Facebook Debuts New Climate Change Info Center

Facebook is honing its propaganda machine with its third “Information Center” in recent months, this one focusing on Climate Change. The ‘settled science’ of global warming is not worthy to be called pseudo-science, but rather it is really ‘fraudulent science.’ ⁃ TN Editor

If you’ve logged on to your Facebook today, you may have already noticed something a little different at the top of your feed.

Today, Facebook launched its new Climate Science Information Center, its third information center in the last few months, following the COVID-19 Information Center and the Voter Information Center.

Users can access the Climate Science Information Center at the top of their Facebook feed or as a tool. It appears as though Facebook “will continue to apply warning labels to demonstrably false information,” according to NBC News. By clicking the link, users will be redirected to information and pages promoting the existence of climate change. Otherwise, Facebook has released little specific information about how the new Information Center will impact users’ usual Facebook experience.

The inclusion of this information center appears to be yet another instance of Facebook caving to the left’s demands.

Just as recently as July of this year, several Democratic politicians had expressed “concerns over reports that Facebook is exempting climate change misinformation from fact-checking,”G according to The Hill.

Facebook claimed in a blog post that “The Climate Science Information Center is a dedicated space on Facebook with factual resources from the world’s leading climate organizations and actionable steps people can take in their everyday lives to combat climate change.”

“We believe a lot of our users are particularly interested in climate science,” Nick Clegg, Facebook’s vice president of global affairs, said in an interview with NBC. He added that there is “a very strong political push around the world for more action.”

Read full story here…




Environmentalists Cause Environmental Disaster In Europe

Under the guise of saving the environment by cutting CO2 emissions, environmentalists demanded wood pellets be used as a source of non-fossil fuel, “enviro-friendly’, heating. Deforestation is now up 49% as they cut down the trees to make pellets. Well, duh! ⁃ TN Editor

Wood pellets.

Swiss meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann calls it “the dumbest energy and environmental policy ever”. Now, finally, after years of being warned, Germany’s mainstream media are finally showing signs of waking up to it.

Germany’s flagship ARD public broadcasting recently presented a report earlier today about how “CO2 neutral” wood burning is leading to widespread deforestation across northern Europe – a rather embarrassing development for the Europeans, who recently expressed their condemnation over Brazilian forest policy.

Deforestation up 49%

The ARD’s “Das Erste” reports how satellite images show deforestation has risen 49% since 2016 in Sweden, Finland and the Baltic countries. The reason: “Because of the CO2 targets. That sounds totally crazy but precisely because of the trend to renewable energies is in part responsible for deforestation in Estonia,” says the Das Erste moderator.

Having spent some time working for the EU, Liiana Steinberg explains in the report how she recently returned to her native Estonia and was shocked to see how much deforestation had taken place over the recent years (2:25). “I discovered how the forests no longer exists here left and right.”

For “CO2-neutral” wood pellets

Where once massive hardwoods once stood now grows tiny fir trees. The harvested trees, the report says, were used for wood pellets – a form of renewable green energy. The trees, the pellet industry says, will grow back.

Not only are the forests taking a hit, but so is the wildlife that once inhabited in them. According to Ms. Steinberg, bird life has fallen some 25%. “It’s wasted. Now we have to start all over again.”

Idiots “follow the science”

Climate activists, including the media like ARD, have long insisted that burning trees was good for the climate and environment because the emitted CO2 would simply be recycled back into nature – “follow the science” they insisted again and again. But they failed to understand that trees, depending on their age, acted as sinks and that some 100 years of stored carbon would be unloaded into the atmosphere in just a matter of hours if burned for heat.

It’s sad that they are just waking up to this (maybe).

Read full story here…




Club Of Rome: Planetary Emergency Plan Declared

Club of Rome was originally founded at a meeting in David Rockefeller’s house in Bellagio, Italy, and promoted alarmism over population growth. Its 1973 book, Limits to Growth, coincided with the creation of the Trilateral Commission, also by Rockefeller. They are still at it.

This text is taken from the Club of Rome’s 2002 report, Planetary Emergency Plan: Securing a New Deal for People, Nature and Climate.

In that the Great Panic of 2020 (pandemic) is currently dominating the new cycle, don’t think for a minute that radical climate change alarmism has gone away. To the contrary, it is just waiting for the massive funding that will be sprung during the Great Reset. ⁃ TN Editor

For 10,000 years, human civilisation has grown and thrived because of Earth’s remarkable climate stability and rich biological diversity. In the last 50 years, human activity has severly undermined this resilience. Our patterns of economic growth, development, production and consumption are pushing the Earth’s life-support systems beyond their natural boundaries. The stability of these systems – our global commons on which we so fundamentally depend – is now at risk. The science is clear that we are now accelerating towards tipping points and that the consequences of inaction will be catastrophic for humanity. The time to act is running out.

