Tag: climategate

Eco Loons Suggest Proliferating A Plague Of Ticks To Prevent People Eating Meat

Perhaps it’s a drinking or smoking game at Western Michigan University. Try to come up with the most farcical, April Fool-style Net Zero nonsense and see if we can get it published.

How about writing a paper titled ‘Beneficial Bloodsucking’ that states it is “morally obligatory” to promote a plague of the lone star tick whose bite can lead to medical problems including an allergy to red meat. Oh, and it could kill you, but more about that later. Promoting these ghastly ticks, which are already increasing in numbers in large areas of the United States, is said to: “prevent the world from becoming a significantly worse place… doesn’t violate anyone’s rights… promotes virtuous action or character”.

How stupid can academics be? These clowns are prepared to unleash a proliferation of ticks on the general population because one side effect of a bite happens to induce an allergy to red meat, notably beef, pork and lamb. What is proposed is a deliberate tick injection of the sugar molecule alpha-gal into human tissue, leading to an immune defence response causing a syndrome known as AGS. This leads to potentially fatal allergic reactions to red meat and many associated products including dairy products such as milk, cheese, yoghurt and butter. Gelatine is also a problem, so no treats for children since it is found in many favourite brands of candy. It is not just mammalian products that cause problems. Alpha-gal-like structures have been found in carrageenan, a seaweed-derived thickener used in some processed food, and in a number of medicines.

It is feasible to genetically edit the disease-carrying capacity of ticks, state the authors.

“If we are right, then today we have the obligation to research and develop the capacity to proliferate tickborne AGS and, tomorrow, carry out that proliferation,” they add.

Tickborne AGS is said by these maniacs to be a “moral bioenhancer”.

So who are these temple-of-learning thickos, these climate-bothering cretins who are promoting a widespread Net Zero fantasy to abolish the eating of meat?

Keep reading

MSNBC Contributor Claims He’s More Afraid of Climate Change Than Crime in Washington, DC

If you needed more proof that MSNBC is not a serious news network, you’re in luck.

During a recent appearance, frequent guest Anand Giridharadas tried to downplay crime in Washington, DC by listing the things he is more concerned about, such as climate change, losing his vote, whatever that means, and other imaginary problems.

At one point, he manages to throw in a concern about the middle class, which is funny because the left abandoned them years ago.

He says that there is a crime problem in DC but qualifies it as a small one and accuses Trump of being an authoritarian. How original.

Transcript via Real Clear Politics:

ANAND GIRIDHARADAS: Crime is real. It is blown out of proportion. People are feeling much more unsafe than they statistically are—but the feeling matters. People deserve to be safe, but they also deserve to feel safe.

I think it is true that Democrats have sometimes ignored or lectured people, holding a spreadsheet of statistics. That said, it’s really important to be clear about what is going on here: a relatively small crime problem is being used for specific authoritarian purposes that we know and understand.

Let’s be clear—D.C. does have one really big crime problem, which was the January 6th insurrection incited by the current president of the United States. His first act in coming back was pardoning all the people who tried to overturn constitutional order in Washington, D.C.

When I go to D.C., I’m not afraid of losing my wallet so much as I’m afraid of losing my vote. I’m not afraid of losing my wallet so much as I’m afraid that my children’s freedom to breathe will be stolen in a world where climate change policy is nonexistent. I’m afraid that the future of middle-class people will be stolen by the very things you were talking about cutting—the safety net, Medicaid, rural hospitals.

If you watch the video below, you’ll notice that Joe Scarborough jumps in at the end, trying to save the segment. It doesn’t work.

Keep reading

Push To Cut Livestock For Climate Goals (Due To Burping & Farting) Worries UK Farmers, Ecologists

UK government advisers have urged deep cuts to the country’s cattle and sheep numbers to reduce the overall levels of methane emissions.

Officials insist no mass cull is planned.

But farmers are concerned that it’s part of a growing push to reduce livestock levels, which could sacrifice traditional grazing and damage the fragile ecosystems it supports. 

The UK’s net-zero policies go further than those of the European Commission, where cattle farms remain outside regulatory crosshairs until next year.

In February, the UK’s independent adviser on climate action, the Climate Change Committee (CCC), whose advice strongly guides government policy, recommended a 27 percent decrease in cattle and sheep numbers by 2040 in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

According to the UK government, agriculture is the country’s largest source of domestic methane emissions, accounting for 49 percent of total emissions. Of this, around 85 percent of agricultural methane comes from cows and other ruminant animals through enteric fermentation and is released as mostly burps but also flatulence.

