Communist China Drug Manufacturing Dominance Threatens Global Supply Chain of Medicine

Communist China Drug Manufacturing Dominance Threatens Global Supply Chain of Medicine

From China hints at denying Americans life-saving coronavirus drugs:

Now that the number of new people infected with the coronavirus in China is slowing down, the country’s Communist Party is ratcheting up threats against the West, with a particularly nasty warning about access to life-saving drugs aimed at the United States.

In an article in Xinhua, the state-run media agency that’s largely considered the mouthpiece of the party, Beijing bragged about its handling of COVID-19, a virus that originated in the city of Wuhan and has spread quickly around the world, killing nearly 5,000 people and infecting thousands more. The article also claimed that China could impose pharmaceutical export controls which would plunge America into “the mighty sea of coronavirus.”

From an article in Xinhua, the state-run media agency [1]:

“If China retaliates against the United States at this time, in addition to announcing a travel ban on the United States, it will also announce strategic control over medical products and ban exports to the United States. Then the United States will be caught in the ocean of new corona viruses.

“Also according to the US CDC officials, most of the drugs in the United States are imported…If China banned exports, the United States will fall into the hell of a new coronavirus pneumonia epidemic.”

“We should say righteously that the US owes China an apology, the world owes China a ‘thank you’.”

From Pentagon Sees Security Threat in China’s Drug-Supply Dominance:

The Trump administration sees the increasing use of Chinese-made active ingredients in drugs taken by U.S. troops and civilians as a national security risk.

China has become the world’s largest supplier of active pharmaceutical ingredients, or API, providing key components to drugmakers worldwide. But a yearlong recall of tainted heart drugs taken by millions of Americans is prompting U.S. national security officials to ask whether China’s growing role in the pharmaceutical supply chain could pose a threat to the health of military personnel.

“The national security risks of increased Chinese dominance of the global API market cannot be overstated,” Christopher Priest, the acting deputy assistant director for health care operations and Tricare for the Defense Health Agency, told a U.S.-China advisory panel last week in Washington.

The Defense Health Agency manages much of the health care of military members, including prescription drugs.

[…]

Larry Wortzel, a member of the U.S.-China commission and a military retiree, said four of his blood-pressure medications were recalled in three months. Wortzel’s pills, versions of a drug called valsartan, were manufactured in India but had active ingredients from China.

“They were contaminated with rocket fuel,” Wortzel said. “I imagine active people have the same problem. This affects the readiness of our troops.”

From China’s grip on pharmaceutical drugs is a national security issue:

There is no single accounting of the percentage of active ingredients in U.S. drugs that are manufactured in China, but it’s significant and growing. The Food and Drug Administration has said approximately 80 percent of active-ingredient manufacturers are located outside the United States, and for some key drugs, China is the only supplier. For instance, China produces the ingredients found in almost every antibiotic and blood pressure medicine and hundreds of other drugs. Thus, China has a virtual monopoly on the ingredients required to manufacture critical medicines.

 

***

Recommended Reading:

China Rx: Exposing The Risks of America’s Dependence on China for Medicine – by Rosemary Gibson and Janardan Prasad Singh
Millions of Americans are taking prescription drugs made in China and don’t know it–and pharmaceutical companies are not eager to tell them.

Several decades ago, penicillin, vitamin C, and many other prescription and over-the-counter products were manufactured in the United States. But with the rise of globalization, antibiotics, antidepressants, birth control pills, blood pressure medicines, cancer drugs, among many others are made in China and sold in the United States. China’s biggest impact on the US drug supply is making essential ingredients for thousands of medicines found in American homes and used in hospital intensive care units and operating rooms. The authors convincingly argue that there are at least two major problems with this scenario. First, it is inherently risky for the United States to become dependent on any one country as a source for vital medicines, especially given the uncertainties of geopolitics. For example, if an altercation in the South China Sea causes military personnel to be wounded, doctors may rely upon medicines with essential ingredients made by the adversary. Second, lapses in safety standards and quality control in Chinese manufacturing are a risk. Citing the concerns of FDA officials and insiders within the pharmaceutical industry, the authors document incidents of illness and death caused by contaminated medications that prompted reform. This probing book examines the implications of our reliance on China on the quality and availability of vital medicines.

 

Notes.

[1] Here is the straight up automated Chinese to English google translation of the Xinhua article (the translation has errors as it is not human proofed — if anyone has a human proofed translation they can share that would be awesome!) :

Righteous, The World Should Thank China
2020-03-04 10:45:32 Source: Huang Sheng

Today, another state in the United States has declared a state of emergency, and the state of Florida in the United States has declared a state of public health emergency. The governor’s office of Florida has announced that the state has found two confirmed cases of new coronary pneumonia and need to wait for further confirmation from the US Centers for Disease Control. The two are being treated in isolation. This is the third state in the United States to declare a state of emergency after California and Washington states. It can be seen that the new crown pneumonia epidemic has shown signs of sparking fire in the United States, and after the first case of new crown pneumonia deaths was announced in the United States yesterday, today There has been one death from neocoronary pneumonia, and a total of two deaths have occurred. However, it is ridiculous that the United States now needs to confirm a new case of new pneumonia in the United States and it needs final review by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is why Florida is very dissatisfied with this. It was declared a state of emergency.

Obviously, the true outbreak of new coronary pneumonia in the United States has been seriously underestimated. The reason is that all confirmed cases must be finally identified by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has made the United States’ data always suspicion worldwide.

As the U.S. crown pneumonia epidemic is getting more and more serious, Trump has also kept coming out to let the Americans not panic, but the actual situation is that Trump is also very anxious. The U.S. vice president responsible for the prevention and control of the new crown pneumonia epidemic is even more Was so nervous, praying for the new crown pneumonia epidemic to pass as soon as possible in the White House office.

At this time, Trump made a big change and began to praise China. At a press conference the day before yesterday, an American reporter asked Trump: “If the new crown pneumonia outbreak in the United States worsens, will the US government consider taking similar measures to China?”

Trump immediately said that he would take some Chinese measures to control the new crown pneumonia, and said that China has made great progress now. We can see that Starbucks has reopened in China, and Apple has fully resumed production in China. China ’s New crown pneumonia prevention and control has indeed made great progress.

Obviously, Trump’s remarks came from the bottom of his heart, and it is also because the role has now changed. China has made significant progress in controlling the new crown pneumonia, but the United States is in a torrential storm. More and more states An emergency was declared, medical supplies in the United States were extremely scarce, and an out-of-control epidemic of new pneumonia was almost inevitable.

The U.S. stock market has plummeted continuously, with a drop of more than 12% in just one week. It has caught up with the big crash during the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis. This makes Trump feel like a pinch. Once the U.S. stock market continues to plummet, it will not only affect the U.S. economy but also affect Lampe ’s president is re-elected, and once the new crown pneumonia epidemic continues, Trump ’s throne will face increasing challenges.

If at this time China announced that it would restrict the entry of Americans or people who have been to the United States, and that it would ban the travel of Chinese to the United States, it would actually impose a travel ban on the United States. It plummeted, but China did not.

And everyone should know that when the new crown pneumonia epidemic broke out in Wuhan, Hubei, China, Trump ’s US government first announced the return of Americans from Wuhan, China, causing other countries to follow up, making China very passive at the time.

Not only that, the U.S. government also announced that restricting the entry of Chinese and foreigners who have visited China into the U.S. is actually an indirect declaration of a travel ban on China, which isolates other countries in the world from China, and has a great economic impact on China. of.

These practices in the United States are very unkind. They can be described as falling into the ground and killing people while they are ill. Now China’s new crown pneumonia epidemic has been controlled. Except for Wuhan, new confirmed cases have been added in single digits. But it’s getting worse.

If China retaliates against the United States at this time, in addition to announcing a travel ban on the United States, it will also announce strategic control over medical products and ban exports to the United States. Then the United States will be caught in the ocean of new crown viruses.

According to the US CDC officials, most masks in the United States are made in China and imported from China. If China bans the export of masks to the United States, the United States will fall into the mask shortage, and the most basic measures to prevent the new crown virus are Can’t do it.

Also according to the US CDC officials, most of the drugs in the United States are imported, and some drugs are imported from Europe. However, Europe also places the production base of these drugs in China, so more than 90% of the US imported drugs are Related to China. The implication is that at this time, as long as China announces that its drugs are as domestic as possible and banned exports, the United States will fall into the hell of the new crown pneumonia epidemic.

However, there is a great love in the world. The Chinese people and the Chinese government have never done so. They have not insulted the United States, nor have they banned the export of masks and medicines to the United States. As China ’s new crown pneumonia epidemic is gradually controlled, China ’s ability to export masks and medicines Will be greatly enhanced, and the United States is one of the demand side. US government officials, such as Secretary of Commerce Rose, US Secretary of State Pompeo, and US White House Economic Adviser Navarro, have publicly gloated over China’s new crown pneumonia epidemic, saying that the outbreak of the new crown pneumonia epidemic in China is good for the United States and will help companies return to the United States. It also called on companies around the world to consider the risks of China’s supply chain. Even the infamous “Wall Street Journal” published an infamous article “China is a real patient in Asia”, and the “New York Times” in the United States also published a document condemning the closure of Wuhan in China as a violation of human rights. The American culture of falling rocks is really shameless. Today, Feng Shui is taking turns, and the United States has become a victim of the new crown pneumonia epidemic. At this time, China has not fallen into rocks and has not condemned the United States. At this time, the United States should be more mistakes for the past. Apologize to China for your actions.

During this time, a voice deliberately speculated that China owes the world an apology, which is very ridiculous. In order to fight the new crown pneumonia epidemic, China has made huge sacrifices, paid huge economic costs, and cut off the new crown virus. The route of transmission. No country has made such a great sacrifice and effort in this new crown pneumonia epidemic.

Moreover, according to the research of Academician Zhong Nanshan, although the new crown pneumonia epidemic broke out in China, the source may not necessarily be in China. Many studies have also pointed out that the origin of the new crown virus may come from other countries. Many confirmed cases of new crown pneumonia in the United States, Italy, Iran and other countries without a history of Asian contact have demonstrated this, so China has no reason to apologize.

Now we should rightfully say that the United States owes China an apology, and the world owes China a gratitude. Without China ’s huge sacrifice and dedication, it would not be possible to win a precious time window for the world to fight against the new crown pneumonia epidemic. The hard-to-find new crown pneumonia epidemic has been blocked for a long time, it is really shocking, crying ghosts!

Editor-in-chief: Zhang Chaohua

 

Free Video Conferencing: All K-12 Schools & Others

The Zoom Corporation is offering free video conferencing tools for schools with no restrictions.

This is the future of education. Thank you, Capitalism!

