SOME OF WHAT THE “97% CONSENSUS” ASSURED US ABOUT SNOWFALL :
❄️ SNOW will become “A very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” – Dr. Viner CRU (2000)
❄️ “Milder winter temps will decrease heavy snowstorms” IPCC (2001)
❄️ “Resorts could lose 1/4 of snow in 15 years” – CSIRO (2003)
❄️ “Alps Under Threat” THE AGE (2005)
❄️ “End of Snow?” NYTimes (2014)
AND, for the “global warming = more moisture in the air” enthusiasts, don’t forget that you need *cold* air to make snow.
Heavy snow fell above 1500 metres across the European Alps this weekend with a number of destinations reporting over 40cm of the fluffy white stuff.
While it is still summer in Europe, temperatures dropped over 15 degrees and dipped into the negatives in less than 24hrs. Germany’s highest peak, The Zugspitze – at 2962m above sea level – recorded 25cm of snow whilst thermometers hit negative 7 degrees.
Although skiing remains possible across half a dozen glacier dependant ski fields throughout Austria, Italy and Switzerland, the snowfall came just days after these areas were recording temperatures in the 10’s and 20’s, with parts of Germany expecting temperatures to reach 30 degrees by mid-week.
The result of the cold front that swept across many of these resorts and throughout Central Europe is perhaps best summed up in the below images… Feast your eyes and enjoy!
The sun came out 12hrs ago, illuminating a pretty spectacular scene. Image:: Gamskarkogel Hütte’s Facebook
GLOBAL WARMING theory obsessed Germany (along with most of the gullible West) has spent upwards of ONE TRILLION €EUROS, of other people’s money, on unreliable energy – wind and solar – under the disastrous Energiewende program, only to undergo the biggest coal-fired power expansion in her history, because unreliables are unreliable…
“We suspect you won’t hear too much about this from the liberal mainstream media, or the environmental movement, or even Al Gore,” says zerohedge.com. “But, according to the latest energy report from The Energy Information Administration (EIA), under President Trump, per-capita carbon dioxide emissions are now the lowest they’ve been in nearly seven decades.”
Even more interesting is the fact that US carbon emissions dropped while emissions from energy consumption for the rest of the world increased by 1.6%, after little or no growth for the three years from 2014 to 2016.
The U.S. emitted 15.6 metric tons of CO2 per person in 1950. After rising for decades, it’s declined in recent years to 15.8 metric tons per person in 2017, the lowest measured levels in 67 years.
DON’T expect the lamestream media to report on this staggering reality any time soon ever…
IMAGINE the red-faces if they, just for once, honestly reported that spending TRILLIONS of €EUROS, of other people’s money, on unreliable energy – wind and solar – was actually increasing emissions, where fracking for natural gas (a “dirty” fossil fuel) was dramatically lowering them! Read the rest of this entry »
However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
SINCE Viner’s vapid verbal, Europe and much of the Northern Hemisphere has experienced some of the coldest winters on record, especially over the past five years, with plenty of snow to boot…
2018 RECORD SNOW
MOSCOW saw more than half its average monthly snowfall in the space of 24 hours with 17 inches blanketing the capital by Sunday morning. At least one man was killed, several injured and about 2000 trees collapsed due to the heaviest snowfall in Moscow since the beginning of the weather records, said meteorologists.
WILL the casualties be recorded as human CO2-induced, global warming climate change related? Or, do only “extreme heat” casualties make the cut?
Simulations of future snow conditions in the Australian alpine regions were prepared for the years 2020 and 2050…
The low impact scenario for 2020 has a minor impact on snow conditions. Average season lengths are reduced by around five days. Reductions in peak depths are usually less than 10%, but can be larger at lower sites (e.g. Mt Baw Baw and Wellington High Plains).
The high impact scenario for 2020 leads to reductions of 30-40 days in average season lengths. At higher sites such as Mt Hotham, this can represent reductions in season duration of about 25%, but at lower sites such as Mt Baw Baw the reduction can be more significant (up to 60%)…
We have very high confidence (at least 95%) that the low impact scenarios will be exceeded and the high impact scenarios will not be exceeded.
