricanes?

Other nastier weather systems?

Are you kidding me here?

What exactly is a “wetter” hurricane, given that I have yet to hear of one that was dry?

And how about these “other nastier weather systems?”

Nastier that what?

And that is not “science,” people, because scientists do not use such terms as “nastier weather systems” – only hysterical people who can’t think straight do, or those who are dishonest.

But I want to stay with the subject of the IPCC’s “contrived science,” or “science” having an unnatural or false appearance or quality: artificial, labored, which takes us back to CLIMATE, HISTORY AND THE MODERN WORLD, Second Edition by H.H. Lamb, to wit:

A more serious reversion to colder climate came with the year 1879, a year well within the class of the 1690s.

Through December 1878 and January 1879 the temperature in England stayed mainly below the freezing point, and it was very snowy; the spring was cold, with May colder than many an April; the summer was the wettest and one of the seven coldest in the long instrument records for England; it was followed by a notably cold autumn and another near freezing month in December.

The cold wet weather delayed the ripening of the harvest, so that even in East Anglia in some places the corn had not been gathered in by Christmas.

end quotes

Now, if one were to calmly and rationally think about what “nasty” weather might be like, I would certainly put that forth as a real good example of the nasty weather we have already experienced on this earth of ours, and that had nothing to do with Carbon Dioxide, which takes us back to the real science, to wit:

But the effects of 1879 and the difficult years with cold winters and wet summers which followed were not confined to England.

The peak emigration of people from the countries of northern, central and western Europe was in the 1880s.

The years 1876–9 also brought droughts, monsoon failures and famine in China and India.

The old stories of medieval Europe’s famine situations of outbreaks of cannibalism and children sold into slavery repeated themselves in these years in the Far East.

end quotes

Those are the times these fools on this IPCC want to take us back to with their cry that the United States must go to zero CO2 emissions by 2030.

Moving right along:

The temperature records in China (fig. 86) and indicators such as the freezing dates of Lake Suwa in central Japan (fig. 90) show that this was one of the severest phases of the Little Ice Age in the Far East.

The deaths due to famine in the late 1870s in India and China have been estimated at 14–18 million.

The historical documentary information which begins to be available from the southern hemisphere in the centuries described in this and the previous chapter seems to confirm that there too a colder climate developed during the last millennium.

Glaciers advanced in South America and New Zealand, and there were appropriate changes in the New Zealand forests.

But the timing of the severest phases was different, it seems almost opposite, to that in the northern hemisphere.

We have referred to evidence of this in chapter 3 (p. 39).

Captain Cook’s voyages in the 1770s and others on to the 1830s confirm that the Antarctic sea ice was more restricted and open sea extended farther south, although those were times when the northern polar ice was well forward and troubling Iceland.

Later in the nineteenth century, in the 1850s and around 1900, the southern sea ice extended farther north and there were many accounts from the sailing ships of those days of sightings of the great tabular icebergs calved from the Antarctic inland ice drifting to much lower latitudes, off the River Plate and approaching the other southern continents.

After 1894–5, when there was a good deal of ice on the Thames in London, there was a long respite from severe winters in England and in Europe generally.

Not again was there a month with mean temperature below the freezing point in England until January 1940.

end quotes

When one reads actual climate history, which is based on extensive records that the IPCC has pretty much successfully buried, one can see how the IPCC has contrived its “science” for the purpose of creating fear in people to advance its agenda, which is entirely political, given that the IPCC is a governmental body, not a scientific organization, which again takes us back to the real science, as follows:

Only the winters of 1916–17 and 1928–9 during that interval of forty-five years could be considered in any way severe, the February in both cases coming near to being a freezing month in England and causing some ice to appear on the Thames.

The much more severe winter of 1962–3 (3-month mean temperature in central England −0.3°C, January −2.1° C) never brought the water temperature in London’s river below about 10°C (50°F), owing to all the industrial and urban effluents now passed into the river.

end quotes

Now, if 1962-3 was a much more severe winter, how did that happen, given that the IPCC says it should have been warmer due to greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere from dangerous anthropogenic (an invented word that means nothing at all) interference with the climate system?

