|-||-||NOT Africans!||China Grows?||While ago||Hawking Rot||Sci Liars||Fukushima2|
|Nice Women||Fukushima||Bad Models||Italy Volcano||More Morons||UN Liars||Ancestors||Volcano|
|Q from Carlos||Handy Mail||NOT-Africans||Saturn||Magnetic Uni||MSM Liars||Too Big||Brave Sci|
|Lying Gore||Dementia||Bent Psychos||Bent OZ||Doomsday?||Homeopathy||Real Science||Re: Consensus|
|Small Genome||AI Fears||WRONG-Climate||Bad Pharma||Bad EPA||Barrier Reef||CERN Fraud||Real Heat|
|Higgs Fake||Fukushima||Asteroids||Higgs Truth||Climate Truth||Climate Reality||Climate Prop||No Black Holes|
|Nemesis||Too Cold||Homeopathy||Bad Air||Oldest Homo?||Van Flandern||Waves||Oz Pollutes|
|All Fine!||Antarctica||Plasma?||Posers||Fake News||Clim-Hoax||Hawking||EARLIER|
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 11:26:53 -0000
Subject: Re: "HUMANS DIDN'T EVOLVE JUST FROM AFRICAN ANCESTORS"?
Hello RodrigoCesar and thanks. It's an interesting subject but actual evidence is very sparse - so far.
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 02:32:57 -0200
Subject: Re: "HUMANS DIDN'T EVOLVE JUST FROM AFRICAN ANCESTORS"?
I forwarded it to my friends and a mail list!
Thanks by the input.
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 13:57:45 -0000
Subject: "HUMANS DIDN'T EVOLVE JUST FROM AFRICAN ANCESTORS"?
"HUMANS DIDN'T EVOLVE JUST FROM AFRICAN ANCESTORS"?
Ha! Most of you know I've been rebutting that old mantra of `Out of Africa 60,000 years ago' for a long time now, citing the much longer time needed for the massive diversity evident in groups of highly evolved peoples in China, followed by almost the same in Europe.
I.e - it's clear to me that Homo Sap. is much older than mainstream scientists want to admit, maybe going back a million or more years, and that Africa is NOT an origin for most of us.
BY KASTALIA MEDRANO ON 11/14/17 AT 12:05 PM
ANCIENT HOMININ SKULL FROM CHINA SUGGESTS HUMANS DIDN'T EVOLVE JUST FROM AFRICAN ANCESTORS
Most scientists believe all modern humans are descended from African ancestors. But a new analysis of an ancient Chinese skull found too many similarities to the earliest human fossils found in Africa to be a coincidence; maybe we didn't all originate in Africa.
Known as the Dali skull, it was discovered nearly 40 years ago in China's Shaanxi province. It belonged to a member of the early hominin species Homo erectus. Its facial structure and brain case are intact, despite being dated to around 260,000 years ago. The Dali skull is so old that archaeologists initially didn't believe it could share features with the modern Homo sapiens.
But Xinzhi Wu of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing believed that due to the overwhelming physical similarities, Homo erectus must have shared DNA with Homo sapiens. After decades of this idea being dismissed by mainstream academia, Wu and a colleague, Sheela Athreya of Texas A&M University, recently reanalyzed the Dali skull and found it may force us to rewrite our evolutionary history after all. It's incredibly similar to two separate Homo sapiens skulls previously found in Morocco.
"I really wasn't expecting that," Athreya told New Scientist.
The Dali skull has similarites with Homo sapiens.
"If we'd found only the Moroccan skulls, and not the Dali skull, it would make sense to keep believing all modern humans evolved in Africa. But the similarities show that early modern humans may not have been genetically isolated from other parts of the world, like what we know today as China.
"I think gene flow could have been multidirectional, so some of the traits seen in Europe or Africa could have originated in Asia," Athreya told New Scientist.
So certain characteristics that we associate with modern Homo sapiens may have actually developed in east Asia, and were only later carried to Africa. We'll still need further comparisons between the Dali skull and the Moroccan ones. But the implications are enormous; we're talking about rewriting the origins of our species as we know it, reassessing how our ancestors migrated and interacted and subsequently evolved.
"In a real sense we are talking about a multiregional population, connected recurrently by migration and genetic exchanges," John Hawks of the University of Wisconsin-Madison told New Scientist.
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:27:38 +0800
Subject: Re: China: A Way To Turn Deserts Into Rich Crops
Yes Ray, I have read about this too and have mentioned it in my political FB, poking satire at those who are so fanatical with Allah while in the Quran Allah told them "Seek knowledge even to China" in the sense of "Stop praying and start thinking".
On the other hand it is because of this I always have that idea that when they really want to settle on Mars they shouldn't leave out China exactly because of this as part of the program for terraforming and permanent human settlement sustenance project, when it comes to building mega infrastructures really, China is unbelievable.
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:37:18 -0000
Subject: China: A Way To Turn Deserts Into Rich Crops
China: A Way To Turn Deserts Into Rich Crops
If true this could relieve the threat of future food-shortages.
Face it, there are huge areas of Earth's surface which are sterile, desertified and covered only in rock (some of it being lava) or sand (silicon).
If China's discovery can transform those huge deserts into productive land that will be a great advance.
Posted on 2017/11/11 | TAGS: CHINA, POSITIVE NEWS, SUSTAINABILITY
Groundbreaking: China Has Found A Way To Turn Deserts Into Rich Crops
Success! Researchers at Chongqing Jiatong University have created a paste that can turn sand into soil. The paste consists of materials found naturally in plant cell walls. When sand is mixed with this paste, it retains water, nutrients and air.
The professors at the University couldn't be happier. `According to our calculation, there are over 70 kinds of crops growing here. Many are not planted by us but they just grow themselves,' said Associate Professor Zhao Chaohua. `The costs of artificial materials and machines for transforming sand into soil is lower compared with controlled environmental agriculture and reclamation' added Professor Yang Qingguo.
It only took six months to transform 200 hectares of desert into a forest of rich in diverse crops. The sands have been turned into rows of corn, tomatoes, sorghum and sunflowers. China's breakthrough offers an effective solution to deforestation. A reforestation project is currently underway and aims to reforest 50% of degraded desert land in the next three years. The researchers are keen to expand their project and are confident that they can turn over 13,000 hectares more into arable soil.
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:04:31 -0000
Subject: CO2 at "three million year high"!
CO2 at "three million year high"!
Ha! Silly alarmist crap!
As you can see (at Glacials page), and especially from `Record of Last 65 Million Years', three million years ago wasn't much different from today: the Antarctic had been re-frozen over for a long time by then, so life was much like now, maybe a trifle cooler already.
So what's the panic?
Monday 30 October 2017 13.06 GMT First published on Monday 30 October 2017 11.23 GMT
Global atmospheric CO2 levels hit record high
The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased at record speed last year to hit a level not seen for more than three million years, the UN has warned.
(more at page ...)
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:03:29 -0000
Subject: Hawking's Waffle still popular with the ignorant
Hawking's Waffle still popular with the ignorant
Ha! Most folk haven't got the time or patience to actually read and analyse Hawking's stuff, starting with `Brief History of Time'.
If they did they might realize he's an airy-fairy mathematician without the slightest idea of physical reality.
For instance, when he began his famous theorizing about "black holes" it became apparent that he didn't know that a body accreting mass (a necessary theoretical pre-black hole scenario) would automatically spin at an accelerating rate (he thought it might just sit there).
More interestingly, seems that Hawking (along with most `status quo' and `big bang' big-wigs) was also unaware that a body of mass can only increase spin to a limit - whereupon it must JET, ejecting core material from its poles in axial jets of plasma.
Which is why there are NO BLACK HOLES, nor ever could be.
But, along with all the other "Big Bang" "Expanding Universe" clique, he's had a clear run, taking our tax-money in huge amounts for years, because nobody had the guts (or intelligence) to analyse their airy-fairy waffle.
Monday 23 October 2017 19.56 BST Last modified on Monday 23 October 2017 19.57 BST
Demand for 1966 PhD work, made freely available for the first time, crashes Cambridge's repository website
Stephen Hawking's 1966 doctoral thesis has broken the internet after becoming available to the general public for the first time.
Popular demand for the thesis, entitled Properties of Expanding Universes, was so great on Monday that it caused Cambridge University's repository site to go down. The site was still inaccessible at 7.30pm on Monday.
The `historic and compelling' thesis had swiftly become the most-requested item in Cambridge's open access repository, Apollo.
The university made the essay public at midnight on Sunday to mark Open Access week after hundreds of readers sent in requests to download Hawking's thesis in full.
A University of Cambridge spokesperson said: "We have had a huge response to Prof Hawking's decision to make his PhD thesis publicly available to download, with almost 60,000 downloads in less than 24 hours.
"As a result, visitors to our Open Access site may find that it is performing slower than usual and may at times be temporarily unavailable."
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 09:28:11 -0000
Subject: You can't trust ANY scientist!
You can't trust ANY scientist!
For over half a century anthropologists insisted on a DOGMA of two myths:
1) Clovis People were the first humans to arrive in N America (via Bering Land Bridge), circa 12,000 years ago;
2) The Clovis People immediately wiped out the American "megafauna": armadillos as big as an automobile, horses, camels, huge ground sloths, large and small elephant types like mastodons and mammoths, dire wolves, giant bears, lions and other big cats, including three kinds of saber-toothed tigers. [That was called `The Overkill Hypothesis' - here's a modern alternative theory ].
Anyone who disagreed, or worse - found evidence to disprove those dogmas - was ridiculed, reviled and often fired and blacklisted.
That's what "Rule by Consensus" does to supposedly `unbiased, dispassionate' scientists.
Here's some _facts_ from `The Extinction of the Mammoth's by Charles Ginenthal:
"Nevertheless, other forms of evidence have also been presented that further suggest man was in the Americas long before the blitzkrieg occurred. According to James Shreeve,
"Since the 1930's, anthropologists have taken it as a fact that the first humans to cross the Bering land bridge and colonize the New World were the Clovis people, dating back some 11,500 years... Genetic studies of mitochondrial DNA among American Indians suggest that at least some populations trace their occupation of the Americas back to between 42,000 and 21,000 years ago. More recently, a comparative study of grammatical structures in different language families suggested that humans reached the New World not long after the Cro-Magnons appeared in Western Europe." Much earlier than 12,000 years ago. (actually c. 43,000 - 45,000 years ago - RD)]
James Shreeve, The Neandertal Enigma, (New York, 1995), p. 324.
The linguistic evidence puts native Americans back at least 35,000 years according to Ruth Gruhn.
"Study of aboriginal language distribution supports Knut Fladmark's hypothesis that the initial route of entry of people into the New World was along the Pacific coast rather than through the interior ice-free corridor.
The greatest diversification of aboriginal languages, as indicated by a number of language isolates and major subdivisions of language phyla, is observed on the Pacific Northwest coast, in California on the northern Gulf of Mexico Coast, in Middle America, and in South America.
Following a conventional principle of historical linguistics, it is assumed that the development of language diversification is proportional to time depth of human occupation of an area. A review of the greatest language diversification indicates a time depth of at least 35,000 years of human occupation of most of the Americas."
Ruth Gruhn, "Linguistic Evidence in Support of the Coastal Route of Earliest Entry into the New World," Man, Vol. 23, (1988), p. 77.
Lewin discusses the DNA evidence showing man was in America long before the overkill hypothesis allows.
"DNA analysis of mitochondria present in the cells of North American Indian populations indicate that the Eskimo-Aleut and Nadene populations arrived about 7,500 years ago. The more geographically widespread Amerind population, however, seems to be descended from two separate influxes; the first about 30,000 years ago, the second about 10,000 years ago."
Roger Lewin, "Mitochondria Tell the Tale of Migration to America," New Scientist, (Feb. 22, 1992), p. 16.
That is, three forms of evidence - archeological dating, genetics, and linguistics - point to the fact that man was in the Americas long before the overkill hypothesis will allow. If each of the forms of evidence supported the hunting theory, there would never be a murmur of disagreement with the findings. Because the evidence is so often and so directly negative to their thesis, the overkill advocates contest each and every scintilla of it.
Jeffrey Goodman, in his book, American Genesis, has written an extremely readable and well-documented analysis of the Bering land bridge myth.
For the reader with an interest in the broad range of evidence which contradicts this anthropological dogma, I suggest that this insightful research be perused. The lack of evidence for the migration of man into America via this route, and the number of blatant assumptions elevated to the eminence of fact to support this thesis, is simply appalling.
As Ceram explains,
"It is significant that scholars no longer discuss the question of whether the first Americans came from Siberia; today that is regarded as conclusive. The theory has been around for a long time. ... But the present certainty rests on a rather indirect type of proof: the fact that all other theories have been eliminated either as wrong or . . . as simply nonsensical."
However, in The New York Times for March 4, 1997, page C6, John Noble Wilford reports that "scientists found evidence that early Stone Age people had managed to live in the bitter cold environment of Siberia as early as 300,000 years ago. Here ... scientists were astonished because they had thought that Siberia had been beyond human occupation. ..." If this evidence holds up, ancient man would have been able to arrive in the Americas prior to the 12,000 year barrier. The accumulating evidence strongly suggests ancient man was in America long before the extinction of the megafauna, and severely undermines the overkill hypothesis.
This creates a double bind for the overkill hypothesis. If man could live in Ice Age Beringia early on, he could indeed hunt the megafauna. But if he could live there, he could easily have arrived in the Americas far earlier and this contradicts the hunting hypothesis.
No one (I need not go into this deeply), can ever know in advance that all other, or other future, theories have been eliminated.
Because today's anthropologists believe that their Bering Strait conclusion is correct, based on nothing resembling solid evidence, is simply science by majority or science by consensus.
So you can see that `science' is riddled with greed, hypocrisy, double-dealing and actual lies about almost anything threatening careers and self-importance.
Don't automatically rush to believe ANY scientist, because most are biased, ill-informed liars.
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:31:41 -0000
Subject: Fukushima - new radioactivity on beaches. "Don't eat fish!"
Fukushima - new radioactivity on beaches. "Don't eat fish!"
It gets worse. I feel sorry for folk on west coast of North and South America.
Published time: 3 Oct, 2017 14:05
`Unexpected' source of radioactivity from Fukushima disaster found - study
Six years on, consequences of the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant continue to uncover. Scientists say they've found new and `unexpected' source of radioactive material dozens of kilometers away from the site.
New radioactivity has been discovered in salty groundwater and sands beneath beaches up to 100km away from the disaster site, according to the findings published in `Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences' journal on Monday.
Researchers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) in the US and Japan's Kanazawa University revealed high levels of persistent cesium-137 in eight beaches, sampled for the study between 2013 and 2016.
These levels turned out to be up to 10 times higher than levels in seawater of the power plant harbor, according to the press release on the WHOI website.
"No one expected that the highest levels of cesium in ocean water today would be found not in the harbor of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, but in the groundwater many miles away below the beach sands," one of the researchers, Virginie Sanial, said.
The radioactive element the scientists suggest traveled from the crippled plant with ocean currents days and weeks after the reactor meltdowns. The sand grains have been storing it for years, slowly emitting cesium into ocean.
The radioactive content could be originating from the 2011 disaster or nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s-60s. However, the research team also found another form of cesium which can only be Fukushima-derived.
"Only time will slowly remove the cesium from the sands as it naturally decays away and is washed out by seawater," Sanial said.
Despite the study showing that cesium doesn't pose a risk to public health, the research still warns of such unsuspected pathway and storage of contamination, which should be considered in nuclear power plant monitoring.
"There are 440 operational nuclear reactors in the world, with approximately one-half situated along the coastline," the study reads.
In March 2016, an 8.9 magnitude earthquake struck northeastern Japan, triggering a tsunami that caused meltdowns at three reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
The disaster forced some 160,000 people to flee their homes and left more than 18,000 dead, becoming the worst since the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe.
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:11:15 -0000
Subject: "It's official - women are nicer than men"
"It's official - women are nicer than men"
Ha! Had already concluded that years ago - see `Altruist Survivor - page Four'
The smaller, weaker female is typically more stable, more intelligent, more altruistic and longer-living than the larger and stronger male.
Research shows that females are more than twice as competent at "social cognition"; ie. reaching correct conclusions - about people, motives and situations - and more readily.
2010 - MIT, Carnegie Mellon University, and Union College have found that "the tendency to cooperate effectively is linked to the number of women in a group."
2013 - Neuroscientists from the University of California and Autonomous University of Madrid find that "Women have ... more efficient brains than men"
2013 - "Women Make Better Decisions Than Men, Study Suggests"
PS - that `Altruist' page goes on to describe some weird insect and animal habits
Tuesday 10 October 2017 14.53 BST
It's official - women are nicer than men. Is this really science?
Today comes news from this new frontline: a paper in the esteemed Nature Human Behaviour journal that shows that women's brains make them nicer than men. Women's biology makes them a soft touch! Putting the bins out is, as the prime minister once claimed, a boy job, but that's only so they don't have to do the washing up. So we can reconcile ourselves to being good team players and doing the housework, because once again science has shown that that is what we are predisposed to do.
At least, that is one way of looking at it. Another way is to say that men are mean: the University of Zurich research actually found that women divided equally between those who would share a wad of cash and those who would keep it for themselves while men were slightly less likely to share. Many women are actually just as mean as most men. Deprive both groups of the neurotransmitter dopamine, however, and women became less generous and men slightly more. The scientists insist that this is about dopamine (their paper is entitled `The dopaminergic reward system underpins gender differences in social preferences') but in the wider, more prejudiced world, it will look like one more justification for keeping women away from the brute hurlyburly of a man's world.
There are few more entrancing subjects than the way brains work and why. The connection between behaviours and chemical actions and reactions is astonishing. The scientific method is awesome. So in this sceptical age where no one is trusted at all on anything however admirable their qualifications I am reluctant to question any finding that has, as this one does, the imprimatur of Nature. But really?
It's not the thoroughness of their work that I question. I'm not for a moment doubting that neuroeconomics is a proper area of research that is capable of illuminating important aspects of behaviour. Why people behave as they do, particularly when they appear to behave against their own self-interest, is a subject of enduring fascination. It is also potentially useful.
What I am finding harder to understand is this particular use of neuroeconomics. Behavioural economics, with its interest in how to influence choices through environmental factors such as the way the choice is presented, has obvious applications. But this kind of neuroeconomics? The role of dopamine in making people behave more generously feels interesting in the way that all knowledge is interesting, but then what?
The practicality of research is relevant not because it is desirable that research should always have some clearly understood purpose - which would obviously be a terrible limit to discovery - but because nowadays, unhappily, it almost always does. Not far behind most research stands a drug company eager to find ways of applying in an innovative way the molecules for which it already owns the patent.
The team behind the Nature Human Behaviour paper that suggests men are meaner than women may have such a backer. Maybe one of the giant Swiss-based drugs companies has a drug discovery department tasked with creating a whole new market to transform the proverbial stinginess of men.
On the other hand, it may be something less imaginatively challenging. Perhaps the paper doesn't only appear to play into a tediously familiar trope which might be called the Mars/Venus thing. Or why girls like pink. Or that women are a soft touch. Maybe that is what it is actually doing. I just can't quite work out why.
As a recent book by Angela Saini, Inferior, argued, every piece of research points in one direction: that neurological differences that can be unquestionably attributed to gender appear to be vanishingly small, and (as the Zurich paper clearly acknowledges) intensely difficult to separate from the other powerful societal and cultural influences that divide boys and girls from the pink and blue cot blankets onwards.
So here's an idea for another study. I'd be interested - I'm not sure if it's a work for a behavioural or a neuroeconomist - in research that tried to find out why reputable scientists who could be, say, finding a cure for Alzheimer's, instead go for yet another trot along the familiar avenue that seeks to explain gender difference as our neurological destiny.
