Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 13, 2022 | Sundance
It’s just coincidental happenstance they say. Both George W Bush and Barack H Obama have scheduled conferences to highlight concerns over disinformation in the wake of the U.S. midterm election. Democracy is at stake if people do not blindly trust the constructs of the election systems that are now in place.
With a demand to accept the new normal….Former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama are hosting back-to-back conferences about disinformation in the days following Donald Trump’s ‘big announcement.’
Bush, 76, will host his The Struggle for Freedom conference in Dallas on November 16, while Obama’s democracy conference will be held in New York City on the 17th.
Trump’s big announcement – largely rumored to be his 2024 presidential campaign announcement – is set for Tuesday.
Organizers said the conferences were not planned together, but will focus on the rising threats from authoritarianism and disinformation.
David J. Kramer, of the Bush Institute, said it was ‘terrific’ the two presidents would be focusing on similar topics, saying: ‘We’re very mindful of what’s happening in the United States, and we have to make sure we stay on a democratic path. (read more)
All just a coincidence…. nothing to see here, move along… move along.
Ignore any remembering that George Bush created the U.S. surveillance state (Patriot Act) and that Barack Obama weaponized it. However, also remember, the most dangerous time for a victim is that moment when the abuser realizes their battered victim has become numb to the continued psychological effort.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 12, 2022 | sundance
For his weekly monologue Neil Oliver outlines the reality of the British government no longer pretending to represent the people of the United Kingdom, but openly represents corporations and the interests of multinationals.
While the general topic of a disconnected governing body is referenced toward how the U.K. government is disregarding the opinion of the British citizens, the overarching theme outlined by Oliver also applies to the United States. WATCH:
(Transcript) – Does Britain still exist? Or is it being dismantled to make way for something else?
Obviously, there are some square miles of dry land off the coast of mainland Europe still going by the name of Britain. Britain is still on the map.
As a for instance, if you pay a people smuggler some thousands of bucks and say, take me to Britain, he will know where you mean and will transport you to a rendezvous with a British border force vessel or an RNLI lifeboat financed by donations from the British public, and either will cheerfully ferry you to the British coast where you will be collected and taken to a fine hotel and given food, money and access to all the facilities a person might need all of it paid for by taxes from those same British people millions of British people who are themselves painfully short of money and struggling to feed themselves and heat their homes.
Those taxes are predicted to rise, so that more of our money might be flushed out of Britain, away from the British, towards those deemed more deserving.
… but does that name, Britain, still define a sovereign country in any meaningful sense?
The crisis on the south coast is only part of a bigger problem. These islands of ours offer free accommodation, three meals a day and cash – no questions asked – plus more chance of bagging a council house than anyone actually born here. Who wouldn’t jump at the chance? But the setting aside of the border to make way for thousands of new arrivals every day is only a symptom of a homegrown sickness.
Ironically, in the aftermath of all the damage done to the personal immune systems of millions, billions of people worldwide, by the policies and medical practices of the past two years, Britain herself has been similarly weakened, deep down:
Instead of keeping the country safe and well those entities supposed to function like the nation’s immune system parliament, the institutions of state the civil service, the judiciary, the police have turned on the British people instead, and upon the structures that ought to protect us from harm. Like someone suffering from auto-immune disease, our national immune system is now destroying the healthy cells which is to say us, the British people.
Any country is a fiction when you get right down to it. For continued existence, every country depends on enough of the people who happen to occupy that space sharing the same idea about where they live. If enough people believe in the existence of Britain – and are prepared to give their all to maintain Britain – then Britain prevails. If the day comes when too many have forgotten what Britain is, or simply don’t care if she exists or not, then Britain is no more. The dry land will still be there, the roads and buildings, but that is all.
This is the time of remembrance, when we claim … claim to honour the ancestors who gave the last full measure of devotion to protect this country and see it handed on intact to future generations: “When you go home, tell them of us and say … For your tomorrow, we gave our today.”
Those words are graven in stone all over this country.
Today’s leaders have no loyalty to Britain or the British – none that I can see. Maybe a few still FEEL some loyalty – but are just too demoralised or scared to declare it, far less to do anything about it.
Whatever loyalties the rest of them have, on both sides of the aisle … they lie elsewhere, not honestly declared.
For one thing, they are loyal to those entities that DO make all the meaningful decisions, which is to say the markets and the banks. It was the markets that wanted rid of Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng and so they went.
Now we have Rishi Sunak – the prime minister none of us voted for and therefore don’t want. Like Jeremy Hunt – blatantly the markets’ choice of chancellor – his loyalties lie anywhere but with Britain and the British. Imagine how both men drool at the prospect of a CBDC and the surveillance society it will force upon us.
