Month: January 2022

Fallen Icon: Sir David Attenborough and the Walrus Deception is now available

My new book, Fallen Icon: Sir David Attenborough and the Walrus Deception, is now available for purchase on Amazon. This is one you won’t want to miss!

Paperback and ebook versions are available at all Amazon outlets, including USA, Canada, UK, and Australia. There should also be a hard cover version within a week or so.

What people are saying about Fallen Icon and my introductory essay are below:

“Dr. Susan Crockford is a fearless pursuer of truth in an era when science has been comprehensively falsified and the media corrupted to promote a non-existent ‘climate crisis.’ In Fallen Icon she takes on the ‘gratuitous animal tragedy porn’ peddled by British natural historian Sir David Attenborough to promote hysteria ahead of the failed COP26 conference in Glasgow.” Peter Foster, National Post columnist and author of Why We Bite the Invisible Hand: The Psychology of Anti-Capitalism.

“In her new book Susan chronicles the deceitful and unscrupulous way in which Sir David Attenborough has characterized the death of hundreds of Russian walruses, claiming they were due to a lack of ice caused by global warning. Thanks to Susan we now know the truth about Sir David’s shameless attempt to use the walrus deaths to support another myth, that there is a ‘climate emergency’ that requires we effectively give up modern civilization altogether.” Patrick Moore, Ph.D. Ecologist, Greenpeace co-founder; and author of Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom.

Fallen Icon exposes how ‘the science’ was corrupted by a political campaign to promote the false notion that a global ‘climate emergency’ exists. How do you scare the public about climate change when polar bear numbers keep rising? Easy, show the public horrifying images of walruses falling to their deaths and hundreds of walrus corpses, and blame those deaths on scarier and scarier predictions of the future based on flawed climate models tuned to maximize dire scenarios. Crockford digs deep to expose the fraudulent tactics that climate activist Sir David Attenborough used to lobby for political ‘solutions’ that included a revolution of society not unlike ‘The Great Reset’ and the ‘Green New Deal’. If you thought Attenborough and the WWF really just wanted to save the walruses, then you need to read Fallen Icon.” Marc Morano, publisher of Climate Depot, former senior staff U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee and author of Green Fraud: Why the Green New Deal is Even Worse Than You Think

“Susan Crockford’s Fallen Icon is a riveting and revealing exposé of the great walrus-over-a-cliff climate scam perpetrated by an A-list of activists from the World Wildlife Fund to Netflix to David Attenborough. The book is detailed and well-documented.  Crockford’s work suggests that a key aspect of Attenborough’s Our Planet documentary series was a deliberate manipulation to create a sensational story describing climate events that never happened. Fallen Icon should serve as a red flag to all who want to hold on to the facts about climate change – and polar bears.” Terence Corcoran, National Post columnist.


An Introduction to Fallen Icon: Sir David Attenborough and the Walrus Deception

Josh’s cartoon on the controversy from 2019.

You can’t have missed seeing the shocking scene from the joint Netflix/WWF blockbuster documentary Our Planet in April 2019, of walruses falling off a high cliff to their deaths on jagged rocks below. Hundreds of animals were shown to have died and narrator Sir David Attenborough blamed all their deaths on lack of sea ice caused by humanity’s wanton use of fossil fuels. Many viewers, including young children, were traumatized by the brutal images.

The falling walrus footage at first seemed similar to National Geographic’s sickening video of a starving polar bear brazenly promoted as a victim of human-caused climate change. When this generated a tidal wave of criticism, the organization eventually admitted its falsehood and apologized for the deception.

The falling walrus fiasco was something altogether different.

Several colleagues (especially Paul Homewood and Andrew Montford) and I exposed the emotional blackmail and dishonesty, which erupted into an international controversy that went on for months. However, the truth didn’t stop Attenborough’s climate action juggernaut, which drove relentlessly toward its goal.

My new book, Fallen Icon, tells the entire, appalling story of how Attenborough assisted the WWF in corrupting science for political objectives.

Attenborough used the gruesome, slow-motion falling walrus imagery, planned strategically by the WWF since 2015, to jump-start a three year campaign against human-caused global warming. The plan entailed the release of ten documentaries laden with baseless ‘climate emergency’ rhetoric, similar to the short WWF message below (00:45), published 1 November 2021.

The ultimate objective was to finally secure a global commitment to aggressive action for reducing CO2 emissions at the United Nations’ climate meeting (COP26) in early November 2021.

Attenborough’s peculiar vision called for immediate and drastic societal changes that might only be attainable by undemocratic means, which sounded eerily similar to the objectives of the wealthiest and most politically powerful supporters of the World Economic Forum (WEF), who just happen to be meeting this week.  

