Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4754


The Complex Chemistry of Surface Ozone Depicted in a New GEOS Simulation

Visualizations by Greg Shirah Released on December 9, 2019
Share on facebook Share on twitter More Sharing Services

96 chemical species are shown from a GEOS atmospheric simulation

Earth’s atmosphere is mainly comprised of nitrogen and oxygen but also contains traces of hundreds of chemical compounds. While tiny in abundance, these chemicals have an outsized impact on humans and the environment due to their reactivity and toxicity. This visualization shows a computer simulation of the complexity of the chemical system of the atmosphere produced by NASA's GEOS modeling system with atmospheric chemistry. Shown is a sequence of modeled surface concentrations of 96 chemical species during the time period July 22, 2018 to October 2, 2018. These chemicals undergo rapid changes as they are being emitted by natural and anthropogenic activities, transported by prevailing winds and vertical lifting motions, deposited to the surface, or chemically transformed.

The visualization starts with a global map of model predicted concentrations of surface ozone, a potent air pollutant that is chemically produced from hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides under the presence of sunlight. Consequently, the highest concentrations of surface ozone can be found during daytime close to urban areas and in the vicinity of forest fires (e.g., Africa). At night, ozone is chemically destroyed in highly polluted environments, leading to very low nighttime concentrations over industrial areas such as Eastern China. These processes are captured in detail by NASA’s GEOS composition forecast (CF) system, which incorporates the latest scientific understanding of the physics and chemistry that guide the formation of ozone, along with measurements from satellites and other instrument platforms. A particular feature of the model system used here is its comprehensive representation of atmospheric chemistry using the GEOS-Chem chemistry model, capturing 240 gaseous species that react with each other via 725 chemical reactions. Directly or indirectly, all of these species impact the formation of ozone. The visualization shows snapshots of modeled concentrations of 96 of the most important chemical compounds, loosely grouped into seven ‘families’ based on their physical and chemical properties.

Very tightly linked to ozone is the hydrogen oxides “HOx” family. It contains the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, OH, which plays a prominent role in atmospheric chemistry due to its role as a ‘cleansing agent’ of the atmosphere. The abundance of OH, which is subject to the availability of water vapor and sunlight, in turn directly impacts the atmospheric lifetime of hydrocarbons such as methane and carbon monoxide. Human activities constitute an important source for both of these gases (beside natural sources) and directly influence the long-term concentration trends of these pollutants, as can be directly observed from NASA satellites. Another related group of chemicals are hydrocarbons from biogenic activity: “Isoprene oxidation”. Plants emit hundreds of (structurally similar) compounds, with isoprene being the most important one. These compounds rapidly react with each other through a complex cascade of reactions, which makes the chemistry over vegetation-rich areas such as rain forests or the Southeast US challenging to simulate. Biogenic compounds also play an important role for the formation of aerosols: tiny particles that can constitute a major health risk when inhaled. The abundance and composition of aerosol particles is highly variable and is influenced by anthropogenic activities (e.g., soot from biofuel burning) as well as natural events, such as wildfires, dust storms, volcanic eruptions, and sea spray. The ocean is also a source of another group of chemicals, the halogens. These species tend to be highly reactive and can effectively destroy ozone, especially over remote areas. The last chemical group depicted in the visualization is related to nitrogen. Nitrogen oxides are central to atmospheric chemistry in general and ozone formation in particular. At the surface, the most important source of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is the combustion of fossil fuels. As a result, NO2 concentrations are highest over urban areas (e.g. highways, power plants) and along ship routes.

The visualization ends back at the beginning with ozone, illustrating the connectiveness of the chemical system of the atmosphere. Given the complexity of atmospheric chemistry, computer simulations – such as those by the NASA GEOS composition forecasting system – are an essential tool to understanding the formation of air pollution and to help formulate effective mitigation strategies.


you'll need to navigate to the article to view the simulation.
(edit) you can view it at this link:


https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a004700/a004754/gmao_chem_5x3_preview.mp4

kickarse said:

Apparently we had "unprecedented" fires in Australia this year, what a load of bullshit

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...ntains-engulfed-by-fires-20181025-p50bxe.html

Click to expand...

Somehow, I knew....

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/australia/sydney-smoke-bush-fires-intl/index.html

Temps at 109 F put them where Redding was in July 2018.

Sydney gets the smoke but they got the easy part.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weat...les-australia-turning-beaches-black-with-ash/

Warning ... Washington post = paywall that deposits $$ into Jeff Bezos' pockets. You get 3 articles for free, something like that.

"the particulates could trigger an algal bloom that could rob water of the vital oxygen needed to sustain wildlife."

I thought Algae was plants but

"the particulates could trigger an algal bloom that could rob water of the vital oxygen needed to sustain wildlife."