If we are led by figures committed to objectives that are against our interests – are we even obliged to obey their diktats when they are undoing everything Britain has been?
Are the needs and wants of the British people to be set aside in favour of the needs and wants of everyone else, anyone else in the world?
I ask those questions sincerely.
Since we’re talking about the markets and the banks, we might as well focus on what it’s all about, all of this upset and upheaval, which is control … control of the people via control of our money.
At a time when British people are struggling in ways that have been unknown to millions for a very long time, a vast mountain of the money they pay in tax is being shoveled elsewhere. For the crime of having been born in the home of the industrial revolution that changed the world for the better and lifted billions of people out of poverty, this latest generation of British people is to be punished, diminished, made dependent upon a State that openly despises us and treats us with contempt.
Setting aside, for example, the fact that China has pumped out more pollution in the last 8 years than Britain managed in the 220 years since the Industrial Revolution began … more of the taxes paid by British people might be handed to the Developing World … perhaps China included, who knows … as our penance for making it possible for 8 billion people to be alive in the world at the same time … courtesy of cheap, efficient energy, plentiful food and all the benefits born of the modern medicine and technology OUR ancestors’ efforts made possible.
The fire kindled here more than 200 years ago made life better, made life possible, for billions. And in return we are to be mugged in broad daylight, our wallets emptied, and our hard-earned cash handed to anyone around the world that wants it.
A good whack of China’s recent output of CO2 came from burning coal to make our wind turbines and the rest of the vanity projects that let our remotely-controlled leaders spout lies about cutting emissions, but hey-ho … never let the facts get in the way of a good global scam.
Back to the point, British money … earned by hard-working, struggling British people … is being funnelled out of Britain and into the wider world as fast as the leaders can make it flow. Cynic that I am, I conclude that all possible efforts are being made to impoverish and so destroy once and for all that upstart aspirational middling class whose very existence so infuriates today’s rulers.
Natural law is summarised in three words: do not steal. It underpins all lawful behaviour. Do not steal the life of another … do not steal the private property of another … do not steal the product of a worker’s labour, which is to say taxation … do not steal a person’s rights. Do not steal. It’s simple. But that simple foundation of lawful society has been set aside for the benefit and enrichment of the few.
Every day and more and more, those calling themselves our leaders are stealing everything. They look us in the eye and steal from us. During lockdown they stole our rights and liberties … they stole the livelihoods of millions … they stole mental and physical wellbeing. They stole the way things used to be. They are stealing the futures we had planned for our children.
There is a line of Latin that goes:
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
It means, who will guard the guards themselves? Those words focus our attention on the situation that arises when people with the power to supervise others are not, themselves, subject to the same scrutiny. It applies also when those who entitle themselves to make the law, also empower themselves to enforce the punishments. That is the definition of tyranny that our constitution was shaped to prevent.
At a time when British people are struggling in ways that have been unknown to millions for a very long time, a vast mountain of the money they pay in tax is being shovelled elsewhere, says Neil Oliver GB News
There’s a Covid enquiry out there. The same people that caused all the harm are now deciding if they did the right thing or not. I think we all know what conclusions they will draw. I ask again, Who will guard the guards themselves?
The UK Border Force – in place to protect and maintain the border – might as well be working in partnership with the people smugglers. The same company involved in border control has the government contract for housing asylum seekers. This is a conflict of interest alongside an inversion of their role.
The police – a citizen police force supposed to protect the British public does next to nothing to keep law-abiding citizens safe from real, violent crime and instead monitors what people say on social media. When they’re not being thought police, they either dance the Macarena with protesters the State likes or take the baton to those it doesn’t.
SO, WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW?
Philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote about how, without observance of right and wrong, human life was, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”. He concluded that such chaos was ended only if individuals agreed, via a social contract, to surrender some liberty to a sovereign on condition that that sovereign would keep them safe.
Who is honouring their part of our social contract now? We, the people, have been doing so … not least because, legally, we have no option.
It is interesting to recall the words of the American declaration of independence:
“Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness … that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed … that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”
I say that by their actions over the last many years, our leaders have made the social contract null and void. They are not protecting our freedoms and rights – nor Britain herself.
On the contrary, they are working in league with others to remove those rights and freedoms and to unmake Britain. If they will not honour the social contract, then why should we?
While we were distracted our governments assumed outrageous powers over us. Body and mind we are being crushed and numbed.
The time for accepting all of this has long passed.
Here’s the thing: where should OUR loyalties lie now?
With those who by their actions have made plain they respect us not a jot?
