Global cooling started in 2016

Global cooling started in 2016. By David Evans. I updated my global temperature graphs last night:

Satellites, to and including Nov 2021:

Surface thermometers, to and including Sep 2021:

Notice that the temperature peaked in early 2016, and seems to be in a downtrend since then.

In 2015 I predicted that global warming would turn to global cooling in 2017, give or take a year or so, for a decade or more. So far so good.

This prediction is based on the relationship between solar activity and global temperature observed in the frequency domain, which nobody in climate world seems to understand because the math is unfamiliar to them. Much of modern telecommunications technology (e.g. your smartphone) is based on that sort of maths. I did my PhD in such maths.

Notice also that the cheating surface thermometers “recorded” a lot more global warming than the UAH satellite record, which is the only honest record.

Meanwhile, here are plenty of signs of cooling if you keep a look out:

Not that your mainstream media will let you think there might be global cooling.

Give it a decade. We shall see.

At last! Some data on vaccine cardiac problems — from Scotland

At last! Some data on vaccine cardiac problems — from Scotland. By David Evans.

This graph shows the deviation from the normal for Scotland:

This suggests an average of about 200 cases per week for about 8 months, or about 8,000 excess cardiac attendances. In a population of 5.5 million, 80% vaxxed, this is roughly 0.2% of the vaxxed being hauled off in an ambulance with heart problems.

The authorities are blaming “post-pandemic stress disorder”, and there might even be other reasons. But on the face of it, the vaccines are causing serious heart problems in 0.2%, and presumably lesser problems not requiring an ambulance in a few percent of the vaxxed.

Sue Donnem:

They KNOW the implications. Where the confusion lies is people thinking they wouldn’t be used as collateral damage/these institutions care about them. They don’t care who lives or dies. Never have. You only have to look across the world and throughout history to see that.

That would account for the large number of anecdotes.

Hollywood’s Next Illusion: The Great Replacement

Hollywood’s Next Illusion: The Great Replacement. By David Cole.

Beginning last summer and culminating in codified industry-wide rules this year, Hollywood now has a pronounced cap on white casting. Amazon Studios set the numbers: no more than 30% white males on any project, no more than 30% white females, and that latter number must include trannies (dudes in wigs), so a good percentage of those “white females” are not females at all, because eliminating white female faces was always the ultimate goal in the effort to artificially influence traditional beauty standards.

Meanwhile, 40% of all casting must be black.

And this time the ethnic cleansing is working. I’ve done three casting gigs this year, and from speaking with hundreds of white actors, I can attest that at the moment they’re unemployable, while my black actor friends (fine actors all of them, and greatly deserving of employment) literally do not stop working, though by edict not skill (skilled though they are).

I recently watched a King Arthur movie, where the presence of two black actors as knights was jarring. The dialog even acknowledges it, the main character joking that he couldn’t be Bedivere’s kid — because Bedivere was black. There’s a glimpse of black Bedivere at 1:17 and 1:20:

Don’t look now, but Dems “souring” on vaccine mandates

Don’t look now, but Dems “souring” on vaccine mandates. By Ed Morrissey.

With Biden’s vaccine mandates getting shot down in federal courts, the political risks of angering vast swaths of the electorate for no good purpose have become apparent to Biden’s allies. For now, Politico reports …:

In recent comments, several high-profile Democrats have stated their opposition to vaccine mandates, specifically applied to private businesses. …

What changed? Gavin Newsom’s win in a recall election had momentarily emboldened Democrats to pursue heavy-handed policies to mandate vaccinations, Politico notes. His campaign advisers told Democrats across the country to embrace vaccine mandates unapologetically. And perhaps that might have worked at the state and local level, where Democrats might have more legal jurisdiction to order such policies. …

The souring of some Democrats on the mandate comes as the courts strike legal blow after legal blow against a series of vaccine mandates President JOE BIDEN unveiled in September, and it’s prompting concerns in the party that they’re ending up with the worst of all worlds: a blunt policy that won’t go into effect but that will saddle them politically.

Indeed. Even if such a policy would have paid off in the end — and that’s no sure thing in a pandemic with moving-target variants — the benefits might have taken months or years to become apparent. Now, all Democrats have to show for it is a string of court losses at both the state and federal level, and the stench of authoritarianism and elitism.

