Category: Econut O’ The Day

“Global Warming” fraudulent pseudoscience debunked.

Good News (If You Like Freezing)! Antarctica Sees More Snowfall, Record Low Temps!

The Germany-base European Institute For Climate And Energy (EIKE) has issued its latest video featuring Antarctica. Good news! The alleged catastrophic warming remains a myth there.

It’s as cold as it ever was. 

Lots of other publications showing Antarctic cooling. See my side bar for all posts about Antarctica. 

Antarctica experienced record low temperatures in late 2023, particularly during late winter (July-August). These extreme cold events were observed across a wide area, impacting both East and West Antarctica, including the Ross Ice Shelf and the Antarctic Peninsula, according to The Watchers here.

The irony just couldn’t be greater, as all we hear in the fake media are stories about big icebergs breaking off somewhere, and everyone being (mis)led to believe the South Pole is melting when clearly as a whole it is not.

The Watchers’ story cites a peer reviewed study “Extreme Antarctic Cold of Late Winter 2023” by Tomanek et al published in Springer Nature.

Natural chaotic climate and weather change

According to The Watchers: “These atmospheric patterns caused severe and persistent cold, influencing weather systems and temperature variations across the continent. The study also found that southerly flows from the continent and calm air conditions contributed to these cold spells.”

Supply of stations disrupted by cold

The study’s  abstract states that the cold temperatures were measured across a broad area and hindered aircraft operations into McMurdo Station and Phoenix Airfield. When temperatures fall below −50°C, flight operations become risky because of hydraulic fluids and fuel can turn into gel onboard aircraft.

How cold was it? “Antarctica as a whole experienced dramatic drops in temperature,” reports The Watchers. “This extreme cold coincided with record-breaking high temperatures in South America, particularly in Chile where temperatures reached -40 ℃.”

“Watermelon”  = ‘Green’ on the outside, Red on the inside.

Green group with ties to Chinese Communist Party part of network influencing U.S. policy.

A national-security watchdog group is asking members of Congress to take a closer look at an energy transition advocacy nonprofit that has ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). According to State Armor, the watchdog group, nonprofits are coordinating with U.S. climate groups to influence climate policy, advance the interests of the CCP and undermine U.S. national security.

A new report by State Armor argues that the CCP is co-opting the American progressive climate change lobby to advance a transition away from fossil fuels. The alternative technologies being pushed by this lobby, according to the report, create significant economic and geopolitical advantages by undermining U.S. energy dominance and leaving it dependent on Chinese supply chains for its energy production.

“It creates a dependence on our side and deprives us of a natural strength, which is our energy independence that comes from other resources,” Michael Lucci, CEO of State Armor, told Just the News. State Armor is a non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for state solutions to global security threats.

Continue reading “”

Spain experienced a nationwide power outage one week after reaching 100% “green” energy.

Across all of Portugal and Spain, people were left without power or cell service of any kind. The nations literally went dark.

Tens of millions of people had to resort to old handheld radios to figure out what was even happening. It could have been an alien invasion for all they knew!

From El Pais:

The outage suddenly set Spain back to the 19th century. Traffic lights out of service, traffic jams forming across the country, pedestrians wandering around cities without public transportation, desperate families trying to communicate with their loved ones, passengers left stranded without trains or flights, canceled medical appointments, rescues underway in subway stations and elevators, lines forming outside small shops due to supermarket closures…

I wonder what could have caused this?

For no reason at all, here’s a video of Spaniards celebrating the destruction of a nuclear power plant three years ago.

CBS Environmental Journo Slams Trump EPA: We Have ‘Less Than 10 Years’ to Save Planet.

During the “By the Way” segment on Friday’s CBS Mornings Plus, CBS environmental correspondent David Schechter decried the Trump Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Administrator Lee Zeldin by giving away the game on the climate alarmists by reupping a line that’s been deployed for at least five decades, which is we have “less than ten years” to save Earth from climate change.

Co-host Adriana Diaz twice teased his appearance and spelled doom about what deregulation at the EPA would mean, ominously wondering “what” the “big changes at the EPA” “could cost you” as the “administration…mak[es] good on the President’s campaign promise to roll back climate protections.”

