XCR1250

Won't open for me.

Propaganda to get folks to buy EV garbage. FOLLOW the MONEY, just like the Covid lies.

You neglect to mention how many millions more of ICE vehicles are out there compared to EV garbage.

Bidens staying at Lake Tahoe home of climate activist Tom Steyer Steve Holland Sat, August 19, 2023 at 10:35 AM CDT·1 min read 766 1 / 2 Bidens staying at Lake Tahoe home of climate activist Tom Steyer Biden arrives in Reno for a vacation in nearby Lake Tahoe By Steve Holland SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, California (Reuters) - President Joe Biden, his wife Jill, son Hunter and other family members have arrived at Lake Tahoe for a week of August vacation, and they are staying at a home rented from billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer. The Bidens arrived late on Friday in the Glenbrook community on the eastern shore of the lake, on the Nevada side. Steyer and his wife, Kat Taylor, own the home but are not present. Steyer ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020 but failed to gain traction and dropped out after the first four state contests. Biden eventually won the nomination and went on to defeat incumbent Republican Donald Trump. The White House said the Bidens are renting the home at fair market value. Biden's son, Hunter Biden, flew separately on a commercial flight with his wife Melissa Cohen and their son Beau and were already at the residence when the other Bidens arrived, the White House said. Hunter Biden is facing a special counsel investigation on tax evasion charges. President Biden, asked about the case at a Camp David news conference on Friday, declined comment. Biden is to travel to Hawaii on Monday to get a firsthand look at the destruction wrought by wildfires that killed dozens of people in Maui. (Reporting By Steve Holland; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

I'm no music/singer expert but listened to the 2 songs posted here, I thought he was terrible..heard much better on AGT.

Never heard of him.

Who?

Don't forget all the reported EV fires.

Hydrogen will happen — if it can come clean latest updates: Back to Top ↑ Back to Top ↑ Steve Fecht for Genreal Motors General Motors Co. entered into a joint development agreement with Nel Hydrogen US, a subsidiary of Nel ASA, to help accelerate the industrialization of Nel’s proton exchange membrane (PEM) electrolyzer platform. TWEET SHARE SHARE EMAIL Long touted as the fuel of the future but not of the present, the age of hydrogen may be about to start. Billions of dollars in federal subsidies are part of a massive industrial policy pushing the energy source. The U.S. Department of Energy is pouring $7 billion into a series of regional hydrogen production hubs to make sure it’s available for transportation and heavy industry. It also plans to subsidize the cost of hydrogen when produced with green technologies. Automotive News’ tech and innovation reporting team identifies the challenges and opportunities for hydrogen fuel adoption in autos and adjacent industries. The industry’s vision for a zero-emission future is clear, and there are multiple paths to get there. Policymakers are ensuring that hydrogen will be one of them. See our report.

