In 2020, Florida took the lead in rejecting lockdowns. The effort was led by Governor Ron DeSantis, who in the course of the pandemic became a master of knowledge and erudition on matters of public health and the cell biological issues concerning immunity. In removing mandates and restrictions, he was under the influence of the signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration along with public health scholar Scott Atlas.
The efforts in Florida to protect the elderly while permitting the rest of society to function normally led to a success that has been celebrated the world over. It causes major disruption to the lockdown narrative that the only way to suppress a virus is to suppress rights and freedoms.
As a retrospective on the policy, the governor held a roundtable with all four scientists. Lasting an hour and a half, they covered all the major issues. The video itself came to serve as a tutorial in the relationship between public policy and virus mitigation.
With no warning, no announcement, and no explanation, YouTube on April 7, 2021, suddenly deleted the entire video from its platform. Once hosted by WTSP Tampa Bay, an NBC affiliate, it originally appeared as embedded in a story on WTSP.com. The video that once lived here is now replaced by this.
AIER embedded that same video on our story about the event, along with the first and still the only full transcript of the event. In the late afternoon, the video appeared completely blanked out.
After the lockdowns last spring, YouTube announced that it would pull any video with coronavirus information that was at odds with the recommendations by the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization, organizations that aggressively backed lockdowns in 2020 (after ten years of opposing them). When the CDC and WHO began to contradict themselves on many issues, among which included immunities and their source, YouTube took a different direction, curating the “science” themselves and deleting any video that its employees didn’t like.
This policy has now run afoul of the basic needs of public health messaging, science, and sound policy decision making, even to the point of removing a serious forum of a popular government along with his scientific advisors from Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford universities.
AIER has dealt with problems of censorship for the better part of a year. We began to find alternative sources to host our content, companies that would not engage in sudden takedowns and censorship. Our own choice has been LBRY, which hosts all our videos on a channel.
This sounds like a good solution to censorship, but there is a vulnerability. The Securities and Exchange Commission has singled out LBRY for investigation and fines as high as $11 million for unlawful distribution of securities. The complaint is about the protocol ownership tokens that are distributed to those who use the platform, as a way of incentivizing and monetizing the creation of content. LBRY is only one of many thousands of companies that are using this new method, which is made possible by blockchain technology and the tokenization of internet finance. The SEC has been ambiguous on the question of whether a token is a security but states such as Wyoming have specifically legislated against this claim that fundamentally threatens the entire crypto industry.
Why is LBRY being singled out for investigation? Is it possible that the complaint against the company was initiated by YouTube as a way of tightening the tech giant’s control over internet content? We do not know but it is not crazy to suspect that this is what’s going on.
This latest attack on public health information comes barely one week after Twitter aggressively censored one of the scientists on DeSantis’s panel, Martin Kulldorff, one of the original creators of the Great Barrington Declaration. Meanwhile, Twitter itself has bragged about its new tools for removing anything that contradicts the government/corporate agenda.
And to mention one more case of big-tech/big-media manipulation, Governor DeSantis himself was subjected to an outrageous case of editing by 60 Minutes. The show deliberately distorted its broadcast version of a question and answer session, completely leaving out of its account an extended explanation by the governor that proved that the nature of the question was completely false.
The pulling of the roundtable video comes a day after the total humiliation of 60 Minutes in many stories that defended the governor. Its deletion of the most viewed version online denies viewers the opportunity to observe DeSantis’s impressive knowledge on the subject of the coronavirus and the public policy response.
Dr Peter McCullough is the leading published medical doctor of his speciality in the world. He is regarded as an impeccable expert and someone to be listened to on COVID19 treatments.
In this testimony before the Texas Senate he bemoans that too little is being done to educate ourselves on non-vaccine alternative treatments.
VIDEO SOURCE: “Peter McCullough, MD testifies to Texas Senate HHS Committee”, released by Association of American Physicians and Surgeons: https://youtu.be/QAHi3lX3oGM (March 11, 2021). Original description: “Testimony given March 10, 2021. Patient Guide at https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/ ”
QUOTE:
”Lets not have a single person going home with a test result with a fatal diagnosis sitting at home going into two weeks of despair before they succumb to hospitalization and death. … There is not a single media doctor on tv who has ever treated a covid patient. Not a single one! … There was a silencing of any information on treatment! You can’t get papers published on this! … All effort has to be on vaccinations! … You cannot beat natural immunity. You cannot vaccinate and make it better! … There is no scientific rationale to vaccinate young and healthy people. … There is no asymptomatic spread of covid-19. … Covid19 has always been a treatable illness. … 85% of deaths could have been prohibited with early treatment.”
Tyrannical World Economic Forum head Klaus Schwab, the pro-Western/pro-Pharma/pro-mass-jabbing with toxic drugs WHO, and over two dozen hardline world leaders allied with US imperial aims are calling for establishment of a draconian pandemic treaty.
Wrapped in deceptive equitable socioeconomic rhetoric, their scheme all about wanting free and open societies abolished — police state enforced neoliberal harshness on steroids replacing them.
The scheme calls for mandatory global mass-jabbing with experimental, unapproved hazardous to health mRNA technology or vaccines for covid that increase the risk of contracting the disease they’re supposed to protect against, but don’t.
Their plot also increases the chance developing any one or more of a number of serious autoimmune and other diseases near-or-longer-term.