"Algae are photosynthetic creatures. They are neither plant, animal or fungi. Many algae are single celled, however some species are multicellular. Many, but not all of red and brown algae are multicellular."

"And summer hasn’t even begun in Australia."

Now that's parochial. US counts summer as beginning June 21.

I get the impression that Australia counts it as June 1 +_ 6 months = December 1.

I'm not sure if this is a normal set of fires or breaking new ground statistically.

Summer in Australia is December to February.

White Beard said:

Somehow, I knew....

Click to expand...

deny, deny, deny...

kickarse said:

The Fabian Socialists do the dirty work for them ^^, and they fund the socialist in return
called progressives in your ****ry ?, its all there in history

together they are behind all the global institutions

Socialists in bed with the $$$$ printers lol
all the while claiming to be looking after the worker and the needy, what a fucking joke

ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT will solve all our problems, they hope "climate change" will do it, it will be the only way left to save the future, from the nasty weather

we could(will) be completely enslaved, and no more allowed to own property

EQUALITY hey, it will be fucking great, we can all be equal, swimming in the shit

Click to expand...

I kinda like the idea of a one world government. It would solve a lot of problems.

we already knew that.
but...


How Much Will the Paris Agreement Cost?
How much is required to fund the Nationally Determined Contributions of developing countries?
Dec 10, 2018 · 2 min read

Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, developed countries have committed to mobilise $100 billion in climate finance per year, but are falling far short of this goal. To date, just $10.3bn has been pledged by developed country parties to the Green Climate Fund.
The committed $100 billion was agreed by countries to be a minimum amount. They also agreed that a new goal will be renegotiated before 2025. It is vital that the new global goal on finance reflects the actual needs and priorities of developing countries in order to meet the Paris Agreement temperature goal of staying below 1.5c warming.
However, throughout the negotiation of a set of guidelines to implement the Paris Agreement, developed countries have resisted rules for them to provide transparency on climate finance under Article 9.5 and 9.7 of the Agreement.
Now, a new analysis performed by International Justice Initiative at the University of Tasmania, and available to view for all here, shows clearly that:
Costs for Developing Countries to Implement NDCs

Sheet1 Country,$ Total, Period, Excerpt from( I) NDC, Comments Afghanistan,$ 17. 4050bn, 2020-2030, Executive Summary…
docs.google.com


The total cost for developing countries to implement their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) is more than US$4.4 trillion. This is based on the costs developing countries have included in their NDCs for implementing their plans for climate change mitigation, as well as adapting to its impacts and addressing the loss and damage it causes.


The total of $4.4 trillion includes costs intended to be met by both domestic and international sources of finance. This number represents a conservative estimate of the total cost for developing countries: more than 40% of developing countries (defined as non-Annex I countries under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) did not include costs of implementation in their NDCs. Further, where a range was given by a country for the estimated cost of implementation, only the lowest end of this range was included in the calculation. This means the real finance needs are likely much higher.
While not all of the $4 trillion is expected to be provided through international climate finance, the figure throws the inadequacy of the $100 billion goal into sharp relief and demands a dramatic re-think from Ministers in Katowice, who are unlikely to even offer concrete pledges to meet the inadequate $100 billion.

https://worldat1c.org/how-much-will-the-paris-agreement-cost-85f78d9a035a




Danish Academic: U.N. Might Use Military to Enforce Climate Agenda


THOMAS COEX/AFP via Getty Simon Kent3 Dec 2019

The United Nations may resort to military action against states that defy its mandates on global climate action, according to Ole Wæver, a prominent international relations professor at the University of Copenhagen.
In an interview with ABC News in Australia, Professor Wæver cautions that what he sees as “climate inaction” might draw the U.N. into considering other means to ensure its goals are met, even if that leads to global armed conflict.
Professor Wæver says more resistance to change could potentially threaten democracy although the U.N. would counter that the end justified the means in much the same way countries like Greece had their debt crisis solutions forced on them by European Union bureaucrats in Brussels and Strasbourg.
“The United Nations Security Council could, in principle, tomorrow decide that climate change is a threat to international peace and security,” he says.
“And then it’s within their competencies to decide ‘and you are doing this, you are doing this, you are doing this, this is how we deal with it’.”
He believes classifying climate change as a security issue could leave the door open to more extreme policy responses.

