“A game changer for addressing climate change.” “It has a role to play in litigation and in policy, because it gives us that precision.” The game changer that gives precision? A “fast-emerging field of climate research” called attribution science that “is helping scientists pinpoint just how many dollars from a natural disaster can be tied to the historic emissions of individual oil companies.”
Am loving the world of AI - the data peddling data center building bandwidth leasing crowd tells us that data is the solution. Except that when it doesn't fit their narrative.......then what? Today's prize is the "data" that has Germans admitting they "falsified" data about their nukes so they could get them shut down. This is from their own files so we'll assume for now it's valid.
So what happens when people realize that one thing that we have proven we can live without, since we did for millennia already? It's not food, water, or fuel. It's the Internet! We could start DeIndustrializing with shutting it down during peak demand for Tesla charging to avoid having to build so many new gas fired power plants for data centers. Let's get this party started.
Since ‘the scientists’ agree that some climate change is natural but cannot say how much is natural and Human - at least half and probably more, which means they don’t know, how does the attribution thingy work to attribute a wildfire, part to nature and part to fossil fuels? Natural disaster is traditionally described as Act of God. So God will soon be getting nearly as many law suits against him as Donald Trump.
In the 1970s, most ‘civilised’ Countries closed their lunatic asylums - we are now enjoying the consequences.
Yes. And *surely* these totally objective advocates, I mean scientists, will also accurately attribute the *benefits* that fossil fuel use provides (less pollution than burning biomass or lignite... looking at you, Germany), not to mention the *benefits* cheap, reliable electricity provide. /sarc
Honest application of the precautionary principle requires examining costs AND benefits.
As we know, "There are no solutions, only trade-offs."
At its very soul, the essence of the entire modern progressive movement is an old Christian myth that a world without people would be a return to the Garden of Eden.
This book is still relevant to explain what they are really trying to do
Many dont. I come from a whole family of very intelligent, highly educated liberals. And one of my close friends for a long time was a VP for NPR and went on to become an important pastor. They just dont realize that the party they support has changed. Its appalling how much people can lie to themselves. But think about Germany from 1925 to 1940. Same kind of change, it happened gradually....
When your livelihood, your whole lifestyle, depends upon you not seeing something, then it does not matter how big, bright, and flashing it is, you wont see it........
Hi Irva, it beggars belief, I am just flaggersted as to how seemingly intelligent people can promote this nonsense. They appear to have no concept of foresight or consequences.
How long will it be until they just get tired of it, noticing to their great disappointment that they would still be able to vacation in the Maldives, if the plane fair wasn't so dammed expensive?
The US National Security Archive has just released declassified documents on global warming and carbon dioxide emissions from the Nixon administration 50 years ago. That global warming was even a concern in the early 1970s is surprising in the era overwhelmingly concerned with global cooling and the return of an Ice Age. It may be useful context and provide important historical evolution of the environmental obsession of our own era.
Since links aren’t permitted on Substack, here’s the email introduction:
Washington, D.C., April 26, 2024 - High-level officials inside the Nixon administration debated climate change and the impacts of sea level rise, extreme temperatures, and fossil fuel consumption as early as 1969, according to declassified documents posted today by the National Security Archive’s Climate Change Transparency Project.
To celebrate Earth Day, the National Security Archive this week publishes a small collection of records from the Nixon Presidential Library and other sources that shed light on the internal debates Nixon advisors were having about climate change and related issues amid the rise of the American environmental movement of the 1970s. The records published here today include correspondence between Nixon aide Daniel Patrick Moynihan, domestic affairs adviser John Ehrlichman, and the Deputy Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Hubert Heffner, among others, and provide new details on what was a first-of-its-kind White House climatic assessment initiated in 1971.