Their diabolical scheme is all risk and no rewards, nothing beneficial from these experimental, rushed to market drugs to be rejected, not used as directed.
A joint press release by Schwab, the WHO, and complicit world leaders defied reality.
It falsely called garden variety seasonal flu-renamed covid “the biggest challenge to the global community since…political leaders came together to forge the multilateral system” in the aftermath of two world wars.
They’re pushing a diabolical Great Reset scheme to transform the world community of nations into ruler/serf societies.
It’s polar opposite “the spirit of solidarity and cooperation (that includes) peace, prosperity, health and security.”
Seasonal flu now called covid shows up annually like clockwork — 2020 and this year no different from earlier ones.
Diabolical dark forces like Schwab, the WHO, and leaders of US vassal states aim to destroy public health, well-being, and fundamental freedoms, not protect and preserve them.
They oppose peace, equity, justice, the rule of law and societies safe and fit to live in.
When ill from seasonal flu now called covid, readily available safe, effective, inexpensive remedies exist — free from hazards posed by toxic mRNA technology and vaccines.
Nothing justifies an international pandemic treaty to combat the common cold or flu — that for the vast majority of people are minor health issues.
They’re in sharp contrast to cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and many other serious ones the above dark forces oppose combatting because their widespread outbreaks let Pharma and large hospital chains cash in big from expensive treatments.
Extensive writing and activism by the late cancer expert Dr. Samuel Epstein explained the following:
The cancer industry is “indifferent (toward and) hostile to “prevention (because it) conflicts” with bottom-line priorities.
The National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Cancer Society (NCS), and American Cancer Society (ACS) are “incestuously tied to the “drug industry, the mammography industry, the pesticide industry, and other such industries” that profit from cancer proliferation.
It’s big business. The more illness, the greater the bottom line benefits.
The same goes for many other major diseases.
The illness industry in the US and West profit from sickness. Health protection and wellness harm their bottom line priorities.
Epstein slammed the cancer industry for “losing the winnable war (on) the disease.”
The same goes for many other curable diseases.
Seasonal flu-renamed covid is being used to fear-monger countless millions of people in the West and elsewhere to self-inflict harm by unneeded/unsafe/toxic drugs to reject, not use as directed.
US federal law prohibits mandatory use of experimental drugs.
Ways around the law include approving use of hazardous drugs by the FDA and/or new legislation to mandate what formerly was prohibited.
Western dark forces will stop at nothing to get their way.
The only solution is mass resistance and revolution.
The alternative risks loss of health, well-being, and free and open societies safe and fit to live in.
That’s where things are heading if not challenged and stopped while there’s time.
At least seven colleges in the US have told students that they will not be permitted on campus this Autumn, if they cannot prove that they have been fully vaccinated.
Brown, Northeastern, Cornell, Rutgers, Fort Lewis, Nova Southeastern and St. Edward’s, are among a growing number of academic institutions to introduce the “no jab, no school” policy.
Students with underlying medical conditions can apply for an exemption. The colleges claim that vaccination is the only way to return to in-classroom learning.
Ivy-league university Brown, became the latest school to announce that it planned to introduce the measure.
Brown President Christina Paxson announced the decision in a letter, in which she declared that the vaccine is mandatory “for all undergraduate, graduate and medical students who will be on campus or engage in any level of in-person instruction.”
Paxson went on to say that students can apply for medical or religious exemptions but warned that those who refuse the vaccine and don’t qualify for an exemption, will be banned from campus.
Brown University is also considering making vaccination mandatory for all staff.
Northeastern University in Boston, announced yesterday that all students must be fully vaccinated by the first day of the semester in September. Senior vice-president for learning, Ken Henderson, said that the policy is vital in order to achieve herd-immunity.
The under-25’s are unlikely to contract covid-19, let alone become ill from it and there is zero evidence that they transmit the virus to others.
Then again, this was never about a virus now was it?
More than a month has passed since Texas Gov. Greg Abbott shocked the Faucis of the world by scrapping COVID-inspired restrictions on businesses and individuals, including removing the mask mandate. The decisions prompted Dr. Anthony Fauci and legions of public health “experts” to warn about the devastating consequences – thousands of unnecessary deaths would result, they said – however, as the data show, practically every metric has shown that the Lone Star State’s outbreak has continued to recede, even as blue states like Michigan are seeing a new surge in infections (believed to be driven by “mutant” strains).
As epidemiologists everywhere have struggled to come up with an explanation, it’s worth noting that Texans are dining out more, according to Opentable seatings, which have become a closely watched proxy for post-quarantine economic activity.
As experts have struggled to come up with a satisfying answer, Dr. Fauci was asked about the phenomenon during an interview on MSNBC Tuesday morning as the senior advisor to President Biden made the rounds. As MSNBC noted, “if you go to Texas… it looks like 2019… the restaurants are full… the ballparks are full…” and yet, cases have continued to tick downward.
Dr. Fauci seemed dumbfounded. He first suggested that the surge in cases simply hadn’t manifested yet because of a “lag”. That might have made sense if the trend had only been in place for a week or two. But a month has passed, and Texas’ positivity rate – the share of new tests that yield positive results, seen as a more accurate representation of community spread – has continued to fall.
“It can be confusing because you may see a lag or a delay, because often you have to wait a few weeks… there’s a lot of things that go into that,” Dr. Fauci said.