 

With the liberal media, any and all regulations are nearly always seen as a benefit and for our own good, not a hassle.

“[O]ne of the things the EPA will now, ‘reconsider’ is what its press release calls a burdensome greenhouse gas reporting program where thousands of companies have to submit their emissions levels. Zeldin said the agency would try to undo a total of 31 environmental regulations from rules governing wastewater to emission standards. The Trump administration has also…revealed plans to shut down the EPA’s Environmental Justice Division,” she added.

Schechter came out swinging with the apocalyptic analysis that Zeldin has changed “the way we interface with the environment” as the EPA has decided it has “nothing” to do with “the environment or ensuring “we have clean air and…clean water.”

He continued with the claim Zeldin doesn’t want to “talk about the environment and why we need to keep it clean and why climate change has become such an existential threat with increased floods and fires and droughts and how the EPA has a role in trying to make sure that we control that and contain that.”

Moments later, he dropped the tiresome claim about having less than a decade or we’re goners:

I think the biggest risk is that we have a small window to deal with climate change, really. It’s getting smaller and smaller, less than 10 years, to sort of level out and reduce our emissions and we had and have currently a lot of rules that deal with that. To throw those all out would undo a lot of progress that’s been made to try to reach these new standards for our country and for the world. And we will lose our opportunity to really get ahead of this problem or even stay current with the problem.

Co-host Tony Dokoupil next summarized Zeldin’s view of the EPA as “if companies save money by not having to report a bunch of things that are a waste of time, they can take that saved money and make the energy process cleaner.”

Schechter was obviously not having it because, you can’t trust non-governmental parties to behave (click “expand”):

SCHECHTER: I don’t know if, I guess if that’s your reading of that claim, I think that’s an interesting way to look at it. You know, companies, corporations, many of them do, do the right thing and do spend a lot of time on their environmental issues and reporting and things like that, but, you know, the government’s job is to set a level playing field, if that’s how you view the government’s job, to set a level playing field with regulations so that everyone is following the same rules. Some companies do get in trouble when they get ahead of their competitors and they have rules that are maybe more stringent than what their competitors have. And then the market kind of catches up to them and they take a lot of criticism for being too far ahead of the pack. So, you know, having stoplights and roads and, you know, rules of the road, is what keeps everybody sort of moving in the same direction. That’s the idea of the EPA. That’s the power of the EPA. And to say we care about the earth and we care about clean water, that’s what we’re going to do, is one thing, but to look at what they did and want to cut 31 important regulations is really what you should be looking at.

DOKOUPIL: It’s interesting. Yeah, but this is the claim from the EPA press release. Hundreds of millions of dollars saved could better be used, “to improve and upgrade environmental controls to have a noticeable impact and improvement on the environment.” We’ll see what happens.

DIAZ: Yeah.

SCHECHTER: Yeah.

DIAZ: And if companies take it upon themselves to try to make that environmental improvement without the regulations.

This Friday segment actually capped three days of rage at CBS.

Rolling back to Thursday, senior White House and campaign correspondent Ed O’Keefe appeared on both CBS Mornings and the Plus editions to say the EPA will now be “rolling back…regulations” that said “greenhouse gasses are bad for public health[.]”

And, on Tuesday, CBS Evening News co-anchor Maurice DuBois said the agency was doing away with red tape “aimed at protecting public health and fighting climate change.”

Co-anchor John Dickerson commiserated with former Obama EPA official Matthew Tejada a half-hour later on CBS Evening Plus.

Tejada went full doomsday and fearmongerer by saying Zeldin’s announcement was “taking us back to the 1960s, from before the times when we had regulations that actually cleaned up our water, protect people from across our country, from cancer-causing agents in our air, actually cleaning up legacy contamination sites that people had been living on top of for generations.”

 

 

Tejada further vented the Trump administration will “tak[e] us back to that time when we didn’t have regulation” in which Americans won’t be “healthier” as they’re purposefully “allowing polluting industries” to “hav[e] absolutely unfettered ability to pour their pollution into our communities[.]”

Always a pompous partisan, Dickerson invited Tejada to go further (click “expand”):

DICKERSON: And Matthew, one of the announcements today said the agency is, quote, “reconsidering the 2009 engagement finding.” Help us understand what that means.