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 15:14:54 +0100
Subject: "Fukushima potentially leaking radioactive water for 5 months"
"Fukushima potentially leaking radioactive water for 5 months"
Heck, the Japanese gov't ministers responsible for monitoring their nuclear power program and ALL the TEPCO bosses already belong in jail - for criminally LYING to the crew of the USS Reagan:
Yup, those US sailors have every right to recompense from Japan and from TEPCO. Why? Because the Japanese - (and TEPCO) - LIED about the very high radiation levels (mainly to save face for themselves), thereby leading a humanitarian mission by US sailors into a deadly trap.
Now they're reluctantly admitting that they've `potentially' (which from those irresponsible and cowardly liars means almost CERTAINLY) been leaking radioactive water from the plant "since April" - but, as they're known liars it could be much longer!
Published time: 29 Sep, 2017 12:34
Fukushima potentially leaking radioactive water for 5 months, owners admit
The Fukushima nuclear power plant may have been leaking radioactive water since April, its owner has admitted.
Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. said on Thursday that a problem with monitoring equipment means it can't be sure if radiation-contaminated water leaked from the reactor buildings damaged in the 2011 nuclear disaster which was sparked by an earthquake and tsunami, the Japan Times reports.
The company said there were errors on the settings of six indicators monitoring groundwater levels of wells around reactor buildings 1-4 at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear power station.
The indicators weren't showing accurate water levels, and the actual levels were about 70 centimeters lower than that which the equipment showed.
In May, groundwater at one of the wells sank below the contaminated water inside, NHK reports, which possibly caused the radioactive water to leak into the soil.
The company said it is investigating, and that no abnormal increase of radioactivity has shown up in samples.
The problem with the six wells in question was discovered this week when the company was preparing another well nearby.
The 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster occurred when three of the plant's reactors experienced fuel meltdowns and three units were damaged by hydrogen explosions as a result of the earthquake and subsequent tsunami.
TEPCO has kept groundwater levels in wells higher than the contaminated water levels inside the plant, usually a meter higher. It also installed water-level indicators, which have now been revealed to be inaccurate.
Last week, the company was ordered to pay damages of 376 million yen ($3.36 million) to 42 plaintiffs for the nuclear disaster in the second case a court has which has seen rulings against the company.
The suit, one of about 30 class actions brought against the plant, was brought by residents forced to flee their homes when three reactor cores melted, knocking off the cooling systems and sending radioactive material into the air.
The case examined whether the government and TEPCO could have foreseen the tsunami. A government earthquake assessment made public in 2002 predicted a 20 percent chance of a magnitude 8 earthquake affecting the area within 30 years. The 2011 quake was a magnitude 9.
The case argued that the disaster was preventable as emergency generators could have been placed at a location higher than the plant, which stands 10 meters above sea level.
The court found the state wasn't liable, but another case in March found both TEPCO and the government liable.
In July, people reacted with anger to news that TEPCO planned to release radioactive material tritium, used to cool reactors, from the plant into the Pacific Ocean.
The Japanese government revised its plan to decommission the plant last week, delaying the 30-40 year projection by an additional three years.
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:24:30 +0100
Subject: Told you - "Dark energy may not exist"
Told you: "Dark energy may not exist"
Ha! Maybe the `big-bangers' will finally have some science-facts shoved down their throats:
a) the universe is probably NOT expanding;
b) observed redshifts are NOT caused by distance / velocity but by energy / action (ie. quasars are NOT very far away after all);
c) there are NO black holes - they don't exist;
d) there is NO Dark Matter;
e) there is NO Dark Energy.
It's about time those fakesters and frauds (Hawking et al) owned up to taking our money - big money - by false pretences.
And, as they're going to have to admit the cosmological `standard model' doesn't work, that automatically means the particle physics `standard model' is crap also, which means those billions or trillions of dollars / pounds spent by CERN et al were all totally WASTED (recall the HIGGS FAKE?).
NEWS | PHYSICS | 27 SEPTEMBER 2017
Dark energy may not exist
Research finds a possible explanation for accelerating cosmic expansion that challenges standard cosmological models. Stuart Gary reports.
The accelerating expansion of the universe due to a mysterious quantity called "dark energy" may not be real, according to research claiming it might simply be an artefact caused by the physical structure of the cosmos.
The findings, reported in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, claims the fit of Type Ia supernovae to a model universe with no dark energy appears to be slightly better than the fit using the standard dark energy model.
The study's lead author David Wiltshire, from the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, says existing dark energy models are based on a homogenous universe in which matter is evenly distributed.
"The real universe has a far more complicated structure, comprising galaxies, galaxy clusters, and superclusters arranged in a cosmic web of giant sheets and filaments surrounding vast near-empty voids", says Wiltshire.
Current models of the universe require dark energy to explain the observed acceleration in the rate at which the universe is expanding.
Scientists base this conclusion on measurements of the distances to Type 1a supernovae in distant galaxies, which appear to be farther away than they would be if the universe's expansion was not accelerating.
Type 1a supernovae are powerful explosions bright enough to briefly outshine an entire galaxy. They're caused by the thermonuclear destruction of a type of star known as a white dwarf - the stellar corpse of a Sun-like star.
All Type 1a supernovae are thought to explode at around the same mass - a figure known in astrophysics as the Chandrasekhar limit - which equates to about 1.44 times the mass of the Sun.
Because they all explode at about the same mass, they also explode with about the same level of luminosity.
This allows astronomers to use them as standard candles to measure cosmic distances across the universe - in the same way you can determine how far away a row of street lights is along a road by how bright each one appears from where you're standing.
On a galactic scale, gravity appears to be stronger than scientists can account for, using the normal matter of the universe, the material in the standard model of particle physics, which makes up all the stars, planets, buildings, and people.
To explain their observations, scientists invented "dark matter", a mysterious substance which seems to only interact gravitationally with normal matter.
To explain science's observations of how galaxies move, there must be about five times as much dark matter as normal matter.
It's called dark because whatever it is, it cannot emit light. Scientists can only see its effects gravitationally on normal matter.
On the even larger cosmic scales of an expanding universe, gravity appears to be weaker than expected in a universe containing only normal matter and dark matter.
And so, scientists invented a new force, called "dark energy", a sort of anti-gravitational force causing an acceleration in the expansion of the universe out from the big bang 13.8 billion years ago.
Dark energy isn't noticeable on small scales, but becomes the dominating force of the universe on the largest cosmic scales: almost four times greater than the gravity of normal and dark matter combined.
The idea of dark energy isn't new. Albert Einstein first came up with it to explain a problem he was having when he applied his famous 1915 equations of general relativity theory to the whole universe.
Like other scientists at the time, Einstein believed the universe was in a steady unchanging state. Yet, when applied to cosmology, his equations showed the universe wanted to expand or contract as matter interacts with the fabric of spacetime: matter tells spacetime how to curve, and spacetime tells matter how to move.
To resolve the problem, Einstein introduced a dark energy force in 1917 which he called the "cosmological constant".
It was a mathematical invention, a fudge factor designed to solve the discrepancies between general relativity theory and the best observational evidence of the day, thus bringing the universe back into a steady state.
Years later, when astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered that galaxies appeared to be moving away from each other, and the rate at which they were moving was proportional to their distance, Einstein realised his mistake, describing the cosmological constant as the biggest blunder of his life.
However, the idea has never really gone away, and keeps reappearing to explain strange observations.
In the mid 1990s two teams of scientists, one led by Brian Schmidt and Adam Riess, and the other by Saul Perlmutter, independently measured distances to Type 1a supernovae in the distant universe, finding that they appeared to be further way than they should be if the universe's rate of expansion was constant.
The observations led to the hypothesis that some kind of dark energy anti-gravitational force has caused the expansion of the universe to accelerate over the past six billion years.
Wiltshire and his colleagues now challenge that reasoning.
"But these observations are based on an old model of expansion that has not changed since the 1920s", he says.
In 1922, Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann used Einstein's field equations to develop a physical cosmology governing the expansion of space in homogeneous and isotropic models of the universe.
"Friedmann's equation assumes an expansion identical to that of a featureless soup, with no complicating structure", says Wiltshire.
This has become the basis of the standard Lambda Cold Dark Matter cosmology used to describe the universe.
"In reality, today's universe is not homogeneous", says Wiltshire.
The earliest snapshot of the universe - called cosmic microwave background radiation - displays only slight temperature variations caused by differences in densities present 370,000 years after the Big Bang.
However, gravitational instabilities led those tiny density variations to evolve into the stars, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies, which made up the large scale structure of the universe today.
"The universe has become a vast cosmic web dominated in volume by empty voids, surrounded by sheets of galaxies and threaded by wispy filaments", says Wiltshire.
Rather than comparing the supernova observations to the standard Lambda Cold Dark Matter cosmological model, Wiltshire and colleagues used a different model, called `timescape cosmology'.
Timescape cosmology has no dark energy. Instead, it includes variations in the effects of gravity caused by the lumpiness in the structure in the universe.
Clocks carried by observers in galaxies differ from the clock that best describes average expansion once variations within the universe (known as "inhomogeneity" in the trade) becomes significant.
Whether or not one infers accelerating expansion then depends crucially on the clock used.
"Timescape cosmology gives a slightly better fit to the largest supernova data catalogue than Lambda Cold Dark Matter cosmology," says Wiltshire.
He admits the statistical evidence is not yet strong enough to definitively rule in favour of one model over the other, and adds that future missions such as the European Space Agency's Euclid spacecraft will have the power to distinguish between differing cosmology models.
Another problem involves science's understanding of Type 1a supernovae. They are not actually perfect standard candles, despite being treated as such in calculations.
Since timescape cosmology uses a different equation for average expansion, it gives scientists a new way to test for changes in the properties of supernovae over distance.
Regardless of which model ultimately fits better, better understanding of this will increase the confidence with which scientists can use them as precise distance indicators.
Answering questions like these will help scientists determine whether dark energy is real or not - an important step in determining the ultimate fate of the universe.
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:15:20 +0100
Subject: "Italy's supervolcano" (near Naples)
"Italy's supervolcano" (near Naples)
Well well, an unanticipated update to that `Pozzuoli' item last week.
And it seems I may've accidentally witnessed some of those "magma movements" noted back in early '80s.
By Amanda Devlin | 21st September 2017, 11:31 amUpdated: 21st September 2017, 11:38 am
Italy's supervolcano Campi Flegrei beneath Naples could erupt at ANY moment, completely devastating the city
The monster magma chamber, called Campi Flegrei, has been quietly growing under the ancient town of Pozzuoli for decades
A SUPERVOLCANO which threatens to wipe out Europe could be about to explode, scientists claim.
Campi Flegrei is a massive magma chamber which has been lying dormant under the city of Naples for decades.
It's feared the "hot zone" could burst at any moment if the pressure of molten rock causes the ground to stretch to breaking point, after quietly growing since the 1980s.
A new study published in the Nature journal Scientific Reports says the eruption could have a serious impact on the Naples region, which is home to around 1.5 million people.
Two thousand years ago Mount Vesuvius destroyed Pompeii, and now experts fear there is another threat of danger.
Dr Christopher Kilburn from the University College London Hazard Center said: "By studying how the ground is cracking and moving at Campi Flegrei, we think it may be approaching a critical stage where further unrest will increase the possibility of an eruption, and it's imperative that the authorities are prepared for this."
Vesuvius incinerated and suffocated thousands when it destroyed the Roman city of Pompeii in 79 AD.
Now scientists are turning their attention to Campi Flegrei which has only had two major eruptions - 35,000 years ago and 12,000 years ago - and a smaller eruption in 1538.
Dr De Siena said: "During the last 30 years the behaviour of the volcano has changed, with everything becoming hotter due to fluids permeating the entire caldera.
"This means that the risk from the caldera is no longer just in the centre, but has migrated. Indeed, you can now characterise Campi Flegrei as being like a boiling pot of soup beneath the surface.
"What this means in terms of the scale of any future eruption we cannot say, but there is no doubt that the volcano is becoming more dangerous."
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 14:49:10 +0100
Subject: Inbreeding makes Morons
"Inbreeding making Morons"
Thanks for the link. That work backs-up earlier conclusions and says emphatically that inbreeding seems solely responsible for marked reductions of cognitive abiilty (intelligence).
That's incurable, and increasingly degenerative in future generations.
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 1:27 AM
Subject: Estimating the Inbreeding Depression on Cognitive Behavior: A Population Based Study of Child Cohort
Here is a study published in an academic journal in 2014.
From the study: "A cohort of 408 children (6 to 15 years of age) was selected from inbred and non-inbred families of five Muslim populations of Jammu region. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children (WISC) was used to measure the verbal IQ (VIQ), performance IQ (PIQ) and full scale IQ (FSIQ). Family pedigrees were drawn to access the family history and children's inbred status in terms of coefficient of inbreeding (F).
We found significant decline in child cognitive abilities due to inbreeding and high frequency of mental retardation among offspring from inbred families."
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 19:41:29 +0100
Subject: "Global warming may be occurring more slowly"
"Global warming may be occurring more slowly"
Ha! Yes indeed "warming too slowly" is the private thought of the mediocre fraudsters posing as "scientists" at the IPCC.
Don't forget the UN formed the IPCC with the sole objective of "proving AGW: `anthropogenic (human caused) global warming', by hook or by crook", and so they've had to make use of corrupt fake scientists like Prof. Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia.
(see my "libel note" below article)
And if you look at "The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World's Top Climate Scientists" by Roy W Spencer, you can get an idea of the slow-witted stupidity (or downright fraud) in the IPCC.
"The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) based its alarmist predictions (or "projections" as they call it) on the assumption that the global climate is relatively instable and sensitive to small disturbances. The relatively small greenhouse effect of CO2 (carbon dioxide) would be enhanced by a factor of three by positive feedbacks, caused by the presence of water and water vapour. This assumption has never been proven or even demonstrated.
Spencer shows that the global climate is relatively stable and insensitive to small disturbances. It is controlled by predominantly negative feedbacks (this was already known from geological history).
The atmosphere's temperature has always fluctuated around a long term mean."
Harry Cockburn | 17 hours ago | 19 Sept 18:10
Global warming may be occurring more slowly than previously thought, study suggests
Previous climate models may have been `on the hot side'
Computer modelling used a decade ago to predict how quickly global average temperatures would rise may have forecast too much warming, a study has found.
The Earth warmed more slowly than the models forecast, meaning the planet has a slightly better chance of meeting the goals set out in the Paris climate agreement, including limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
Scientists said previous models may have been "on the hot side".
The study, published this week in the journal Nature Geoscience, does not play down the threat which climate change has to the environment, and maintains that major reductions in emissions must be attained.
But the findings indicate the danger may not be as acute as was previously thought.
Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford and one of the study's authors told The Times: "We haven't seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models. We haven't seen that in the observations."
The original forecasts were based on twelve separate computer models made by universities and government institutes around the world, and were put together ten years ago, "so it's not that surprising that it's starting to divert a little bit from observations", Professor Allen added.
According to The Times, another of the paper's authors, Michael Grubb, a professor of international energy and climate change at University College London, admitted his earlier forecasting models had overplayed how temperatures would rise.
At the Paris climate summit in 2015, Professor Grubb said: "All the evidence from the past 15 years leads me to conclude that actually delivering 1.5C is simply incompatible with democracy."
But speaking to The Times he said: "When the facts change, I change my mind, as [John Maynard] Keynes said. "It's still likely to be very difficult to achieve these kind of changes quickly enough but we are in a better place than I thought."
Professor Grubb said the reassessment of the situation was good news for low-lying countries and island states in the Pacific, which would be swamped by sea-level rises if average temperatures rose by more than 1.5C.
The previous scenario allowed for the planet to emit a total of 70 billion tonnes of Carbon after 2015, in order to keep temperature rises to just 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. But the reassessment allows for a `carbon budget' of another 240bn tonnes of emissions before catastrophic damage is done.
"That's about 20 years of emissions before temperatures are likely to cross 1.5C," Professor Allen said.
"It's the difference between being not doable and being just doable."
Try clicking on ClimateGate I, ClimateGate II, and find out about the criminal fraudsters posing as scientists at the UN.
In fact, I'm willing to risk my neck in the bent libel courts of England by stating flatly that Prof. Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia is a corrupt hypocrite and unworthy of the title `scientist'. He's been lying about `climate science', for money and power.
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:40:15 +0100
Subject: Scientists track last 2,000 years of British evolution
Scientists track last 2,000 years of British evolution
Yup, it's surprising how many of us have stuck around locally (as descendants, I mean). A few years ago a research team was digging out stone-age human remains from the Cheddar Gorge caves (I think), and when they ran a check on local folk to try to match DNA - lo and behold they found a direct descendant living in the local town (think that's called Cheddar too).
Anna Nowogrodzki | 17 May 2016
Scientists track last 2,000 years of British evolution
Technique tested on Britons' genomes provides first look at human genetic adaptation over the past 2,000 years.
People of British origin are better able to digest milk than their ancestors were just two millennia ago.
Humans may be members of an advanced species, but we haven't stopped evolving. Over the past 2,000 years, British people have adapted to become taller and blonder, more likely to have blue eyes and better able to digest milk, according to researchers who have developed a technique to track very recent changes in the human genome.
Some previous methods to suss out such adaptation could only do so over the past 25,000 years. Others have been able to track selection pressures that work to shape the modern human genome over shorter time periods, but they rely upon ancient human DNA or the comparison of closely related populations, which are often unavailable.
The new technique, which is based on a statistical analysis of whole-genome sequences, narrows this window to just two millennia. It is also able to pinpoint the adaptation of complex traits - such as height - which are influenced by many different genes, the researchers report in a paper posted to the preprint server bioRxiv1.
"This method is pretty exciting," says Laura Scheinfeldt, a human geneticist at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Jonathan Pritchard, a geneticist at Stanford University in California, and his colleagues developed the technique and tested it on the whole-genome sequences of 3,195 people collected as part of a project to study the genomes of 10,000 Britons.
Their method takes advantage of the fact that genetic variants, or alleles, favoured under natural selection are, by definition, increasing in frequency. This means that the population that they came from is smaller than the population they are currently in. Alleles from smaller populations have less variability, and so favoured alleles should have fewer single mutations near them.
In the British population, the researchers found that natural selection over the past 2,000 years has favoured genes for lactase (an enzyme that allows people to digest milk), blond hair and blue eyes. It has also favoured a more complex trait: increased height. Height is complicated to study over time because it is a polygenic trait, which means that many genes are involved in determining it.
(more at page ...)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 17:21:13 +0100
Subject: Re: "Parents die while trying to save son at volcanic crater"
There's a Roman temple somewhere in Pozzuoli. From old photos the floor was under a foot of water (sea-water?) only a hundred or so years ago, and even more interestingly the pillars of the temple show minute bore-holes from marine limpets or barnacle thingies extending up for more than a couple of metres (I think).
So, in the last two thousand years the ground around there has sunk several metres and now has risen back up again (think the temple floor is dry again now).
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:44:55 +0100
Subject: "Parents die while trying to save son at volcanic crater"
"Parents die while trying to save son at volcanic crater"
Very sad - they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. It sounds like a gas eruption or maybe a crater collapse.
Maybe more importantly, over recent years we've been hearing of new local eruptions in southern Italy, in Rome AND Naples vicinities, starting with surface cracks with sulfur fumes but then developing into `mini-volcanos' .
That might be a bit worrying if it's a trend.
Published time: 12 Sep, 2017 15:39 | Edited time: 13 Sep, 2017 18:19
Parents die while trying to save son at volcanic crater - reports
Two adults and one child from the same family have reportedly been killed at a volcanic park near Naples.
The incident happened at the Campi Flegrei natural reserve in the coastal city of Pozzuoli, with reports suggesting that two of the victims died after trying to rescue their son from a restricted zone.
According to Il Mattino, Massimiliano Carrer and his wife Tiziana were killed trying to reach their 11-year-old son who had fallen near the Solfatara volcanic crater.
Eyewitness Diego Vitagliano told local media that the tragedy was the `worst scene' he had ever experienced in his life.
A spokesperson for the park's campsite, who declined to give his name, confirmed to RT.com that three Italian nationals died near a volcanic trail.
READ MORE: `Pure surprise': Scientists marvel as Kamchatka volcano erupts for first time in 250 years (VIDEO)
He said the people were killed in a restricted area. RT.com has contacted the local police for comment.
The park, a popular tourist attraction, contains 40 volcanic craters.
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 17:36:12 +0100
Subject: Re: Climate Change debate
Re: Climate Change debate
no problem, it was a pleasure in a way to reassess my own thoughts on the subject and to review the material available (and that `Settled Science' piece by James P Hogan (R.I.P) is well worth another read).
Think each of us has a duty to recognise WHAT is happening and to decide whether anyone can really - truthfully - say WHY it is happening.
So far what is happening is a weak sporadic upward variation in winter temperatures, more than compensated for by a DROP in summer temperatures.
As to WHY - the politicians and their lickspittle tenured `scientists' claim they know (and want to take lots of extra taxes off ordinary people, and oppressively limit any industry NOT owned or controlled by the Rothschilds - scroll).
While most independent scientists say nothing much is happening and any temperature increase and CO2 increase will be beneficial (increasing vegetation, tree-cover and crop-growth world wide).
I confess to not trusting western gov'ts, especially UK and USA, if only because they have a record of long-term corruption and theft of ordinary folks' tax-money, plus a heavy tendency of using propaganda, and then violent coercion of citizens.
So here's a basic `self-help' resource:
General Climate Resources page - Glacials
which also contains links to these pages:
Top MIT Scientist: Global Warming Science Is `Propaganda'
A leading MIT scientist claims that global warming science is based on pure propaganda, and that the "97 percent consensus" statistic is false.
According to Dr. Richard Lindzen, most scientists do not agree that CO2 emissions are the cause for climate change.
Dr. Patrick Moore Testimony in US Senate Subcommittee
Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, gave this testimony in front of the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Oversight.
Hearing was entitled "Natural Resource Adaptation: Protecting Ecosystems and Economies".
Hearing took place on February 25, 20014, in room 406 of the Senate Dirksen office building.
A PDF copy of Dr. Moore's testimony can be downloaded here:
The Settled Science
By James P. Hogan - December 29, 2009
Concerned Scientists Protesting Against Propaganda
Analysis of the situation - w/advice from scientist: Professor Hermann Flohn
Date: 2017-09-09 03:26 GMT-03:00
Subject: Re: Climate Change debate
Thank you again. The article from Syracuse University is really a good proof. I've sent it tonight, highlighting INCONCLUSIVE and the last paragraph. No response back. He had promised some data for tomorrow, though. Let's us see what comes tomorrow, then. I'll let you know. As you said, there may be dogma behind all this. If at the end this is the only thing that remains, I will quit.
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 00:25:05 +0100
Subject: Re: Climate Change debate
Re: Climate Change debate
Ha! - That's an old ploy (saying it was `local warming' in only the Northern Hemisphere).
On that Glacials Page scroll UP to "March 2012 Confirmation - `Medieval Warm Period' was a GLOBAL EVENT - w/world temps hotter than now (article)"; he will find the proof showing the Antarctic was also warm then. The original article, from Syracuse University, is HERE:
"The scientists were particularly interested in crystals found in layers deposited during the `Little Ice Age', approximately 300 to 500 years ago, and during the `Medieval Warm Period', approximately 500 to 1,000 years ago. Both climate events have been documented in Northern Europe, but studies have been inconclusive as to whether the conditions in Northern Europe extended to Antarctica."
"We showed that the Northern European climate events influenced climate conditions in Antarctica," Lu says. "More importantly, we are extremely happy to figure out how to get a climate signal out of this peculiar mineral. A new proxy is always welcome when studying past climate changes."
PS - it's sounding like your pal is a bit dogmatic and closed-minded. However, many professional academics are afraid to speak out these days, so don't be disappointed if he backs-off from admitting the truth.
From: Carlos P****
Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2017 00:09 AM
Subject: Re: Climate Change debate
I've started, or re-started. My friend is saying that these periods shown in the graphics refer to temperatures raising exclusively in the northern hemisphere. The Southern Hemisphere was much colder and Earth average temperature was in fact colder than today's average. I asked proofs, because I told him this is a very important data. Proofs of research data showing tree rings and gases held inside glaciers in the Southern Hemisphere, not just text.
He will provide those tomorrow. Let's see...
Have a good night!
From: Carlos P****
Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2017 2017 17:14 GMT-03:00
Subject: Re: Climate Change debate
Thank you very much Ray !! It is more than enough to go on.
I honestly would like to convince him. This is important, as he is a professor.
I will do my best.
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:32:11 +0100
Subject: Re: Climate Change debate
Right, the situation in climate science is distressing for all honest scientists. And your pal's link is an example. You can tell it's a propaganda piece because it has `disinformation' (lies) built into the very title. In reality a `consensus' didn't exist (and that claimed "97%" is a fraud - someone should be jailed for that).
Honest scientists are angry about all this disinformation and have launched a long term project to try to correct the alarmists' blatantly inaccurate statistics (lies).
It's called `The Petition Project' and one of its description pages has some very interesting graphs illustrating the _real_ facts about climate in the last few hundred years.
As you can see there is _no_ correlation of temperature with CO2 (or any other industrial gasses, not even cow-farts).
However there is complete correlation of temperature with solar activity (and similar correlation of glacier shrinkage with solar activity - only lagging by twenty years, which is usual).
Here's the Petition Project's FAQ page where the scientists describe the reasons they had to speak out - it concerns the machinations of the IPCC, which by the way has virtually _no_ real scientists on its panel - only political appointees who like to call themselves `science delegates'.
Here's part of what the Petition Project says about the IPCC:
"During and after each of these meetings, there have been further publicity campaigns claiming that the "science is settled" - that the "consensus" of scientists in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming is so overwhelming that further examination of the science is unnecessary.
Realizing, from discussions with their scientific colleagues, that this claimed "consensus" does not exist, a group of scientists initiated the Petition Project in early 1998. Thousands of signatures were gathered in a campaign during 1998-1999. Between 1999 and 2007, the list of petition signatories grew gradually, without a special campaign. Between October 2007 and March 2008, a new campaign for signatures was initiated. The majority of the current listed signatories signed or re-signed the petition after October 2007. The original review article that accompanied the petition effort in 1998-1999 was replaced in October 2007 with a new review incorporating the research literature up to that date.
The renewed petition campaign in 2007 was prompted by an escalation of the claims of "consensus," release of the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" by Mr. Al Gore, and related events. Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a "consensus" and "settled science" in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims, which no informed, honest scientist could endorse."
So you can see, from those two web-pages alone, that your pal has swallowed a whole bunch of politically-inspired lies, under the guise of "climate science", which doesn't exist.
And if he needs further convincing send him to Glacials Page where he can see truthful long-term climate data.
That's also referenced in a recent post - where I said:
"I.e. from 1,400 BC - 600 BC it was very hot (maybe ten degrees warmer than now); then from year 1 AD to 450 AD it was also very warm (about five or six degrees hotter than now; the Romans were in Scotland wearing short tunics and sandals); and from 900 AD to 1300 AD it was a bit warmer than that (maybe six to eight degrees warmer than now - warm enough to grow grape vines in northern England and for the Norse to raise cattle and sheep in Greenland)."
Hope that's enough to be going on with.
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 3:54 PM
Subject: Climate Change debate
I have engaged few months ago in an intense debate on Climate Change with a friend of mine who is an engineer, a strong mathematician and teacher. I used what I could of my own reasoning plus many articles, including some data already gathered together on your site.
I believed that the "battle" was more like a draw, but at the end I stopped arguing because the debate was getting too intense for my liking and this was not the objective of bonding this group of friends. This is a group of engineers, physicians, biologists, computer experts and mathematicians. Every one was silent on the subject of climate change, but my friend and I.
Now he comes back with the link below.
This article means near to nothing (to me at least) conclusive to bear with the anthropomorphic cause for climate change, which I strongly do not believe.
However, I am getting tired to go on and perhaps running out of ideas and good data sources.
May I ask for your help on good and reliable research on climate change?
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 15:42:29 +0100
Subject: Useful Little Mail
Useful Little Mail
Pleasant little mail, even if unsolicited. The link is to a Periodic Table of Elements which is the best I've seen, and easiest to refer to. On mouse-over you get a quick-view and you can click on that for the full blurb.
Hello Ray, I noticed your commitment to providing exceptional resources on your Blind Science page. The Beacon has created a Periodic Table of Technology, an interactive guide that's showing the everyday use of elements in technology.?
Check it out here: Periodic Table of Technology
Feel free to share it under the resources on this page or elsewhere on your site.
I'm Natalia, Communications Specialist for The Beacon. Please feel free to contact me.
Communications Specialist, The Beacon
Fios.Verizon.com, Verizon Authorized Retailer
206 College St.| Pineville, NC, 28134
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2017 23:37:17 +0100
Subject: "200,000-Year-Old 'Baby Tooth' Reveals Clues"
"200,000-Year-Old 'Baby Tooth' Reveals Clues"
Well, well! From what we'd already read on this subject it's clear the the Denisovans were close enough to modern humans to allow interbreeding (`mixed marriages') between humans, Denisovans and even Neanderthals.
From modern DNA analyses it seems most interbreeding happened with humans in the East, so today maybe native Siberians, Mongolians, Pacific Islanders, and also Native Australians might have the largest amount of Denisovan DNA.
More interestingly this Denisovan girl lived up to 227,000 yrs ago (Denisovan and Neanderthal are thought to have split up to 470,000 years ago).
So, as Africans have NO trace of Neanderthal (or Denisovan?) DNA, while ALL other humans do, that means "Out of Africa 60,000 years ago" is a load of crap!
PS - most of you know I've never believed in "Out of Africa 60,000 years ago", as I'm more inclined to disregard Africa altogether as a "first origin" and look much further East, maybe to China / Mongolia. And think the process was independent, convergent evolution - because, in so short a time, there's NO WAY a sophisticated, complex and highly intelligent modern Chinese can evolve from an African.
By Charles Q. Choi, Live Science Contributor | July 10, 2017 08:58am ET
200,000-Year-Old `Baby Tooth' Reveals Clues About Mysterious Human Lineage
Scientists say the molar tooth found in Denisova Cave in Siberia estimate the tooth is at least 20,000 years older than previously examined Denisovan fossils. Credit: Slon et al. Sci. Adv. 2017; 3: e1700186
DNA in a fossil from a young girl has revealed that a mysterious extinct human lineage occupied the middle of Asia longer than previously thought, allowing more potential interbreeding with Neanderthals, a new study finds.
Although modern humans are the only surviving human lineage, other hominins - which include modern humans, extinct human species and their immediate ancestors - once lived on Earth. These included Neanderthals, the closest extinct relatives of modern humans, as well as the Denisovans, who lived across a region that might have stretched from Siberia to Southeast Asia.
In 2010, researchers analyzed DNA from fossils to reveal the existence of the Denisovans, suggesting the lineage shared a common ancestor with Neanderthals. However, the Denisovans were nearly as genetically distinct from Neanderthals as Neanderthals were from modern humans, with the ancestors of Denisovans and Neanderthals splitting about 190,000 to 470,000 years ago. [Denisovan Gallery: Tracing the Genetics of Human Ancestors]
The 2010 study also revealed that the Denisovans might have interbred with modern humans thousands of years ago just as Neanderthalsdid. Subsequent research suggested that genetic mutations from Denisovanshave influenced modern human immune systems, as well as fat and blood sugar levels.
However, much remains unknown about the Denisovans, since all fossil evidence of them until now was limited to just three specimens: one finger bone and two molars. All three fossils were unearthed from Denisova Cave, after which the Denisovans are named, in the Altai Mountains in Siberia.
Now, scientists have revealed that they have a fourth Denisovan fossil - a "baby tooth" that likely fell from the jaw of a 10- to 12-year-old girl, said study lead author Viviane Slon, a paleogeneticist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.
"Any additional Denisovan individual that we can identify at this point is very exciting for us," Slon told Live Science.
The crown of the "baby" molar was almost completely worn away when researchers unearthed it. To help preserve the fossil, the researchers used 3D X-rays of the tooth to help find the best way to extract as little powder from the molar as possible. Next, they analyzed what little surviving DNA they could from about 10 milligrams of tooth powder, confirming that the fossil belonged to a Denisovan girl.
The deep layer of sediment in which this molar was found ranges from 128,000 to 227,000 years old. This age makes the tooth one of the oldest human specimens discovered in central Asia to date, and about 50,000 to 100,000 years older than the first known Denisovan fossil.
"This would indicate that Denisovans were present in the Altai area for a very long time - at least as long as modern humans have been in Europe, if not much more," Slon said. Such a long span of time increases the chances that the Denisovans and the Neanderthals may have interacted and interbred, the researchers added.
These new findings, combined with previous data, suggest that there may have been low levels of genetic diversity among the Denisovans, comparable to the lower range of modern human genetic diversity seen among small or secluded populations.
"The low genetic diversity we infer for the Denisovans can most probably be linked to their small population size," Slon said. "This is similar to what has been inferred for Neanderthals. Both groups of archaic hominins seem to have had a far smaller population size than humans today."
Still, the researchers noted that because all four Denisovan fossils unearthed to date come from the same place, it is possible that they represent an isolated population and that Denisovan genetic diversity across their entire geographic range was greater than that seen in these isolated samples. Additional fossils from Denisovans from other locations would help scientists more comprehensively gauge Denisovans' genetic diversity across space and time, Slon said.
The scientists detailed their findings online July 7 in the journal Science Advances.
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:23:13 +0100
Subject: I prefer Tom Van Flandern's logic
I prefer Tom Van Flandern's logic
Ha! Tom Van Flandern has already used logic to research Saturn's rings.
Tom had evidence that there was a planetary explosion about 3.2 M years ago, probably in what is now the Asteroid Belt. The most striking evidence is a coating of sooty residue on all Solar System bodies where it could `stick' - especially fast rotating airless moons; and the only really slow-rotating moon (Iapetus - once in about 80 days) has the coating only on half on its surface.
He also says that Saturn's rings must be a really `recent' formation anyway, simply because micrometeoroids will erode them WITHIN a period of 100,000,000 years (which this article below doesn't seem to be aware of).
And, because Saturn's rings are made up of white clean icy particles (i.e. no soot), he reckons that means those rings were formed SINCE the planetary explosion. I.e. that's within the last 3 M years or so!
Published time: 30 Aug, 2017 15:53 | Edited time: 31 Aug, 2017 07:41
Saturn rings may be far younger than previously thought (VIDEOS)
As Cassini continues its terminal descent towards Saturn, its unique perspective from between the planet's rings and surface has yielded unprecedented insights into one of the solar system's enduring treasures.
The spacecraft, which arrived at the planet 13 years ago to see out its 20-year mission, has just two more close flybys before it meets its fiery end on September 15. It has, however, sent back information which could indicate that Saturn's rings are far younger than previously believed.
Early interpretation of the data gathered by the Cassini spacecraft in the past few weeks indicates that Saturn's rings may be just 100 million years old.
Cassini mission control is trying to weigh the rings as their mass will help the team to determine their exact age.
The bigger they are, the older they are likely to be. That's because the intense gravitational field around the planet draws in a lot of cosmic debris travelling at such high speeds that it would effectively sandblast larger bodies in orbit.
(more at page ...)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 20:09:25 +0100
Subject: "Galaxy 5 billion light-years away shows we live in a magnetic universe"
"Galaxy 5 billion light-years away shows we live in a magnetic universe"
Probably not! [Not lensed images that is.] Nearly ALL claimed `lensed images', including the infamous `Einstein's Cross' are no such thing!
In fact there is no chance of `lensing' forming a four image cross - it's just not optically possible.
So now you have a sure-fire way of rating `scientists' who call themselves astronomers or cosmologists - if they talk about lensing (and especially about Einstein's Cross) then they are trendy rubbish, not real scientists at all (just like Hawking, Dawkins etc..).
[Fully agree we live in a magnetic universe though; see Hannes Alfvén and his much under-appreciated work.]
PS - actually ALL the so-called `facts' in this article are misunderstandings: the distances quoted were derived using `red-shift' - which real scientists are now realizing is WRONG; instead of meaning "far away and therefore old" a high redshift means "close-by, active and young".
PPS - The fact that this article is so `behind-the-times' shows how out of date some scientists AND the media are in cutting-edge scientific matters. - RD
Staff Writers | Toronto, Canada (SPX) Aug 29, 2017
Record-breaking galaxy 5 billion light-years away shows we live in a magnetic universe
An image obtained using the Hubble Space Telescope showing three objects. The two brightest objects (upper right and lower left) are lensed images of the same, distant quasar. The dimmer object between the two lensed images is the galaxy in which a magnetic field was detected.
A team of astronomers has observed the magnetic field of a galaxy five billion light-years from Earth. The galaxy is the most distant in which a coherent magnetic field has been observed and provides important insight into how magnetism in the Universe formed and evolved.
The observation shows a magnetic field of a similar strength and configuration to that seen in our own Milky Way Galaxy, even though the distant galaxy is five billion years younger than ours. This is evidence that galactic magnetic fields form early in a galaxy's life and remain relatively stable.
"This finding is exciting," says Dr. Sui Ann Mao, an astronomer and Minerva Research Group leader at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy and lead author of the paper describing the observation. "It is now the record holder of the most distant galaxy for which we have this magnetic field information." The paper will be published August 28th in Nature Astronomy.
Galaxies have their own magnetic fields, but they are incredibly weak - a million times weaker than the Earth's magnetic field. One theory suggests that the magnetic field of a young galaxy starts off weak and tangled, becoming stronger and more organized over time.
But, because the magnetic field of the observed galaxy is not much different from the fields we observe in our own Milky Way Galaxy and nearby galaxies, the detection is evidence that galactic magnetism appears relatively early, rather than growing slowly over time.
"This means that magnetism is generated very early in a galaxy's life by natural processes, and thus that almost every heavenly body is magnetic," says Prof. Bryan Gaensler, Dunlap Institute for Astronomyand Astrophysics, University of Toronto, and a co-author of the paper. "The implication is that we need to understand magnetism to understand the Universe."
Studying the evolution of galactic magnetic fields requires observations of galaxies at different distances from us because such observations show us galaxies at different ages. But these observations are difficult to make, in part because a magnetic field can't be detected directly. Instead, we can only detect one by observing the magnetic fingerprint it leaves on light passing through it - an effect referred to as Faraday Rotation.
Mao, Gaensler and their colleagues were able to make their observation because a quasar - a very bright and distant galaxy - lies beyond the galaxy being studied, along the same line of sight. Thanks to this chance alignment, the quasar's light passes through the galaxy's magnetic field on its way to us, picking up the tell-tale Faraday Rotation fingerprint.
The observation was made using the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array, an array of radio telescope dishes in Plains of San Agustin in the New Mexico desert, operated by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory.
"Nobody knows where cosmic magnetism comes from or how it was generated," says Gaensler. "But now, we have obtained a major clue needed for solving this mystery, by extracting the fossil record of magnetism in a galaxy billions of years before the present day."
1) Faraday Rotation: A radio wave, like a wave on a pond, oscillates or vibrates in a single direction or plane; for example, a wave on the surface of a pond move up and down in a vertical plane. When a radio signal passes through a magnetic field, the magnetic field rotates the plane of vibration. This so-called Faraday Rotation gives us information about the strength and the polarity - or direction - of the magnetic field.