This is a Planetary Emergency. The definition of an emergency is a dangerous event requiring immediate action to reduce risk of potentially catastrophic results. The impacts of climate change and ecological destruction are more severe and are manifesting themselves earlier than many scientific predictions in previous decades had foreseen. The most authoritative global scientific assessments conclude that without major interventions, the risks will soon reach a critical stage. We need to stabilise the climate at 1.5°C above pre-industrial temperatures, halt the loss of biodiversity, slow polar ice sheet melt and glacier retreat, protect critical biomes and store more carbon in soils, forests and oceans. This is how we will guarantee the longterm health and well-being of both people and planet. To do that, however, our response to this complex emergency must reflect the intricate links between life on our planet and the systems that regulate it. It must address the convergence of crises and tipping points which have created this Planetary Emergency. We have no more time for incremental, siloed policy action.

2020 is a “Super Year” for international policy action. It is the 75th anniversary of the United Nations. It is the first opportunity for nations to increase climate ambition and meet 2050 net-zero goals. A new treaty on the oceans will be agreed. Biodiversity targets will be announced. And 2020 will mark the beginning of the decade to scale action to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. This decade must be a turning point, the moment when the world bends the curve, averts the impending disaster and opts instead to embark on the fastest economic transformation in our history. Declaring a Planetary Emergency provides a new compass for nations and injects the essential urgency into decision-making. It will ensure that all action from 2020 will be taken in light of its impact on the stability of Earth’s life-support systems, and be underpinned by the social and economic transformations needed to secure the long-term health and well-being of people and planet. While our efforts should be global, our responses must be local. They should be tailored to local needs, resources and cultures to ensure they have maximum impact and work to everyone’s advantage.

The existential risk is real. Yet, the opportunities to not just avert disaster but to rebuild, improve and regenerate are readily available. History has shown that humanity is remarkably resilient. We are well adapted to respond to disaster through cooperation and innovation. But the potential consequences we face this time are different – we have a narrow window to act now to reduce risk or avoid catastrophe. We don’t know how to reconstruct the cryosphere, the hydrological cycle, the rainforests, coral reefs and all other life-support systems on Earth. Once the emergency fully manifests itself, it will simply be too late to reverse the breakdown. As well as halting climate change and protecting nature, these efforts will improve health, livelihoods and equity and create more liveable and sustainable cities and rural communities.

Our proposed commitments and underpinning action are of the scale needed to respond to the emergency facing people and planet. Our aim is to protect the Global Commons through 10 clear commitments, and ensure they are met by immediately implementing a set of transformational policy and market levers. This is our insurance policy to emerge from emergency and guarantee a just transition for all.

We invite nations to discuss the case for a Planetary Emergency Plan. We propose such a plan be founded on the urgent need to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, to reach carbon-neutrality by 2050, while halting biodiversity loss and protecting essential Global Commons. Such an initiative is consistent with the Sustainable Development Goals to end poverty and improve quality of life. We can emerge from emergency to a world which benefits all species, within planetary boundaries and leaving no one behind. This is the world we envisage, and the world to which we must all aspire.

The Rationale For Emergency Action

The science is clear: the climate and biodiversity are fully integrated and interdependent. Every year since the Industrial Revolution, land-based and ocean ecosystems have absorbed close to half of all emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Without nature’s ability to absorb and store our GHG emissions, we would have already exceeded 2°C of warming, with potentially disastrous consequences. Breaching this threshold of warming could push the planet towards irreversible and catastrophic biosphere feedbacks

When climate change alters a chink in the planetary system, it can set off a chain of negative feedback loops. Increasing droughts, for instance, are reducing the ability of tropical forests to store carbon, making them more prone to fires, releasing yet more GHG emissions. The significant loss of the Cryosphere has reduced the albedo capacity of key Earth systems to reflect heat away from the planet. The higher the temperature, the more permafrost thaws, with greater emissions of both CO2 and methane, leading to even greater warming and triggering further negative feedback loops.

At least one million species risk disappearance, many within decades7 . Food chains could disintegrate and vital ecosystems collapse. Species diversity and ecosystems integrity play a fundamental role in regulating the climate, water cycles, carbon sequestration and food production.