Let’s go back to the science and see what more we can see:

It should plainly be desirable to update our portrayal in fig. 91a of the course of world-average temperature at the surface of the Earth, as indeed has been attempted in various quarters.

The most authoritative version is due to the (WMO/UNEP) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change14 (IPCC for short).

The curve here shown as fig. 91b represents the IPCC figures when looked at as the successive five-year means from 1860 to 1989.

The three-year mean for the remarkably warm years 1990–2 is the last point at the right-hand end of the graph.

The overall shape of this historical curve is the product of successive revisions adjusting the values for urban and industrial warming and any other possibly distorting influences at the observation sites — not least the changes that have taken place in the observing practices at sea with ever bigger ships, changes in the height of their decks above the water, and measurements in recent decades being made within the vessel in intake pipes instead of in open buckets.

This writer is inclined to the belief that, however careful the observing procedures and however carefully studied the adjustments applied afterwards to the observations, to declare a value for the world average or an area average to within some hundredths of a degree centigrade is an unattainable ideal.

end quotes

WHOA, get that back off the page – publicly declaring that a value for the world average or an area average to within some hundredths of a degree centigrade is an unattainable ideal.

What could I have been thinking when the IPCC climate crisis crowd says otherwise?

Getting back to the science:

All responsible researchers agree that the temperatures measured must be adjusted for peculiarities of the site and the changes of these peculiarities with time.

All these things have led to revisions of the data.

Urban and industrial influences also change with time, as does the pollution of various kinds which may influence the data.

Also, it is now appreciated that the climates of islands, big and small, differ from those over the open sea as well as from the climate of the nearest extensive land-masses.

Even the inhabited camps in polar wastes create their own climates through the artificially generated heat, smoke and pollution, all of which tend to be trapped locally and held beneath the temperature inversions.

The light wind speeds below the inversion also lead to a strong local concentration of the effects.

Hence, adjustments must be attempted even though they introduce an arbitrary element into the results.

end quotes

So, despite the fact that there is no rational scientific basis for this “global average” temperature, as it truly means nothing, nonetheless the IPCC and their parrots in the media will continue to use the term while shrieking as they did today about how warm it has gotten, as we here to the north of you dig out from under around two feet of snow that obviously failed to get the message from the IPCC and media that it is supposed to be warmer, not colder, which again takes us back to the science, to wit:

It is agreed that the 1880s and early 1890s were a cold time, though not everywhere in the northern hemisphere oceans, and that the twentieth century has been generally warmer.

Warming was rapid from about 1920 to 1940.

The cooling which set in in the 1940s had a wobbly course, but the climatic record continued generally colder in the northern hemisphere until some time after 1970.

In the southern hemisphere, particularly the Antarctic and the sub-Antarctic ocean zone, there was a rapid warming going on from about 1950 onwards.

Despite the rapid rise of world temperature after 1975 indicated by our fig. 91b (a graph produced by the IPCC which shows continuous warming for the earth), there has been a noteworthy occurrence — seen, for example, in the Danish temperature record here reproduced in fig. 28a (p. 80) and in other records in North America and Europe of further cold events or some continued colder conditions until 1985 to 1987.

The state of affairs at the time of writing (1994) seems to be that, after truly exceptional warmth in the years 1989–91, there has been some fall of temperature world-wide, which has been attributed by many to the effects of the great volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in June 1991.

end quotes

So why is the IPCC, and by extension the media, to include the AP and NPR, trying to concoct a false narrative that the earth’s climate is continually warming, when the earth has climatic zones, not an earth climate?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-204046
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR December 4, 2019 at 10:03 pm

Paul Plante says :

So, who then is this Ko Barrett who is making these reckless, irresponsible, and frankly from my perspective as an engineer, quite hysterical statements about “(T)he consequences for nature and humanity are sweeping and severe,” when she herself is not in possession of a shred of evidence she can point to or rely on to justify that patently hyberbolic statement, which is dishonest on her part, as well as fraudulent to make such hysterical claims without having any evidence whatsoever to support them, which demonstrates a decided lack of both integrity and basic common sense which would tell a mature adult that you do not sow panic in a population based on hyperbole and falsehood?