2) In the Hubble Space Telescope image, there appear to be three objects. Of the three, the central, dimmer object is the galaxy. Both of the two remaining objects are lensed images of the same, more distant quasar. As light from the quasar travels toward us, its path is bent by the gravity of the galaxy, just as the trajectory of a spacecraft is bent as it flies by a planet. We see light from the quasar that traveled along different paths as multiple images of the same object. Says Mao, "Having multiple lensed images of the background quasar to probe along different sight lines through the lensing galaxy is the key to getting the measurement we have here."
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 13:12:50 +0100
Subject: Ha! UK's MSM are thrice-proven liars
Ha! UK's MSM (mainstream media) are thrice-proven liars
In last three months I've been seeing headlines saying "Summer HeatWave Coming!", and then "August to be Baking Hot" and now "UK's Hottest Autumn On The Way".
And guess what? So far they've been as wrong as could be. Instead of temperatures in the high twenties or even thirties, the temps have been mostly in the teens, sometimes even the low teens!
That's ten or even twenty degrees BELOW seasonal average. So where is `global warming'?
PS - for the record, today's temps have been low (mid-teens) and are forecast to be even lower tomorrow - RD
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:00:45 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: Trump to dissolve climate
Trump to dissolve climate advisory panel
Amen Ray! Agree 100%. Al
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:41 AM
Subject: Trump to dissolve climate advisory panel
Trump to dissolve climate advisory panel
Sensible move. There can be no justification for wasting public funds on "advisory panels" whose advice cannot help a putative climate problem.
Take a look at the real climate situation - as those graphs and all the historical and current reports will show, whatever is affecting climate now has happened several times before in the last ten thousand years, only it was much stronger then!
That is, several times well before humans were capable of ANY industrial effects, there were pulses of very high temperature (much higher than now) which lasted hundreds of years.
[ I.e. from 1,400 BC - 600 BC it was very hot (maybe ten degrees warmer than now); then from year 1 AD to 450 AD it was also very warm (about five or six degrees hotter than now; the Romans were in Scotland wearing short tunics and sandals); and from 900 AD to 1300 AD it was a bit warmer than that (maybe six to eight degrees warmer than now - warm enough to grow grape vines in northern England and for the Norse to raise cattle and sheep in Greenland). ]
So whatever is happening now is most likely due to similar forces (i.e. solar), much too large for any human "advisory panels" to even understand, never mind attempt to change.
Report: Trump dissolves climate change advisory panel
The Trump administration has decided to dissolve a federal advisory panel that contributes to a report that measures the current and future impacts of climate change on the U.S., The Washington Post reports.
The acting administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Ben Friedman, informed the chair of the advisory committee that the agency would not renew its charter, which expired Sunday, the report said. This comes two years after NOAA formed the panel, called the Advisory Committee for the Sustained National Climate Assessment, whose 15 members were tasked with advising government and private sector stakeholders on navigating climate change.
The National Climate Assessment, as the report on climate change is known, is supposed to be issued every four years, and the next one is expected next spring, according to the Post.
In the meantime, the administration is reviewing a report that could be key to the final assessment, which estimates that human activities are to blame for an increase in global temperature from 1951 to 2010. Scientists from 13 different agencies produced the report.
That report, which was obtained by The New York Times earlier this month, is awaiting final approval by the Trump administration. The report indicates that temperatures in recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years.
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 07:34:29 +0100
Subject: "The Static Universe: Exploding the Myth of Cosmic Expansion"
"The Static Universe: Exploding the Myth of Cosmic Expansion"
Just finished a second, more thorough reading of "The Static Universe: Exploding the Myth of Cosmic Expansion" by Hilton Ratcliffe - a book recommended for anyone who wants to look past the tangled (and corrupt) undergrowth of modern `science propaganda'.
Ratcliffe is one of my heroes, like Halton Arp, Tom Van Flandern and earlier Fred Hoyle, and, more recently discovered here or here, the husband and wife Burbridges team (see the B2FH group, i.e. with William Fowler and Fred Hoyle), who have consistently and bravely stuck to real science.
During the modern period fashionable astrophizz and `cosmology' has been dominated by frauds like Hawking, Martin Rees and the rest of the BigBang mathematical delusionists (and Michio Kaku, who will apparently say anything for cash or publicity). Before them the doyens were Harlow Shapley and Carl Sagan, who also turned out to be fake scientists, willing to use prestige to bully and blackmail innocents (see Velikovsky affair and scroll a bit). Worst of all, they were all willing to lie about the science in order to fool the public - as bullying hypocrites like Dawkins et al are still doing.
Posterity will judge them as `the scum of science'.
PS - just realized this item might be linked to others about sci-censorship, corruption etc.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 13:12:46 +0100
Subject: "Global Temps Lower Now Than When Gore Received Nobel Prize"
"Global Temps Lower Now Than When Gore Received Nobel Prize"
Yup - she/he is quite right about the Noble prizes being awarded for corrupt reasons (to Gore _and_ Obama).
First realized when reading about Fred Hoyle, who'd earned about three Nobels for really significant discoveries (including the secret of carbon - for which another scientist, who only did what Fred told him, WAS awarded a Nobel) while Fred was never given one because the English elite didn't like his habit of speaking his mind and being truthful, so they vetoed the corrupt Nobel committee.
Meanwhile, the article is also quite right about temperatures, which is no surprise when you know the real facts about climate.
P. Gardner Goldsmith | gardgoldsmith | August. 14. 2017
Inconvenient: Global Temps Lower Now Than When Gore Received Nobel Prize
Many of us know that the Nobel Prize is frequently used for political ends, rather than to award actual achievement in a field. Hence why the `Peace Prize' went to Barack Obama for promoting collectivism cloaked in the euphemism of "bringing people together" prior to him entering the White House.
So why should it come as a surprise that 10 years after Al Gore won his shiny medallion and cash from the Nobel folks, his predictions about the Earth's temperature have proven to not only be wrong, but the complete opposite of what has actually occurred?
Indeed, a decade on, global temperatures are lower than they were when Gore got his proverbial pats on the back from Nobel's clubhouse.
As Marc Morano reports for ClimateDepot, `Global temps were warmer when Al Gore won the 2007 Nobel Prize than today, even after the 2015/16 super El Nino.'
And never forget, the Nobel folks saw fit to award Gore his prize despite the clear mistakes and falsehoods in his 2006 pseudo-doc, "An Inconvenient Truth."
But why bother criticizing unreliable datasets and their widespread propagation in pop media when the Nobel organization can perpetuate the myth and work toward the collectivist agenda of global carbon taxes and massive regulations on industries ranging from coal plants, to oil refineries, to wood stove manufacturers, and light bulb makers?
Why bother giving the Nobel Peace Prize to, say, a woman who saved 2,500 lives in World War II, when one can hand it to Gore and the corrupt UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC - which has been proven to have manipulated data and excised dissent) in 2007?
Indeed. Many folks have forgotten whom the 2007 Nobel cats overlooked in favor of the corrupt climate mob and Gore, but Meteorologist Joe Bastardi hasn't:
"I am glad Al Gore has his new movie out. It reminded me of Irena Sendler, who (sic) he beat out for the Nobel Prize. Irena Sendlerowa was a Polish woman who, along with her underground network, rescued 2,500 Jewish children in Poland during World War II. Many of this number were already outside of the Ghetto and in hiding."
And, of course, Gore's new "An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power" (really?) has flopped, with fewer than 250,000 people watching, and just $2 million in gross revenues after nearly three weeks wasting energy and burning carbon to project it on screens. But pay no attention to the fact that many people are avoiding his second flick because his first was shown to be so full of falsehoods.
Thankfully, scientists and non-scientists around the globe are standing up against the rhetoric and data manipulation of Gore, Michael Mann, the IPCC, and others involved in Climategate. From climatologists resigning to escape the politicized science at universities, to Gore and most other proponents of climate fascism assiduously avoiding invitations to debate evidence of man-made global warming, or lack thereof, people who are interested in unalloyed information, in conversations cleansed of political manipulation, are becoming increasingly aware that what Mr. Gore and his allies offer is not honestly presented, or even honestly collected and studied.
We understand very well. That's why we publish new information about what the climate has been doing for two decades (i.e., not warming), while they try to hide and overlook the truth.
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 22:54:04 +0100
Subject: "11 Early Warning Signs Someone You Love May Have Dementia"
"11 Early Warning Signs Someone You Love May Have Dementia"
Ha! Think the main thrust of this article is alarmist crap designed to make you buy their sponsors' products.
Reasons: During my lifetime the accumulating evidence seems to point to genetic reasons for mental degeneration - and most factors involved seem linked to greed, power and privilege.
I.e - mainly upper-middle and ruling class people tend to go down with dementia and/or Alzheimer's.
11 Early Warning Signs Someone You Love May Have Dementia (and How to Help)
By Dr. Mercola
Virtually everyone has forgetful moments, but how do you know if your memory lapses are the normal day-to-day variety or a sign of something more serious like dementia? It's a common concern, especially with increasing age.
Among Americans, the notion of losing mental capacity evokes twice as much fear as losing physical ability, and 60 percent of U.S. adults say they are very or somewhat worried about memory loss.
On a bright note, most memory blips are nothing to panic over. As you get older, your brain's information-processing speed may decline, which means it may take you longer to recall who wrote the book you're reading or the name of your childhood playmate.
(more at page ...)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 19:56:58 +0100
Subject: "Psychiatrist admits failings but denies misconduct"
"Psychiatrist admits failings but denies misconduct"
All the `professionals' involved here - including the tribunal members - are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Because they all know that psychiatry is a fake, composed of shallow and contradictory opinions - (see details). Here's a truthful 5 min video short "CCHR on Psychiatry: No Science, No Cures"
But gov'ts always support fake `psychiatrists' - because they can use their false diagnoses as pretexts to `justify' locking up and drugging whistle-blowers (especially those with info on parliamentary pedophiles).
Josh Halliday | Thursday 10 August 2017 15.09 BST Last modified on Thursday 10 August 2017 15.37 BST
Connor Sparrowhawk psychiatrist admits failings but denies misconduct
Dr Valerie Murphy tells tribunal she failed to spot teenager had epileptic seizures in weeks before he drowned in NHS care unit
A consultant psychiatrist has admitted failing to spot warning signs before a vulnerable teenager suffered a seizure and drowned in a bath at an NHS care unit.
Dr Valerie Murphy said she now accepted that Connor Sparrowhawk, 18, had at least two epileptic seizures in the weeks before his death.
The psychiatrist conceded that at the time she had `closed her mind' to the possibility and disagreed with concerns raised by Connor's mother.
The teenager, who had epilepsy, autism and learning difficulties, had a seizure and drowned in the bath at Slade House, a now-closed NHS facility in Oxfordshire, on 4 July 2013.
At a medical tribunal on Wednesday, Murphy was asked why she had changed her clinical opinion about two previous epileptic seizures Connor is believed to have had weeks before he died.
She replied: "Time, reflection, further studies. At the time after Patient A [Connor] died it was a very stressful time. I don't think I gave it enough head space."
Becoming tearful, Murphy added:
"And I got it wrong."
Murphy, who was the lead clinician in charge of Connor's care, gave evidence in her defence on the fourth day of a medical practitioners tribunal service hearing in Manchester.
The psychiatrist, who now practises in Cork, Ireland, on Monday admitted a string of failings but she denies misconduct.
The tribunal previously heard that when Connor was admitted to Slade House on 19 March 2013, a plan was drawn up to observe him every 10 minutes because of his epilepsy. But a month before he died, Murphy approved a decision to reduce the frequency to once an hour.
(more at page ...)
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:38:12 +0100
Subject: "Climate Scientists Move Global Meltdown from 2018 to 2168"
"Temperature readings plunge after Australia's Bureau of Meteorology orders end to `tampering;"
Yup, so it goes. And it's actually much worse than they admit, for all but exceedingly isolated places the temperature-monitoring stations have been increasingly built-around by development - so all apparent temperatures have been "increased" by more surrounding hard-top streets, sunlight reflecting buildings, walls and roofs etc.
But the corrupt `global-warming mafia' usually refuse to admit the obvious is happening. Ha!
PS - tks to FB for article
By Marc Morano | August 7, 2017
Temperature readings plunge after Australia's Bureau of Meteorology orders end to `tampering'
"The Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) initially claimed the adjustments were part of its quality control procedures. But bureau chief executive Andrew Johnson later told Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg that investigations had found a number of cold-weather stations were not `fit for purpose' and would be replaced."
Aussie temperature tampering scandal: `Smart cards' filter out coldest temperatures. Full audit needed ASAP! - `The story changes: first it was quality control, then equipment failure, now a smart card?'
Flashback - Scandal: Australian Bureau of Meteorology caught erasing cold temperatures
Flashback: Australia Weather Bureau Caught Tampering With Climate Numbers
TEMPERATURES PLUNGE AFTER AUSTRALIA'S BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY ORDERS FIX
Graham Lloyd | The Australian | Date: 04/08/17
Recorded temperatures at the Bureau of Meteorology's Thredbo Top automatic weather station have dropped below -10C in the past week, after action was taken to make the facility `fit for purpose'.
A record of the Thredbo Top station for 3am on Wednesday shows a temperature reading of -10.6C. This compares with the BoM's monthly highlights for June and July, both showing a low of -9.6C.
The BoM said it had taken immediate action to replace the Thredbo station after concerns were raised that very low temperatures were not making it onto the official record. Controversy has dogged the bureau's automatic weather station network since Goulburn man Lance Pigeon saw a -10.4C reading on the BoM's website on July 2 automatically adjust to -10C, then disappear.
Later independent monitoring of the Thredbo Top station by scientist Jennifer Marohasy showed a recording of -10.6C vanish from the record.
BoM initially claimed the adjustments were part of its quality control procedures. But bureau chief executive Andrew Johnson later told Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg that investigations had found a number of cold-weather stations were not `fit for purpose' and would be replaced.
The BoM has admitted that, in addition to Goulburn and Thredbo Top, stations at Tuggeranong in the ACT, Butlers Gorge and Fingal in Tasmania and Mount Baw Baw in Victoria would be replaced.
An in-house investigation that includes two independent experts has been called. The bureau said it rejected allegations aired in some media outlets that it had sought to tamper with temperature data.
It has been reported online that electronic smart cards were allegedly fitted to the BoM's automatic weather stations, which put a limit on how low temperatures could be recorded in official weather data. The BoM declined to comment ahead of the internal review.
"The findings of a review into this matter will be made available after completion," a BoM representative said. "We do not intend to publish detail prior to that."
"The AWS program is part of the observing systems and operations program, separate from the climate areas."
On her website yesterday, Dr Marohasy said it was not the recording devices that were at fault. "To be clear, the problem is not with the equipment; all that needs to be done is for the smart-card readers to be removed," Dr Marohasy said.
"So that after the automatic weather stations measure the correct temperature, this temperature can be brought forward firstly into the daily weather observation sheet and subsequently into the CDO (climate data online) dataset."
Mr Frydenberg rejected any suggestion that he had prior knowledge of smart cards or the cause of problems which made the stations not fit for purpose. He said he only learnt of the issue with the weather station readings when it was raised by The Australian.
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:38:12 +0100
Subject: "Climate Scientists Move Global Meltdown from 2018 to 2168"
"Climate Scientists Move Global Meltdown from 2018 to 2168"
Ha! This climate change controversy (was "global warming") is a lot like the `social sciences' so-called research a decade or more ago. What they usually did was choose what "conclusion" they wanted to "prove" and then just collect and publish all "evidence" FOR, and ignore or cover-up all evidence AGAINST.
That is simply unfalsifiable - so, as Karl Popper first made clear, it's pseudoscience.
http://conservativetribune.com/climate-scientists-cancel-doomsday/ BY V SAXENA | JULY 17, 2017 AT 10:20AM
Climate Scientists Move Global Meltdown from 2018 to 2168
In 1988, climate change `scientist' James Hansen predicted that within 20 to 30 years New York City's West Side Highway would "be under water."
"And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds," Hansen said at the time, as recalled by reporter Bob Reiss during an interview 16 years ago with Salon. "And the same birds won't be there. The trees in the median strip will change. There will be more police cars - (because) you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up."
That was about 30 years ago, yet not surprisingly, New York City remains OK for the most part, save for its radical leftist mayor, Bill de Blasio.
So now that Hansen's predictions about New York City being flooded have clearly not come true, what has he done? Surprise, surprise - the fake `scientist' has upgraded his prediction by claiming in a paper published last year that if the United States continues to use fossil fuels, sea levels would increase by "several meters over a timescale of 50 to 150 years."
And just last week he addressed the prospect of further temperature increases during an interview with New York magazine. Keep in mind that Hansen predicted in a greenhouse model that there would be "an increase of from two to five degrees Fahrenheit" in global temperatures by 2018, as quoted from December 1998 edition of Spin magazine.
"I don't think we're going to get four or five degrees this century, because we get a cooling effect from the melting ice," he said last week. "But the biggest effect will be that melting ice. In my opinion that's the big thing - sea-level rise - because we have such a large fraction of people on coastlines, more than half of the large cities in the world are on coastlines."
So let me get this straight. Temperatures won't increase because of melting ice, despite him predicting the opposite 30 years ago. And though New York City remains perfectly fine, despite him claiming it would be drenched in water by 2018, it will one day become flooded like Atlantis.
Hah. Maybe, just maybe buried deep within Hansen's so-called research are some real insights, but most likely, and based on his litany of false predictions, his research is nothing but bull.
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 19:25:01 +0100
Subject: Re: `Ignorant bean-counters' to ban Homeopathy as "placebo"
Quite agree - although a couple of decades ago I was probably fairly sceptical about homeopathy - but the sister of a girlfriend swore by it, and gave me a lot of data (I still have a tiny bottle of something (for emergency) which she gave me; don't think I've used it yet).
But my real eye-opener came recently when reading Mae-Wan's books (she was a microbiologist and was in touch with the pioneer researchers in quantum coherent water, mainly in Japan, China and some in eastern? Europe).
`The Rainbow and the Worm'
`Living Rainbow H2O'
They are exciting to read, both because she was very enthusiastic, and also for the breakthrough science revealed (it turns out that if two bulk containers of water, one containing DNA the other sterile, are placed in one room for at least 18 hours (I think?) then the second container of water will also develop that same DNA - without _any_ contact or contamination).
From: Carlos P****
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: `Ignorant bean-counters' to ban Homeopathy as "placebo"
That is a shame. I have Britain's NHS as one of the best and one of the grades that put it at the top is the natural line of medicines. I remember Boots, the pharmacy chain where you feel better only by looking at the enormous availability of homeopathy options to treat you.
I have friends that disdain homeopathics and invariably start the same old litany on Avogadro and moles, when I dare to advocate the benefits of homeopathy, especially for cronic illnesses.
Date: Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:57:10 +0100
Subject: `Ignorant bean-counters' to ban Homeopathy as "placebo"
`Ignorant bean-counters' to ban Homeopathy as "placebo"
Typical of mainstream `science consensus': a bunch of ill-informed mediocre bean-counters who are unaware of what is happening at the cutting-edge of research into the quantum-coherent attributes of water, either in bulk or in cellular suspension - like in our bodies!
Here's my own quote: "Mae-Wan Ho et al show that `There is now good evidence that water is quantum coherent under ambient conditions' - so water has `a memory', and can `communicate' with other water - I.e. the conditions needed for homeopathy to work." and here's Mae-Wan Ho herself describing the quantum coherent state quite movingly.
Meanwhile the ignorant bean-counters of the mainstream `science consensus' are probably totally unaware - as always!
PS - and, typical of our ignorant bean-counting `scientists', they've decided to ban homeopathy just when Swiss scientists are realizing its worth!
Katie Forster Health Correspondent | 21 July 2017
NHS set to ban homeopathy for patients because it is `not evidence based and any benefits are down to placebo'
Health service currently spends more than £90,000 a year on the natural treatment
Doctors should no longer prescribe homeopathic medicine to NHS patients, the health service has said.
The change has been proposed because "at best, homeopathy is a placebo and a misuse of scarce NHS funds which could better be devoted to treatments that work", said Simon Stevens, NHS England's chief executive.
The NHS currently spends £92,412 a year on the natural `treatment', which uses highly diluted doses of natural substances that some claim help the body heal itself.
Recommendations set out in a consultation document categorise homeopathy as a treatment with a `lack of robust evidence of clinical effectiveness' and says GPs should not give it to new patients in a drive to cut prescription costs. "Often patients are receiving medicines which have been proven to be ineffective or in some cases dangerous," says the document, noting there are often "more effective, safer and/or cheaper alternatives".
Last year 1.1 billion prescription items overall were signed off by GPs at a cost of £9.2bn - an amount health bosses have been tasked to reduce through increased scrutiny of the medicines provided.
The new national guidelines state that 18 treatments should generally not be prescribed and sets out action on limiting the prescribing of around 3,200 prescription items, such as eye drops, cough mixture and sun cream, that are commonly available over the counter in chemists and supermarkets.
Other treatments that could soon be banned by the NHS include herbal treatments, lidocaine plasters, omega-3 fatty acids and unlicensed use of the painkiller co-proxamol, which was withdrawn from the market in 2007 due to safety concerns. In March it was revealed that the cost-cutting plans could stop NHS doctors from providing travel vaccinations and prescriptions for hayfever tablets and gluten-free food for coeliacs.
Health services in Bristol is the lead commissioner for homeopathy for 13 local healthcare providers, said NHS England.
"The NHS is probably the world's most efficient health service, but like every country there is still waste and inefficiency that we're determined to root out," said Mr Stevens.
"The public rightly expects that the NHS will use every pound wisely, and today we're taking practical action to free up funding to better spend on modern drugs and treatments."
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:46:13 +0100
Subject: "Trump nominates climate-denying radio host"
"Trump nominates climate-denying radio host"
Interesting. Sometimes the right decisions are made for the `wrong' reasons.
Trump officially nominates climate-denying conservative talk radio host as USDA's top scientist
The Trump administration's war on science continues apace.
Sam Clovis, a former Trump campaign adviser and one-time conservative talk radio host, has no background in the hard sciences, nor any policy experience with food or agriculture. Still, that did not stop President Donald Trump from officially nominating Clovis to the position of the United States Department of Agriculture's undersecretary of research, education, and economics, the agency's top science position.
(more at page ...)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:11:39 +0100
Subject: "Reliability of Science and the Scientific Consensus"
Reliability of Science and the Scientific Consensus
"Science is unique to human activities in that it possesses vast areas of certain knowledge. The collective opinion of scientists in these areas about any problem covered by them will almost always be correct. It is unlikely that much in these areas will be changed in the future, even in a thousand years. And because technology rests almost exclusively on these areas the products of technology work as they are intended to do.
But for areas of uncertain knowledge the story is very different. Indeed the story is pretty well the exact opposite, with the collective opinion of scientists almost always incorrect. There is a very easy proof of this statement. Because of the large number of scientists nowadays, and because of the large financial support which they enjoy, uncertain problems would mostly have been cleared up already if it were otherwise.
So you can be pretty certain that wherever problems resist solution for an appreciable time by an appreciable number of scientists the ideas used for attacking them must be wrong. It is therefore a mistake to have anything to do with popular ideas for solving uncertain issues, and the more respectable the ideas may be the more certain it is that they are wrong."
p.p. 17 - 18 `The Origin Of The Universe And The Origin Of Religion' by Sir Fred Hoyle - ISBN 13: 9781559210836
It's worth recalling that Hoyle's dictum - which is still true today - means that the scientific consensuses on "Black Holes", "Big Bang Theory", "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy" are most likely to be completely wrong - way off-beam.
Because all those trendy theories are unsubstantiated ; they were `invented' to support a `standard model', despite lack of any evidence for them. - RD
Ditto for the (fake) "consensus" on AGW (`global warming') - see ansci915.html#carlos
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 14:24:48 +0100
Subject: "U.S. study shows functional human genome less than 25 pct"
"U.S. study shows functional human genome less than 25 pct"
Well, while I have to agree with the crude logic of the deleterious mutation rate, there's clearly some UNKNOWN THINGS in the human genome that encode a staggering number of different traits and characteristics, encompassing the physical (i.e. like ethnic, tribal or family physiques, abilities etc.), and mental (i.e. forcing monster / moron births from even slight inbreeding).
Thats why human beings generally shunned cousin matings - from time immemorial.
We've seen the births of monsters / morons increase massively over the last few thousand years, mainly due to "religious doctrine" (the religions that advised cousin marriages were really aiming for fast population increase of sparse and isolated tribal peoples, so they could be used in war as cannon fodder - i.e. as useful idiots); and "greed / economic forcing" (when economic collapses occur people can be tempted to break the cousin taboo, to keep the family farms / businesses intact).
And on at least one occasion (maybe 5,000 or more years ago) a system of apartheid was so harshly established that it still exists today - the "caste system" of India: ensuring that most Indians are much more stupid than they need be, because marriages are from a more limited gene pool.
PS - note that China has a strong taboo against marrying _any_ possibly related folk, and an Empire tradition of (fair) examinations determined which people were sent out - far and wide- as administrators, thereby ensuring maximum gene pool mating. As a result China gets top IQ scores.
Source: Xinhua| 2017-07-15 02:20:04 | Editor: Mu Xuequan
U.S. study shows functional human genome less than 25 pct
HOUSTON, July 14 (Xinhua) -- A biologist at the University of Houston has calculated that at least 75 percent of the genome is junk DNA, according to a university report released on Friday.
Evolutionary biologist Dan Graur has published new calculations, indicating the functional portion of the human genome probably falls between 10 percent and 15 percent, with an upper limit of 25 percent. The rest is so-called junk DNA, or useless but harmless DNA.
The research result is in stark contrast to suggestions by scientists with the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project. In 2012, ENCODE announced that 80 percent of the genome had a biochemical function.
The ENCODE consortium is an international collaboration of research groups funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI). Its goal is to build a comprehensive parts list of functional elements in the human genome, including elements that act at the protein and RNA levels, and regulatory elements that control cells and circumstances in which a gene is active.
The calculations took a deceptively simple approach to determining how much of the genome is functional, using the deleterious mutation rate - that is, the rate at which harmful mutations occur - and the replacement fertility rate.
If 80 percent of the human genome to be functional, unrealistically high birth rates would be required to sustain the population even if the deleterious mutation rate were at the low end of estimates, Graur found.
Graur said this new study may help refocus the science of human genomics.
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:16:15 +0100
Subject: "What an artificial intelligence researcher fears about AI"
"What an artificial intelligence researcher fears about AI"
Neat - hadn't known about this group until now. Seems they have some interesting articles archived (as you see my interests are in AI / consciousness etc.)
If you go to the original page and look at the bottom there should be about four sample articles to click on. Have put a couple below this one too, just scroll down.
July 14, 2017 3.51am BST
Arend Hintze - Assistant Professor of Integrative Biology & Computer Science and Engineering, Michigan State University (more at page ...)
Will the robots come to control us?
As an artificial intelligence researcher, I often come across the idea that many people are afraid of what AI might bring. It's perhaps unsurprising, given both history and the entertainment industry, that we might be afraid of a cybernetic takeover that forces us to live locked away, `Matrix'-like, as some sort of human battery.
And yet it is hard for me to look up from the evolutionary computer models I use to develop AI, to think about how the innocent virtual creatures on my screen might become the monsters of the future. Might I become `the destroyer of worlds,' as Oppenheimer lamented after spearheading the construction of the first nuclear bomb?
I would take the fame, I suppose, but perhaps the critics are right. Maybe I shouldn't avoid asking: As an AI expert, what do I fear about artificial intelligence?
Fear of the unforeseen (more at page ...)
Fear of misuse (more at page ...)
Fear of wrong social priorities (more at page ...)
Fear of the nightmare scenario (more at page ...)
Fighting malevolent AI: artificial intelligence, meet cybersecurity - June 13, 2016 10.55am BST
Evolving our way to artificial intelligence - February 5, 2016 11.08am GMT
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:23:25 +0100
Subject: "Here's how you can actually help stop climate change" WRONG!
"Here's how you can actually help stop climate change" WRONG!
The article's been edited down to just the four options, and even they are probably pointless. Why?
Climate is continually changing; each day, month, year, decade, century is different from the last.
What causes change? And what tries to stop change?
The biggest cause of cooling change is increase of cloud cover (i.e. including volcanic eruptions).
The biggest cause of warming change is increase of insolation (more sunlight reaching Earth's surface).
The biggest protection Earth has from the ever-present danger of Ice-Age (i.e. `Snowball Earth' events) is our `thermal blanket' of water vapour. Water vapour is the only really efficient `greenhouse gas' and has acted to stabilize Earth's temperature for billions of years.
CO2 on the other hand is almost useless as a greenhouse gas and cannot significantly protect Earth against cooling.
[Yes, you should now be realizing that "global warming" is a political hoax, designed to take lots of taxpayers' money and give it to corporates (and politicos themselves).]
Compared to the energy swings (of insolation, caused by massive Solar `twitches' - or by gigantic outpourings of volcanic smoke and ash), themselves bolstered and shielded by our thermal blanket of water vapour - there's no way a few billion humans' measly activities can affect climate.
The relatively tiny amounts of atmospheric CO2 (anyway higher in the distant past) don't make _any_ difference, one way or the other.
All the evidence is here - at `Glacials Page'
Here's how you can actually help stop climate change
It takes more than turning off the lights, but it's all doable.
By Kendra Pierre-Louis 3 hours ago
According to Wynes, co-author (along with Kimberly Nicholas of Sweden's Lund University) of a new study in the journal Environmental Research Letters, the four actions that create the most bang for your emissions-reducing buck are ones most of us avoid: having fewer children; living without a car; avoiding transatlantic flights; and eating a plant-based (mostly vegetarian) diet.
(more at page ...)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:07:29 +0100
Subject: "Lancet: `80% of big-pharma "research" is fraudulent'"
"Lancet: `80% of Big Pharma research is fraudulent'" (VIDEO)
Yup, we've had similar warnings in recent years - although I didn't realise the figure was so high.
Alex Pietrowski, Staff Writer, Waking Times | July 10, 2017
FAKE MEDICAL RESEARCH AS BIG A PROBLEM AS FAKE NEWS, SAYS FORMER CBS ANCHOR
As the world confronts the realization that mainstream media organizations are the primary source of fake news and corporate propaganda in our world, more information continues to come to light indicating that much of mainstream science and medical research is also largely fraudulent.
In 2015 the editor of the prestigious Lancet Study issued a report warning that as much as 80% of today's research supporting pharmaceutical marketing is fraudulent.
"Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness." - Dr. Richard Horton, editor of the world's most respected medical journal, The Lancet
These cracks of credibility have been growing for many years now, and as we reported in 2016, the scientific community is proving itself to be highly susceptible to the corruption, dishonesty, dogma, and blatant profiteering, the same negative influences found in all other segments of today's economy.
This is absolutely insane when you consider that the implications of corruption in this field very directly affect people's lives and well-being by leading them into false cures and phony treatments for life-changing medical issues. Medical research journals influence law, insurance policy, doctor's decisions, and bolsters prospective treatments and cures for many ailments and diseases.
Now, in 2017 we are still uncovering just how flawed and corrupt the medical research industry really is, and this may lead us to question much of what we hear and read on scientific medical studies.
A recent report for Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson dives into this issue more deeply. Attkisson is a former anchor for CBS News who quit after 21 years with the network to expose how fake news is rampant within the network. Her best-selling book, The Smear: How Shady Political Operatives and Fake News Control What You See, What You Think, and How You Vote, exposes the fake news industry.
In her recent report on fake science, Attkisson interviews a number of respected professionals, beginning with Dr. Marcia Angell who was at one time the editor-in-chief of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine. Angell is a pioneer in the field of medical journals, but is highly critical of the state of the industry today, has been targeted for her views on this issue.
"I think physicians and the public have come to believe that drugs are much better and much safer than they really are."
- Dr. Marcia Angell
Angell points out this type of corruption wasn't always the norm, but that things began to change when the pharmaceutical industry became wealthier and gained more influence over doctors and researchers. Dr. Howard Pomeranz offers a similar warning on the impact that pharmaceutical companies now have in producing so-called research.
"One always has to be aware of the possibility that somebody who is an author or co-author, or someone who is consulted to help support the research was a paid consultant by the pharmaceutical industry, and that's not always apparent."
- Dr. Howard Pomeranz
The conclusion is that unseen interests are exercising a `startling level of control over medical research and over what is and is not published.' The message is that the public has been trained to take this kind of research at face value because of the air of credibility that many of these institutions in the public eye.
Watch the full news segment with host Sheryl Atkisson here:
FULL MEASURE: May 7, 2017 - Fake Science
Published on May 9, 2017
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 05:47:58 +0100
Subject: "Scientists discover new subatomic particle"
"Scientists discover new subatomic particle"
Ha! That's exactly what they claimed the Fake Higgs boson would do: bind matter together. Didn't happen, did it?.
So the fraudsters at CERN are still riding that tiger, and will have face the music sooner or later.
PS - Check "THE HIGGS FAKE; How Particle Physics Fooled The NOBEL Committee" and there's more reasons here.
The Independent Online | 07 July 2017
Scientists discover new subatomic particle at Large Hadron Collider laboratory
Physicists hope findings will help explain a key force that binds matter together
Scientists have found an extra charming new subatomic particle that they hope will help further explain a key force that binds matter together.
Physicists at the Large Hadron Collider in Europe announced on Thursday the fleeting discovery of a long theorised but never-before-seen type of baryon.
Baryons are subatomic particles made up of quarks. Protons and neutrons are the most common baryons. Quarks are even smaller particles that come in six types, two common types that are light and four heavier types.
The high-speed collisions at the world's biggest atom smasher created for a fraction of a second a baryon particle called Xi cc, said Oxford physicist Guy Wilkinson, who is part of the experiment.
The particle has two heavy quarks - both of a type that are called "charm" - and a light one. In the natural world, baryons have at most one heavy quark.
It may have been brief, but in particle physics it lived for "an appreciably long time," he said.
The two heavy quarks are in a dance that's just like the interaction of a star system with two suns and the third lighter quark circles the dancing pair, Mr Wilkinson said.
"People have looked for it for a long time," Mr Wilkinson said. He said this opens up a whole new "family" of baryons for physicists to find and study.
"It gives us a very unique and interesting laboratory to give us an interesting new angle on the behavior of the strong interaction (between particles), which is one of the key forces in nature," Mr Wilkinson said.
Chris Quigg, a theoretical physicist at the Fermilab near Chicago, who wasn't part of the discovery team, praised the discovery and said "it gives us a lot to think about."
The team has submitted a paper to the journal Physical Review Letters.
The Large Hadron Collider, located in a 27-kilometre (16.8-mile) tunnel beneath the Swiss-French border, was instrumental in the discovery of the Higgs boson. It was built by the European Organization for Nuclear Research, known by its French acronym CERN.
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 04:19:13 +0100
Subject: "EPA sued for hazardous pesticide"
"EPA sued for hazardous pesticide"
Yup, the primal or primitive equation was simple:
GREED = TRIBAL EXTINCTION (see Altruist Survivor pages)
But then humans invented `civilization' and `governments', so then the equation became:
GREED + WORLD GOVERNMENT = GLOBAL EXTINCTION
Published time: 7 Jul, 2017 03:37 | Edited time: 7 Jul, 2017 09:52
EPA faces lawsuit from 4 states & DC for keeping hazardous pesticide on market
A coalition of states have jumped aboard a lawsuit against Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt for not banning a purportedly dangerous chemical that can affect the development of a child's brain.
Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia filed a motion Wednesday against EPA chief Scott Pruitt, in a suit which claims he broke the law by ending efforts to ban the chemical, chlorpyrifos.
The pesticide is sold by Dow Chemical through its subsidiary, Dow AgroSciences, and is sprayed onto food.
Neurodevelopmental problems are cited as a main issue with chlorpyrifos. The EPA made the decision not to outlaw the pesticide, which is sprayed on apples, citrus fruits and cherries among others. On Thursday, the EPA said it was reviewing the lawsuit, the Associated Press (AP) reported.
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco will hear the case. Federal law states that the US Food and Drug Administration must ensure that pesticides used on food are safe for humans consumption.
Announcing the legal action, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said, "job No. 1 should be protecting Americans' well-being, especially that of our children."
He continued, "yet, the administration is jeopardizing our kids' health, allowing the use of a toxic pesticide for which it can't even identify a safe level," AP reported.
Chlorpyrifos is actually shockingly similar to a chemical spray which was developed during WW II as a weapon. It has been used on farms since the '60s. Now, it is one of the most widely used agricultural pesticides in the US, with around 5 million pounds being sold annually.
READ MORE: Dow Chem pushes regulators to scuttle findings of pesticide study - report
Pruitt told Congress last month that his decision to keep chlorpyrifos in production in the US was `based on meaningful data and meaningful science.'
Dow spent $13.6 million on lobbying in 2016 and has a long history of retaining influence in Washington through massive contributions. Andrew Liveris, Dow's CEO, is a close advisor to President Trump and pumped $1 million into his inauguration event, AP reported.
Lawyers hired by Dow Chemical - along with two other producers of organophosphate pesticides - asked Trump's administration to `set aside' negative government findings which show that the pesticide is a risk to almost every federally protected endangered species, according to AP.
Last month, the American Academy of Pediatrics - which represents more than 66,000 pediatricians and pediatric surgeons - urged the EPA to ban chlorpyrifos. The group says it is `deeply alarmed' about the continued use under Pruitt's watch.
The Pesticide Action Network and the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC), also asked a federal court in April to force the EPA to ban the pesticide, The Hill reported.
In October 2015, former President Barack Obama's administration submitted a proposal to ban the spray on food. A risk assessment conducted by nine EPA scientists found that `there is a breadth of information available on the potential adverse neurodevelopmental effects in infants and children as a result of prenatal exposure to chlorpyrifos,' AP reported.
The NRDC and other groups sued the Obama administration before it had taken the action to ban the substance.
Dow Chemical Pressures Trump Administration to Cover Up Pesticide Dangers
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 09:16:00 +0100
Subject: "Battle for credit over Great Barrier Reef"
"Battle for credit over Great Barrier Reef"
Like we've said before, that `climate change' mention is only propaganda. The science is clear, many coral reefs around the world are thriving, so world temperatures CAN'T be to blame for coral bleaching.
Those same scientists have also found chemical `pharmaceuticals' present all over the Great Barrier Reef, many so loaded with hormones that sea-turtles around Australia are now riddled with cancers and may go extinct locally.
We (and UNESCO) also know corrupt politicos are still hand-in-glove with greedy land-clearers and `developers' (felling millions of trees, polluting the rivers, allowing massive chemical fertilizer run-off); and they were still legally dumping thousands of tons of toxic dredging `sludge' directly into the ocean over the reef until recently!
PS - whenever you hear or read "climate change" you can be fairly certain it's propaganda from a lying politico.
Battle for credit over Great Barrier Reef
THERE'S good news for the Great Barrier Reef, but in true political style, a war of words has erupted between who did what, and when.
Shae McDonald - AAP - JULY 6, 20171:24PM
A WAR of words has erupted between the Queensland and federal environment ministers over who has done more to keep the Great Barrier Reef off UNESCO's "in danger" list.
The Great Barrier Reef has been left off UNESCO's "in danger" list following a meeting of its World Heritage Committee. It voted to endorse the federal government's Reef 2050 Plan, which lists a series of measures designed to protect and manage the ecosystem.
State Environment Minister Steven Miles said Josh Frydenberg had taken credit for measures listed in the joint Reef 2050 Plan when it had been largely thanks to his own government.
