Multiple mainstream media outlets published stories this week uncritically publicizing the claims of a climate change interest group, Climate Central (CC). According to CC, climate change has caused higher weather disaster costs in the United States this year than ever in history – or at least since 1980, which is as far as the records CC uses go back. These claims are false. While the costs of extreme weather events and wildfires were high in early 2025, there are no trends that indicate climate change is responsible. Rather, higher populations, increased development in disaster prone areas, poor water management, and human evil in the form of arson, were the cause of the abnormally high disaster costs.
The Guardian’s headline on the high costs from natural disasters in the first six months of 2025 directly attributed it to climate change, “Climate disasters in first half of 2025 costliest ever on record, research shows.” NBC News’s story took a shot at the Trump administration as well as hyping a climate connection to the 2025 mid-year disaster cost totals, writing, “What canceled climate data would have shown: The costliest 6 months of weather disasters on record.”
The tenor of The Guardian, NBC, and other outlets covering CC’s disaster cost report was nearly universal. Climate change resulted in worse weather disasters and higher costs in early 2025 than ever before, a fact that would have been missed absent CC’s work since President Donald Trump cut funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration program, which has previously monitored such costs.
Per The Guardian :
The first half of 2025 was the costliest on record for major disasters in the US, driven by huge wildfires in Los Angeles and storms that battered much of the rest of the country, according to a climate non-profit that has resurrected work axed by Donald Trump’s administration that tracked the biggest disasters.
In the first six months of this year, 14 separate weather-related disasters that each caused at least $1bn in damage hit the US, the Climate Central group has calculated. In total, these events cost $101bn in damages – lost homes, businesses, highways and other infrastructure – a toll higher than any other first half of a year since records on this began in 1980.
As NBC News wrote:
The first half of this year was the costliest ever recorded for weather and climate disasters in the United States, according to an analysis published Wednesday by the nonprofit organization Climate Central.
It is information that the public might never have learned: This spring, the Trump administration cut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration program that had tracked weather events that caused at least $1 billion in damage. The researcher who led that work, Adam Smith, left NOAA over the decision.
To be clear, Climate Central is not an objective authority on the causes and consequences of climate change, or a neutral party regarding proposed solutions. Rather, it was created and exists solely to produce and promote material blaming human activities for causing climate change resulting in catastrophic consequences that threaten human life, and to promote government enforced solutions that limit fossil fuel use.
Leaving aside the motives of the organization that produced the report, the news coverage of the report was inaccurate from the start. The stories ignore the history of natural disasters in the regions that have been impacted this year, the demographic changes that have resulted in the higher costs, and, most importantly, the lack of any long-term discernable changes in weather patterns and the incidences and severity of extreme weather events for the areas affected.
Looking at where the disasters occurred in the first half of this year, from CC’s own tracking we find the weather events were tornadoes that occurred during typical tornado season stretching from Texas through the plains to the upper mid-west. This area of the country is commonly referred to as “tornado alley” because such events are so common there during the spring and early summer. So, nothing unusual there. What critically undermines the CC report and the media’s suggestion that the rising cost of tornadoes is due to climate change is the fact, as explored in Climate Realism, here, here, and here, for example, that neither the number, frequency, nor severity of tornadoes has increased as the Earth has slightly warmed.
Other events include flooding in areas of the country historically known for spring flooding as a result of snowmelt and severe spring snowstorms – many of the areas are popular riverfront towns or communities. Climate Realism has repeatedly debunked media claims that flooding is getting worse – data show it isn’t. If flooding is not becoming more frequent or severe, climate change can’t be causing higher costs related to flooding.
Indeed, even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified no worsening trend in floods or tornadoes that it can attribute to climate change.
Finally, more than 60 percent of the $101 billion disaster costs that CC says resulted from climate change altered weather events are attributable to just a single event: the January 2025 wildfires that decimated a large swath of Los Angeles. The Los Angeles fires were horrific, of a kind not experienced there in recent history, but not unusual historically. The huge damage was a result of a combination of factors, good seasonal rainfall in recent years creating lush natural growth combined with and regular lawn and tree watering in wealthy enclaves, followed by a severe drought, creating conditions for a wildfire, and strong Santa Anna winds to drive a fire quickly across the landscape once started (once again a natural feature of the area). With these conditions, all that was needed was a spark, which a perverse arsonist provided. Once the fire started, winds drove it quickly across a tinder dry landscape and firefighters found a shortage of water in reservoirs as a result of political decisions made by the state government.
Los Angeles is not warmer than is was in the 1950s and precipitation has actually increased slightly in the region since 1895. Despite climate alarmists and advantage seeking, virtue signaling Democratic politicians attempting to blame climate change for the fire and its severity, the evidence indicates it had nothing to do with it.
If climate conditions haven’t change appreciably across the United States, in the sense that the more extreme weather patterns are emerging, the question is, why have costs related to weather disasters gone up so much in nominal dollars? Keep in mind that in inflation adjusted dollars as a percentage of GDP, the costs of natural disasters have fallen over time. (see the figure, below)
As should be obvious to any honest observer exercising the least bit of common sense, the reason for rising disaster costs is clear, the expanding bullseye effect. As Climate Realism has explored in dozens of articles previously, with more people moving into ecologically/climatically desirable locations, locations prone to natural disasters, erecting more homes, businesses, and related structures and infrastructure, property has gone up dramatically in value overtime. When a disaster like a wildfire (in this case an arson started wildfire) strikes, more people and property is impacted and related costs are higher. Climate Realism discussed this very point in articles linked, here, here, and here, to take but a few examples. Quite simply, when a hurricane hits Miami or Galveston now, there are more buildings and structures to destroy at those locations than there was 100 years ago.
One can acknowledge that CC is right, natural disasters are imposing higher costs in nominal dollars now than they did in the past, without jumping to the completely unfounded claim that climate change is the cause. Legitimate journalists and honest news outlets, as NBC News and The Guardian purport to be, should check their facts before parroting the false rantings of a climate lobbing group as the truth. Misleading, false alarm stories like these are perhaps why trust in the media is low and falling.
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | NBC, The Guardian |
Leave a comment
Today, Americans for Public Trust released a new report exposing how a group of foreign “charities” has spent almost $2 billion bankrolling U.S. policy fights and advancing an extreme climate agenda.
Click HERE to read the full report.
“It is extremely alarming that five foreign charities have quietly poured almost two billion dollars into advocating for the most extreme liberal policies and protests in the United States. Since current laws regulating foreign giving to U.S.-based nonprofit organizations are hindered by a lack of oversight and exploitable exemptions and loopholes, foreign actors have been able to advance their radical and dangerous interests virtually unchecked. Congress needs to address these serious shortfalls in our laws to protect American interests and keep foreign influence out of our politics.” — Caitlin Sutherland, Executive Director, Americans for Public Trust
Fast Facts:
- Five foreign charities have quietly funneled almost $2 billion into U.S. policy fights, litigation, research, protests, lobbying, and the nonprofit sector to advance their extreme, foreign, activist climate agenda. The groups support a radical green agenda including: the managed decline of oil and gas, climate protests, opposing the Keystone XL Pipeline, and more.
- Quadrature Climate Foundation (QCF): QCF, out of the United Kingdom has given $530 million in foreign money to 41 U.S.-based groups from 2020 to the present, including: ClimateWorks Foundation, Growald Climate Fund, The Grantham Foundation, Arabella’s Windward Fund, and the Sunrise Project.
- KR Foundation: The KR Foundation, a Danish charity, has given over $36 million in foreign cash to 53 U.S.-based groups from 2015 to 2024, including: The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), Stop the Money Pipeline, Fossil Free Media, The Associated Press, and Oil Change International (OCI).