Imposing the mandates threw gasoline on a diminishing partisan and cultural divide, generating even more resistance to the vaccines and losing pro-vaccination allies who had tried to reach out to the skeptical and convince them to vaccinate on their own. Instead of a scientific and public-health conversation, the mandates transformed the debate into that of politics, exclusion, and governmental overreach.

The injudicious abuse of executive authority has a real cost, not just a political cost. Biden set back the vaccination effort to a degree that may never quite be measured.

The tide is turning.

The Democrats Have a Hate Problem

The Democrats Have a Hate Problem. By Joe Cunningham.

Name-calling has consequences — the name-callers come to believe their calumnies!

Ouch. What haters they are on the left.

The Democrats will argue that this is a result of Republicans being hateful, racist bigots who are way outside the mainstream. However, that doesn’t quite line up with reality. …

The Democrats routinely call Republicans and their activists “culture warriors,” but when it comes to pushing the country in a particular direction away from where it currently is, it’s always the Democrats who have been at the forefront.

  • On abortion, they have been pushing to open up the definition to make it as widely available and as routine as any other form of birth control.
  • With social spending, they have moved to make it more and more available while lowering the requirements further and further, creating programs that are impossible to pay for.
  • On issues like education, they are tightening their control as much as possible and shutting families out, even going so far as to label concerned parents as “terrorists.”

They are pushing to fundamentally change the country and its values, and anyone who doesn’t see eye to eye with them is treated as human filth. When someone supports a Republican candidate, they are labeled racists and bigots. When someone says they voted for Trump, they’re called an enemy of America and democracy.

For Democrats, their young voters are unable to even be in the same room as a Republican. That is ultimately going to make the party’s future bleak. Democrats scream for bipartisanship now, but if that’s how Republicans are going to be treated, Democrats will never get it.

And why should Republicans give them any ground?

Who wants to share a country with such people? Is it too late to close down all the universities?

Why Putin Won’t Invade Ukraine

Why Putin Won’t Invade Ukraine. By Loren Thompson.

There is little doubt that Russia’s vastly superior forces are capable of overrunning Ukraine, particularly the region east of the Dnieper river where many ethnic Russian live. Moscow has been aiding a rebellion of ethnic Russians in the east against the central government since 2014, when it seized the Crimean Peninsula — the other area where ethnic Russians predominate.

However, Moscow’s military moves to date seem more calculated to influence the behavior of the Ukrainian government than actually occupy the country.

Risk aversion:

Vladimir Putin undoubtedly would like to project an image similar to that of the brave bogatyrs who populate Slavic mythology, but his operating style more closely resembles the behavior of a different regional archetype: the cunning peasant who plays a weak hand well.

Putin has maintained power for two decades by standing up to the West without taking big chances. Invading a nation of 40 million where four out of five inhabitants are non-Russian would entail incalculable uncertainties — uncertainties that might ultimately endanger Putin’s hold on power. Taking such risks would be out of character.

You break it, you own it:

That’s what Secretary of State Colin Powell warned President Bush before the U.S. invaded Iraq, a formulation that has come to be known as the Pottery Barn rule. An invasion of Ukraine would require Russia to occupy part or all of Europe’s poorest, most corrupt country.

Assuming that Moscow does not envision genocidal extermination of non-Russians, it would then have to subsidize a restive developing nation that is recovering from the effects of war. That burden would persist indefinitely, imposing big costs on the Russian state for returns that are likely to be quite modest.

Tucker Carlson majored in history for his bachelors degree, and I seem to remember it was in Russian history. Which would make him one of the few in the US media to know what they are talking about on Ukraine.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

US meddling on Russia’s turf puts relationship at risk

US meddling on Russia’s turf puts relationship at risk. By Michael Sexton.

The real dispute, however, between the US and Russia has been the expansion of NATO into what the Russians see as their sphere of influence.

This started under the presidency of Bill Clinton in 1994 and eventually led to Hungary and Poland joining NATO in 1999 and then Bulgaria, Romania, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in 2004. Now Ukraine would like to join them and Russia views this prospect as a threat to its authority on and around its borders.

It is not alone in this view; in 1977, veteran American diplomat and Soviet expert George Kennan wrote that “expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era”. He added that such a decision might be expected “to restore the atmosphere of the Cold War to East-West relations”.

Russian resentment at the policies of the Ukrainian government is exacerbated by the fact until 2014 Ukraine had an administration that was much less hostile to Russia. But that regime effectively was removed in 2014 with the moral support of some members of the EU and $US5bn of fin­ancial assistance by the US to Ukrainian opposition groups. …

Russia has little appeal for the West and that has been true for most of its history but that is no reason for the US and its allies to become involved in conflicts where they have no real interests of their own at stake. They might remember the advice of sixth US president John Quincy Adams that the nation “goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy”.

