Climate change.

[The Green Barbarian]

More proof that taking over Twitter was a really good thing for the general public, as science-denying alarmist scum aren't able to spread disinformation and more importantly, can't quell real discussion about the man-made climate change myth like they were able to under the old Marxist Twitter regime. Good job Elon!

Twitter hinders 'troll hunters' battling climate denial

For years, a band of science-loving "troll hunters" hounded climate change deniers off Twitter -- but Elon Musk's takeover has upended their efforts, with many ousted accounts back, pushing fresh disinformation.

Despite the threat climate change poses to the planet, disinformation about it has gone largely unsanctioned on Twitter. But a secretive global community of about 25 scientists and activists, calling themselves Team Ninja Trollhunters (TNT), found a roundabout way to tackle it.

Since its founding in 2019, TNT claims to have secured the suspension of some 600 accounts of climate change denialists by reporting them for other infringements, including hate speech, that are officially recognized by the platform as valid grounds for termination.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/tw ... 8e7&ei=291

Love the use of Orwellian Big Brother language to make the actual trolls, the myth pushers, the heroes, instead of being labeled truthfully as trolls, which they are. Despite there being zero threat to the planet from man-made climate change, these scum continue to try to silence all voices of reason. Thankfully, Elon has allowed those seeking the truth to fight back, and good for him.

[Jlabute]

More proof that taking over Twitter was a really good thing for the general public, as science-denying alarmist scum aren't able to spread disinformation and more importantly, can't quell real discussion about the man-made climate change myth like they were able to under the old Marxist Twitter regime. Good job Elon!

Twitter hinders 'troll hunters' battling climate denial

For years, a band of science-loving "troll hunters" hounded climate change deniers off Twitter -- but Elon Musk's takeover has upended their efforts, with many ousted accounts back, pushing fresh disinformation.

Despite the threat climate change poses to the planet, disinformation about it has gone largely unsanctioned on Twitter. But a secretive global community of about 25 scientists and activists, calling themselves Team Ninja Trollhunters (TNT), found a roundabout way to tackle it.

Since its founding in 2019, TNT claims to have secured the suspension of some 600 accounts of climate change denialists by reporting them for other infringements, including hate speech, that are officially recognized by the platform as valid grounds for termination.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/tw ... 8e7&ei=291

Love the use of Orwellian Big Brother language to make the actual trolls, the myth pushers, the heroes, instead of being labeled truthfully as trolls, which they are. Despite there being zero threat to the planet from man-made climate change, these scum continue to try to silence all voices of reason. Thankfully, Elon has allowed those seeking the truth to fight back, and good for him.

The antics of the left are empty-headed and disgusting. Their asinine guesses are not facts no matter how they feel. As-if they believe they can control fact or ideas by force. Just as much stupidity as hate and TNT is unable to support their own 'anonymous' beliefs. Obviously, blogs and social media are important points of dissemination and thankfully Elon is now in control. TNT members are anonymous because no one would ever hire them for their scientific intellect, or realize they are clown scientists.

Previously noted, those such as Dessler, Gleick, and Hayhoe, always lose public debates. The only tool they have is to deny other free speech by banning, physical attacks, drive-by shootings, and lying. Thankfully Twitter is no longer compliant to the liars.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/05/24/ ... and-leave/


"Helen" apparently knows nothing about climate but a lot about hospitality. She doesn't know enough to know she knows nothing.

https://www.huckmag.com/article/team-ni ... sm-twitter

[77TA]

A couple observations on this story

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/430164 ... nd-drought

1. Is Environment Canada now called Environment and 'climate change' Canada?

"Matt Loney, a meteorologist with Environment and Climate Change Canada..."

2. How much secondary education is needed to know that warm temperatures make dry grass?

"With spring drawing to a close and hotter-than-normal temperatures in the forecast again, MacDonald said he expects to see grass drying out..."

[Jlabute]

A couple observations on this story

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/430164 ... nd-drought

1. Is Environment Canada now called Environment and 'climate change' Canada?

"Matt Loney, a meteorologist with Environment and Climate Change Canada..."

