The wind industry has worked very hard to cover up sleep deprivation and other adverse health effects caused by turbine-generated low-frequency noise and infrasound. It started with the woefully inadequate, indeed, utterly irrelevant noise standards written by the wind industry; and the institutional corruption that:

a) allowed those standards to become the “benchmarks” in the first place; and

b) sees government authorities with a responsibility to protect public health, not only sitting on their hands, but barracking in favour of the wind industry, at the expense of the very people these planning and public health agencies and authorities are paid handsomely to protect.

Back in February 2015, STT set out a chronology (linked here) of what the wind industry and its pet acoustic consultants knew (and when they knew it); what the wind industry did in response to that knowledge; and how the wind industry and its parasites foot tooth and nail to ensure that that knowledge has no impact on its freedom to ride roughshod over the human rights, health and well-being of people living next door to industrial wind turbines.

The chronology is set out as a timeline, which can be accessed by clicking on this link here or the image below.

Almost a decade on, and the wind industry’s attitude and approach to the harm it causes hasn’t changed a bit. However, the ability of its victims to define and describe that harm continues to improve and the evidence of the (obvious) cause, nature and extent of that harm continues to mount, as Robert Bradley Jr details below.

Industrial Wind vs. the Environment (ILFN issues in debate)
Master Resource
Robert Bradley Jr.
9 April 2024

“Inner organs are sensitive for sound and vibration. The current state of knowledge on mechano-transduction together with known oscillatory and oxidative stress effects, point in the direction of our hypothesis and should be reason for urgent precautionary actions and further research.”

It is a very technical subject–but certainly one for deep ecologists that see humankind being a cancer to optimal, fragile Nature. Industrial wind turbines, huge and disruptive in the open space, are certainly man-made and subject to the guilty-until-proven-innocent doctrine of the “precautionary principle.”

Infrasound and low-frequency noise (ILFN) is an important issue that wind apologists do not want to discuss or debate. MasterResource posts by Stephen Cooper and others over many years have made a case that “what you cannot hear can hurt you.” As one critic put it:

More than just audible sound, grinding, whomping, blade pass whooshes, an ever-present hum, industrial wind turbines have a silent, below audible impact. It is not like a day contamination/harm at work where people can go home at night for relief. With industrial wind projects literally engulfing homes and rural areas, there is little or no escape.

———————

The ILFN debate continues. In the June 2023 issue of Journal of Biosciences and Medicines (Vol. 11; No. 6), “Impairment of the Endothelium and Disorder of Microcirculation in Humans and Animals Exposed to Infrasound due to Irregular Mechano-Transduction,” Ursula Maria Bellut-Staeck presented an important hypothesis for the mainstream to debate (not ignore). The Abstract and Conclusion follow.

Abstract
The microcirculation of mammals is an autoregulated and complex synchronised system according to the current demand for nutrients and oxygen. The undisturbed course of vital functions such as of growth, blood pressure regulation, inflammatory sequence and embryogenesis is bound to endothelial integrity. The sensible vasomotion is particularly dependent on it.

Mechano-transduction signalling networks play a critical role in vital cellular processes and are the decisive physiological mechanism for an adequate NO-release, main responsible for the autoregulation of vessels. Disturbed endothelial integrity, originating, e.g., from chronic oxidative stress and/or mechanic (oscillatory) stress, leads to disturbance of vasomotion as well as a disequilibrium of redox systems, recognized as main cause for the development of chronic inflammation diseases such as atherosclerosis and corresponding secondary illnesses, possibly cancer.

The endothelial cytoskeleton, which corresponds to a viscoelastic “tensegrity model”, offers the possibility for mechano-transduction via its special construction. The rapidly growing knowledge about mechanical forces in cellular sensing and regulation of the last years (that culminated in the Nobel Prize award for the decoding of pressure/vibration sensing ion channels), led us to the following hypothesis: The extern stressor “Noise” produces under certain conditions an oscillatory stress field in the physiologically laminar flow bed of capillaries, which is able to lead to irregular mechano-transductions. Findings provide a strict dependence on frequency in mechano-transduction with determination of thresholds for a 1:1 transmission.

The knowledge, recently gained on endothelial mechano-transduction, sheds a new light on the importance of low frequencies. This could indicate the long-sought pathophysiological way in which infrasound can exert a stressor effect at the cellular level. Noise-exposed citizens, who live near infrastructures such as a biogas installation, heat pumps, block-type thermal power stations and bigger industrial wind turbines (IWT’s), show worldwide mainly a symptomatology associated with microcirculatory disorder. Conceivable are also effects on insects or fishes, since the piezo-channels are recognised as conserved structures of all multicellular organism.