"He did seem to claim this was all about what they had done and that's pretty clearly not the case," he told AAP on Thursday.
Mr Frydenberg earlier described the UNESCO decision was a "big win for Australia".
"We've received a strong endorsement that our Reef 2050 Plan ... on enhancing the resilience of the reef is working," he told ABC Radio on Thursday.
Mr Frydenberg said several steps had already been implemented, including reducing nitrogen run-off and tackling the crown of thorns starfish.
"We're taking every action possible to ensure this great wonder of the world stays viable and healthy for future generations to come," he said.
But Dr Miles said it was primarily work done by the state government over the past two-and-a-half years that convinced the World Heritage Committee to endorse the management and protection strategy.
"When the Palaszczuk government was elected we made very substantial changes to that plan," he said.
Dr Miles said the language used by UNESCO to describe the improvements was diplomatic for saying "things are going a lot better now than they were before".
Despite its endorsement of the long-term management plan, the World Heritage Committee expressed "serious concern" about the health of the reef. It urged Australia to accelerate its efforts to improve water quality, describing it as "essential to the overall resilience of the property". Dr Miles said the Queensland government had committed to spending a record $63m to address the issue.
"We could always do more if the commonwealth provided us with more support," he said. He said it had also committed to reintroducing tougher land clearing laws, following a defeat by the LNP and crossbenchers in August 2016, if it won with a majority at the next election.
Dr Miles said if his government wasn't able to pass the legislation, the World Heritage Committee may have a "different view down the track".
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 07:09:53 +0100
Subject: Fakery and Fraud - Particle Physics today
Fakery and Fraud - Particle Physics today
Just finished a first read-through of `The Higgs Fake: How Particle Physicists Fooled the Nobel Committee' by Alexander Unzicker and it seems the situation in particle physics is even worse than I'd thought [maybe see my earlier critique from some years ago.]
He makes a good case for thinking that all of the billions of dollars / pounds / euros thrown into those massive installations [like the LHC at CERN] have been wasted, AND that the dozen or so Nobel prizes awarded for `particle discoveries' were taken under false pretences - because only the particle physicists are allowed to `peer review' their own experiments' results and nobody else gets to see the data - unlike all other scientific disciplines.
In other words they're running a `science Ponzi scheme' of self-proclaimed "discoveries".
After summing-up the history of particle physics since the glory days of the 1920's and 1930's he considers the systems in place today. As he says, no theoretical progress has truly been made in sixty or more years and all the unexplained stuff from back then is still just that - unexplained.
To quote: "It is not only that sloppy and superficial work, trickily managed and full of swagger, prevailed over careful, thorough analysis. But CERN, back then, was already a Nobel-greedy big science company seeking to get close to politics and big money. Scientifically, a sick monster." p. 111
He then quoted Gary Taubes, author of `Nobel Dreams: Power, Deceit, and the Ultimate Experiment', who'd said "But nobody ever won a Nobel prize for proving that something didn't exist or by showing that something else was wrong."
So the show goes on - fakery and fraud. But they're riding a tiger and it can't end well.
BTW - that so-called Higgs boson (actually non-existent) was supposed to magically endow matter with its "mass" and therefore also with "inertia" but nothing of the sort has been shown to have happened.
Here's some clues about reality of inertia, and you can demonstrate that inertial field by spinning a coin on a table-top - the fact that the coin stands upright (while spinning fast) can't be explained by the equations of particle physics. Ha! - RD
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 02:07:59 +0100
Subject: "'Very strong' climate change signal in record June heat"
"'Very strong' climate change signal in record June heat"
Ha! Absolute crap! They've clearly not heard of (or wilfully ignored) a real `record' hot June/July - of 1783: - i.e. during the `Little Ice Age' [Wiki].
"... All the time the heat was so intense that butchers' meat could hardly be eaten on the day after it was killed; and the flies swarmed so in the lanes and hedges that they rendered the horses half frantic, and riding irksome."
Just goes to show: the experts don't know everything.
By Matt McGrath | Environment correspondent | 2 hours ago - 30 June 2017
`Very strong' climate change signal in record June heat
The chances of soaring temperatures have been increased by human related climate change
The June heat waves that impacted much of the UK and Western Europe were made more intense because of climate change say scientists.
Forest fires in Portugal claimed scores of lives while emergency heat plans were triggered in France, Switzerland and the Netherlands.
Britain experienced its warmest June day since the famous heat wave of 1976.
Human-related warming made record heat 10 times more likely in parts of Europe the researchers say.
During June, mean monthly temperatures about 3C above normal were recorded across western parts of the continent. France experienced its hottest June night ever on 21st when the average around the country was 26.4C.
That same day had seen the mercury hit 34.5 at Heathrow in what was the UK's warmest June day for 40 years.
It was a similar story in the Netherlands which is set to have its hottest June on record while in Switzerland it was the second warmest since 1864.
Now, researchers with World Weather Attribution have carried out a multi-method analysis to assess the role of warming connected to human activities in these record temperatures.
"We simulate what is the possible weather under the current climate and then we simulate what is the possible weather without anthropogenic climate change, and then we compare these two likelihoods which gives us the risk ratio," Dr Friederike Otto from the University of Oxford, one of the study's authors, told BBC News.
"We found a very strong signal."
That signal, according to the authors, made heat waves at least 10 times more likely in Spain and Portugal.
(more at page ...)
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 17:20:06 +0100
Subject: "The Higgs Fake"
"The Higgs Fake"
Just opened "The Higgs Fake - how particle physicists fooled the Nobel Committee" by Alexander Unzicker - and read:
`Beware of false knowledge, it is more dangerous than ignorance' - George Bernard Shaw
"Needless to say this book will hardly appeal to particle physicists, and not even lay much of a basis they will wish to discuss. There is no way to convince an expert that he or she has done nonsense for thirty years."
PS - here's my own critiques of ALL "standard models"
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 15:51:13 +0100
Subject: "Fukushima: USS Reagan crew can sue Japanese"
"Fukushima: USS Reagan crew can sue Japanese"
Yup, those US sailors have every right to recompense from Japan and from TEPCO. Why? Because the Japanese (and TEPCO) LIED about the very high radiation levels (mainly to save face for themselves), thereby leading a humanitarian mission by US sailors into a deadly trap.
[BTW - that "firefighters rule" doesn't apply - the Navy guys weren't objecting to danger, but they WERE objecting to being lied to about the severity of the danger.]
I know it's difficult for politcos and corporates to get their heads round, but we normal people like, and expect, to be told the truth!
Published time: 23 Jun, 2017 04:26 | Edited time: 23 Jun, 2017 08:31
USS Reagan crew can sue Japanese company over Fukushima nuclear disaster - court
A federal appeals court has ruled that members of the US Navy can now, in a US court, pursue their lawsuit which alleges that they were exposed to radiation while providing aid after the nuclear crisis in Fukushima, Japan.
On Thursday, the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in favor of the sailors who were exposed to dangerous levels of radiation while providing humanitarian aid after an earthquake destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan.
The ruling allows sailors, who were aboard the ship at the time, to pursue their lawsuit against the state-owned Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) for misrepresented radiation levels in the surrounding air and water. The lawsuit alleges that TEPCO misled them about the extent of the radiation leak.
Photo published for Study claims USS Reagan crew exposed to extremely high levels of radiation near Fukushima
Study claims USS Reagan crew exposed to extremely high levels of radiation near Fukushima - RT
A new report on the nuclear crisis that started to unfold in Fukushima, Japan almost three years ago suggests that American troops who assisted with disaster relief efforts were exposed to unheard of ...
An investigation into the incident found that TEPCO did not take proper precautions to prevent the incident and described the meltdown as a `manmade' disaster. TEPCO later admitted the meltdown could have been avoided.
US Navy sailors sue Japan for lying about Fukushima radiation
The Japanese government set up the Nuclear Damage Claim Dispute Resolution Center to deal with all the claims against TEPCO. So far, a total of $58 billion has been paid out to victims of the disaster.
However, TEPCO asked the courts to dismiss the case from the US sailors under the `firefighter's rule,' which states that first responders cannot sue those who caused the emergency.
Up to 75,000 US citizens could have been affected by the meltdown, according to former Democratic senator and presidential candidate John Edwards who is presenting the case in court.
"These members of the United States Navy deserve their day in court, and they will get it," said Edwards. "These American heroes served the United States and were innocent victims in a nuclear disaster that never should have happened. This case has broad US interests, both because of our nation's long-standing relationship with Japan, and because plaintiffs in this case are members of the US military harmed while on a humanitarian mission."
The sailors continue to suffer from blindness, thyroid cancer, leukemia and brain tumors, Edwards said.
Attorneys are seeking $1 billion in damages from TEPCO and several other defendants, including General Electric, EBASCO, Toshiba Corp. and Hitachi.
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 18:16:40 +0100
Subject: "Asteroid Collision With Earth Inevitable, Say Experts"
"Asteroid Collision With Earth Inevitable, Say Experts"
Yup, I believe "If it can happen, it will happen" and, despite reassurances from `experts' (with axes to grind) oil-tankers continue to rupture and sink, nuclear power stations run amok and disintegrate and all sorts of sensitive hi-tech stuff still obeys Murphy's Law by failing or blowing up.
Like they say: "It's only a matter of time".
Updated: June 21, 2017 17:17 IST
Asteroid Collision With Earth Inevitable, Say Experts
The warning comes ahead of the Asteroid Day to be observed on June 30. On that day in 1908, a small asteroid exploded over Tunguska in Russia's Siberia, burning the ground over 2,000 square kilometres.
LONDON: An asteroid strike on Earth is just a matter of time and it could destroy major cities, experts have said. According to Alan Fitzsimmons from Queen's University Belfast in Britain, it is a case of when an asteroid collision will happen, rather than if it will happen.
The warning comes ahead of the Asteroid Day to be observed on June 30. On that day in 1908, a small asteroid exploded over Tunguska in Russia's Siberia, levelling trees and burning the ground over 2,000 square kilometres.
This year, discussions and presentations will be streamed live from Luxembourg on June 30. Experts including Apollo 9 astronaut Rusty Schweickart and International Space Station astronaut Nicole Stott will answer questions from people on social media.
Mr Fitzsimmons said an unexpected strike today by an asteroid similar in size to the one that exploded over Siberia could easily destroy a major city, and a larger asteroid could be more dangerous.
"It is important to know that scientists and engineers have made great strides in detecting near-Earth asteroids and understanding the threat posed by them," Mr Fitzsimmons said.
"Over 1,800 potentially hazardous objects have been discovered so far, but there are many more waiting to be found," he said.
"Astronomers find near-Earth asteroids every day and most are harmless. But it is still possible the next Tunguska would take us by surprise, and although we are much better at finding larger asteroids, that does us no good if we are not prepared to do something about them," he added.
The risk of a sizeable asteroid hitting the Earth is significantly growing every few years, Czech scientists who analysed 144 fireballs from a recent meteor shower had warned.
The Taurid meteor shower showed significantly enhanced activity in 2015. Researchers found that this was due to a well-defined orbital structure.
Researchers from the Astronomical Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences recently showed that a "new branch" of Taurids contains at least two asteroids of the size 200-300 metres.
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:30:24 +0100
Subject: "THE HIGGS FAKE"
THE HIGGS FAKE; How Particle Physics Fooled The NOBEL Committee
Excellent! - and I should admit to having strong opinions on this subject, which came from reading and agreeing with the scathing critique of "particle physics" from the professors Stewart and Cohen more than a decade ago. Here's a trio of illustrations (simple analogy) based on their comments.
That "Excellent" was to welcome this new book by Alexander Unzicker, called "The Higgs Fake" which starts off strong and looks like carrying-on stronger - like he says: "To make intelligent people do stupid things, it takes particle physics."
As he also implies, all `standard models' are now corrupt: unrealistic and indeed ridiculous pretences rigged by posturing fakers (like Hawking, Dawkins etc).
Roll on the revolution!
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 06:38:44 +0100
Subject: FWD - "Rick Perry does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming"
"Rick Perry does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming"
Well, well. This time I'm agreeing with a politico (is he a politico?). Anyway, he's quite right, water vapour is by far the strongest heat reflector (greenhouse gas), carbon dioxide has only a relatively tiny effect and even that is not constant or level across the spectrum (i.e. CO2 is a very inefficient reflector of heat).
But of course the biggest actual _influence_ on global temperature is solar, even a slight change in insolation (the amount of solar radiation arriving at Earth's surface) has a huge effect on both long and short-term climate.
It's about time the MSM dropped the lie about a fake consensus and printed truthful science - i.e. that most competent climate scientists _know_ the `anti-CO2 campaign' has no scientific basis and is purely a political ploy. Maybe they want to to squeeze more taxes out of us, maybe using it as a NWO-implementing device ... who knows?
BY MATTHEW DALY, ASSOCIATED PRESS June 19, 2017 at 1:32 PM EDT
Energy Secretary Rick Perry says carbon emissions not main driver for climate change
WASHINGTON - Energy Secretary Rick Perry said Monday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming, a statement at odds with mainstream scientific consensus but in line with the head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Asked on CNBC's `Squawk Box' whether carbon emissions are primarily responsible for climate change, Perry said no, adding that `most likely the primary control knob is the ocean waters and this environment that we live in.'
Perry's view is contrary to mainstream climate science, including analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The EPA under President Donald Trump recently removed a web page that declared `carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to recent climate change.'
Taking down the web page came after EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, appearing on `Squawk Box' in March, said `there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact' of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases on the planet.
"So, no, I would not agree that (carbon dioxide) is a primary contributor to the global warming that we see," Pruitt said.
The Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, organized by the United Nations, calls carbon dioxide the biggest heat trapping force, responsible for about 33 times more added warming than natural causes.
The panel's calculations mean carbon dioxide alone accounts for between 1 and 3 degrees warming, said MIT atmospheric scientist Kerry Emanuel.
Perry, like Pruitt, rejected the scientific consensus on climate change.
"This idea that science is just absolutely settled and if you don't believe it's settled then you're somehow another Neanderthal, that is so inappropriate from my perspective," he said.
Being a skeptic about climate change issues is `quite all right,' Perry added, saying skepticism is a sign of being a "wise, intellectually engaged person."
(more at page ...)
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 19:56:46 +0100
Subject: "[A]n incredible drop in temperature"
"[A]n incredible drop in temperature"
Just now reading John Keel's `Our Haunted Planet' which, typically, is engagingly written and soundly scientifically based, while being provocative and controversial in the extreme.
For instance, as the extract below shows, something happened (maybe 13,000 or 30,000 years ago?) which our scientists simply can't explain - so they hide it away and refuse to discuss it.
How `scientific' is that?
"Studies of the rock levels of the last Ice Age have produced evidence that major shifts of the earth's crust or the planet's entire axis occur every twelve thousand years or so. Such shifts would change the climate completely; frigid areas would suddenly be in the tropic zones, water would inundate land areas, and of course, all life would be affected.
In a stimulating article in the `Saturday Evening Post' of January 16, 1960, zoologist Ivan T Sanderson documented the amazing results of one of these planetary inversions. Prehistoric mammoths found preserved in the frozen muck of Siberia had mouthfuls of unswallowed plants, as though they had been quick frozen while munching happily on their feeding grounds. Sanderson pointed out that the only way these animals could have been so splendidly preserved was to have been exposed to an incredible drop in temperature.
This could have occurred in several ways, he pointed out cautiously. The earth's crust could have shifted very suddenly, carrying the animals farther north very rapidly, the entire axis could have rocked over, or some cloud of frigid gases from space could have suddenly engulfed the entire planet.
Whatever the case, the discovery of these animal carcasses is solid evidence that some unexplained calamity took place with fierce suddenness thousands of years ago."
p. 62 `Our Haunted Planet' by John A. Keel
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 18:40:27 +0100
Subject: Full Facts re: Climate Propaganda
"It is astonishing that any journal could have published a paper claiming a 97% climate consensus when on the authors' own analysis the true consensus was well below 1%," said Dr. David Legates, a geology professor at the University of Delaware and the study's lead author.
Here's the full facts as laid out on June 7, 2017
PS - had the earlier version of this (2013) already - this is clearer, check at `glacials page'.
PPS - warnings about `consensus' here and here
PPPS - was a bit surprised that Obama quoted the fake consensus without checking it, then remembered that he's a politician: i.e. unscientific and unscrupulous.
Top MIT Scientist: Global Warming Science Is `Propaganda'
June 7, 2017 Sean Adl-Tabatabai News, US 35
A leading MIT scientist claims that global warming science is based on pure propaganda, and that the `97 percent consensus' statistic is false.
According to Dr. Richard Lindzen, most scientists do not agree that CO2 emissions are the cause for climate change.
Dailycaller.com reports: "It was the narrative from the beginning," Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), told RealClear Radio Hour host Bill Frezza Friday. "In 1998, [NASA's James] Hansen made some vague remarks. Newsweek ran a cover that says all scientists agree. Now they never really tell you what they agree on."
"It is propaganda," Lindzen said. "So all scientists agree it's probably warmer now than it was at the end of the Little Ice Age. Almost all Scientists agree that if you add CO2, you will have some warming. Maybe very little warming."
"But it is propaganda to translate that into it is dangerous and we must reduce CO2," he added.
Lindzen is referring to the often cited statistic among environmentalists and liberal politicians that 97 percent of climate scientists agree human activities are causing the planet to warm. This sort of argument has been around for decades, but recent use of the statistic can be traced to a 2013 report by Australian researcher John Cook.
Cook's paper found of the scientific study `abstracts expressing a position on [manmade global warming], 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.'
But Cook's assertion has been heavily criticized by researchers carefully examining his methodology.
A paper by five leading climatologists published in the journal Science and Education found only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate studies examined in Cook's study explicitly stated mankind has caused most of the warming since 1950 - meaning the actual consensus is 0.3 percent.
"It is astonishing that any journal could have published a paper claiming a 97% climate consensus when on the authors' own analysis the true consensus was well below 1%," said Dr. David Legates, a geology professor at the University of Delaware and the study's lead author.
A 2013 study by Andrew Montford of the Global Warming Policy Foundation found that Cook had to cast a wide net to cram scientists into his so-called consensus. To be part of Cook's consensus, a scientific study only needed to agree carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and that human activities have warmed the planet `to some unspecified extent' - both of which are uncontroversial points.
"Almost everybody involved in the climate debate, including the majority of sceptics, accepts these propositions, so little can be learned from the Cook et al. paper," wrote Montford. "The extent to which the warming in the last two decades of the twentieth century was man-made and the likely extent of any future warming remain highly contentious scientific issues."
Despite the dubious nature of the consensus, liberal politicians used the figure to bolster their calls for policies to fight global warming. President Barack Obama even cited the Cook paper while announcing sweeping climate regulations.
"Ninety-seven percent of scientists, including, by the way, some who originally disputed the data, have now put that to rest," Obama said in 2013, announcing his new global warming plan. "They've acknowledged the planet is warming and human activity is contributing to it."
Lindzen disagreed with politicians who cite Cook's paper to call for stricter energy regulations. He said it's part of a political machine that's used by scientists and politicians to direct more taxpayer dollars to pet projects.
"If you can make an ambiguous remark and you have people who will amplify it `they said it not me' and the response of the political system is to increase your funding, what's not to like?" Lindzen said.
"If I look through my department, at least half of them keep mum. Just keep on doing your work, trying to figure out how it works," he said.
Date: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:17:59 +0100
Subject: "No Black Holes"
"No Black Holes"
Just remembered a nice trick of logic, one of many mastered by Tom Van Flandern, and which enabled him to be so scathing about the `mediocre mainstream' of conformist scientists.
For several reasons (most of which I fully agree with) Tom didn't believe in all the `fashionable' add-ons which trendy but unscientific frauds have claimed to exist (we're talking "black holes", "dark matter", "dark energy" here - and the fraudsters include Hawking and all the "Inflationary Universe" gang).