“That’s what happens when something becomes a security issue, it gets the urgency, the intensity, the priority, which is helpful sometimes, but it also lets the dark forces loose in the sense that it can justify problematic means,” he says.
This urgency, he says, could lead to more abrupt – and essentially undemocratic – action at an international level.
“If there was something that was decided internationally by some more centralised procedure and every country was told ‘this is your emission target, it’s not negotiable, we can actually take military measures if you don’t fulfil it’, then you would basically have to get that down the throat of your population, whether they like it or not,” he says.
“A bit like what we saw in southern Europe with countries like Greece and the debt crisis and so on. There were decisions that were made for them and then they just had to have a more or less technocratic government and get it through.”
Professor Wæver made his predictions last month on the eve of the United Nations COP25 climate conference now underway in Madrid, Spain.
Almost 25,000 delegates and 1500 journalists have flown into the Spanish capital to attend the two-week long meeting.
COP25 will consider a wide agenda of global action including implementing taxes on developed countries to transfer wealth to nations dealing with “the cost of drought, floods and superstorms made worse by rising temperatures,” as Breitbart News reported.
President Donald Trump officially withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, which COP25 is a continuation thereof, in October as part of an election promise to voters, saying he was “elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”

https://www.breitbart.com/environme...might-use-military-to-enforce-climate-agenda/

Russia Plans to Set Up Arctic Air Defense 'Dome' With S-400 Missiles
Dec. 9, 2019
Russia has been stepping up its military presence in the Arctic, building new infrastructure and overhauling its ports as it vies for dominance in a region with huge untapped mineral wealth amid warmer climate cycles.

Sergei Malgavko / TASS


Russia plans to establish an air defense "dome" across its polar region by arming all of its Northern Fleet's Arctic divisions with S-400 missile batteries, a Russian naval commander said on Monday.
Russia has been stepping up its military presence in the Arctic, building new infrastructure and overhauling its ports as it vies for dominance in a region with huge untapped mineral wealth amid warmer climate cycles.


Other countries have also scrambled to boost their Arctic presence, stoking fears of intensifying geopolitical rivalry. In May, Washington accused Russia of aggressive behavior in the polar region and said China's actions must be watched closely.
Russia in September deployed its S-400 air defense systems to the Novaya Zemlya archipelago in the far north, and the commander of Russia's Northern Fleet said on Monday that similar deployments would be made across the region.
"The plan is for all our Arctic divisions to be supplied with such complexes in the coming years and there will effectively be an air defense dome created over the Russian part of the Arctic," Vice-Admiral Alexei Moiseyev said.
"This means that the Arctic will be protected from any kind of enemy aerial attack, whether from planes, cruise or ballistic missiles," Moiseyev said in an interview with the Russian Defence Ministry's Zvezda TV channel.


https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019...c-air-defense-dome-with-s-400-missiles-a68530


China seeks Arctic clout, 'Polar Silk Road,' Pentagon says

By Carlo Muñoz -
The Washington Times - Thursday, May 2, 2019


China has set its sights on the North Atlantic and Arctic Circle, planning to establish a new “Polar Silk Road” through the region in the coming years, Pentagon planners are warning in their latest assessment of Chinese military power.
Beijing has made no secret of using its expanding economic and military clout to extend its influence across the globe, from the South China Sea to its growing footprint in Africa, South Asia and elsewhere.
For the first time, Beijing is setting in motion plans to assert its power in the Arctic, directly competing with the U.S. and Russia for influence in the region and setting the stage for further destabilization, Defense Department officials say in the annual report, issued Thursday.

Since last year, China has begun moving a number of icebreakers into the Arctic region, while simultaneously creating a number of new, civilian-operated research stations in Norway, Iceland and other critical locations in the high North Atlantic, say Pentagon officials. U.S. defense officials say the moves are part of a larger Arctic strategy unveiled by China last January.
The report argues that Beijing has “promoted a ‘Polar Silk Road’ [and] self-declared China to be a ‘Near-Arctic State’ that had vested interests in access to the region, including access to natural resources and sea lines of communication as warmer temperatures open up the region to development and navigation.
Beijing is already dispatching a number of next-generation warships to operate in the region’s harsh conditions, as a way to secure those much-needed resources and sea lanes.
The Chinese icebreaker vessel, the Xuelong, has conducted nine deployments in and around the Arctic Circle as of last September, Pentagon officials said. The newest class of Chinese icebreaker, the Xuelong-2, is slated to ship out this September.
While designated as “research vessels,” both icebreaker variants are built to blast through nearly five feet of solid ice.
Currently, the U.S. Navy has no icebreaker ships able to traverse the frozen waters in the region. The Coast Guard only has six icebreaker ships total, three medium and three heavy Polar Icebreakers.
China is also moving ahead with a new class of “ice-capable patrol boats,” Pentagon analysts say.
Beijing’s naval buildup in the Arctic, combined with its growing civilian research operations, “could support a strengthened Chinese military presence in the Arctic Ocean, which could include deploying submarines to the region as a deterrent against nuclear attacks,” the report states.
American allies in the region are already voicing their concerns over China’s expansion in the waters of the Arctic and Northern Atlantic. Denmark has publicly protested efforts by Beijing to establish a research outpost in Greenland, while other northern European countries have sought to curb China’s expansion.
Russia is also reportedly eyeing China’s Arctic ambitions nervously.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/2/china-seeks-arctic-clout-polar-silk-road-pentagon-/