- Oak Foundation: OF, based in Switzerland, has given over $750 million in foreign money to 152 U.S.-based groups from 2014 to 2024, including: The Environmental Law Institute (ELI), Community Change – the fiscal sponsor for Free DC -, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors (RPA), Arabella’s New Venture Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and The Tides Center.
- Laudes Foundation: Since 2020, The Laudes Foundation, another Swiss-based charity, has poured almost $20 million into 17 U.S.-based groups, including: The Pulitzer Center for Crisis, Ceres, Community Initiatives, and The World Resources Institute (WRI).
- Children’s Investment Fund Foundation: CIFF, based in the United Kingdom, has given over $553 Million in foreign money to 39 U.S.-based groups from 2014 to 2023, including: The Energy Foundation China (EFC), The Institute for Governance & Sustainable Development (IGSD), Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and The Sunrise Project.
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | United States |
Leave a comment
In a fleeting glimpse of lucidity, the mainstream media has noticed a tiny fraction of the corruption and authoritarianism in Kiev
It’s that time of the great proxy war crusade against Russia again. Someone in the mainstream West has woken up to, if not the facts about the politics of Ukraine, then at least a quantum of disquiet.
The last major wave of the likes of the Financial Times, The Economist, and the Spectator suddenly noticing – all at the same time, as if on cue – that Ukraine has an authoritarianism and corruption problem (and then some) took place less than half a year ago.
Now it’s Politico – usually a steadfast party organ of Russophobia, Zionism-come-what-genocide-may, and servility to NATO – that feels vaguely troubled by the realities of the Kiev regime or, as the publication puts it, the “dark side” of Vladimir “I don’t like elections” Zelensky’s rule.
Not all of those realities, of course. That would be asking too much. Instead, Politico is homing in on one great scandal (out of countless ones) concerning one man and the anguish of a few “civil-society”-NGO types, both with good connections to the West. This time, the scandal concerns the obvious, shameless political prosecution of Vladimir Kudritsky, formerly a high-ranking and effective energy infrastructure executive and de facto civil servant.
Yet what about noticing the murder in Ukrainian detention of critical blogger – and US citizen – Gonzalo Lira? Or the vicious persecution of leftist war critic Bogdan Syrotiuk? Or the mean, indecent harassing of Christian clergy and believers for not saying their prayers in quite the right Ukrainian-nationalist-approved manner? Perish the thought!
In a similar spirit of extreme selectiveness, some Western outlets are now registering – a little and very slowly – the brutal realities of Ukrainian forced mobilization that feed the Western proxy war: Recently, a war – pardon, “defense” – editor of the ultra-gung-ho British tabloid The Sun has returned shell-shocked from NATO’s de facto eastern front, not because of the bloody and wasteful fighting but because the uncouth Ukrainians press-ganged his fixer.
In a similarly traumatic experience, Hollywood’s Angelina Jolie had her local driver snatched away at a Ukrainian military roadblock. Yet violent forced mobilization has been an everyday occurrence in Ukraine for years already. So much so that Ukrainians have chosen the term “busification” (from minibus, a popular vehicle for mobilization manhunts) as word of the year for 2025.
For quite a few of its victims, it ends up even worse than for those privileged enough to work for Western movie stars and British propagandists. Roman Sopin, for instance, who did not even resist, has just been beaten to death in a mobilization precinct in central Kiev, as an official medical assessment of his cause of death implies as clearly as anyone may dare under Zelensky’s regime.
But let’s get back to the few things Western media deign to notice occasionally: Already dismissed last year, Kudritsky is now facing the courts under transparently trumped-up charges. The reason is obvious to everyone. He has been too popular and far too vocal about corruption at the highest levels and the authoritarian power grabs of Zelensky’s presidential office in particular.
