Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Japan Deploys Interceptor Near DPRK Missile Flight Path, Climate Change Science Implodes As IPCC Models Found To Be 'Totally Wrong'

Japan deploys interceptor near DPRK missile flight path

Japan on Tuesday moved a mobile missile-defense system on the northern island of Hokkaido to a base near recent flyover routes of a missile fired by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera said a Patriot Advanced Capability-3 interceptor unit was deployed at the Hakodate base on southern Hokkaido "as a precaution" as part of government preparations for a possible emergency.
The relocation came after a DPRK missile was test-fired last week and flew over southern Hokkaido and landed in the Pacific off the island's east coast — the second flyover in less than a month.
The PAC-3 was brought from another base in Yakumo town on Hokkaido, about 80 kilometers northeast of Hakodate. The system has a range of about 20 kilometers.
Four more of Japan's 34 PAC-3 units, largely used to defend the capital region, were relocated to southwestern Japan recently after the DPRK warned of sending missiles toward the US territory of Guam.

President Trump's debut speech today at the U.N. was one for the history books.  The three-quarters-of-an-hour speech contained many firsts and covered a lot of ground.
No American president has ever threatened that if America is forced to defend itself or its allies, "we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea."  At one level, this is obvious.  A nuclear attack would bring nuclear retaliation, and everyone knows it.  The doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction demands it.
That prediction of Armageddon was followed with "Rocket Man is on a suicide mission," using a nickname of ridicule against the regime, as he did with Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush.  I look forward to seeing how Pyongyang reports this to its people.  I suspect that it will be portrayed as a compliment.
President Trump also attacked the regimes in Iran and Venezuela.  But my favorite bits of the speech were two themes related not to other countries, but to ideas.
President Trump defended nationalism as an appropriate focus for Americans as for other countries and their leaders, including those assembled before him at the U.N.  Implicitly, this is a rebuke to the E.U. in particular, but also other multilateral organizations.  Sovereignty is anathema to the global financial elites.
President Trump also ridiculed socialism and communism, stating that the problem is not that socialism was badly implemented, but "that socialism has been faithfully implemented in Venezuela."

A devastating 7.1 magnitude earthquake struck central Mexico on Thursday, marking the second major quake in just a week and a half.

This is what you need to know about the unfolding situation

  • At the time of this posting, over 100 people have been killed as a result of the earthquake’s effects
  • The figure is expected to climb as victims are pulled from the rubble of demolished structures
  • The sheer force of the earthquake caused damage within a 75-mile radius of where it occurred
  • The quake occurred on the 32nd anniversary of the infamous 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which caused the deaths of 10,000 people and injured approximately 30,000 more
  • Education Minister Aurelio Nuño tweeted a “suspension of [school] classes at all levels” until further notice
  • The magnitude of the quake caused over 40 buildings in the surrounding area to collapse, trapping people inside the debris
  • This is the second earthquake to strike the area over the last 10 days: the first quakeoccurred off of the country’s southern coast and was an 8.1 magnitude quake and killed approximately 90 people

 A stunning new science paper authored by climate change alarmists and published in the science journal Nature Geoscience has just broken the back of the climate change hoax. The paper, authored by Myles R. Allen, Richard J. Millar and others, reveals that global warming climate models are flat wrong, having been deceptively biased toward “worst case” warming predictions that now turn out to be paranoid scare mongering.

The paper, entitled, “Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C,” concludes that the global warming long feared and hyped by everyone from Al Gore to CNN talking heads was based on faulty software models that don’t stand up to actual measured temperatures in the real world. In technical jargon, the paper explains, “We show that limiting cumulative post-2015 CO2 emissions to about 200GtC would limit post-2015 warming to less than 0.6°C in 66% of Earth system model members.”

In effect, the current global warming software models used by the IPCC and cited by the media wildly over-estimate the warming effects of CO2 emissions. How much do they over-estimate warming? By about 50%. Where the software models predicted a 1.3 C rise in average global temperatures, only a rise of about 0.9 C has actually been recorded (and many data points in that average have, of course, been fabricated by climate change scientists to push a political narrative). In other words, carbon dioxide emissions don’t produce the warming effects that have been blindly claimed by climate change alarmists.

“Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modelling wrong,” reports the UK Telegraph. “New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.”

In other words, the climate change threat has been wildly overstated. The fear mongering of Al Gore and the government-funded science community can truly only be described as a “junk science hoax.”

“The paper … concedes that it is now almost impossible that the doomsday predictions made in the last IPCC Assessment Report of 1.5 degrees C warming above pre-industrial levels by 2022 will come true,” writes James Delingpole. He goes on to say:

One researcher – from the alarmist side of the argument, not the skeptical one – has described the paper’s conclusion as “breathtaking” in its implications.

He’s right. The scientists who’ve written this paper aren’t climate skeptics. They’re longstanding warmists, implacable foes of climate skeptics, and they’re also actually the people responsible for producing the IPCC’s carbon budget.

In other words, this represents the most massive climbdown from the alarmist camp.

Are we about to see climate change alarmists owning up to the fact that real-world data show their software models to be rooted in junk science? The unraveling has begun, but there is so much political capital already invested in the false climate change narrative that it will take years to fully expose the depth of scientific fraud and political dishonesty underpinning the global warming hoax.

A legal representative of Paul Manafort, who at one time managed the successful 2016 presidential bid of Donald Trump, has demanded an investigation into the FBI after anonymous sources seemingly broke federal law by leaking classified information to the media regarding the investigation into Manafort.
On Tuesday, CNN broke the news that the FBI had secured a wiretap on Manafort's phone under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA.) The investigation began in 2014 following allegations that Manafort was operating as a foreign agent in his capacity as a campaign adviser to Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych. The wiretap paused in 2016, and resumed in 2017 under new allegations of Manafort's ties to Russian intelligence. Eventually, the FBI ended the wiretapping for a lack of evidence. 
If the reports are true, then a felony has been committed — but not by Manafort. According to Jason Maloni, a spokesman for the former lobbyist and Trump presidential campaign manager, "it is a felony to reveal the existence of a FISA warrant, regardless of the fact that no charges ever emerged. The US Department of Justice's Inspector General should immediately conduct an investigation into these leaks and to examine the motivations behind a previous Administration's effort to surveil a political opponent."

No comments: