At https://notrickszone.com/2021/04/17/the-dawn-of-the-e-vehicle–battery-e… … it is bad enough that wind turbine blades cannot be recycled, and have to be cut up and placed in landfill but now it seems that an even bigger toxic problem awaits the next generation. All those earnest young activists having their bums bitten big time by the money making machine. It seems that electric vehicle batteries are going to be an even bigger problem than wind turbine blades. Lithium ion batteries are going to be a major problem that until now has studiously been ignored by the publicity. The release of this news comes just as the climate change bandwagon is ratcheting up in the US, closely followed by the UK, anxious to catch the shirt tails of the new president. The idea of producing 200 million lithium ion batteries in order to replace petrol tanks has been foisted on Joe Public without any of the drawbacks. It is disposing of them after their relatively short lives that is going to be the problem. Perhaps the issue might kill the golden goose for those claiming climate change is a horrendous problem – but smoke and mirrors will be in the air to puff up a little fog.
It is all put into wonderful proportion over at Spiked – see www.spiked-online.com/2021/04/23/the-green-new-deal-will-impoverish-amer… … where we are told the idea is not for ordinary people to lash out £40,000 for an e-vehicle but for their betters to have roads to drive on that are not snarled up by traffic jams. In other words, their won't be 200 million lithium ion batteries required. The oiks will not have wheels.
At https://phys.org/news/2021-04-medieval-period.html …masquerading as science we have a wonderful piece of propaganda, something for Extinction Rebellion to berate Joe Public. Here we are solemnly told that the medieval warm period was not really such a big deal. It was not that much warmer than normal. However, they have to acknowledge its existence as recent research has shown the period was indeed as warm if not warmer than present day temperatures. So, how do they do it? Quite simples really, they shift the goal posts – either end. They expand the medieval warm period from AD750 to 1350. You may notice the latter includes all the climatic anomalies associated with the early half of the 14th century, the first throes of the Little Ice Age, caused by volcanoes and a heavy meteor flux. However, it also includes, at the front end, almost 200 years of climate downturn, three very cold episodes that were the primus for the Viking migrations southwards to Britain and Ireland. These were also most likely driven by clusters of volcanic eruptions – and solar minima. Here we have a clear case of pulling the wool over the eyes of the annointed. Usually, the medieval warm period is confined to AD950-1250. That is a big difference, not an overt exaggeration but a purposely planned torpedo aimed at quelling recent research on the medieval warm period that was certainly a global event. The wonder to behold is how quickly it will become part of the hype surrounding climate change. Expect this new finding to be quoted ad nauseum across the media. No doubt most people will just think it is a legitimate piece of research rather than a spot of mudslinging but there will always be those who will dig into the issue to get at the truth – but that won't be the media.
If you don't think mischief is afoot have a look at https://notrickszone.com/2021/04/16/8-long-term-australian-stations-alte… … some eight long term Australian temperature stations have been altered from cooling to warming by NASA GISS is the claim. This is not the space people but a subset of climate scientists working in their own office complex miles from any launch pad but funded by the US government via the NASA umbrella. Hansen was part of the apparatus and he ended up with heavy pockets and a sagging jacket and is now enjoying the fruits of his endeavours. The link is from a Japanese sceptic but one of the commenters has a more succinct and brief explanation of what occurred, which has been outlined on several occasions at Tony Heller's 'Real Climate Science' blog. It is all down to a built in trend in the homogenisation models. It is a built in climate trend and not really anything to do with Australians in particular, contrary to the link. That is not to say they are not knowingly in the know. The homogenisation trend is built on an assumption. That assumption is that co2 causes temperatures to go up. However, the biggest greenhouse gas is water vapour – which makes sense as we are living on a water planet. It dominates the surface [the oceans] and the atmosphere. The earth is also an evolved system. It has found a way to dispose of excess heat and that is what happens when a big CME pumps lots of new energy into the upper atmosphere. It eventually gets rid of it as it upsets the system balance. The atmosphere is open. There are no glass windows as in a greenhouse. Even greenhouses have vents and windows and doors to dispose of noon time heat. So does the earth. As environmentalists these people should be well aware of the Gaia hypothesis – which adds further rebuttal to the idea of a greenhouse earth.
Anyway, based on that assumption the trend was concocted as some climate scientists thought that even if a temperature station didn't show any warming of note it should do – as co2 levels had gone up. Hence, they made it go up by introducting the trend as an algorithm that automatically updates temperatures in order to conform with consensus ideas. In other words, they knowingly alter the temperature in order to fit the theory of global warming – which is why every year we are told that temperatures have gone up by a wee bit. This is also why the models do not follow the reality and always run hot. They are designed to do that. The has led to the idea that because satellite data does not agree with the models there must be something wrong with the satellite record. Or more specifically, the guy in charge of collating the data. He has been accused of being a religious fundamentalist, the equivalent of Satan in left wing parlance. Apparently, he goes to church.
Lastly, at 'The Week That Was', a weekly newsletter from the Science and Environmental Policy Project, see Ken [at] haapala [dot] com we have an essay by Richard Lindzen, an atmospheric physicist, and William Happer, also a physicist but specialising in atomic, molecular and optical physics rather than purely atmospheric studies [although there is an overlap of the two], in their take on the composition of the atmosphere. Over 150 years ago John Tyndall recognised that it is the interactions between outgoing infrared radiation [electromagnetic radiation] and certain gases that slow the loss of heat, keeping the land masses from deeply freezing at night. The dominant greenhouse gas is water vapour, as already mentioned, and covers a wide range of wavelengths, or frequencies, in the infrared spectrum. Its effectiveness crashes when water vapour freezes out in the tropopause, approximately 60,000 feet above the equator and 20,000 feet above the poles. Co2 covers only a smal range of wavelengths but is highly effective in that small range of frequencies. However, once all the infrared radiation in those narrow ranges is blocked the range of frequencies is said to be saturated. The really interesting point here is that these wavelengths were already saturated before human made co2 was recognised as a problem. In other words, human emissions have little effect on temperatures according to Lindzen and Happer, not the message that climate science doommongerers wish you to hear. Hence, Lindzen and Happer have also been demonised. Many activists would simply refuse to read or take note of anything they might say or have said in the past – and will only read material produced by the scammers. That is the nature of propaganda. How do you really know what is the truth. What is lies based on computer models or what is deduction based on actual research. At this point in time the scam is so embedded in the brains of people, as the propaganda has been constant for over 20 years, getting on 30. It is a constant barrage from the media, from climate scientists, from the UN and various other organs such as NGOs – and not least, from Charley Chuckles. Genuine research can be published in academic journals but who will read them. Not so many. The propaganda machine simply ignores the science that is contradictory. Out of sight out of mind. Meanwhile, there are pick pockets abroad.