RISING CO2 IS DRIVING TROPICAL TREES INTO THE SUBTROPICS, AND AS
THE
RAIN ON THE SPANISH MAIN FALLS MORE WARMLY ON THE PLAINS,
THE PIRATE INFESTED PARROT JUNGLES OF
THE MAR A LAGO COAST
CAN GROW BALSA WOOD FOR WIND TURBINE & PEG-LEG PRODUCTION
IN ALEXANDRA CORTEZ'S MODERN SEQUEL TO PRESCOTT'S CONQUEST OF MEXICO, THE CONQUEST OF MARALAGO THE LATINX CONQUISTATRIX PONDERS UNLEASHING HER RED CLIMATE BRIGADES ON THE DREAD PIRATE TRUMP'S WATERFRONT REAL ESTATE TO END AMERICAN DEPENDENCE ON SPANISH RENEWABLE ENERGY MATERIALS LIKE PAULOWNIA WOOD:
In January, Twitter ubergeek Tucker Carlson interviewed Willie Soon, who delivered a Putin length stemwinder. Constrained by Carlson's rigorous fact checking, Soon limited himself to statements that fell into three broad categories:
1. : That's mildly interesting
2. : That's not true.
3. : That's wrong by several orders of magnitude.
Carlson reciprocated by introducing Soon as an " Astrophysicist and a geoscientist who spent 31 years at Harvard " albeit Soon's last academic post was as a John Birch Society summer camp science counselor. Soon , who has a UCLA aerospace engineering PhD. never attended Harvard or served on its faculty.
In 1994, lobbyist and Moonie science guru S. Fred Singer helped Soon secure a Smithsonian Institution post. After coauthoring a paper on solar variabilty with a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, which should not be confused with the Harvard Observatory. Soon used the Center as funding conduit, but was terminated nine years ago after it discovered that the "soft money" it received on his behalf was being granted in exchange for "deliverables" written in support of coal company efforts to downplay or deny the role of CO2, in climate forcing.
While some might wonder how life survived the 4 billion year Gas of Life drought preceding the advent of coal mining Carlsonnodded cheerfully throughout Soon's spiel.
However, those viewing it at leisure with access to science resources on the web
may find it edifying to keep score on science according to Soon asth interview progresses, using the handy peer review toolkit developed by Professor John Baez of the University of California:
A simple method for quantitatively rating potential contributions to science:
To score each Soon comment , add as you read:
1 point for every statement widely known to be false.
2 points for every clearly vacuous statement.
5 points for each such statement adhered to despite careful correction.
5 points for each thought experiment contradicting a real one.
10 points for each existing acronym expropriated, e.g. CERES
20 points for complaining an index like this "suppresses original thinkers"
20 points for every use of anecdote or myth as fact.
20 points for each use of " communist libtard" or "reactionary racist."
30 points for each public appearance with a person in a polar bear or chicken little suit
Willie Soon , at right 40 points for claiming that a "scientific establishment" or modern-day Inquisition is engaged in a "conspiracy" to suppress your work. 50 points for for comparing those opposing your ideas to Nazis, gangsters, or the KGB. 60 points for putting words in Einstein's mouth or chalk 100 points for displaying both in a single photoshopped image while pretending to take a call from President Trump:
Willie channels bogus Einstein quote while taking a call from a Trump impersonator
* The concentration of uranium in rocks is ~ 600 times higher than seawater, and as rocks are ~2.8 X denser than sea water Soon is off by a factor of a thousand.
Gavin Schmidt needed ten short REAL CLIMATE paragraphs to explain the latest demolition of the efforts of Willie Soon's "CERES team" to blame climate change on solar variability :
I predict that none of this will prevent Soon and colleagues continuing to cling to the original HS93, or it’s purported extension from Scafetta (which did not dig into the original methodology at all). But maybe they will surprise me. Maybe they will acknowledge the shenanigans and move on to more valid arguments? I won’t hold my breath.
Traditional analysis of heat conduction in materials assumes that heat diffuses (Fourier’s law) with exceptions only at the nanoscale.
Here, scrutinizing limits of this assumption, we examine translucent materials through which energy also transfers by electromagnetic radiation, and we perform the experiments in a vacuum to avoid air convection. We conclude that the independent pathway of energy transfer by electromagnetic radiation produces macroscopic-scale exceptions to predictions made using Fourier’s law. These empirical findings offer a challenge for theorists and a unique approach to engineer heat management.