… or with each other, those who have seen through the lies and the transparent grasping for power and control. On this Remembrance weekend I would honour those who gave their lives for a free world and a country called Great Britain.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 12, 2022
There was always a strong suspicion the woke corporations were holding back negative employment intentions until after the midterm elections.
Well, as expected, the U.S. multinationals are starting to announce advanced downsizing.
(CNBC) – Tens of thousands of tech workers have been laid off within days, as tech giants including Meta, Twitter, Salesforce and others shed headcount going into the final stretch of the year. At least 20,300 U.S. tech workers were let go from their jobs in November, and more than 100,000 since the beginning of the year, according to Layoffs.fyi, which tracks layoffs in the field.
Tech workers reported huge drops in confidence in their job security through the summer, as news of layoffs, hiring freezes and rescinded offers put a damper on what’s so far been a worker-driven Covid pandemic recovery.
But the latest headlines are all converging at once as businesses course-correct on over-hiring and acknowledge how rising interest rates are thwarting their growth plans, says ZipRecruiter chief economist Julia Pollak. (more)
Nov 11 (Reuters) – Walt Disney Co (DIS.N) is planning to freeze hiring and cut some jobs as it strives to move the Disney+ streaming service to profitability against a backdrop of economic uncertainty, according to a memo seen by Reuters on Friday.
Chief Executive Bob Chapek sent the memo to Disney’s leaders, saying the company is instituting a targeted hiring freeze and anticipates “some small staff reductions” as it looks to manage costs. (read more)
As noted by Yahoo News, a “wave of layoffs” has begun that encompasses dozens of medium and large corporations [SEE HERE].
The layoffs, outlined in Yahoo, cover real estate, tech companies, banking, finance, automakers, EV startups, and brick and mortar stores like 7-11 and GAP. It should not come as a surprise, but it is sad to see, nonetheless.
Within the economy, a great pretending can only last so long… then reality hits.
The skilled trades should likely end up in the best employment situation, with the tech sector the worst. Service industries are also one of the first sectors hit when employment becomes an issue.
With rising interest rates, high inflation, excessive inventories, a shrinking production economy, extreme energy costs and diminished disposable income as a result of inflation and gas prices, there was going to come a time when it all starts to congregate. 2023 looks to be the year when economic pretenses collapse under the weight of having to admit a recession exists.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 11, 2022 | Sundance
Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake appears on Fox News with Tucker Carlson to discuss the insufferable and chaotic state of the Arizona election counting fiasco. {Direct Rumble Link}
Maricopa County remains the epicenter of the ridiculous exploits from election officials, including the intentional dragging out of the vote tabulation in an effort to support the Sunday Talk show narrative. However, that said, when the final ballots are counted, it’s almost certain that Kari Lake will stand victorious despite the shenanigans of the election officials; the remaining question is by what margin. WATCH:
.
Additionally in Nevada, Republican candidate Joe Lombardo has been declared the winner [data]. Republican Senate Candidate Adam Laxalt remains in the lead by 2,000 ballots/votes with 93% of the stuffing counted. Meanwhile in Colorado, as expected, Lauren Boebert has widened her lead with 95% of ballots (and votes), counted.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 11, 2022 | Sundance
CNN’s Bob Costa reports about explosive reports from sources who have heard anonymous reports from those who might have some familiarity with reports from others who have a connection to the matter. Things sound super cereal (source):
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 11, 2022 | Sundance
They have proposed and refined so many of the carbon trading schemes, it becomes difficult to remember which iteration each new formula replaces. Heck, I’ve lost track of how many of the individual components of the larger plan are already in place. However, John Kerry has introduced the western elites at COP27 to the latest acceptable proposal surrounding coal fired energy.
Against the backdrop of sped-up Build Back Better urgency, this coal-based carbon trading platform is called the Energy Transition Accelerator (ETA).
When you stay elevated to the larger way the Energy Transition Accelerator works you can clearly see the transferring of wealth from your bank account to the global control mechanism that will eventually determine your energy allotment. The companies that provide energy are simply the collectors for the fees you will pay to the World Economic Forum income disbursement group.
(Reuters) – […] The scheme, known as the Energy Transition Accelerator (ETA), was launched at the United Nations’ COP27 conference this week by John Kerry, the United States’ climate envoy, in collaboration with the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bezos Earth Fund.
[…] Voluntary carbon markets, in which companies get emissions credits in return for channeling cash to poor countries that cut their carbon output, have often been riddled with fraud and double-counting. Many critics think rich countries should just fork out the cash themselves to close coal plants – or tax fossil fuel companies to get the money. (read more)
There’s the system in a nutshell. Energy providers must purchase emission credits from the ‘carbon market’ (govt); in the U.S. likely the EPA as they do with RIN credits. The electricity provider puts the carbon purchase credit fee in your electricity bill.