Read full story here…

 




Germany Threatens Naomi Seibt With Prison Over Climate ‘Denialism’

Naomi Seibt is the non-alarmist counterpart of hysterical Greta Thunberg. Naomi brings logic and facts to the table on climate change and encourages people to think, but she is the one who German authorities want to throw in jail. ⁃ TN Editor

The response to our appeal for Naomi Seibt has been splendid – but more of us need to help her, because the State Media Authority in North Rhine Westphalia, in the hope of interfering with Naomi’s right to post YouTube videos critical of the Party Line on climate, have menaced her not only with two enormous fines and two sets of costs but also with prison.

Naomi really, really needs our help. If you have already donated, many thanks for your generosity. More than $1000 a month has been pledged in just 24 hours. Keep it coming – she’ll need every penny. Just donate to Naomi directly. Do it now, if not sooner.

Naomi’s defense lawyer has already scored one success: the Authority has been compelled to abandon its campaign to force her to take down the first of the three videos it has complained of, because she made it long before she had met anyone from the Heartland Institute, which the Authority dislikes because they regard her single mention of it in one of the three videos complained of as constituting “product placement”, contrary to the anti-free-speech law of North Rhine Westphalia, where she lives.

Though the two videos of which the Authority continues to complain would constitute a first offense – Naomi is only 19, after all, and cannot be expected to have known that free speech had been shut down in her part of Germany by an obscure and inspissate law – the Authority is trying to make her pay a fine of 1000 euros plus another 200 euros costs for each of the two videos: total 2400 euros. If she doesn’t pay, this is the threat these wretches have made:

“If the enforcement of the penalty payment is unsuccessful, the competent administrative court may, upon application by the enforcement authorities, order first-time compulsory detention. The substitute compulsory detention is at least one day and at most two weeks.”

I WANT YOU TO THINK

Welcome to the Heartland Institute 2020

Posted Feb 11, 2020

Hello, everyone. My name is Naomi Seibt and I am a new member at the Heartland Institute. And I’ve got very good news for you. The world is not ending because of climate change. In fact, 12 years from now we will still be around, casually taking photos on our iPhone 18s, Tweeting about the current President on Twitter and ranting about the latest celebrity gossip. However, we are currently being force-fed a very dystopian agenda of climate alarmism that tells us that we as humans are destroying the planet and that the young people especially have no future: that the animals are dying, that we are ruining nature.

I truly believe that many members of Antifa, Fridays for Future groups, Rebellion Extinction, I really believe that many of them have good intentions but they are genuinely scared of the world ending, and scared that their parents and grandparents are ruining the planet, that it’s breaking relationships, it’s breaking up families, and we at the Heartland Institute, we want to spread truth about the science behind climate realism, which is essentially the opposite of climate alarmism.

Many people are now actually developing mental disorders, and referring to it as eco-anxiety and eco-depression. And I believe it is important that we act now and change this entire mainstream narrative of fear-mongering and climate alarmism, because it’s basically just holding us hostage in our own brains.

With all of that said, don’t let an agenda that is trying to depict you as an energy-sucking leech on the planet get into your brain and take away all of your passionate spirit.

I don’t want you to panic. I want you to think.

Would you inflict a fine of 1000 euros plus 200 euros costs, or up to two weeks’ jail in lieu, for that short, harmless video that does little more than announce to Naomi’s 46,000 subscribers that she was going to work for the Heartland Institute? This was a first “offense” – if “offense” were the right word, which of course it is not. Would you imprison a teenager who had not actually said or done anything wrong, except to exercise her right of free speech in terms of the European Human Rights Convention? No. But welcome to today’s Europe.

Here’s the full text of the second video, which doesn’t mention Heartland at all. It is a speech that Naomi gave in Germany. Heartland had absolutely nothing to do with it, did not pay for it and did not influence the content in any way. Much of the material, including data and even some direct quotations, came from a speech that Naomi had heard me give in Munich a few weeks previously:

ANTI-GRETA or PRO-HUMAN?

Posted Feb 16, 2020

Manmade climate change has become a topic so unquestionable that everyone who dares to express even just a hint of scepticism is immediately labelled a “Climate Denier”. And, out of all people, it is the ones who tend to call us “Nazis” who fail to realize that this is a truly disgusting way to mock the severity of the Holocaust. I personally prefer the term “Climate Realist”. [Applause]

But why should you, in the context of such a profound and scientific topic, listen to some girl with long blonde hair giving a speech? And – yes, exactly – this question, “Why are you listening to a young girl?”, is the same question that I ask the people who go out and protest for Fridays for Future every single week,as Greta-worshippers.