2. How much secondary education is needed to know that warm temperatures make dry grass?

"With spring drawing to a close and hotter-than-normal temperatures in the forecast again, MacDonald said he expects to see grass drying out..."

The answer to #1 is Yes. The government agency is now called Environment and Climate Canada. Only for the duration of the current stupidity.

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-cl ... hange.html

I am sure #2 is complicated. Wet makes grass grow, then hot an dry makes grass dry. Random weather that has occurred for a billion years. Over periods of 30 years does the trend change? Even then, is it a cyclic change? Climate change is complicated and it might be that a global average temperature is meaningless, as well as the meaningless and arbitrary 1.5C limit.

When people hear the planet temperature has risen, they believe that has ocurred everywhere. It may not be the case. Germany and Japan as examples have not seen an average temperature increase for almost 40 years.

[The Green Barbarian]

Kenneth Green: Canada’s burning because of bad forest policy, not climate change[/b

Unless you’ve been living in an underground cave, you’re aware that there’s been a massive explosion of forest fire activity across Canada that’s sending clouds of smoke south to our American neighbours. Not surprisingly, they’re not happy — the orange skies are more than a bit reminiscent of Hollywood post-apocalyptic movies.

Here at home, our usual opportunistic climate alarmists including Prime Minister Trudeau , Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault and the irrepressible Elizabeth May blame the flames on climate change (and not their leadership in Canadian forest policy). And the only cure is to end fossil fuel use.

But let’s bring some facts to the hysteria. First, the climate is indeed warming. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global average atmospheric temperature is rising globally, and according to one analysis, twice as fast in Canada.

But is this recent atmospheric warming causing the increase in forest fires globally and Canadian fires specifically? The IPCC, in its latest omnibus climate report, only assigns “medium confidence” to the idea that climate change has actually caused increased “fire weather” in some regions around the world. This, mind you, after desperately seeking to tie real-world events to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations for some 40 years now. In addition, many reports have shown that while fire activity is on the rise in some regions, we’re still not seeing an overall increase when considering the total areas burned at the global level.

As the Royal Society, an independent scientific academy in the United Kingdom, summarizes in a 2020 blog post updating its 2016 research on global wildfire extent , “Fire activity is on the rise in some regions, but when considering the total area burned at the ground level, we are not seeing an increase an overall increase.” The 2016 report was more explicit, finding: “Instead, global area burned appears to have overall declined over past decades, and there is increasing evidence that there is less fire in the global landscape today than centuries ago.” While the Royal Society acknowledges that climate change may be increasing risk, it also observes there are many other human activities that may contribute to more or less fires, and more or less areas consumed.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topst ... cb40&ei=16

[rustled]

But instead of calming down and addressing that reality, here's what the professionals are saying:

FIRES FUELLING ECO-ANXIETY
Wildfires are fuelling eco-anxiety but taking climate action can help, experts say

Climate anxiety is "a feeling of hopelessness about either the present environment and what's going on in terms of the problem of climate change, but also the future," said Dr. Lindsay McCunn, an environmental psychologist at Vancouver Island University in Nanaimo, B.C.
SNIP
Kids Help Phone has seen a 30 per cent increase in text conversations with counsellors this month compared to last month, said Alisa Simon, the organization's executive vice-president of e-mental health transformation and chief youth officer.

Although it's not known how much of that increase can be attributed to climate anxiety, young people "see the news, they see the air, they hear the messages from their teachers and many of them are directly experiencing these wildfires," Simon said.

SNIP

The organization also created a web page dedicated to letting young people know how to get mental health support, which also included tips on how to cope with feelings of distress, hopelessness, guilt and anger they may be feeling around climate change.

One of the most important things to tell people suffering from climate anxiety is "you're not alone," Simon said.

The first step is to help anxious young people calm down if they're in a panicked state, often using breathing, relaxation and mindfulness exercises, as well as helping them identify their feelings, she said.