The money generated from that credit purchase system is then delivered to the government who take a cut; then pass along the balance to the central climate control unit who take a cut; then forward the remaining balance to the third-world government who also take a cut; and then the remainder is used to develop clean energy systems; which returns to the starting point with the energy providers.
See how that works?
That’s the basic operational model of all the carbon-trading platforms.
Widget Corp (energy provider) is forced to purchase a credit. Widget Corp. get the fee for the credit from the customers (you). The fee is passed on to govt, then passed on to central control, then passed on to foreign govt, then passed on to Widget Corp. for building the new clean energy system.
Yes, it’s a Build Back Better circle.
The only way to avoid the Carbon-Trading Exchange is not to join the carbon trading system.
Well, that said, what does not joining the carbon trading system look like?
(Silk Road) – The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov has stated that ‘over a dozen’ countries have formally applied to join the BRICS grouping following the groups decision to allow new members earlier this year. The BRICS currently includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
It is not a free trade bloc, but members do coordinate on trade matters and have established a policy bank, the New Development Bank, (NDB) to coordinate infrastructure loans. That was set up in 2014 in order to provide alternative loan mechanisms from the IMF and World Bank structures, which the members had felt had become too US-centric.
The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) was set up by China at about the same time for largely the same reasons and to offer alternative financing than that provided by the IMF and World Banks, which were felt to impose political reform policies designed to assist the United States in return for providing loans. Both the NDB and AIIB banks are Triple A rated and capitalised at US$100 billion. The NDB bank shares are held equally by each of the five members.
In total, the BRICS grouping as it currently stands accounts for over 40% of the global population and nearly a quarter of the world’s GDP. The GDP figure is expected to double to 50% of global GDP by 2030. Expanding BRICS will immediately accelerate that process.
Concerning a BRICS expansion, Lavrov stated that Algeria, Argentina, and Iran had all applied, while it is already known that Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, Egypt and Afghanistan are interested, along with Indonesia, which is expected to make a formal application to join at the upcoming G20 summit in Bali.
Other likely contenders for membership include Kazakhstan, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Senegal, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates. All had their Finance Ministers present at the BRICS Expansion dialogue meeting held in May. (more)
Can you see it now?
This is the global trade and finance system cleaving as a result of western government’s chasing climate change.
There will eventually be two systems of finance, banking, investment and energy use.
Can you see it now?
Right now, the ‘western’ team is not going to allow any ally to join the BRICS team without punishment.
It’s a battle for global wealth using energy development as the tool.
Last point. With this in mind, does the multinational opposition to President Trump carry a new “trillions at stake” context for you?
By Greg Chapman “The world has less than a decade to change course to avoid irreversible ecological catastrophe, the UN warned today.” The Guardian Nov 28 2007 “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.” Yogi Berra Introduction Global extinction due to global warming has been predicted more times than climate activist, Leo DiCaprio, has traveled by private jet. But where do these predictions come from? If you thought it was just calculated from the simple, well known relationship between CO2 and solar energy spectrum absorption, you would only expect to see about 0.5o C increase from pre-industrial temperatures as a result of CO2 doubling, due to the logarithmic nature of the relationship. Figure 1: Incremental warming effect of CO2 alone [1] The runaway 3-6o C and higher temperature increase model predictions depend on coupled feedbacks from many other factors, including water vapour (the most important greenhouse gas), albedo (the proportion of energy reflected from the surface – e.g. more/less ice or clouds, more/less reflection) and aerosols, just to mention a few, which theoretically may amplify the small incremental CO2 heating effect. Because of the complexity of these interrelationships, the only way to make predictions is with climate models because they can’t be directly calculated. The purpose of this article is to explain to the non-expert, how climate models work, rather than a focus on the issues underlying the actual climate science, since the models are the primary ‘evidence’ used by those claiming a climate crisis. The first problem, of course, is no model forecast is evidence of anything. It’s just a forecast, so it’s important to understand how the forecasts are made, the assumptions behind them and their reliability. How do Climate Models Work? In order to represent the earth in a computer model, a grid of cells is constructed from the bottom of the ocean to the top of the atmosphere. Within each cell, the component properties, such as temperature, pressure, solids, liquids and vapour, are uniform. The size of the cells varies between models and within models. Ideally, they should be as small as possible as properties vary continuously in the real world, but the resolution is constrained by computing power. Typically, the cell area is around 100×100 km2 even though there is considerable atmospheric variation over such distances, requiring each of the physical properties within the cell to be averaged to a single value. This introduces an unavoidable error into the models even before they start to run. The number of cells in a model varies, but the typical order of magnitude is around 2 million. Figure 2: Typical grid used in climate models [2]
Once the grid has been constructed, the component properties of each these cells must be determined. There aren’t, of course, 2 million data stations in the atmosphere and ocean. The current number of data points is around 10,000 (ground weather stations, balloons and ocean buoys), plus we have satellite data since 1978, but historically the coverage is poor. As a result, when initialising a climate model starting 150 years ago, there is almost no data available for most of the land surface, poles and oceans, and nothing above the surface or in the ocean depths. This should be understood to be a major concern. Figure 3: Global weather stations circa 1885 [3]
Once initialised, the model goes through a series of timesteps. At each step, for each cell, the properties of the adjacent cells are compared. If one such cell is at a higher pressure, fluid will flow from that cell to the next. If it is at higher temperature, it warms the next cell (whilst cooling itself). This might cause ice to melt or water to evaporate, but evaporation has a cooling effect. If polar ice melts, there is less energy reflected that causes further heating. Aerosols in the cell can result in heating or cooling and an increase or decrease in precipitation, depending on the type. Increased precipitation can increase plant growth as does increased CO2. This will change the albedo of the surface as well as the humidity. Higher temperatures cause greater evaporation from oceans which cools the oceans and increases cloud cover. Climate models can’t model clouds due to the low resolution of the grid, and whether clouds increase surface temperature or reduce it, depends on the type of cloud. It’s complicated! Of course, this all happens in 3 dimensions and to every cell resulting in considerable feedback to be calculated at each timestep. The timesteps can be as short as half an hour. Remember, the terminator, the point at which day turns into night, travels across the earth’s surface at about 1700 km/hr at the equator, so even half hourly timesteps introduce further error into the calculation, but again, computing power is a constraint. While the changes in temperatures and pressures between cells are calculated according to the laws of thermodynamics and fluid mechanics, many other changes aren’t calculated. They rely on parameterisation. For example, the albedo forcing varies from icecaps to Amazon jungle to Sahara desert to oceans to cloud cover and all the reflectivity types in between. These properties are just assigned and their impacts on other properties are determined from lookup tables, not calculated. Parameterisation is also used for cloud and aerosol impacts on temperature and precipitation. Any important factor that occurs on a subgrid scale, such as storms and ocean eddy currents must also be parameterised with an averaged impact used for the whole grid cell. Whilst the effects of these factors are based on observations, the parameterisation is far more a qualitative rather than a quantitative process, and often described by modelers themselves as an art, that introduces further error. Direct measurement of these effects and how they are coupled to other factors is extremely difficult and poorly understood. Within the atmosphere in particular, there can be sharp boundary layers that cause the models to crash. These sharp variations have to be smoothed. Energy transfers between atmosphere and ocean are also problematic. The most energetic heat transfers occur at subgrid scales that must be averaged over much larger areas. Cloud formation depends on processes at the millimeter level and are just impossible to model. Clouds can both warm as well as cool. Any warming increases evaporation (that cools the surface) resulting in an increase in cloud particulates. Aerosols also affect cloud formation at a micro level. All these effects must be averaged in the models. When the grid approximations are combined with every timestep, further errors are introduced and with half hour timesteps over 150 years, that’s over 2.6 million timesteps! Unfortunately, these errors aren’t self-correcting. Instead this numerical dispersion accumulates over the model run, but there is a technique that climate modelers use to overcome this, which I describe shortly. Figure 4: How grid cells interact with adjacent cells [4]
Model Initialisation After the construction of any type of computer model, there is an initalisation process whereby the model is checked to see whether the starting values in each of the cells are physically consistent with one another. For example, if you are modelling a bridge to see whether the design will withstand high winds and earthquakes, you make sure that before you impose any external forces onto the model structure other than gravity, that it meets all the expected stresses and strains of a static structure. Afterall, if the initial conditions of your model are incorrect, how can you rely on it to predict what will happen when external forces are imposed in the model? Fortunately, for most computer models, the properties of the components are quite well known and the initial condition is static, the only external force being gravity. If your bridge doesn’t stay up on initialisation, there is something seriously wrong with either your model or design! With climate models, we have two problems with initialisation. Firstly, as previously mentioned, we have very little data for time zero, whenever we chose that to be. Secondly, at time zero, the model is not in a static steady state as is the case for pretty much every other computer model that has been developed. At time zero, there could be a blizzard in Siberia, a typhoon in Japan, monsoons in Mumbai and a heatwave in southern Australia, not to mention the odd volcanic explosion, which could all be gone in a day or so. There is never a steady state point in time for the climate, so it’s impossible to validate climate models on initialisation. The best climate modelers can hope for is that their bright shiny new model doesn’t crash in the first few timesteps. The climate system is chaotic which essentially means any model will be a poor predictor of the future – you can’t even make a model of a lottery ball machine (which is a comparatively a much simpler and smaller interacting system) and use it to predict the outcome of the next draw. So, if climate models are populated with little more than educated