Now I've just recalled a little analysis in Tom's book (`Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets - Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated') - which conclusively disproved all those "black holes" which are still being claimed to lurk at the center of all or most spiral galaxies (including ours).
The center of a galaxy can't be seen directly because of the gas and dust clouds circling around it, interspersed with many large and small stars.
But you _can_ measure the speeds of those gas and dust clouds, and also the speeds of those stars.
From those speeds you can conclude that there is NO infinitely dense, infinitely massive object (like a "black hole" fr'instance) at the galactic center, because if there was, the stars would be moving much faster (dragged by the "black hole's huge gravity"). What there _is_ at the galactic center is a rotating axis (w/spokes) of highly magnetic plasma, which is responsible for the speeds of the gas and dust clouds, but which can hardly affect the stars - which are made of fairly solid matter.
[Think Tom's examples of the maths used data from the Milky Way - but any nearby spiral galaxy would do.]
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 06:34:06 +0100
Subject: Ha! "New evidence that all stars are born in pairs"
"New evidence that all stars are born in pairs"
Ha! Although folk seem to be claiming kudos for this `discovery' - seem to recall that Tom Van Flandern worked it out from basic principles and published it at least once, I think, in `Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets - Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated', his last `big book'.
But then, Tom was a rebel (and usually right), so the mediocre mainstream will probably ignore his priority.
New evidence that all stars are born in pairs
June 14, 2017 by Robert Sanders
Did our sun have a twin when it was born 4.5 billion years ago?
Almost certainly yes - though not an identical twin. And so did every other sunlike star in the universe, according to a new analysis by a theoretical physicist from UC Berkeley and a radio astronomer from the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory at Harvard University.
Many stars have companions, including our nearest neighbor, Alpha Centauri, a triplet system. Astronomers have long sought an explanation. Are binary and triplet star systems born that way? Did one star capture another? Do binary stars sometimes split up and become single stars?
Astronomers have even searched for a companion to our sun, a star dubbed Nemesis because it was supposed to have kicked an asteroid into Earth's orbit that collided with our planet and exterminated the dinosaurs. It has never been found.
The new assertion is based on a radio survey of a giant molecular cloud filled with recently formed stars in the constellation Perseus, and a mathematical model that can explain the Perseus observations only if all sunlike stars are born with a companion.
"We are saying, yes, there probably was a Nemesis, a long time ago," said co-author Steven Stahler, a UC Berkeley research astronomer.
"We ran a series of statistical models to see if we could account for the relative populations of young single stars and binaries of all separations in the Perseus molecular cloud, and the only model that could reproduce the data was one in which all stars form initially as wide binaries. These systems then either shrink or break apart within a million years."
(more at page ...)
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 10:01:47 +0100
Subject: "Global Warming Study Gets Cancelled Because of `Unprecedented' Ice"
"Global Warming Study Gets Cancelled Because of `Unprecedented' Ice"
Thanks to F.B.
PS - already got much of that (in reports, graphs and charts) - at glacials page.
Global Warming Study Gets Cancelled Because of `Unprecedented' Ice
08:00pm June 13, 2017
It's always funny when the global warming scam gets blown apart by the very weather the scammers would like to twist to their will.
Here's the latest.
From Breitbart, via Vice:
The study, entitled BaySys, is a $17-million four-year-long program headed by the University of Manitoba. It was planning to conduct the third leg of its research by sending 40 scientists from five Canadian universities out into the Bay on the Canadian Research Icebreaker CCGS Amundsen to study "contributions of climate change and regulation on the Hudson Bay system."
But it had to be cancelled when the Icebreaker was needed to help rescue ships from `unprecedented ice conditions'.
"It became clear to me very quickly that these weren't just heavy ice conditions, these were unprecedented ice conditions," Dr. David Barber, the lead scientist on the study, told VICE. "We were finding thick multi-year sea ice floes which on level ice were five metres thick - it was much, much thicker and much, much heavier than anything you would expect at that latitude and at that time of year."
That doesn't fit the narrative.
This isn't the first time that the climate hoaxers got hoisted on their own icy petard.
There was the Ship of Fools expedition in which an Australian climate researcher called Chris Turkey had to call an expedition to the melting Antarctic after his ship got stuck in the ice.
The Caitlin Expedition - supported by the Prince of Wales - in which Pen Haddow and his team had to abandon their trip to the North Pole because it was colder than they'd expected.
Most recently there was Ship of Fools II, in which a global warming research voyage by David Hempleman Adams had to be curtailed because of unexpected ice.
The alarmists have been warning us since at least the 1970s, except then it was global cooling and the new Ice Age which would soon be upon us.
Then they vacillated to global warming when the Ice Age failed to happen.
But when global warming didn't seem to pan out, came the even more amorphous, `climate change'.
But of course, what they can't get around is that yes, weather has varied for time immemorial, that doesn't prove their claims ...
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 16:59:16 +0100
Subject: "Homeopathy officially recognized by Swiss government"
"Homeopathy officially recognized by Swiss government"
Ha! Some years ago was quite sceptical about homeopathy, although having women friends who swear by it (one gave me a tiny bottle of `emergency drops' - not needed so far).
However, have recently read a couple of books by Mae-Wan Ho, a geneticist also into "quantum biology" and am now convinced that she, and her many colleagues in that challenging area have cracked some of its secrets.
Here's a quote (only partly from me): "There is now good evidence that water is quantum coherent under ambient conditions - so water has `a memory', and can `communicate' with other water - I.e. the conditions needed for homeopathy to work" (a quick definition of "quantum coherence")
And here's Mae-Wan Ho herself writing about it quite movingly.
(Whatever happens you can expect that bigoted folk like Dawkins & the editor of `Nature' will lie about it - they hate to let evidence speak for itself.)
Homeopathy officially recognized by Swiss government as legitimate medicine to coexist with conventional medicine
The Swiss government has announced a positive shift in alternative healing and complementary therapies.
For a long time, health insurance has guaranteed control for a system that is widely dominated by synthetic drugs.
The Swiss government is breaking out of their shells and allowing patients' health insurance to cover 5 new complimentary therapies. In May of 2017, health insurance plans in the country of Switzerland will be covering a variety of healing channels, including traditional Chinese medicine, homeopathy, acupuncture, holistic medicine and herbal medicine. In a way, Switzerland is bringing back the successful traditional healing's of the past.
Swiss people speak out, pressure government to include complementary therapies on list of paid health services
After health authorities in Switzerland blocked the alternative medicine fields from legitimacy in 2005, the people have vocally spoke out. Two-thirds of the Swiss people, in 2009, voted for the inclusion of 5 important healing modalities on the country's constitutional list of paid health services. It wasn't until 2012 rolled around, when all 5 complimentary healing modalities were included together in basic insurance coverage, for a six-year trial. At the end of this trial, there would be determinations that would be made based on the alternative therapies "cost-effectiveness, efficacy and suitability."
Holistic approaches are gauged through observation, in the progress of healing over time
The interior ministry now determines what many holistic practitioners already believe about the healing arts, It's "impossible to provide such proof for these disciplines in their entirety." Proof of efficacy is in the individuals actual experience, commitment and initiative. Holistic therapy are not like synthetics. The whole person is treated, not just one symptom. Its hard to measure an alternative therapy on paper, in a perfectly controlled area. The proof is in the observation, in the progress of healing in time.
In this understanding, its these 5 modalities that will continue to be reimbursed by health insurance plans, so long as they are done by certified medical professionals. Its a huge step in the right direction for the Swiss healthcare system, which is seeking to add in, together, other than just synthetic manipulations and suppression of the human body. This change in medicine will allow various questionable treatments within these complimentary healing channels to face heightened scrutiny, so the best holistic approaches can come out of the dark and work for everyone.
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 20:00:37 +0100
Subject: "Paris pollution victim sues France for bad air"
"Paris pollution victim sues France for bad air"
This might be a good idea for the future - but we'll have to make sure the politicos either go to jail or pay their own fines.
They've always made us pay (or suffer polluted air) up till now.
Remember that deadly air-pollution of 2014? It was "caused primarily by ammonia fertilizer from farms in Europe combined with vehicle and factory pollution from Britain" - but UK _and_ French politicos conspired to lie to us, blaming the lethal air (estimated to have "killed 300 people in 10 days, and put another 1,600 in hospital") on `Saharan dust'.
And guess what, the scientists went along with those UK Gov't lies - exactly as they do with fake news re: `global warming'.
Paris pollution victim sues France for bad air
7 June 2017
A Parisian woman is taking the French state to court for failing to protect her health from the effects of air pollution.
Clotilde Nonnez, a 56-year-old yoga teacher, says she has lived in the capital for 30 years and seen her health deteriorate.
However, it became worse than ever when pollution in Paris hit record levels last December.
Her lawyer says air pollution is causing 48,000 French deaths per year.
"We are taking the state to task because we think the medical problems that pollution victims suffer are as a result of the authorities' lack of action in tackling air pollution," François Lafforgue told Le Monde newspaper.
More cases would be brought in the coming weeks, in Lyon, Lille and elsewhere, he added.
Paris has struggled for years to combat high levels of smog and the authorities have introduced fines for any vehicle not carrying a "Crit'Air" emissions category sticker - part of a scheme to promote lower-emitting vehicles.
Several routes in the capital now have restrictions on car use and a 3km (1.8-mile) stretch of the Right Bank of the River Seine has become pedestrianised.
Ms Nonnez says she has led a healthy life, first as a dancer and more recently as a yoga teacher, but has increasingly suffered from respiratory problems, ranging from chronic asthma to pneumonia.
When pollution hit the worst levels for a decade last December, her existing bronchial condition prompted an acute pericarditis attack.
"The doctor treating me says Paris air is so polluted that we're breathing rotten air. She has other patients like me, including children and babies too. My cardiologist says the same," she told the France Info website.
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 22:46:30 +0100
Subject: Oldest Homo sapiens bones ever found shake foundations of the human story
"Oldest Homo sapiens bones ever found shake foundations of the human story"
Ha! Recall, maybe ten years ago when the `experts' were saying "Out of Africa 60,000 years ago" (i.e. not even 200,000 years ago), now we see this (and there was another `oldest ancient human' story last month - DNA from 400,000 to 600,000 years ago was analyzed.)
Personally, I think we go back much further than that.
Wednesday 7 June 2017 18.00 BST Last modified on Wednesday 7 June 2017 22.00 BST
Oldest Homo sapiens bones ever found shake foundations of the human story
Idea that modern humans evolved in East Africa 200,000 years ago challenged by extraordinary discovery of 300,000-year-old remains in Moroccan mine
Fossils recovered from an old mine on a desolate mountain in Morocco have rocked one of the most enduring foundations of the human story: that Homo sapiens arose in a cradle of humankind in East Africa 200,000 years ago.
Archaeologists unearthed the bones of at least five people at Jebel Irhoud, a former barite mine 100km west of Marrakesh, in excavations that lasted years. They knew the remains were old, but were stunned when dating tests revealed that a tooth and stone tools found with the bones were about 300,000 years old.
"My reaction was a big `wow'," said Jean-Jacques Hublin, a senior scientist on the team at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig. "I was expecting them to be old, but not that old."
Hublin said the extreme age of the bones makes them the oldest known specimens of modern humans and poses a major challenge to the idea that the earliest members of our species evolved in a `Garden of Eden' in East Africa one hundred thousand years later.
"This gives us a completely different picture of the evolution of our species. It goes much further back in time, but also the very process of evolution is different to what we thought," Hublin told the Guardian. "It looks like our species was already present probably all over Africa by 300,000 years ago. If there was a Garden of Eden, it might have been the size of the continent."
Jebel Irhoud has thrown up puzzles for scientists since fossilised bones were first found at the site in the 1960s. Remains found in 1961 and 1962, and stone tools recovered with them, were attributed to Neanderthals and at first considered to be only 40,000 years old. At the time, a popular view held that modern humans evolved from Neanderthals. Today, the Neanderthals are considered a sister group that lived alongside, and even bred with, our modern human ancestors.
In fresh excavations at the Jebel Irhoud site, Hublin and others found more remains, including a partial skull, a jawbone, teeth and limb bones belonging to three adults, a juvenile, and a child aged about eight years old. The remains, which resemble modern humans more than any other species, were recovered from the base of an old limestone cave that had its roof smashed in during mining operations at the site. Alongside the bones, researchers found sharpened flint tools, a good number of gazelle bones, and lumps of charcoal, perhaps left over from fires that warmed those who once lived there.
"It's rather a desolate landscape, but on the horizon you have the Atlas mountains with snow on top and it's very beautiful," said Hublin. "When we found the skull and mandible I was emotional. They are only fossils, but they have been human beings and very quickly you make a connection with these people who lived and died here 300,000 years ago."
The first almost complete adult mandible discovered at the site of Jebel Irhoud. The bone morphology and the dentition display a combination of archaic and evolved features.
Scientists have long looked to East Africa as the birthplace of modern humans. Until the latest findings from Jebel Irhoud, the oldest known remnants of our species were found at Omo Kibish in Ethiopia and dated to 195,000 years old. Other fossils and genetic evidence all point to an African origin for modern humans.
In the first of two papers published in Nature on Wednesday, the researchers describe how they compared the freshly-excavated fossils with those of modern humans, Neanderthals and ancient human relatives that lived up to 1.8m years ago. Facially, the closest match was with modern humans. The lower jaw was similar to modern Homo sapiens too, but much larger. The most striking difference was the shape of the braincase which was more elongated than that of humans today. It suggests, said Hublin, that the modern brain evolved in Homo sapiens and was not inherited from a predecessor.
Apart from being more stout and muscular, the adults at Jebel Irhoud looked similar to people alive today. "The face of the specimen we found is the face of someone you could meet on the tube in London," Hublin said. In a second paper, the scientists lay out how they dated the stone tools to between 280,000 and 350,000 years, and a lone tooth to 290,000 years old.
The tools found were based on a knapping technique called Levallois, adding to the realisation that the sophisticated way of shaping tools originated earlier than thought.: The remains of more individuals may yet be found at the site. But precisely what they were doing there is unclear. Analysis of the flint tools shows that the stones came not from the local area, but from a region 50km south of Jebel Irhoud. "Why did they come here? They brought their toolkit with them and they exhausted it," Hublin said. "The tools they brought with them have been resharpened, resharpened, and resharpened again. They did not produce new tools on the spot. It might be that they did not stay that long, or maybe it was an area they would come to do something specific. We think they were hunting gazelles, there are a lot of gazelle bones, and they were making a lot of fires."
Hublin concedes that scientists have too few fossils to know whether modern humans had spread to the four corners of Africa 300,000 years ago. The speculation is based on what the scientists see as similar features in a 260,000-year-old skull found in Florisbad in South Africa. But he finds the theory compelling. "The idea is that early Homo sapiens dispersed around the continent and elements of human modernity appeared in different places, and so different parts of Africa contributed to the emergence of what we call modern humans today," he said.
John McNabb, an archaeologist at the University of Southampton, said: "One of the big questions about the emergence of anatomically modern humans has been did our body plan evolve quickly or slowly. This find seems to suggest the latter. It seems our faces became modern long before our skulls took on the shape they have today."
Two views of a composite reconstruction of the earliest known Homo sapiens fossils from Jebel Irhoud The braincase (blue) indicates that brain shape, and possibly brain function, evolved within the Homo sapiens lineage.
"There are some intriguing possibilities here too. The tools the people at Jebel Irhoud were making were based on a knapping technique called Levallois, a sophisticated way of shaping stone tools. The date of 300,000 years ago adds to a growing realisation that Levallois originates a lot earlier than we thought. Is Jebel Irhoud telling us that this new technology is linked to the emergence of the hominin line that will lead to modern humans? Does the new find imply there was more than one hominin lineage in Africa at this time? It really stirs the pot."
Lee Berger, whose team recently discovered the 300,000 year-old Homo naledi, an archaic-looking human relative, near the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage site outside Johannesburg, said dating the Jebel Irhoud bones was thrilling, but is unconvinced that modern humans lived all over Africa so long ago. "They've taken two data points and not drawn a line between them, but a giant map of Africa," he said. John Shea, an archaeologist at Stony Brook University in New York who was not involved in the study, said he was cautious whenever researchers claimed they had found the oldest of anything. "It's best not to judge by the big splash they make when they are first announced, but rather to wait and see some years down the line whether the waves from that splash have altered the shoreline," he said, adding that stone tools can move around in cave sediments and settle in layers of a different age.
Shea was also uneasy with the scientists combining fossils from different individuals, and comparing reconstructions of complete skulls from fragmentary remains. "Such `chimeras' can look very different from the individuals on which they are based," he said. "For me, claiming these remains are Homo sapiens stretches the meaning of that term a bit," Shea added. "These humans who lived between 50,000-300,000 years ago are a morphologically diverse bunch. Whenever we find more than a couple of them from the same deposits, such as at Omo Kibish and Herto in Ethiopia or Skhul and Qafzeh in Israel, their morphology is all over the place both within and between samples."
But Jessica Thompson, an anthropologist at Emory University in Atlanta, said the new results show just how incredible the Jebel Irhoud site is. "These fossils are the rarest of the rare because the human fossil record from this time period in Africa is so poorly represented. They give us a direct look at what early members of our species looked like, as well as their behaviour. "You might also look twice at the brow ridges if you saw them on a living person. It might not be a face you'd see every day, but you would definitely recognise it as human," she said. "It really does look like in Africa especially, but also globally, our evolution was characterised by numerous different species all living at the same time and possibly even in the same places.
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:48:34 +0100
Subject: Tom Van Flandern - `White Knight' who took on a corrupt science establishment
Tom Van Flandern - `White Knight' who took on a corrupt science establishment
Am well into my second or third read of Tom Van Flandern's big book - `Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets - Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated' - and am realizing why he has so many fans and followers among professional and amateur astronomers alike.
It's because he's truthful - which the posers and fakers of cosmology (Hawking et al) definitely aren't! - and also because he knows his subject in detail, so he can lay it out and explain it simply, in everyday terms without having to hide behind a cloud of "magic" mathematics like the posers do.
[Einstein (and at least one other) said "If you can't explain your theory in simple terms to your grandmother (or landlady) - then you don't understand it yourself".]
Other heroes fighting against the entrenched corruption of -
"peer review" (kept so the old professors still have the power to suppress new ideas), and class distinction (where Nobel prizes are denied to genius if not part of elites - see Hoyle × 3) and corporate ownership (censorship), are:
* Fred Hoyle - whose `Steady State Universe', in a slightly revised version, is still looking quite likely;
* Halton Arp - who showed-up the deceit and lies of USA's + NASA's astronomy (which raises the question - "Why did NASA, and all North American Universities lie, and fake photographs, and finally deny telescope time to Chip Arp - thus driving him out of USA?");
and latterly folk like Eric J. Lerner (disciple of Hannes Alfvén), and Hilton Ratcliffe
So maybe also see:
The Static Universe: Exploding the Myth of Cosmic Expansion by Hilton Ratcliffe
The Big Bang Never Happened by Eric J. Lerner
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 10:41:55 +0100
Subject: "Gravitational waves: Third detection of deep space warping"
"Gravitational waves: Third detection of deep space warping"
What a lot of trendy waffle - and it's all meaningless.
* Firstly, there are no black holes - the densest body of mass is probably a neutron star;
* Secondly, there is no `warping of space-time', a LIGO type device only detects a slight increase in the (apparent) gravitational `pull' from a preferred direction;
* Thirdly, from the aforesaid, you can see that if and when two or more nearby neutron stars happen to align with each other and with Earth (which must happen quite often), then a LIGO detector will `feel' extra gravity from that direction.
But the fakers in charge of cosmology (Hawking et al) need all the hype they can get - they (and the particle physics fakers) have painted themselves into a corner and daren't admit it.
