Saturday, June 12, 2021

A Skeptical Look at Climate Science

In response to...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7FAAfK78_M

I wrote ...

The controversy centers around what the Climate Sensitivity is to a doubling of CO2. We are told that the atmospheric CO2 level will double to 800 Parts Per Million by the year 2100, at which time we will be running out of most fossil fuels, so all the focus has been on what will happen by the year 2100. The Climate Sensitivity depends upon positive feedback because the direct effect of doubling CO2 is only a change of 1.1 degrees Celsius. The degree of positive feedback has been controversial.

However, they keep moving the goalpost. Original claims of Climate Sensitivity were as high as 5 to 12 degrees Celsius. However, the IPCC now gives a range of 1.5 to 4.5, stating that the predicted average is about 3 degrees. I saw videos from a decade ago stating that we were on course to raise the temperature 3 degrees by the year 2100, but if we take action we could limit that to 2 degrees, and they further state that this would be manageable. However, in the last five years, the wording has shifted to state that we are on course to raise the temperature by 2 degrees Celsius by the year 2100, but if we take action we could limit that to 1.5 degrees and this new goal would be manageable. They even have a catchy slogan, "Half a degree makes a difference."

Almost everybody is comparing temperature change to the year 1880 because presumably, that is when the more accurate records were kept. However, the 1880s were a cold period resulting in massive snowstorms that killed hundreds of people. It would an amazing coincidence if the year 1880 had the exact ideal temperature for humans on planet Earth, and everything since then is an aberration.

The atmospheric temperature has only risen about 1 degree Celsius in the last 140 years. This is a slow process giving us plenty of time to adjust. Climate Alarmism has ignored that there are proposed methods of removing CO2 from the atmosphere should we need to, such as Iron Fertilization. However, I don't feel that we will ever need to do this.

Meanwhile, the increased atmospheric CO2 levels have resulted in the greening of the Earth. Crop yields have gone through the roof. Deserts have been slowly shrinking.

If you look at the atmospheric CO2 level over the last 40 million years then you will see that it is in a nosedive. Not just a slight decline, but the CO2 levels have been in an almost vertical drop. The reason for this is that natural processes sequester CO2 with water and rock. We depend upon volcanoes to release CO2 back into the atmosphere, but we haven't had enough volcanoes to maintain past levels. This is why we have been in an ice age for the last 2.5 million years. During the last period of glaciation, the CO2 level got dangerously low, down to 180 parts per million, which is close to the level of 150 parts per million where all terrestrial plants die. We were running out of CO2 until human beings intervened.

Tuesday, June 8, 2021

For Biden, Being Transgender Is The New Storming The Beaches of Normandy


Sorry to keep sending out long videos, but I feel like Ben Shapiro nails it once again.

Why a Judge Has Georgia Vote Fraud on His Mind: ‘Pristine’ Biden Ballots That Looked Xeroxed

In short, the Biden votes looked like they'd been duplicated by a copying machine.

"All of them were strangely pristine," said Voyles, who said she'd never seen anything like it in her 20 years monitoring elections in Fulton County, which includes much of Atlanta.

Saturday, June 5, 2021

Pennsylvania lawmakers hopeful of an audit after the Arizona election survey

Mastriano told a pool reporter that he supports Pennsylvania to do an audit like in Arizona.
 
"I'm not going to get over it. I'm just trying to figure out what went right, what went wrong? And how will we have better elections in the future? He said.

Biden's Maga

I've noted that President Joe Biden steers his administration using his rearview mirror. Whatever President Donald Trump did, he'll do the opposite. He talks about the future but seems to spend most of his time looking behind him rather than ahead.

You might assume this is a good idea, an instinct for self-preservation, because the president is an old-school Democrat heading a new-school socialist revolution. And such revolutions have a strong track record of displacing their leaders ruthlessly. Biden doesn't want to find himself stumbling out of the White House one day crying, "Et tu, Kamala?"