  • Zoom: https://zoom.us/docs/en-us/covid19.html free for K-12 schools in US, Belgium, Czech Republic, Greece, Norway, Portugal, and Switzerland, UAE, Austria, Denmark, France, Ireland, Poland, Romania, South Korea
  • 8×8: https://8×8.vc/ – free video conferencing for everyone, no account required, webrtc
  • Cisco WebEx: https://www.webex.com/go-covid19.html Unlimited usage (no time restrictions), up to 100 participants, VoIp and toll dial-in
  • GlobalMeet Collaboration Basic plan available for free. It’s not a COVID-19 special, it’s free and open to everyone like Zoom is. https://www.pgi.com/sign-up/
  • Google Hangouts: https://gsuite.google.com/products/meet Hangouts Meet video conferencing available to anyone for free until July 1,
  • Lifesize: https://pages.get.lifesize.com/remote-work-with-lifesize/ For the next 6 months, they’re offering their premium enterprise-grade video conferencing solution everywhere you need it free of charge. This offer includes Unlimited hosts – Every employee has the ability to work remotely, Unlimited meetings – Come together as frequently as needed, and Unlimited call duration – Talk for as long as it takes to get the job done.
  • LogMeIn: https://support.logmeininc.com/coronavirus – free for healthcare providers, educational institutions, municipalities, and non-profit organizations
  • Microsoft Teams: 6 months free of e1 license to everyone:
  • RingCentral: free video conferencing (based on Zoom), phones and meeting for healthcare providers, schools (K-12), and non-profit organizations

Thomas Jefferson on “a wall of separation between Church and State”

A Letter to the Danbury Baptists Association by Thomas Jefferson. Emphasis added.

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, and Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.

Th Jefferson

Jan. 1. 1802.

America’s 10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech

From FIRE names America’s 10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech: 2020:

Who are the worst campus censors? The competition is stiff, but today the nonpartisan Foundation for Individual Rights in Education released its annual list of America’s 10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech.

This year’s “worst-of-the-worst” list includes a college that fired a professor for an innocuous joke on social media, another that allowed its student government to flatly reject a student club because of its conservative beliefs, one that unilaterally canceled a faculty-organized lecture, and a college that chose to suspend a librarian for curating a historical display highlighting the university’s own photos of its racist past.

The 10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech: 2020 are, in alphabetical order:

Babson College (Wellesley, Mass.)
Doane University (Crete, Neb.)
Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.)
Jones County Junior College (Ellisville, Miss.)
Long Island University Post (Brookville, N.Y.)
Middlebury College (Middlebury, Vt.)
Portland State University (Portland, Ore.)
Syracuse University (Syracuse, N.Y.)
University of Connecticut (Mansfield, Conn.)
University of Scranton (Scranton, Pa.)

Detailed descriptions of each college’s speech-chilling misdeeds are available on FIRE’s website.

Howard Zinn vs. History

Ronald Rodash reviews Mary Grabar’s Debunking Howard Zinn in Howard Zinn: Fake Historian over at the Law&Liberety blog. Writes Rodash:

Zinn tries to blame organized labor strikes right before and during WW II on labor militancy that could not be contained. Grabar first shows these strikes were limited and of brief duration. She discusses the June 1941 strike of workers at the North American Aviation plant in Inglewood, California and notes that the CPUSA-led union kept other non-strikers from going to work, using threats and actual beatings by union thugs to maintain the strike. President Roosevelt’s decision to send in 2,500 soldiers to restore order and open the factory was greeted with cheers by most of the workers, who wanted the strike ended so that they could return to work. Grabar does not mention that the strike was ordered by the Central Committee of the American Communist Party on Moscow’s orders. Because it took place during the Nazi-Soviet Pact, Stalin wanted to harm war production in the United States. It was not militancy by locals that caused this famous strike, but an order from the Kremlin. For years, pro-Communist writers and historians have blamed the Cold War on America’s desire to dominate Europe and avoid détente with a peaceful Soviet Union. Zinn, Grabar shows, ignored the very real threat the Soviet Union posed to Western Europe, rooted in Stalin’s desire to dominate it as he did the Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe. Zinn was, Grabar aptly puts it, “a propagandist for the Soviet Union’s ‘peaceful intentions.’”

Now available on Amazon: Mary Grabar’s Debunking Howard Zinn

Did Trump Act According to the Constitution in Regards To The Killing of Iran’s Soleimani?

From A Lawless Political Assassination, by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano:

The Constitution provides only two means for the federal government to kill a human being. The first is pursuant to a declaration of war, which only Congress can do. That permits the president to use the military to kill the troops of the government of the country against which war has been declared. Congress has not declared war on Iran. The second way that the Constitution permits federal government killings is pursuant to due process. That means that the person to be killed is lawfully in custody, has been properly charged, lawfully tried and fairly convicted of a capital crime, and the conviction has been upheld on appeal.

[…]

Think about it. If the American president can kill an Iranian government official in Iraq because of fear of what he might do — without a declaration of war or any legal process — can the Chinese president kill a Mexican government official visiting in Texas or an American intelligence agent encouraging revolution in Venezuela for fear of what they might do? This is not a fanciful or academic argument. It not only goes to the fidelity to the rule of law that we require of our leaders in order to maintain personal liberty and limited government, it also goes to our safety. We have laws to prevent wanton killings, lest killers turn on us.

In contrast, Attorney Dershowitz Says Targeting Soleimani Was Constitutional, But Impeachment Is Not:

“I am an expert on the use of targeted killings and a strong supporter of targeted killings of terrorists and ongoing terrorist situations. But it’s not something the president discussed with me. I wrote a piece for The Wall Street Journal yesterday, and I’ve been talking about what I believe is the strong case for the legality. I don’t take a position, particularly on the long-term wisdom of the action. But I think the legality is not even a close question. I think it was more legal, if anything, than the killing of Osama bin Laden, because the Osama bin Laden killing was not preventive. It was vengeance. It was getting even with a massive criminal that was justified, but it was justified on different grounds. The Soleimani case is a much stronger case for preemptive or preventive targeted killing.”

On whether Trump made the right decision by ordering the killing of Soleimani “I think that’s reasonable. People could disagree about that. But I don’t think anybody should conflate the policy arguments with the legal arguments, and many people do that. Something could be illegal and good policy and something could be legal and bad policy.” [Here & Now]

U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman in the WSJ notes that former President Barack Obama ordered drone strikes and “[h]e did so without specific congressional authorization, and without significant Democratic opposition.”

