Penguin ‘Supercolony’ Discovered in Antarctica; Another Global Warming Scare Story Bites the Dust

Penguins
AP/Maxi Jonas

Researchers in Antarctica have discovered a supercolony of 1.5 million Adélie penguins whose existence was previously unknown to biologists.

According to Science News:

On an expedition to an icy island chain off the Antarctic Peninsula’s northern tip, researchers discovered a massive supercolony of more than 1.5 million Adélie penguins, according to a study published March 2 in Scientific Reports.

Scientists had known of an Adélie penguin colony (Pygoscelis adeliae) in these Danger Islands, but satellite images revealed more guano on the rocky islands than could be explained by the colony’s expected numbers.

Even though the tiny island chain is only about 10 kilometers across, researchers hadn’t realized the extent of the penguin population, says study coauthor Heather Lynch, an ecologist at Stony Brook University in New York. “In the Antarctic, distances are so vast, something major could be just around the corner and you wouldn’t know.”

Obviously this is great news for Adélie penguin fans. But terrible news for environmentalists. The penguin is what you might call their ‘polar bear of the south’ – that is, the cute, lovable, telegenic species most frequently cited in their propaganda stories about polar critters threatened by “climate change.”

Here are a few examples.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Alarmist Scientists Announce the Latest Climate Change Threat: Mutant Transgender Turtles

Sea Turtle
pixabay.com

Alarmist scientists have found a terrifying new ‘ climate change’ threat: mutant transgender turtles.

Their study, titled Environmental Warming and Feminization of One of the Largest Sea Turtle Populations in the World, warns that global warming could turn the world’s sea turtle populations female, possibly leading to their extinction.

The study authors, from NOAA’s Marine Mammal and Turtle division in La Jolla, California, analyzed sea turtle populations on beaches at the northern and southern ends of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef.

Here is WWF‘s account of their findings:

Because incubation temperature of turtle eggs determines the animal’s sex, a warmer nest results in more females. Increasing temperatures in Queensland’s north, linked to climate change, have led to virtually no male northern green sea turtles being born.

For the study, scientists caught green turtles at the Howick Group of islands where both northern and southern green turtle populations forage in the Great Barrier Reef.  Using a combination of endocrinology and genetic tests, researchers identified the turtles’ sex and nesting origin.

Of green turtles from warmer northern nesting beaches, 99.1% of juveniles, 99.8% of subadults, and 86.8% of adults were female. Turtles from the cooler southern reef nesting beaches showed a more moderate female sex bias (65%–69% female).

If global warming continues, the study concludes, then so many turtles may turn female that there will be no males with which to mate. Extinction will then be inevitable.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

‘All the Wild Animals Are Going Extinct’ Says WWF. Yeah, Right. And I’m a Giant Panda

The analysis, the most comprehensive to date, indicates that animal populations plummeted by 58% between 1970 and 2012, with losses on track to reach 67% by 2020.

The report analysed the changing abundance of more than 14,000 monitored populations of the 3,700 vertebrate species for which good data is available. This produced a measure akin to a stock market index that indicates the state of the world’s 64,000 animal species and is used by scientists to measure the progress of conservation efforts.

The biggest cause of tumbling animal numbers is the destruction of wild areas for farming and logging: the majority of the Earth’s land area has now been impacted by humans, with just 15% protected for nature. Poaching and exploitation for food is another major factor, due to unsustainable fishing and hunting: more than 300 mammal species are being eaten into extinction, according to recent research.

Pollution is also a significant problem with, for example, killer whales and dolphins in European seas being seriously harmed by long-lived industrial pollutants. Vultures in south-east Asia have been decimated over the last 20 years, dying after eating the carcasses of cattle dosed with an anti-inflammatory drug. Amphibians have suffered one of the greatest declines of all animals due to a fungal disease thought to be spread around the world by the trade in frogs and newts.

Rivers and lakes are the hardest hit habitats, with animals populations down by 81% since 1970, due to excessive water extraction, pollution and dams. All the pressures are magnified by global warming, which shifts the ranges in which animals are able to live, said WWF’s director of science, Mike Barrett.

What can we do to prevent this happening?

Well I can think two immediate steps we can all take.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Enron Environmentalism: The Carbon Credits Scam Pumps Millions of Tonnes More Greenhouse Gases into the Atmosphere

As well as pumping much as 600 million tonnes more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the carbon credits scheme has been abused by countries like Russia and the Ukraine which have used them as a money making scam.

Vladyslav Zhezherin, one of the co-authors of the study by the Stockholm Environment Institute says:

“This was like printing money.”

Another co-author Anja Kollmuss has told BBC News.

“We were surprised ourselves by the extent [of the fraud], we didn’t expect such a large number.”