But his backward glances aren't the furtive and alarmed type that keep a weather eye on impending danger. Rather, they are focused and sustained, as though the president was reading a map. He uses the past as an inverted guide about what to do next. He wants, where possible, to create a carbon copy of the policies of his good friend Barack Obama — see Iran; sucking up to — but even more than that, he is determined that whatever Trump did, he'll do the opposite.

Lend an ear, and you can hear Biden mumble, "Trump cut taxes big time, so I must raise them as never before. He slashed red tape, so I'd better tangle business up in that stuff again. He wanted 'energy dominance,' so I'm going to kill fossil fuels. The orange man's signature policy was to stem illegal immigration, so I'll encourage it — maybe I can get to two million illegal immigrants in my first year, a big-time achievement. Trump investigated the origins of the Wuhan flu, so I'm going to shut that down;

Joe Biden has his MAGA: Make America Goofy Again | Washington Examiner


Biden order bans investment in Chinese defense, tech firms

Unrest Erupts After A Man Was Fatally Shot During An Arrest Attempt In Minneapolis : NPR

Friday, June 4, 2021

China is about to Attack

I recommend the segment from 3:42 to 7:30.

Original Scripps rang analysis for natural origin

Ex-CDC director Redfield says he received death threats after mentioning lab-leak theory

Robert Redfield, the former head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention told Vanity Fair he received death threats after an appearance on CNN in March where he said he believed COVID-19 may have escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China.

He told the magazine that "death threats flooded his inbox" from "prominent scientists," some of whom were former friends. 

"I was threatened and ostracized because I proposed another hypothesis," he said. "I expected it from politicians. I didn't expect it from science."

The Vanity Fair report said that back in January 2020, Redfield received a troubling message from Dr. George Fu Gao, the head of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Gao warned him about sickened individuals in Wuhan. The report said "Redfield immediately offered to send a team of specialists to investigate" because he had suspicions about the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If a team found antibodies in blood samples of workers there, that would be convincing evidence. China refused, he said.

https://www.foxnews.com/health/ex-cdc-director-redfield-says-he-received-death-threats-after-mentioning-lab-leak-theory

Thursday, June 3, 2021

We Didn’t Start The Fire

EcoHealth Alliance

In April 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, the NIH ordered EcoHealth Alliance to cease spending the remaining $369,819 from its current NIH grant at the request of the Trump administration due to their bat research relationship with the Wuhan Institute of Virology,

Peter Daszak, a leading scientist whose organization had funded the coronavirus research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, had thanked Dr Anthony Fauci for downplaying the theory that the coronavirus may have leaked from a lab.

According to the reports, Peter Daszak, the president of EcoHealth Alliance, a research group that secured a grant to perform coronavirus research in Wuhan before the pandemic, had written a mail to Dr Fauci to say a "personal thank you" on behalf of his staff and collaborators after the latter had dismissed the idea that the pandemic started due to a lab accident in Wuhan.


Shi Zhengli - Wikipedia

The SCMP also reported that Shi was the focus of personal attacks in Chinese social media who claimed the WIV was the source of the virus, leading Shi to post: "I swear with my life, [the virus] has nothing to do with the lab", and when asked by the SCMP to comment on the attacks, Shi responded: "My time must be spent on more important matters".[24] In a March 2020 interview with Scientific American, where she was called China's "Bat Woman",[25] Shi said "Bat-borne coronaviruses will cause more outbreaks", and "We must find them before they find us."[2] Leading virologists have explained that SARS-CoV-2 is most likely of natural origin, and that it is extremely unlikely that it leaked from a lab.[26][27] Shi's colleague Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance,[28] which studies emerging infectious diseases, has noted estimates that 1–7 million people in Southeast Asia who live or work in proximity to bats are infected each year with bat coronaviruses.[26][27] In an interview with Vox, Daszak comments, "There are probably half a dozen people that do work in those labs. So let's compare 1 million to 7 million people a year to half a dozen people; it's just not logical."[27] On July 31 Science Magazine published a interview with Shi in which she commented "to date, there is zero infection of all staff and students in our institute."[29] Asked by Science Magazine why the WIV conducts coronavirus experiments in BSL-4 labs when most other scientists work with coronaviruses BSL-2 or BSL-3 conditions, Shi explained that her group also used BSL-2 and BSL-3 laboratories for their coronavirus research, but that they had begun to use BSL-4 laboratories per government regulations after the pandemic.