“I’m not really sure, it could be because they’re doing things outdoors, you know it’s very difficult to just one-on-one compare that…I hope they continue to tick down, if they do that would be great. But there’s always the concern that when you pull back on methods, particularly things like indoor dining, or bars that are crowded…you could see a delay, then all of a sudden cases tick back up.”
“We’ve been fooled before with places opening up, then nothing happens, but all of a sudden a few weeks later cases explode on you.”
He concluded by saying “we’ve got to be careful we don’t prematurely judge” the situation in Texas.
For those who haven’t been closely following the situation in Texas, 26 days have passed since the state “reopened 100%” with no mask mandate, and 34 days have passed since Gov. Abbott announced the reopening. The number of new cases, deaths, hospitalizations ICU occupancy and positivity rate have all fallen.
Once again, the UK government has been shown to have used ‘covert tactics’ in order to scare UK residents into staying at home for lockdown by increasing the ‘perceived threat’ of COVID’ rather than genuine science-backed risk assessment data, and also used ‘hard-hitting emotional messages’ designed to cower the public into complying with the government’s arbitrary diktats.
Due to the heightened level of public outrage, mainstream media outlets are finally being forced to admit what they have been systematically covering-up now for 12 months – that Government have been involved in active psychological and information warfare measures against their own population.
In a document presented to the UK government’s ‘SAGE’ confab, a scientific group meant to advise government on pandemic policies, it was revealed how technocrats sought to increase the ‘perceived threat’ of COVID-19 using aggressive psychological ‘hard-hitting emotional messages’ in order to brainwash the public into compliance.
Upon hearing the official admission, some psychology professionals have turned their sights on Downing Street, accusing bureaucrats of using “covert psychological strategies” in order to hype-up the threat of the virus, and offering no context as to the actual risk posed to the general public.
Government officials are accused of creating ‘a state of heightened anxiety’ which led to many people becoming ‘too frightened to attend hospital’.
This rebuke of the government’s active measures is given further credence by the fact that the majority of hospital beds in the UK remained largely empty in 2020, especially during the first few months of the ‘pandemic.’ This is especially relevant because it was at this same time when the government and mainstream media were relentlessly pushing out the idea that health services were ‘under threat’ of being overrun by Covid, only it never happened.
As a result of the government’s fear campaign, along with the overall throttling of the NHS, there have been an estimated 4.66 million people left waiting many months to begin even routine treatment, as well as thousands of pre-cancer screening appoints abandoned or pushed back – all because of the constant ramping-up of the fear of Covid.
The question still remains: will cabinet ministers be held to account for this unprecedented over-reach of state power?
Experts fear Britons have been the subject of an experiment in the use of tactics which operate ‘below their level of awareness,’ it was said.
They have now made a formal complaint to an organisation which will rule on whether Government advisers are guilty of a breach of ethics.
Downing street denies this, claiming it simply presented the facts.
Complainants point to a document handed to the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies last March, when the pandemic began to rapidly grow in Britain.
The paper, written by Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviours, said: ‘A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened; it could be that they are reassured by the low death rate in their demographic group, although levels of concern may be rising.
‘The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging. To be effective this must also empower people by making clear the actions they can take to reduce the threat.’
The document, seen by the Telegraph, allegedly then gave 14 options for improving compliance including ‘use media to increase sense of personal threat’, which they said would be highly effective but runs the risk of ‘negative’ side effects.
SAGE members have since claimed the British public have been ‘subjected to an unevaluated psychological experiment without being told that is what’s happening.’
They added that SPI-B reports are often not ‘challenged’ by SAGE because many of those involved are ‘not very well equipped to evaluate it.’
‘When someone from SPI-B is saying we need to ramp up the fear and keep it ramped up – there wasn’t much questioning of that at the beginning and most of the questioning came from external sources, not from within.’
SPI-B is described as providing behavioural science advice aimed at anticipating and helping people adhere to interventions that are recommended by medical or epidemiological experts.
(…) Last November, Sir Patrick Vallance admitted he had ‘regrets’ over frightening people with a doomsday dossier that forecasted as many as 4,000 Covid-19 deaths a day over winter and was used to justify a second national lockdown.
Number 10’s top scientific adviser made the comments alongside Professor Chris Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, after the pair were hauled before MPs to defend SAGE’s modelling that also predicted hospitals would be overrun with virus patients by the end of this month.
During the grilling by members of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, Labour MP Graham Stringer asked Sir Patrick if he believed he had frightened people with the bleak deaths data presented during Saturday night’s press briefing.
The Chief Scientific Adviser said: ‘I hope not and that’s certainly not the aim… I think I positioned that as a scenario from a couple of weeks ago, based on an assumption to try and get a new reasonable worst-case scenario. And if that didn’t come across then I regret that.
Greenland set a record cold in January 2020, its glaciers are relatively stable, its ice sheet is cooling and it has been warmer in the past. People might be surprised to see how today’s frigid Greenland looked during the last two interglacial periods.
Today, northwest Greenland hovers in the 30s and low 40s F and weathers snowstorms in summer. But average summer temperatures in the early Holocene (8,000 to 11,000 years ago) and Last Interglacial (116,000 to 130,000 years ago) climbed well into the 50s. (1)
A new reconstruction for SE Greenland (1796-2013) shows temperatures have risen and fallen without any hockey stick like trajectories for the last 200+ years. Temperatures were warmer than today in the 1920s and 1940s and even briefly during the 1800s. (2)
Yet, according to alarmists, if rising CO2 concentrations are a driver of Arctic warming, the 19th and 20th centuries presumably have been much colder than today.