Kudritsky’s case – comparatively harmless, really – does raise many disturbing questions: why is it that the Zelensky regime has such a nasty record of abusing arbitrary financial sanctions and politically perverted legal processes, or lawfare? And haven’t we been told that this regime under its “Churchillian” leader is fighting for Western values of democracy and legality?
Are Zelensky, his sinister fixer-in-chief Andrey Yermak and their team preparing the ground for elections after a possible end of the war – that is, after losing it – by preemptively crippling domestic critics and rivals? Does this mean Zelensky, Ukraine’s most catastrophic leader since independence in 1991 (and that’s a high bar) is seriously considering not slinking away into exile but imposing himself even longer on his unfortunate country?
Or is all of this part of decimating whatever is left of Ukraine’s mangled society to continue the meatgrinder war for as long as the NATO-EU Europeans are willing to pay? If things go the way the bloodthirsty fantasists at The Economist want, then the West will shell out another cool $390 billion over the next four years. Apparently, they believe that waves of forced conscription in Ukraine will provide the human cannon fodder to go along with the Western funding.
Yet if Zelensky’s fresh authoritarian moves are really aiming at preparing for a postwar election next year, then that is a terrible sign, too. It would indicate not only that he is planning to damage Ukraine even further by his presence, but also that those postwar elections will be anything but fair and equal. In other words, in that scenario, Zelensky will try to stay around, and so will the authoritarian regime he has built.
To be fair to Zelensky, his authoritarianism has never been a response to the war, as his Western fans still believe, even when they are finally deigning to notice a little of his “dark side.” Zelensky was building an authoritarian regime – widely known and criticized in Ukraine back then already as “mono-vlada” – long before the escalation of February 2022.
Zelensky is not a benevolent leader who has been forced to adopt dictatorial habits by an emergency. In reality, if anything, he has exploited the emergency for all it was worth to indulge his lust for unlimited power and extreme corruption. So, trying to take his misrule into the postwar period is at least not inconsistent: it has never been tied to wartime.
But behind all of this, there is one great irony and one bigger question: The question is simple. If Politico really believes that going after Kudritsky with lawfare and frustrating the “civil-society”-NGO crowd is “the dark side” of Zelensky’s rule, what, if we may ask, is the bright side supposed to be?
Indeed, where is the better side of real-existing Zelensky-ism? Is it the humungous corruption? The Bakhmut-style military fiascos, the Kursk Kamikaze incursion, and now Pokrovsk? The fact that the media have been mercilessly streamlined? The raging nepotism that makes sure that the poor fight and the sons and daughters of Ukraine’s gangsterish “elite” go on holidays and party? The personality cult?
Or is it – and this brings us to the great irony – that Zelensky-Ukraine is allegedly in sync with “Western values”? And do you know what? It really is! But not the way that the propagandists of both Ukraine and the NATO-EU West want us to believe. What the Zelensky regime and its supporters in the EU really have in common is that neither care about either democracy or the rule of law.
Zelensky going after critics with individual financial sanctions to evade normal legal procedures and leave his victims not even a slim chance to defend themselves, for instance? That is exactly what Germany and the EU are now doing to the journalist Hüseyin Dogru, and not only to him. Zelensky using a perverted reading of the law to harass whoever does not submit or is a political danger to him? Bingo again. That as well is now EU practice, too. Ask, for instance, Marine Le Pen in France. Finally, widespread abuse of political office for self-enrichment and influence peddling? Bingo again: Less than a month ago, the Financial Times ran a detailed article on “scores” of EU parliament members who “earn income from second jobs in areas that overlap with their lawmaking,” raising “questions about disclosure of potential conflicts of interest.” How delicately put. And it sounds just like Ukraine’s Rada.
Here’s the real news: The “dark side” of Zelensky’s rule is all of Zelensky’s rule. And it is also what has become the new normal in an increasingly authoritarian and corrupt EU. Who has learned from whom? Kiev from NATO-EU Europe or vice versa? Either way, this is not a bug but a feature. And it must stop. Everywhere.