Mike Pompeo preps major Arctic policy speech amid concern over Chinese warships in region

By Guy Taylor -
The Washington Times - Friday, May 3, 2019

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will deliver a major speech Monday in Finland on the administration’s evolving policy toward territorial disputes in the Arctic amid heightened U.S. concern over expanding Chinese and Russian maritime operations there.
State Department officials are mum on whether Mr. Pompeo intends to directly confront China or Russia in the speech at a multinational conference of the Arctic Council, but suggested during a background call with reporters that the secretary is most concerned about Beijing’s expanding movements in the region.
“China sometimes refers to itself as a near-Arctic state,” a senior State Department official said on the call Thursday. “There’s no such definition in the council’s lexicon.
The comment came as officials at the Pentagon released a biting new assessment on Chinese military power Thursday, warning that Beijing has set its sights on the North Atlantic and the Arctic Circle with plans to establish a new “Polar Silk Road” through the region in the coming years.
The annual assessment argued that since last year, China has begun moving a number of icebreakers into the Arctic region, while simultaneously creating a number of new, civilian-operated research stations in Norway, Iceland and other critical locations in the high North Atlantic, Pentagon officials said.
Beijing is dispatching a number of next-generation warships to operate in the region’s harsh conditions, as a way to secure those much-needed resources and sea lanes, the officials said, adding that the Chinese icebreaker vessel, the Xuelong, has conducted nine deployments in and around the Arctic Circle as of last September.
The newest class of Chinese icebreaker, the Xuelong-2, is slated to ship out this September. While designated as “research vessels,” both icebreaker variants are built to blast through nearly 5 feet of solid ice.
The U.S. Navy currently has no icebreaker ships able to traverse the frozen waters in the region. The Coast Guard only has six icebreaker ships total, three medium and three heavy Polar Icebreakers.
It remains to be seen what Mr. Pompeo may reveal in terms of new U.S. policy plans during his speech in Finland or whether other member nations of the Arctic Council — China is not a member, but Russia is — might embrace a more robust American posture. Other member nations include Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland.
One senior State Department official who spoke on background with reporters described the council as the “premier international forum for building consensus to support peace and cooperation in the Arctic region.”
Increasing Arctic glacier melt caused by a warming climate has made the region more and more penetrable by ships from different nations in recent years, putting it under a new geopolitical spotlight and creating potential friction on the council.
The issue of climate change is seen to be a politically sticky one for U.S. relations with the council at the moment. The Washington Post reported Thursday that the Trump administration faced resistance from other member nations by seeking to remove references to climate change from a council statement on Arctic policy that Mr. Pompeo is expected to endorse in Finland next week — but that U.S. officials had softened their position on the matter in recent days.
The senior State Department official pushed back Thursday when asked whether disagreement on such matters might distract from U.S. efforts to counter Chinese moves in the Arctic.
“No, just the opposite,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “Climate is a complex global issue, and it’s a global challenge all around, and this administration supports a balanced approach that promotes economic growth and improves energy security while protecting the environment. And we talk about that in each forum, and we work with our partners to come to agreement on how we express it.”
Mr. Pompeo’s trip from Sunday through Thursday will also include stops and meetings with leaders in Germany, the United Kingdom and Nuuk, Greenland.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/3/mike-pompeo-preps-major-arctic-policy-speech-amid-/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tZTB9polQE


[youtubeif]5tZTB9polQE[/youtubeif]


one government solution?

Every time I see a claim that man is changing the climate it reminds me of the Element Report in This Is Jinsy.

Was made aware of global warming through
at DoD publication years before hearing of
it elsewhere.
An entire denial industry feeds off of the
masters of hydrocarbon.

i live near the 45th parallel ............same area for 40 years.....lmao if you think humans havent effected our weather and planet health...........you no doubt have tide pod challenge winners in your family!

I love this climate change, long summers and shorter winters, by now all good where I live.

Gry said:

Was made aware of global warming through
at DoD publication years before hearing of
it elsewhere.
An entire denial industry feeds off of the
masters of hydrocarbon.

Click to expand...

yup. our military has been making plans to deal with its effects for a long time RE low-lying bases etc. too bad so many others have their heads in the sand. not hard to see who has money in the game, and who has their head up their ass...

