1/18/2020

Comment on Climate Change and Politics


Your comment is awaiting moderation. 

HAS, I researched how the IPCC named RCP8.5 their “Business as Usual” (BAU) case. As you point out, they didn’t use the term in AR5, instead they began to use the term during press conferences and presentation of AR5 contents in late 2013 and early 2014. The BAU term became the standard they used in interviews and discussions, this was picked up by the media, and almost immediately we began to see papers referring to RCP8.5 as BAU.

This extended to training material used in universities, and to position statements written by scientific organizations in numerous countries. By 2015 almost all climate change papers referred to RCP8.5 as BAU, and this was also picked up by US government agencies during the Obama administration.

The period 2013 to 2018 saw a significant number of comments, articles and papers explaining RCP8.5 wasn’t BAU. I myself saturated the comments sections in newspapers and blogs with repetitive remarks about this error. In my case I came to conclude RCP8.5 wasn't BAU because of tendencies we observed: fossil fuel resources were increasingly more difficult to extract, competing technology prices were dropping, and the assumptions in RCP8.5 didn’t make sense (I’m not going to get into it here, but do remember the RCPs were scenarios prepared to meet an arbitrary IPCC request: they wanted four cases with four forcings, and the team preparing RCP8.5 had to include absurd system behavior to reach the 8.5 watts per m2).

We can’t blame the RCP8.5 authors because they were asked to deliver the target forcing. But I think a case can be made to accuse IPCC principals of scientific fraud for: 1. using the BAU term for RCP8.5 on a consistent basis, and 2. Failing to inform the scientific community and decision makers that RCP8.5 wasn’t really BAU.

I think we can also consider the ongoing (but increasingly feeble) defense of RCP8.5 as BAU without a corresponding correction by the IPCC as a sign that it can be considered a political organization with clear political goals, no regard for the quality of its products or their adequate use by the scientific community, and lacking in ethics to such an extent that it deserves to be shut down and replaced by a new organization outside of the UN structure.

The problems we see with the RCP8.5 use are a symptom of a very serious disease which has pervaded this field for decades, a disease which is now entering the realm of criminal behavior, because fake science is used to justify trillions of dollars in spending which are going to bring hefty profits to certain actors, and give geopolitical advantages to nations such as China and Russia (because they aren’t about to commit economic suicide cutting CO2 emissions to zero).

Criminal behavior can also be seen in the use of exaggerated alarmism to scare children, and put teenagers on the street asking for political changes (which conveniently demand the end of capitalism and parrot Neomarxist lines about climate justice, the white patriarchate, and etc). 

Scaring and traumatizing children using false information is a criminal act, and such abuse ought to stop.  But we already know that radical political movements will stop at nothing, and unfortunately the climate change problem is now a weapon used by Neomarxist radicals as a means to take over.

And when we combine the economic harm they will cause with their repressive and social engineering methods, we may be about to see the West fall in the hands of a political faction which may eventually rival Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Chavez when it comes to its innate evil nature.

8/28/2019

Brazil Fires email by Hugo Fernando Maia Milan

I just wrote a post about it (inobio-manera.fcav.unesp.br/index.php/2019/08/28/...). I am including it here with more details. Hope it helps!

I am originally from the Amazon rainforest region (I grew up in the state of Rondônia). Brazilians strongly believe we should preserve the forest but, at the same time, bring economic development.

Before I dive-in into this discussion, I would like to clarify some common misconceptions:

a) I agree with Dallas Weaver, most of the O2 produced by the Amazon rainforest is consumed by the forest itself, as demonstrated by previous research (https://www.nature.com/articles/35002062https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12957). The liquid amount of O2 production from the Amazon rainforestis almost zero. We should revise the common misconception that the Amazon is the lung of the world. The main source of global liquid O2 are the blue algae in the ocean, which might be strongly affected by the radioactive waste (mostly from Nuclear Power Plants) dumped in the oceans by developed countries in the period from 1946 to 1993 (http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/jones-a2/).