The Nixon-era documents posted today are a reminder that the policies and rhetoric of U.S. conservatives toward environmental issues have not always been as divisive and vitriolic as in recent years. On the one hand, Nixon was an unlikely environmental reformist, who was often disdainful of environmental activism. But Democrats and Republicans also found much common ground on environmental issues, and key officials in the Nixon White House were free to discuss and debate the origins and impacts of climate change and the implications for government policy without the level of polarization often seen today. As a result, President Nixon left a significant environmental legacy, fostering the passage of important legislation and the establishment of key agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
I was at a wine tasting fundraiser last night for approximately two and a half hours. Attribution science clearly points to those dastardly wine reps as the root cause of why I feel so lousy this morning. Shameful behavior from all of them!
The claims made by the purveyors of attribution-whatever, are the most ridiculous I have ever heard. As for their so called model, may this be the permanent definition of "GIGO" (garbage in garbage out). I am glad you gave us a moment to reflect on the comment about not investing in technology that was government subsidy dependent. This is the best example yet of the leader of the circular firing squad telling his men, "We have met the enemy, & it is us." This was an excellent way to start my Friday. Thanks Irina. 🤘😎🤘
The worst of this insanity, at least here in the US, is when (not if) blackouts begin in ‘blue’ cities, the benighted citizens won’t know why it’s happening.
It's all kinda insanity. It's like ppl would be train to become insane. To deny the rational thinking, to deny reality they see. Well... cheer up! And look up which region or big country uses more energy per capita. EU? USA? And... again - cheer up! :)
Ah yes, just what we need…another dismal science with computer modeling. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, they’re progressives. By definition they can never cease destroying our lives.
Some days it just seems hopeless. But then I think about all the hands working out in the oil patch and coal mines, the pipeliners, refinery workers, power plant operators, linemen, and so on. It gives me some hope to think that these folks are still hard at work trying to make sure we have access to the energy we need for our way of life.
Am loving the world of AI - the data peddling data center building bandwidth leasing crowd tells us that data is the solution. Except that when it doesn't fit their narrative.......then what? Today's prize is the "data" that has Germans admitting they "falsified" data about their nukes so they could get them shut down. This is from their own files so we'll assume for now it's valid.
So what happens when people realize that one thing that we have proven we can live without, since we did for millennia already? It's not food, water, or fuel. It's the Internet! We could start DeIndustrializing with shutting it down during peak demand for Tesla charging to avoid having to build so many new gas fired power plants for data centers. Let's get this party started.
“Except that when it doesn't fit their narrative.......then what?”
Data in - computer model… numbers out to fit the occasion.
One of my wildest dreams is the Internet shutting down for just 24 hours. Can't wait.
Since ‘the scientists’ agree that some climate change is natural but cannot say how much is natural and Human - at least half and probably more, which means they don’t know, how does the attribution thingy work to attribute a wildfire, part to nature and part to fossil fuels? Natural disaster is traditionally described as Act of God. So God will soon be getting nearly as many law suits against him as Donald Trump.
In the 1970s, most ‘civilised’ Countries closed their lunatic asylums - we are now enjoying the consequences.
Yes. And *surely* these totally objective advocates, I mean scientists, will also accurately attribute the *benefits* that fossil fuel use provides (less pollution than burning biomass or lignite... looking at you, Germany), not to mention the *benefits* cheap, reliable electricity provide. /sarc
Honest application of the precautionary principle requires examining costs AND benefits.
As we know, "There are no solutions, only trade-offs."
At its very soul, the essence of the entire modern progressive movement is an old Christian myth that a world without people would be a return to the Garden of Eden.
This book is still relevant to explain what they are really trying to do
https://www.amazon.com/New-Holy-Wars-Environmental-Contemporary/dp/027103582X
Anyone who wants their children to survive needs to fight back. Because they mean to kill us all. Whether or not they know it, that is what they want.
They know it.
I would be perfectly comfortable in a world without modern progressives :)
Many dont. I come from a whole family of very intelligent, highly educated liberals. And one of my close friends for a long time was a VP for NPR and went on to become an important pastor. They just dont realize that the party they support has changed. Its appalling how much people can lie to themselves. But think about Germany from 1925 to 1940. Same kind of change, it happened gradually....
When your livelihood, your whole lifestyle, depends upon you not seeing something, then it does not matter how big, bright, and flashing it is, you wont see it........