And why have we got an elected official in what is a foreign governing body, the IPCC, serving as a deputy assistant administrator for research at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where she supervises daily operations and administration of NOAA’s research enterprise, and the execution of NOAA programs including the Climate Program Office, Ocean Acidification Program, the National Sea Grant College Program, Ocean Exploration and Research, and the Office of Weather and Air Quality research, when that very much appears to be a major-league conflict of interest on her part?

And why is she apparently exempt from NOAA’s supposed Scientific Integrity Policy which tells all agency employees to “approach all scientific activities with honesty, objectively, and completely, without allegiance to individuals, organizations, or ideology,” which she clearly is not doing making such irresponsible and reckless and hysterical comments to AP “science writer” Seth Borenstein about “(T)he consequences for nature and humanity are sweeping and severe,” when she herself is not in possession of a shred of evidence she can point to or rely on to justify that patently hyberbolic statement, which is dishonest on her part, as well as fraudulent to make such hysterical claims without having any evidence whatsoever to support them.

As to her position with NOAA, since we American citizens are closed out of the proceedings of the IPCC by which she was elected an IPCC co-chair, we are informed of the following from a NOAA press release entitled “Ko Barrett named NOAA Research deputy assistant administrator” on Tuesday, July 12, 2016, to wit:

Craig McLean, NOAA’s assistant administrator for NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), has named Ko Barrett as the deputy assistant administrator for OAR Programs and Administration.

“Ko has many valuable skills that made her a sound choice for this leadership position, not the least of which are her experience in and knowledge of OAR and NOAA, a savvy sense of organizational and policy issues, and a willingness to challenge the status quo in unselfish and constructive ways,” said McLean.

Barrett comes to this position from seven years of serving as deputy director of OAR’s Climate Program Office, which oversees and coordinates climate activities across NOAA, addressing climate observations and monitoring, research and modeling, and the development and delivery of climate services.

For over 15 years, Barrett has represented the United States on delegations charged with negotiating and adopting scientific assessments undertaken by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international body created to review and assess the most recent scientific, technical, and socio-economic information produced worldwide that is relevant to understanding climate change.

end quotes

However, as we know, the IPCC does not carry out original research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena itself; rather, it assesses published literature including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources, which is to say, it cherry-picks the “science” it wants to support its position that all climate change on earth today is a function of human beings, not natural processes, which according to the IPCC, no longer function, despite having done so for millions of years prior to this.

So it is another falsehood to state that IPCC reports are relevant to understanding climate change, unless you are a true believer in the carbon dioxide theory of the IPCC, which is a perversion of the original science of Svante Arrhenius back in the early-1900s.

Getting back to the NOAA press release:

She is widely recognized as an expert on climate policy, particularly on issues related to climate impacts and strategies to help society adapt to a changing world.

Barrett currently serves as one of three vice chairs of the IPCC.

Prior to joining NOAA in 2005, Barrett was the director of the Global Climate Change program at the US Agency for International Development and oversaw climate activities in more than 40 countries.

end quotes

As to USAID, it’s mission statement reads as follows:

“As the U.S. Government’s principal leader, coordinator, and provider of international development and humanitarian assistance, USAID advances national security and economic prosperity, while demonstrating American values and goodwill abroad.”

“Our investments save lives, foster inclusive economic growth, reduce poverty, and strengthen democratic governance while helping other countries progress beyond needing our assistance.”

end quotes

As to their “vision of success,” we have:

“We anticipate, mitigate, and respond to global challenges, standing together with people affected by poverty and disaster.”

“The people we help achieve their own peace and prosperity and create stable institutions that respond to their needs.”

“We are recognized as the world’s premier development agency.”