I would personally welcome any form of visit, based on an open, transparent, trusting, reliable and reasonable dialogue. But the specific plan is not decided by me.




The Wuhan Lab Leak Hypothesis Is A Conspiracy Theory, Not Science

Fwd: Fauci emails

Dr. Fauci mostly unfairly has been used as a punching bag by the political right.  They claim that he has contradicted himself and lied.   Fauci has stated repeatedly that as our scientific understanding of the pandemic changed, so did the advice he gave.  He also changed his advice when the CDC changed its recommendations.  

Fauci has also erred on the side of caution.  In his job, how could he not?  Before we knew if vaccinated people could still spread the disease, he was telling people to still be cautious and follow the CDC guidelines.

Part of the problem is that the political right has all along downplayed the seriousness of this pandemic.  Fourteen months ago I observed how fast this disease was spreading and predicted that millions would die.  Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh compared COVID-19 to the common cold and other political commentators echoed his opinion.

The point I kept hearing for over a year is that Fauci changed his position on masks.   Back when COVID-19 was barely present in the United States, Fauci was saying that people didn't need to wear masks and that COVID-19 was not that big of a threat to America.  But in March of 2020, the disease exploded in the United States and Fauci changed his recommendation.  Fauci also admitted later that he did not want to see a run on masks that would create a shortage for medical professionals.

For example, I am listening to a radio program right now where the host is bitterly complaining that Fauci stated that masks weren't effective.  Although true, when evidence came out that masks helped stop the spread of the disease, he changed his position.

A couple of Fauci's emails out of thousands show that people were discussing the possibility that this disease came from a lab leak, but he still states that he thinks that this is the less likely possibility.  The reason he gives is that all the previous pandemics came from animal transmission.  Early on, the experts were saying that this did not come from a lab.  We also don't have any evidence that this was a lab leak, mainly because the Chinese government isn't cooperating.  Personally, I don't trust the Chinese government nor do I trust the safety of gain of function research.  We also don't have any evidence that this disease came from an animal.  This is another area where Fauci has changed his position, stating that it is possible that the disease came from a lab.

I have a much bigger problem with Fauci testifying under oath that the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases did not support the gain of function of research in the Wuhan lab.  However, reportedly it did support this research through an intermediary.  That appears to be a problem.



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Larry

We came to these conclusions incrementally, spurred by evidence that accumulated over the course of a year. Tonight, we have the mother-load. Thanks to a freedom of information request from Buzzfeed, we have thousands of emails to and from Tony Fauci, going back to the early winter of 2020. Collectively, they show that from the beginning, Fauci was worried the public might conclude that COVID originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Why was Fauci be concerned that Americans would conclude that? Possibly because Tony Fauci knew perfectly well he'd funded gain-of-function experiments at that same laboratory.

The emails prove Fauci lied about this under oath. 

Consider this exchange, which began the evening of January 31, 2020. It was a Friday, just before midnight. 

The first email came from an immunologist called Kristian Andersen, who works at the Scripps Research Institute in California. Andersen warned Fauci that COVID appeared to have been manipulated in a laboratory.  

"The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (less than point one percent), so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered." 

The next day, on February 1, Tony Fauci wrote back, "Thanks, Kristian. Talk soon on the call."  

Fauci then sent an urgent email to his top deputy, Hugh Auchincloss. The subject of his email, in all-caps, was "IMPORTANT."  

"Hugh: It is essential that we speak this AM. Keep your cell phone on. Read this paper as well as the email that I will forward you know. You will have tasks today that must be done." 

Attached to the email was a document entitled, "Baric, Shi, et al -- Nature Medicine -- SARS Gain of Function.pdf." 

The "Baric" in that attachment refers to Ralph Baric, a virologist based in the United States who collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.  