One study (2019) instead finds there were: – warming and cooling episodes of multiple degrees per decade throughout the last 215 years in southeast Greenland – decadal periods in the 1800s were occasionally warmer than 2013 – more sustained warming the the 1920s and 1940s than during the 21st century. (3)
A 2020 study affirms a significant warming trend occurred in the late 20th century across Greenland mirroring the warming that occurred in the early 20th century. Since 2001, the temperature trends across Greenland have stopped rising and begun cooling. (4)
Record Cold Temperatures
The DMI (Danish Met Institute) confirmed that the NOAA GeoSummit records showed it got down to -64.9C, an all-time record in January 2020. (5)
Glaciers Relatively Stable
Greenland’s largest glacier (Jakobshavn) has quite abruptly thickened since 2016. The thickening has been so profound the ice elevations are nearly back to 2010-2011 levels. The nearby ocean has cooled ~1.5C, a return to 1980s average temperatures. (6)
The 47 largest Greenland glaciers also experienced a ‘relatively stable’ period of rather insignificant retreat from 2013 to 2018. (7)
Ice Sheet Cooling
The Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) we are told will inevitably melt if market forces are left unchecked, leading to utter ruin for our descendants. The collapse of the GIS is one of a handful of frequently cited ‘tipping points’ that ostensibly show just how irresponsible it would be to delay aggressive government intervention to severely restrict greenhouse gas emissions. (8)
For over 40 years (1961-2002), the GIS cooled, thickened, and gained mass just as anthropogenic CO2 emissions were sharply rising. (9)
A new analysis of recent trends for the GIS reveals that since 2012 there has been an abrupt slowing of melt rates and a trend reversal to cooling and ice growth. Large regions of the oceans surrounding Greenland have been rapidly cooling by as much as 1-2C in the last few years. Temperature trends across the ice-free part of Greenland indicate cooling since 2001. (10)
Greenland hasn’t been showing signs of warming since man made CO2 started rapidly rising after World War II. Indeed Greenland has been not responding to CO2 for 140 years or maybe a million. (11)
All of this in the place that is supposed to be the canary in the climate coal mine.
References
Steve Milloy, “Study: ancient Greenland was much warmer than previously thought,” junkscience.com, June 4, 2018
Kenneth Richard,, “A new 1796-2013 Greenland reconstruction showsit was warmer in the 1920s-1940s—and no hockey sticks,” notrickszone.com, April 6, 2020
David J. Wangner et al., “Sea surface temperature variability on the SE-Greenland shelf (1796-2013 CE) and its influence on Thrym Glacier in Norre Skjoldungesund,” Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology, December 5, 2019
Edward Hanna et al., “Greenland surface air temperature changes from 1981 to 2019 and implications for ice-sheet melt and mass-balance change,” International Journal of Climatology, August 17, 2020
Joanne Nova, “Jan 2020: coldest ever day in Greenland -65C comes and goes, no one notices,” joannenova.com.au, February 20, 2020
Kenneth Richard, “New study: Greenland’s largest glacier has rapidly thickened since 2016…fueled by 1.5C ocean cooling,” notrickszone.com, February 17, 2020
Jonas K. Anderson et al., “Update of annual calving front lines for 47 marine terminating outlet glaciers in Greenland (1999-2018), Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, GEUS Bulletin Vol. 43, June 26, 2019, eng.geus.dk
Robert P. Murphy, “Greenland’s ice sheet and climate change policy, Part 1 of 2,” instituteforenergyresearch.org, August 16, 2019
Kenneth Richard, “CO2 emissions tripled during 1961-2002 as Greenland cooled and gained 1.35 trillion metric tons of ice,” notrickszone.com, October 31, 2019
Kenneth Richard, “Greenland has been cooling in recent years—26 of its 47 largest glaciers now stable or gaining ice,” notrickszone.com, May 20, 2019
Joanne Nova, “Climate change means Greenland is the same temperature now as 1880,” joannenova.com.au, April 19, 2018
A new report from the National Academies of Sciences recommended the United States pursue a robust research program into solar geoengineering, to reflect sunlight and forestall some of the worst effects of global warming. Seeking $200 million over 5 years for research from the Biden administration, those scientists push a climate crisis narrative, arguing greenhouse gas emissions are not falling quickly enough and, “Without decisive action and rapid stabilization of global temperature, risks from a changing climate will increase in the future, with potentiallycatastrophic consequences” This should alarm everyone. Not because a climate crisis is real, but because solar geoengineering is the height of stupidity and truly endangers humanity. Still solar blocking experiments were planned for June 2021 in Sweden. Fortunately objections from other scientists, environmentalists, and Indigenous groups just cancelled those plans … for now.