“What went on was that these countries could approve these projects by themselves there was no international oversight, in particular Russia and the Ukraine didn’t have any incentive to guarantee the quality of these credits.”

To which the two obvious questions are:

Have any of these people actually been to Russia or the Ukraine?

and:

This stuff that these greenies have been smoking sounds totally amazing. How do we go about getting some?

The corruption they describe is by no means a recent thing. It dates back to Enron whose entire business model was based on dodgy carbon credits, which it used not to save the planet but to close down its rivals in the coal industry.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

BBC Breaks Impartiality Rule on Climate and…Ooh, Look, a Performing Dog!

The BBC has been caught red-handed breaking its own rules on impartiality by running a series of green propaganda documentaries funded by the United Nations on its BBC World News channel. (H/T Guido)

But you’d never guess this from the way the BBC has reported on the story about its censure in a report by the broadcasting regulator Ofcom. Instead, like a laser, it has focused on what it considers to be the only important bit of the report, viz:

Commercial rival ITV should have made it much, MUCH clearer to viewers that the amazing, performing dog which won Britain’s Got Talent earlier this year was in fact two amazing, performing dogs. That’s because there was one trick – walking the tightrope – that the main amazing, performing dog Matisse couldn’t do. So it had to be faked using a Matisse lookalike called Chase, who had trained for years and years after being inspired by watching an acclaimed arthouse documentary called Dog On Wire.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m as shocked as anyone by the appalling deception which Britain’s Got Talent practised on its viewers. Had I voted for the evil, lying, faking trickster devil dog Matisse and then subsequently discovered that I had been duped about his talents, I expect that I would almost certainly have wished to commit suicide in shame. TV documentaries involving animals, as we know, are widely recognised for their scrupulous accuracy and integrity and lack of artifice. The same is true of TV talent shows.  So I can well understand why viewers who’d voted for Matisse rang to ask for their premium phoneline money back. And if David Cameron doesn’t call a public inquiry into this vital issue then I think we all have a right to know why.

All that said, I still think there may be more pressing issues of public concern in this Ofcom report.

Take, for example, the revelation that BBC World News ran no fewer than three documentaries plugging the United Nations REDD scheme, kindly funded by and made on behalf of the United Nation’s REDD scheme. (These were among 14 half-hour programmes run on BBC World News and all “funded by not-for-profit organisations operating largely in areas of developing world issues and environmental concerns.”

It’s clear from the BBC’s defensive response towards Ofcom’s initial inquiries that it saw nothing wrong with this.

BBCWN, however, believed that not for profit bodies such as United Nations agencies could fund programmes without engaging the sponsorship rules.It believed that if the content of the programme could not be considered promotional of the funder and its activities or interests, the funder should not be categorised as a sponsor.BBCWN said it believed that subjects of general public interest such as health, education, social welfare etc. could not be considered to be proprietorial interests of a funder provided that the particular activities of the funder were not promoted.

But this tells us more about the ideological mindset of the people who work at the BBC than it does about the BBC’s actual charter obligations as a public service broadcaster with quasi-monopolistic privileges.In the Beeboids’ eyes, NGOs and UN bodies like the ones that funded this propaganda, are so pure in motivation, so unimpeachably correct in their collectivist urges, that there is need to subject them to any kind of scrutiny.Had they done their due diligence – a basic requirement, you might have hoped, for a news organisation of the BBC’s international stature and supposed respectability – they might have discovered otherwise.REDD, as Christopher Booker revealed at the time those programmes ran, was a scam of epic proportions, cooked up by the green movement in order to enrich its cronies at public expense.

If the world’s largest, richest environmental campaigning group, the WWF – formerly the World Wildlife Fund – announced that it was playing a leading role in a scheme to preserve an area of the Amazon rainforest twice the size of Switzerland, many people might applaud, thinking this was just the kind of cause the WWF was set up to promote. Amazonia has long been near the top of the list of the world’s environmental cconcerns, not just because it includes easily the largest and most bio-diverse area of rainforest on the planet, but because its billions of trees contain the world’s largest land-based store of CO2 – so any serious threat to the forest can be portrayed as a major contributor to global warming.

If it then emerged, however, that a hidden agenda of the scheme to preserve this chunk of the forest was to allow the WWF and its partners to share the selling of carbon credits worth $60 billion, to enable firms in the industrial world to carry on emitting CO2 just as before, more than a few eyebrows might be raised. The idea is that credits representing the CO2 locked into this particular area of jungle – so remote that it is not under any threat – should be sold on the international market, allowing thousands of companies in the developed world to buy their way out of having to restrict their carbon emissions. The net effect would simply be to make the WWF and its partners much richer while making no contribution to lowering overall CO2 emissions.

Fortunately, the scam was nipped in the bud by the collapse of the carbon-trading market.