After that, it helps some young people to take an action "that makes them feel like they have some control ...so that it doesn't feel like something like climate change is just happening and they have to sit back and just deal with the ramifications," Simon said. https://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/43 ... xperts-say

So here's ^^ the illogical response to recognizing children are being exposed to something that's toxic to their mental health, folks: Keep right on exposing them to the toxic messaging (climate change will destroy life as we know it), expose them to more information about antidotes to their natural responses to toxic messaging (we know this messaging is toxic but we're going to make sure you hear it anyway), and repeat and reinforce the toxic message that it's really up to them to do something to make climate change stop before it destroys life as we know it because that's the only way to retain some semblance of the mental health the toxic messaging is destroying.

One of the key things to remember in dealing with climate anxiety is that it "isn't a pathological problem," said Dr. Joe Vipond, an emergency department physician in Calgary and past president of Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE).

"This is a normal response to seeing threats to essentially civilization and our existence that are not being dealt with," Vipond said.

"For many people, this may be the first real, ‘Oh my God' moments when they do see that smoke enveloping their cities. It does seem very apocalyptic."

Vipond has felt "elements of eco-anxiety for decades," he said.

"The way to manage, to get through those two-in-the-morning fetal position wake-up periods is to really start to get involved (in climate movements)" he said.

"I don't really know of any other therapy for this. Like there's no medication you can take for an existential threat."

Jeez louise. These ^^ are the professionals, and they can't see the forest for their own smoke.

[Jlabute]

^^^ Yes. The harm done by leftists and mindless complicit media to the younger generations can't be over-stated. I am sure as children commit suicide, the left uses this as evidence of climate change despite the left having caused it in the first place. I don't see the left ever changing this since eco anxiety is a benefit to them, even if people die believing all the lies.


https://www.businessinsider.com/millenn ... oll-2019-3

[JLives]

*removed*

[rustled]

^^^ Yes. The harm done by leftists and mindless complicit media to the younger generations can't be over-stated. I am sure as children commit suicide, the left uses this as evidence of climate change despite the left having caused it in the first place. I don't see the left ever changing this since eco anxiety is a benefit to them, even if people die believing all the lies.


https://www.businessinsider.com/millenn ... oll-2019-3

Puts me in mind of the religious hell-and-damnation nonsense foisted on children just a few generations ago.

When children's mental health is of so very little interest to those with passionate about the climate change "cause" and intent on "doing good", it's time for those passionate to examine the "cause" and address its negative consequences for children's mental health.

Climate change cultism is cultism of the worst sort.

[JLives]

A couple observations on this story

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/430164 ... nd-drought

1. Is Environment Canada now called Environment and 'climate change' Canada?

"Matt Loney, a meteorologist with Environment and Climate Change Canada..."

2. How much secondary education is needed to know that warm temperatures make dry grass?

"With spring drawing to a close and hotter-than-normal temperatures in the forecast again, MacDonald said he expects to see grass drying out..."

The answer to #1 is Yes. The government agency is now called Environment and Climate Canada. Only for the duration of the current stupidity.

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-cl ... hange.html

I am sure #2 is complicated. Wet makes grass grow, then hot an dry makes grass dry. Random weather that has occurred for a billion years. Over periods of 30 years does the trend change? Even then, is it a cyclic change? Climate change is complicated and it might be that a global average temperature is meaningless, as well as the meaningless and arbitrary 1.5C limit.

When people hear the planet temperature has risen, they believe that has ocurred everywhere. It may not be the case. Germany and Japan as examples have not seen an average temperature increase for almost 40 years.


germtemp.png

It is complicated and you're not qualified here. Publish your research paper so other scientists can tear it apart.

[rustled]

Kenneth Green: Canada’s burning because of bad forest policy, not climate change

Unless you’ve been living in an underground cave, you’re aware that there’s been a massive explosion of forest fire activity across Canada that’s sending clouds of smoke south to our American neighbours. Not surprisingly, they’re not happy — the orange skies are more than a bit reminiscent of Hollywood post-apocalyptic movies.

Here at home, our usual opportunistic climate alarmists including Prime Minister Trudeau , Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault and the irrepressible Elizabeth May blame the flames on climate change (and not their leadership in Canadian forest policy). And the only cure is to end fossil fuel use.