In contrast to many failed “climate crisis” predictions, there’s an abundance of research detailing the truly detrimental effects of decreased solar heating. Human suffering during the cooler Little Ice Age (LIA), spanning 1300 to 1850 AD, has been well documented. Scientists agree LIA cooling is linked to volcanic activity and several periods of reduced solar output associated with low sunspots, such as the Maunder Minimum that lasted from 1645 to 1715 AD. Satellites have verified that less solar energy is emitted when sunspots decline. During increased volcanic activity, volcanic aerosols are spewed into the atmosphere reflecting sunlight away from the earth. Likewise climate scientists seek to inject aerosols into the atmosphere to cool the earth. It’s mind-boggling that fear‑ridden scientists would want to return our climate to the cooler temperatures like Little Ice Age. So please examine what a similar LIA cooling of 1°C (1.8°F) could do.
Tropical rainfall patterns control the subsistence lifestyle of more than one billion people. Reconstructions of precipitation during the cooler 14th and 15th centuries reveal a series of monsoon mega‑droughts in central India, north-central China, and southern Vietnam, each lasting several years to decades. Although the Maunder Minimum increased rainfall in Africa’s Sahel, it also resulted in a megadrought in subtropical West Africa. Could cooling the earth be construed as racist?
Tropical rainfall and the Asian and Australian monsoons are largely controlled by the region where moisture carrying trade winds from the north and south converge. The earth’s greatest rainfall happens there and is called the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). It is easily recognized in satellite images as a band of heavy clouds.
As the sun moves northward during the northern hemisphere’s summer, the ITCZ likewise shifts northward, and a rainy season follows. During the winter as the ITCZ shifts southward the rainy season moves southward while the more northern region then experiences a dry season. Regions south of the ITCZ experience a dry season when northern tropics experience more rain and vice versa. Scientists have shown variations in solar strength alter the ITCZ and the accompanying rainfall. However the ITCZ does not strictly follow the sun. Its location is also affected by the temperature of the oceans and continents. During the LIA, cooler northern hemisphere temperatures pushed the average position of the ITCZ southward, resulting in the monsoonal megadroughts and famines that devastated India, and southeast Asia.
The LIA cooling of 1°C disrupted ocean and atmospheric circulation around the world, so that alternating good and bad weather whiplashed a struggling humanity. Indeed climate scientist Michel Mann wrote, “the Little Ice Age may have been more significant in terms of increased variability of the climate”. Bouts of extreme inclement weather from about 1550 to I700 AD brought famine and the age of great mortality to Europe. Ten percent of the population of northern France died in 1693-1694. In northern China, rapid cooling and increasing extreme disasters in the late 16th and 18th centuries resulted in severe social consequences characterized by more famine and popular unrest. The year 1816 was known as the Year Without a Summer, and prompted historians to write about The Last Great Subsistence Crisis in the Western World.
In contrast, with minimal increases in land use, our so-called warming crisis paired with the industrial world’s technological innovations to steadily increase global food production and feed a burgeoning global population that had increased from 600 million in 1700 to 7.7+ billion today.
In the polar Urals where trees had previously existed further northward, the colder 15‑19th century temperatures replaced forests with treeless tundra, as new tree growth was totally inhibited. On the other hand, twentieth century warming has now allowed tree line to recover its pre-LIA habitat. Satellite data reveals a global greening and multiple global ecosystem models suggest CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of that observed greening trend. Long appreciating such CO2 fertilization, commercial growers around the world pump an extra 1000 ppm CO2 into their greenhouses to increase plant growth.
By the 1700s a new killer began to dominate the LIA – accidental hypothermia. When indoor temperatures fall below 48°F for prolonged periods, the human body struggles to keep warm, setting off a series of reactions that causes stress and heart attacks. During the intense cold season of I739/40, indoor temperature readings fell below the freezing point throughout Western Europe. Frozen rivers disrupted transportation, creating a shortage of coal and wood for home heating in urban locations causing numerous deaths from accidental hypothermia. The cold and dry weather also caused shortages of grass and fodder resulting in widespread death to livestock. Though not as devastating as the LIA thanks to modern heating, Americans from the Great Plains as far south as Texas were killed by cold weather with over 100 humans dying during the February 2021 cold snap.
The weaker LIA sun also cooled the upper 600 meters of the oceans, and reduced upwelling. Based on marine sediments off Peru, oceanographers uncovered very low marine productivity during the cooler LIA. But warming that began in 1850 soon brought rapid expansion of upwelled nutrient-rich waters, resulting in the present-day higher biological productivity from plankton to pelagic fish throughout the marine food web.
Its most disturbing that the varied crises predicted for a warmer 21st century were worse during the cooler LIA. For example global warming is predicted to spread tropical disease. However from 1564 to the 1730s – the coldest period of the Little Ice Age – malaria was an important cause of illness and death in several parts of England. Malaria outbreaks expanded into the Arctic. Transmission began to decline only in the 19th century, when the present warming trend was well under way. Similarly the first mosquito-borne yellow fever outbreaks in the United States occurred in late 1690s. Nearly 100 years later, in the late summer of 1793, refugees from a yellow fever epidemic in the Caribbean fled to Philadelphia. By the middle of October, 100 people were dying from the virus every day. Those outbreaks encouraged the US to move its capital from Philadelphia to Washington DC.