TEJADA: Yeah, that was the endangerment finding. That was the finding that basically unlocked the authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and our federal government to start combating climate change. We have seen repeatedly how our climate is changing on a regular basis and having devastating consequences, not just in our country, but across the world, how it is causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damages every single year. They’re taking us back to not even square one, to the one decision that allowed us to start to make the slightest progress that was then supercharged during the last administration through the Inflation Reduction Act, another regulatory progress that we made recently. It is taking us back in time, just like all these other decisions are taking us way back to an era when we were suffering from pollution in every part of this country.

DICKERSON: And let me ask you now, finally, Matthew, about the environmental justice offices. Remind us about — define environmental justice for us and what you think will now happen as a result of these policies.

TEJADA: So environmental justice has worked for decades to make sure that every part of our country, especially those parts of our country that have not had the power to keep pollution out of their community and to bring in the positives of a clean environment, of green space, of natural resources. Those are black and brown communities. Those are indigenous communities. Those are low-income white communities. Those communities that have not had a power to actually be protected from environmental pollution. The environmental justice program at EPA worked every single day to make sure that those communities felt heard by their government and to bring their voices back into government to make it respond and serve those people too. And they are gutting that program today as we speak.

To see the relevant CBS transcripts, click here (for March 12’s CBS Evening News Plus) and here (for March 14’s CBS Mornings Plus).

Colorado Supreme Court Rules Elephants Are Not Human and Must Stay in a Zoo.

One of these days, one of these animal rights nutcases will come before an equally nutty judge and win a case that frees some wild animal from a zoo.

Fortunately, that day has not yet arrived. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled 6-0 on Tuesday that six elephants in the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo cannot be transferred to an elephant sanctuary based on the legal theory that they have the same rights as human beings.

The court said the decision “does not turn on our regard for these majestic animals.”

“Instead, the legal question here boils down to whether an elephant is a person,” the court said. “And because an elephant is not a person, the elephants here do not have standing to bring a habeas corpus claim.”

You have to admit that it’s a very clever fundraising strategy by the Nonhuman Rights Project, which has sued a dozen times over the last decade trying to free elephants and chimpanzees from various zoos. They haven’t once been successful, but that doesn’t matter as long as the cash keeps coming in.

The elephants — Missy, Kimba, Lucky, LouLou and Jambo — had no intelligible comment.

That doesn’t mean they can’t communicate. Researchers have discovered an incredible number of sounds that elephants make at an amazing number of frequencies. We don’t know what they’re saying, of course, but that it’s a sophisticated example of cognitive thinking is undeniable.

However, until elephants can submit a legal brief on their own, they are out of luck in American courts.

Continue reading “”

Chris Martz
Why do most climate activists oppose nuclear power? I’ll tell you why.

It has nothing to do with the cost to deploy; it is actually pretty cheap without burdensome compliance regulations.
It has nothing to do with radioactive waste; that is easily compactible into steel and concrete casks, and much of it is in fact reusable.
Instead, their vitriol towards nuclear is an artifact of their Malthusian religion. They maintain that industrial processes are harming the planet and the only way to avert catastrophe is to decarbonize our economy rapidly and stop economic growth by abolishing capitalism.
Many in fact admit that is their intention. Solar and wind are their preferred energy technologies.

Why?

Because they are intermittent electricity generation sources. The activists know that neither solar nor wind can serve as the baseload to power modern civilization. It’s simply not feasible with current technologies [which is why they require fossil fuel backup when there is no sunlight reaching the panels or wind blowing to turn the turbine blades].

This means that supply must be rationed. Nuclear, on the contrary, can.
France runs 70% of their grid on it.
Fission is symbolic of an economically prosperous future.

Solar and wind are symbolic of what the degrowthers want.
It’s essentially a population control grift.

Some activist academics have gone so far as to say that the planet has too many people. But, they never take the liberty to decarbonize themselves and net zero their own existence. Oh, no.
There is just the right amount of them, but too little of us.

They don’t care about the planet; as George Carlin once said, they only care about having their own space to live. Their own little habitat. It’s narcissism guised as environmentalism.

You and I are the carbon that they want to reduce. It’s that simple.

I can only stand just so much of this joy….