Paul Starick (Advertiser Dec 6) correctly warns that South Australia is at extreme risk of domination from eastern States, regarding the Murray Darling Basin. He explains our lack of MP’s on the federal scene will provide minimal resistance to any attack.
The real problem which has generated so much feeling among irrigators has been caused by over-allocation, combined with minimal inflow due to drought conditions.
The irony is the over-allocation has not meant over-use. Much of the water entitlement is held by speculative investors. Until they sell the water (at a high price) to an irrigator, the speculator’s water will flow past those who are keen to use it - if only it was affordable.
Emotion is running high and much finger pointing has failed to focus on the real problem.
Plans to decommission the barrages and build a lock at Wellington lacks a vision for the whole Murray Darling Basin. River infrastructure from source-to-sea has provided a wonderful asset which must be retained.
Changes are needed but they must deliver unity - even if it requires recognition of less water being available.
I was sent this link down the food chain, having a little archaeological knowledge, from Ken who sends out dozens of emails with juicy bits of info, the original email coming in from I don’t know, and was too lazy to ask, but, good on you anyway, get the word out. The book by Bruce Pascoe, Dark Emu: Aboriginal Australia and the Birth of Agriculture (2014/2018), puts the case that Australian Aboriginal culture was not exclusively a hunter and gatherer society, but had agriculture, and well, a civilisation a bit like a kind of Wakanda (Black Panther movie)! This all goes with a modern narrative about their sophisticated spiritualism and cosmological beliefs.
There is a site “Dark Emu Exposed”:
https://www.dark-emu-exposed.org/home/category/Aboriginal+Agriculture which undertakes a step-by-step critique of the Aboriginal agriculture claim. The entries are detailed and well argued, and anyone interested in this topic should have a look. As well, a few days ago there was this in the national rag:
The medical journal The Lancet, has a name which I have found a bit scary, since it refers to a surgical cutting instrument with a double-edged blade. Could that be symbolic? Well, the journal of that name is certainly well into the climate apocalypse stuff. Here is some material on this, which I do not necessarily endorse in full, because I am new to this area.
“What should we make of a scientific journal that has decided that being culturally "woke" is more important than presenting evidence-based reports and opinions? Alas, this is what has become of The Lancet. For decades, The Lancet was seen as one of the world's preeminent biomedical journals, along with publications such as the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). But something has changed, and the journal now regularly publishes bad research and bizarre opinions. The latest example is The Lancet's decision to publish a review of a theatrical performance called Lungs, which is about climate change. (Why a biomedical journal is publishing theatrical reviews at all is a legitimate question in itself.) The very first paragraph is already full of misinformation:
For many years I have been writing that climate change has become something of a fanatical cult, which has now morphed into a new religion. Nobody paid attention to what I have said, because, well, I’m just an old loser, who drowns my sorrows for a lost life in cheap alcohol, but still, there are others, who are real people, saying the same thing now:
“Greta Thunberg, the teenager from Stockholm, is the prophet of a new religion sweeping the West. Call it Climatism. Like any religion worthy of the name, it comes with its own catechism (what to believe) and eschatology (how the world will end). Thunberg’s bible is the latest report of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which gives us 12 years to save civilization as we know it. We have prayed to the false gods of fossil-fired growth, runs Thunberg’s indictment. Guilty are the adults who have “lied to us” and given us “false hope.” But her children’s crusade—no-school “Fridays for Future”—will show the path to redemption. And so, the youngsters did. For September 20, the 16-year-old had managed to organize worldwide protest marches. From New York to Nairobi, from Asia to Australia, tens of thousands thronged the squares and streets of their cities, chanting: “You had a future, and so should we!” 2019 is the year 1 a.g., Anno Gretae. Of course, Greta Thunberg did not come out of nowhere. All new religions emerge from competing sects, as Jesus did in Jerusalem and Muhammad in the Arabian Hejaz. Why did she succeed so quickly, virtually in a space of months? An “innocent child,” muses Gerard Baker in the Wall Street Journal, “is an inspiring story that is very effective in offering role models and propagating the faith.” A guileless demeanor trumps reams of data and multiple regressions churned out by the IPCC. But it also helps that Greta has a flawless PR machine running in the background at all times.
