“Climate Change” News: Unpicking the narrative one stitch at a time…
by Rhoda Wilson
Analysis of surveys proves the Great Barrier Reef is recovering while at the same time a “star marine ecologist” is found to have committed fabrication and falsification in her scientific work on fish behaviour and coral reefs.
Become a paid subscriber: support the “Do NOT comply.” It’s 8 cents a day.
Geoengineering Watch exposes the US military’s involvement in using “wildfires” as a weapon. A huge UK electric car battery factory is put on “life-support” and a report from California reveals why climate alarmists haven’t planned for storage of “clean” energy – they plan to turn off your electricity when they feel like it.
Great Barrier Reef Recovery: Technical Details of Coral Cover Statistics, and Background
Peter Ridd used data from the Australian Institute of Marine Science (“AIMS”) surveys to construct the coral cover since 1986 (Figure 1) which shows that the Great Barrier Reef (“GBR”) has a record high coral cover.
Using these data, the coral cover for the entire reef can be calculated by averaging all the sectors and is found to be 33.9% with an uncertainty of about 4%. This assumes equal weighting for each sector. AIMS no longer does this last calculation to get the average for the entire GBR (of 33.9%), i.e., AIMS no longer provides the final average statistic that is of most interest. It shows data for individual reefs, sector data, and region data, but not the average/aggregate for the entire GBR.
AIMS no longer provides an average coral cover for the entire GBR because they have previously made far-reaching claims about the poor state of the GBR based on data of GBR-wide average data. For example, when the coral cover hit a low point in 2011 after major cyclones destroyed large amounts of coral, AIMS authors (De’ath et al., 2012) wrote in a very high-profile paper, that was widely quoted in the world media, the following:
Without significant changes to the rates of disturbance and coral growth, coral cover in the central and southern regions of the GBR is likely to decline to 5–10% by 2022. The future of the GBR, therefore, depends on decisive action. Although world governments continue to debate the need to cap greenhouse gas emissions, reducing the local and regional pressures is one way to strengthen the natural resilience of ecosystems.
Coral cover reduces after major cyclones, when coral-eating starfish numbers increase, and after some bleaching events. Coral cover at a given location usually takes five to ten years to recover from these events.
This prediction of 5-10% for 2022 has turned out to be incorrect as the average coral cover for all the regions is now over 30%. By no longer publishing the GBR average, it obscures the good data for 2022, and their inaccurate prediction of a decade ago.
Read more: Climate Science Press, 4 August 2022 and Jennifer Marohasy, 5 August 2022
Star Marine Ecologist Committed Misconduct, University Says
A major controversy in marine biology took a new twist last week when the University of Delaware (UD) found one of its star scientists guilty of research misconduct.
Marine ecologist Danielle Dixson committed fabrication and falsification in work on fish behaviour and coral reefs. The university is seeking the retraction of three of Dixson’s papers and “has notified the appropriate federal agencies,” a spokesperson says.
The investigative panel’s draft report paints a damning picture of Dixson’s scientific work, which included many studies that appeared to show Earth’s rising carbon dioxide (CO2) levels can have dramatic effects on fish behaviour and ecology.
Read more: Science, 9 August 2022
Wildfires as a Weapon: US Military Exposed
Is the military-industrial complex insane enough to incinerate Earth’s last remaining forests to achieve the objectives of the global controllers?
The short answer is yes. A formerly classified US military document titled ‘Forest Fire as a Military Weapon’ is a truly shocking exposé of planned scorched Earth destruction. The US Forest Service actually participated in the research and planning that went into this military instruction manual for carrying out orchestrated forest fire catastrophes.
What part have climate intervention operations played in the preparation of forests for extreme and unprecedented incineration all over the world?
The short video report below reveals the shocking degree of research that the US military and the US Forest Service have put into preparing forests for extreme incineration.
Read more: Geoengineering Watch, 11 August 2022
Big Green Lie: Why Endless Subsidies to Wind & Solar Won’t Make the Weather Any Better
If climate change is a problem, then wind turbines and solar panels aren’t a solution: heavily subsidised and unreliable wind and solar are an economic and environmental disaster.
The most widely celebrated paper in recent years on the economics of climate change concludes that green-energy subsidies mostly just increase total energy consumption rather than displace fossil fuels. The impact on CO2 and temperatures is “minuscule,” according to Princeton’s José Luis Cruz Álvarez and Esteban Rossi-Hansberg.
But organised green interests want your money; voters want a warm feeling from being told they’re doing something about climate change (as long as it doesn’t involve a carbon tax).
Read more: Climate Science Press, 9 August 2022
Huge UK Electric Car Battery Factory On ‘Life Support’ To Cut Costs
Construction of a huge electric car battery factory that has attracted tens of millions of pounds of taxpayer cash and been hailed as a flagship project of Boris Johnson’s levelling up policy has been put on “life support” to cut spending, leaked internal documents suggest.
Britishvolt, which since its formation in 2019 has made a string of increasingly ambitious promises about powering the boom in electric cars, chose the “life support” option to “minimise cash out”, the presentation dated 25 July suggests.
Britishvolt and ISG, its main construction contractor, said the pause affected only some parts of the project while they awaited final designs which are due in October. Britishvolt said “life support” in the documents only referred to specific “packages of work as we optimise the design”.
Read more: Climate Science Press, 12 August 2022
We’ll Turn Off Your Electricity When We Feel Like It
Francis Menton has had occasion to look carefully into the plans of many countries and US states that claim to be the “leaders” in climate virtue, specifically on the subject of how they intend to reach the goal of Net Zero carbon emissions from the generation of electricity. These climate “leaders” include Europe, Germany and the UK, and in the US, California and New York.
One would think that for any jurisdiction pursuing Net Zero ambitions, and seeking to abolish the use of fossil fuels, it would be completely imperative that some energy storage solution absolutely must be found to provide back-up for the electricity system when the wind and sun are not producing. But what Menton’s research has shown is that every one of these jurisdictions seeking to be the leader toward Net Zero has given astoundingly insufficient consideration to the energy storage problem.
The single most astounding universal failure of all jurisdictions pursuing Net Zero is the failure to pursue any sort of working prototype or demonstration project of a Net Zero electricity system before committing the entire jurisdiction to the project based on a blank check to be paid by the taxpayers and ratepayers.
So, what will the future of energy usage actually look like in these places as fossil fuels get phased out and wind and solar take over, with woefully insufficient energy storage to cover the intermittencies?
To get an idea look at the Report for California put out by consultancy Energy Innovations on 9 May, with the title ‘Achieving an Equitable and Reliable 85 Percent Clean Electricity System by 2030 in California‘.
Read through the report until you get into pages in the mid-30s, where the subject becomes what they euphemistically call “demand response”:
Demand-side measures can substitute for supply-side resources and therefore contribute to resource diversity; their increased availability hedges against the risk of deploying new clean supply-side resources too slowly (including generators and storage).
This is bureaucratese meaning “we’ll turn off your electricity at random times when we feel like it.” Get ready for this, California, Germany, et al.
Read more: Manhattan Contrarian, 28 July 2022
There is no such thing as fossil fuels, they are abiotic fuels.
Do NOT comply.
Become a paid subscriber: support the “Do NOT comply.” It’s 8 cents a day.