While Attenborough failed to attain the legacy win he was after at COP26, some of his rich and powerful supporters may not have given up their ideology. The global political response to the Covid-19 pandemic seems to have handed Attenborough’s WEF cronies new ideas to constrain what they see as the evils of capitalism that underlie their fabricated ‘climate emergency’. These bear watching closely (no pun intended).

Writing Fallen Icon changed me. Chronicling the story of Attenborough and the falling walrus deception opened my eyes to the way that science has been deliberately corrupted to attain a political goal, in a way that manipulated polar bear science didn’t quite achieve.

I think it will do the same for you.

via polarbearscience

https://ift.tt/3KoM121

January 19, 2022 at 01:41AM

Industrial Wind Turbines: Negative Health Effects (more evidence)

“The weight of evidence indicates occurrences of adverse health effects (AHEs) from living and working near industrial wind turbines (IWTs).”

“Based on our analysis of clinical, biological, and experimental evidence and its concordance with the nine [Bradford Hill] criteria, we conclude that there is a high probability that emissions from IWTs, including infrasound and [Low Frequency Noise], result in serious harm to health in susceptible individuals living and/or working in their proximity.”

A recent issue of Environmental Disease provides more evidence of the negative health effects of industrial wind turbines. It is common sense: audible noise and infrasound, vibrations, and flicker light are unwanted intrusions for those who live remotely to get away from industrialization.

Professional environmentalists must look the other way given that they have little supply-side strategy otherwise against consumer-preferred, taxpayer-neutral mineral energies. But at the grassroots, some farmers can get paid off, but friends are few. Which leads to the question: why aren’t real environmentalists against industrial wind (and solar-slabs) increasingly taking over the landscape?

————————

Here are the major findings of Anne Dumbrille, Robert Y. McMurtry, Carmen Marie Krogh, “Wind turbines and adverse health effects: Applying Bradford Hill’s criteria for causation” (December 10, 2021).

ABSTRACT

The weight of evidence indicates occurrences of adverse health effects (AHEs) from living and working near industrial wind turbines (IWTs). Descriptions of the AHEs being reported by those living or working near the turbines are similar. While these occurrences have been associated with exposure to audible and inaudible noise annoyance, the causation of reported wind turbine‑associated health effects remains controversial. 

Establishing an argument of causation of adverse health outcomes has important clinical, scientific, and societal implications. Bradford Hill (BH) criteria have been widely used to establish causality between an environmental agent and risk of disease or disability, but have not previously been used to evaluate the relationship between IWTs and AHEs. The objective was to apply the BH criteria to evaluate the relationship between IWTs and AHEs.

The nine criteria include the strength of the association, consistency, specificity, temporal sequence, biological gradient, plausibility, coherence, experimental evidence, and analogous evidence. These nine criteria have been applied to IWT exposure and reported AHEs using peer‑reviewed and other published literature that describes clinical, animal, and laboratory studies, testimony and reported experiences, and internet sources. Applying the BH criteria to the IWT‑related clinical, biological, and experimental data demonstrates that the exposure to IWTs is associated with an increased risk of AHEs. 

This analysis concludes that living or working near IWTs can result in AHEs in both people and animals. Our findings provide compelling evidence that the risk of AHEs should be considered before the approval of wind energy projects and during the assessment of setback distances of proposed and operational projects.

CONCLUSION

Incontrovertible proof of causation has tended to be an elusive goal. The debate of determining causality associated with placing IWTs near family homes is similar to past controversies around the debate of causality from the use of tobacco products and from worker exposures to asbestos and coal. The “best available evidence” is the current standard, and it is our contention that the Bradford Hill criteria are that standard.

Based on our analysis of clinical, biological, and experimental evidence and its concordance with the nine BH criteria, we conclude that there is a high probability that emissions from IWTs, including infrasound and LFN, result in serious harm to health in susceptible individuals living and/or working in their proximity. These effects can be attributed to IWT‑related events such as recurring sleep disturbance, anxiety and stress, and likely others. 

With the growing weight of evidence  indicating this causation and the rapid proliferation of IWT installations globally, preventative actions should be taken, and policies implemented that are more cautiously protective of public health, safety, and welfare rather than wait for absolute certainty. More stringent regulation is needed to recognize, monitor, analyze, and document effects on the health of local residents and animals. Of concern is the lack of determination of the safe exposure cumulative dose of noise, including LFN and infrasound, for adults, the elderly, and particularly for fetuses and young children. There are no evidence‑based guidelines for setbacks of IWT; rather regulations have a wide variance across jurisdictions.