But it’s quite a big deal, don’t you think, that the BBC willingly lent its services to help promulgate this outrageous scheme?

Bigger even, I’d suggest, than the Britain’s Got Talent scandal. I mean, however, much Matisse’s owner may have trousered as a result of that relatively innocuous sleight of paw involving his canine pal Chase, I suspect it didn’t come anyway near the $60 billion the WWF and its greenie co-conspirators stood to make at our expense if they’d pulled off that Amazonian eco-heist.

From Breitbart

Related posts:

  1. There is nothing cuddly about the WWF
  2. Power cuts are a much more serious problem than ‘Climate Change’
  3. Government’s £6 million ‘Bedtime Story’ climate change ad: most pernicious waste of taxpayers’ money ever?
  4. ‘Climate Change’: there just aren’t enough bullets

 

Wildlife Populations Have Dropped Over 50 per cent Since 1970 Says WWF. Bollocks!

The world’s wildlife population is collapsing – with fewer than half as many wild animals around today as there were in 1970. So claims the WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature) in its latest headline-grabbing report.

Here are some reasons why we ought to take these claims with a massive pinch of salt.

1. The WWF is not an objective scientific body but an environmental activist organisation with a strong vested interest in ramping up public hysteria, a) to put pressure on government to advance its preferred green totalitarian measures and b) to increase donations.

This is clearly evident if you actually look at the report from which these headline figures are taken. It abounds with scaremongering claims like: “We are not only threatening our health, prosperity and well-being, but our very future”, with pseudo-scientific greenie-lefty jargon like “planetary boundaries” and “sustainable development”, and anti-capitalist, anti-growth admonitions like “Changing our course and finding alternative pathways will not be easy. But it can be done.”

2.The environmental movement has a long and undistinguished track record of overstating population decline and species extinctions in order to exaggerate its case. Most recently we saw this in the tale of the “extinct” giant snail that wasn’t. Few would dispute that as human populations grow and land is developed and deforested animal populations will come under increasing pressure. But that 53 per cent figure looks about as trustworthy as those equally dubious claims by ecologists claiming that as many as 40,000 species go extinct every year. Really? Where are the bodies?

3. These are not solid scientific figures but extrapolations based on estimates, expressed as a modeled trend. The Global Living Planet Index (LPI)? Oh yeah? And what’s one of them when it’s at home? In order for us to take it seriously, we must first trust the accuracy of the raw data on individual species populations (dependent on what may be partial and limited field studies), second the way this data has been adjusted by the WWF to extrapolate a global trend. As we’ve seen with global warming, the opportunities for cherry-picking, confirmation bias and outright fraud are legion.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. 59 per cent of UK population are ‘village idiots’ thunders The Times
  2. Extinct snail ‘killed’ by climate change crawls back from the dead
  3. Climategate: the scandal spreads, the plot thickens, the shame deepens…
  4. Climategate goes SERIAL: now the Russians confirm that UK climate scientists manipulated data to exaggerate global warming

 

There Is Nothing Cuddly about the WWF

Today in the Sunday Telegraph my colleague Christopher Booker breaks possibly the most important environmental story since Climategate: a devious plan, truly Blofeldian in its scope and menace, by a hard-left-leaning activist body to gain massive global political leverage and earn stupendous sums of money by exploiting and manipulating the world carbon trading market.

My cynical prediction is that this vitally important story will gain little traction in the wider media, especially not with organisations like the BBC. Why? Because the activist body in question has a lovely, cuddly panda as its motif, and a reputation – brainwashed into children from an early age – for truly caring about the state of our planet. What’s more, this latest campaign by the WWF (formerly the World Wildlife Fund) is very easy to spin as something unimpeachably noble and right. After all, what kind of fascistic, Gaia-hating sicko would you have to be NOT to applaud a delightful heartwarming scheme to buy up whole swathes of the beauteous, diversity-rich, Na’avi-style, Truffula-tree dotted Amazon rainforest to preserve it for all time from the depredations of evil loggers, cattleranchers and other such profiteering scum?

Hence the understandably cautious tone in Booker’s opening par:

If the world’s largest, richest environmental campaigning group, the WWF – formerly the World Wildlife Fund – announced that it was playing a leading role in a scheme to preserve an area of the Amazon rainforest twice the size of Switzerland, many people might applaud, thinking this was just the kind of cause the WWF was set up to promote. Amazonia has long been near the top of the list of the world’s environmental cconcerns, not just because it includes easily the largest and most bio-diverse area of rainforest on the planet, but because its billions of trees contain the world’s largest land-based store of CO2 – so any serious threat to the forest can be portrayed as a major contributor to global warming.