b) I agree with Olger Linares. Most developed countries, which had almost completely deforested their territory, focus on slowing down developing countries. Instead of taking more impactful initiatives, such as reforesting their territory or fostering sustainable development, they invest on promoting farming in their countries and on fighting against any development of the developing countries. For instance, see the campaign "Farms here, forest there" (http://assets.usw.org/our-union/pulp-paper-forestry/farms-here-forests-there-report-5-26-10.pdf) supported by the American National Farmers Union.

c) As I discuss below, the Federal Government has strict laws regarding the protection of the ALL Brazilian forests. Burning is illegal in Brazil since 1998 (law 9.605/1998). In addition, President Jair Bolsonaro is doing everything under his power to protect the forest, even sending military forces to fight against illegal burning of the forest and to fight wildfires. This is the first year of his term and he is the ONLY president who demonstrated attitude towards sustainable developing the Amazon region and in protecting the forest. One curious fact is that several NGOs are seen in the Amazon rainforest region. In this region, people live sustainable with a strong connection with the forest. Curious enough is why we see so much NGOs in such an region with so much natural richness and not in the poorest Northeastern parts of Brazil. The Northeastern is marked by strong droughts but with rich underground water vessels. The potential impact of the NGOs on reducing inequality and improving life quality in the Northeastern is huge.

d) What we see are wildfires or small illegal fires. In total, the burning was estimated to be around 200 km2 (a 0.0036% of the total 5,500,000 km2 of Amazon rainforest region; brasil.elpais.com/brasil/2019/08/23/politica/...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_rainforest). 

The huge increase in fire we see in the media is on the number of fires, not in the burned area. In comparison, in 2018, the wildfire in California (which accounted for 21% of all territory burned in the United States; www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...) was ~40 times bigger (7664 km2; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_California_wildfires) and burned 5.74% of the California Forest (133,546 km2, roughly 2.4% of the size of the Amazon rainforest region; ucanr.edu/sites/forestry/California_forests). 

8/27/2019

Referendum on the creation of a Police Force

Yesterday I wrote a "Proposal: Conduct a referendum of Venezuelans abroad to indicate whether they support the creation of a police force and call for international assistance invoking the TIAR." Then sent it to a few friends to see if they liked it. The first answer I received is copied below: 

Fernando,

Proposing the referendum to see if Venezuelan exiles want to support creating a police force is a good initiative, but…  Venezuelans want high level jobs ...  that cause is lost, because the politicians and citizens want jobs.  

Look, between January and May I was working full on the country's recovery program and more than half of the time was spent listening to how the "experts" created arguments to justify being given the X or Y position. 

Some shamelessly told me to put them in a position such that they could create a service company and from that position give them contracts and then leave.  These were not chavistas, they were fuck ex-PDVSA employees! 

Also when I raised the need to create an armed force in exile and prepare us to recover the country, no one responded, all of them want Trump to send troops, pay with US dead, free the country, and give them to them so that they can share all the important jobs.  They tell me that they are non-military and that they are more valuable thinking about the recovery… 

Anyway, in my opinion, based on the stupidities I see, Venezuela is going to reach a point of co-habitation where the Chavistas continue  to hold power and the opposition will have one or another position.  

And US sanctions are going to stay there, because the USA wants to neutralize a competitor in the commodities market. I personally thank you for your concern for Venezuela, but that country has people who are comfortable in this terrible conditions and will not react!

 A hug!

6/07/2019

Spanish socialist teacher suggests castrating boys

A socialist party leader who belongs to the City Council of Puerto del Rosario (Fuerteventura), Aurelia Vera Rodriguez, said in one of her classes - she is a language teacher at the middle school Santiago de Alcalá in that town - that "children have to be castrated  at birth".  The students of 4th of ESO were stunned by the postulates of their teacher.

 During one of her classes to children between 14 and 15 years old, Vera, who just won re-election om May 26th, addresses the boys in her class, telling them that "they cut you the penis and nothing happens to you",  that we have to "make men stop governing, so that they give power to us.  Will they voluntarily do it?  No. We have to resort to selective castration. "

This teacher has been denounced of teaching abusive feminist doctrine during her classes.  Fortunately one of the students recorded her, and this recording has been presented as proof.  The official complaint has been filed by Francisco de Asís Serrano Castro, deputy and president of the Vox parliamentary group in Andalusia.

Translated and summarized from 


The recording was played in Antena 3 here