“We are highly effective, efficient, accountable, and agile.”

end quotes

So, what has any of that to do with research into climate science, besides nothing, especially since Barrett only has a bachelor of science degree in environmental studies from the University of North Carolina Asheville?

What game is NOAA playing at here?

Stay tuned for more.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-204046
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR December 5, 2019 at 7:30 pm

Paul Plante says:

And let us stay with NOAA Deputy Assistant Administrator, Programs & Administration Ko Barrett for the moment as one of the key people and prime movers behind this irresponsible and reckless HYSTERIA-MONGERING in the media about a contrived “CLIMATE CRISIS” that is literally making people crazy and berserk with fear, as we were witness to just today in the AFP article “‘Do it for our children,’ parents plead at UN climate meet” on 5 Dec 2019, where we were informed as follows as to just how hysterical people like this Ko Barrett have made the public at large with their own reckless and hysterical statements about a “CLIMATE CRISIS, ” to wit:

Parents from around the globe Thursday said governments locked in negotiations at UN talks in Madrid must beat back the threat of global warming to “give our children the future that they deserve”.

end quotes

Beat back the threat of global warming?

Seriously, people, exactly how is that to be done, given that it is the earth that is in charge of what its climate is going to be at any given time and place, and not human beings?

That these people actually are asking these governments locked in negotiations at UN talks in Madrid to “beat back the threat of global warming” to “give our children the future that they deserve,” shows just how deluded they are about reality, and that is thanks to HYSTERIA MONGERS like NOAA’s Ko Barret, and this IPCC climate crisis crowd.

Staying with that AFP article, we have further, as follows:

“Our children are being handed a broken world on the verge of climate chaos and ecological breakdown,” they said in an open declaration from 222 associations in 27 countries.

end quotes

A broken world on the verge of climate chaos and ecological breakdown?

What is “climate chaos?”

And where on earth is it that they getting that term from, besides irresponsible hysteria-mongerers like NOAA’s Ko Barrett, because there is no such scientific term as “climate chaos,” which takes us back to the AFP story on just how hysterical NOAA’s Ko Barrett has made people with her irresponsible and reckless blather about a “climate crisis,” to wit:

“At our current rate of emissions, we are dangerously close to reaching tipping points which could unravel human civilisation within our own and our children’s lifetimes,” the declaration said.

“We are at a turning point in the story of our species, and you, the delegates of this influential UN climate summit, have an opportunity to choose what happens next.”

end quotes

So, people, there you are seeing in real time the results of this propaganda campaign based on contrived science that NOAA and the IPCC are using to make people so crazy with fear so they cannot think straight and thus are easily led down the garden path by a ring in their nose, with that crazy talk about us being “dangerously close to reaching tipping points which could unravel human civilisation within our own and our children’s lifetimes,” and “We are at a turning point in the story of our species.”

Keep repeating a lie over and over and over, as this IPCC crowd and Ko Barrett have been doing, and as this AFP article clearly shows, you can get the unwitting masses to think anything you want them to think, like the world is going to end and civilization, which was never raveled too tight to begin with, is going to unravel unless they surrender their futures and the futures of their grandchildren to this pack of fools meeting right now in Madrid who can’t even agree on what day it is, and Ko Barrett and the IPCC.

Closing out on Ko Barrett, since she is in many ways the star of this climate crisis show now on-going in Madrid, where of course, little Greta Thunberg and her crowd and marching and shrieking and chanting in the streets and creating clouds of toxic and noxious carbon dioxide each time they exhale, on a site called ZoomInfo, she has posted for herself a Business Profile, where we learn the following about what NOAA considers to be her qualifications to head up NOAA’s so-called “research” efforts despite only possessing a bachelor’s degree in environmental studies, which is a liberal arts survey program, to wit:

Ko Barrett leads the Global Climate Change Team for the US Agency for International Development .

She manages climate-related activities in more than 40 countries and regions around the world that seek to promote sustainable development, while minimizing the growth in greenhouse gas emissions and reducing vulnerability to climate change.

Ms. Barrett has held this position for five years.