Iran vs Trump

Writes Larry Elder on Iran vs Trump: How Did Trump Become the Villain?:

Of the numerous reasons Trump haters offer for their hatred of the President, the criticism over his withdrawal of the Iran deal is among the most difficult to follow. That these critics blame Donald Trump for Iran’s recent aggressive behavior is even more bizarre.

Iran attacks oil tankers and bombs Saudi Arabian oil facilities and Trump becomes the villain?

On the recent U.S. response to Iran see After Years of Appeasement, America Acts Morally Against Iran by Scott Holleran.

Iranian Americans in San Francisco Celebrate Death of Soleimani

From Iranian Americans rally in SF to celebrate killing of Iranian general – SFChronicle.com:

Wearing red and waving large Iranian flags, demonstrators bid farewell to a man they said is responsible for the bloodshed of thousands of people in the Middle East and during the decades-long oppression of citizens in Iran. Mitra Rahmat, of Cupertino, couldn’t stop dancing as she held a poster with Soleimani’s picture that read, in part, “rot in hell.” Rahmat, who grew up in Tehran, said her best friend was tortured and killed by the Iranian regime at 16 during student demonstrations in 1981. She called Soleimani’s death the “best gift” she has received in 40 years. “I’m celebrating the death of this criminal that killed so many children in Syria, so many children in Iran and Iraq and Afghanistan, Lebanon, you name it,” she said. “We’re so happy that he’s gone, and we know that peace is going to come to the Middle East because he’s not there.”

 

The 1619 Project Is Not History; It Is Conspiracy Theory Against Capitalism

Writes Allen C. Guelzo in Preaching a Conspiracy Theory:

The 1619 Project is not history: it is polemic, born in the imaginations of those whose primary target is capitalism itself and who hope to tarnish capitalism by associating it with slavery. Slavery made cotton profitable; but profitability is not capitalism. Profit-seeking has been around since Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah in the book of Genesis. If profitability were capitalism, then the Soviet Union’s highly profitable sales of natural gas and other commodities would surely make it one of the great success stories of capitalism – which, of course, it was not. Ask any worthwhile Marxist: capitalism is about the creation of class, and especially the bourgeoisie. And one thing the South never developed was a bourgeoisie. Which is why no single American, North or South, before 1861 ever imagined that slavery and capitalism were anything but mortal enemies. The proslavery apologist, George Fitzhugh, frankly declared that slavery was a form, not of capitalism, but feudal socialism; the antislavery president, Abraham Lincoln, explained the war on slavery as a war on behalf of free labor.

 

Why “Critics” Love Rian Johnson’s Knives Out

Post-modern movie critics are celebrating Rian Johnson’s movie Knives Out. They applaud it with the same enthusiasm they did for his previous cinematic failure, The Last Jedi, that “subverted,” that is, spat on, the beloved characters in George Lucas’ Star Wars universe.

They applaud it for the same reason: Johnson’s in-your-face Left-wing dogma.

Writes one adoring reviewer at the Verge [Knives Out review: a great mystery that fumbles its big finish] about the villains in Rian “subvert Star Wars” Johnson’s latest movie:

“The Thrombeys ….believed themselves to be good people because they were nice to her despite all their casual racism and espousement of conservative talking points on immigration ….We want to see [the heroine] prevail over the scheming wealthy white people who callously brush off concerns about the grotesque inhumanity on the US southern border in drawing rooms, who feign principle in opposition to their most egregiously offensive family members but ultimately only maintain their noble beliefs from the comfort of wealth.”

Excuse me, but “conservative talking points on immigration” and  “casual racism”?

See Larry Elder’s Democrats Against Illegal Immigration for a taste of reality.

Sadly for the reviewer, the movie ultimately fails in its central conflict:

“As Knives Out twists its way toward a conclusion, it doubles down on condescension, elevating Marta over the political landscape that would rather demonize her. Trouble is, people like Marta are already demonized by bigger and crueler buffoons than the Thrombeys — and there’s no fortune waiting to save them.”

For that, I suppose we require the forced wealth distribution of “Democratic Socialism.”

“And so, even though Knives Out ultimately brings its mystery to a satisfying conclusion with a culprit named and cuffed, there’s another one that gets away clean: white guilt.”

For this, we will have to wait for Rian Johnson’s next “subversive” political screed posing as entertainment.

Recommended Reading: The Big Lie in Hollywood: The Hollywood Ten Were Not Victims But Villains

 

 

CBS News on YouTube: “Very Little Transparency in Transparency Report”

From CBS News 60 Minutes on 300+ Trump ads taken down by Google, YouTube:

In an interview on 60 Minutes, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki said the controversial Trump/Biden ad does not violate their policy. 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl asked Wojcicki, “Have you taken down any of President Trump’s ads at all?” YouTube’s CEO responded, “There are ads of President Trump that were not approved to run on Google or YouTube.” When pressed for an example, Wojcicki added, “Well, they’re available in our transparency report.”

In response to concerns raised after the 2016 election cycle, Google and YouTube, like Facebook, keep a searchable archive of political ads that have run on the site. 60 Minutes reviewed the archive to learn more about President Trump’s problematic political ads. We found that over 300 video ads were taken down by Google and YouTube, mostly over the summer, for violating company policy. But the archive doesn’t detail what policy was violated. Was it copyright violation? A lie or extreme inaccuracy? Faulty grammar? Bad punctuation? It’s unclear. The ads determined to be offending are not available to be screened. We found very little transparency in the transparency report.

 

Why Che Guevara Is Admired on College Campuses

Why Che Guevara Is Admired on College Campuses

Che Guevara on Executions without Trial

“We executed many people by firing squad without knowing if they were fully guilty. At times, the Revolution cannot stop to conduct much investigation.” — (1962) Quoted by the editor of the RevolucÍon, Carlos Franqui.

