Putin and Biden are squared to have a meeting on June 16, five days from zero. Topics they will discuss include the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack, treatment of Navalny, as well as a litany of other topics that are so broadly defined it is difficult to imagine Tweedle Dee Joey being able to rattle off a rational one line sentence much less a days worth of intense dialogue. Perhaps Biden’s chosen interpreter will fill in the massive Grand Canyon cracks with prescripted detente. Or maybe Biden will use a teleprompter to respond to Putin. Or maybe, just maybe, Biden #2 will show up for Putin.
One thing is certain it will be less than the rapport between Lavrov and Blinken. Albeit that meeting was about more noteworthy topics; Nord Stream, Syria and Ukraine. However, even those talks seem meaningless in hindsight, as though it might have all been a bizarre stage show. Which has become the nom-de-pleu of all things Biden. Militaries are still strutting the cock-fight. And the blame all things on Russia continues unabatedly boringly doggedly forever like the High School teacher in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.
While Summit leaders wander about maskless and far from social distancing unless for a PR shot, the UK is still in Lockdown. Bojo has declared that the easing of restrictions scheduled for June 21, won’t happen. The reasoning? CoVid variants. For thee – but not for me!
Bojo seems to rather enjoy his totalitarian regime – and change could easily offend his dictator status. It is much like playing the game “Mother May I” wherein permission must be granted by the Queen for everything. Unfortunately, the directions have altered somewhat over the years and apparently mother is no longer a female designate. Sigh.
The Topic of G7Summit? Gee whilikers – Climate Change of course, same as it has been for a decade now I suppose. With nothing accomplished but lots and lots of renewed pledges made – pinkie swear! Amazing…how that happens.
In 2019, Germany’s carbon emissions were roughly 805 million tons, matching 2013 and 2007 according to their data. Not exactly stellar. But Merkel thinks pledging to reduce is what matters, not what you actually ‘Do”. “Germany will now aim to cut emissions by 65% by 2030” – headliner. The claim is that Germany’s emissions are 40% lower than the arbitrary year 1990. Therefore they are grand Achievers! Yeah – applaud applaud.
ISSUE: measuring carbon emissions is an estimate, a good guess, that until 2015 was not a global uniform means. In fact it is and was always a guess.
The International Panel on Climate Change was first conceived in 1988 by the UN. They didn’t really actually do anything except publish various reports. The first one of any significance at all was in 1995. Of the six summaries, #5 concludes that climate is expected to continue to change in the future – although uncertainties remain. #2 and #4 attack aerosols as the main culprit. #3 states that ‘air temperature’ has increased .3 or .6’ C over the last century. For which nobody gives a rats ass. #6 states there are many uncertainties. Ahhh, the only truth statement.
I suppose that is about as much ‘scientific’ as we can get.
The next report was in 2001. In this report 1990 is claimed as the warmest year since instrumental record dating at 1850. They then reference adaptation, projections, and the fact that there will be ‘benefits and adverse effects’.
How much are these scientists paid?
It was not until a Special Report queried emission recordings that a call for uniform means of measuring be adopted globally given ‘estimates’ determined a discrepancy range of 5%-25%. Of course even the discrepancy ratio was a GUESS! In other words – all numbers presented by individual countries are completely worthless until 2015 – 2016 – or forever. It’s an honor system among communist rules.
Prior to this 2015 proclamation, a 2006 request for uniform methodologies was requested – although no one seemed willing to comply.
These reports are the formative basis for all Climate Change pronouncements. The ‘science’ is uncontested, and all scientists must concur on the end evaluation. Hardly a definition of – SCIENCE.
Science is defined as a ‘body of facts or truths’ based on ‘objective observations’. The IPCC is wholly unobjective. Wholly unfactual. And Completely untruthful. Because it is based on a core of – Estimates.
The IPCC is thus simply a media affirmative.
Meaning: ALL the numbers used to calculate carbon emissions prior to 2016 are fictitious, created, contrived, and meritless. It is a scientific impossibility to factually confer fact onto an estimate. Thus using any numbers prior to 2016 as a measurement of emissions is completely contrived and False.
How Are CO2 emission measured? CO2 emissions are measured on the basis of ‘production’. Calculated based on consumption:
To calculate consumption-based emissions we need to track which goods are traded across the world, and whenever a good was imported we need to include all CO2 emissions that were emitted in the production of that good, and vice versa to subtract all CO2 emissions that were emitted in the production of goods that were exported.
This is why Science historically was defined as a ‘philosophy of thought’, not of any factual, or diagnostic, or objective principle. When Fauci declares his statements are all based on Science – he actually upholds the lack of factuality definition given it is a continual evolution. By definition, philosophy is: creed, belief, faith, theory, and viewpoint.
Following is the ‘classic’ graph submitted by Science depicting CO2 emissions:
The CDIAC no longer exists and all information was transferred to the National Center For environmental Information. The Director, Mary S. Wohlgemuth, is an ‘attorney’. The Deputy Director, Joe Pica, is a civil engineer, and Eric Kihn, the Chief Oceanographic and Scientific Services rep – has a graduate degree in ‘philosophy’. Whose research papers include; data mining, use of algorithms, and software tools. SCIENCE.
Once upon a time statistics were the basis for factual data. Today they are nothing more than a contrived algorithm with a preconceived data determination. Numbers are worthless and thus we can begin to understand the Common Core Math values wherein 2+2 = 10 is a correct answer.
Science has NO idea what actual emissions are for ANY country today or yesterday much less a decade or century ago. Scientists spend six years as a team to conclude that Climate Change is possibly maybe sort of going to continue in the future for an indeterminate length of time.
And Fauci would have us believe that he only sites Science… In this context of guestimates – I tend to agree.