An experimental design is proposed to demonstrate the direct pathological influence of infrasound of defined strength, frequency, effect/time profile and duration on the sensitive vasomotion.

Conclusions
For the first time, the symptomatology of chronically infrasound exposed humans and animals can be classified pathophysiologically in a coherent hypothesis. This was made possible by the progress in knowledge of endothelial mechano-transduction, essential as vascular function of vital character in response to mechanical forces. Crucial cellular processes such as growth, differentiation, migration, angiogenesis, redox homeostasis and inflammation, are simultaneously dependent on mechanical forces and the integrity of the endothelium.

Normally, the flow in the mammalian microcirculation is laminar and not variable. This is achieved by the upstream connection of the resistance vessels in the arterioles. Persistent changes in shear stress patterns, particularly oscillatory flow, have been associated with decreased bioavailability of NO, an increase in reactive oxygen species (ROS), higher lipoprotein oxidation rates, increased endothelial apoptosis, pro-atherogenicity, chronic inflammation and possible development of cancer.

We have positive evidence for our hypothesis that a chronically acting oscillating stressor with certain conditions in frequency, time/effect profile, sound pressure and duration might induce an oscillatory stress field and therefore trigger a stress reaction on the cellular level. With the crucial basics of mechano-transduction, there is now a strong evidence with obvious indicators for a possible interaction of infrasound, especially with deep frequencies and impulsive character, as have, e.g., IWT’s or heat pumps. The elucidation for the strong dependency on mechano-transduction from the frequency of “Noise” and the identification of actin filaments and microtubules as “low-pass filters”, support our hypothesis.

In this way, the propagation of sound wave in the viscoelastic organism could become a decodable information. Regeneration, as would occur with a one-time or infrequent exposure, could not take place with chronic impact. Initially functional disturbances of the orchestrated vasomotor system, respectively of sensible vasomotion,can be expected,with longer exposure fixed anatomically recognisable pathological damages in endothelial integrity. Important in this context are the structural changes that tend to be self-reinforcing, as described in the example of remodelling of the heart.

By probably elucidating the pathophysiological pathway of how infrasound/IFLN could lead to the main health disorders, it will be possible to make steps forward in defining safe distances for living or working with emitting technical installations. Many scientific questions remain to be answered, but there is sufficient evidence to suggest that, as precautionary measurements, further technologies, involving very low frequencies and/or impulsive emissions with potential impact on living organisms, should be limited or better avoided until all issues are scientifically resolved. The possible effects on insects, which have not been clarified yet, could be of great importance, e.g., for the biodiversity and for co-affection of pollinators and thus nutrition.

The decoding of the PIEZO-1-channels should have already alerted public to the potential risks. Inner organs are sensitive for sound and vibration. The current state of knowledge on mechano-transduction together with known oscillatory and oxidative stress effects, point in the direction of our hypothesis and should be reason for urgent precautionary actions and further research.

Final Comment
So will “ExxonKnew” be replaced by “Industrial Wind Knew” in future litigation? When did the issue of infrasound and low-frequency noise first emerge, and did the trade groups in the U.S. and abroad take note and investigate the issue? The future of dilute, intermittent, inefficient, land-intensive, noise-intensive industrial wind power is part of Earth in the Balance.
Master Resource

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

It’s worth taking a closer look at daily rainfall in Oxford, as it has such a long database, back to 1827. It tells us a lot about the weather in recent years, things that the Met Office want to hide from us.

Although we keep being told by the Met Office that our weather has been so wet in recent years because a “a warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture”, the principal factor is, and always has been, the number of days when it rains. In other words a meteorological phenomenon, not a climatic one.

The general definition of a rainday is when rainfall exceeds 1mm. The chart below plots these at Oxford. Data is from KNMI:

https://climexp.knmi.nl/data/pgdcnUK000056225.dat

Last year was 5th wettest and also featured high in the number of raindays. The years 2000, 2012 and 2014 also feature highly, as well as earlier ones such as 1872, 1916, 1927, 1951, 1958 and 1960.

Some periods have plenty of raindays, others much less. But there is no apparent trend in either direction.

But we can also analyse the average rainfall intensity, that is rainfall per rainday:

Last year had one of the highest intensities, in large part because spring and early summer was so dry. These are the times of year when daily rainfall is low, with mainly showery weather, so the overall average is bound to be exaggerated. But 2023 was by no means unusual, as there have been other years with similar rainfall intensity, such as 1915, 1949 and 1960.