1) Most people are far more intelligent than the elites give them credit for. They can see through the deception they have been fed, and are capable of using their own eyes to see what is really going on.
2) People are growing numb to the incessant propaganda.”
3) Economies, businesses and (non-elite) peoples’ livelihoods are being destroyed by insanely high electricity bills as a direct result of the West’s mad obsession with unreliable-energy, wind and solar.
If one were to rate the investment made by governments globally aimed at creating concern for a potential problem, then the huge investment in climate change fear by now would definitely have to be rated as “junk” quality.
Never has so much seen so little return.
Hundreds of billions have been invested so far with the aim of generating mass fear, and by now we would think the global public should be in a state of panic. That’s the least one would expect from such a massive investment in fostering fear.
But it turns out that climate change remains very low on the list of concerns that citizens have.
Ahh the delicious irony! EU CO2 emissions rising – whilst they lambast Trump whose emissions are declining – all the while blaming it on “Cold” weather which obviously corrupts the “CO2 = warming” narrative!
The Balkan region’s first privately-funded power plant came online on Tuesday, increasing the region’s dependency on coal-fired power stations even as environmental concerns are driving them to the brink of the extinction elsewhere in Europe. It was built by China’s Dongfang Electric Corp and financed with the help of a 350 million euro ($391.13 million) loan from the China Development Bank.
Coal-fired power plant Stanari
Planned coal power plants in south-eastern Europe; source Bankwatch
The 300-megawatt plant, in the northern Bosnian town of Stanari, is a foreign investment in a chronically impoverished country that remains heavily dependent on foreign aid more than 20 years after it emerged from war.
Even though the Western Balkans has a power deficit, European investors are reluctant to finance more polluting coal which forms the backbone of supply in the region, attracting Chinese financiers and contractors.
“If we don’t overthrow capitalism, we don’t have a chance of
saving the world ecologically. I think it is possible to have
an ecologically sound society under socialism.
I don’t think it is possible under capitalism”
– Judi Bari,
principal organiser of Earth First
My background is basically European — and more specifically, Western European. I have lived and worked in many of those countries, and I know most of the major cities intimately — from Stockholm in the north, Newcastle, London, Paris, The Hague, Munich, Vienna, to Rome and Erice, Sicily in the south. I have also spent several months in Moscow and in Jerusalem as a guest of academic institutions.
The ongoing economic suicide of Europe is based on a faulty understanding of the climate issue by most Western politicians and on their extreme policy response, based on emotion rather than logic and science. The major European economies have reacted irrationally to contrived, unjustified fear of imagined global-warming disastersPerhaps I should explain that the climate has not been warming for the past 18 years — and even if it had been warming, it would be no disaster. The EU wants to cut emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, a natural plant-fertilizer, by 40% within 15 years — by 2030. This insane drive to replace energy sources from fossil fuels that release plant-friendly CO2 into the atmosphere has led to greatly increased costs of energy. As is well understood, such actions not only hurt economic growth, but they increase poverty levels and therefore threaten the social fabric of these nations.
There are some exceptions. of course: France and Belgium rely heavily on nuclear energy; Austria and Norway rely heavily on hydro. Poland has actively resisted the general trend to demonize CO2, but the UK and Germany, which has been the power-house of European economic growth, are severely threatened by their insistence on installing wind and solar energy. The latter is especially inappropriate to the Continent and to Great Britain.
The pity of it all is that these economic sacrifices in Western Europe will hardly affect the level of atmospheric CO2 — which is controlled globally by huge emissions from China — and soon also from India.
Unfortunately, during the past few years, and even during the White House administration of George W. Bush, the United States has tended to move in the same direction — and energy costs have gone up markedly.
The regulatory burdens created by the EPA’s “War on Coal,” by holding up permits for pipelines and for exploration-production of fuels on Federal lands, etc, are imposing real costs on US households, which are the equivalent of a large energy tax — except that none of these increased costs flow into the US Treasury.
Cultural, plus even more dangerous Demographic Suicide,
But it is cultural suicide, which adds to economic suicide and spells doom for the future of Western Europe. I have in mind here the heavy immigration from Islamic nations — with most immigrants unwilling to adjust to the prevailing culture of the host country.
Examples are rampant. In Great Britain, the dangerous immigration has come mostly from Pakistan and Bangladesh, Islamic successors to the British rule over India; Hindu immigrants present no special problem. In Southern Europe, the Low Countries, and most of Scandinavia, much of the immigration has been from Somalia and North Africa. France has experienced massive immigration from North Africa and other African French-speaking former colonies.
In many of these nations now, these immigrant communities have formed enclaves that the native inhabitants can no longer enter safely; even the police have great difficulty controlling law and order in these enclaves. Examples exist in cities like Birmingham, Amsterdam, Malmo (Sweden), Paris and Marseille. Germany seems slightly better off, with immigrants from Turkey making some effort to become good Germans. Of course, the aim of many in these enclaves is to take over the host country — using available democratic means — and institute Sharia (Islamic law).
It is clear that these immigrants are taking advantage of the democratic nature of the host nations and their willingness to grant asylum status and lavish economic subsidies to any who declare themselves as refugees. A prime example is Sweden, where multi-culturalism runs wild and is supported by the government-subsidized and beholden media. So far, no real revolt yet — except for some grumbling from the indigenous population (whom the compliant media denounce as “racists.”)
Least affected have been the Slavic nations, which were formerly under Soviet domination. Perhaps because of their delayed economic development, they have not been as attractive a destination for immigrants. Ironically, these East-Europeans may yet save Western civilization.
The United States faces a rather special situation. There is much immigration, mostly illegal, from south of the border. But these Latino immigrants are not Islamic; they share similar cultural values with native-born Americans — and most are making an effort to adapt to the prevailing culture. The main danger is one of national security. With porous borders, potential terrorists can easily slip into the United States and create mayhem.
A peculiar problem exists in Israel, which has experienced illegal Islamic (!) immigration, mainly from Sudan and Eritrea. We are told that some southern suburbs of Tel Aviv now resemble a Third-World nation. Efforts are underway to deport these illegal immigrants; but standing in the way is Israel’s Supreme Court, a group of unelected liberal lawyers, who personally oppose the Parliament-passed law of deportation — certainly an anomalous situation by US standards.
Russia has experienced problems of its own, mainly from Islamic provinces in the Caucasus. The suppression of the Chechen revolt has caused a violent reaction, leading to major terror acts, even in Moscow.
Exacerbating the Islamic “conquest“ of Western Europe is the fact that the indigenous people — from Swedes to Spaniards — are not reproducing themselves. Whatever the cause may be, the number of children per family is well below the replacement level of 2.11; in some countries it is as low as 1.30. The statistics are frightening — as seen in records of births, welfare rolls, and school attendance. By mid-century, parts of Europe will have a Moslem majority — and even before then it will be too late to rectify the situation.
What of the future?
With ongoing internal battles within Islamic groups, it is not easy to predict the future. In Syria, some 200,000 have been killed and millions have been turned into refugees. The rise of the “Islamic State” in the last few months promises a brutal suppression of any who hold even a slightly different Islamic view. Their announced goal is to set up a theocratic Caliphate in any lands that have ever been under Islamic rule — including most of the Balkans, Andalus-Spain, and of course Israel.
At the battle of Tours in 732, Charles Martell stopped the advance into France of Moslem armies from the Iberian peninsula. In 1571, in the great naval battle of Lepanto, off Greece, a Spanish-Italian fleet defeated the Turks. In their farthest advance into Central Europe, a Turkish army besieged Vienna in 1683. Christian forces, under the command of King John Sobieski of Poland, defeated the invaders decisively and saved Western civilization.
Americans have twice saved Europe in the 20th century and may soon be forced to defend Europe again against a new threat. The first assault on Western European civilization came from Nazi Germany and its allies; it took a bloody World-War-II (1939-1945) to defeat them. Certainly, without US intervention, Western Europe, and even Britain, might now be part of a German-ruled dictatorship, a sort of involuntary European Union. It is doubtful also whether the Soviet Union could have withstood Hitler’s onslaught without the active material assistance of the United States.