Che Guevara Against the Freedom of the Press

“We must eliminate all newspapers; we cannot make a revolution with free press.”

Che Guevara on the “Progressive” Echo Chamber

“My friends are friends only so long as they think as I do politically.”

Che Guevara on Cuban Concentration Camps (Guanahacabibes)

“We send to Guanahacabibes people who have committed crimes against revolutionary morals [i.e., homosexuality, Christianity]…it is hard labor…the working conditions are harsh…”

Che Guevara on Gun Crime

“My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood…I’d like to confess, Papa, at that moment I discovered that I really like killing.” — Letter to his father.

***

Che clearly would fit right in with any College Leftist.

Sources: Victims of Communism

 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the Enlightenment

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the escape from reigious totalitarianism for Europeans:

Four hundred years ago, the Enlightenment cut European culture from its roots of magic, kingship, social hierarchy, and the domination of priests, and regrafted it onto a great strong trunk that supported the equality of each individual, and his right to free opinions and self-rule.

Further Truths About Climate Change

By Andrew Bernstein

In 2017, I published an essay, “The Truth About Climate Change,” showing the evidence that climate periods cycle–and that climate change is natural, on-going, and likely incessant. The Modern Warm Period from the late-19th to the early 21st centuries, is only trivially man-made and not pernicious, but rather, is overwhelmingly natural and fully benign.[i] It is to be neither deplored nor curtailed–but to be celebrated. Now, after further research, I present more evidence supporting these conclusions.  

 

Part One: Endless Climate Predictions Endlessly Wrong

Does anyone remember the great ice age fear of the 1970s? Although during the 20th century the Earth generally warmed slightly, there was a cooling period roughly from 1940 to 1975. It triggered a mini-hysteria in response. For example, on April 16, 1970, the Boston Globe ran a story entitled, “Scientist Predicts a New Ice Age by 21st Century.” James P. Lodge, a scientist at the national center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado claimed that within the first third of the 21st century ice age conditions might prevail on Earth.[ii] Similarly, on July 9, 1971, the Washington Post published a story entitled, “U.S Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming,” in which Dr. S.I. Rasool of NASA predicted possible ice age conditions within the next 50 or 60 years.[iii] Continuing, on January 29, 1974, the British newspaper, The Guardian, ran a story with the sensational headline, “Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast.”[iv]  Time, on June 24, 1974, in its Science section, published an essay entitled, “Another Ice Age?” It fretted that declining temperatures since the 1940s might herald the dawn of a new ice age. Finally, one of many other essays that could be cited to this effect, “The Cooling World,” published by Newsweek on April 28, 1975, worried that declining temperatures of the past few decades might signal a “reversion to the ‘little ice age’ conditions that brought bitter winters” to northern Europe and North America between 1600 and 1900.[v]

It is important to note that many of these media reports cited scientists considered experts at the time. Dr. George Kukla of Columbia University is referenced many times, for example, as are numerous other scientists. A New York Times essay, “International Team of Specialists Find No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend in Northern Hemisphere,” is especially noteworthy. It mentions that with increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, rising temperatures, not falling ones, should be expected. The aforementioned Dr. Kukla said that “the cause of the apparent cooling remained unknown…”[vi]  This New York Times article, claiming that no end to the cooling was in sight, was published on January 5, 1978. By 1979-80, the Earth started slowly warming again. Oops.

It is fascinating that Dr. Kukla (and presumably other scientists who believed that rising atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide should cause warming) did not know the cause of the apparent cooling. For part of the answer shined on them virtually every day: The Sun. But more on the sun-climate connection to come.[vii] So from roughly 1979 until the present day, the Earth gently warms again…as it did in the early years of the 20th century. By the late-1980s, a full-blown hysteria regarding warming, to dwarf the previous one regarding cooling, is underway.

Let’s cite a few examples. An Associated Press story of June 30, 1989, quoted “a senior UN environmental official” to the effect that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth  by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”[viii] Less than a year before this prediction, in September 1988, the Environmental Affairs Director of the Maldives claimed that these Indian Ocean islands could be entirely submerged “within the next 30 years.”[ix]  In March, 2000, Dr. David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) at Britain’s East Anglia University predicted that, in England, winter snows “will become a very rare and exciting event.”[x]  In December, 2008, Al Gore warned that the “North Polar Ice Cap would be completely ice free in five years;” in 2009, Gore amended his prediction to claim that the Arctic would have ice-free summers by 2014.[xi] In July 2013, a report in Britain’s The Guardian quoted scientist,   Peter Wadhams, who claimed that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2015.[xii]  And on it goes….Including the prediction that the Arctic polar bear population would be severely diminished, if not made extinct.

How about a reality check? No nations were wiped off the face of the Earth by 2000, nor by 2019, nor were any close to it–and the Maldives are still above water. By 2018, there were still millions of square kilometers of summertime Arctic Ocean with at least 15 percent sea ice[xiii] and, in 2017, ice increased in parts of Greenland and the Arctic.[xiv] As for snow in England, a severe snowstorm hammered the United Kingdom, including England, in March 2018;[xv] October 2019 saw record cold temperatures across significant swathes of the country;[xvi] and, also in 2019, snow fell across parts of Wales, England, and Scotland during the second weekend of November.[xvii] The polar bears, of course, are flourishing. Due to a ban on hunting, their population has increased from some 5,000 in the 1960s to roughly 22,000 to 30,000 today.[xviii]

Why are the doomsday warming predictions always flagrantly wrong? Why, for thirty years now, are the warnings regarding dangerous consequences of warming never accurate? Why do the hyperbolic warming claims turn out to be as repeatedly mistaken as the earlier hyperbolic cooling ones? Let us approach these questions like intellectual detectives seeking to unravel a mystery, and we’ll find the truth.