It is all happening, like a Christmas present for me, just as most of us journalists here struggle to get through the day now, counting the nanoseconds until the holidays, to allow time for our back and neck injuries to heal before killing ourselves writing next year. Anyway, Climate-Princess Greta has come out embracing total Marxism and anti-capitalism, which shows that the colour of the Greens, is always red:
“Greta Thunberg the teenage Climate Puppet has gone full Marxist. In her latest public statement, she says that the ‘climate crisis is not just about the environment’: It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fuelled it. We need to dismantle them all.”
Well, I am impressed, and I do not impress easily. Imagine the ingenuity involved here, in coming up with a scheme to shut down the pollies in Canberra, by stopping them getting to their rat holes!
“Climate activist group Extinction Rebellion has threatened to blockade Canberra airport when parliament rises unless MPs meet its demand and begin to “shut down the fossil fuel industry” in the next two weeks. An ACT division of the group has written a letter to all federal MPs demanding that parliament also “legislate towards meeting net zero emissions” by 2025. “If you fail to do this by the last sitting day of parliament, we will give you a taste of the kind of disruption that you are inflicting on ordinary people across the world by failing to take action on climate change,” the letter said. “We plan to blockade your route to the airport on the 5th of December.
‘‘You don’t deserve a smooth trip home from work if your work is ensuring the continued destruction of the planet.” Resources Minister Matt Canavan told The Australian the tactic was “straight from the Green activist playbook”. “They always resort to threats and blackmail when reason and debate fails,” he said. Labor’s resource spokesman, Joel Fitzgibbon — who holds the NSW electorate of Hunter where coalmining is a key industry — was also unimpressed. He warned that the demand for net zero emissions by 2025 would “destroy our economy”. “Their idealism is to be commended but a dose of realism would be a good thing too,” Mr Fitzgibbon said.
All of those young feral Extinction folks, need to focus on the real killer, their beloved smart phones which are going to destroy the earth quicker than you can say: “red meat”:
“A new study from researchers at McMaster University published in the Journal of Cleaner Production analyzed the carbon impact of the whole Information and Communication Industry (ICT) from around 2010-2020, including PCs, laptops, monitors, smartphones, and servers. They found remarkably bad news. Even as the world shifts away from giant tower PCs toward tiny, energy-sipping phones, the overall environmental impact of technology is only getting worse. Whereas ICT represented 1% of the carbon footprint in 2007, it’s already about tripled, and is on its way to exceed 14% by 2040. That’s half as large as the carbon impact of the entire transportation industry. Smartphones are particularly insidious for a few reasons. With a two-year average life cycle, they’re more or less disposable. The problem is that building a new smartphone–and specifically, mining the rare materials inside them–represents 85% to 95% of the device’s total CO2 emissions for two years. That means buying one new phone takes as much energy as recharging and operating a smartphone for an entire decade. Yet even as people are now buying phones less often, consumer electronics companies are attempting to make up for lost profits by selling bigger, fancier phones. The researchers found that smartphones with larger screens have a measurably worse carbon footprint than their smaller ancestors. Apple has publicly disclosed that building an iPhone 7 Plus creates roughly 10% more CO2 than the iPhone 6s, but an iPhone 7 standard creates roughly 10% less than a 6s. So according to Apple, the trend is getting better, but the bigger phones companies like Apple sell seem to offset some gains. Another independent study concluded that the iPhone 6s created 57% more CO2 than the iPhone 4s. And despite the recycling programs run by Apple and others, “based on our research and other sources, currently less than 1% of smartphones are being recycled,” Lotfi Belkhir, the study’s lead author, tells me. In any case, keeping a smartphone for even three years instead of two can make a considerable impact to your own carbon footprint, simply because no one has to mine the rare materials for a phone you already own. It’s a humbling environmental takeaway, especially if you own Samsung or Apple stock. Much like buying a used gasoline-fueled car is actually better for the environment than purchasing a new Prius or Tesla, keeping your old phone is greener than upgrading to any new one.
In the era before coal, oil and electricity, the environment suffered greatly. Whales were slaughtered for lamp oil; forests were cleared for firewood, mine props, building materials, roofing shingles and sailing masts; London (“The Big Smoke”) and Pittsburgh (“The Smoky City”) were smothered in smog from open fires, charcoal kilns and iron smelters; horses powered public and military transport and city streets were layered with horse manure. Then came the hydro-carbon revolution. Kerosene lamps saved the whales and coal-powered steam engines delivered electricity (clean-coal-by-wire) to the cities. Much of the sulphurous smogs disappeared. Coke from coal replaced wood charcoal to make iron and steel. Steel and concrete saved the forests and trucks and railways allowed the farmland which once fed millions of horses, mules and oxen to produce food for humans. Not one of these boons for humans AND the environment was driven by a UN resolution, invented by a government committee or funded by statutory levies on consumers, or subsidies from taxpayers. None were mandated in a government energy plan. The anti-human, anti-industry policies of the Global Greens are now reversing all that progress. A key event occurred in 2006 when a leading left-wing politician, Al Gore, invented the Global Warming Industry. Despite a finding by a British High Court that his movie “The Inconvenient Truth” contained nine key scientific errors, it is still shown in schools. This has misled students and teachers and created spreading circles of damage to jobs, industry and the cost and reliability of electricity. It also created fake industries based on energy adventurism, UN talk-fests, climate hysteria and green activism.
The Green Piglets were born, and the environment and the economy suffered. Land that once fed horses is now used to produce biodiesel and ethanol for cars, so food prices must go up. Forests are felled to burn in green power stations and for green-tick buildings while grasslands are invaded by feral pests, woody weeds and bushfires from the ever-growing parks and Kyoto Protocol Forests. Birds and bats are being sliced by wind turbines, flatlands are being smothered by solar panels, access roads and transmission lines. But electricity costs soar, supply is rationed while reliability crashes. Behind every one of these modern maladies are troughs of Big Green Pigs getting fat on market mandates, subsidies from consumers or tax payers, and special tax treatments. In the background, governments fund an academic/media industry promoting climate alarmism, energy rationing and intermittent energy. Electric cars and penny farthings were pushed off the roads by Henry Ford’s petrol engines, but politicians are trying to put them back – a Tesla for the rich and a bicycle for the poor. Consumers and industry don’t count and taxpayers are there to be milked. In this Greentopia no one needs miners, farmers or fishermen. All are lost for a fake global warming Emergency.
No doubt someone else at this site has used the zombie metaphor, perhaps in the same existential despair as me, to describe the plight of our kind. But, for the money, and there is not much of that, here it is again:
“Around the world, parasitoid wasps use spiders as the host for their babies. Researchers recently found that the wasps take advantage of the spiders’ hormone to force their victims into doing their bidding. A wasp starts the gruesome series of events by laying an egg on the body of a spider. Its larva feeds on their host to gather nutrients for the pupa stage. Eventually, the wasp larva forces the spider to spin a specific web that will support its pupal cocoon. Once the spiderweb is finished, the larva kills the spider, wraps its former host and itself in a cocoon, and starts the maturation process into an adult wasp. Researchers from the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) and Brazil’s Universidade Federal de Uberlandia (UFU) investigated how parasitoid wasps hijack the bodies of the spiders. They learned that the wasp larvae take advantage of ecdysone, a hormone that controls the molting behavior of spiders. The parasites change the way spiders respond to increasing ecdysone levels so that their hosts produce webs for their pupal cocoons. (Related: Bugs for green thumbs: 7 Beneficial bugs that you need in your garden.) Parasitoid wasp larvae inject psychotropic substances into spiders to turn them into “zombies” STRI researcher William Eberhard teamed up with his UFU counterpart Marcelo Gonzaga. Together, they went over the existing papers on parasitoid wasp species around the world that target spider species. They also incorporated the findings of a separate Brazilian molecular study. Last but not least, they looked at the behavior of spiders in Costa Rica.”
Leaders of the Clintel Group of world scientists and professionals will attend the UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) which starts in Madrid today (2 December) and runs for twelve long days. (The Climate Summit was shifted suddenly to Spain after Chile cancelled because of violent riots in Santiago.) Clintel will present their “No Climate Emergency” petition at the Climate Reality Forum. This petition has already been presented to the UN Secretary General, the European Commission and the European Parliament. Voting on a motion promoting a climate emergency declaration (in opposition to the Clintel statement), over one third of the members of the EU Parliament voted for “No Climate Emergency”. This shows there is a significant opposition to alarmism, even in the EU. The Climate Summit is expected to attract up to 25,000 high-flying delegates and hangers-on from 197 member countries. Most will not arrive using bicycles, sailing boats or gliders – they will burn hydrocarbons. Desperate to spread their “Climate Emergency” alarmism, delegates will try to force high energy costs and rationing on us while they waste it conspicuously themselves. Clintel says that computerised global temperature simulation models are unfit for the purpose of setting climate policies – they have consistently run hot for 20 years.
The real global climate has warm and cold cycles. Current global temperatures are about as warm as the Medieval Warm era (which was followed by the Little Ice Age). There is no uniform global temperature at any place or any time, and no one knows what ideal temperature we should aim for – the Frigid Zone would probably like it warmer, the Torrid Zone would probably like it cooler. We need to take heed of climate history and energy realities, both neglected in alarmist/UN propaganda. Too many UN “scientific” reports are tinkered with by officials before release, and are designed to alarm rather than inform. For too long we have been forced to listen to biased academics (chasing research funds), energy speculators (chasing government subsidies and tax breaks), alarmist journalists (chasing sensations), noisy children (chasing days off school) and greenish politicians (chasing votes). It’s time to stop the chasing. We need a grown-up debate allowing all sides to present their science on “Man-made Global Warming”. CLINTEL says “There is NO Climate Emergency”.
Here is an article arguing that to deal with the climate crisis people need to have fewer children. What people? Why, going from the photograph of Nordic/Northern European white children in the article, the implication is, whites. That is applying the same standard that the establishment applies to anything else, for consistency. Thus, predict what the response would have been if only African children were portrayed. But, in fairness, judge for yourself:
“The greatest impact individuals can have in fighting climate change is to have one fewer child, according to a new study that identifies the most effective ways people can cut their carbon emissions. The next best actions are selling your car, avoiding long flights, and eating a vegetarian diet. These reduce emissions many times more than common green activities, such as recycling, using low energy light bulbs or drying washing on a line. However, the high impact actions are rarely mentioned in government advice and school textbooks, researchers found. Carbon emissions must fall to two tonnes of CO2 per person by 2050 to avoid severe global warming, but in the US and Australia emissions are currently 16 tonnes per person and in the UK seven tonnes. “That’s obviously a really big change and we wanted to show that individuals have an opportunity to be a part of that,” said Kimberly Nicholas, at Lund University in Sweden and one of the research team. The new study, published in Environmental Research Letters, sets out the impact of different actions on a comparable basis. By far the biggest ultimate impact is having one fewer child, which the researchers calculated equated to a reduction of 58 tonnes of CO2 for each year of a parent’s life. The figure was calculated by totting up the emissions of the child and all their descendants, then dividing this total by the parent’s lifespan. Each parent was ascribed 50% of the child’s emissions, 25% of their grandchildren’s emissions and so on.”
The more carbon pollution the better I say! If our enemies support it, then it is a methodological principle that we should oppose it, and no-one is as much a bug-eyed fanatic as me … not, that is not right, our opponents are more fanatical, have bigger bugged eyes, and are, to top it off just wrong! I don’t care what thousands of professors say: what would they know? They would not recognise the majestic beauty of a coal-fired power station if they fell down the sooty chimney of one.
“In recent months, emotional eco-activist Greta Thunberg who has become synonymous with the global anti-global warming climate change movement has made consistent appeals at the developed world, demanding an end to its evil, polluting ways. She even went so far as to sue some of the bigger carbon polluters in the world — Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, and Turkey — for violating her rights as a child by failing to adequately reduce emissions. And yet one nation has consistently escaped her steely gaze: China. Which is unfortunate, because whereas many of the nations that have provoked Greta's ire in the past have made concerted efforts to reduce their emissions, it is the world's biggest polluter, China, that has curiously evaded her anger. Hopefully that is about to change because as the FT reports, China is set to add an army of new coal-fired power plants equivalent to the EU’s entire capacity, as the world’s biggest energy consumer ignores global pressure to rein in carbon emissions in its bid to boost a slowing economy. Across China, a whopping 148GW of heavily-polluting, coal-fired plants are either being built or are about to begin construction, according to a report from Global Energy Monitor, a non-profit group that monitors coal stations. Putting that number in context, the current capacity of the entire EU coal fleet is 149GW, or the same as what China is about to add.
I found this article while wondering through the Amerika.org site, on the health dangers of Wi Fi, and the dangers are many, including zapping sperm, which is the last thing most of us need, well, maybe not the blokes who write here, who are mostly over the hill, and coming down the other side, but the young blokes, eager to sow wild oats. Good luck with that one, all you young and hot blooded agriculturalists:
“Repeated Wi-Fi studies show that Wi-Fi causes oxidative stress, sperm/testicular damage, neuropsychiatric effects including EEG changes, apoptosis, cellular DNA damage, endocrine changes, and calcium overload. Each of these effects are also caused by exposures to other microwave frequency EMFs, with each such effect being documented in from 10 to 16 reviews. Therefore, each of these seven EMF effects are established effects of Wi-Fi and of other microwave frequency EMFs. Each of these seven is also produced by downstream effects of the main action of such EMFs, voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) activation. While VGCC activation via EMF interaction with the VGCC voltage sensor seems to be the predominant mechanism of action of EMFs, other mechanisms appear to have minor roles. Minor roles include activation of other voltage-gated ion channels, calcium cyclotron resonance and the geomagnetic magnetoreception mechanism. Five properties of non-thermal EMF effects are discussed. These are that pulsed EMFs are, in most cases, more active than are non-pulsed EMFs; artificial EMFs are polarized and such polarized EMFs are much more active than non-polarized EMFs; dose-response curves are non-linear and non-monotone; EMF effects are often cumulative; and EMFs may impact young people more than adults. These general findings and data presented earlier on Wi-Fi effects were used to assess the Foster and Moulder (F&M) review of Wi-Fi. The F&M study claimed that there were seven important studies of Wi-Fi that each showed no effect. However, none of these were Wi-Fi studies, with each differing from genuine Wi-Fi in three distinct ways. F&M could, at most conclude that there was no statistically significant evidence of an effect. The tiny numbers studied in each of these seven F&M-linked studies show that each of them lack power to make any substantive conclusions. In conclusion, there are seven repeatedly found Wi-Fi effects which have also been shown to be caused by other similar EMF exposures. Each of the seven should be considered, therefore, as established effects of Wi-Fi.”
Think of me as being like a kindly mother bird, collecting anti-climate change material to feed to you, not just any random worm of information, but choice, warm and wriggling ones, still with life in them:
“The Earth's average temperature is rising. It's risen 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880. The U.N. predicts it will rise another 2 to 5 degrees this century. If that happens, that will create problems. But does that justify what's being said? "We have 12 years to act!" says Joe Biden. "The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change!" adds Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Twelve years? That's the new slogan. The Heartland Institute invited some climate alarmists to explain the "12 years" and other frightening statements they keep making. The alarmists didn't even show up. They never do. They make speeches and preach to gullible reporters, but they won't debate anyone who is skeptical. Over the years, I repeatedly invited Al Gore to come on my TV shows. His staff always said he was "too busy." At a Heartland Institute event I moderated, climatologist Pat Michaels put the 12-year claim in perspective by saying, "It's warmed up around 1 degree Celsius since 1900, and life expectancy doubled in the industrialized democracies! Yet that temperature ticks up another half a degree and the entire system crashes? That's the most absurd belief!" Astrophysicist Willie Soon added, "It's all about hand-waving, emotion, sending out kids in protest. It has nothing to do with the science."
Here is a good one; the academic dude who formulated the crazy Gaia idea of the earth as a self-regulating super-organism, has slammed Extinction Rebellion, as far as a 100-year old can slam anything:
“James Lovelock, the world’s most distinguished environmentalist, has come out against Extinction Rebellion (XR). They are a bunch of “silly buggers”, the 100-year-old told me this week. Dr Lovelock — independent scientist; inventor of Gaia Theory; creator of the first device to measure the CFCs causing a hole in the ozone layer; environmental campaigner over many decades — told me that he has no sympathy with the Extinction Rebellion mob and their claims to be saving the planet. “No, I don’t [support Extinction Rebellion], I think the silly buggers are going far over the top. It’s all very well to mount a barrier, but make sure when you jump off you don’t crash on the other side!” The eminent British scientist — who celebrated his 100th birthday earlier this year and is still going strong — was laughing at the expense of the Extinction Rebellion activists at Canning Town station in the East End of London, who climbed onto tube train carriages only to be dragged off by angry commuters.”
There is an amazing photo published of a girl from 1898, who looks like climate change princess, Greta Thunberg. The internet line being run, is I suppose is that she is a time traveller sent back to save us. Well, I guess the feminist movie Terminator: Dark Fate is still running and is fresh in their minds:
The problem with the time traveller hypothesis is that the photo is from the past, and she is supposedly here now. So, where does the future come in? And, wouldn’t she tell us that she was from the future, if she was, because one thing this little gal can do is talk, and talk, and talk, increasing carbon emissions. And why not go back further in time and just terminate capitalism in the beginning? And, where are her advanced weapons from the future? No, I am far from convinced! Yes, I imagine that the idea that everyone has a double is true. In fact, most leftists look pretty much alike, coming out of the same genetic engineering factory.
The crazed Left has moved on from smashing racists, and now equate even those who question the climate change mania, as evil, with no right to speak. The conference that they stopped below has apparently been rescheduled at a secret location. Thus, free thinkers are forced into hiding in this most repressive of regimes.
“The NH Hotel Group will no longer host the 13th annual “alternative climate conference” in Munich featuring scientists skeptical of climate change alarmism following protests at its hotel. Each year, the Jena-based European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE), Germany’s leading private think tank on climate and energy issues, has rented out the NH Congress Center Munich for its alternative climate conference and did so once again this year until the hotel abruptly terminated the agreement this past week. The hotel group cited “security” concerns for its cancellation of the event after activists from the “Anti-Capitalist Climate Society,” whose motto is “system change, not climate change,” staged a protest of the conference including the formation of a flash mob in the hotel lobby, causing a disturbance and distributing flyers to hotel guests. “The safety and well-being of our guests and staff is always our top priority,” hotel management declared in its cancellation letter. “Due to the polarizing effect of the EIKE association, we could not guarantee this security for our hotel guests or for the participants of the event. For this reason, our responsibility as hosts requires you to cancel this booking.”
As you all know, we are all climate change critics here, even Brian Simpson, who is so scientifically cautious about bloody everything that he normally does not have a position on most things, thus writing the least articles of the team, except Mr Ian Wilson, whom I do not know (Sydney scene). Why, he even rejects IQ, and has a beef about American Renaissance magazine, while I like it. I even have a picture of Jared Taylor on my bar fridge. Anyway, what about biodiversity destruction, which is now being linked in the climate change narrative. What should be our position on that?
“AN insect “apocalypse” is under way that could impact on all life on Earth, a report warns. The heavy use of pesticides has helped wipe out around half of all species of insects since 1970, say ¬worried researchers. Prof Dave Goulson added: “It could be much more. We just don’t know, which is scary. "If we don’t stop the decline of our insects there will be profound consequences for all life on earth — for human wellbeing.” An investigation carried out by ecologists at Sussex University for the Wildlife Trusts found that 40 per cent of the one million known insect species are now nearing extinction. Many birds, bats, reptiles, small mammals and fish would starve without insects to eat. And with 87 per cent of plants needing animal pollination, mostly from insects, human food sources are at risk too. Meanwhile the use of ¬pesticides has doubled over the past 25 years, statistics show. During this time at least 23 ¬species of bees and wasps have disappeared.”
Fear not the walking dead, but 5 G:
“While globalists happily push 5G into America and now on a fast-track with words like ‘5G Revolution‘ being tossed around, the website Scientific American recently put out this story within which they warned “We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe“. As this story Steve Quayle linked to Sunday over at the Mind Unleashed reports of the Scientific American story, of particular significance is the fact that SciAm is the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States, founded by inventor and publisher Rufus M. Porter in 1845, and running monthly since 1921. It is a highly influential publication, widely reputed for its rigorous scientific standards, and lauded by today’s fact-checkers as highly credible and staunchly pro-science. With the Scientific American story reporting that “the technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks“, their story confirmed much of what the independent media has been reporting for the past couple of years about 5G, that America is flying blind into a potentially disastrous health mess with potential damages to human beings including: Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).
The Pope is on the verge of declaring a new sin, an ecological sin:
“Pope Francis on Friday issued a warning against the rise of fascist forces worldwide that remind him of the Nazis of the 20th Century as he also railed against corporate crimes and announced consideration of adding "sins against ecology" to the church's official teachings. During a speech at the Vatican before the 20th World Congress of the International Association of Penal Law, a network of justice system and criminology experts from around the world, the leader of the Catholic Church said worrying developments both in the political arena and from the world of business remind him of dark episodes from humanity's past, including Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. "It is not coincidental that at times there is a resurgence of symbols typical of Nazism," Francis said as he decried the "culture of waste and hate" represented by contemporary politicians who spew derogatory and racists attacks against homosexuals, gypsies, Jewish people, and others. "I must confess to you," he continued, "that when I hear a speech (by) someone responsible for order or for a government, I think of speeches by Hitler in 1934, 1936." The Pope also highlighted environmental degradation and said the church was considering adding crimes against nature and the environment to the catechism—the official text of church doctrine and teachings. "We have to introduce, we are thinking about it, in the catechism of the Catholic Church, the sin against ecology, the sin against our common home, because it's a duty," he said. Francis has been championed by climate activists for using his position to preach about the urgent need for humanity to recognize the dangers of human-caused global warming and calling on other world leaders—and the estimated 1.2 billion Catholics in the world—to act boldly to address the crisis.