Major media outlets will cherry‑pick speculative research to proclaim, “Climate Change Is Making Hurricanes Stronger, Researchers Find”. However the Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index suggests other factors are in play. In the Southern Hemisphere (green line), there has been no change in cyclone energy. However in the Northern Hemisphere (blue line), hurricane energy varies with El Ninos and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
Experts examining historic archives of hurricane disturbances found the frequency of intense Caribbean hurricanes increased at around 1700 AD. Despite the region’s cooler LIA ocean temperatures, sediment records from Puerto Rico to New York indicate an increase in intense hurricane landfalls since about 1700 AD. Other researchers found more than 13 category‑2 or stronger hurricanes per century hit the Bahamas between 1500 to 1670 AD, compared to just 9+ per century since 1850 AD. Thus many experts now believe that sea surface temperatures as high as we now observe are not necessary to support intervals of frequent intense hurricanes. Intervals of frequent intense hurricane strikes over the past 5000 years corresponded primarily to periods with relatively few El Nino events and the strength of West African monsoon. Thus to accurately predict changes in intense hurricane activity, it is more important to understand how El Ninos will respond to futureclimate change. But there is absolutely no consensus on how rising CO2 affects natural El Ninos.
Media outlets, politicians and some scientists have also profited by blaming wildfires on climate change. The Union of Concerned Scientists (as many others have) presents a misleading graph of increasing wildfires since 1985. But cherry-picking a 1985 start date is blatant dishonesty. If we extend observations back into the LIA starting in 1700, there has been a clear decline throughout the fire prone southwestern US. Similarly in Quebec, a 300‑year fire history from 1688 to 1988 AD shows wildfires decreased starting 100 years ago.
The USGS admits there is no direct relationship between climate and wildfires. However the evidence clearly shows a direct relationship with more humans causing more wildfire ignitions while additionally making landscapes more fire prone. Fires need kindling like dead grass and twigs to start, and human disturbance has increased the supply invasive grasses. Dead grasses and twigs become highly flammable within just hours of warm dry temperatures that are common every summer regardless of climate change. Large fires also need an adequate fuel supply, and decades of fire suppression and poor fuel management have created more fuels that promote bigger fires. Furthermore many of California’s largest fires in recent decades occurred when local maximum temperatures were lower than in the 1930s.
So why are climate scientists suggesting the cooler temperatures of the LIA are the wiser ideal to pursue? It’s hard to comprehend when the science suggests otherwise. Of course every profession has its share of idiots and misguided professionals. In 1970 Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against the problems facing mankind. To ‘celebrate’ the 1970 Earth Day, Stanford’s Paul Ehrlich wrote “that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.” In 2012, the media trumpeted the prediction of Cambridge University’s world leading expert on sea ice of “the final collapse of Arctic summer sea ice within four years”. And in 2000 climate expert David Viner wrote, “Within a few years winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event… Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”
None of these “expert opinions” have come to pass. So why do some climate scientists continue to push climate crises???
It appears many intelligent scientists proclaiming a climate crisis suffer from the Pygmalion syndrome. Pygmalion was a great sculptor from Greek mythology who thought his statue of a woman was so beautiful and realistic he fell in love with it. He no longer became interested in real women. Likewise some climate modelers having invested their life’s work in sculpting life‑like climate change models, have become smitten with their model’s limited perspective and so downplay contradictory real-world observations. Some narcissistic scientists crave the attention that the media gives for predicting crises. Imitating the devious world of advertising, politicians pushing their own agenda seek out sympathetic scientists and under‑informed children to give credence and sympathy to whatever they are selling. Some junior scientists are afraid to contradict a bogus consensus even when their research suggests they should, while other climate scientists like Michel Mann hire their own PR person to sway opinions to favor their research.
Modelers too often eschew the bountiful evidence of real natural climate change when it competes with their CO2‑driven models. They downplay the myriad of critical factors that have caused change throughout history, to eliminate challenges to their belief only CO2 is the climate change control knob. Unprofessionally they denigrate all who dare question their model as deniers. But their deep love for their own models has become a fatal attraction. Not only do they try to suppress the very foundations of science and dismiss calls for further debate, they are advocating for highly dangerous and wasteful actions to block the sun. As the Little Ice Age scholar Robert Bolton insightfully warned, “A belief is not merely an idea the mind possesses; it is an idea that possesses the mind”. Far too many are possessed by their willing belief in a climate crisis.
PANDA (Pandemics – data and analysis) has been outspoken with regards to the policy-makers’ reaction to Covid-19, lockdowns and other approaches to the virus. Its viewpoints have ruffled feathers over the past year, with many in the establishment openly hostile towards the group of actuaries, accountants, economists and other professionals who participate in the global think tank. Nick Hudson, co-founder of PANDA, spoke at the inaugural BizNews Investment Conference in March 2021. Here’s his keynote address.
HART vs SAGE
HART Pathology Lead Dr John Lee appeared on Good Morning Britain this week alongside Professor Susan Michie who sits on SAGE and the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours (SPI-B).
Dr Lee noted the lack of evidence for asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 and also pointed out the absence of diverse scientific discussion in the media. Susanna Reid denied this, stating that the other side was being heard on social media and in the papers. However, these avenues are not the same as trusted mainstream TV programmes and the void of diverse thinking here has no doubt hampered the public’s understanding of ‘the science’.
Reid went on to say that ‘we know from the evidence that lockdown does work’. This is simply not true. Increasingly, the body of evidence points to the exact opposite as can be seen here and in dozens of published peer-reviewed papers, in stark contrast to the absence of evidence demonstrating significant benefits from lockdown when examining the real-world (as opposed to modelled) evidence. In addition, these models neglect to adequately assess the collateral harms.