Thursday, 12 December 2019

UN Speakers Push Population Reduction for “Climate Emergency”

MADRID — To deal with the alleged “climate emergency,” reducing the number of people on the planet is high on the agenda among activists and speakers at the United Nations COP25 “climate” summit. The growing extremism and even paranoia among population-control advocates, who worry that more people will release more CO2 into the atmosphere, is reaching deafening levels. But the establishment media is largely keeping silent.

The advocates of population control and population reduction are divided, though, on what particular peoples and groups should be targeted most heavily. One key speaker at the UN summit said “white men” and especially Americans and Swedes must stop having babies. An exhibitor promoting “sustainable development,” meanwhile, argued that Africans and Asians ought to be the key target of the depopulation. Others think all of the above.

What means should be used was also a subject of debate. Some activists and speakers promoted propaganda, indoctrination, tax-funded contraception, abortion, ubiquitous birth-control availability, and even coercive population-reduction measures. Others say even more drastic means are needed to deal with the “emergency.” One UN speaker went even further earlier this year, suggesting that actually “killing” people could be on the table.
A major speaker at the UN summit, Oscar-winning director Michael Wadleigh (shown above) of “Woodstock” fame, minced no words in an interview with The New American. “Don't have children — and I'm looking at you, white man,” he said on camera, speaking in a deep voice, echoing comments he made in high-profile official speeches at the summit.

The reason why it is so important to reduce the population of Europeans and their descendants is because their nations are more developed and they consume more resources, he said. Even Scandinavia and Sweden, which have a “clean” image, are destroying the planet, Wadleigh continued, warning that average Swedes consume 40 times more than average Tanzanians. Even socialist presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is not radical enough on these issues, he said.

“If you were into population control or population reduction, which is good idea worldwide, you should go to Sweden, because if your efforts resulted in one less baby in Sweden, that would be equal to your efforts to go to Africa and reduce populations by 46 percent, sorry, by 46 people in Africa,” said the director turned population-control activist, who spoke just a few hours prior on the same stage as former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

Wadleigh, who has one child and works closely with the UN, crunched the numbers and became convinced. “So where does it make sense to start your population reduction efforts? Start with the people who are the highest per capita emitters, if your goal is to reduce climate change and unsustainable development,” he explained, without noting that the environment in more developed countries such as Sweden, America, Switzerland, Japan, and so on is generally far cleaner than in Third World nations.

Prominent population-control advocates such as neo-Malthusian Paul Erlich of “Population Bomb” fame and Obama's “Science Czar” John Holdren have offered radical ideas on this subject. In their 1977 book EcoScience, the duo — who at the time were peddling “global cooling” alarmism — discussed mandatory abortions and adding “sterilizing agents” to the water supply as potential tools for bringing population levels under control.
When asked if those ideas might be going too far, Wadleigh smiled and responded: “You haven't heard me talk yet!” The ultra-left-wing UN speaker, a fan of communism, did not elaborate on how much further he would be willing to go to reduce human numbers, before going on to speak about what he sees as over-consumption.

In one of his UN talks from one of the most prominent stages in the entire convention, Wadleigh emphasized the need for government coercion to achieve his vision. One of his main messages was the need to drastically reduce consumption. “We can no longer do this voluntarily,” said Wadleigh, pining for a global government that he said did not yet exist. “Make it a law, not a voluntary action.”

A few hours later, former Senator Kerry took the same stage to bad mouth America and lie about all sorts of things. Among other “climate whoppers,” he claimed that solar energy was now cheaper than traditional forms of energy “by every metric.” If that were true, everybody would be using it, of course.

Rather than targeting Western nations — virtually all of which have birth rates at less than replacement levels — others in Madrid for the COP25 proposed targeting Third World populations. Alejandro Moran Rodriguez, for example, a UN volunteer at the COP25, was manning a booth promoting the UN's controversial "Sustainable Development Goals." He told Rebel News that countries in Africa and in Asia should be high on the list for population-control, because they do not have “that culture.” And so, governments must “manage their population,” he said, calling for UN enforcement of contraception.

Another UN speaker also veered into the highly controversial and sensitive area. Self-described “Eco-Social Strategist” Stuart Scott with the group Scientists Warning, who gave almost a dozen talks and press conferences throughout COP25, spoke on topics such as “Too Many Of Us.” “It is undeniable that humanity's footprint is the number of us times the consumption,” he said, adding that concerns over upsetting religious people were holding back necessary discussions on how to limit the number of human beings on the planet. The Christian Bible, for example, calls on people to “be fruitful and multiply.”

But Scott does not think that is a good idea at all. Pointing to Project Drawdown, Scott suggested that “educating females” and making tax-funded “family planning” available to them would be among the top three ways to reduce CO2 emissions if combined into one package. “The topic [of population control] needs to be part of the negotiations,” he argued. “We are making tiny progress.... Our request — it should be our demand, but I'm not the one making the demand — is that the UN put it on the agenda.”