The usual basis to analyze heat transfer within materials is the equation formulated 200 years ago, Fourier’s law, which is identical mathematically to the mass diffusion equation, Fick’s law. Revisiting this assumption regarding heat transport within translucent materials, performing the experiments in vacuum to avoid air convection, we compare the model predictions to infrared-based measurements with nearly mK temperature resolution. After heat pulses, we find macroscale non-Gaussian tails in the surface temperature profile. At steady state, we find macroscale anomalous hot spots when the sample is topographically rough, and this is validated by using two additional independent methods to measure surface temperature. These discrepancies from Fourier’s law for translucent materials suggest that internal radiation whose mean-free-path is millimeters interacts with defects to produce small heat sources that by secondary emission afford an additional, non-local mode of heat transport. For these polymer and inorganic glass materials, this suggests unique strategies of heat management design.
Since the verdict in Mann v. Steyn, WUWT , Climate Depot and Climate Etc. have hosted thousands of anonymous comments adducing the view that as 97% of contrarians think Steyn better informed than Mann they must be as well.
Readers are invited to score the amateur peer review process at Climate, Etc.
and WUWT as the discussion progresses, using the invaluable quantitative methodology developed by Professor John Baez of the University of California just before the hockey stick's Nature debut:
A simple method for quantitatively rating potential contributions to science:
To score each comment , add as you read:
A minus 5 point starting credit.
1 point for every statement widely seen to be false.
2 points for every clearly vacuous statement.
3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
5 points for each such statement adhered to despite careful correction.
5 points for each thought experiment contradicting a real one.
5 points for each word in all capital letters,
5 points for each mention of "Einstien", "Hawkins" or "Feynmann".
10 points for pointing out that you have an undergrad degree.
10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it.
10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves or finds any flaws in your theory.
10 points for each acronym you invent or misspelling you report in item 8.
10 points for asserting your theory is sound and just needs equations.
10 points for claiming that your work is a "paradigm shift".
20 points for complaining an index like this "suppresses original thinkers"
20 points for pointing to (insert name of Nova or National Geographic science episode here .)
20 points for every use of anecdote or myth as fact.
20 points for naming an equation after yourself.
20 points for talking about how great your theory is, but never actually explaining it.
20 points for each use of "libtard" or "reactionary racist."
30 points for claiming that your theory must be approbated by extraterrestrial civilizations
40 points for comparing those who argue against your ideas to Nazis, Maoists or the KGB.
40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to suppress your work.
40 points for suggesting a modern-day Inquisition is hard at work on your case.
50 points for claiming to have a revolutionary theory without testable predictions.
Seeking solutions to its water stresses, the Singaporean government has spent decades developing...A massive sewage recycling program purifies wastewater through microfiltration, reverse osmosis and ultraviolet irradiation, adding to drinking supply reservoirs. Dubbed “NEWater”
To help build people’s confidence in the safety, Singapore’s national water agency collaborated with a local craft brewery to create a line of beer made with only the finest ingredients:
WE THINK THE REAL PROBLEM IS PEOPLE WHO HATE CODFISH CAKES
[At] COP28 in Dubai, a panel of soil experts presented the case for cows as climate allies, not gas-spewing destroyers... Contrary to the anti-cow cacophony of the climate crisis crowd, these experts explained the vital role ruminants like cows play in nourishing and rebuilding precious soils. It turns out, grazing cows sequester massive amounts of carbon.
The Case for More Cows
The entire argument is premised on claims of enteric methane emissions from cattle confined in unnatural factory operations:
Rotationally grazed cows sequester more carbon dioxide in the soil with their manure than they emit when they burp. Cow manure rebuilds soils destroyed by synthetic fertilizers and other chemicals, nurturing microbial life that feeds on methane. Robust natural soils sequester more carbon dioxide than forests, yet bovines are denied any carbon credit.
The push to eliminate cows has been crafted by the same industrial forces that imprisoned them... Synthetic and fake meats grown from soy or corn harvested with tractors and chemicals do not rebuild soils, instead accelerating erosion and the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Cows are not the cause, but the solution, of climate change. Humanity needs more cows, not fewer! Those who say otherwise are simply manure deniers.
British soap operas cross-over for the first time to raise awareness for climate change
UK soap operas and dramas are joining forces for the first time in Britishtelevisionhistory to highlight the issue of climate change.
Casualty, Coronation Street, Doctors, Eastenders, Emmerdale, Holby City and Hollyoaks have all filmed scenes that cover different aspects of climate change and environmental issues.
Each programme will also reference one another for the first time; characters from other shows will appear to discuss moments debated in their respected shows... to commemorate theCOP26 climate summit and raise awareness for it.
Emmerdale’s Executive Producer, Jane Hudson, who commented: “Never before have all five soaps and both continuing dramas come together and united in telling one story.