But let’s bring some facts to the hysteria. First, the climate is indeed warming. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global average atmospheric temperature is rising globally, and according to one analysis, twice as fast in Canada.

But is this recent atmospheric warming causing the increase in forest fires globally and Canadian fires specifically? The IPCC, in its latest omnibus climate report, only assigns “medium confidence” to the idea that climate change has actually caused increased “fire weather” in some regions around the world. This, mind you, after desperately seeking to tie real-world events to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations for some 40 years now. In addition, many reports have shown that while fire activity is on the rise in some regions, we’re still not seeing an overall increase when considering the total areas burned at the global level.

As the Royal Society, an independent scientific academy in the United Kingdom, summarizes in a 2020 blog post updating its 2016 research on global wildfire extent , “Fire activity is on the rise in some regions, but when considering the total area burned at the ground level, we are not seeing an increase an overall increase.” The 2016 report was more explicit, finding: “Instead, global area burned appears to have overall declined over past decades, and there is increasing evidence that there is less fire in the global landscape today than centuries ago.” While the Royal Society acknowledges that climate change may be increasing risk, it also observes there are many other human activities that may contribute to more or less fires, and more or less areas consumed.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topst ... cb40&ei=16

Interesting stuff! A more well-rounded analysis than "because climate change".

[Jlabute]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topst ... cb40&ei=16

Interesting stuff! A more well-rounded analysis than "because climate change".

Right. Anything for these criminals to scam people in order to fund their socialist programs. No science, just opportunities to lie.

... our usual opportunistic climate alarmists including Prime Minister Trudeau, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault and the irrepressible Elizabeth May blame the flames on climate change (and not their leadership in Canadian forest policy). And the only cure is to end fossil fuel use.

LIBNDPG+ are the ultimate con artists.

You are being conned: Data, studies & UN IPCC all reveal Canadian fires not due to ‘climate change’

https://www.climatedepot.com/2023/06/09 ... -of-fires/

[GordonH]

Large portion of the population has taken their brain and placed it on the shelf when comes to this issue.

[Jlabute]

Large portion of the population has taken their brain and placed it on the shelf when comes to this issue.

Especially AOC, Biden, Trudeau, and Guilbeault.

These people are not interested in truth, just power. To assert stupidity over an entire country requires a special audacious stupidity. They want to convince people of their climate budget plans. Few people are fooled.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden- ... ate-crisis

[The Green Barbarian]

Good news from Shell today...they aren't caving to the brain-dead Klimate kooks....

Shell drops target to cut oil production as CEO aims for higher profits

Shell has abandoned plans to cut oil production each year for the rest of the decade, in a shift in approach to firmly target fossil fuels and increase payouts to shareholders under its new chief executive, .

The FTSE 100 oil company on Wednesday announced that production would remain stable until 2030, after previously saying it would cut output by about 1-2% each year.

Shell will invest $40bn in oil and gas production between 2023 and 2035, compared with between $10bn and $15bn in “low-carbon” products.

Sawan was appointed as Shell’s chief executive in September, replacing Ben van Beurden who had surprised some activists and investors by putting in place a target of achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050, albeit with only gradual reductions in fossil fuel output planned.

Since taking over, Sawan has emphasised financial returns for investors. He told investors at the New York stock exchange that he wanted to “reward our shareholders today and far into the future”. While saying he wanted to lower emissions, he also repeatedly emphasised his belief that oil and gas would be required for the long term.

In its strategy in 2021, Shell said it would aim for “an expected gradual reduction in oil production of around 1-2% each year, including divestments and natural decline”.

However, Shell argued on Wednesday that the previous strategy did not constitute a commitment to cutting oil production steadily.

It said it had in fact hit the target within seven months of announcing it because of the $9.5bn sale later in 2021 of its interest in al project in the Permian Basin, Texas. Shell’s output was 1.9m barrels of oil a day in 2019, and dropped to 1.5mls a day – a 21% decline.

A Shell spokesperson: “Our target of a reduction in oil production by 2030 has not changed. We’ve just met it eight years early.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... er-profits