The concern is compounded by the lack of centralized vigilance monitoring for those who have constant, long‑term exposure while living in their homes. Our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a pressing need for risk assessment before deployment of IWT into rural community settings that consider more effective and precautionary setback distances. A margin of safety sufficient to prevent pathogenic LFN from being detected by the human vestibular system is paramount before proceeding with political or economic policies. 

As written by Hill: “All scientific work is incomplete— whether it be observations or experimental. All scientific work is liable to be upset or modified by advancing knowledge. That does not confer upon us a freedom to ignore the knowledge we already have, or to postpone the action that it appears to demand at a given time.”[2]

The post Industrial Wind Turbines: Negative Health Effects (more evidence) appeared first on Master Resource.

via Master Resource

https://ift.tt/3tNdnsK

January 19, 2022 at 01:06AM

Furious Fishermen Take On Offshore Wind Industry Wrecking Atlantic Fishing Grounds

The offshore wind ‘industry’ has been given a lesson by Atlantic fishermen: don’t mess with another man’s livelihood. Which is precisely what’s been happening up and down the Atlantic coast for years now.

An Italian owned outfit, US Wind has been infuriating local fishermen for years. In one of its recent outrages, its survey ship managed to destroy one local fishermen’s gear, despite his efforts to intervene.

Not only did Jimmy Hahn lose his precious pots, ripped up by US Wind’s survey vessel, the fact that a quarter of them were destroyed or damaged meant that he lost the opportunity to fish and earn income.

Hahn’s experience is hardly unique, with at least a dozen other local fishermen suffering the same type of treatment from US Wind.

Met with the usual run of lies and obfuscation, Hahn and his equally furious compatriots decided to enlist the support of their local Congressman, Andy Harris and Senator, Mary Beth Carozza to help save their fishing grounds and livelihoods.

Standoff at sea sours fishermen, US Wind relations
Delmarva Now
Kristian Jaime
12 November 2021

After an on-the-water standoff between commercial fisherman Jimmy Hahn and a US Wind survey boat, Rep. Andy Harris met with area fisherman to discuss encroachment into fishing areas.

The closed meeting Wednesday, also attended by state Sen. Mary Beth Carozza, R-38-Worcester, included more than 12 fishermen primarily from Ocean City who discussed survey ships damaging potentially lucrative fishing pots in allowed fishing areas.

“On Nov. 1 at approximately 3 p.m., we were on our way to set more conch pots and I noticed a US Wind survey boat was tearing through my gear,” Hahn said. “I contacted them on a radio channel, as well as our fishing liaison from US Wind, and we had a conversation for 30 minutes and they would not stop going through my gear.”

What followed was Hahn placing his ship between his pots and the much larger boat. Eventually, the survey ship begged off.

“US Wind sent me an email on Oct. 22 stating I was allowed to fish in an area from the beach to 7.5 miles offshore. They should honor what they say,” Hahn said. “I talked to them numerous times and their fishing liaison, and they agreed to pay for the cost of the gear, but I want to be paid for what the pot would have earned for the year.”

For fishermen like Hahn, time is of the essence when his season lasts only three months.

According to Hahn, a quarter of his usual gear is now unusable following the incident.

“If these wind mills are allowed to be placed out here, we’re out of business. You’ll no longer see any fresh seafood coming into Ocean City,” Hahn said. “This is not a done deal because US Wind doesn’t have all its permits, and Rep. Harris can get the word out that (US Wind) isn’t doing what it’s supposed to be doing.”

Fishermen feel “railroaded”
According to Hahn, he feels wind energy companies have not been forthcoming with the public when it comes to how fishermen are treated and the impact on the industry.

Derrick Hoi, another fisherman from Ocean City echoed Hahn’s sentiment noting ongoing surveys are making it impossible to fish, and thus, earn a living.

“Right now, the wind energy companies aren’t allowing us to work because they’re surveying and dredging all our gear up,” Hoi said.

“It means a great deal having Rep. Harris listen,” he said. “You have to have someone to speak up. We’re just getting railroaded and we don’t have any say at all.”

Hoi noted events like the one Nov. 1 were inevitable if the local seafood industry is continually halted.

According to Hoi, fishermen who have fished those waters for a number of years and have legally purchased licenses and permits are dealing with a lack of consideration by companies like US Wind.

“The government has sold us out,” Hoi said.

Vince Cannuli, a fisherman in the for-hire and recreational sector, works in Ocean City and says it is no longer just commercial fishing being impacted by potential expansion of wind farms.

“The viewshed, the recreational anglers, for-hire anglers and commercial fisheries are all being impacted by this wind farm plan,” Cannuli said. “The federal government has leased our recreational and livelihood to corporation called US Wind, but is a subsidiary of an Italian corporation.”