The second threat to Europe came from the post-1945 Soviet Union; it was dominated by the specter of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. The “Warsaw Pact” encompassed even a large part of Germany. This “Cold-War” threat was neutralized thanks to the steadfastness of the United States — but also by the internal economic problems brought about by the planned economy of the Soviet empire.
The new threat of course is Islamo-Fascism and its aim to introduce Sharia — in at least those parts of Europe that had been Muslim lands in the past, but aiming really at all of Europe — and eventually the rest of the world. This new threat uses a method of warfare that is different from the past and more insidious. Terrorism has come into its own, partly based on large Islamic populations in Western Europe.
Coupled with this external threat is the internal one from Islamic fanatics, many of them born in Europe — and even from converts. We have seen this happen in Spain, and more recently in Britain. Their methods have been crude and their weapons have been primitive; but with nuclear proliferation and with the possibility of chemical and biological warfare, these threats have to be taken very seriously.
Fighting these threats takes resources for surveillance, intelligence, sundry military expenditures, and weapons, both offensive and defensive. Resilience requires above all a strong economy. And one cannot have a strong economy without adequate energy resources – which gets us back to the issue of climate fears.
The problem now is that while the threat of terrorism is growing, so is the suicidal drive to limit the use of energy and thereby also economic growth. This internal threat is particularly strong in Europe and has been called, quite properly, eco-Bolshevism. It would have all the earmarks of the failed Soviet system, with government involvement in every facet of the economy and with energy restrictions reducing economic growth.
There is no question that the policies being discussed now in Europe and in the United States would be extremely costly, would force industrial cutbacks and of course massive job losses. All of these exacerbate social tension in nations that have a large number of immigrants, who traditionally have the highest unemployment levels.
Will the US step up again and save Europe? Doubtful
One may ask: Is there any way to stop this steamroller? There’s probably little hope that such an initiative can come from Europe; it may have to come from the United States. Somehow we would have to convince European leaders that their policies, based on global-warming fears, are mistaken. That job may prove to be very difficult — unless there is a drastic change in current US policy. But it is something that has to be done if we want Europe to survive economically, as an ally against the threat of Islamo-Fascism. Continue Reading »
S. Fred Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project. His specialty is atmospheric and space physics. An expert in remote sensing and satellites, he served as the founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service and, more recently, as vice chair of the US National Advisory Committee on Oceans & Atmosphere. He is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute and the Independent Institute. He co-authored theNY Timesbest-seller Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 years. In 2007, he founded and has since chaired the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change), which has released several scientific reports [See www.NIPCCreport.org]. For recent writings, seehttp://www.americanthinker.com/s_fred_singer/and also Google Scholar
“So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that’s a real worry for the people in the bush.”
Within a year of making that now infamous prediction, the heaven’s opened, flooding the eastern board of Australia with monumental rainfall. Once again filling our dams and our river systems. Water storage in most major cities is now either at, or close to full capacity.
Flannery’s persistent cries of never-ending drought were at best hyper-alarmist. At worst, his comments have inflicted untold financial misery on families and workers, costing them billions upon billions of dollars.
Before I detail the financial damage inflicted by Flannery’s alarmist intent, it is worth analysing the ‘climate mood’ around the time Flannery cut-loose with his dire drought prognostications…
2007 marked the high-point of global warming climate change hysteria. One year before, Al Gore released his Academy Award winning movie “An Inconvenient Truth”.
Inconveniently for Al, by 2007 A British High Court judge cited 9 key errors in his alarmist and pseudoscientific movie. Judge Michael Burton ruled that the 9 errors had arisen “in the context of alarmism and exaggeration” in order to support Mr Gore’s thesis on global warming. Judge Burton noted the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and thus not an impartial scientific analysis of climate change. It was also ruled, a “political film.”
In order to be shown in British schools, Judge Burton ruled that 77 pages of supporting documentation would be required as reference material for students.
With the Academy Award, Gore also received a Nobel Peace Prize.
However, the damage was done and Gore’s silver-screen alarmist fraud swept the world gobbling up the gullible with catastrophic ease.
By now, there was little doubt that Earth was headed for thermageddon as Flannery spouted, “This planet is on course for a catastrophe. The existence of Life itself is at stake.”