 

Part Two: Further Mistaken Predictions

One such truth is that atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide continue to rise but there is no corresponding acceleration in the rate of warming. The computer models deployed by the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predict that as atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide increase, the Earth’s rate of warming should accelerate. The models project that from 1995 to the present, the Earth should have warmed by just under a full degree Celsius (a significant amount in such a short time period). Finally, they predict that the rise in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide occurring since 1880 should have increased Earth’s temperatures by 4.1 degrees Fahrenheit (roughly 2.3 degrees Celsius).

All of these predictions, when compared to real-world measurements, are mistaken. In fact, the rate of warming since 1995 has not increased; rather, the Earth has continued to warm at a gentle rate of 0.096 degrees Celsius per decade, that is, by less than one-tenth of a degree every ten years, the same as it was in 1995.[xix]  A 2017 study in the journal,  Nature Geoscience, acknowledges this truth. “‘We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models,’ said Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at Oxford and one of the authors of the study. ‘We haven’t seen that in the observations.'”[xx]  This truth is known via satellite data, which measures the entire atmosphere, not merely parts of it, and is consequently the most accurate data available.

Further, since the rate of warming is so slow, the Earth since 1995 has not even approximated a one-degree Celsius temperature rise; rather, the satellites show virtually no increase in temperature since the late-1990s.[xxi]  Finally, real-world measurements show that since 1880 global temperatures have risen not by 2.3 degrees Celsius but by merely 1.2 degrees.[xxii]

AGW (anthropogenic or man-made global warming)supporters argue that 2016 was the hottest year on record. Insofar as this claim goes, it is true. But it is not the full truth. The full truth is that 2016 was a major El Nino year with the significant warming that this generates. Not surprisingly, early in 2017, global temperatures plummeted by some 0.6 degrees Celsius.[xxiii] As if all of this weren’t bad enough, it gets worse for the AGW Hypothesis.

 

Part Three: Inconvenient Truths For the AGW Hypothesis 

Climate scientist, Dr. Fred Singer, points out that most of the 20th century warming occurred before 1940…before a significant rise in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide. Then, as a post-War industrial boom pumped substantial amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, the Earth cooled between roughly 1940 and 1975. “Most of the current warming occurred before 1940, before there was much human-generated CO2 in the air. After 1940, temperatures declined until 1975 or so, despite a huge surge in industrial CO2 during that period. These events run counter to the CO2 theory…”[xxiv]  They certainly do. They coincide, however, with variations in emission of solar radiation, as well as with multi-decadal shifts in ocean currents, as will be seen.

Making matters worse, some 95 percent of all carbon dioxide spewed annually into the atmosphere comes from natural, not man-made sources. Given the hysteria over human-caused carbon dioxide emissions, this is an astonishing truth.  Dr. Roy Spencer, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, confirms it. Dr. Spencer holds a Ph.D. in Meteorology from the University of Wisconsin, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, and he–along with his partner, Dr. John Christy–received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites.   He points out: “…natural CO2 emissions are about 20 times what anthropogenic emissions are…(since human emissions are now close to 5% of natural sources and sinks)….we emit twice as much [carbon dioxide] as is needed to explain the atmospheric increase…”[xxv]

So, according to the best estimate of one of our best climate scientists, human beings emit twice as much carbon dioxide as is needed to explain observed atmospheric increases, and nature emits twenty times as much CO2 as we do. Where in hell does all the carbon dioxide go? The IPCC acknowledges that it does not know. We know there are “sinks,” i.e., natural repositories that absorb carbon dioxide. The oceans, for example, contain 50 times as much carbon dioxide as does the atmosphere.[xxvi]  Is that a clue regarding where the “excess” carbon dioxide might go?

Dr. Tom Segalstad thinks it is. Dr. Segalstad is a Norwegian geologist, he has served as head of the Mineralogical-Geological Museum at the University of Oslo, and has accomplished much else besides in his distinguished career.[xxvii]He is a former expert reviewer for the IPCC. “The IPCC,” he asserts, “needs a lesson in geology to avoid making fundamental mistakes…most leading geologists throughout the world, know that the IPCC’s view of Earth processes are implausible if not impossible.”[xxviii]How so? Because the agency holds that man-made carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for 50, 100, or even 200 years, leading thereby to substantial atmospheric accumulations. “This is nonsense,” Dr. Segalstad states. Dozens of real-world studies, conducted by numerous scientists, in varying disciplines, relying on differing methods of measurements, over a period of decades, have established that the shelf life of atmospheric CO2 is five to ten years, perhaps as long as twelve years.[xxix]

“Amazingly, the hypothetical results from climate models have trumped the real-world measurements of carbon dioxide’s longevity in the atmosphere.” The IPCC’s claim that “CO2 lasts decades or centuries [in the atmosphere]  have no such measurements or other physical evidence to support their claims….Neither have they demonstrated that the quite various forms of measurement that support the traditional five-to-ten year view are wrong.

“‘They don’t even try,’ says Prof. Segalstad. ‘They simply dismiss evidence that is, for all intents and purposes, irrefutable. Instead, they substitute their faith, constructing a kind of science fiction or fantasy world in the process.'”[xxx]

What, according to the real-world studies, happens within 5-10 years to CO2 pumped into the atmosphere? The studies show that the oceans have a “near-limitless capacity to absorb CO2.”

Herein lies one reason that the IPCC’s predictions are always wrong, and always overstate–never understate–the warming. AGW advocates consistently over-estimate the duration of CO2 in the atmosphere.

