NEW YORK – The collapse of a Spanish-based multinational renewable energies company could cause election-year embarrassment not only to President Obama, Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and the Democratic Party, but also to Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz and his wife Heidi, through their ties to Goldman Sachs.

Announced Tuesday, Seville-headquartered renewables multinational firm Abengoa plans to sell off four solar photovoltaic power plants in Spain for a collective value of $65.13 million, $57.26 million and a net cash flow of $13.9 million, helping the company meet its debt-restructuring targets set out in its feasibility plan.

The asset sale announced Tuesday comes after the company sold in February its 20 percent share in the 100MV Shams-1 concentrated solar power plant in the United Arab Emirates to the Abu Dhabi-based renewable energy company Masdar.

It’s something climate skeptics have long suspected: Government involvement in science has skewed data to reflect the government’s agenda.

“Many have suspected that U.S. political intervention in climate science has corrupted the outcome,” notes Ron Arnold in an essay posted on CFact.org. “The new emergence of an old 1995 document from the U.S. State Department to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirms those suspicions, or at least gives the allegation credence enough to ask questions.”

Fears that catastrophic earthquake is building today grew after a fourth major tremor struck the same region in just 48 hours.

There have been three large earthquakes recorded in recent days, including a major one in southern Japan which destroyed buildings and left at least 45 people injured, after Myanmar was rocked on Wednesday.

Tremors were also felt as far as 500 miles away at the national park in India where the Royal couple Kate and William were visiting.

Yesterday, The Japanese Red Cross Kumamoto Hospital confirmed 45 were injured, including five with serious injuries after a quake of magnitude 6.2 to 6.5 and a series of strong aftershocks ripped through Kumamoto city.

Abstract: The source of energy in the core of the Sun is neutron repulsion, the same source of energy in cores of the uranium and plutonium atoms that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 August 1945, respectively. The Sun is an ordinary star that produces and discards hydrogen generated by neutron-emission followed, in succession, by neutron-decay. This conclusion is based on precise measurements of meteorites, planets, the Moon and the Sun during the space age and on precise atomic rest mass data. It assumes that free neutrons decay spontaneously into hydrogen atoms and that solar energy arises from the conversion of nuclear rest mass (m) into solar energy (E).

1. Introduction

I am grateful for the invitation to submit this review on neutron repulsion as the source of solar energy. The manuscript is based primarily on the work of two great scientists that participated on opposing sides of the Second World War and then died in 2001. The astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist, Sir Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), led a radar development group for the British during WWII and later left unambiguous hints in his 1994 autobiography [1] of inexplicable, sudden changes in the foundations of these major fields of science in 1946. The nuclear geochemist, Paul Kazuo Kuroda aka Kazuo Kuroda (1917-2001), was more circumspect in leaving hints in the description of his life as a graduate student and then as a faculty member at the Imperial University of Tokyo, studying radium, radon and other trace elements in hot springs and later extracting uranium from Manchurian euxenite ore for Japan during WWII [2].

Abstract

Rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are accelerating the growth of B.C.’s forests by one to three per cent a year, enough to cancel out the impact on the climate from the mountain pine beetle outbreak by 2020, according to a new study from the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions. 

“This turnaround will happen much sooner than we had imagined,” said lead author and Environment Canada climate scientist Vivek Arora.

The pine beetle infestation, which killed countless trees over 18 million hectares, had a double impact — dramatically reducing the ability of western Canadian forests to store carbon, and worse, releasing massive quantities of carbon as dead stands of pine rotted or burned. The combined effect turned B.C. forests from a carbon sink (a reservoir) into a carbon source during the peak years of the outbreak between 2009 to 2011, said co-author Werner Kurz of the Canadian Forest Service. 

hockeyschtick.blogspot.com

A recommended essay by Swedish climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring [1] offers a high school through advanced level debunking of the so-called ‘greenhouse effect.’ Dr. Jelbring finds that basic scientific principles demonstrate that global temperatures are not controlled by human emissions of ‘greenhouse gases’ and the ‘greenhouse effect’ is explainable using only the physics of pressure, gravity, volume, and the adiabatic lapse rate.

Essay from source has been edited to remove references to Swedish law and politics
What has politics, a needed instrument to run a nation, to do with a scientific concept that tells the difference between the surface temperature of earth and the temperature of earth’s atmosphere as seen from space? This temperature difference of 33C has unfortunately and inadequately been named “The Greenhouse Effect” (GE) despite the absence of any relationship between this effect and the warm climate in a real greenhouse. The intention of this paper is to cover the title subject in a few pages in a way that is understandable to a high school student and, hence, to Swedish parliamentary members.
Basic scientific principles demonstrate that the overall GE phenomenon is not a result of human emissions of “greenhouse gases”.

Time of Observation Bias (TOBS)  is the first refuge of climate scoundrels. It is normally described by alarmists as “they used to take temperatures in the afternoon, but now they take them in the morning.”

This explanation is complete nonsense. Min/Max thermometers record the lowest minimum and highest maximum since the last time they were reset. The actual claim is that people used to be incredibly stupid and reset their thermometer only once per day near the afternoon maximum, causing double counting of warm temperatures on cold days which fell after warm days.

Even using NCDC fake data, this claim doesn’t hold up. NCDC  TOBS adjusted temperatures show no US warming over the past 25 years. All of the reported US warming over the past 25 years is due to infilling fake data. NCDC TOBS adjusted temperatures show no warming since 1990.