Only after this nod to fashionable concerns is Booker able to stick in the knife:

If it then emerged, however, that a hidden agenda of the scheme to preserve this chunk of the forest was to allow the WWF and its partners to share the selling of carbon credits worth $60 billion, to enable firms in the industrial world to carry on emitting CO2 just as before, more than a few eyebrows might be raised. The idea is that credits representing the CO2 locked into this particular area of jungle – so remote that it is not under any threat – should be sold on the international market, allowing thousands of companies in the developed world to buy their way out of having to restrict their carbon emissions. The net effect would simply be to make the WWF and its partners much richer while making no contribution to lowering overall CO2 emissions.
WWF, which already earns £400 million yearly, much of it contributed by governments and taxpayers, has long been at the centre of efforts to talk up the threat to the Amazon rainforest – as shown recently by the furore over a much-publicised passage in the 2007 report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC’s claim that 40 per cent of the forest is threatened by global warming, it turned out, was not based on any scientific evidence, but simply on WWF propaganda, which had wholly distorted the findings of an earlier study on the threat posed to the forest, not by climate change but by logging.

Read the full story here. Then, for even more grisly details – about how, for example, the WWF’s scheme rides roughshod over the interests of native peoples, in way that might rather shock those who think of the organisation purely in terms of that cute panda – turn to Richard North’s comprehensive analysis at Eureferendum. The work North and Booker have done exposing the great AGW scam is quite beyond admiration. Truly they are the McIntyre and McKitrick of British journalism.

But why does the story matter so much? Because it goes to the heart of what is truly the most shocking and evil aspect of the Global Warming Industry: the way democratically unaccountable – but quite astonishingly well-funded – activist groups like the WWF (annual income: £400 MILLION) have been able to subvert the scientific process, and coax and bully politicians into making policies which will benefit the environment barely one jot, but which will fleece the taxpayer, increase energy bills, and make a handful of filthy rich investors even richer. If this scheme ever comes off – and it still might, if Americans are foolish enough to vote for Cap and Trade – then the WWF will have the financial clout of decent mid-ranking economy and a political influence as great as any G8 nation. For WWF, read New World Order.

Related posts:

  1. After Climategate, Pachaurigate and Glaciergate: Amazongate
  2. ‘Global warming’: time to get angry
  3. Meet the man who has exposed the great climate change con trick
  4. Memo to Prince Charles: CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is plant food.

 

WWF ‘Appalled’ at Massive Publicity Generated by Poster Campaign with Which of Course It Had Absolutely Nothing to Do

It’s sick, it’s disgraceful, it’s offensive, it’s crudely manipulative.

WWF: Tsunami kills!

Award-winning poster produced by a Brazilian ad agency. The caption reads: “The tsunami killed 100 times more people than 9/11. The planet is brutally powerful. Respect it. Preserve it.”

But it’s also a devilishly effective piece of eco-fascist propaganda to rival those “stranded” polar bears on the melting ice floe or Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Presumably that’s why it won a merit award from The One Club – a non-profit organisation that promotes excellence in advertising. And why so many Twitterers have been tweeting about it.

However the World Wildlife Fund – whose name appears on the poster – is frantically distancing itself from the project. According to a report in the New York Daily News, it was all a terrible mistake:

“We are just utterly appalled,” said WWF spokeswoman Leslie Aun.

“This ad is not something that anyone in our organization would ever have signed off on.”

The image was presented by admen from the agency DDB Brasil to WWF officers in Brazil and quickly rejected, Aun said.

“You hear a lot of concepts in meetings. We assumed it was dead and gone. But it appears now that someone submitted it to a competition,” she said.

Officials at The One Club, the Manhattan-based group that gave the ad an award for public service, pulled it from their website Wednesday.

DDB Brasil apologized for the ad they said dates to last December.

“The team in question is no longer with the agency,” said spokeswoman Lana Pinheiro. The ad, she said, “should never have been made.”

Phew, so that’s all right then. Or is it?

Of course, I have no reason whatsoever to doubt what the WWF says.

But my friends in advertising tell me that there is such a thing as a viral campaign where an idea considered too strong meat to be associated avowedly with the client’s name is instead leaked out in “unofficial” form. It then spreads like wildfire through the internet, blogosphere and Twitterverse, generating maximum shock-value publicity, while yet relieving the client of any need to feel embarrassed by association with such dodgy propaganda.

It goes without saying that a lofty, cuddly animal welfare charity like the WWF would never stoop to such methods. But suppose for one silly moment it had done so: wouldn’t this be just the perfect case of having your cake and eating it?

Note: original Telegraph post non-recoverable. 

Related posts:

  1. Husky Rescue, Massive, Midlake
  2. I need YOUR pledge NOW for the most important campaign in the history of the planet!
  3. 10:10’s ‘No Pressure’ exploding kids campaign: why it was such a success
  4. Campaign Against Climate Change: a Christmas appeal