One discussed option in the House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee’s 2024 report as a mitigation strategy included “reducing ruminant livestock numbers, enabled by dietary change and reduced food waste.”

‘It’s Completely Backwards’

Britain’s livestock farms, which are mostly grass-based, are integrated into the iconic patchwork countryside, with sheep and cattle grazing in open fields divided by hedgerows and stone walls as part of a complex natural ecosystem.

Alan Hughes, a fourth-generation tenant farmer who is part of the Farmers to Action agricultural rights campaign, told The Epoch Times that wider net-zero proposals on livestock ignore the ecological function of grazing.

“It’s completely backwards to stop grazing. It causes fires, which then releases far more CO₂ than the livestock sequence by grazing,” he said.

He added that without sheep grazing, “sheep don’t eat the dry matter,” which then turns to kindling.

“This then starts wildfires, from the peat and from the crops which should have been eaten by the sheep, which causes a massive release of CO₂,” he said.

Beyond fire risk, Hughes said that reducing livestock also damages food security and degrades natural ecosystems.

“The biggest issue we’re going to have before long is not enough protein to feed our population, which is why they’re looking at bugs,” he said.

“If they force us to do more, I call it ‘less natural’ ways of production. If you don’t have livestock grazing, you don’t have the manure or improve the biodiversity of soil, and that’s when you get soil erosion, which causes deserts, or you’re forced to do vegetable crops.

“Now, when you plow up a field for vegetable crops, you kill the root structure of grass. Now that then turns to methane and carbon dioxide, which is actually released.”

Keep reading

Trump moves to shut down NASA missions that measure carbon dioxide and plant health

The Trump administration is moving to shut down two NASA missions that monitor a potent greenhouse gas and plant health, potentially shutting off an important source of data for scientists, policymakers and farmers.

President Donald Trump’s budget request for fiscal year 2026 includes no money for the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, which can precisely show where carbon dioxide is being emitted and absorbed and how well crops are growing.

NASA said in an emailed statement Wednesday that the missions were “beyond their prime mission” and being terminated “to align with the President’s agenda and budget priorities.”

But the missions — a free-flying satellite launched in 2014 and an instrument attached to the International Space Station in 2019 that include technology used in the Hubble Space Telescope — still are more sensitive and accurate than any other systems in the world, operating or planned, and a “national asset” that should be saved, said David Crisp, a retired NASA scientist who led their development.

They helped scientists discover, for example, that the Amazon rain forest emits more carbon dioxide than it absorbs, while boreal forests in Canada, Russia and places where permafrost is melting absorb more than they emit, Crisp said.

Keep reading

Before The Supposed Climate Change Crisis Could Ruin John Kerry’s Posh Neighborhood – Drug Addicts Did It Instead

Former Secretary of State and climate change alarmist John Kerry’s high-class neighborhood has reportedly been overrun with drug users, who ironically did more damage to the area than his supposed extreme weather events.

Kerry’s been preaching about climate-change consequences for decades. Yet before any of the hypothetical chaos had a chance to affect him, liberal governance brought another plague to his doorstep: Addiction.

Back in 2007, Kerry spoke with the Council on Foreign Relations about how climate change is “a national security issue.”

The former senator was introduced as having spoken out “on the topic of climate change for some 20 years now and has promoted hi-tech green solutions to stabilizing climate change and called attention to the economic risks of failing to address climate change. He’s also [an] advocate for the adoption of innovative and strategic national energy policy.”

Kerry’s 2009 claim in a Huffington Post op-ed that the Arctic would be “ice free by the summer of 2013” was examined by PolitiFact and judged to be “mostly false” at the time.

“Scientists project that the Arctic will be ice-free in the summer of 2013. Not in 2050, but four years from now,” Kerry wrote. “Make no mistake: catastrophic climate change represents a threat to human security, global stability, and — yes — even to American national security.”

In 2017, when Kerry paid $11.75 million for property on the water in Martha’s Vineyard, he didn’t seem too concerned about rising sea levels or climate catastrophes.

Fast forward to today, and an actual crisis is playing out in Beacon Hill, where Kerry also owns property, according to Fox News.