By Jonathan Amos | BBC Science Correspondent | 1 June 2017
Gravitational waves: Third detection of deep space warping
Scientists are reporting yet another burst of gravitational waves.
The signals were picked up by the Advanced LIGO facilities in the US and are determined to have come from the merger of two huge black holes some three billion light-years from Earth.
It is the third time now that the labs' laser instruments have been perturbed by the warping of space-time.
The detection confirms that a new era in the investigation of the cosmos is now truly under way.
"The key thing to take away from this third, highly confident event is that we're really moving from novelty to new observational science - a new astronomy of gravitational waves," said David Shoemaker, spokesperson for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
The latest detection, which was made at 10:11 GMT on 4 January, is described in a paper accepted for publication in the journal Physical Review Letters.
(more at page ...)
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 21:48:09 +0100
Subject: "Man-made chemicals are destroying marine life of Australia's Great Barrier Reef:"
"Man-made chemicals are destroying marine life of Australia's Great Barrier Reef:"
Just what I've been saying for some years now. Australian politicos have been consistently and corruptly acting in collusion with industrial and agricultural polluters for decades. They've corruptly tried to blame "climate change" for the damage caused by massive pollution - the dumping of industrial waste and allowing fertilizer run-off - which is all going into the ocean.
Man-made chemicals are destroying marine life of Australia's Great Barrier Reef: Scientists discover turtles are ingesting substances found in cosmetics and medicines
Endangered green turtles have ingested hundreds of thousands of chemicals
Pollutants come from industrial and cosmetic chemicals, and some medications
Chemicals have caused animals to suffer from liver dysfunction, research found
By Daisy Dunne For Mailonline and Afp | PUBLISHED: 06:03, 2 June 2017
Medications for the heart (milrinone) and gout (allopurinol), as well as cosmetic and industrial chemicals, were among substances detected in the reptiles' bloodstream as part of an ongoing conservation project.
Green turtles are considered endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List.
Scientists said exposure to the substances had caused side effects in the turtles, with indications of inflammation and liver dysfunction.
`Humans are putting a lot of chemicals into the environment and we don't always know what they are and what effect they are having,' said Amy Heffernan of the University of Queensland.
`What you put down your sink, spray on your farms, or release from industries ends up in the marine environment and in turtles in the Great Barrier Reef.'
The 2,300-kilometre (1,400-mile) long barrier reef, a World Heritage site, is already under pressure from farming run-off, development, crown-of-thorns starfish and climate change.
It suffered its most severe bleaching on record last year and some scientists say the reef is now damaged beyond repair.
Aerial and in-water surveys showed 22 per cent of shallow water corals were destroyed in 2016, but it has now been bumped up to 29 per cent and with the reef currently experiencing an unprecedented second straight year of bleaching, the outlook is grim.
`We're very concerned about what this means for the Great Barrier Reef itself and what it means for the communities and industries that depend on it,' Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) chairman Russell Reichelt said.
`The amount of coral that died from bleaching in 2016 is up from our original estimates and, at this stage, although reports are still being finalised, it's expected we'll also see an overall further coral cover decline by the end of 2017.'
WWF-Australia said the turtles could be used as a bio-monitoring tool to find out what chemicals were entering reef waters and what their impact on marine life could be.
In 2015, scientists said that a chemical used in sunscreen could be causing massive damage to coral reefs worldwide and threatening their very existence.
The chemical, oxybenzone, was causing 'gross deformities' in baby coral, the study said.
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 19:32:02 +0100
Subject: 12,000 years ago - EVERYTHING WAS FINE!
10,000 to 12,000 years ago - EVERYTHING WAS FINE!
Ha! Read the below article carefully and you can see it's actually an admission that c. 10,000 to 12,000 years ago Earth was hotter than now, the oceans were hotter than now - AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE!
All life survived and indeed prospered, the corals and the fish in the oceans, the animals on land (and the humans doing a bit of farming, or hunting or fishing) - all were fine!
Thawing Arctic Glaciers Released `Explosive' Methane - and Could Do So Again
Twelve-thousand-year-old craters on the floor of the Barents Sea suggest large methane releases could occur abruptly as human-caused climate change worsens.
BY JOHN DYER JUNE 2, 2017 10:06 AM EDT
Millennia ago, as the great glaciers of the Ice Age receded, methane that had been frozen under the seafloor melted and burst forth, leaving massive craters that remain on the ocean bottom to this day.
Today, new research suggests humankind should be concerned that a similar release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that can harm marine ecosystems, might happen again as global warming melts the ice in the Arctic, Greenland, and elsewhere.
"We provide a model for abrupt and explosive methane releases," said Karin Andreassen, a professor at CAGE Centre for Arctic Gas Hydrate, Environment, and Climate and the lead author of a study on Arctic methane published in the journal Science.
Examining craters formed by methane eruptions 12,000 years ago, Andreassen and her colleagues determined that enormous amounts of methane in hydrate form - an ice-like mix of water and gas - must have dissolved as the 6,500-feet-thick ice sheets retreated from the Barents Sea north of what is now Scandinavia and western Russia.
They found more than 100 craters on the seafloor that ranged from around 1,000 to almost 3,300 feet wide - larger than any discovered before - as well as thousands of smaller pockmarks, according to their research.
"The principle is the same as in a pressure cooker," she said. "If you do not control the release of the pressure, it will continue to build up until there is a disaster in your kitchen. These mounds were over-pressured for thousands of years, and then the lid came off."
It's not clear how much of that methane reached the atmosphere, where it traps 84 times more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.
Today, methane seepage is common throughout the oceans. Researchers believe bacteria consumes most of that methane, however, converting it into other chemicals like carbon dioxide that causes coral bleaching and other problems but also prevents it from reaching the surface to contribute to global warming.
The large craters discussed in the study suggest methane blowouts could occur on a scale much larger than people have seen, especially as global warming worsens, Andreassen said.
It's not clear what's going on under glaciers that are melting now because studying them firsthand is difficult, she added.
"When we see what took place in the Barents Sea, this is also what we can expect to happen under today's ice sheets," she said.
Andreassen is now calculating the pace of the eruptions the caused the craters - she suspects they took place over the course of months or a year - and the amount of methane they disgorged.
Those numbers will be key to determining whether to be alarmed about this new research, said University of Washington Oceanographer H. Paul Johnson, who has studied methane in waters off the Pacific Northwest. Unfortunately, he added, humans might soon witness the lid coming off a methane pocket. The conditions that melted glaciers in the past are occurring now.
"The only way you can keep this hydrate that's in the ground is to keep from warming the oceans," said Johnson. "The only way you can keep them from warming is to reduce the greenhouses gases in the atmosphere."
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 10:57:08 +0100
Subject: Antarctic turning green as global warming triggers moss explosion
"Antarctic turning green as global warming triggers moss explosion"
Great, in a few thousand years the Antarctic might get as warm as it was a long time ago, when trees were growing there - and tropical trees at that!
See - "Tropical climate in the Antarctic: Palm trees once thrived on today's icy coasts"
and maybe "Strange forests with some features of today's tropical trees once grew in Antarctica, new research finds."
Antarctic turning green as global warming triggers moss explosion
Scientists say the frozen continent is likely to 'alter rapidly under future warming, leading to major changes in the biology and landscape of this iconic region'
Ian Johnston Environment Correspondent @montaukian 16 hours ago118 comments
The Antarctic is turning green with rising temperatures having a "dramatic effect" on the growth of moss in the frozen continent, scientists have discovered.
Since 1950, temperatures in the Antarctic Peninsula have risen by about half a degree Celsius each decade - much faster than the global average.
And growth rates of moss after about 1950 have been running at four to five times the level before that year, according to a study by UK-based researchers who studied three sites across a 1,000km stretch of the peninsula.
(more at page ...)
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 11:25:48 +0100
Subject: "Magnetic Bridge Between Galactic Neighbours"
"Magnetic Bridge Between Galactic Neighbours"
Ha! The article hypocritically says "there were hints that this might exist" but the truth is that Hannes Alfvén and colleagues had been trying to tell the `establishment' about cosmic magnetism for years but the elite's professors refused to even look at his results and conspired to prevent his work being published.
Just like the fraudulent posers led by Hawking (who's never been right about anything in his whole career) are today trying to suppress the enquiries of real scientists because they might (WILL) expose their complacent stupidity.
Hilton Ratcliffe, a strident `rebel', has already indicted Hawking et al of science fraud and criminal waste of resources for greedy career reasons.
He wrote: "All the billions spent over the last half century have not produced a new discovery in physics", in his book `The Static Universe', which is a real eye-opener, detailing the consistent corruption and blackmail operated by the `establishment' of science: bloated professors (like Hawking) whose careers were built on fancy, fashionable & fraudulent (unscientific) flights of mathematical imagination.
May 12, 2017
Mapping the Magnetic Bridge Between Our Nearest Galactic Neighbours
For the first time, astronomers have detected a magnetic field associated with the Magellanic Bridge, the filament of gas stretching 75 thousand light-years between the Milky Way Galaxy's nearest galactic neighbours: the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (LMC and SMC, respectively).
Visible in the southern night sky, the LMC and SMC are dwarf galaxies that orbit our home galaxy and lie at a distance of 160 and 200 thousand light-years from Earth respectively,
"There were hints that this magnetic field might exist, but no one had observed it until now," says Jane Kaczmarek, a PhD student in the School of Physics, University of Sydney, and lead author of the paper describing the finding.
Such cosmic magnetic fields can only be detected indirectly, and this detection was made by observing the radio signals from hundreds of very distant galaxies that lie beyond the LMC and SMC. The observations were made with the Australia Telescope Compact Array radio telescope at the Paul Wild Observatory in New South Wales, Australia.
"The radio emission from the distant galaxies served as background 'flashlights' that shine through the Bridge," says Kaczmarek. "Its magnetic field then changes the polarization of the radio signal. How the polarized light is changed tells us about the intervening magnetic field."
A radio signal, like a light wave, oscillates or vibrates in a single direction or plane; for example, waves on the surface of a pond move up and down. When a radio signal passes through a magnetic field, the plane is rotated. This phenomenon is known as Faraday Rotation and it allows astronomers to measure the strength and the polarity - or direction - of the field.
The observation of the magnetic field, which is one millionth the strength of the Earth's, may provide insight into whether it was generated from within the Bridge after the structure formed, or was "ripped" from the dwarf galaxies when they interacted and formed the structure.
"In general, we don't know how such vast magnetic fields are generated, nor how these large-scale magnetic fields affect galaxy formation and evolution," says Kaczmarek. "The LMC and SMC are our nearest neighbours, so understanding how they evolve may help us understand how our Milky Way Galaxy will evolve."
"Understanding the role that magnetic fields play in the evolution of galaxies and their environment is a fundamental question in astronomy that remains to be answered."
The paper is one of a growing number of new results that are building a map of the Universe's magnetism. According to Prof. Bryan Gaensler, Director of the Dunlap Institute for Astronomy & Astrophysics, University of Toronto, and a co-author on the paper, "Not only are entire galaxies magnetic, but the faint delicate threads joining galaxies are magnetic, too. Everywhere we look in the sky, we find magnetism."
The paper appeared in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.
More information: J. F. Kaczmarek et al. Detection of a Coherent Magnetic Field in the Magellanic Bridge through Faraday Rotation,
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2017). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx206,
On Arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.05962
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 11:14:29 +0100
Subject: Posers try to suppress `realism' in cosmology
Posers try to suppress realism in cosmology
Ha! Great - at last someone (apart from my favourite mavericks - Hoyle, Arp, Van Flandern et al) is stating the bloody obvious!
I.e. that cosmology's `standard model' is fatally flawed because it's made up of overlapping `wishful thinking' assumptions none of which can be justified on its own, so the whole edifice amounts to sheer speculation!
Sensible folk would've scrapped these probably false assumptions: the assumed meanings of `redshift' and the `M.C.B' etc.. And that would question the existence of a "Big Bang", then "Black Holes", "Inflation", "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy".
Because none of those concepts was suggested by actual evidence (i.e. by observations). No, they're all artificial `inventions', with no basis in fact, they're only needed to prop up the `standard model' (and the fraudulent careers of pompous posers like Hawking).
PS - Coincidentally am tonight returning to `The Static Universe' by Hilton Ratcliffe, the latest in a growing number of rebel scientists refuting `Inflation' & `Big Bang' theory. "All the billions spent over the last half century have not produced a new discovery in physics" (p. 20). RD
Stephen Hawking among 33 scientists on offensive against critics of popular universe origin theory
Published time: 13 May, 2017 12:56 | Edited time: 14 May, 2017 08:15
Thirty-three of the world's most respected scientists, including renowned physicist Stephen Hawking, have signed an open letter responding to a controversial article that branded popular views on the origins of the universe unscientific. The letter was published in response to an article in the February issue of the magazine Scientific American, in which three physicists criticized the popular inflation theory.
The idea is that the universe started expanding exponentially after the Big Bang, with quantum fluctuations translating into stars and galaxies. First proposed in the 1980s, it is now taught as standard in most schools and universities, and is being explored through several related competing models.
"Pop Goes The Universe," written by Princeton University's Paul Steinhardt and Anna Ijjas, and Harvard University's Abraham Loeb, argues that recent research into cosmic microwave background - radiation left over from the time of the Big Bang - does not support the theory of a rapid expansion. Instead, it posits an alternate theory, the `big bounce,' in which the Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe, but rather, "a transition from some preceding cosmological phase to the present expanding phase."
(more at page ...)
Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 10:56:25 +0100
Subject: Fake News Alert: "Suffocated Ocean Will Heal - In a Million Years"
Fake News Alert: "Suffocated Ocean Will Heal - In a Million Years"
Ha! They never tire of pushing fake "climate news" - now saying "the modern ocean is rapidly approaching anoxia". What's wrong with that?
Well, firstly it's stupid because it contradicts known data, and secondly it's downright illogical anyway.
Fr'instance, we know that only `recently' (within last few thousand years) the Earth was _much_ warmer than now, and the further back you go the hotter it was. But the oceans didn't go anoxic, certainly not for "a million years" (or we'd never have been born!).
Suffocated Ocean Will Heal - In a Million Years
In a study published Friday in the journal Nature Communications, a team of researchers presents a timeline for this gradual buildup following such a reduction in oxygen, a phenomenon known as anoxia.
The scientists studied how periods of anoxia end and found that the decrease in oxygen causes more organic carbon to be buried in sediment on the ocean floor. Eventually, this stockpile of carbon raises oxygen in the atmosphere, which in turn oxygenates the ocean.
This finding is especially critical today, as experts believe the modern ocean is rapidly approaching anoxia. The team says it is "critical" to reduce carbon emissions before the point of no return.
(more at page ...)
Date: Sun, 7 May 2017 10:48:05 +0100
Subject: "Tens of Thousands Of Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax"
"Tens of Thousands Of Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax"
Yup, already had this info on record, however this is first time in a while I've seen it clearly presented on a single page.
BTW - if you go to this `climate history page' you can see the `forcing' of climate (up _or_ down in temps) is almost entirely due to long or short term changes of solar radiation - insolation - and volcanic outbursts (some due to impacts?)
Also on that page is links to the Petition Project - real scientists who object to being railroaded by false pretences.
But, just in case, here's their URLs again:
PS - like he says that "97% consensus" was a direct lie. It was done by cherry-picking replies from self-selecting `interested parties', and ignoring the fact they counted ignorant and corrupt political reps as "scientists". Ha!
Tens of Thousands Of Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax
September 2, 2016 Sean Adl-Tabatabai Weird 828
30,000 scientists declare man-made climate change a hoax
A staggering 30,000 scientists have come forward confirming that man-made climate change is a hoax perpetuated by the elite in order to make money.
One of the experts is weather channel founder, John Coleman, who warns that huge fortunes are being made by man-made climate change proponents such as Al Gore.
In a recent interview with Climate Depot, Coleman said:
`Al Gore may emerge from the shadows to declare victory in the `global warming' debate if Hillary Clinton moves into the White House. Yes, if that happens and the new climate regulations become the law of the land, they will be next to impossible to overturn for four to eight years.'
Climate change proponents remain undeterred in their mission, ignoring numerous recent scientific findings indicating that there has been no warming trend at all for nearly two decades. Al Gore's dire predictions of the melting of polar ice on a massive scale have proved to be completely false. In fact, in 2014 - a year that was touted as being `the hottest ever' in the Earth's history - there were record amounts of ice reported in Antarctica, an increase in Arctic ice, and record snowfalls across the globe.
Debunking the `97 percent' lie
On top of those `inconvenient truths,' the White House's assertion that 97 percent of scientists agree that global warming is real has been completely debunked. Several independently-researched examinations of the literature used to support the `97 percent' statement found that the conclusions were cherry-picked and misleading.
More objective surveys have revealed that there is a far greater diversity of opinion among scientists than the global warming crowd would like for you to believe.
From the National Review:
`A 2008 survey by two German scientists, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, found that a significant number of scientists were skeptical of the ability of existing global climate models to accurately predict global temperatures, precipitation, sea-level changes, or extreme weather events even over a decade; they were far more skeptical as the time horizon increased.'
Other mainstream news sources besides the National Review have also been courageous enough to speak out against the global warming propaganda - even the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece in 2015 challenging the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) pseudoscience being promulgated by global warming proponents.
And, of course, there are the more than 31,000 American scientists (to date) who have signed a petition challenging the climate change narrative and 9,029 of them hold PhDs in their respective fields. But hey, Al Gore and his cronies have also ignored that inconvenient truth, as well.
Many of those scientists who signed the petition were likely encouraged to speak out in favor of the truth after retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist John L. Casey revealed that solar cycles are largely responsible for warming periods on Earth - not human activity.
Al Gore and cronies continue getting richer from the global warming hoax
But the global warming crowd continues to push their agenda on the public while lining their pockets in the process. If you're still inclined to believe what Al Gore has to say about global warming, please consider the fact that since he embarked on his crusade, his wealth has grown from $2 million in 2001 to $100 million in 2016 - largely due to investments in fake `green tech' companies and the effective embezzlement of numerous grants and loans.
You might want to take all of this information into serious consideration before casting your vote in the November election.
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 08:55:44 +0100
Subject: "Stephen Hawking says humans need to leave Earth within the next 100 years"
"Stephen Hawking says humans need to leave Earth within the next 100 years"
Ha! He's decided to go more pessimistic. Actually the statistics seem to show that a `planet killer' is quite rare, maybe one per many millions, or even billions of years, although quite scary ones (like those `Age of Leo' impacts, 12,000+ years ago) are maybe much more frequent.
Stephen Hawking says humans need to leave Earth within the next 100 years or face extinction
CHRIS SOSA | May 3rd 2017 3:30PM
In the upcoming BBC documentary Expedition New Earth, Hawking suggests humans have 100 years to colonize elsewhere or prepare for the extinction of our species.
A hundred years is a lot sooner than Hawking's previous predictions. In November, he gave a similar warning - but said we had a comparatively lengthy 1,000 years to find a new spot to carry on the future of humankind:
"Although the chance of disaster to planet Earth in a given year may be quite low, it adds up over time, and becomes a near certainty in the next 1,000 or 10,000 years ... By that time, we should have spread out into space and to other stars, so a disaster on Earth would not mean the end of the human race."
So where are we going to go? Thankfully, Musk has said humans should make it to Mars in the near future.
"If things go according to plan, we should be able to launch people probably in 2024 with arrival in 2025," he said, according to Time.
The upcoming documentary series with Hawking is a reboot of BBC's Tomorrow's World. Per Tony Hall, director-general of the BBC:
"We've come together behind a simple, and very bold ambition - to equip all of us with the knowledge and understanding we need to make sense of our lives and the future ... Whether it's the rise of robotics or the demise of antibiotics, traveling to Mars or the arrival of 3D printed food, science is changing the world at an extraordinary pace."
Let's just hope science changes the world fast enough for our species to escape it.