And this is why I ask you not to believe every word I say unconditionally, but to give me a chance to speak, to listen carefully, and then to continue doing your research and form your own opinion on the climate change situation and any other political topic. I can be wrong sometimes. Don’t create an ideology out of something that a young girl has to say, regardless of the political side she’s on.

All the predictions that the IPCC, which you have probably heard of before, has published since 1990 have not been supported by the empirical evidence. In the last copule of decades global warming has been way less severe than initially foretold by the IPCC. They calimed that we would have tro expect a third of a degree of global warming per decade. Well, that prediction failed, so they are now calling it “Climate Change” instead of “Global Warming”. On top of that, they overestimated the magnitude of global warming even despite the fact that CO2 emissions have been increasing more than anticipated by the IPCC – which shows us just how successful all those political “Climate Conferences” with their CO2 reduction goals have been in recent years.

Moreover, all hypotheses that the IPCC has put out there are entirely based on climate models. So this means that they come up with lots of climate-related variables that they think will have an effect on global warming. But in reality those variables cannot possibly describe climate processes accurately, because the climate is way too complex to be depicted by a computer model. We have to consider so many factors, such as the makeup of the Earth’s surface, feedback responses, from water in all of its aggregate phases, mechanisms in the atmosphere – and what about the Sun? Has anyone considered the immense impact that the Sun has on the climate in comparison to manmade CO2 emissions?
The IPCC’s climate models predict that you get a warming effect of 4.1 degrees per doubling of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. However, when we apply the reverse calculation with real temperature data since 1850, we will find that CO2 emissions only account for 1.4 degrees of actual extra warming. So that means that those climate models are calculating with amplifying factors that artificially inflate the global warming prognoses.

But what is so dangerous about all of this is that we are now doing real politics with this fictional science – and that does not work. [Applause]

Man overestimates his power if he thinks that his plastic straw could have any significant effect at all on the climate. Furthermore, it is incredibly primitive to confuse “climate “ with “weather” in the same breath, which is what most people do. This overestimation of Man’s power leads to a hysterical implementation of climate policies and we must not tolerate such an impulsive reaction because the consequences for our society will be detrimental. We know that.

The scientific scepticism of climate alarmists fails in the face of even the most simple questions: What is the ideal global mean surface temperature for the Earth? [Applause]. Has anyone ever given you an answer to that question? And if not, that means that we don’t even have any kind of foundation upon which we can base an evaluation of the repercussions of global warming. Perhaps global warming isn’t even that detrimental. But as long as we don’t answer simple questions, we cannot tolerate impulsive political reactions. [Applause] And this is exactly what becomes evident: it is not about science. It is all about politics. It is about the suppression of scepticism. It is about the suppression of free science and free speech, and that’s why we have to fight back. [Applause]

And they all worship Greta, a young and innocent, but als an utterly immature and uneducated girl who is being shamelessly taken advantage of for the perfidious agenda of climate hysteria. And this is why I want to make this very clear: I am not the anti-Greta. Because that is exactly the label that those protesters outside want me to embrace, so that they have another scapegoat whom they can put in a simple box with the rest of their adversaries.

The message that I want to send out is way more than “Anti-Greta”. I am not “Anti-Greta”. I don’t force anyone to give up their dogmas about climate change. I want us to havew more opportunities for discussion. I want us to listen to one another. And I want us to be allowed to be scientific sceptics. [Applause]

Instead, by misrepresenting us in the media, chanting malicious slogans to defame us and prohibiting us from making public appearances, they want to strip us of every opportunity to speak up, because our words and free thoughts are a threat to those whose world-views are no more than an ideological complex on shaky foundations. [Applause]

No, I am not “Anti-Greta”, and we are not “Climate Deniers”. We must not let anyone degrade us and make us members of the controlled opposition. For we have our own positive ambitions, ideas and qualities. We are not “Anti-Nature”, but “Pro-Science, “Pro-Innovation”, “Pro-Sensible Environemtnal Policies”; and, most importantly, we are “Pro-Human”. [Applause]

The true Anti attitude belongs to the enemies of reason – the proponents of anti-humanism. [Applause]

We are not parasites on the planet. For hundreds of years we have been exploring, researching, inventing and building for a healthier, better and freer society. We must not put ourselves into a tight strait-jacket of overtaxation. We must not deny to ourselves, nor to the people from very poor third-world countries, access to cheap and reliable energy. We must not take away the young generation’s hope for a good future and drive them into an eco-depression. [Applause]