Currently, US Wind has permits to move forward with its surveying projects in and around the lease area approved by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. They have submitted to the federal government an application for their construction and application plan and are updating that.

Following the submittal, the application undoes a sufficiency review and, if approved, US Wind would receive a notice of intent to move forward with an Environmental Impact Statement.

That begins a two-year process under the National Environmental Policy Act. After approval of that, construction can begin.

Cannuli doubted the projected output of large-scale areas of turbines given delays in construction of green-lit projects off the coast of Maryland and Delaware. Some of those delays have been attributed to pandemic-based causes, according to wind energy companies.

He added such large structures (some over 800 feet tall) would also create navigational hazards.

“There’s animals that live in the area where they’re going to put a 40-foot in diameter piling 200 feet into the ground,” Cannuli said. “They’re conchs, scallops, clams and crabs that can’t move to get out of the way of these operations. They’ll be doing this without prejudice.”

Cannuli characterized the “decadelong” conversation with US Wind as little more than promises on how successful the plans will be, with few actual developments.

Andy Harris on wind farms
Harris, a stalwart opponent of large-scale wind farms off the coast of Maryland, continued to decry the push by the Maryland Public Service Commission asking for bids to distribute 1,200 offshore megawatt credits.

“Unfortunately this is not the first time US Wind has not negotiated in good faith,” said Harris, a Republican who represents District 1. “They promised the windmills were going to be shorter and at least 17 miles off shore, now, they’ll be much taller and 13 miles off shore. They’re not willing to talk to Ocean City — and this is what we thought was going to happen from the start.”

Harris added the state PSC should revisit slated wind projects as “they aren’t viable without the state subsidy” even if they have a federal lease on the land.

Plans by US Wind include MarWin, which represents only a fraction of the potential power production as the total lease area of 80,000 acres has the capacity to create 1,500 megawatts [when the wind is blowing at a constant 7-14m/s and nothing at all when it stops for hours and days on end].

“Other issues that come up are the horseshoe crabs and their importance to the pharmaceutical industry in testing intravenous drugs and these projects disrupt that,” Harris said. “We want to hear what the problem is, how US Wind has not addressed their concerns. They may be willing to not use this survey boat, but the fact they hired one that didn’t respect commercial fishermen is a very bad sign.”

Harris said he felt US Wind is taking advantage of the fact that such leases were sped up under the current presidential administration.

Subsidies, Harris argued, come from higher rates paid by the public. Lack of proper oversight for projects such as these is an affront to taxpayers.

“The General Assembly could provide proper oversight, but I’m not sure if they’re willing to do it. It really falls to the state PSC,” Harris said.
Delmarva Now

via STOP THESE THINGS

https://ift.tt/3IyBMH1

January 19, 2022 at 12:37AM

Guardian: BoJo’s Political Weakness Endangers Climate Action

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

UK PM Boris “Lockdown Party” Johnson’s deteriorating political fortunes are worrying climate activists, who are concerned his successor might be more worried about trimming household bills than hitting net zero.

Johnson’s political weakness leaves climate agenda at risk, say campaigners

Analysts fear government’s commitment to net zero is facing most severe test yet as PM comes under increasing pressure

Fiona Harvey
Environment correspondent
Wed 12 Jan 2022 05.08 AEDT

The government’s climate agenda is under threat as Boris Johnson’s popularity slumps, according to green campaigners who work closely with the Conservative party.

As the prime minister faces further lockdown party allegations, and angry Conservative MPs seek answers over energy price rises and the cost of living crisis, analysts fear the government’s commitment to net zero is facing its most severe test yet.

Tom Burke, a co-founder of the E3G green thinktank and a veteran government adviser, said: “Johnson has been the standard bearer for net zero, and lots of people were happy about that. There is now a sustained assault from the right on net zero. They see the prime minister’s political weakness, and they see net zero as a flank on which to attack him.”

Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, is meeting backbench Tory MPs this week to calm fears that the squeeze on incomes caused by rising inflation and soaring gas prices will turn away voters, particularly in “red wall” seats in the north of England. He is under pressure from vocal quarters to abandon green measures such as carbon levies, which play a small role in energy bills.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jan/11/boris-johnson-climate-action-net-zero-conservative-party

In his frantic struggle to survive, Boris Johnson has put his weight behind populist measures like eliminating the mandatory BBC license fee, which would in itself be a major blow against climate activism, by exposing the BBC to consumer choice.

I think this political farce is going to become a lot funnier before Boris Johnson loses his job. I look forward to writing about all the costly green initiatives BoJo unhesitatingly dumps overboard, in a frantic but futile effort to save his own skin.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/3Ac9QWc

January 19, 2022 at 12:10AM