Enter the part of the story that annoys me the most about the over-sold, climate fiasco and the central issue that lends itself to the name of this site…
“Over the past 50 years southern Australia has lost about 20 per cent of its rainfall, and one cause is almost certainly global warming. Similar losses have been experienced in eastern Australia, and although the science is less certain it is probable that global warming is behind these losses too. But by far the most dangerous trend is the decline in the flow of Australian rivers: it has fallen by around 70 per cent in recent decades, so dams no longer fill even when it does rain…”
One only needs to click on the Bureau Of Meteorology’s rainfall page to discover the sheer nonsense of Flannery’s deluded rant :
*Even with 2010-2011 spike removed, the overall trend bears little resemblance to Flannery’s dire warnings.
Here’s the kicker. In 2007, all eastern board states of Australia; QLD, NSW, VIC and SA were run by Labor government’s. Government’s sympathetic with big government, big regulations and the Greens twisted ideology of environmental extremism – though not an unpopular belief system at the height of anthropogenic global warming climate change hysteria, with no thanks to Gore’s mass-circulated doom flick.
“I believe the first thing Australians need to do is to stop worrying about “the drought” – which is transient – and start talking about the new climate… Australia is likely to lose its northern rainfall… In Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane, water supplies are so low they need desalinated water urgently, possibly in as little as 18 months.”
By late 2007, the four Labor/Green allied state government’s, satisfied with Flannery’s pseudoscientific alarmism, began construction of $12 Billion worth of desalinisation plants.
On completion a few years later, ribbons were cut and the shiny new desals were ready to save Australia from drought ridden doom. Only problem ~ Australia’s eastern board water supplies were by then, and still are, very much full.
All four desalination plants, that were given birth to by Flannery’s global warming climate change, fear mongering, were mothballed, without producing a single drop of water.
Taxpayers gulled into spending billions of dollars on the back of global warming climate change alarmists, who persuaded politicians the rains would dry up.
In September 2013, the Abbott conservative Government was swept into power in a landslide win. The public had simply had enough of six years of the big taxing, big spending Gillard/Rudd, ALP/Greens regimes. Australia was racked with debt and had nothing to show for it except a litany of failed greenschemes scams and the $23/ton Carbon (dioxide) Tax.
Flannery now heads a privately funded global warming climate change propaganda unit, the ‘Climate Council’. They spew out the usual alarmist weather reports blaming evil mankind on bush-fires and any summer heatwave that unseasonably rolls through Australia in summer.
Aside from scaring your children about the next 38 degree day in March, the Climate Council’s main aim is to demonise coal-fired power generation and its bi-product carbon dioxide pollution, and replace with renewable energy.
There shouldn’t be a sole on the planet who doesn’t eventually want a cheap, efficient, reliable, stand-alone, low impact ‘renewable’ energy source providing base-load power to the grid. However, it doesn’t take much objective research to work out that the current crop of renewable technology, namely wind and solar, even in their ‘advanced’ form, remain utterly useless and importantly, do little to reduce emissions.
The rush to embrace renewables “before the planet fries”, is placing a severe burden on households and industry as conventional fossil fuel sources are priced up to make expensive renewables competitive in the market place.
The billions who live with no electricity at all face an even bleaker future. With the proposed global switch to renewables, the most vulnerable are unable to access cheap efficient sources of energy such as coal-fired power, as organisations like the sustainability obsessed “World Bank” cutback funding for new coal-fire power in developing nations. 1.3 billion of the planets most needy, with no access to electricity at all, will remain in grinding poverty. Special thanks must be forwarded to the ever caring United Nations’ “Sustainability” agenda and their even more misanthropic ‘don’t give the poor power because they might breed’ philosophy.
‘Feel-good’ renewable energy remains the domain of comfortable, western climate change elites, and truly are a token gesture to the folly of green madness.
Before we investigate what is going on in the world of renewable energy, it should be ascertained that the impetus behind the ‘renewable’ energy boondoggle explosion, is in reaction to 22 years of apparently ‘unprecedented’ global warming climate change from 1976-1998.
Renewables aim to stem the flow of evil carbon dioxide pollution, thus preventing the temperature of the globe from spiralling out of control.