Thirty years ago, the Soviet empire was crumbling and they were thinking of withdrawing Soviet armed forces from East Germany, Poland, Hungary etc. The West solemnly promised it would not expand NATO into those countries. This is rarely mentioned any more in western media.

Not only did it break that promise, but now the West is flirting with expanding NATO into Ukraine, once an integral part of the Soviet Union.

Russia has advanced weaponry. It’s hypersonic missiles might be able to sink half the US Navy in about ten minutes. And then there’s the nukes. Why take those risks, just to add Ukraine to NATO and the EU?

The US Democrats are unpopular and falling fast on any number of domestic issues, so they desperately need something to change the public’s focus. Maybe they think they can have a limited war with Russia in Ukraine.

Pfizer vaccine: 40-fold reduction in antibodies to Omicron, compared to original covid

Pfizer vaccine: 40-fold reduction in antibodies to Omicron, compared to original covid. By Antony Sguazzin.

Researchers at the Africa Health Research Institute in Durban, South Africa, found omicron resulted in about a 40-fold reduction in levels of neutralizing antibodies produced by people who had received two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech SE shot, compared with the strain detected in China almost two years ago.

The loss of immune protection is “robust, but not complete,” Alex Sigal, head of research at the laboratory, said in an online presentation of the first reported experiments gauging the effectiveness of the vaccine against the new variant.

“There will be more breakthrough” of vaccine-induced immunity, Sigal said. “A good booster probably would decrease your chance of infection, especially severe infection leading to more severe disease. People who haven’t had a booster should get one, and people who have been previously infected should be vaccinated.”

Apparently the solution to everything is more vaccines. Who would have guessed?

Tyler Durden: Pfizer Vaccine Less Effective Against Omicron.

The silver lining is that, as we have previously reported, cases so far have overwhelmingly been mild. Officials in Norway say that is likely because so many of the infections have been in vaccinated people. Many cases are still only a few days old, however, and scientists say it is too soon to be sure whether the level of disease severity reported reflects some property of Omicron itself, or is a result of factors such as the protection afforded by vaccination or prior infection, or age.

The picture emerging from labs in South Africa … and increasingly from Europe is that the variant is likely more transmissible than previous versions of the virus and may be able to more easily sidestep the immunity from prior infection or vaccination. It displays dozens of mutations, some linked to faster spread and some whose properties are entirely unknown.

Does that mean the current vaccines are pretty useless against Omicron transmission? Maybe.

Empirical data: Waning Vaccines versus Natural Protection

Empirical data: Waning Vaccines versus Natural Protection. By Yair Goldberg et al., 5 Dec 2021, Israel.

This study is the first to comprehensively quantify the waning of natural and hybrid immunity at the national level in a real world setting.

Fig. 3. Confirmed infections per 100,000 risk days.

Clear evidence of waning immunity is evident for the Recovered cohort (Figure 3A), the Vaccinated cohort (Figure 3B), and the Hybrid immunity cohorts (Figure 3C). This pattern of waning immunity was evident across all the age groups.

Immunity from vaccination is only better than the natural immunity you get from  recovering from covid for the first two months. After than, natural immunity is better — three times better by eight months.

Karl Denninger:

It turns out the claims that “you must get jabbed”, especially if you were previously infected, were a damned lie.

Due to the nearly-universal vaccination in this nation (Israel) there is no longer a control group of unvaccinated people of sufficient size to provide good data. How convenient! …

Odds of severe outcomes (hospitalization or death):

Severe cases, which can progress to critical or fatal outcomes, are the only ones that matter. None of the others do. Not only are PCR tests known unreliable, but in addition who cares if you sneeze?

We’ve known for decades that coronaviruses run on a roughly four-year cycle in the population and this means that reinfection is … a near-certainty. Just as in gunfights where only the hits count when it comes to respiratory viruses only the severe (or worse) cases count. …

  • If you were infected and recovered your risk of a severe outcome, if you got infected [again], was 0.18% under 39, 1.1% if 40-59 and 7.8% if you were over 60.
  • If you were vaccinated and boosted …: 0.1% if under 39 (too few events for good statistical power; there was only one), 0.6% if 40-59, but 6.2% if over 60. …
  • If just vaccinated but not boosted …: 16-39 your risk there was 0.05%, for 40-59 it was 0.6% (!!) and for 60+ it was 8.1%. …

In other words:

  • If you’re old … the jabs are basically worthless compared against prior infection. …
  • Among infections that matter, being boosted had negative or no efficacy when it comes to severe outcomes for everyone under 60! …

Note that none of this includes the risk from the jabs themselves. To the mortality and morbidity (“severe” outcomes) you must also add that which comes directly from the medication, since no drug is ever without said risks.