Prior to working at USAID , she lived overseas for seven years, working on environment policy issues in Egypt and Ukraine.

end quotes

So, how does that then qualify her to be what is in essence NOAA’s top scientist in charge of what research is done, or not done?

A question for our times.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ent-204435
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 74159
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR December 8, 2019

Opinion: Pelosi announces formal surrender of US to IPCC


Opinion by Paul Plante

Yes, people, that is the gist as I understand it of a breaking news story in The Hill that announced that Speaker of the House and Democrat faction leader and San Francisco, California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and a whole passel of Democrats created a huge cloud of noxious and toxic carbon pollution flying over to Madrid, whether first-class, as befits her station, or military aircraft at present is unknown, so she and her entourage, which included a pet senator or two, could surrender the United States of America to governance by the IPCC, by by-passing Trump and bringing the United States of America back into that FARCE called the PARIS AGREEMEMNT, which Trump got us out of, precisely because it is a FARCE.

In the article in The Hill entitled “Pelosi: Congress has ‘iron-clad’ commitment to climate crisis” by Miranda Green on 2 December 2019, we and the candid world that watches were informed thusly concerning Leader Pelosi’s surprise trip to Madrid to surrender the United States of America to the IPCC, to wit:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) promised world leaders Monday that Democrats in Congress have an “iron-clad” commitment to addressing climate change despite the Trump’s administration rollback of multiple environmental efforts.

end quotes

Now, seriously, people – is there anyone out there who will be bold enough to step up to the plate in defense of Nancy Pelosi and explain to us how that is not just mindless drivel?

Does anyone have a clue as to what Nancy is on about when she says, “Democrats in Congress have an ‘iron-clad’ commitment to addressing climate change despite the Trump’s administration rollback of multiple environmental efforts,” given that the earth’s climate for the last several thousand years or more has never been constant nor stable, and instead has always been changing, sometimes quite rapidly?

Is she saying that the Democrats will finally yank their heads out of their collective ***** to study the basic high school science they so obviously missed if they don’t know that the earth’s climatic zones are constantly shifting?

Getting back to that breaking news:

Speaking at a United Nations conference in Madrid, Pelosi promised that the U.S. would continue to push for the goals set by the Paris climate agreement despite President Trump removing the country from the international pact.

end quotes

Except the Paris Agreement goals are pure horse****, as we can clearly see from p.10 of “Ecomodernism: Technology, Politics and The Climate Crisis” by Jonathan Symons, who is an Australian, by the way, not a Trump Republican, copyright 2019, to wit:

Social psychology also tells us that people are generally much more likely to acknowledge the existence of a threat if they believe others have caused it.

Consider the 2015 Paris Agreement’s aspirational target of limiting warming 1.5°C.

This goal was always a fantasy whose adoption suggests a collective desire to avoid difficult truths.

Even if all emissions ceased today, warming might eventually exceed 1.5°C (Hansen et al. 2008).

The more ambitious 2°C now also looks practically unfeasible.

Full implementation of the Paris Agreement pledges would bridge only about twenty-two percent of the gap between our current emissions trajectory and a pathway consistent with limiting this century’s warming to 2°C (UNFCCC 2015b, p. 44).

At the time of writing, no major developed economy is on track to meet even these feeble pledges Victor et al. 2017).

end quotes

And that is mirrored in the IPCC special report on global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius October 8th 2018 which was delivered to the Democrats in our Congress by little Greta Thunberg of Sweden in September of this year at their invitation in Chapter 4, to wit:

Limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels would require transformative systemic change, integrated with sustainable development.

Such change would require the upscaling and acceleration of the implementation of far-reaching, multilevel and cross-sectoral climate mitigation and addressing barriers.

Such systemic change would need to be linked to complementary adaptation actions, including transformational adaptation, especially for pathways that temporarily overshoot 1.5°C (medium evidence, high agreement) {Chapter 2, Chapter 3, 4.2.1, 4.4.5, 4.5}.

Current national pledges on mitigation and adaptation are not enough to stay below the Paris Agreement temperature limits and achieve its adaptation goals.