Local residents are complaining that city leaders aren’t doing enough to contain open drug use in the streets, creating a chaotic situation.

“Prior to this year, I’ve never seen the Boston Common, Cambridge Street or the Esplanade get this overrun with drug paraphernalia or folks in crisis,” resident Katherine Kennedy said. “As a mother of two small children, this is very scary.”

Boston’s Democratic mayor hasn’t helped the situation, either.

Back in 2022, Mayor Michelle Wu launched a needle exchange program, which also included distributing free pipes for smoking crack or meth.

Wu defended the program, claiming it prevents addicts from contracting diseases that could spread into the general populace, WHDH in Boston reported.

So, using liberal logic, we should spend billions — even trillions — of dollars on climate-change funding with no questions asked, despite its ever-changing benchmark. But when it comes to a drug epidemic, we should feed the fire by giving out free paraphernalia?

Keep reading

Devastating US Report Lays Bare The Abuses Of ‘Settled’ Climate Science And Its Role In Net Zero

Net Zero is dead in the United States and the last rites have been administered in the devastating official report from the Department of Energy. Released earlier this week, the report cancels the decades-long censorship imposed by so-called ‘settled’ climate science. It is compiled by five eminent scientists and is a systematic take-down of the claims, methodologies and motivations driving activist scientists, politicians and opinion formers promoting the hard-Left Net Zero fantasy. Despite its ground-breaking importance, to date it has been largely ignored by mainstream media including the BBC and Guardian.

Computer models are said to offer “little guidance” on how much of the climate responds to higher levels of carbon dioxide, most extreme weather events are not increasing, sea levels in North America show no increasing trend while weather attribution claims are challenged by natural climate variation along with an admission that they were originally designed with ‘lawfare’ in mind. For Anthony Watts, who has spent decades challenging the ‘settled’ politicised science, the most important consideration is that the report, “directly confronts the exaggerated and politicised rhetoric that has dominated headlines for decades”.

Watts, who runs the Watts Up With That? (WUWT?) site that was responsible for publicising the infamous Climategate scandal, argues that the new report is unique in that it has both official status and author independence. It is not a think tank paper or an article in a ‘dissenting’ journal.

“It’s rare to see scientists of this calibre (with backgrounds at NASA, IPCC and major universities) allowed to directly challenge prevailing policy narratives with government resources behind them”, he notes.

The work is a “comprehensive critique” quoting extensively from peer-reviewed literature with clear explanations of scientific uncertainties and climate model error. 

For regular readers of WUWT? and other inquiring publications such as the Daily Sceptic, many of the issues discussed in the report will be familiar. In the last four years, your correspondent has written nearly 500 articles on climate science and Net Zero in an attempt to fill in the significant reporting gaps left by the narrative-driven mainstream media. Many of the papers quoted are familiar, not least in the section that deals with the sensational ‘greening’ of the planet caused by higher levels of CO2. 

The report quotes from recent work that shows extensive plant and crop growth due to the atmospheric fertilisation that has enhanced photosynthesis and improved water use efficiency. Over the past 60+ years, the authors observe that there have been thousands of studies on the response of plants to rising CO2 levels, and the overwhelming theme is that they benefit from the extra gas. In 2016, Zhu et al detected greening over 25%–50% of the planet. But there is a near official news blackout on the subject. A few mentions can be found in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports but overall, observe the authors, “the Policymakers Summaries, Technical Summaries and [IPCC] Synthesis reports of AR5 and ASR6 do not discuss the topic”.

Keep reading

Three new studies challenge decades-old climate dogmas on sea level rise

For years, climate reports have relentlessly painted a bleak picture: the ice caps are melting, the oceans are rising, and humanity is on the brink of catastrophic flooding.

The motivation for the recently published opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was justified, among other things, by the dangers to islands and coastal areas. ” Rising temperatures are leading to the melting of ice sheets and glaciers, resulting in a rise in sea levels and threatening coastal communities with unprecedented flooding.” These unprecedented floods, by the way, have been predicted for 40 or more years, each five years in a row. But let’s look at the scientific evidence on this. Personally, I’m going to Venice to see if the islands there have finally sunk under water since their founding in 421.

We have heard it again and again from politicians, activists and the media who want to dramatize every rise in global temperatures as an unprecedented catastrophe.