Tarik Cyril Amar, is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Corruption, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Human rights, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
A few key issues must be resolved between the US and Russia before the Budapest peace summit can happen, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has stated. What’s he driving at?
At least three issues concerning Ukraine require careful consideration, according to Michael Maloof, former senior security policy analyst in the US Office of the Secretary of Defense.
- First, Russia won’t give up what it holds; it also made it clear that Ukraine should withdraw from the new Russian regions. As of yet, the Kiev regime has resisted the option, the pundit explains to Sputnik.
- Second, it’s the security arrangement: “In a post-settlement period, do you allow Western forces into Ukraine at all? Because then it becomes ipso facto a NATO bastion. And that’s the thing that [President Vladimir] Putin is trying to avoid,” Maloof says. Russia has repeatedly warned that the deployment of a military contingent involving NATO countries in Ukraine could trigger an uncontrolled escalation of the conflict with unpredictable consequences. The Russian Foreign Ministry assessed the EU and UK’s calls for intervening as “openly provocative and predatory”.
- Third, the US also needs to make sure its NATO allies comply with any agreement it signs with Russia.
Once those issues are solved, Russia and the US “can get on with their own bilateral areas of interest in a more geostrategic fashion,” including new arms control and nuclear weapons.
“So you have issues that are overriding the Ukraine issue that need to bring Russia-US relations back in sync so that we can lessen the temperature in the world,” Maloof concludes.
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | NATO, Russia, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
Leaked documents have exposed how Jeffrey Epstein helped former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak broker covert security deals across Africa, deepening the disgraced financier and sex trafficker’s shadowy ties to Israeli intelligence and state-linked operations.
The revelations, based on files released by the hacker collective Handala and the US House Oversight Committee, detail Epstein’s behind-the-scenes role in advancing Israel’s military and surveillance footprint in Côte d’Ivoire during Barak’s tenure as defense minister and beyond.
The leaked emails and Epstein’s personal schedules show the financier acting as a key intermediary between Barak and Ivorian leaders in 2012 and 2013, facilitating meetings, smoothing negotiations, and pushing forward Israeli security proposals, as reported by Drop Site on Friday.
Epstein’s communications reveal his enthusiasm for monetizing regional turmoil. “With civil unrest exploding […] and the desperation of those in power, isn’t this perfect for you,” he wrote to Barak.
The former Israeli premier replied: “You’re right [in] a way. But not simple to transform it into a cash flow.”
That “cash flow,” according to the documents, took the form of Israeli surveillance contracts and intelligence-sharing agreements with the Ivorian government.
Even after leaving office in 2013, Barak continued negotiating through private channels, with Epstein’s assistance. Emails show the pair discussing plans for mass monitoring systems, designed by ex-Israeli intelligence officers, and coordinated meetings with top Ivorian and Israeli officials.
The leaked House records allege Epstein’s meetings with Ivorian President Ouattara’s relatives and aides in New York and his subsequent travel to West Africa, which coincided with high-level Israeli visits.
While Barak has claimed his ventures with Epstein were purely “private investments,” the new disclosures suggest otherwise.
Israeli companies linked to Barak’s network, including MF Group and Elbit Systems, later supplied surveillance infrastructure and “public order” equipment to Côte d’Ivoire after the United Nations lifted its arms embargo in 2014, according to the report.
The leaked documents also place Epstein squarely at the heart of these dealings, coordinating meetings for Barak with Israeli intelligence figures and Ivorian envoys.
According to the leaked proposal authored by former Israeli military intelligence chief Aharon Ze’evi-Farkash, Israel’s plan for Côte d’Ivoire involved a sweeping SIGINT (signals intelligence) system designed to intercept phone, radio, and satellite communications—technology originally developed during the Palestinian Intifadas.
Within months, Barak and Epstein’s lobbying paid off with the Ivorian government reportedly approving the Israeli proposal.