They keep lying to themselves because admitting being wrong is unbearable. I wonder how it came to this, honestly.
That’s about the dumbest waste of resources and time
Hi Irva, it beggars belief, I am just flaggersted as to how seemingly intelligent people can promote this nonsense. They appear to have no concept of foresight or consequences.
How long will it be until they just get tired of it, noticing to their great disappointment that they would still be able to vacation in the Maldives, if the plane fair wasn't so dammed expensive?
Easy. They'll simply refuse to acknowledge it.
The US National Security Archive has just released declassified documents on global warming and carbon dioxide emissions from the Nixon administration 50 years ago. That global warming was even a concern in the early 1970s is surprising in the era overwhelmingly concerned with global cooling and the return of an Ice Age. It may be useful context and provide important historical evolution of the environmental obsession of our own era.
Since links aren’t permitted on Substack, here’s the email introduction:
Washington, D.C., April 26, 2024 - High-level officials inside the Nixon administration debated climate change and the impacts of sea level rise, extreme temperatures, and fossil fuel consumption as early as 1969, according to declassified documents posted today by the National Security Archive’s Climate Change Transparency Project.
To celebrate Earth Day, the National Security Archive this week publishes a small collection of records from the Nixon Presidential Library and other sources that shed light on the internal debates Nixon advisors were having about climate change and related issues amid the rise of the American environmental movement of the 1970s. The records published here today include correspondence between Nixon aide Daniel Patrick Moynihan, domestic affairs adviser John Ehrlichman, and the Deputy Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Hubert Heffner, among others, and provide new details on what was a first-of-its-kind White House climatic assessment initiated in 1971.
The Nixon-era documents posted today are a reminder that the policies and rhetoric of U.S. conservatives toward environmental issues have not always been as divisive and vitriolic as in recent years. On the one hand, Nixon was an unlikely environmental reformist, who was often disdainful of environmental activism. But Democrats and Republicans also found much common ground on environmental issues, and key officials in the Nixon White House were free to discuss and debate the origins and impacts of climate change and the implications for government policy without the level of polarization often seen today. As a result, President Nixon left a significant environmental legacy, fostering the passage of important legislation and the establishment of key agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
"Since links aren’t permitted on Substack" ?!? Say what?
I was at a wine tasting fundraiser last night for approximately two and a half hours. Attribution science clearly points to those dastardly wine reps as the root cause of why I feel so lousy this morning. Shameful behavior from all of them!
Attribution successful.
The claims made by the purveyors of attribution-whatever, are the most ridiculous I have ever heard. As for their so called model, may this be the permanent definition of "GIGO" (garbage in garbage out). I am glad you gave us a moment to reflect on the comment about not investing in technology that was government subsidy dependent. This is the best example yet of the leader of the circular firing squad telling his men, "We have met the enemy, & it is us." This was an excellent way to start my Friday. Thanks Irina. 🤘😎🤘
My pleasure, Karloff!
Attribution Science - just missing the last ‘S’
Wow Irina. What a list of woe. I feel like I’ve been run over by several 40 tonnes trucks - the dice 🎲 rolling and doubling down continues
You and me both. it really is like being run over by truck after truck.
The worst of this insanity, at least here in the US, is when (not if) blackouts begin in ‘blue’ cities, the benighted citizens won’t know why it’s happening.
They'll probably blame fossil fuels.
It's all kinda insanity. It's like ppl would be train to become insane. To deny the rational thinking, to deny reality they see. Well... cheer up! And look up which region or big country uses more energy per capita. EU? USA? And... again - cheer up! :)
Yes, they train. They study for it.
Ah yes, just what we need…another dismal science with computer modeling. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, they’re progressives. By definition they can never cease destroying our lives.
Some days it just seems hopeless. But then I think about all the hands working out in the oil patch and coal mines, the pipeliners, refinery workers, power plant operators, linemen, and so on. It gives me some hope to think that these folks are still hard at work trying to make sure we have access to the energy we need for our way of life.
These are the people we should celebrate.