We know that the Holocene Temperature Maximum, during the ongoing interglacial period, was warmer in Greenland than today, at about 4–8.5°C. Amazingly, despite this warmth, global sea level was lower than today. How is this possible if models predicting catastrophic sea level rise are correct? If the Greenland ice cap survived such warming without flooding the coasts, how does this fit with claims that the current moderate warming will do so?

Keep reading

Mainstream Naysayers Gather As Hopes Rise For 4th Year Of Record Coral On The Great Barrier Reef

In the next few days, the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) will issue its annual report on the state of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). For alarmists promoting the Net Zero fantasy the news has been dire over the last three years, with record coral reported across the largest reef in the world.

Such is the obvious despair even daft excuses suggesting it is the wrong type of coral have been heard.

Faced with inconvenient facts, the usual groomed game plan in mainstream media has been to issue dire warnings of possible imminent collapse and then keep schtum when the sensational figures surface.

Recently the BBC gave us its “’underwater bushfire’ cooking Australia’s reefs”. Alas, the Australian Government’s Reef Authority is less cataclysmic in its reporting, noting indications in June this year that there were “no current heat stresses across the Reef”. Between April 14th and May 31st, 342 impact inspections were carried out which found coral bleaching on just three of the 34 reefs surveyed.

Keep reading

Climate Alarmists Wrong: Increased Economic Damage Doesn’t Prove Storms Are Getting Worse

One of the indicators that climate alarmists use to push the climate crisis narrative is the increasing cost of storms.

The logic appears straightforward: a storm that did $10 million in damage must be more severe than one that did $1 million in damage, and since storms cost less money in the past, they claim this proves that storms are getting more severe.

They also set dollar thresholds for severe storms, and since more storms exceed this dollar threshold, they claim that severe storms are occurring more frequently.

However, this reasoning fundamentally misunderstands the economic factors driving storm damage costs.

According to data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), since 1980, there have been 403 billion-dollar weather disasters in the United States, with tropical cyclones causing over $1.5 trillion in total damage.

In 2024 alone, the U.S. experienced 27 billion-dollar disasters resulting in $182.7 billion in damages. Climate activists point to these numbers as evidence of worsening storms, but this analysis reveals a critical flaw in their methodology.

The $1 billion threshold used to classify “severe” storms is fixed and not adjusted for inflation beyond the basic Consumer Price Index.

According to NOAA’s Climate.gov, this flawed approach has resulted in 57 events since 1980 that were originally below the billion-dollar threshold but are now classified as billion-dollar disasters simply due to inflation.

This artificial inflation of severe storm counts creates the false impression that dangerous storms are becoming more frequent when, in reality, the monetary threshold has simply lost its meaning over time.

Inflation has turned million-dollar storms into billion-dollar ones. The effect is clear in historical comparisons. Hurricane Katrina caused $125 billion in damage in 2005—equivalent to $200 billion today, according to WCNC.

Hurricane Harvey’s $125 billion in 2017 would equal about $159 billion in 2024, a $33 billion jump in just seven years. Most striking is the 1926 Great Miami Hurricane, which cost $105 million at the time but would have caused $236 billion in 2018, per the Washington Post.

These examples show how inflation alone can make storms seem far more “severe” over time.

Keep reading

EPA Chief Lee Zeldin to Rescind ‘Holy Grail of the Climate Change Religion’ That Led to $1 Trillion in Regulations

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin on Tuesday released the agency’s proposal to rescind what he has described as the “holy grail of the climate change religion,” which has led to over a trillion dollars in regulatory impact.

Zeldin made the announcement to repeal the Obama-era Endangerment Finding at an auto dealer in Indiana alongside U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, Gov. Mike Braun (R-IN), Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, and American Trucking Association President and CEO Chris Spear.

The EPA has said the Endangerment Finding has been used to justify over $1 trillion in regulations, including the Biden-Harris administration’s electric vehicle mandate. Scrapping the so-called Endangerment Finding would repeal all of the greenhouse emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines and give Americans consumer choice.

The Endangerment Finding created the legal basis for the agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, believing that the emissions serve as an alleged threat to public health and welfare.

Zeldin explained in a Breitbart Fight Club Roundtable that the Endangerment Finding never made a “straight-line conclusion” that carbon dioxide from motor vehicle engines caused “endangerment.” He described this finding as the “holy grail of the climate change religion.”

Keep reading