Antarctica’s Coldest September Temperature Since 2012; Germany’s Solar Panel Disintegration; The Wrath Of The Climatariat Descends On Dr Patrick Brown; + Sunspot Eruption

Antarctica’s Coldest September Temperature Since 2012

Antarctica is continuing to hold anomalously cool, as it has been for the past few months, and indeed years.

The -80.6C (-113.1F) posted at Vostok over the weekend is the continent’s lowest September reading since 2012 (-84.2C, Sept 15):

This coming off the back of the station’s coldest month of August since 2002:

Antarctica’s September chill isn’t just confined to Vostok, either; Concordia has been holding at around -77C (-107F) for days now.

Germany’s Solar Panel Disintegration

The solar industry in Germany is reporting that 15% of the country’s solar capacity is rapidly disintegrating.

This not only represents the wasting of many billions of Euros of tax payer funds, but also exposes the pathetic capacity–that even after decades of propaganda–the country was able to generate: 15% of German solar production represents just 10 GW.

The infrastructure, even when new, didn’t work as sold. And from a poor start, the panels are now only getting worse with age. Conversely, Germany’s nuclear plants were becoming more effective with age, the data show, with extraordinary uptime and production at exceptionally low cost.

The push for renewables can’t be intended to end our fossil fuel use and still see us prosper. To achieve this, all country’s need do is increase their nuclear capacity–even if only for a 20-30 year stop gap to allow for other technologies to prove themselves.

Nuclear has powered many nation at or above 50% for decades, we know it works and we know it’s ‘green’. Wind and solar, on the other hand, remain in the experimental stage, and the jury is still out as to whether they even work on the scale required.

Denmark is the only country to exceed the 50% renewable mark, and it has been rewarded with cripplingly-high electricity prices, the costliest in the world.

Countries are risking the prosperity and safety of their citizens on what amounts to a grand experiment. And for what? The Science is still yet to convince the people–you know, those that supposedly have a vote in the policies that they have to live by–that the eradication of cheap and reliable energy is even required.

Based on a recent survey, a whopping 45% of Americans don’t believe that climate change is a problem at all, with 41% saying that it is nothing but a natural phenomenon with humans playing no part.

Americans don’t trust academic institutions, the study revealed, with said distrust shown to hold more weight than age, gender, race, education and region. The study’s co-authors blame this “growing denialism” for the slow implementation of climate action policies, such as carbon taxes and congestion charges.

Cambridge Zero Fellow and Assistant and co-author, Professor Ramit Debnath, said: “If voters don’t believe in the proven outcomes of fundamental research, then how can politicians make the changes we need in the next decade to stop climate change?”

The Wrath Of The Climatariat Descends On Dr Patrick Brown

Dr Patrick Brown’s recent exposing of the agenda-forwarding scientific elite has been met with the expected disdain.

The editor-in-chief of Nature, Dr Magdalena Skipper, has accused Patrick T. Brown, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University and doctor of earth and climate sciences, of “poor research practices” that are “highly irresponsible”.

Brown recently said that editors at Nature and Science –two of the most prestigious scientific journals– select “climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives” and favor “distorted” research which hypes up dangers.

He said that his recently accepted study, ‘Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California’, was written so as to exclusively focus on climate change and intentionally ignore all other key factors — a tailoring Brown said is common in the scientific community as ‘supporting the mainstream narrative’ increases the chances of a scientists work receiving publication.

Dr Brown elaborated: “The editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives–even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.”

He added: “To put it bluntly, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change.”

In a scathing response, Magdalena Skipper said: “The only thing in Patrick Brown’s statements about the editorial processes in scholarly journals that we agree on is that science should not work through the efforts by which he published this [study].

“We are now carefully considering the implications of his stated actions; certainly, they reflect poor research practices and are not in line with the standards we set for our journal.”

Retraction incoming?

Probably, this is how these skewing institutions work.

Dr Judith Curry recently commented: “Thou shalt not publicly criticize important people in the establishment, e.g. journal editors or IPCC (been there, done that). Or the wrath of the climatariat will descend on you. Nothing to do with actual science.”

For a review of Dr Brown’s ‘crimes’, see the article linked below:

Dr Brown responded to Skipper’s criticism in a lengthy X thread:

Sunspot Eruption

New sunspot ‘AR3429’ erupted Monday morning, Sept 11th (0128 UT).

The result was an M1.3-class solar flare and a surge of plasma over the sun’s northeastern limb:

A fast-moving coronal mass ejection (CME) is now emerging from the blast site. It is on the edge of the Earth-strike zone, reports, and a glancing blow may be possible later this week.

Updates from NASA and NOAA to come.

Please help keep Electroverse online, consider becoming a Patreon.
Become a patron at Patreon!