Baric worked with a woman called Dr. Shi Zhengli -- known as the "Bat Lady," because she manipulates coronaviruses that infect bats. 

Keep in mind that during questioning from Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, Tony Fauci denied that this same Ralph Baric had conducted gain-of-function research. Again, this is the Ralph Baric in Fauci's attachment entitled, "Baric, Shi et al - SARS Gain of Function." Yet, under oath, Fauci denied it: 

DR FAUCI:  Dr. Baric does not do gain function research. And if it is, it's according to the guidelines and it is being conducted in North Carolina…And if you look at the grant and you look at the progress reports, it is not gain function despite the fact that people tweet that.

Oh, it wasn't just on Twitter. It was in Fauci's own emails.

In retrospect, that looks a lot like perjury. We do know that starting early last year, a lot of people at NIH were worried that COVID had not occurred naturally — that it had instead been manipulated in a lab in China – and yet they seemed determined to hide that fact from the public. Why?

On the afternoon of February first last year, Fauci held a conference call with several top virologists. Most of the details of that call remain hidden from public view. They've been redacted. We know the call was related to a document entitled, "coronavirus sequence comparison."  

Jeremy Farrar, a British physician who runs a major research nonprofit, reminded everyone on the call that what they said was top-secret.  

"Information and discussion is shared in total confidence and not to be shared until agreement on next steps," he wrote. 

In other emails, Jeremy Farrar passed along an article from the website ZeroHedge, suggesting that the coronavirus might have been created as a bioweapon.  

We now know that's a more plausible explanation than the one we believed at first and were told by the media which is that coronavirus came from a pangolin.

But for the crime of saying it out loud, a more plausible explanation, ZeroHedge was banned from social media platforms. Until recently, you weren't allowed to suggest that COVID might be manmade.  

Why? The fact-checkers wouldn't allow it. Why wouldn't they? Because Tony Fauci assured the tech monopolies that the coronavirus could not have been manmade. So the tech giants shut down the topic. Fauci lied. 

FAUCI: A group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve, and the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.

That was April 17, 2020. Very shortly into the course of this pandemic. At that point, what Tony Fauci just asserted as known could not have conclusively been known. That was a lie. Tony Fauci suggested that he knew because top researchers had decided conclusively, that this must have jumped naturally from an animal to a human being. That was dishonest. 

Two days later, one of the virologists Tony Fauci was funding to conduct dangerous coronavirus experiments in Wuhan wrote to thank him for the help. That man, Peter Daszak, complained to Fauci that the American tax dollars he'd taken for these experiments were being "publicly targeted by Fox News reporters." Yet he remained grateful for Tony Fauci's support. 

"I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators," he wrote. 

Strangely, most of this specific email from Daszak to Fauci has been redacted under FOIA section (b)(7)(A). That specific exemption to disclosure applies to: "records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that production could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings." 

Are Dazak and Fauci under criminal investigation?

Tucker Carlson: Is Dr. Fauci under criminal investigation? | Fox News


Wednesday, June 2, 2021

Fauci emails

In hindsight, Fauci keeps looking worse.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Larry 

On January 31, 2020, Kristian G. Andersen, director of the Scripps Research Institute, wrote to Fauci to say that some of the SARS-CoV-2's features "(potentially) look engineered."

Andersen noted that the "unusual features" of the virus made up "a really small part" of its genome.

"We have a good team lined up to look very critically at this, so we should know much more at the end of the weekend," he wrote as part of a chain of emails.

"I should mention that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory," Andersen said. "But we have to look at this much more closely and there are still further analyses to be done, so those opinions could still change."

Andersen and his team subsequently published an article in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Medicine where they wrote that they did not "believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible."

However, the article noted that more scientific data "could swing the balance of evidence to favor one hypothesis over another."

.................................

In an email on February 5, 2020, Fauci advised against wearing masks and said that face masks bought in a store would not be effective at protecting against the virus. He was replying to queries from one Sylvia Burwell, who may be to the same Sylvia Burwell who served as secretary for health and human services from 2014 to 2017.

"Masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection," Fauci wrote.

"The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material. It might, however, provide some slight benefit in keep out gross droplets if someone coughs or sneezes on you."

Fauci Emails: 5 Biggest Revelations (newsweek.com)

.................................

n an email chain released by BuzzFeed News on Tuesday night, the NIH director sent Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a link to a Mediaite article. This report noted that the Fox News anchor Bret Baier had said "multiple sources" believed COVID-19 could have originated from a Chinese lab.

The April 16 email from Collins had "conspiracy gains momentum" in the subject line. Most of the message was redacted, aside from the link to the Mediaite article. Fauci responded to the email from Collins at 2:45 a.m. on April 17, but his response was also redacted.

NIH head dismissed Wuhan lab leak theory as 'conspiracy': email (nypost.com)


Biden's 'equity' agenda could lead to 'troublesome debate' in America

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Larry 

KARL ROVE: We've come as a country to accept that we want every American to have the opportunity to rise. And if there's a need to give special help to those who come from poor circumstances, we're willing to do that as a country.  

That's a very different question to say we don't care where you are financially, but if you are Black or Bown or Asian American, you know what? You get special privileges that other people don't get. And that's going to be a very difficult and, I think troublesome, debate for the country to have. We hide behind the word equity. And that sounds nice, equitable treatment.  

But we had an agreement that we wanted equality, equality of opportunity, equity implies an equality of outcome. And we're going to therefore give aid to people based on the circumstances of their skin color, not simply the circumstances of their other financial background 

Rove: Biden's 'equity' agenda could lead to 'troublesome debate' in America | Fox News


I wrote this on Facebook 1 year ago today

When I drove by the Columbus, Indiana Best Buy, I saw a hand-drawn message on the side of the building that said, "We are with you in this!" First of all, rioters have targeted Best Buy and Target stores. Second, who isn't for justice and racial equality? I'm tired of people saying that there is systemic racism, accusing a large group of people or an entire segment of society of being racist. In the year 2020, I don't know a single person who is racist. I'm sure that there are a few bad apples, but they don't represent the rest of us.
I'm sorry that you have drunk the liberal socialist Kool-Aid. The old socialism failed both economically and to catch the imagination of the public. The new socialism only had one resource remaining to promote its agenda, which was to divide people by ethnicity and to convince them that they are victims. As long as you think that you are a victim then you lose at least some control of your life because you think that others are responsible for what happens to you. Consequently, you will look to politicians, mostly radicals, to save you from your grievances.
The tools of the radicals are violence or the threat of violence. On the surface, they want to burn it all down. They sponsor thugs to go from city to city and from state to state to incite the mobs and to commit acts of violence. This is why shop owners, men and women, are being beaten. This is why Molotov cocktails are being thrown. This is why buildings are being burned. This is why police cars are being overturned and burned.
The socialist left is not about helping people. It never has been, because the results of socialism have always been the opposite of its goals. The socialist left is about Power and making sure that they are in control. Although they claim to give power to the people, it never turns out that way. The purpose of Power is to secure it for a small group of people.
The United States is one of the most diverse and racially harmonious places on the planet. Try going to Japan, Korea, or China, and see how racially tolerant they are.
The most prosperous and stable societies are the ones where people respect each other and the rule of law. The more we diverge from that then the more we degrade society and our common interests.
What we are seeing can bring down a society and lead to radical extremists rising up. I don't think that it will happen here, but the violence hurts the cause of the peaceful protestors who have legitimate grievances. And almost everyone wants to see justice done. We are with you in this!

The end

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Larry


Long before the onset of COVID-19, the luminaries of Silicon Valley began advocating for the implementation of universal basic income (UBI). This is the idea that governments should issue checks to all citizens regardless of work, regardless of need, just for being alive - in other words, true and direct socialistic redistribution of wealth, completely disconnected from merit and creation.

Today, it is clear that UBI proponents, along with advocates of job-killing $15-an-hour minimum wage policies, are using the economic destruction wrought by poorly thought out COVID-19 lockdowns, coupled with the psychological effects of constant fearmongering, to try to slip their policies in through the back door.