So please do not leave this event with a profound rage against Greta or the protesters or even the media who might want to depict us as Climate Deniers or radical right-wing egoists. It’s time we put an end to this depressing “Anti” attitude. Rage and panic belong to our opponents. [Applause]

My last words to you: I don’t want you to panic. I want you to think. [Standing ovation]

Some commenters on my first piece about this burgeoning international scandal could not quite believe that fines – and, as it now turns out, menaces of imprisonment – could possibly have been issued in what is supposed to be a democratic country without any court hearing. But that is exactly what happened.

Worse, when the Authority demanded that Naomi should reply to its original letter, it gave her a frighteningly short time to reply in detail. Yet she had been very ill with an ailment that came quite close to proving fatal, so her lawyer wrote to ask for more time. The Authority paid no attention and issued the demand for fines and costs regardless.

Read full story here…




How Green Globalists Exploit The Great Panic Of 2020

For Technocracy, it’s business a usual. The goal is to kill Capitalism and Free Market Economy and replace it with Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. The object of fear drives people in whatever direction the Technocrats choose. ⁃ TN Editor

Get ready for the “new normal.” Deep State globalists and environmentalists, along with their legions of followers, are literally celebrating the coronavirus pandemic as an opportunity to completely remake the world to suit their wishes. From Hollywood celebrities and United Nations bigwigs to government leaders and Big Business, elites around the globe are coming out of the closet and revealing their true agenda. In short, it means less freedom and less prosperity for you — and a lot more power for them. Think of the coronavirus lockdown as a test drive.

Leading the charge for weaponizing coronavirus to promote a global environmental regime has been the UN. In a screed demanding trillions of dollars from governments, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for nations to “recover better” from the pandemic by making sure that their development going forward is in line with the UN’s vision on “climate” and sustainable development. The Socialist Party operative, who led the Socialist International before taking over the UN, has been banging the climate drums almost from the start of the coronavirus outbreak.

Just this week, writing in the New York Times, Guterres spelled out the agenda. “Addressing climate change and Covid-19 simultaneously and at enough scale requires a response stronger than any seen before to safeguard lives and livelihoods,” he said, proposing “six climate-positive actions” for governments to take while “building back” their economies and societies. “A recovery from the coronavirus crisis must not take us just back to where we were last summer. It is an opportunity to build more sustainable and inclusive economies and societies.”

He has been parroting that theme a lot lately. “We have a rare and short window of opportunity to rebuild our world for the better,” he said last week at a climate meeting in Berlin, calling for “brave” leadership to address the “looming existential threat” of global warming amid coronavirus. “Let us use the pandemic recovery to provide a foundation for a safe, healthy, inclusive and more resilient world for all people.” In particular, Guterres urged the European Union superstate to show “global leadership” on the green agenda. Already, many EU governments are forcing companies to become “green” in exchange for help surviving the shutdown they themselves mandated.

On the global economic front, the UN chief made clear that governments all over the world should also exploit the shutdown and the massive “stimulus” spending to bring about permanent changes to the economy, the energy sector, business, and more. “Where taxpayers’ money is used to rescue businesses, it must be creating green jobs and sustainable and inclusive growth,” he said. “It must not be bailing out outdated, polluting, carbon-intensive industries.”

“Like the coronavirus, greenhouse gases respect no boundaries,” he added, using typical globalist rhetoric about “global problems” supposedly requiring “global solutions.”

Governments are falling in line. Aside from globalist European leaders, leftist U.S. governors are also lining up to exploit the crisis to advance their pet issues — especially “climate” and “environment” goals. Washington State Governor Jay Inslee, for instance, told Bloomberg the parallels between coronavirus and climate show that everyone must obey “science.” “They have a very different time scale, but there are a lot of similarities in the best way to address both,” he said. “Number one is the most important: You’ve got to be aware of and accept the science and make decisions based on data — even if that is uncomfortable.”

In other words, forget liberty and self-government — technocracy and rule by “experts” and “scientists” armed with dubious “data” will determine the future course of humanity, even if it is “uncomfortable.”

Even the supposedly Conservative government of Boris Johnson in the United Kingdom has jumped on the bandwagon. Speaking via video link to the climate summit in Berlin, U.K. Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said that when coronavirus recedes, “it will be the duty of every responsible government to see that our economies are revived and rebuilt in a way that will stand the test of time.” “That means investing in industries and infrastructure that can turn the tide on climate change,” he told the assembled globalists and government officials.