“We certainly haven’t seen characters pop up in other shows before. This is a real treat for our audience, whilst also allowing us to get across a very important message.”
Kate Oates, Head of Continuing Drama at the BBC, added: “I’m thrilled that our soaps and serial dramas have all come together to help highlight the issue of climate change amongst our millions of viewers.
Make sure you check out the latest Net Hero Podcast episode:
THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL FOR THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE MAY BE SUBSTACKIAN ERIC HOEL'S JUST COMPLAINT OF CHEAP BOT-GHOSTED PSEUDOBOOKS:
"last year I published a nonfiction book, The World Behind the World, and now on Amazon I find this.
What, exactly, are these “workbooks” for my book? AI pollution. Synthetic trash heaps floating in the online ocean. The authors aren’t real people, some asshole just fed the manuscript into an AI and didn’t check when it spit out nonsensical summaries.
But it doesn’t matter, does it? A poor sod will click on the $9.99 purchase one day, and that’s all that’s needed for this scam to be profitable… Now that generative AI has dropped the cost of producing bullshit to near zero, we see clearly the future of the internet: a garbage dump.
Google search? ... amid the real things you’ll find dozens of AI-written summaries in response... and people openly shill their services for creating them... Scientific papers are being AI-generated. AI images mix into historical research.
THE CONSERVATIVE POLAR-BEAR ACTION COMMITTEE HAS TOLD TRUMP THAT EAST POLE SEA LEVEL HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THE PUNIC WARM PERIOD, DISMAYING CATASTROPHIC ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMISTS !
THE COMMITTEE FOR ALTERNATE CLIMATE THEORIES (CFACT) TOLD CPAC THAT DESPITE 3,000 YEARS OF "CLIMATE-CHANGING" FOSSIL FUEL FIRE WORSHIP
THE HIGH SEAS AROUND THE EAST POLE REMAIN 100% UN-CARBONATED & ICE AND POLAR BEAR-FREE.
For the past 35 years, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned us that emissions.. are causing dangerous global warming. This myth is blindly accepted — even by many of my science colleagues who know virtually nothing about climate.
As a scientist, my purpose here is to help expose this fairy tale. The global warming story is not a benign fantasy… Life on Earth is based on carbon! CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant!...
Dishonest climate scientists feel justified in spreading disinformation because they need governmental support for salaries and research.
However, it’s impossible to do appropriate experiments — unless the roof of your laboratory is at least six miles high... Columbia University geochemist Wallace Broecker (1975) and Columbia University adjunct professor James Hansen (1981) wrote oft-cited articles in Science magazine, both overstating the perils of CO2 causing dangerous global warming — without providing scientific proof...
If you try to find these facts on the web, good luck! ..The door of a nearby classroom displays a poster of Abraham Lincoln with the caption: “Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
RESEARCHGATE LAUDS DOCTOR NEBERT AS AN EMERITUS MEDICAL SCHOOL PROFESSOR BUT FINDS HE HAS PUBLISHED VIRTUALLY NOTHING ABOUT CLIMATOLOGY OR GEOPHYSICS.
The Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory has developed an AI model that predicts, and then figures out how to avoid fusuin power plasma becoming unstable and escaping the strong magnetic fields that hold it inside certain donut-shaped reactors. They published their findings Wednesday in Nature
Donut-shaped tokamak reactors rely on magnets to squeeze plasma particles close together and keep them constantly spinning around a ring, creating a lasting fusion reaction. They’re one of the front-runners in designs for a practical fusion reactor. But if there’s one little disruption to the magnetic field lines running through the plasma, the delicate balance keeping it all contained gets out of whack: The plasma escapes the magnets’ clutches and the reaction ends.
Chijin Xiao, a plasma physicist at the University of Saskatchewan who wasn’t involved in the study, explained that these instabilities can lead to catastrophic consequences. “When the plasma stops operating, there are several risks: one is that all the energy stored in the plasma is going to be released as thermal energy and may damage the wall of the reactor," she said. "More importantly, a sudden change in the [magnetic] current can introduce a great deal of force on the reactor that can really destroy the device. Xiao added that one of the biggest tokamak reactors around today, ITER in France, is only designed to withstand a few of these plasma disruptions before the whole machine has to be repaired—a huge expense. The goal is to catch instabilities while they’re small and intervene.
The Princeton lab’s model can predict so-called tearing mode instabilities 300 milliseconds before they happen. It doesn’t sound like a lot of heads-up, but it’s enough time to get the plasma under control, their study shows.
Researchers tested the algorithm on a real reactor, the DIII-D National Fusion Facility in San Diego. They saw that their AI-based system could control the power being pumped into the reactor and the shape of the plasma to keep the swirling particles in check.