First generation covid vaccines: The more we find out, the worse they appear.

Totalitarian Medicine: The US government is effectively “fining” hospitals if they use Ivermectin

Totalitarian Medicine: The US government is effectively “fining” hospitals if they use Ivermectin. By Joanne Nova.

Finally, a detailed explanation of how bureaucrats are effectively deciding doctor patient decisions in hospitals throughout the US. Something that explains why hospitals are bafflingly working so hard to stop doctors using alternate protocols. Money.

There is a system of payments to hospitals that effectively punish them for using ivermectin or any other treatment outside the one permitted protocol.

Hospitals must pay back these “bonus” payments if they use drugs outside the one approved protocol.

If the payments really are of this size, hospital management would be very effectively controlled, and there would be little competition, no free market, and only the illusion of choice. …

Obviously statistics in the US have been compromised hopelessly by these incentive payments, but bear in mind that statistics from other nations with other systems show the CCP coronavirus is a problem. …

The shocking corruption has to be exposed. Spread the word.

The bureaucracy ultimately controls everyone with money. If necessary, they print more.

Elizabeth Lee Vliet, MD:

Upon admission to a once-trusted hospital, American patients with COVID-19 become virtual prisoners … They have a shockingly high mortality rate. How and why is this happening …?

The CARES Act provides incentives for hospitals to use treatments dictated solely by the federal government under the auspices of the NIH. These “bounties” must paid back if not “earned” by making the COVID-19 diagnosis and following the COVID-19 protocol.

The hospital payments include:

  • A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with government-paid fee to hospital.
  • Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
  • Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
  • A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
  • Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
  • More money to the hospital if cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
  • A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.

CMS implemented “value-based” payment programs that track data such as how many workers at a healthcare facility receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Now we see why many hospitals implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates. They are paid more.

Outside hospitals, physician MIPS quality metrics link doctors’ income to performance-based pay for treating patients with COVID-19 EUA drugs. Failure to report information to CMS can cost the physician 4% of reimbursement.

Because of obfuscation with medical coding and legal jargon, we cannot be certain of the actual amount each hospital receives per COVID-19 patient. But Attorney Thomas Renz and CMS whistleblowers have calculated a total payment of at least $100,000 per patient.

Well that explains a lot.

The Vaccines Don’t Reduce Transmission

The Vaccines Don’t Reduce Transmission. By Eugyppius.

It’s an old point, but as vaccine mandates are proposed across the world, it bears repeating: It is highly doubtful that the vaccines do anything to reduce transmission at all.

In all likelihood, they merely reduce your chances of testing positive for several months, because they moderate the symptoms of infection and because governments subject the unvaccinated to closer diagnostic scrutiny.

Graphs like this one, from the Swedish matched cohort study, merely compare rates of confirmed symptomatic infection.

They don’t confirm that SARS-2 is actually less prevalent among the vaccinated or suppressed in highly vaccinated populations.

The more you control for different rates of testing, the harder it gets to find vaccine effectiveness against transmission, and the more you start stumbling over evidence of negative efficacy. …

When you test everyone all the time regardless of vaccination status, a very different picture emerges.

The reason the bureaucrats want to vaccinate children is to achieve herd immunity. They think they can almost eliminate covid by vaccinating everyone, then mopping up the rest using contact tracing and isolation of the few infected people and their contacts.

It’s immoral, and it won’t work.

Children almost never die from covid. In the younger cohorts, the harm from vaccines definitely outweighs the benefits from vaccines — for the individuals. The bureaucrats insist they get vaccinated in order to confer benefits on the group. In other words, the children are getting deliberately harmed (statistically) in order to increase the (statistical) protection for the oldies. That’s immoral.

For the foreseeable future, society will be constantly reinfected with covid due to cross-border travel and from the many animal populations that are now harboring covid. The first generation vaccines barely reduce transmission, and the variants are inevitably becoming more contagious and better at evading vaccines. (Let’s pray they don’t also become more dangerous — the third leg of Marek’s disease.) So vaccinating everyone will not even come close to herd immunity. So vaccinating children is ineffective.