Scientists say they have developed ultra-thin electronic “skin” that can measure oxygen levels when stuck to the body.

The goal is to develop such “skin” to monitor oxygen levels in organs during surgery, say researchers in Japan.

Tests on volunteers found the “skin” provided stable measurements of oxygen concentration in blood.

The device contains micro-electronic components that light up in red, blue and green on the surface of the body.

Scientists at the University of Tokyo are working on ways to display numbers and letters on the skin for health monitoring purposes.

Once respected American space agency, NASA, is again mired in allegations of a data fraud over historic global climate temperatures. Independent researcher, Steven Goddard, uncovers further proof that the narrative on man-made climate change is riddled with misrepresentations and alterations of long-undisputed facts. He writes:

In 1974, NCAR and CRU reported half a degree global cooling since the early 1940’s, and blamed drought and famine on it.

On Earth, we can definitely say that there is a significant, and important, direct solar heating of the planetary surface to high temperature by the action of sunlight.  This fact alone allows for a phase of physics to be entered that would not be allowed under the climate science supposition of a sunlight that can only warm the surface by itself to -18 °C (i.e., the ability for sunlight to generate liquid and vaporous water, or not), and this is sufficient to reject the foundation of climate science and its alarmism, and its radiative greenhouse effect, which erroneously dilutes solar power to such a low temperature value.

It must however be simultaneously included that despite whatever temperature-driving force the direct action of sunlight presents on the surface, an atmosphere above that surface has a natural temperature gradient with the bottom of the atmosphere being the warmest region, and the top the coolest.  This fact necessarily results in that any expected average temperature state of the atmosphere thus can not be found at either of its extremities, i.e. the bottom or top of the atmosphere, since the temperature gradient is constant in its direction.  That is, any expected average of a sequential series of values can not be found at either end of the sequence, but must be found within the sequence.

We recently published an article by Edward Hoskins entitled “The Junk Science Of A Supposed Climate Sensitivity Formula”. The author requested a review from PSI’s former chairman Dr. Tim Ball, which we pleased to be publishing below with extracts from the original article.

The diminishing influence of increasing Carbon Dioxide CO2 on temperature

The diminishing effect of CO2 on temperature

The temperature increasing capacity of atmospheric CO2 is small, but it is real enough.

The influence of CO2 concentration on temperature is known and widely accepted to diminish progressively as its concentration increases.

I understand that this is the generally accepted position about CO2 as greenhouse gas (GHG). I have yet to find or hear of any definitive proof that CO2 operates as a GHG, I have read much about rotating dipoles and other issues. I also heard the argument made some 20 years ago at a presentation in Calgary by a prominent skeptic that it was politically safer to say CO2 had a small greenhouse effect but it was so small as to be insignificant. I never agreed with this position and still don’t.

CO2’s effect diminishes logarithmically with increasing concentration. Both  Global Warming advocates and Climate Change sceptics agree on this.  IPCC Published reports, (TAR3), acknowledge that the effective temperature increase caused by growing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere radically diminishes with increasing concentrations.[i].

This information has been presented in the IPCC reports. However it is well disguised for any lay reader, (Chapter 6. Radiative Forcing of Climate Change: section 6.3.4 Total Well-Mixed Greenhouse Gas Forcing Estimate).

One of several deceptions about CO2 made by the IPCC to further their objective of proving their hypothesis is that CO2 is evenly distributed throughout the atmosphere. I knew that was wrong and was borne out by the recent results from the NASA satellite OCO2.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/oco2/index.html

Other deceptions included the residency time of CO2 in the atmosphere, to support their argument that even if we stopped production now the problem would persist for decades.

There are other deceptions but you get the picture.

This is a crucial fact.  It is not acknowledged in the IPCC summary for Policy Makers.[ii].

The rapid logarithmic diminution effect is an inconvenient fact for Global Warming advocates and alarmists.

It is well understood within the climate science community.

It is certainly not much discussed.

This logarithmic diminution effect is the likely reason there was no runaway greenhouse warming caused by CO2 in earlier eons when CO2 levels were known to be at levels of several thousands parts per million by volume, ppmv.

The following simplifying diagram shows the logarithmic diminution effect using tranches of 100ppmv up to 1000ppmv and the proportional significance of differing CO2 concentrations on the biosphere.

That cold blob in the North Atlantic just keeps getting bigger. A couple of months ago, it looked like this.

The KNMI climate explorer gives us this time series for the area involved (20 to 50W:40 to 60N):

In 1989, NOAA’s Tom Karl said that the global climate cooled from 1921 to 1979.

NASA now shows 0.5C warming from 1921 to 1979.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) are planning to shut down Theranos’s labs and ban founder Elizabeth Holmes from the medical testing business for two years.

According to a April 13 report by the Wall Street Journal, the CMS sent Theranos a letter dated March 18, indicating that based on continuing failure to correct blood-testing accuracy and competence in its products, the government would terminate federal licensing of Theranos’ California facilities in Newark and Palo Alto.

As Theranos labs’ “responsible parties,” 31-year-old Holmes and the company’s president, Sunny Balwani, would be banned by CMS for a period of two years from owning or running operations of any blood-testing lab in both California and Arizona.

Taking the hallucinogenic drug LSD can make the brain more “unified” and “complete,” according to a groundbreaking new study that researchers say could provide a breakthrough in neuroscience research.