More notable though is the occurrence of those years in the 1830s, when rainfall was clearly much more intense. Hardly evidence for the Met Office’s theory!

All of this is, of course, weather. I defy anybody to find a pattern or trend towards rainfall becoming more intense in Oxford in the above chart.

Again the overall trend suggests that rainfall intensity has been declining over the period of record.

Maybe the Met Office would like to explain.

From CFACT

By Gabriella Hoffman

America’s public lands should be conserved and remain open to the public for shared uses.

Although most public lands lie west of the Mississippi River, there are several sites here in the Eastern U.S. managed by the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service. The Biden administration, however, is targeting millions of acres for permanent protection in the name of “conservation” to bolster its America the Beautiful (or 30-by-30) initiative–a dangerous rewilding plan masquerading as conservation.

Should the Biden administration get its way, two places — Bears Ears National Monument in southeastern Utah and Big Cypress National Preserve in South Florida – will see areas closed off to most users going forward.

Bears Ears National Monument

The Bears Ears National Monument saga continues with the new Draft Management plan unveiled on March 14th, 2024. In December 2016, former President Obama created the 1.35 million acre national monument before leaving office and without consulting Utahns. During the Trump administration, former Interior Secretary and now Congressman Ryan Zinke announced a national monument review of 27 sites, including Bears Ears, citing overreach by the previous administration. It resulted in the shrinking–not elimination–of the monument down to about 200,000 acres. Then President Biden restored the monument to its original size in an October 2021 proclamation, disregarding stakeholder input again.

The nearly 700-page Draft Management Plan contains five plans. The White House favors Alternative Plan E, the most extreme plan of the five. Plan E places a strong emphasis on indigenous knowledge (IK), noting, “This alternative is meant to emphasize resource protection and the use of Traditional Indigenous Knowledge and perspectives on the stewardship of the Bears Ears landscape. This includes consideration of natural processes and seasonal cycles in the management of BENM and collaboration with Tribal Nations to incorporate those considerations into BENM day-to-day management.” Indigenous knowledge is extremely subjective and not scientific because it generally favors progressive notions. But that isn’t stopping the Biden administration from implementing it across all federal agencies.

Equally concerning with Plan E is the proposal to restrict multiple uses across these lands managed by both the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. Recreational shooting would be prohibited outright throughout the entire area. Grazing will be barred in 170,000 of 1.36M acres, while 570,000 acres would be off-limits to vehicles, and 795,000 acres would be designated as “OHV limited areas.” This isn’t the wise use of natural resources; it’s radical preservation.

Large national monument designations are questionable under Section II of the Antiquities Act of 1906, which says presidents can only protect objects of scientific, cultural, or historical significance “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” The nearly 1.4 million acres comprising Bears Ears today hardly fit the definition of “smallest area compatible.” That’s why Congress must clarify presidential powers and prevent future abuses like this from occurring again. Reforms are long overdue to make the monument designation process democratic and reduce the influence of radical preservationist groups.

Big Cypress National Preserve

In South Florida, a portion of the 720,000 acres comprising Big Cypress National Preserve could soon be declared a wilderness area.

Wilderness areas boast the highest degree of protection, are off-limits, and quite difficult to traverse. Under the Wilderness Act of 1964, Congress created a National Wilderness Preservation System that, today, manages 800 areas to be “administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and to provide for the protection of these areas…”

Native American tribes, hunters, and other recreationists relayed their concerns about the wilderness designation to the Miami Herald, arguing the designation, if approved, would restrict access to scientific inquiries, air boating, hunting, and vehicles. A Native Organizers Alliance Action Fund petition also warned closing off Big Cypress like this would restrict “Tribal citizens’ right to move freely about their homeland” and fail to “accommodate Tribal rights to permanent residence in those spaces.”

These stakeholder concerns prompted Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rick Scott (R-FL) to express their dismay to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland.

“Big Cypress is a cherished natural resource, and its proper management is crucial to preserving its ecological integrity while maintaining access opportunities for the public,” the Florida senators wrote to Haaland. “We are deeply concerned about the potential hindrance of natural resource management, especially regarding prescribed fire, invasive species control, and the maintenance of native fish and wildlife habitats.”

The letter added, “In light of these concerns, we respectfully request that you do not move forward with any proposed wilderness designation that will hinder the proper management of public access and natural resources within the Big Cypress National Preserve.”

Public lands are for all Americans to enjoy and cherish, not just the Biden administration’s preferred environmental buddies. This isn’t conservation; it’s a land grab.

This article originally appeared in Town Hall