THREE aliases, Joe? The Biden Mafia setup is crystal clear By Post Editorial Board August 18, 2023 3:25pm Updated House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer is demanding unredacted access from the National Archives to emails Joe Biden sent as veep using any of his three known pseudonyms: Robert L. Peters, Robin Ware and JRB Ware.James Messerschmidt President Biden took an oath of office in which he swore his highest duty was to his country, but it’s clear he has only one loyalty: his crooked, access-selling family. It’s positively Mafiaesque. The latest development: House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) is demanding unredacted access from the National Archives to emails Biden sent as veep using any of his three known pseudonyms: Robert L. Peters, Robin Ware and JRB Ware. (The prez got a little lazy on #3, it seems.) Comer outlines the clear possibility that these aliases were an attempt by the then-vice president to deflect scrutiny from his dealings with son Hunter — citing a May 2016 email in which Biden’s schedule for the day was sent to Hunter (the only other real person copied on the email) and the “Peters” alias. That schedule included a call with Ukraine’s then-president, Petro Poroshenko, as Hunter sat on the board of Burisma. The Ukrainian energy company not only paid Hunter over $1 million for that “service” (when he had no experience in energy or anything relevant) — an FBI informant says Burisma’s head claimed he’d paid Joe and Hunter $5 million each. President Biden let Hunter use the White House as a secret hideout for two weeks after he signed his now-dead sweetheart plea deal. What possible legitimate reason could there be for a sitting vice president to have not one, not two, but three email aliases? None, of course — and the obvious illegitimate reason is a typically brazen Biden solution to an ugly problem: namely, the fact that the Obama White House was rightly worried about Hunter’s influence-peddling, er, “business” career and Joe’s obvious involvement in it. SEE ALSO That is: Joe took to amateur-hour spyjinks to keep up his role in the family racket. And the big bucks it was bringing in. It’s of a piece with the revelation that Biden let his ne’er-do-well, national-security-risk kid use the White House as a secret hideout for two weeks after he signed his now-dead sweetheart plea deal. Two weeks? Imagine how much business he and the prez didn’t discuss during that time! Worse, it’s the White House, the most visible and important symbol of the presidency — not a fancy flop joint for rich fly-by-nights. No matter how hard liberal journos close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears, no matter how desperately Biden flunkies like Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) front for the Big Guy … This. Is. Not. Going. Away.

Nancy Pelosi repeatedly urges White House audience to clap: 'That's an applause line' Kyle Morris Wed, August 16, 2023 at 6:27 PM CDT·3 min read 760 Nancy Pelosi repeatedly urges White House audience to clap: 'That's an applause line' Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., struggled to drum up support amid her remarks about the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) on Wednesday, insisting the audience should clap throughout certain parts of her speech. Joined by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., at the White House to boast about the measure on its one-year anniversary, Pelosi touted what she believes to be benefits of the IRA, which she described as a "remarkable accomplishment." Pelosi said there is "no more urgent task than saving our planet," claiming the issue of climate change is a "health issue," an "economic issue," and a "moral issue." "It's a moral issue if you believe as I do that this planet is God's creation. We have a moral responsibility to be good stewards of it. But even if you don't, we can all agree we have a moral obligation to ensure strong, healthy, resilient communities for future generations," she added. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaks during the anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act event at the White House in Washington D.C., on August 16, 2023. Hearing no applause as she gathered her thoughts, Pelosi said to the tranquil crowd, "I think that's an applause line." Later during the speech, while recognizing legislative action taken to address climate change by Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Pelosi told the audience once more, "That's an applause line." Waiting and laughing, Pelosi's statement was met with a round of applause by those in attendance. Continuing on with the speech, Pelosi also urged the crowd to clap to for House Democrats who worked to pass the IRA. "Now let's hear it for the House Democrats," Pelosi told those in attendance as she motioned for the lawmakers to stand up. Pelosi's plea for applause at the White House mirrored a similar request she made last September when she failed to ignite a crowd gathered on the White House lawn. Celebrating President Biden’s signing of the Inflation Reduction Act at the time, Pelosi told the audience the same line.