While transitions in energy efficiency, carbon intensity of fuels, electrification and land-use change are underway in various countries, limiting warming to 1.5°C will require a greater scale and pace of change to transform energy, land, urban and industrial systems globally. {4.3, 4.4, Cross-Chapter Box 9 in this Chapter}

Although multiple communities around the world are demonstrating the possibility of implementation consistent with 1.5°C pathways {Boxes 4.1-4.10}, very few countries, regions, cities, communities or businesses can currently make such a claim (high confidence).

To strengthen the global response, almost all countries would need to significantly raise their level of ambition.

In developing countries and for poor and vulnerable people, implementing the response would require financial, technological and other forms of support to build capacity, for which additional local, national and international resources would need to be mobilized (high confidence).

end quotes

So why would We, the American people with our own Constitution and laws and form of national government wish to jettison our Constitution and laws and form of national government to submit ourselves to governance by this foreign IPCC?

And since this is all common knowledge that the so-called Paris Agreement is a SHAM, why is Nancy Pelosi so hot to sell us out as an independent nation to this IPCC, which itself is a world government scheme?

Getting back to The Hill:

“Congress’s commitment to take action on the climate crisis is iron-clad,” she said.

“By coming here we want to say to everyone, ‘We’re still in.'”

“‘The United States is still in.'”

end quotes

And no, Nancy, there is where you are dead wrong, and you obviously do not read the Cape Charles Mirror, because We, the American people want nothing to do with that SCAM known as the Paris Agreement, from which we gain no benefits whatsoever as a people and as a nation!

Getting back to The Hill once again:

Flanked by 14 Democratic senators and representatives, Pelosi’s attendance at this year’s United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is meant to position congressional Democrats as counter figures to the White House, whose talking points have frequently derided the Paris climate accord, a capstone of the countries involved in this week’s international meeting.

end quotes

And yes, Nancy, we know – it is all about the childish, silly tit-for-tat infantile political games you Democrats are playing as you try to get even with Trump for being president instead of Hillary Clinton, and then for having the gall and temerity to investigate prominent Democrats for alleged corrupt acts.

And PHOTO OPS, which Nancy is a master of, as one can see by looking at the photo at the top of the story with Nancy and her entourage in front of the UN backdrop with Nancy looking quite regal and imperious people up this way are saying, a woman of great power in the world who knows she is in charge, not Trump, and who has no qualms about using that power, either, which takes us back to the narrative of Nancy in Madrid, to wit:

“It’s our moral responsibility, if you believe as do I that this planet is God’s creation and we must be stewards of it.”

“But if you don’t share that belief, we all agree we have a moral responsibility to our children to pass on this planet to our children in a very responsible way,” Pelosi said.

end quotes

Speaking as a grandfather, Nancy, I would say that it is our moral responsibility to not lie to children and fill their heads full of “CLIMATE CRISIS” bull**** to make them scared, when you and all the rest of the Democrats are in possession of no evidence whatsoever that there is a “climate crisis,” which is an invented term.

That is what our true moral responsibility is – to not teach our children FALSEHOODS implying that the Democrats in Congress actually have such control over nature as its “stewards” that they can literally make the earth stand still and have it be like sunny Burbank for everybody in the world, except the Russians, 24/7/365.

And finishing out that news:

Pelosi journeyed to the event as part of a bicameral delegation with members of Congress who have been key figures in the party’s climate action push, including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.).

The House in May passed a bill introduced by Castor that would force the U.S. to rejoin the Paris climate agreement and recommence steps to meet its emissions goals.

end quotes

Except there is no linkage between the two!

The United States of America does not need the Paris Agreement for it to reduce CO2 emissions.

The United States is a sovereign nation!

If its CO2 emissions need to be reduced, then it is totally within our power as a people and as a nation to reduce them.

So what then is Nancy Pelosi really doing in Madrid, beyond playing at childish partisan politics while making empty promises to the youth of America, exploiting them for partisan political gain in the 2020 presidential election?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... s-to-ipcc/
Post Reply