guesses instead of actual observational data at time zero, and errors accumulate with every timestep, how do climate modelers address this problem? History matching If the system that’s being computer modelled has been in operation for some time, you can use that data to tune the model and then start the forecast before that period finishes to see how well it matches before making predictions. Unlike other computer modelers, climate modelers call this ‘hindcasting’ because it doesn’t sound like they are manipulating the model parameters to fit the data. The theory is, that even though climate model construction has many flaws, such as large grid sizes, patchy data of dubious quality in the early years, and poorly understood physical phenomena driving the climate that has been parameterised, that you can tune the model during hindcasting within parameter uncertainties to overcome all these deficiencies. While it’s true that you can tune the model to get a reasonable match with at least some components of history, the match isn’t unique. When computer models were first being used last century, the famous mathematician, John Von Neumann, said: “with four parameters I can fit an elephant, with five I can make him wiggle his trunk” In climate models there are hundreds of parameters that can be tuned to match history. What this means is there is an almost infinite number of ways to achieve a match. Yes, many of these are non-physical and are discarded, but there is no unique solution as the uncertainty on many of the parameters is large and as long as you tune within the uncertainty limits, innumerable matches can still be found. An additional flaw in the history matching process is the length of some of the natural cycles. For example, ocean circulation takes place over hundreds of years, and we don’t even have 100 years of data with which to match it. In addition, it’s difficult to history match to all climate variables. While global average surface temperature is the primary objective of the history matching process, other data, such a tropospheric temperatures, regional temperatures and precipitation, diurnal minimums and maximums are poorly matched. Even so, can the history matching of the primary variable, average global surface temperature, constrain the accumulating errors that inevitably occur with each model timestep? Forecasting Consider a shotgun. When the trigger is pulled, the pellets from the cartridge travel down the barrel, but there is also lateral movement of the pellets. The purpose of the shotgun barrel is to dampen the lateral movements and to narrow the spread when the pellets leave the barrel. It’s well known that shotguns have limited accuracy over long distances and there will be a shot pattern that grows with distance. The history match period for a climate model is like the barrel of the shotgun. So what happens when the model moves from matching to forecasting mode? Figure 5: IPCC models in forecast mode for the Mid-Troposphere vs Balloon and Satellite observations [5] Like the shotgun pellets leaving the barrel, numerical dispersion takes over in the forecasting phase. Each of the 73 models in Figure 5 has been history matched, but outside the constraints of the matching period, they quickly diverge. Now at most only one of these models can be correct, but more likely, none of them are. If this was a real scientific process, the hottest two thirds of the models would be rejected by the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC), and further study focused on the models closest to the observations. But they don’t do that for a number of reasons. Firstly, if they reject most of the models, there would be outrage amongst the climate scientist community, especially from the rejected teams due to their subsequent loss of funding. More importantly, the so called 97% consensus would instantly evaporate. Secondly, once the hottest models were rejected, the forecast for 2100 would be about 1.5o C increase (due predominately to natural warming) and there would be no panic, and the gravy train would end. So how should the IPPC reconcile this wide range of forecasts? Imagine you wanted to know the value of bitcoin 10 years from now so you can make an investment decision today. You could consult an economist, but we all know how useless their predictions are. So instead, you consult an astrologer, but you worry whether you should bet all your money on a single prediction. Just to be safe, you consult 100 astrologers, but they give you a very wide range of predictions. Well, what should you do now? You could do what the IPCC does, and just average all the predictions. You can’t improve the accuracy of garbage by averaging it. An Alternative Approach Climate modelers claim that a history match isn’t possible without including CO2 forcing. This is may be true using the approach described here with its many approximations, and only tuning the model to a single benchmark (surface temperature) and ignoring deviations from others (such as tropospheric temperature), but analytic (as opposed to numeric) models have achieved matches without CO2 forcing. These are models, based purely on historic climate cycles that identify the harmonics using a mathematical technique of signal analysis, which deconstructs long and short term natural cycles of different periods and amplitudes without considering changes in CO2 concentration. In Figure 6, a comparison is made between the IPCC predictions and a prediction from just one analytic harmonic model that doesn’t depend on CO2 warming. A match to history can be achieved through harmonic analysis and provides a much more conservative prediction that correctly forecasts the current pause in temperature increase, unlike the IPCC models. The purpose of this example isn’t to claim that this model is more accurate, it’s just another model, but to dispel the myth that there is no way history can be explained without anthropogenic CO2 forcing and to show that it’s possible to explain the changes in temperature with natural variation as the predominant driver. Figure 6: Comparison of the IPCC model predictions with those from a harmonic analytical model [6]
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 11, 2022 | Sundance
Perhaps a little focus on the foundation of the issue is in order.