Epstein’s Personal Links With Barak
The revelations follow renewed scrutiny of Epstein’s personal relationship with Ehud Barak, which has long drawn controversy.
In her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein’s most prominent accusers, alleged that a “well-known prime minister” brutally assaulted her on Epstein’s private island in 2002, when she was 18.
Giuffre did not name the individual in the book but had previously identified Barak in court filings as one of the men who abused her.
She recounted pleading with Epstein not to send her back to the “Prime Minister” after the attack, but, as she wrote, “Epstein cared only about Epstein.” The financier dismissed her pleas, telling her, “You’ll get that sometimes.”
The disturbing allegations, coupled with the newly leaked documents, further expose the depth of Epstein’s connections within Israeli political and intelligence circles.
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Deception | Africa, Côte d'Ivoire, Ehud Barak, Israel |
Leave a comment
A German court has ruled that authorities in Berlin acted unlawfully when they barred British-Palestinian surgeon Dr Ghassan Abu Sitta from participating in a conference on Palestine held in the German capital in April 2024.
The Berlin Administrative Court’s decision, reaffirmed this week, declared that the immigration authorities’ actions were illegal, upholding a lower court ruling issued in July. The Higher Administrative Court rejected an appeal by the Berlin state government, stating that it did not meet the legal criteria required for a retrial.
According to the court’s findings, immigration authorities had no legal grounds to prohibit Dr Abu Sitta from attending the conference, giving media interviews, or making public statements. The ruling emphasized that the restrictions imposed lacked adequate justification related to national security or the protection of public order.
Authorities had originally justified the ban by suggesting that Abu Sitta might express support for the 7 October 2023 Hamas-led Al-Aqsa Flood operation against Israel, or make statements perceived as threatening to the existence of the Israeli state. However, the court concluded that there was no evidence that his participation or remarks posed any danger to Germany’s democratic order.
Dr Abu Sitta, who has treated victims of the Israeli genocide in Gaza and other war zones, has become a prominent advocate for Palestinian medical and human rights. The latest ruling is seen as a significant legal victory for freedom of expression in Germany amid growing debates over restrictions on pro-Palestinian speech.
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | Germany, Human rights, Israel, Palestine, Zionism |
Leave a comment
German arms giant Rheinmetall has reported a surge in operating profit for the first nine months of 2025 and a record backlog of orders, citing the Ukraine conflict and growing EU defense budgets.
Company shares have nearly tripled over the past year on rising demand for military hardware. Rheinmetall produces a wide range of weapons supplied to Ukraine, including tanks, armored vehicles, artillery shells, and ammunition.
Sales jumped by 20% to €7.5 billion ($8.7 billion), while operating profit rose by 18% to €835 million, according to the Dusseldorf-based firm’s third-quarter results released on Thursday. Rheinmetall said its order backlog reached a record €64 billion.
In the report, the manufacturer said it was expanding production, with 13 sites under construction or upgrade across the bloc, including a new plant in Lithuania and planned facilities in Latvia and Bulgaria. It noted that Ukraine, the EU, and Germany remain Rheinmetall’s core markets.
“We are becoming a global defense champion,” CEO Armin Papperger said.
Germany has become Kiev’s second-largest arms provider after the US. Berlin has changed its budget rules to permit long-term defense spending beyond the €100 billion fund created after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Chancellor Friedrich Merz has called for the creation in Germany of “Europe’s strongest army.”
Moscow has condemned what it calls the West’s “reckless militarization,” arguing that continued arms deliveries to Kiev only prolong the fighting. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has accused Merz of wanting to turn Germany back into “the main military machine of Europe,” saying Berlin’s actions demonstrate its “direct involvement” in a proxy war against Russia. He also warned that the broader EU was sliding into what he described as a “Fourth Reich.”
November 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | European Union, Germany |
Leave a comment
Aletho News 