By how much will the $trillions we have already spent change the temperature of the globe now and into the future? Nobody knows.
What we do know, is that over the past 17 years there has been no atmospheric global warming, or any statistically-significant warming for between 18 and 23 years, depending on which data set is used. A distinct lack of any warming evident, despite 35% of all human CO² emissions, since 1751, emitted over the same period.
According to RSS satellite measurements, for 17 years and 3 months, there has been no global warming climate change, at all :
Flannery’s Climate Council has endorsed a call by United Nation’s Climate Chief, Christiana Figueres for a ‘tripling’ of clean energy investment. Figueres says $1 Trillion a year (only) is required for the transformation needed to stay within 2°C of warming…(which will guarantee we avoid total human annihilation by 2100…fear…scare…fear…pay your carbon tithes here).
Two weeks ago the Czech Government has decided to end all subsidies.
Spain owes €126bn to renewable energy investors.
In Spain more than 5,000 solar entrepreneurs face bankruptcy without the subsidies.
EU leaders now officially list affordable energy as being more important than greenhouse emissions.
How much was lost from European manufacturing, to China, which could not compete? Investors are “pouring money into the US, where energy prices have fallen to one-third of those in the EU, thanks to the shale gas revolution.”
And just in case the wind stops blowing or the sun is blocked by clouds of evil man’s 12 parts per million colourless, odourless, trace gas carbon dioxide, rendering their half a trillion €uro investment in windmills and solar panels useless, Germany have another 15 coal plants planned to open by 2020.
Written by Dr. Benny Peiser, GWPF, November 18 2013.
Steag GmbH started Germany’s first new power plant fueled by hard coal in eight years, allowing the generator and energy trader to take advantage of near record-low coal prices that have widened profit margins. The plant is the first new hard-coal-fired generator in Europe’s biggest power market since 2005. It marks the start of Germany’s biggest new-build program for hard coal stations since its liberalization in 1998. Ten new hard-coal power stations, or 7,985 megawatts, are scheduled to start producing electricity in the next two years, according to information from German grid regulator Bundesnetzagentur and operators. –Julia Mengewein, Bloomberg, 15 November 2013. Continue Reading »
Yesterday I wrote 2 posts on the renewable energies folly in Germany, see here and here.
Now the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) confirms the mess with a press release and survey results of businesses and industries. The survey (see right) shows that energy prices and supply risks are threatening the ability of many German industrial companies to compete, and that many are now gearing up to move their operations to friendlier foreign locations.
Renewable energies are leading to higher prices, unreliable supply, less competitiveness and widespread job loss
In total, some 2400 companies of all sizes, sectors, and regions were surveyed throughout the country. Keep Reading »
Oh the dilemma. German Greens have been so “successful” that coal use is rising fast. They helped get rid of the nukes in 2011, punished coal, and subsidized “renewables”. But woe…. energy has to come from somewhere, so the paradoxical crunch comes. Green policies mean that everyone is poorer, but the cheapest energy comes from coal …
The coal industry must be praying for more Green activism:
“IT’S been a black Christmas for green thinkers as Germany, the world leader in rooftop solar and pride of the renewable energy revolution has confirmed its rapid return to coal.
After scrapping nuclear power, Germany’s carbon dioxide emissions are back on the rise as the country clamours to reopen some of the dirtiest brown coalmines that have been closed since the reunification of east and west.The Australian. Continue Reading »
Europe’s green energy basket case, where its ‘limits to growth’ ideology has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. One more reminder of the insanity of trying to phase out coal-fired power before proper alternatives exist.
Just as socialist central planning failed miserably before it was replaced by free market economies, green central planning will have to be discarded before Europe will be able to see a return to economic growth and technological optimism.
Eco-Activist Tim Flannery was the head of Australia’s Climate Commission. For his $180,000, three day, part-time working week, he got to make decisions that affected billions of dollars of Australian taxpayer’s money. Would you want this man in charge of your hard-earned ? …
Quote by Steven Cooper - 'These pulsation waves of air occur at a very low rate and activate the brain's sensory receptors. It has been suggested that the brain becomes confused, the brain thinks it receives noise, but there is no noise - just the pulsations".