Asked about whether the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the UN agency tasked with population control, was doing an adequate job, he responded: “I can't comment on that because I'm not well enough informed.” According to congressional testimony, the UNFPA and Planned Parenthood have worked with Beijing on perpetrating forced abortions.

Of course, Communist China's coercive population-control regime literally includes kidnapping pregnant women and killing their pre-born children. When asked if the regime had gone too far in its efforts, Scott did not say. “Even though China relaxed its one-child policy, it's birth rate has not gone up the way they thought it would,” he said, hopefully, suggesting that fears about climate change were causing women not to have children.

While controversial, Scott's efforts have been endorsed by everyone from prominent global-warming scientist James Hansen and neo-Malthusian Ehrlich to organizations such as 350.org, Friends of the Earth, and Citizens Climate Lobby, which has former Secretary of Treasury and State George P. Schultz on its advisory board. Erlich, one of Scott's supporters, has been one of the most vocal advocates of reducing human numbers. Scott even spoke on a panel with Hansen during COP25.

This zealotry for reducing the number of people on the planet has become a common theme at UN gatherings. Earlier this year, at the 68th UN Civil Society Conference in Salt Lake City, Utah, one speaker went further than most would dare to in public. After speaking on a panel with UN Assistant Secretary-General Satya Tripathi, Global Initiative for Food Security and Ecosystem Preservation (GIFSEP) Executive Director David Michael Terungwa dropped a bombshell. “We can't kill them all,” he said, twice, laughing.

Before that, at the COP24 in Poland last year, Al Gore trumpeted the theme. Among the solutions to the supposed “climate crisis,” Gore touted more and stricter population-control policies by government. Perhaps oblivious to the ghoulishness of his words, Gore praised the population-control regime operated by the government of India, which has been widely condemned as abusive and coercive. Showing a graph of China's population, he also celebrated the policies of the mass-murdering dictatorship in Communist China.

However, showing a graph of Africa's population, Gore suggested that Africans were still having far too many babies for planet Earth to sustain in the face of supposed “climate” change. Despite lip-service to the pope and Catholicism, Gore demanded, among other tactics, that contraception be made “ubiquitously available” all over the world. The goal: Help reduce the number of children, and especially Africans.

The New American asked Democrat presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, known for his desire to have Big Government disarm you and regulate everything from Big Gulps to salt content in food, for his thoughts on the population-control subject. "Thank you, have a nice day," he responded with a strange grin. His handlers promptly rushed in — "he's not taking interviews right now" — before his armed security, looking grumpy, whisked him away.

Children are already being bombarded by UN propaganda at school and in official UN publications. The goal: convincing students that having babies is bad for the planet. The the 1994 UN-produced book Rescue Mission: Planet Earth : A Children's Edition of Agenda 21, the UN's self-styled “education” agency teaches children that “the planet groans every time it registers another birth.” And that is just the start of what critics say is the anti-human, anti-Christian, anti-freedom propaganda that has been peddled by the UN to children for decades now.
During the recent debate on a whether or not to declare a “climate emergency,” German Members of the European so-called Parliament expressed deep unease over the declaration. The reason is that the German term for emergency, der Notstand, is associated with a Nazi law adopted by Adolf Hitler's National Socialist party to consolidate power.

The UN summit, led by international socialists such as Antonio Guterres, appears to be hoping for vast new powers to deal with this supposed “climate emergency.” And at the top of the list will be reducing the number of people on the planet, by any means that they consider necessary.


are you sure you want to support this?
we're not talking about POLLUTION here, stop conflating CO2 with pollution. it's not.
of course if you do support this, then walk the walk and stop breathing, eating beef, driving, heating your home, procreating etc.

i might be inclined to believe your sincerity then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbT1WkgwPRI


[youtubeif]IbT1WkgwPRI[/youtubeif]

Read The Report From Iron Mountain from the 1950's where they talk about using co2 as a means to tax people to fund a world wide government and invading those countries that don't pay.

Frosty Nuggets said:

Read The Report From Iron Mountain from the 1950's where they talk about using co2 as a means to tax people to fund a world wide government and invading those countries that don't pay.

Click to expand...

if they haven't gotten around to it in 60 years, doubt it will happen, myself. like our govt has to invent a story to invade some poor bastards, lol.