Biden goes west for his second vacation of the month SEUNG MIN KIM Fri, August 18, 2023 at 3:00 PM CDT·2 min read 342 President Biden steps down from Air Force One after landing at the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport in Avoca Thursday, August 17, 2023. Biden was en route to Scranton to attend the viewing of the former Pennsylvania first lady Ellen Casey, who died last week./The Times-Tribune via AP) (ASSOCIATED PRESS) WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden are heading west on Friday for more rest and relaxation. The first couple will spend about a week in the area of Lake Tahoe, the massive alpine lake that abuts California and Nevada and is a tourist attraction, particularly in the winter for its ski resorts. The president is headed there from Camp David, where he was hosting a summit Friday with the leaders of South Korea and Japan. The Bidens will halt their vacation for a day on Monday to visit Maui, where a wildfire ripped through the historic town of Lahaina and killed more than 100 people so far. They will meet with survivors, first responders, and local officials while surveying the damage. Biden vacationed earlier this month at his home in Rehoboth Beach, where he went on bike rides, visited the Delaware beaches and went for a date night with the first lady to a showing of the blockbuster film “Oppenheimer.” In previous summers, the Bidens have also vacationed on Kiawah Island, South Carolina, and the first family spends their Thanksgiving on the resort island of Nantucket, Massachusetts. They traveled to the U.S. Virgin Islands at the end of last year, staying there through the new year. Once Biden returns to Washington, there will be no shortage of issues to tackle. The White House will spend much of September ensuring that a government shutdown will be avoided at the end of the month, while persuading lawmakers to pass a supplemental funding package that includes billions more for Ukraine as well as disaster aid. In September, Biden also has the Group of 20 summit in India and the annual United Nations General Assembly on his plate. The White House will also continue to aggressively promote Biden's legislative accomplishments under the umbrella of “Bidenomics," focused on winning over more approval from voters as he campaigns for a second term in office.

Few years from now EV's will be collectable antiques as Hydrogen takes over for Gasoline.

Average long-term US mortgage rate climbs to 7.09% this week to highest level in more than 20 years ALEX VEIGA AND MATT OTT August 17, 2023 at 1:35 PM The average long-term U.S. mortgage rate climbed this week to its highest level in more than 20 years, grim news for would-be homebuyers already challenged by a housing market that remains competitive due to a dearth of homes for sale. Mortgage buyer Freddie Mac said Thursday that the average rate on the benchmark 30-year home loan rose to 7.09% from 6.96% last week. A year ago, the rate averaged 5.13%. It’s the fourth consecutive weekly increase for the average rate and the highest since early April 2002, when it averaged 7.13%. The last time the average rate was above 7% was last November, when it stood at 7.08%. High rates can add hundreds of dollars a month in costs for borrowers, limiting how much they can afford in a market already unaffordable to many Americans. “With prices even higher than they were a year ago in many markets, crossing the 7% mortgage rate threshold again could be what sets in motion a major contraction in the housing market this fall,” said Lisa Sturtevant, chief economist for Bright MLS. The latest increase in rates follows a sharp uptick in the 10-year Treasury yield, which has been above 4% this month and climbing. The yield, which lenders use to price rates on mortgages and other loans, touched its highest level since October on Thursday morning, and it’s close to where it was in 2007. The yield has been rising as bond traders react to more reports showing the U.S. economy remains remarkably resilient, which could keep upward pressure on inflation, giving the Federal Reserve reason to keep interest rates higher for longer. “The economy continues to do better than expected and the 10-year Treasury yield has moved up, causing mortgage rates to climb,” said Sam Khater, Freddie Mac’s chief economist. “Demand has been impacted by affordability headwinds, but low inventory remains the root cause of stalling home sales.” High inflation drove the Federal Reserve to raise its benchmark interest rate 11 times since March 2022, lifting the fed funds rate to the highest level in 22 years. Mortgage rates don’t necessarily mirror the Fed’s rate increases, but tend to track the yield on the 10-year Treasury note. Investors’ expectations for future inflation, global demand for U.S. Treasurys and what the Fed does with interest rates can influence rates on home loans. The average rate on a 30-year mortgage remains more than double what it was two years ago, when it was just 2.86%. Those ultra-low rates spurred a wave of home sales and refinancing. The sharply higher rates now are contributing to a dearth of available homes, as homeowners who locked in those lower borrowing costs two years ago are now reluctant to sell and jump into a higher rate on a new property. The lack of housing supply is also a big reason home sales are down 23% through the first half of this year. The average rate on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages, popular with those refinancing their homes, rose to 6.46% from 6.34% last week. A year ago, it averaged 4.55%, Freddie Mac said.

Ambushed business owner opens fire on masked men, killing them both, Texas cops say Mitchell Willetts Thu, August 17, 2023 at 11:07 AM CDT·2 min read 1.3k ARCHIVO DEL MIAMI HERALD Two men are dead after ambushing an armed business owner in what investigators believe was an attempted robbery, according to Texas police. Officers with the Houston Police Department responded to calls of a shooting near a business on the city’s east side after 11 a.m. on Aug. 16, Assistant Chief Chandra Hatcher said during a news briefing. Officers arrived to find two masked men shot to death, Hatcher said. The business owner told police he had just returned from the bank, gotten out of his vehicle and was entering his business when someone hit him in the back of the head with an “unknown object,” Hatcher said. The owner turned around, saw the two men in masks and “immediately” opened fire, Hatcher said. An employee, who was armed, heard the commotion and also shot at the men. “To anyone who’s watching … please consider your actions, consider your decisions, because choices have consequences,” Hatcher said at the briefing. “The suspects here, I would believe, have loved ones who will now be grieving their loss.” Police believe the business owner was the target of a jugging attempt, Hatcher said. Jugging is a type of theft in which criminals follow a victim leaving a bank to their next location and rob them of the money they’ve just withdrawn. The business had been robbed previously, according to Hatcher. “We don’t ever advocate violence … but our citizens do have the right to defend themselves,” she said. The business owner is “shaken” but “fine,” Hatcher said. Another suspect was at the scene, waiting nearby in a Lincoln Navigator, but the SUV drove away when the shooting started, according to Hatcher. Investigators are searching for the vehicle, which had the license plate number RTS3919. Police are investigating and anyone with information regarding the case is asked to contact the department’s homicide division at 713-308-3600.

What treatment was that?

https://www.ereplacementparts.com/appliance-parts.html

There is no green ‘transition’ to renewable energy. China and India are playing us for fools 1.4k David Blackmon Wed, August 16, 2023 at 7:58 AM CDT Clean energy - Angus Mordant/Bloomberg We’re constantly told nowadays that an “energy transition” is underway, from the fossil-fuel powered world of yesterday to the renewables-powered one of tomorrow. But is this actually happening? It’s a question on many minds these days, and one that comes with varying answers depending on who’s answering. For Daniel Yergin, Vice Chairman of S&P Global and author of best-selling books like The Prize and The New Map, the answer is complex and fraught with uncertainty, far more than policymakers in the western developed world would like. I was able to interview Yergin recently in the wake of the publication of a new study that is a joint project between S&P Global and the International Energy Forum (IEF). The study, titled “Shaping a Living Roadmap for Energy Transition,” assesses the status of what is referred to as the energy transition, and finds it has in fact evolved into a set of widely disparate transitions among nations in differing geographies and with differing states of economic and societal development. “I think that what drove this study on energy transition is the sense that the last two years have demonstrated that it is more complicated and indeed more challenging than just drawing a scenario and putting numbers on it and saying this is how it would happen,” Yergin says, adding that priorities of national energy security have risen to increased prominence in the wake of Russia’s ongoing war on Ukraine. He points to Germany, long a leading proponent of renewable energy, as a prime example of this reality. “Germany would not have given a minute’s thought to importing liquefied natural gas from the United States two years ago, but is now importing US LNG and building import terminals, which just wouldn’t have happened before,” he points out. “So, when governments, even Western governments, are faced with energy security issues, price issues, they kind of have to rethink their policies.” He is quick to add, though, that Germany’s new-found appetite for US LNG does not mean Germany has abandoned its climate commitments, just that the shifting geopolitical situation forced officials to re-think and adjust the direction of its transition to bolster energy security. For China no such adjustment has been necessary, since the Xi Jinping government has always prioritized energy security above climate goals. China, which retains its nominal status as a “developing nation” in the eyes of the UN and other global organizations despite having the world’s second-biggest economy, has been happy to let western developed nations sacrifice economic and grid stability in pursuit of “net-zero by 2050” goals while it has continued to commission hundreds of new coal-fired power plants and become the world’s biggest importer of crude oil. Even the timing of China’s own climate commitment – net-zero by 2060, not 2050 – reflects the priority Xi and his ministers afford energy security in their thinking. A similar dynamic is at play in the world’s most populous country, India, whose own climate commitment timing is 2070, even further out into the future. Likewise, the study points out that other developing nations in Asia, Africa and other regions continue to push back on western efforts to force them to abandon the use of fossil fuels to grow their own economies and allow their people to rise out of energy poverty in the same way those western nations have enjoyed over the course of the last 160 years. “People from all over Asia have a very different perspective because they said, you know, we need energy to grow, we need natural gas to grow,” he says. “We’d like to use natural gas to replace coal in electric generation. It’s a very different agenda.” In The New Map, Yergin sets out the reality that past energy transitions, like the one in the UK from wood to coal that began in the 1500s, have taken place across a century or more and have never ended with the former energy source being abandoned. In fact, the world burned more wood for energy in 2022 than ever before, just as it used more oil, coal, and natural gas than in any other year on record. At the same time, though, we currently see heavily subsidized renewable energy sources like wind and solar rapidly expanding, along with myriad innovations taking place in battery technologies, hydrogen, and modular nuclear facilities. What it all boils down to is this: the prevailing narrative being pushed by policymakers, activists and much of the western news media of an energy transition that will dramatically reduce the use of fossil fuels and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 is a fantasy. The direction and pace of whatever transition ultimately occurs will be dictated by real-world complexities and events, not by schemes promoted in Brussels, Washington DC, and London.

I used to drink..btw many smokers I know said the same thing including my mom and sister, both died from smoking while in their 60's..I never smoked, stopped drinking in 1981 when Doctors told me it was killing me if I didn't stop.

"It's estimated" How do they count the Cat killed Birds? Hire people to watch each Cat household?

shambles

Drinking Alcohol Increases Cancer Risk—But Very Few Americans Are Aware of the Link Few Americans know of the increased risk of cancer associated with alcohol consumption. More than 50% of U.S. adults report not knowing how alcohol affects cancer risk, new research shows. Drinking alcohol of any kind is a known, but modifiable risk factor for cancer. Drinking alcohol of any kind—liquor, beer, and wine—is a leading risk factor for developing cancer, but too few Americans are aware of the risk, and it could be putting their health in jeopardy. A research article published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, and Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer, shows that most Americans—more than 50%—report not knowing how alcoholic drinks affect cancer risk. Some individuals (10.3%) believed wine in particular decreased cancer risk.1 “All types of alcoholic beverages, including wine, increase cancer risk,” senior study author William M.P. Klein, PhD, associate director of the National Cancer Institute’s Behavioral Research Program, said in a press release.2 “This study’s findings underscore the need to develop interventions for educating the public about the cancer risks of alcohol use," said Klein, "particularly in the prevailing context of national dialogue about the purported heart health benefits of wine.” AIRE IMAGES / GETTY IMAGES Few Americans Know of Alcohol-Related Cancer Risk To determine American's knowledge about the link between alcohol and cancer risk. researchers analyzed data from the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey, which included survey responses from nearly 4,000 American adults. The respondents were asked, "In your opinion, how much does drinking the following types of alcohol [wine, beer, and liquor] affect the risk of getting cancer?" Respondents were also asked about their awareness of the link between alcohol and heart disease, as well as their own current alcohol habits. More than 50% of those surveyed reported not knowing how alcohol affects cancer risk. About 31% of U.S. adults were aware of the alcohol-cancer link for liquor specifically, followed by beer and wine (24.9% and 20.3%, respectively). Incorrectly, 10% of U.S. adults surveyed believed wine decreases cancer risk, while fewer people—2.2% and 1.7%—believed beer and liquor decreases risk. Age also determined if a person was more likely to know about alcohol's link to cancer risk. Adults over the age of 60 were less likely to be aware of alcohol as a risk factor for cancer, while adults ages 18–39 were more likely to know of the link. According to study authors, this may be due to longer-standing drinking habits among older Americans. Drinking habits, however, were not associated with awareness of the link: non-drinkers, average drinkers, and heavy drinkers were similarly aware of alcohol's cancer risk. Drinking Alcohol Is a Little-Known Carcinogen “Alcohol is a leading modifiable risk factor for cancer in the United States and previous research has shown that most Americans don’t know this,” lead study author Andrew Seidenberg, PhD, MPH, who conducted this research while serving as a Cancer Prevention Fellow at the National Cancer Institute, said in a press release.2 That previous research is a 2021 study published in Cancer Epidemiology, which