The scope and permanence of these changes could be enormous. Over the course of 2020, the amount of global work lost was likely equivalent to 255 million full-time jobs. Ultimately, economists at the University of Chicago predict that between 32 percent to 42 percent of COVID-19-related layoffs may end up being "permanent.

Beyond the expedited automation and elimination of jobs, Biden's artificial attempt to drive up the cost of labor is also spurring inflation. Consumer prices were up 4.2 percent in April of this year over April 2020

Therein lies the rub. As the left has been building their socialist bona fides by advocating for "giving out cash with no strings attached," they are - in real time - destroying real opportunities to earn wages, start careers, gain skills, climb the ladder, and live the American Dream. Simultaneously, the chain of events set in motion, if left unchecked, will drive up the cost of living for those the left claims to want to help.

Further consider the fact that America's national debt now sits at $28 trillion and growing, troublingly larger than our country's 2020 GDP of $21.48 trillion. The money dispersed by the federal government today is literally borrowed on the backs of future generations who will struggle to pay it off.

Beyond that, were UBI advocates to get their way with the installment of never-ending cash payments issued from the government to individuals, how would a republic such as the United States sustain itself? Can you have a self-governing country in which a majority of the citizenry is to some degree dependent on government officials for the issuance of a monthly income check?

No, of course not...

To spur real, market-driven wage growth such as that America experienced during the Trump administration before the pandemic, our economy must be fully opened, with no restrictions. Growth must be coaxed through low and consistent tax rates that encourage sound investment on the part of the American people and American businesses. 

Wages will grow and workers will prosper when our economy grows and prospers. But for that to happen, the Biden administration and Congress need to get out of the way and stop destroying opportunities for real growth and advancement.

Biden opens the back door to universal basic income (msn.com)


Tuesday, June 1, 2021

China State Media Says Country Must Prepare for Nuclear War With U.S. After Biden Asks for COVID Probe

I assume that this is bluster.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Larry 



Technically Biden Canceled the State departments Covid probe, that would have been transparent and maybe lead to sanctions and/or penalties.
The Intelligence probe will probably not reveal its' findings and not penalize China.

Friday, May 28, 2021

Tucker makes big announcement about Rush Limbaugh's successors

Since the passing of Rush Limbaugh, his show has remained on the air using a combination of guest hosts and classic clips by Rush.  Because of this, I have only taken a minor interest in the show.  I have been waiting for the show to move on since I find Ben Shaprio far more interesting than a dead talk show host.  I have my doubts about his newly announced successors because nobody can really replace Rush Limbaugh.

Thursday, May 27, 2021

Indiana number of new cases

In six months, we have gone statewide from thousands of new cases per day to hundreds.



Tuesday, May 25, 2021

CRYPTO CRASH. I'M DONE (as a millionaire)

The first seven minutes give a pretty good reason why as to why cryptocurrency might be a bad idea.  The rest is just technical analysis.





Bitcoin has no value other than the willingness of other people to buy it or accept it as payment.  This is called the "bigger fool" theory, where you hope that there is a bigger fool than you out there.

I could have bought bitcoin at $5, $50, and $5,000.  I could have made a fortune.   During an inflationary period, some assets will increase in value.  Someday Bitcoin could be worth a million dollars.  However, the moment that people decide that they don't want it, it could lose all its value.  Likewise, the government could regulate it out of existence.





Monday, May 24, 2021

Earth's Climate every 100,00 years

Something very interesting happens to the Earth's Climate roughly every 100,000 years.  The Earth's temperature very quickly spikes up 8 to 15 degrees Celcius, followed by at least 10,000 years of relatively stable warm temperatures.  This is then followed by a rapid decline in temperature leading to 80,000 to 90,000 years of glaciation where half of North America is covered by glaciers, during which time the Earth slowly gets colder.  Then the cycle repeats.  The last time we experienced rapid warming was about 11,000 years ago.  All of human civilization arose during this brief warm period, thanks in part to the fertile crescent in the Middle East making grains more available.