Hollywood celebrities added their voices to the corona chorus, too. Just this week, a gaggle of some 200 celebrities and scientists issued an editorial in a major French newspaper demanding “radical transformation” of the world’s economy and values in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Supposedly, this “profound overhaul of our goals, values, and economies” will help avoid “the massive extinction of life on Earth.” Among those signing the “No To A Return To Normal” were Madonna, Robert De Niro, Jane Fonda, and many more you have probably never heard of.

Media propaganda on the issue has been deafening. The U.K. Guardian, perhaps the world’s main peddler of climate hysteria, but by no means unique, claimed there was “data” and “scientific research” supposedly showing that global-warming and coronavirus “are linked,” and apparently this is very “clear.” The paper did not bother to cite any data, instead writing a story around a 30-year-old climate activist named Emily Atkin. The activist claims those who reject her views are “just stupid” and that there is some sort of giant conspiracy of “climate denial” that also rejects what she considers to be the appropriate level of hysteria over coronavirus.

Anti-human extremists in the press have actually been celebrating the potential of coronavirus to advance their “climate” agenda for months. On March 5, for example, Times of London columnist Ed Conway wrote a piece celebrating the possibility that the virus would kill large numbers of “old” people, who, “let’s face it, are more likely to be climate skeptics.” He also cheered on the economic collapse, arguing that it would help reduce human-released “greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere by grounding planes and reducing economic activity.

Even Pope Francis has jumped on the bandwagon. Infuriating Catholics around the world, the left-wing pontiff even suggested that the coronavirus was Mother Earth’s revenge for humanity’s lack of environmental concern. “Is it possible that this is nature’s hour of reckoning with us?” he wondered, suggesting the Earth was “having a fit” in response to the supposed “ecological sin” and pollution of mankind. “There’s a saying that you surely know: God always forgives, we forgive sometimes, [but] nature never forgives.”

ClimateDepot.com editor Marc Morano, the world’s most-quoted climate realist, commented on the growing extremism of climate alarmists celebrating coronavirus as an opportunity to re-shape the world. “If you like living under the coronavirus fears and government-mandated lockdowns, then you’ll love living your life under a ‘climate emergency’,” Morano said in a special report compiling quotes from alarmists. Indeed, governments’ ostensible responses to coronavirus have already enacted many long-sought goals of the climate movement, he explained, pointing to shutting down air travel, stopping economic growth, reduced energy consumption, and more.

Interestingly, technocracy expert Patrick Wood, author of two books on the subject, documented the links between coronavirus alarmists and the climate alarmists and sustainability zealots. Consider the self-styled “global university” known as Imperial College London, which was at the center of the fear-mongering operation used to trigger societal lock-downs and economic shutdowns worldwide, using now-debunked forecasts and projections. Aside from being funded by Bill Gates, the university specializes in promoting the UN’s “sustainable development” agenda and climate hysteria. Wood also pointed out that phony models were used to drum up fear over coronavirus, just like on climate.

Read full story here…




christiana figueres

Christiana Figueres Blasts ‘Irresponsible’ Governments Over COVID-19

Former UN head of Climate Change Christiana Figueres succinctly ties together COVID-19 and Climate Change hysterias in order to drive the deep economic transformation of Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. This would mean spending stimulus funds on ‘decarbonization’ projects. ⁃ TN Editor

The U.S., the U.K. and Brazil have been “nothing but irresponsible” in their isolationist approaches to the coronavirus crisis, and such stances will weaken the global response to climate change, climate action advocate Christiana Figueres has said. At the same time, she claimed, the pandemic had created an opportunity to “reinvent” the economy in a way that valued sustainable outcomes over growth.

Figueres, the former UN Executive Secretary for Climate Change, made the comments yesterday to an online audience at the U.K.’s Hay Festival of Literature and Arts, which this year is being held digitally because of the ongoing coronavirus lockdown.

“There is one responsibility that governments everywhere have, and that is to protect their citizens,” Figueres said, referring to the huge death tolls from COVID-19 seen in Britain and America. On the other hand, she said, “those countries that have managed to protect their citizens from the worst of COVID-19 have done their job, and they are probably the ones who are doing a better job on climate change.” Figueres singled out Germany, Iceland, Finland, New Zealand and Denmark as countries that in her view had dealt effectively with the pandemic threat.

Speaking to Tom Rivett-Carnac, a strategist for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Figueres stressed the need for more international cooperation to combat climate change, but that the coronavirus pandemic had the power to force countries to work together. 