estimated that the number of annual cancer diagnoses in the U.S. attributed to alcohol is around 75,000, including almost 19,000 cancer deaths.3 Currently, alcohol is considered a risk factor in at least six different cancers: mouth, pharynx, and larynx cancers, along with esophageal, breast, colorectal, stomach, and liver cancers.4 In its most recent Report on Carcinogens, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' National Toxicology program lists consumption of alcoholic beverages as as a known human carcinogen.5 The main reason alcohol can cause cancer is because it produces a carcinogen called acetaldehyde when the body metabolizes it, according to Edward Giovannucci, MD, a professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, who was not involved with the new research. The human body naturally produces acetaldehyde in small amounts, but in large amounts, it can cause DNA damage, which is how carcinogens create abnormal cancer cells. Aside from acetaldehyde, drinking excessive amounts of alcohol can cause breakdown in the tissues it comes into direct contact with, such as the upper throat, esophagus and stomach, said Dr. Giovannucci. The cancer risk for alcohol is lower than the risk carried by other, more well-known carcinogens. Smoking, for example, is responsible for about 20% of all cancers and about 30% of all cancer deaths in the U.S. However, "you don't want to ignore any carcinogens," Klein told Health. Cutting Back on Alcohol Consumption The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend that males drink no more than two alcoholic drinks daily, and females have no more than one. According to Klein, the more you drink in one sitting, the worse alcohol is for you, making binge drinking particularly dangerous. “When you are drinking a lot all at one time your body is trying to break it down and the more you drink, the more your acetaldehyde you create,” he said. If you’re concerned that you may be drinking too much, Klein said the most important thing you can do to cut back is not rely on willpower alone. “We know from years of research that simply relying on willpower is not effective because most of us will give in at one point or another,” he said. Instead, George F. Koob, PhD, director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), suggests beginning by taking a closer look at your relationship with alcohol: whether you tend to drink in certain settings or situations, if you do it out of boredom, or if you simply like the taste. Once you've pinned down your why, find a substitute. For example, meditating to combat anxiety or reaching out to friends or family when you feel stressed instead of turning to drinking. Koob also recommends letting people close to you know about your goals to drink less: “It can be easier to make behavior changes if you know you’re supported by people close to you.” If you’re a social drinker, Klein recommends substituting social outings that revolve around drinking for an activity that doesn’t have to include alcohol. It can seem hard, especially if others in your circle also rely on drinking as their main way to socialize, but it’s been done before. “People need social connection and having something like alcohol can be a way to facilitate that connection,” he said, adding that this is the relationship many people had with smoking before its health impacts became widely known. If you want professional help with reducing the amount you’re drinking, Klein recommends seeking out a therapist or certified health and wellness coach that specializes in behavior changes, substance use, and helping people establish and reach goals.