We should be in the cool-down phase by now, but anthropogenic greenhouse gases have at least temporarily delayed it.  It was predicted in the 1970s that we were entering a new ice age.  A period from 1500 to 1850 has been labeled "the little ice age", however, atmospheric CO2 levels started to go up in the 1800s.  Some have said that no matter what we do we can't avoid the next period of mass glaciation roughly 10,00 years from now, while others have suggested that we can delay it.  Previous ice ages have caused massive declines in the human population.

These temperature cycles are caused by the roughly 5 different Malankovich cycles aligning with each other to produce rapid warming.  These cycles affect the Earth's orbit and its axial tilt.  The Earth is currently halfway between its maximum tilt and its minimum tilt, which has a 41,000-year cycle.  At the maximum tilt, the glaciers melt more, reducing the Earth's albedo, which means that less sunlight is reflected into space.  The increasing temperatures cause the oceans to release more of their stored CO2 into the atmosphere, which creates a temporary positive feedback loop.  The warming effect of CO2 in the atmosphere is logarithmic, which means that it reaches a saturation point, producing a temporarily stable warm climate.




I don't understand why the cycle is every 100,000 years instead of every 41,000 years, and this Wikipedia article talks about this being an "issue" that they don't understand.  Prior to about 3 million years ago, the cycle was every 41,000 years.


--







NASA traces source of mysterious fast radio bursts sending signals to Earth - CBS News

Don't panic, but mysterious sources have been sending radio signals to Earth for years. Now, scientists have tracked down some of their origins — and they were surprised by what they found.

And no, it's still not aliens.  

Wuhan Lab


The State Department acknowledged in January 2021 the "United States government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019." It found that they'd experienced symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 "and common seasonal illness."

But, the Wall Street Journal on Sunday, citing a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report, went further and said these workers required hospital care. The report said it was not entirely unusual for people in China to visit hospitals instead of primary care physicians, but the report could lend weight to the theory that the coronavirus leaked from a laboratory.

US learned several Wuhan lab researchers sickened before COVID-19 outbreak: former State Department official | Fox News


The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box at Wuhan?

"We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin," a group of virologists and others wrote in the Lancet on February 19, 2020, when it was really far too soon for anyone to be sure what had happened. Scientists "overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife," they said, with a stirring rallying call for readers to stand with Chinese colleagues on the frontline of fighting the disease.

Contrary to the letter writers' assertion, the idea that the virus might have escaped from a lab invoked accident, not conspiracy. It surely needed to be explored, not rejected out of hand. A defining mark of good scientists is that they go to great pains to distinguish between what they know and what they don't know. By this criterion, the signatories of the Lancet letter were behaving as poor scientists: They were assuring the public of facts they could not know for sure were true.

It later turned out that the Lancet letter had been organized and drafted by Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance of New York. Daszak's organization funded coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If the SARS2 virus had indeed escaped from research he funded, Daszak would be potentially culpable. This acute conflict of interest was not declared to the Lancet's readers. To the contrary, the letter concluded, "We declare no competing interests."

...

A second statement that had enormous influence in shaping public attitudes was a letter (in other words an opinion piece, not a scientific article) published on 17 March 2020 in the journal Nature Medicine. Its authors were a group of virologists led by Kristian G. Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute. "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus," the five virologists declared in the second paragraph of their letter.

Unfortunately, this was another case of poor science, in the sense defined above. True, some older methods of cutting and pasting viral genomes retain tell-tale signs of manipulation. But newer methods, called "no-see-um" or "seamless" approaches, leave no defining marks.

...

First, they say that the spike protein of SARS2 binds very well to its target, the human ACE2 receptor, but does so in a different way from that which physical calculations suggest would be the best fit. Therefore the virus must have arisen by natural selection, not manipulation.

If this argument seems hard to grasp, it's because it's so strained. The authors' basic assumption, not spelt out, is that anyone trying to make a bat virus bind to human cells could do so in only one way.

...