Reid highlighted the figure of 126,000 COVID-19 deaths. However, there is a serious issue with excess, mainly non-Covid deaths at home which have reached over 50,000 in total. Here in the UK this figure currently sits at roughly 1,000 people each week. Perhaps many of these people would not have been put off seeking medical treatment had Michie, and her behavioural science colleagues, not terrified them into ‘staying at home’. A review of these covert, ethically questionable, psychological strategies was recently published by a member of HART here.
Michie also talked about mutant variants and how many people it is or is not ‘safe’ to interact with. It is a shame that these questions were addressed to a psychologist, rather than to a pathologist with medical training. No mention was made of the inevitable seasonal decline of the virus and Michie mentioned several thousand new cases a day, neglecting to outline how these figures relate to hospital statistics (currently at September levels).
Patients admitted to hospital in the UK
In fact, we know from numerous studies that there will be a significant number of post infectious positives at this stage with patients admitted to hospital for other reasons, incidentally testing positive. In the community, the expected surge in cases in the secondary school population has not materialised and the results of testing show that there is no active SARS-CoV-2 in that population. Overall, there is minimal evidence of residual coronavirus in the community. Mitchie went on to say cases are rising in Scotland. Again, this simply is not true.
Cases in Scotland
Michie then described the possibility of exponential growth if we remove measures too quickly, which shows a misunderstanding of the current immunity status of the population. With so many now having antibodies through natural infection or vaccination, it seems highly unlikely that this virus could now spread in an epidemic fashion. A transition into an endemic phase, as with seasonal flu in which there may be localised outbreaks, mainly in specific institutionalised settings, is much more likely.
The problems with Michie’s thesis are underpinned by the false assumption that asymptomatic spread is a major driver of transmission. There is no robust evidence for this phenomenon, and it would go against decades of understanding of respiratory viruses and how they are transmitted. By continuing to disseminate this questionable hypothesis to the British public, she is continuing to spread unnecessary fear. A far more balanced approach would be to focus on:
1. The viral season rapidly waning
2. The huge percentages of vaccinated people & those with acquired or innate immunity
3. The fact that children are not a significant driver of the disease
4. The fact that clinical symptoms are the driver of transmission of respiratory viruses
We need to stop ‘acting like we’ve got it’ and start living what is left of our finite lives.
Data not dates
It was reported this week that the weekly COVID-19-related death toll has fallen to the lowest rate since October. However, in a scenario of ever-decreasing death rates and diminishing prevalence of the virus, a comparison to the COVID mortality rate at the beginning of the winter wave seems somewhat arbitrary and of no relevance to the current situation. Once deaths reach minimal levels, this indicates that cases must have been minimal 18 days earlier.
A far more sensible metric for comparison would be the current test positivity rate. Since 21 March the PCR positivity rate has been only 2.1% i.e. only 1% higher than the baseline positivity rate we saw in summer. Including all testing, only 0.43% of 1.2 million tests were positive on 29 March. To put this in perspective, 9,957 people tested negative out of every 10,000 tests done. Remaining locked down under these circumstances indicates that the Government has adopted a “Zero Covid” strategy, despite their own admission of the futility and harm that would be caused by attempting this policy. Patrick Vallance himself said: “I think the chance of eradication, true eradication – ie zero – are in themselves close to zero.”
Tracking the success of the vaccine and maintaining confidence Last week, Sir Christopher Chope MP and William Wragg MP raised important questions in the House of Commons regarding COVID-19 deaths following coronavirus vaccination. Health Secretary Matt Hancock responded ‘I think we do have it’. Hancock also referred to the SIREN study but this only covers healthcare workers and therefore does not provide the complete information required for monitoring adverse effects, safety and efficacy. HART would urge active data capture, including a simple vaccine history taken at every unscheduled attendance at a hospital.
We must not forget that these are experimental vaccines, without full regulatory approval but issued under emergency waivers. It would be concerning in the extreme if data were not being collected or if the level of scrutiny of vaccine effects was not sufficient. The availability and rapid access to this data is vital in maintaining the public’s confidence in the vaccination programme.
US states continuing to open up Governors across the US are continuing to open up their states and remove COVID-19 restrictions. Earlier this month, Mississippi and Texas both announced the end of business restrictions and mask mandates, while North Dakota went a step further and implemented legislation to make mask mandates illegal. In Florida, Governor DeSantis is to forbid vaccine passports with an executive order.
In Texas, COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations carry on their downward trajectory despite their removal of measures being described variously as: “absolutely reckless” by California Governor Gavin Newsom, “it just is inexplicable why you would want to pull back now” by Dr Fauci and “neanderthal thinking” by President Joe Biden.
Essential viewing Nick Hudson, co-founder of the international group Pandemics ~ Data & Analytics (PANDA), has given a keynote address at the inaugural BizNews Investment Conference in South Africa. In his speech, Hudson gives a comprehensive overview of the COVID-19 pandemic and explores how instead of helping to slow the spread of the virus, lockdowns have led to infant mortality, poverty, starvation, joblessness and a major upsurge of psychological disorders. Well worth taking 30 minutes to watch in full, here. This video is currently being viewed by several thousand people per hour.