Nolte: Greta Thunberg Says We Will ‘Put World Leaders Against the Wall’

AP Photo/Antonio CalanniJohn Nolte14 Dec 20191,892 4:04
Time’s “Scold of the Year,” Greta Thunberg, told a crowd in Italy that “we will make sure we put world leaders against the wall” if they do not do what she tells them to do.
On her way home, the 16-year-old Swedish eco-activist and chronic truant stopped to address a Fridays for Future gathering in Turin, Italy, at which she went the full-Fidel Castro.
“Unfortunately, we probably already know the outcome. World leaders are still trying to run away from their responsibilities but we have to make sure they cannot do that. We will make sure that we put them against the wall and they will have to do their job to protect our futures,” she said, according to the Daily Mail.
“Against the wall” is fairly common jargon in revolutions, especially youthful revolutions, and the accepted translation means executions — lots and lots of executions, specifically firing squads, where the old leaders are permanently removed by fresh-faced revolutionaries.
During the speech, and while wearing what looks like a plastic — and, therefore, a petroleum-based — yellow rain slicker, Greta shouted her usual spiel about how The Children should be in charge of everything because The Children will have to live in a future that will not exist unless we return to the Dark Ages of wind and solar power, unless we accept socialism.
Daily Mail:
She sounds like a pint-sized Jim Jones.
Now I want to share something I found interesting about our favorite Greta…
She only has 3.6 million Twitter followers.
Granted, that’s more than ten times yours truly, but when you consider the media hype not just here in America, but throughout the world… Well, that’s not a whole lot.
Khloe Kardashian has 27 million.
Sean Hannity has 4.4 million.
Russell Wilson has 5.5 million.
Aaron Rodgers has 4.4 million.
Tom Cruise has 6.7 million.
What I’m saying is that, once again, the media are gaslighting us into believing Greta is some kind of worldwide phenom, when she’s about 1/10 the phenomenon of a lesser Kardashian sister.
The world elites adore Greta; people like the leftist editors at Time adore any child who will lead the world backwards to the Dark Ages, to socialism, to a centralized government where all the Deplorables become serfs. They have loved this stuff since the ’60s, when we were all told to “Listen to the children,” and all that got us was a national case of the clap and an addiction crisis.
But in the real world, the world where you and I live, a Western world filled with billions and billions of everyday people, the number of those people interested in what Guyana Greta has to say is less than that of an aging quarterback in a place called Green Bay, Wisconsin.
Perspective in these matters is important, and the only place Greta is a phenom is in the isolated, velvet-lined, elite bubbles of the media and far left.
Good people, however, flinch at the sound of her anti-science madness and threats, at her Bond-villain rants.

NASA’s Operation IceBridge Completes Eleven Years of Polar Surveys

Released on December 11, 2019

For eleven years from 2009 to 2019, the planes of NASA’s Operation IceBridge flew above the Arctic, Antarctic and Alaska, gathering data on the height, depth, thickness, flow and change of sea ice, glaciers and ice sheets.

Designed to collect data during the years between NASA’s two Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellites, ICESat and ICESat-2, IceBridge made its final polar flight in November 2019, one year after ICESat-2’s successful launch. The fleet of aircraft carried more than a dozen instruments, from elevation-mapping lasers and ice-penetrating radars to optical and infrared cameras. And the mission did much more than bridge the altimetry gap – it enabled many other discoveries, too, from diminishing snow cover over Arctic sea ice to impact craters hidden beneath Greenland’s ice.

As the team and planes move on to their next assignments, the scientists and engineers reflected on a decade of IceBridge’s most significant accomplishments.


videos here:


https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/13501

armedoldhippy said:

if they haven't gotten around to it in 60 years, doubt it will happen, myself. like our govt has to invent a story to invade some poor bastards, lol.

Click to expand...

Look at how many Bullshit Government programs the US has.

MASSIVE make-work programs

TSA
DHS
US military, 4 or 5 branches

& military contractors that pass over the $7 solution because they want a $5 Million development program - adding to system complexity - reducing reliability.

They have already turned CO2 into a product. I don't mean dry ice at the supermarket for a greenhouse or indoor grow, I mean when a surf contest wants to buy "carbon offset" to compensate for all the CO2 generated by the contest.

I hear Goldman Sachs is one of the brokers.

https://twitter.com/PolishPatriotTM/status/1205984764517388288/video/1


George Carlin (1992): Everybody’s going to save something now. “Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails.” And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet. Are these f*cking people kidding me? We don’t even know how to take care of ourselves yet.


George had a knack of demonstrating perspective and it's just as relevant today as it was in 1992.