When are they going to break out the anti-virals?

Vax Coercion Around the World

Vax Coercion Around the World.

23 months ago on the Wentworth Report we were putting up Chinese tweets of people being welded in their apartments and people in hazmat suits tackling people in the street and dragging them off. Seemed very odd. Now look at the west.

Meanwhile in Victoria (only, the other states are still open to the unvaccinated):

This is an airborne virus. The barriers are there for politics, not health.

And finally, a glimpse of what the public think, before it was taken down:

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Almost 2000 WA public servants refuse COVID-19 jab after vaccination deadline

Almost 2000 WA public servants refuse COVID-19 jab after vaccination deadline. By Peter de Kruijff.

About 2.5 per cent of the 77,552 public servants in the West Australian government required to have received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine by last Wednesday have been told not to come to work after refusing the jab.

Across 81 government entities, 1938 people refused to get vaccinated, about 853 went on long-term leave, with the government unable to determine their vaccination status, and about 155 have been exempted.

We know people who are being forced to get the jab because they need their job. They are very unhappy about it. They know the vax is of limited ability, can have nasty side effects, and is becoming more useless with each new variant. They would rather be allowed to take ivermectin, and don’t appreciate their body being violated by the bureaucrats.

UPDATE: Only Vaccinated farmers can sell their grain in Western Australia after Dec 31. By Jenne Bremmer. By government decree.

WA’s bulk grain handler CBH has told its 3700 grower members they will not be allowed to enter its sites to deliver grain after December 31, unless they have had their first COVID-19 vaccination.

CBH employees, contractors and visitors will also need to have received their first COVID-19 vaccination dose by the end of the month and be fully vaccinated by January 31 in order to enter a CBH site or office. …

Acting chief executive Ben Macnamara … said $100,000 fines would apply for each incident of non-compliance. …

He added CBH was exploring the possibility of hosting mobile vaccination clinics to help farmers get their jabs.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Perth Hospitals overflowing. Must be the vax?

Perth Hospitals overflowing. Must be the vax? By a reliable witness who wishes to remain anonymous.

I’ve been in [a hospital in Perth metro] …

There were so many people in ER they were lined up in the hallways. …

One nurse told me that only a small handful of nurses have left because they refuse the jab.

But [another] nurse said that so many have left, they have empty beds and overflowing waiting rooms but no staff — because of no jab no work. … Half the ward are patients with side effects from an experimental drug that are not being reported, but she has a mortgage and a car to pay so she has no choice but to take the jab. SHe is convinced that when our borders do eventually open and we let covid enter WA — that they’ll be begging the nurses who left to comeback to work. …

They were announcing code yellow over the speaker and asking for all patients who could recover at home to be discharged.

Perth has had virtually zero covid. Deviations from normal are due to vaccines. Why, after 18 months to increase capacity over normal, are Perth hospitals full? Why are so many patients with “complicated” cases? Why are their rumors of many additional stroke and heart patients?

The bureaucrats aren’t saying. They’re all in on the vaccines.

Musk tells why ‘civilization is going to crumble’

Musk tells why ‘civilization is going to crumble’. By RT.

Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk has called all those believing our planet is overpopulated to think again. It is depopulation, not overpopulation, that is going to be humanity’s doom, the Tesla CEO believes.

The world population is nearing 8 billion, but Musk believes there are still “not enough people” on Earth. “I think one of the biggest risks to civilization is the low birth rate and the rapidly declining birthrate,” the Tesla and SpaceX head, who is also a father of six, told Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council on Tuesday. …

“If people don’t have more children, civilization is going to crumble, mark my words,” the billionaire predicted. …

“I think it is important for us to die because most of the times, people don’t change their mind, they just die. If they live forever, then we might become a very ossified society where new ideas cannot succeed,” the entrepreneur said. He also said it was important for people in “very important” security positions to have “sufficient presence of mind and cognitive ability” to make good decisions, adding that he was not “poking fun at aging.”

Unlike Bill Gates, this guy is actually talented and educated.

When quantum mechanics began replacing classical physics, many physicists trained in the old ways refused to accept the evidence for quantum effects. Max Planck, one of the advocates of quantum mechanics, said

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

or sometimes just

Science advances, funeral by funeral.

hat-tip Stephen Neil