Shi returned to her lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and resumed the work she had started on genetically engineering coronaviruses to attack human cells. How can we be so sure?

Because, by a strange twist in the story, her work was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a part of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). And grant proposals that funded her work, which are a matter of public record, specify exactly what she planned to do with the money.

The grants were assigned to the prime contractor, Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance, who subcontracted them to Shi. Here are extracts from the grants for fiscal years 2018 and 2019. ("CoV" stands for coronavirus and "S protein" refers to the virus's spike protein.)

"Test predictions of CoV inter-species transmission. Predictive models of host range (i.e. emergence potential) will be tested experimentally using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments across a range of cell cultures from different species and humanized mice."

"We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential."

What this means, in non-technical language, is that Shi set out to create novel coronaviruses with the highest possible infectivity for human cells. Her plan was to take genes that coded for spike proteins possessing a variety of measured affinities for human cells, ranging from high to low. She would insert these spike genes one by one into the backbone of a number of viral genomes ("reverse genetics" and "infectious clone technology"), creating a series of chimeric viruses. These chimeric viruses would then be tested for their ability to attack human cell cultures ("in vitro") and humanized mice ("in vivo"). And this information would help predict the likelihood of "spillover," the jump of a coronavirus from bats to people.

The methodical approach was designed to find the best combination of coronavirus backbone and spike protein for infecting human cells. The approach could have generated SARS2-like viruses, and indeed may have created the SARS2 virus itself with the right combination of virus backbone and spike protein.

It cannot yet be stated that Shi did or did not generate SARS2 in her lab because her records have been sealed, but it seems she was certainly on the right track to have done so.

...

On December 9, 2019, before the outbreak of the pandemic became generally known, Daszak gave an interview in which he talked in glowing terms of how researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been reprogramming the spike protein and generating chimeric coronaviruses capable of infecting humanized mice.

"And we have now found, you know, after 6 or 7 years of doing this, over 100 new SARS-related coronaviruses, very close to SARS," Daszak says around minute 28 of the interview. "Some of them get into human cells in the lab, some of them can cause SARS disease in humanized mice models and are untreatable with therapeutic monoclonals and you can't vaccinate against them with a vaccine. So, these are a clear and present danger…."

...

the long history of viruses escaping from even the best run laboratories. The smallpox virus escaped three times from labs in England in the 1960's and 1970's, causing 80 cases and 3 deaths. Dangerous viruses have leaked out of labs almost every year since. Coming to more recent times, the SARS1 virus has proved a true escape artist, leaking from laboratories in Singapore, Taiwan, and no less than four times from the Chinese National Institute of Virology in Beijing.

One reason for SARS1 being so hard to handle is that there were no vaccines available to protect laboratory workers. As Daszak mentioned in the December 19 interview quoted above, the Wuhan researchers too had been unable to develop vaccines against the coronaviruses they had designed to infect human cells.

...

Where we are so far. Neither the natural emergence nor the lab escape hypothesis can yet be ruled out. There is still no direct evidence for either. So no definitive conclusion can be reached.

That said, the available evidence leans more strongly in one direction than the other. Readers will form their own opinion. But it seems to me that proponents of lab escape can explain all the available facts about SARS2 considerably more easily than can those who favor natural emergence.

...

Proponents of natural emergence have a rather harder story to tell. The plausibility of their case rests on a single surmise, the expected parallel between the emergence of SARS2 and that of SARS1 and MERS. But none of the evidence expected in support of such a parallel history has yet emerged. No one has found the bat population that was the source of SARS2, if indeed it ever infected bats. No intermediate host has presented itself, despite an intensive search by Chinese authorities that included the testing of 80,000 animals. There is no evidence of the virus making multiple independent jumps from its intermediate host to people, as both the SARS1 and MERS viruses did. There is no evidence from hospital surveillance records of the epidemic gathering strength in the population as the virus evolved.


https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/

Sunday, May 23, 2021

David Horowitz | The Ben Shapiro Show Sunday Special Ep. 115

This is an hour long and well worth listening to all of it, but you can get the gist of it in 20 minutes.