The coronavirus recovery was “a huge forced collaboration exercise, because it’s the only way through this,” she said. “Those countries that want to exempt themselves and be isolationist about it may have very difficult measures to deal with, because borders may not be open to their citizens.”

Figueres and Rivett-Carnac discussed the necessity for the global community to reduce cumulative emissions by 7.5% per year by 2030, in order to stay on track with the recommended Paris Agreement target of restricting global warming to 1.5 Celsius by 2100. In order to achieve this, they said, the $15-20 trillion dollars of funding so far earmarked for the global economic recovery from the pandemic would need to support a coherent strategy of decarbonization, instead of being funnelled into a strategy of returning the world to the way it was prior to the pandemic.

“If that money is put into high carbon assets … then there is no way that any [separate] policies and measures on decarbonizing the economy could possibly reach the impact that those $20 trillion are going to have because they will dwarf any efforts on climate change,” Figueres said. That sort of money, she believed, “will define the contours of the global economy for at least the [following] decade.”

Tom Rivett-Carnac, who along with Figueres co-authored The Future We Choose, a book that explores a global response on climate action, said in his view the 2020s were “the most consequential decade in human history,” in which the world would need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50%, defining the climate outcomes for the rest of the 21st century. 

Figueres hailed efforts in Europe by governments and private companies to urge the EU to make the European Green Deal a cornerstone of any recovery measures, and highlighted Spain’s recent move to draft a law to ban all new hydrocarbon projects in an effort to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2050.

Read full story here…




Global Cooling

Global Cooling Gives Nightmares To Global Warming Alarmists

Cycles of sun spots are fairly predictable and the current cycle is looking more and more like the Maunder Minimum that created the “Little Ice Age” between 1650 and 1715. The story below is largely propaganda that minimizes the story of impending global cooling.

The article also cites Imperial College London, which was directly responsible for the Great Panic of 2020 when it released Professor Neil Ferguson’s trashy computer model on the COVID-19 pandemic.

With global warming’s dead horse, this alarmist crowd needed a new champion to drive the world into their coveted deep transformation, and the coronavirus was the perfect replacement. ⁃ TN Editor

The sun has entered an unusually quiet period, with the number of sunspots appearing on the surface unusually low. This level of activity is so low, some scientists have suggested we may be entering a “deep” solar minimum, and potentially even a Grand Minimum—the last of which took place in the 17th century and coincided with a mini ice age.

The sun has an 11-year cycle where activity waxes and wanes. This is caused by the strengthening and weakening of its magnetic field. The point when activity is highest is known as the solar maximum, which is characterized by more sunspots appearing on the surface. The solar minimum is where activity falls, and far fewer sunspots appear. The last solar maximum peaked in 2014.

In April last year, scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicted the forthcoming solar minimum would be similar to the last cycle. In a statement, Lisa Upton, Ph.D., solar physicist with Space Systems Research Corp, said the next solar cycle would be much like the last, with a weak maximum and a “long, deep minimum.” However, she also said there was “no indication” we are approaching a solar minimum in line with the last Grand Minimum—known as the Maunder Minimum.

So far this year, there have been 104 days where no sunspots have appeared on the sun’s surface, according to SpaceWeather.com. Across the whole of 2019, there were 281 sunspot-free days. As the website notes, the lack of activity on the sun suggests the solar minimum is taking place. “So far this year, the sun has been blank 76 percent of the time, a rate surpassed only once before in the Space Age,” it said. “Last year, 2019, the sun was blank 77 percent of the time. Two consecutive years of record-setting spotlessness adds up to a very deep Solar Minimum, indeed.”

Mathew Owens, Professor of Space Physics at the University of Reading, U.K., told Newsweek that entering a solar minimum is not unusual, but the level of activity currently taking place is out of the ordinary. “The Sun has been ‘spotless’ for a large fraction of the last year, which is indeed quieter than is typical,” he said in an email. “It’s still a little early to say where it fits relative to other minima we’ve seen. If it does continue in this fashion, it may well rank up there with the longer minima on record. But at present it is not unprecedented; in fact, the very previous solar minimum [2009-2010] was longer.”

Read full story here…




Climate Scientists, Stars Call For ‘New Normal’ After Pandemic

Radical climate change agenda has now completely dovetailed with the Great Panic of 2020, based on COVID-19. The goal is to drive the world into the United Nations’ Sustainable Development economic system, aka Technocracy. ⁃ TN Editor

A host of celebrities and scientists including Madonna, Robert de Niro and a clutch of Nobel Prize winners have called for radical change in the world rather than “a return to normal” after the coronavirus lockdowns.