Greta Apologizes For Execution Comment As People Question Who's Actually 'Ruining Her Childhood'

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopoliti...inst-wall-if-they-refuse-fight-climate-change

Climate change: Call for 'flexibility' to reach consensus at talks

By Matt McGrath and Paul Rincon Science and environment, BBC News

• 15 December 2019
• Related Topics
• COP25

Talks in Madrid have gone into extra time as delegates try to agree on measures The Chilean official leading UN climate talks in Madrid has called on delegates to show flexibility, as they struggle to reach agreement on crucial measures needed to tackle climate change.
The negotiations, which were scheduled to end on Friday, continued throughout Saturday and into Sunday morning.
Carolina Schmidt said a deal was almost there but the outcome needed to be ambitious.
The goal is a commitment to new carbon emissions cuts by the end of 2020.
The European Union and small island states vulnerable to climate change are pushing for stronger commitments to cut those emissions. Some of the biggest polluters, including the United States, Brazil and India, say they see no need to change their current plans.
Ms Schmidt, Chile's environment minister who is the conference's president, said early on Sunday: "I request all the flexibility, all your strength to find this agreement to have an ambitious result."
She added: "It's hard, it's difficult but it's worth it. I specially need you. But people in our countries need us."

• Download the BBC Energy Briefing, from October 2019 (10.7MB)
• Stalemate at climate talks as splits re-appear
• Methane pulse detected from South Sudan wetlands

On Saturday, a new draft text from the meeting was released, designed to chart a way forward for the parties to the Paris agreement, which came into being in 2015.
The pact's intention is to keep the global average temperature rise to well below 2C. This was regarded at the time as the threshold for dangerous global warming, though scientists subsequently shifted the definition of the "safe" limit to a rise of 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
The situation was unprecedented since talks began in 1991, said Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists.
He commented: "The latest version of the Paris Agreement decision text put forward by the Chilean presidency is totally unacceptable. It has no call for countries to enhance the ambition of their emissions reduction commitments.
"If world leaders fail to increase ambition in the lead up to next year's climate summit in Glasgow, they will make the task of meeting the Paris agreement's 'well below 2C' temperature limitation goal - much less the 1.5 degrees Celsius goal - almost impossible."

Report

End of Twitter post by @Peters_Glen


His view was echoed by David Waskow, international climate director for the World Resources Institute (WRI). "If this text is accepted, the low ambition coalition will have won the day," he said.
The conference in the Spanish capital has become enmeshed in deep, technical arguments about a number of issues including the role of carbon markets and the financing of loss and damage caused by rising temperatures.
Responding to the messages from science and from climate strikers, the countries running this 26th conference of the parties (COP) meeting are keen to have a final decision here that would see countries put new, ambitious plans to cut carbon on the table.

According to the UN, 84 countries have promised to enhance their national plans by the end of next year. Some 73 have said they will set a long-term target of net zero by the middle of the century.
But earlier in the meeting, negotiators from the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) pointed the finger of blame at countries including Australia, the United States, Canada, Russia, India, China and Brazil.
Protests led by young delegates have seen up to 200 protestors ejected from the talks They had failed to submit revised plans that would help the world keep the rise in global temperatures under 1.5C this century.
At a "stock-taking" session on Saturday morning, Tina Stege, a negotiator with the Marshall Islands delegation, said: "I need to go home and look my kids in the eye and tell them we came out with an outcome that will ensure their future."
She added: "The text must address the need for new and more ambitious NDCs and long-term goals. We can't leave with anything else."
Reinforcing the sense of division, India, supported by China, Saudi Arabia and Brazil, has been taking a hard line on promises made by richer countries in previous agreements before the Paris pact was signed in 2015.
The deal saw every country, India included, sign up to take actions.
This was a key concession to the richer nations who insisted that the deal would only work if everyone pledged to cut carbon, unlike previous agreements in which only the better off had to limit their CO2.
Image caption Some visitors have other things to do at the COP But India now wants to see evidence that in the years up to 2020, the developed world has lived up to past promises.
For many delegates, the deadlock is intensely frustrating in light of the urgent need to tackle emissions.
"I've been attending these climate negotiations since they first started in 1991. But never have I seen the almost total disconnect we've seen here at COP25 in Madrid between what the science requires and the people of the world demand, and what the climate negotiations are delivering in terms of meaningful action," said Alden Meyer.
"The planet is on fire and our window of escape is getting harder and harder to reach the longer we wait to act. Ministers here in Madrid must strengthen the final decision text, to respond to the mounting impacts of climate change that are devastating both communities and ecosystems all over the world."
Jake Schmidt, from the US-based Natural Resources Defense Council, said: "In Madrid, the key polluting countries responsible for 80% of the world's climate-wrecking emissions stood mute, while smaller countries announced they'll work to drive down harmful emissions in the coming year.
"The mute majority must step up, and ramp up, their commitments to tackle the growing climate crisis well ahead of the COP26 gathering."
Also on Saturday, activists staged a protest outside the summit venue to express their frustration at what they see as the failure of world leaders in taking meaningful action on climate change.


https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50795294