The Silly Science of Climate Alarmism By David Wojick You may think that climate science is complicated and that the scientists who are alarmed about climate change know what they are doing. Well, yes and no. The climate is complicated but scientists have bought into some very silly science. Happily this is all easy to see with no science involved. Seriously, don’t back away. There is no science coming, especially nothing hard. Happily the world’s top alarmists have provided everything we need in a very simple way. Of course they do not see it because they are committed to alarmism. But I will point it out and you can use your own judgement. Here goes. Globally, climate alarmism is led by the United Nations. Huge sums of money are at stake but that is not the point here, although it does explain much of what is going on. On the science side alarmism is led by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, usually just called the IPCC. “Intergovernmental” sounds like a word you might learn as a joke. In this case it means that the members of this Panel are most of the world’s national governments. Most or maybe all of these governments pay lip service to climate alarmism. Every five years or so the IPCC puts out a monster report that claims to be an overview of the latest climate science. In reality they just pick the science that best supports alarmism. This year is one of those years and they outdid themselves. Instead of the usual 1,000 page report it is a whopping 4,000 pages. Of course no one in their right mind will read it, but it sure shows how smart they are, right? Where it gets useful is that there is a 40 page Summary for Policy Makers, which means for ordinary people. Anyone who votes is a policy maker of sorts. It is here that we find the basic scientific arguments for alarmism and they don’t amount to much. In fact there are just two arguments for alarmism, which occur as two windows in the very first figure. They are labeled figure 1a and 1b. They are easy to describe so you don’t have to look them up. If you want to see them go here: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/. Figure 1a is called the Hockey Stick by skeptics of alarmism (like me). It claims to be the global average temperatures for the last 2,000 years (like we can know that). It is pretty much a flat line until about 150 years ago and this is the hockey stick handle. Then it suddenly shoots up with big rapid warming from then until now, making the hockey stick blade. Handle flat then blade pointing up. In short they say there was no global warming until we started it 150 years ago. What makes this silly is that there is lots of evidence for two prior periods of warming that may have been just as warm as today’s. These are so well known that they have names — the medieval warm period (when Vikings farmed Greenland) and the Roman warm period (when civilization flourished). In between there were really cold spells including the little ice age that ended with the recent warming. In fact our warming may be nothing but the natural end to the little ice age. There are thousands of research reports on these natural periods of warming and cooling but the IPCC simply ignores them. Alarmism depends on the recent warming being unprecedented. Natural warming disappears. Do not look behind the curtain! So much for the bogus hockey stick. Figure 1b then zooms in on the recent warming, with a fancy variation on the same disappearing act. This time it is about the computer models of climate change, which is where alarmism comes from. It is these silly computer models that say we are causing dangerous global warming, with worse to come. Figure 1b shows two computer model outputs. Each line is the global temperature over the last 150 years, when the recent warming occurred. One is supposedly the temperature history as it would have been without human interference, the natural history, and the other is the history with human inputs. Guess what? The natural history has no warming, while the human history shows all the warming that has occurred over the period. The IPCC says this proves all the warming is caused by us humans. What makes this silly is figure 2, which gives the game away. It is a list of all the things in the models that can cause warming. All are human! There are no natural causes. This means the models are programmed so that only humans can cause warming. Thus what figure 1b really says is “If we assume that only humans can cause long term warming then we find that the long term warming is caused by humans”. This is called circular reasoning because the conclusion is just a restatement of the assumption. It is truly silly. What is missing of course is just what was missing In the hockey stick, namely nature. There is actually a great deal of research on possible natural causes for some of the long term warming, maybe even all of it. Keep in mind that the recent warming is very small, just around one degree over 150 years. Small changes in the sun, or the ocean, or even just in the clouds, could easily cause this little bit of global warming. The IPCC simply ignores all this research, just like it ignored the warm and cold periods in the 2,000 year hockey stick. In fact this extreme alarmist bias dominates government funded climate science, which is most of it. That is really all there is to alarmist science and it sure is silly! No deep scientific mystery. Just assume that everything that happens is our fault, program the computers that way, and let the computer then predict worse to come. Ignore all the research that says otherwise. Ignore the little ice age and the medieval warm period. Ignore natural change even though it is right in front of us. Ignoring nature is the silly science of climate alarmism.

Those aren't smiles, those are the Middle fingers and laughing at the EV junk.