 

Part Four: The Failure of the AGW Hypothesis to Explain Climate Change

The AGW hypothesis cannot explain how or why most 20th century warming occurred before 1940, prior to human emission of large amounts of industrial CO2. The theory does not and cannot explain the mid-20th-century cooling that triggered the mini-hysteria regarding an impending ice age. Worse, it cannot explain why the rate of 21st century warming does not accelerate even as atmospheric levels of CO2 gradually rise. Nor can it explain why the total warming of the entire Modern Warm Period dating back to 1880 is significantly less than the models predict. Finally, it does not explain how the 5 percent of CO2 spewed annually into the atmosphere by humans contributes more decisively to rising CO2 levels than does the 95 percent regurgitated by natural sources.

The AGW Hypothesis has little evidence to support it. The best that might be said for it is this: There is a greenhouse effect, rising levels of atmospheric CO2 will cause a slight warming, human activities contribute marginally to rising CO2 levels–therefore,  human activities might contribute trivially to the observed 20th century warming. But predictions based on this theory are relentlessly, manifestly false.

It is time to point out, as in Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale, that the Emperor has no clothes…or, at best, a few threads. What the AGW Hypothesis does have is a gigantic, noisy fan club. But, as I instruct my Logic students regularly, popularity does not equal truth. The scientific theories opposing such innovative minds as Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin, and Pasteur were widely held, as well. Their popularity among scientists did not make them true. Only evidence in support of an idea does that.

Rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide only trivially explain the Modern Warm Period and explain the mid-20th century cooling not at all. We need to look further and deeper to find the causal factor(s).

 

Part Five: The Sun-Climate Connection

Astrophysicists have identified that the Sun undergoes various cycles in its emission of radiation. To put it simply, at times it gives off greater amounts of energy, at other times lesser. The varying amounts of radiation reaching the surface of the Earth contributes to rising or falling temperatures. Further, diverging amounts of the Sun’s output trigger other natural processes, terrestrial and/or celestial, that in concert drive Earth’s temperatures up or down. One such process, identified by Danish astrophysicist, Henrik Svensmark, is the role of cosmic rays, and the complex relationship between the Sun’s varying output, the amount of cosmic rays reaching Earth’s atmosphere, and the role these rays play in generating cooling cloud cover.[xxxi]  The complexity of factors impacting Earth’s natural climate cycle is staggering, still little understood, and extends way beyond atmospheric accumulations of CO2, which is merely one factor.

However, Fred Singer reproduces a graph published by astrophysicists, Dr. Sallie Baliunas and Dr. Willie Soon. It charts the relationship between amounts of solar radiation emitted and terrestrial temperatures from 1750 to 1995, a period of almost 250 years.[xxxii]   Dr. Singer comments: “Given the variability of the temperatures, the close relationship between the two is startling.”[xxxiii]

Dr. Singer continues: “Richard Wilson, affiliated with both Columbia University and NASA, reported that the sun’s radiation has increased by nearly 0.05 percent per decade since the late 1970s [tracked from 1978 to 2003]….The trend is significant because the sun’s total energy output is so huge. A variation of 0.05 percent in its output is equal to all human energy use.”[xxxiv]    This time line correlates exactly with the late-1970s resurgence of warming and the Earth’s continued warming throughout the rest of the century.   The timing is also congruent with the Great Pacific Climate Shift. We know today that the Pacific Ocean (and the Atlantic, as well) undergoes multi-decadal oscillations.  In 1976, the Pacific entered its warm phase and proceeded to warm the northern Pacific area by a full 3 degrees Celsius[xxxv] (roughly 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit). This event drove some of the warming observed by satellites between 1979 and 2000.

Earth’s temperatures do not correlate exactly with atmospheric levels of CO2, but they do with such natural occurrences as variations in emission of solar radiation–and with oscillations of Earth’s ocean currents. This includes the mid-20th century cooling, as well as the entirety of the Modern Warm Period.[xxxvi]

Related, the sun-based climate theory helps explain another truth regarding carbon dioxide. The oceans, it turns out, are a source of, as well as a sink for CO2. “The oceans swing both ways [between source and sink]: they have enormous capacity to absorb CO2, but sometimes they give it up.”[xxxvii] When do they function as a source of CO2? Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov has one possible answer to the question. Abdussamatov, born in Uzbekistan in 1940, earned his Ph.D. at the University of Leningrad and headed the space research laboratory of the Russian Academy of Science’s Pulkovo Observatory.  “If the temperature of the ocean rises even a little, gigantic amounts of CO2 are released into the atmosphere through the evaporation of water,” explains Dr. Abdussamatov. “It is no secret that increased solar irradiance warms Earth’s oceans, which then triggers the emission of large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. So the common view that man’s industrial activity is a deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation of cause-and-effect relations.”[xxxviii]

So total solar irradiance (TSI) increases–the Earth, including its oceans warm–the warmer water evaporates more quickly, releasing large amounts of CO2 into the air.

 

Conclusion

Although there are numerous factors that drive the natural climate cycle, the activities of the Sun are one of the principal causes. The bad news is that the Sun currently winds down toward the Dalton Minimum, a relative low point of the sun spot cycle. Diminished solar irradiance will reach Earth’s surface, bringing in its train a colder climate, as it has done in the past.[xxxix]   Dr. Abdussamatov asserts that: “The depth of the decline in solar irradiance reaching Earth will occur around 2041 (plus or minus 11 years, he estimates) and ‘will inevitably lead to a deep freeze around 2055-60,’ lasting some 50 years, after which temperatures will go up again.”[xl] A colder climate means shortened growing seasons and diminished agricultural production. In poorer nations, this will inevitably unleash famine.

Dr. Abdussamatov’s prediction of a looming colder climate is not based in ignorance of its cause, as was the case during the 1970s scare; nor is it based on the relatively puny power of man-made carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, rather, it is based on known cycles of the Sun, and the colder climates associated with the Dalton Minimum in Earth’s past. Largely because of AGW hysteria, we are not paying attention to the colder climate looming before us. But reality has a way of painfully slapping the faces of those who try to ignore it. We need to pay attention. Now.

