Or, instead of the suggestion made in the previous post, perhaps one of the servants of the would-be - won't-be royal couple simply read this article to them
/Norway: New report throws cold water on man-made global warmig pseudo-science
Well, this is awkward. Statistics Norway, aka Statistisk sentralbyrå or “the national statistical institute of Norway and the main producer of official statistics”, has just published a paper “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?”
The awkward part isn’t trying to grasp the subtleties of Norwegian since it’s also available in English. It’s that the Abstract bluntly declares that “standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures” while the conclusions state “the results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations.”
But the really awkward part is that a paper from a government agency dares to address openly so many questions the alarmist establishment has spent decades declaring taboo, from the historical record on climate to the existence of massive uncertainty among scientists on it.
What the Norwegians did was conduct statistical analyses of observed and reconstructed temperature series and test whether the recent fluctuation in temperatures differs systematically from previous temperature cycles potentially due to the emission of greenhouse gases. For example, the researchers gathered all the data from various sources, including those related to the four previous glacial and inter-glacial periods, and did a statistical analysis to see how more recent Global Climate Models (GCMs) compare.
In the global climate models (GCMs) most of the warming that has taken place since 1950 is attributed to human activity. Historically, however, there have been large climatic variations. Temperature reconstructions indicate that there is a ‘warming’ trend that seems to have been going on for as long as approximately 400 years. Prior to the last 250 years or so, such a trend could only be due to natural causes.
The statisticians take all the data, show their calculations, offer their explanations, and come to the following conclusion:
In this paper we have reviewed data on climate and temperatures in the past and ascertained that there have been large (non-stationary) temperature fluctuations resulting from natural causes.
Subsequently, we have summarized recent work on statistical analyses on the ability of the GCMs to track historical temperature data. These studies have demonstrated that the time series of the difference between the global temperature and the corresponding hindcast from the GCMs is non-stationary. Thus, these studies raise serious doubts about whether the GCMs are able to distinguish natural variations in temperatures from variations caused by man-made emissions of CO2.
…[T]he results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.
… Norwegian brains decided to double-check the work of the climate crowd, only to discover a massive fraud. The overly simplistic “greenhouse effect” account of rising CO2 levels correlating perfectly with rising global temperatures fell apart upon further examination.
By the way, did you know that websites that report on articles like this are being demonetized by Google, Facebook and Amazon? It’s true.
Paula Bolyard, Editor of PJ Media: It’s so ridiculous that it would be funny if it weren’t so deadly serious. We thought censorship by Facebook and other social-media companies was bad, but that was only the tip of the iceberg.
Every week now I get an email showing which articles have been demonetized by Big Tech. If an article is demonetized, it means we can’t run ads on it. We still have to pay our writers for their work, but because we can’t run ads, we have to take a loss on it.
Here are some of the articles that have been demonetized just in the last three weeks:
Study Suggests U.S. Government Lied About Myocarditis Risk From COVID Vax
Military Notes a Spike in Myocarditis Cases — Wonder Why?
Warning: Pfizer mRNA Flu Shots Are on the Way
Climate Crazies Have Discovered That Summertime Is Hot
Dems’ ‘Science Denier’ Accusation Is Old, Wrong, and Pathetic
How Many Thousands Did Corporate State Media COVID Misinformation Potentially Kill?
Notice any patterns here? The Powers That Be don’t want us writing about climate change or COVID-19 — unless we agree that climate change is an immediate existential threat to the world and that the CDC and Anthony Fauci got everything right in their response to COVID. Telling the truth about transgenderism is another topic that gets us slapped with flags. Oh, and this article will most likely be demonetized too.
If you’ve ever taken a business class — or if you have half a brain cell — you know you won’t be in business long if you are paying out more than you take in. We’ve obviously got a big problem on our hands.
Like I said, it’s ridiculous. They’re essentially holding a gun to our head and saying, “Nice little website you’ve got there. It’d be a shame if anything happened to it.” They’re leaving us with two choices: stop writing about these important topics, or keep on writing about them and lose money. They think squeezing us financially is how they’ll finally silence us. The Left doesn’t have good arguments on these topics, so they’re using the immense power they hold over the digital ad industry to shut us up.
The same censorship is occurring at all conservative websites, even at InstaPundit
OCTOBER 18, 2023
SOME PEOPLE DON’T LIKE THE NEW ADS. Sorry, the problem is that InstaPundit has been demonetized by Google, for unspecified “dangerous” content. Between the overall trend of ad revenue decline — which hits everyone — and the trend of cutting advertising to right-leaning sites, and now this, ad revenue is down about 90% from its high, I’d estimate, and it may get worse. (The Amazon revenue, which we’ve been phasing out anyway, is similar). At some point I’ll probably have to go to some sort of subscription model — maybe one that lets you buy out of the ads — or a purely donation-supported model.
FWIW is too puny to worry about this — my great ad “revenue” is about $250 a month — although, because I just recently got around to putting ads on this site, I have no way to measure whether that revenue might have been greater before this demonetizing campaign began. But for large publications that offer conservative writers an outlet and a voice, the implications are dire.
Fight back: subscribe to PJ Media, which will also support RedState, HotAir, DailyCaller, and Twitchy.