Hollywood stars Cate Blanchett, Jane Fonda, Marion Cotillard and Monica Bellucci also added their names to the open letter published in the French daily Le Monde pleading for an end to unbridled consumerism and a “radical transformation” of economies to help save the planet.

“We believe it is unthinkable to ‘go back to normal’,” said the letter which was also signed by Nobel laureates for medicine, chemistry and physics as well as peace prize winner Muhammad Yunus.

They said the pandemic was a tragedy but it was a chance for humanity to “examine what is essential”.

“Adjustments are not enough. The problem is systemic,” the letter added.

“The ongoing ecological catastrophe is a meta-crisis. Unlike a pandemic… a global ecological collapse will have immeasurable consequences,” it said.

The 200 signatories said it was time for leaders “to leave behind the unsustainable logic that still prevails and to undertake a profound overhaul of our goals, values, and economies.

Read full story here…




‘Green New Deal’ Will Look Like Pandemic Lockdown

Green New Deal advocates are thrilled over the pandemic lockdown of America and the world, claiming that the 6% reduction in CO2 is just what the world needs to beat global warming. The Green New Deal, aka Technocracy, is anti-civilization and anti-human. ⁃ TN Editor

When socialist darling Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez first floated her “Green New Deal,” it was an intangible vision for society rather than a concrete policy proposal. Even after the New York Democrat and her acolytes added details (including a ban on airplanes and flatulent cows) in a voluminous range of policies costing an astounding $93 trillion, the idea of running the economy without fossil fuels seemed unthinkable.

Now, however, thanks to the pandemic lockdown of society, the public is in a position to judge what the “Green New Deal” revolution would look like. It’s like redoing this global pandemic and economic slump every year.

Environmental activists say the silver lining of the lockdown is that carbon emissions will drop by nearly 6% globally this year because of reduced travel and industrial emissions. Climate hawks such as Ocasio-Cortez call for this level of reduction every year. The United Nations Environment Programme goes even further, demanding 7.6% each year to stave off climate change.

“This is what ‘rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society’ looks like,” prominent climate activist Eric Holthaus wrote on Twitter. “We’re doing it. It’s possible!”

“That’s the whole point of a Green New Deal,” he continued. “We can build a better world for everyone out of the ashes of the old one.”

Ocasio-Cortez, incorrectly pointing to falling oil prices as a boon to green energy, agrees that the coronavirus shutdown reflects her vision of a climate change solution.

This is intellectually unimpressive, but at least it’s honest. The socialist greens acknowledge that the meltdown and shutdown we’re enduring (with gritted teeth) is what their climate agenda entails. They’re right.

Read full story here…




Greta Thunberg

Greta: Coronavirus Key To Choosing ‘New Way Forward’

As predicted, climate change alarmists are coming out of the woodwork to link COVID-19 hysteria to Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. Greta promotes the use of ‘science’ in fighting threats to humanity. ⁃ TN Editor
 

 Countries have a chance to choose a new path as societies begin to return to normal after lockdowns imposed to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, activist Greta Thunberg told an Earth Day event on Wednesday.

Thunberg, who shot to fame as a 15-year-old when she started skipping school on Fridays to protest over carbon emissions outside Sweden’s parliament building, said the outbreak showed the need for long-term thinking.

“Whether we like it not the world has changed, it looks completely different from how it did a few months ago and it will probably not look the same again and we are going to have to choose a new way forward,” she said.

“If one single virus can destroy economies in a matter of weeks, it shows we are not thinking long term and we are not taking these risks into account.”

She was taking part in a streamed event to mark Earth Day, launched 50 years ago to highlight environmental challenges.

Last year was the hottest on record in Europe, according to a study released on Wednesday by the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service.

Thunberg’s school strikes calling for climate action sparked a global movement and transformed the now 17-year-old into the equivalent of an environmental rock star.

Drawing on her statement to the World Economic Forum last year, in which she said: “I want you to act as if our house is on fire. Because it is,” her Fridays for Future movement released a video to mark Earth Day showing a family carrying out their normal routine, despite flames licking round their home.

But not everyone agrees with her approach. U.S President Donald Trump in December urged her to “work on her Anger Management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie”.

And while some still question the role of human activity in the rise in temperatures, opinions are also divided on the best approach to handling coronavirus.

Read full story here…