24 March 2021
There is no emergency COVID-19 cases are low and all-cause deaths are now back to normal pre-pandemic rates and falling. All vulnerable groups have been offered a vaccination. There are no longer any justifiable or ethical reasons for prolonging Covid-related statutory ‘emergency powers’.
It is anticipated that all phase 1 priority groups (approximately 32 million people) will have been offered a vaccine by 15 April, a group accounting for 99% of the deaths last spring. This will be an amazing achievement. The virus is now endemic and will circulate at very low levels this summer and is then likely to join the range of respiratory viruses circulating each winter. Talk of continuing social distancing and masks for several years is therefore unnecessary and unhelpful. We urgently need to reduce fear and increase hope as we recover from this crisis.
It is vital that we harness the benefits of the rapid vaccine rollout by acknowledging we are no longer in an emergency. We can and must reopen society. Government and SAGE will need to undo the negative messaging, after a year in restrictions many people will still be fearful to pick up their lives again. News that a £2m Government contract has just been awarded for a COVID Public Information Campaign over the next two years is concerning. The repeal of the coronavirus emergency legislation would give a very positive message of confidence and hope to the British public. Therefore, HART continues to urge all MPs to vote against the renewal of the Coronavirus Act this week in Parliament.
No evidence of SARS-CoV-2 in schools HART predicted 24,000 false positive results in children in the first week of mass testing based on 4 million children being tested twice. In the week of 4 March, only 2.7 million tests were carried out on secondary school children and 0.05% of them were positive. Our previous prediction was based on the estimated false positive rate for the adult population of 0.3%. Testing of university students prior to Christmas showed a very low false positive rate of at or below 0.06% including Newcastle, Hull, Exeter and Birmingham. Testing among school children is demonstrating a similar rate. The good news is that these numbers are so low that no-one can be left in any doubt that they represent only false positive results and that there is no SARS-CoV-2 at present in the secondary school population. The ONS estimated that there would be SARS-CoV-2 in 0.4% (1 in 250) 12-24 year olds, so this is another instance of failed testing with PCR. With no virus in schools, there is now no justification for the mask mandate or mass testing.
Is mask wearing benign? This week, Dr Mary Ramsay from Public Health England told the BBC that face coverings were a ‘lower level restriction’ that ‘people can live with’ and they should continue to be worn ‘for a few years’. Her words are similar to those used by politicians to justify the introduction of the mask mandate in summer 2020, when it was portrayed as an extra layer of protection, a precautionary measure, a nothing-to-lose restriction.
While there is no evidence that masks significantly reduce transmission when worn routinely in real-world settings, there is recognition that they may constitute an infection hazard, particularly when used incorrectly. Masks potentially cause physical harms, while the social and psychological cost of concealing our faces from other people is considerable. Face coverings impair all forms of communication and human connection, make lip-reading impossible for the deaf and constitute a gross impediment to children’s social development.
A highly visible reminder that danger is supposedly all around, face coverings are fuelling widespread, irrational fear at a time when the current viral threat is very low and the vulnerable have been vaccinated. As we look to re-activate the economy and reopen our society, this mask-induced fear will act as a major obstacle. HART believes the Government should now lift the mandate and allow people to decide for themselves whether to wear one. It is time to trust the public with their own personal risk-based decision making.
The futility of border closures Summer holidays are in doubt again, with the news that a £5,000 fine will come into force for anyone trying to travel abroad without a ‘reasonable excuse’. Matt Hancock has said the restrictions are to ‘guard against’ new variants that might put the vaccine rollout at risk. Professor Neil Ferguson was also quoted as saying we ‘should be planning on summer holidays in the UK not overseas’. Closing international borders to keep out ‘foreign mutants’ of an already endemic virus is neither useful nor possible. It is worth noting that mutant variants from abroad pose no extra threat compared with any homegrown variants and are likely to have very similar sequences. Mutant variants, emerging overseas or domestically, are an inevitable biological reality once a virus is in the population, as is the case in the UK. The virus will mutate slowly over time, irrespective of borders.
Mandatory vaccination for care home workers The news that the government is considering making COVID-19 vaccination a legal requirement for all care workers is concerning and against international law. This would create a precedent of eroding informed consent, and is difficult to justify when the vulnerable population have themselves already been offered at least one dose of vaccine, especially in the light of Scottish data that suggests the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine reduces risk of hospitalisation by up to 94%. If this is case, would it be better to prioritise second doses for all vulnerable groups, thus rendering the vaccination of our younger, healthy population unnecessary?
And some good news… The number of patients admitted per day to intensive care units is now close to normal, pre-pandemic levels for the time of year. It appears we are well beyond the risk of overwhelming the NHS – further highlighting that now is the time to lift restrictions and allow the NHS to begin rapidly addressing the backlog of postponed appointments and operations. There is no sign of a virus resurgence in American states such as Florida and Texas which have lifted restrictions.
On February 13, 1960, France carried out its first nuclear test in Algeria’s southern Reggane region. According to official statistics, 17 nuclear tests were carried out in total over the next 6 years. The area remains affected, and local scientists say that radioactive contamination has caused genetic mutations and irreversibly changed the region.
There are no official statistics on the number of victims. The only figures can be found in the records kept by the French representative of the local church, which lists 42,000 victims of nuclear tests. Three years ago, the French Ministry of Defense issued a statement, putting the number at 27,000 people. The victims include French soldiers as well as local Algerians who lived in the surrounding areas. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