Co-author Azarakhsh Jalalvand said in a statement that the success of the AI model comes from the fact that it was trained on real data from previous fusion experiments, rather than theoretical physics models.
“We don’t teach the reinforcement learning model all of the complex physics of a fusion reaction,” Jalalvand said. “We tell it what the goal is—to maintain a high-powered reaction—what to avoid—a tearing mode instability—and the knobs it can turn to achieve those outcomes. Over time, it learns the optimal pathway for achieving the goal of high power while avoiding the punishment of an instability.
”The study is significant, saidco-author Jaemin Seo, because previous models studiedhave only been able to suppress tearing instabilities after they happen. “Our approach allows us to predict and avoid those instabilities before they ever appear.”
But tearing mode instabilities are just one of the ways plasma can become unhinged. There are dozens of ways a glob of plasma can wobble, bend, or break apart: like a kinked garden hose, a fan, or even a sausage.
Nevertheless, tearing instabilities are one of the biggest challenges on the way to boundless clean fusion energy. “Tearing mode instabilities are one of the major causes of plasma disruption, and they will become even more prominent as we try to run fusion reactions at the high powers required to produce enough energy,” said Seo. “They are an important challenge for us to solve.”
Vladimir Putin awards “Order of Friendship” medal to Exxon CEO & Trump Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for “significant contribution to strengthening cooperation in the energy sector”
"The first week of February, I had the most bizarre experience of my life... I thank God I came home alive…The [video] producers said they appreciated Cornwall Alliance’s perspective… I’d expected a business-like setting... What I found was... the interviewer...was wearing a clown’s suit!
[He] had, they said, a TikTok channel with millions of viewers. The aim, they said, was to help calm young people’s fears about climate change."
Then, after about 20 minutes, the interviewer stood… to change into another clown costume, hanging on a barrier just off stage… after about another 15 minutes he stood and said he was going to change outfits again...
But this time he said I must do the same. I refused. They tried to persuade me, but they finally gave up, and we finished the interview—during some of which he began imitating mice, lions, or other animals… to hold the attention of the young TikTok audience
... I tried to just say something intelligent about the intended subject, but much of the time I just looked puzzled and even laughed...
By now I was, I confess, traumatized...they had about an hour’s worth of video of me struggling hard to say sensible things in response to questions and antics that were anything but sensible—and they could do anything they wanted with it.
Later I realized I had been wholly in their keeping, potentially in danger, because no one else I knew, not even my wife, knew where they’d taken me.
So, I thank God I came home alive—
I don’t know what will be done with that video footage. Will it surprise me by accurately depicting my words about climate and energy? Or, by creative video editing, will it make me look stupid, evil, or both?"
Beisner's fears seem odd given his standup performances at the Mandalay Bay Casino & Resort in Vegas :
“ satellites which re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere burn and create tiny alumina particles, which will float in the upper atmosphere for many years,”Takao Doi, a Japanese astronaut and aerospace engineer with Kyoto University, toldBBC News’ “Eventually, it will affect the environment of the Earth.”
In 2020, a team of Japanese researchers launched the LignoStella Space Wood Projectto test the durability of three different types of wood in space: Erman’s birch, Japanese cherry and magnolia bovate. They subjected the samples to exposure tests for more than 290 days on the International Space Station before returning them to Earth earlier this year. The team’s analysis found that despite the harsh conditions of space, the wood samples had no measurable changes in mass and showed no signs of decomposition or damage.
“When you use wood on Earth, you have the problems of burning, rotting and deformation, but in space, you don’t have those problems: There is no oxygen in space, so it doesn’t burn, and no living creatures live in them, so they don’t rot,” Koji Murata, a researcher at Kyoto University, tells CNN’s Rebecca Cairns.
"Anyone read Greta Thunberg’s book? or have an opinion about soup? Be substantive, be polite, be talking about climate"
Silvia Leahu-Aluassays
I do have an opinion about the soup. It reminded me of one of the famous ethical dilemmas: a museum is on fire, inside there is a dog and a unique painting, you can save only one, which one would you choose?
to point out our trivial preoccupations with and fetishization of our artifacts as opposed to life and the biosphere
… and question the huge investment in and ecological footprint of all art and other museums, while there are millions of unhoused people, the energy required to operate them could be used by people in need, the land occupied by the museums could have a myriad of truly valuable uses, the list of opportunity costs is long...
I do have an opinion about the soup. It reminded me of one of the famous ethical dilemmas: a museum is on fire, inside there is a dog and a unique painting, you can save only one, which one would you choose?