Ever since the professional Republican apparatus decided to target, eliminate and destroy the grassroots movement known as the Tea Party, there was always going to come a time when the battle for the heart and soul of the GOP Club would take place.
CTH has been calling this battle ‘The Big Ugly‘ for around a decade.
The Big Ugly battle is essentially the fight between the grassroots working class base of MAGA voters and the professional political snobs in control of the Republican Club boardroom.
Some call it the ‘base’ -vs- the ‘establishment’. There are other names and catchphrases, but the essence of the dynamic is the same. A scruffy voting base, who, prior to Donald Trump, had no visible leader to represent their internal interests around the mahogany table.
Ordinary voters were in an abusive relationship with the people around the GOP boardroom. The Club needed our votes, and our money (less so after the Citizens United decision) but had no intention of ever actually delivering on the priorities of the voters. The Republican political establishment played Lucy with the football for years, and We The People always ended up flat on our backs, continually frustrated and feeling used.
In the same year the Tea Party rose up, the Supreme Court gave the GOP Club legal access to unlimited corporate money with the 2010 Citizens United decision. Mitch McConnell used the newly unrestrained campaign finance mechanism to further diminish the influence of the unwashed masses and eliminate the movement; it’s all well documented.
For the next several years we watched and participated in a political pantomime with highlights to include the 2012 installation of Club member Mitt Romney to represent our interests. Yeah, whatever…. It was a hot mess. Bumper Sticker:
The base voters watched the GOP Corporate Club do nothing to block Obamacare, even after we gave them the House in 2010 midterms. Obamacare was another Lucy and the football scenario, while the Senate wing of the Corporate Club created “comprehensive immigration reform,” including amnesty with Marco Rubio. Eventually, the bloom wore off the ruse, and we dispatched Virginia Club official Eric Cantor as a message to the Corporate Club to knock it off.
The Corporate Club didn’t and doesn’t care. Instead, while they sold out the working-class to the multinationals (TPA, TPP, Paris Climate, etc) they fought harder, gaslight more, and made even more promises they never intended to keep. Lucy had an unending supply of footballs.
Then in 2015 things changed. The voting base found a weapon for use against the Republican Club, the weapon’s name was Donald Trump. From the very first poll conducted after his 2015 announcement Trump was leading the charge, and that lead steamrolled 16 other Club approved candidates. The Club remained furious and vowed to remove the disrupter we sent into the boardroom.
Candidate Trump and President Donald Trump tried to deal with them fair and square on our behalf, but they rebuked him and us.
The Club schemed against him, connived in their little corporate groups to get rid of him, joined with the communists in common cause to cleanse the Club boardroom of the smell from oil, tar and fuel oil, and wanted that vulgarian representative of the dirty fingernail working class eliminated. They want only the “approved Republican” presence.
So, it was always going to get ugly.
It was always going to get Big Ugly.
The Club’s enlistment of former TPP approving congressman Ron DeSantis as a foil against the MAGA leader is transparent. DeSantis, funded by massive contributions from the Wall Street approval committee, replaces the prior approved candidate, Jeb. This Big Ugly battle was always going to end up with vulgarian Trump -vs- the next Jeb. The Club has selected DeSantis as Jeb.
Now, let’s be clear. The Republican political establishment, which includes the entirety of the multinationals in/around it, hereafter just called ‘The Club’, doesn’t give a damn about actually winning the 2024 presidential race. The Club didn’t give a damn when Romney was used either.
What the Club wants is full control of the Club agenda, that’s where the money is. The color of the flag atop the Capitol Hill dome is irrelevant to the activity that takes place beneath it. To understand, remind yourself of: The 2017 Obamacare repeal vote, 2015 TPA and fast track approval, 2015 Corker-Cardin amendment for Obama’s Iran Deal, 2014 Gang-of-Eight amnesty bill, or more recently the 2022 unlimited Ukraine funding.
Under the Capitol Hill dome both Club wings of the UniParty apparatus feed the multinational corporate vulture, regardless of the color of the flag atop the spire.
The Republican Club has no interest in Ron DeSantis becoming President of the United States. The Republican Club has interest in Donald Trump NOT becoming President of the United States. Ron DeSantis is the foil, nothing more. It’s not about Ron DeSantis, it’s about the Club, the mechanism behind Ron DeSantis – the same mechanism that put $200 million into his campaign as enticement for his usefulness.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis -vs- California Governor Gavin Newsom in 2024 is simply two clubs playing the illusion of choice game.
Ultimately, using history and modern politics as the perspective, if you really boil down the political sauce to its reduced state, what you find is… With DeSantis the DNC Club needs less ballot collection to defeat him. However, that’s irrelevant to the intent of his usefulness for the GOP club.
For the professional GOP Club, as openly expressed by the establishment politicians within it, the donors behind it and the media who promote it, the goal is to remove the populism within the club and bring back the multinational Club alignment with the corporations. That alignment was severely damaged by President Trump and the America First economic agenda.
The core of the Big Ugly battle is a Club motive based on money, power and boardroom affluence, in essence, GREED.
For ten plus years on these pages, I have written extensively about how there was always, always, going to be a point where the Big Ugly battle was going to have to be waged. We have waited and waited, looking at each moment, each conflict, each disparagement, each slight and snub, in hope the spark would ignite.
If the Big Ugly arrives in a contest between President Trump and Governor DeSantis, well, great; it needs to happen.
The bottom line is we need this Big Ugly fight. Not only does the future of the GOP reside in the outcome, the future of a constitutional republic free from corporatism is contingent upon it.
Yes, this fight is going to be big, and it’s going to be ugly… and in the aftermath, hopefully lots of free footballs.
COMMENT: Marty, I love all that you do. I want to challenge anyone to find a county in the USA that is more corrupt that Harris County Texas (Houston) regarding vote fraud, nothing to see here keep moving: Harris County Elections administrator can’t answer why polling locations ran out of paper Harris County Elections Administrator Clifford Tatum said his office started receiving paper ballot shortage calls as early as 7:30 a.m. on Election Day. (21 republican locations and up to 100,000 votes) an Author: Jeremy Rogalski Published: 7:25 PM CST November 9, 2022
Nearly 127,000 Harris County drive-thru votes appear safe after federal judge rejects GOP-led Texas lawsuit The Republican plaintiffs in an appeal asked that drive-thru voting be halted on Election Day, but did not immediately ask again that ballots that have already been cast be tossed out. BY JOLIE MCCULLOUGH NOV. 2, 2020UPDATED: NOV. 3, 2020 Houston Scrambles After Blaze That Destroyed Voting Machines Houston firefighters poured water on the smoldering shell of a warehouse that caught fire around 4 a.m. on Aug. 27. Credit…Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle, Via Associated Press By James C. McKinley Jr. Sept. 10, 2010.
PES
REPLY: This is my big concern. Reports are coming in from all over. This election will never be accepted. I have warned that this election will be so corrupt, it will probably go down in history with the most corrupt election during the Roman Republic where there were so many bribes, and interest rates soared during 53BC. When Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49BC, the people cheered and it was the oligarchs who fled to Greece – all the Senators. Unfortunately, Cicero was one of the oligarchs and his FAKE NEWS wrongly influenced many including the Founding Fathers of the United States. Had they seen the other accounts, they may never have chosen a Republic without term limits and prohibited any change to anything major absent a 2/3rd vote.
People are simply not prepared for a sharp economic downturn. The Money and Pensions Serviceconducted a poll in the UK in which it found around 25% of adults have under £100 in savings. The 3,000-person survey found that 17% reported having absolutely nothing set aside. Around 5% reportedly had under £50, while 4% had between £50 and £100.
The drastically increased cost of living has many living paycheck to paycheck. The Building Societies Association (BSA), as reported by the BBC, conducted a separate survey that found that 35% of people in the UK simply stopped saving due to inflation. Around 36% said they are already dipping into their savings accounts to pay the bills.
The Bank of England is anticipating a long recession ahead. The central bank sees economic conditions contracting through the first half of 2024. The central bank’s prediction of five consecutive quarters of contraction would mark the longest recession in UK history. The people have not experienced the full effects of this recession, and most are simply not prepared for what lies ahead.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Figure 1: Incremental warming effect of CO2 alone [1]
Figure 2: Typical grid used in climate models [2]
Figure 3: Global weather stations circa 1885 [3]
Figure 4: How grid cells interact with adjacent cells [4]
Figure 5: IPCC models in forecast mode for the Mid-Troposphere vs Balloon and Satellite observations [5]
Figure 6: Comparison of the IPCC model predictions with those from a harmonic analytical model [6]
Centinel2012 