Andrew Bernstein holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the City University of New York. He lectures all over the world. He has written numerous books, including his novel, A Dearth of Eagles, recently published and available from Amazon.

 

Endnotes

[i] Andrew Bernstein, “The Truth About Climate Change,” www.andrewbernstein.net

[ii] Myron Ebell and Steven Milloy, “Wrong Again: Fifty Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions,” September 19, 2019, cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions. Retrieved on November 6, 2019.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] www.dennisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm  Retrieved on November 10, 2019.  An extensive list of 1970s  essays predicting global cooling and/or possible ice ages can be found at: Dr. Roy Cordato, “Climate experts believe the next ice age is on its way…within a lifetime…” www.johnlocke.org/update/climate-experts-believe-the-next-ice-age-is-on-its-way-within-a-lifetime/ Retrieved on November 10, 2019.

[vi] Walter Sullivan, “International Team of Specialists Find No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend in Northern Hemisphere,” January 5, 1978, www.nytimes.com/1978/01/05/archives/international-team-of-specialists-finds-no-end-in-sight-to-30year.html  Retrieved on November 11, 2019.

[vii] And a great deal regarding this issue is discussed in my first climate change essay.

[viii] Myron Ebell, Steven Milloy, “Wrong Again: Fifty Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions,” September 18, 2019, cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions. Retrieved on November 6, 2019.

[ix] Ibid.

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] Ibid.

[xiii] Anthony Watts, “Ten years ago, Al Gore predicted the North polar ice cap would be gone. Inconveniently, it’s still there,” December 16, 2018, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/16/ten-years-ago-algore-predicted-the-north-polar-ice-cap-would-be-gone-inconveniently-its-still-there/ Retrieved on November 8, 2019.

[xiv][xiv] “Global Warming: Who Are The Deniers Now?” http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/global-warming-who-are-the-deniers-now/ Retrieved on November 8, 2016.

[xv] Andrea Tonks, “UK snow in Pictures as Met Office issues weather forecast warning for Beast from the East,” http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/933224/snow-UK-latest-pictures-weather-forecast-Met-Office-warning-pics. Retrieved on November 8, 2019.

[xvi] “Central England Experiences Historically Chilly October,” http://electroverse.net/central-england-experiences-historically-chilly-october/ Retrieved on November 8, 2016.

[xvii] Faye Brown, “Snow blankets parts of UK as temperatures plunge to -7C,” November 9, 2019,  http://metro.co.uk/2019/11/09/snow-blankets-parts-uk-temperatures-plunge-7C-11071817/ Retrieved on November 10, 2019.

[xviii] Craig Rucker, “Polar bear expert purged,” October 18, 2019, www.cfact.org/2019/10/18/polar-bear-expert-purged/  Retrieved on November 11, 2019.

[xix] “Another Global Warming Study Casts Doubt On Media’s Climate Change Fairy Tale,” November 30, 2017, www.investors.com/politics/editorial/another-global-warming-study-casts-doubt-on-medias-climate-change-fairy-tale/  Retrieved on November 9, 2019.

[xx] “Global Warming: Who Are The Deniers Now?”Op. cit.

[xxi] “Global Warming: Who Are The Deniers Now?” Op. cit.

[xxii] “Another Global Warming Study Casts Doubt On Media’s Climate Change Fairy Tale,” Op. cit.

[xxiii] “Global Warming: Who Are The Deniers Now?” Op. cit.

[xxiv] Fred Singer and Dennis Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years (New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.: 2007), 10.

[xxv] Roy Spencer, “How Much of Atmospheric CO2 Increase is Natural?” August 27, 2014, www.drroyspencer.com/2014/08/how-much-of-atmospheric-co2-increase-is-natural/ Retrieved on November 11, 2019.

[xxvi] Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers: The World-Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud–And Those Who Are Too Fearful to Do So (Minneapolis, Minn.: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), 84.

[xxvii] Ibid., 84.

[xxviii] Ibid., 80.

[xxix] Ibid., 79-83.

[xxx] Ibid., 83-84.

[xxxi] Henrik Svensmark and Nigel Calder, The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change (Cambridge, England: Icon Books, 2007), passim.

[xxxii] Singer and Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming, op. cit., 192. Source: S. Baliunas and W. Soon, “Solar Variability and Climate Change,” Astrophysical Journal 450 (1995): 896.

[xxxiii] Ibid., 192.

[xxxiv] Ibid., 192.

[xxxv] Brian Hartmann and Gerd Wendler, “The Significance of the 1976 Pacific Climate Shift in the Climatology of Alaska,” https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI3532.1 Retrieved on November 15, 2019.

[xxxvi] The sun-climate connection is discussed much more extensively in my prior essay on this topic.

[xxxvii] Solomon, The Deniers, 80.

[xxxviii] Ibid., 163.

[xxxix] “NASA Predicts Next Solar Cycle Will Be Lowest In 200 Years,” June 18, 2019, https://electroverse.net/nasa-predicts-next-solar-cycle-will-be-lowest-in-200-years-dalton-minimum-levels-the-implications/ Retrieved on November 14, 2019.

[xl] Solomon, The Deniers, 163.

De Gaulle on France’s National Vice

General Charles de Gaulle on France’s national vice:

Envy is our national vice, it is the worst of the Deadly Sins, it is what projected the angels into Hell because they wanted to be the equal of God. It is worse than pride because pride has a certain nobility, while envy is the feeling of the defeated and rancorous, it is the crime of Cain against Abel, of him who has failed in everything and kills his neighbour because he is successful, it is the anger of losers. If the French did not have this fault, one could forgive them for many things.

In other words, “Liberté, égalité, fraternité” — sans liberty.

Voice of Capitalism

Capitalism news delivered every Monday to your email inbox.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest