One wonders if the SA article isn't just another thinly veiled attempt to influence our freely made decisions about how to live. Don't buy an acreage; that's wasteful and dangerous.
We wondered if the reference to "neighborhood density" in the close wasn't a subtle harp to encourage urbanization/density under the mirage of Sustainabilchemy.
"Aiming for the lowest possible dementia risk is all about a balance: enough neighborhood density to have easy access to services and social support but plenty of trees for a walk in the park."
Nice article, Mental. Yea, these scientific journals / publication mills can’t help but to jump the shark from time-to-time. I remember seeing all the articles being mass published during covid. I told a colleague, “I can’t wait to see all the retractions.”
I joke that the competition in science is so high because the rewards are so small.
This history of Scientific American from an old Ecofascism.com article, now closed due to death threats from the Antifa bunch, you know the watermelons, green on the outside, red on the inside. They're hard core Stalinist/Maoists but when the climate change bandwagon started they jumped on board with blessings from the Malthusian, Misanthropist Financial Parasite Overlords, more useful idiots, like the poor Ukrainians dying in the muddy fields to facilitate another regime change operation.
"...Closely tracking Reinhard was Westphalia aristocrat and publisher Georg von Holtzbrinck (1909-1983). Georg was a Nazi Student League activist in 1931 and a Party member soon after. His publishing business benefited enormously from his Party contacts. During the Third Reich's death throes, Georg volunteered for the Wehrmacht. After the war he was condemned and fined by the denazification commission, but was back publishing by 1948.
The Holtzbrinck media empire has been divided among Georg's three children. In the 1980s they began accumulating key English language assets. They own such famous imprints as Palgrave, Macmillan, Henry Holt, and St. Martin's Press. They purchased Scientific American in 1986 and Nature in 1995. These latter two companies produce over a dozen monthlies, supplements, and online editions reaching millions of scientifically involved people. The Holtzbrincks also own a stable of German newspapers with a combined daily readership of over two million.
Dieter Holtzbrinck quit the board of Dow Jones when it was rumored News Corp was attempting to acquire the company. News Corp is one of the few media conglomerates airing climate skepticism. Dieter denounced News Corp's lack of journalistic integrity. In 2008 Nature endorsed Obama for President, on scientific grounds.."
"..However nebulous, and distant from the gaze of the mainstream media, the universe does contain a German Global Organization. This consists of state agencies and philanthropic foundations marching in step with the following ultra-green, German-based corporations:
Adidas, Allianz, BASF, Bayer, Continental, DHL, E.ON, Evonik, Heidelberg Cement, Henkel, Bosch, Siemens, Evonik, Heidelberg Cement, Linde, RWE, Siemens, Thyssen Krupp, TUI, Vodafone, Volkswagen Group (includes Audi et al.), BMW, German Railways, Deutche Bank, Lufthansa, SAP, Deutsche Bourse, Nordbank, Munich Re, Bertelsmann, Holtzbrink, and Commerz Bank.
These commanding heights of the German economy are governed by tightly interlocking boards of directors. These companies are often customers of one another and partners in joint ventures. To advance the German Energy Concept, the uniform propaganda coming out of these enterprises regarding "global warming" is as shrill and militant as anything coming out of Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth.
The German Energy Concept seeks to overcome Germany's lack of natural energy resources with renewable energy and electro-mobility. .."
Your customary standard of excellence, thank you. A few comments/questions.
Does the paper you reference define “greenness?” “wilderness?” Is ‘greenness’ a physical place, or a state of mind? I’ve known some ‘greenies’ who have certainly lost their mind, and it had nothing to do with where they took a walk every day.
If they talk about forests, do they discriminate between deciduous or coniferous forests?
Does Dr. Heying offer an opinion on the value of this work?
It would seem that their hypothesis could be bolstered, or trashed, by comparing dementia diagnoses between urban and rural populations, specifically farmers and ranchers. In my opinion, the entire kerfuffle seems like yet another example of decision-based evidence making!
A darn shame, but we need to remember that the Scientific American and most heretofore respected academic publications have morphed into political publications. Theses are the tools of propagandists who have already established an outcome as an objective and twist data attempting to support it.
Heather Heying went on a good rant on the Dark Horse after describing the research article on the SA piece covering it, suggesting the current administration start sending messages to researchers about govt. funding crap science.
Not to disagree, but if this administration threatens to kill federal funding for crap science, the communists will be screaming “censorship”. These faux ‘scientists’ (note, they don’t even rate a full quotation mark) are a virus on the process of true science, but have the loudest voice. They have turned science into a cheap veneer of knowledge like social media has done to communication, a mile wide and a film deep.
While harboring the same opinion as the authors regarding SA, it occurs that, if team chemtrails is correct and millions of pounds of aluminum and other metal dust are being sprayed into the atmosphere, those tons may be far more likely to wash away down paved surfaces, roofs, etc., than when falling on vegetation and dirt. This would leave a far larger and more neurotoxic load in the wilderness than in the city.
In our opinion, it would be rather difficult for that level/duration/large spatial area of intentional release of any known pollutant to be kept secret for one year, much less decades.
But that opinion is worth what you just paid for it. B/c based on that opinion it never occurred to us to spend much time investigating it.
The below is from the Substack of Elizabeth Nickson.
FTA: Whenever you see trails now, you are looking at metals. When you see a haze, aluminum. Every breath you take is filled with highly toxic particles, 2.5 microns per breath at best. On heavy spray days, people complain of headaches, sinus problems, irritability. It is destroying the lungs of babies.
Alan Buckman, former USAF Meterologist: “We are finding aluminum, barium, strontium is being poured into lower stratosphere. Fly ash, the detritus from refining coal is now used in the lower atmosphere – fine particles are enriched by the toxic elements of mercury, chromium, creating a toxic nightmare. It is harmful for everyone.
Wiginton decided to test for chemicals named in geoengineering patents, (US Patent 29,142) : “combustible compositions for generation aerosols, particularly for cloud modification and weather control and aersolization processes: barium, strontium, aluminum.” He raised enough money to take up a NOAA flying lab and test at altitude to measure the particulate trails three separate times. They sampled point to point above and below the cloud layer as well as through and found exactly the same elements listed in climate engineering patents and found in surface tests from all over the globe. They tested the glacier up on top of Mount Shasta, found 61,000 micrograms of aluminum per liter in the snow water. There should be none. Aluminium does not occur in nature on its own. They tested ponds in northern California, soil, farm animals, bees, insects, and sampled the dirt to show that the arthropods, microorganisms in the soil, were dying off. In air and water, they found 375 parts of aluminum per million, an escalation of 50,000% in five years.
Here are [her] credentials. I was trained at the London Bureau of Time Magazine, spent seven years there, ending as European Bureau Chief of LIFE Magazine. I published a novel, The Monkey Puzzle Tree with Knopf and Bloomsbury. I’ve written for the Telegraph, the Globe and Mail, Harper’s Magazine, the Sunday Times Magazine, British Vogue, the Independent, the Guardian, the Observer. I have moonlighted writing for the Daily Mail (fun!) and covered the collections in Paris and London for the Toronto Sun and the LA Weekly.
In 2012, I published Eco-Fascists, How Radical Environmentalists are Destroying Our Natural Heritage, with Adam Bellow at Harper Collins New York.
To research the book, I drove 20,000 miles into the American backcountry, deep into the towns and counties no one visits. Over a full decade, I talked to thousands of men and women negatively impacted by the regulatory regime put in place by activists in government. They care deeply about the land and its health and no one listens to them. Regulations are put in place by people who live thousands of miles away and who are utterly heartless in their orientation, because the devastation is extreme. 20 million have been driven from their lands in the developing world, and I counted 14 million in the USA. Those lands more often than not, degrade. No one else has done that reporting in any systematic way, and I am, God help me, an authority on zoning, regulations, rules, legislation, land use, environmental NGOs, and the bitter fight over land, water and resources in the US, and to a lesser extent in Canada.
You nail it on the head with this one- and it reminds me of the findings from EPA and several other studies I have seen from Beijing and Mexico City about the deleterious effects of PM on glutathione levels and chronic inflammation.
I was surprised to learn that the metals in the airborne particulates cause inflammation in the same way metabolic pathways that chronic stress, poor diet, and activity do. And interestingly, those studies, suggested modest omega-3 supplementation insulated people from the relatively high background levels of PM2.5.
In other words- rather than focusing solely on reducing pollution to zero, which puts what remains of our manufacturing capabilities in the US at risk, focusing on improving life choices and access to nutrients that reduce chronic inflammation may be a much more effective use of time and resources.
As you noted in this article, even the Fed EPA acknowledged the findings in 2022, and has been mum. You can’t suggest people get a little healthier and suddenly the background levels of ambient air pollution that’s left in the US doesn’t matter. No, we have to get to absolute zero.
Looks like the price of nat gas driving coal out of the electricity gen market in the U.S. since 2007 thanks to fracking is helping reduce PM 2.5 nicely over time. Displacing more with nuclear wouldn't hurt.
One wonders if the SA article isn't just another thinly veiled attempt to influence our freely made decisions about how to live. Don't buy an acreage; that's wasteful and dangerous.
We wondered if the reference to "neighborhood density" in the close wasn't a subtle harp to encourage urbanization/density under the mirage of Sustainabilchemy.
"Aiming for the lowest possible dementia risk is all about a balance: enough neighborhood density to have easy access to services and social support but plenty of trees for a walk in the park."
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Perhaps my cynicism is turned up a bit too high, but that’s where I am.
We apologize if we have compounded that effect.
😉
So, I guess the indigenous communities, who call the rain forest home, are screwed.
Good point.
Nice article, Mental. Yea, these scientific journals / publication mills can’t help but to jump the shark from time-to-time. I remember seeing all the articles being mass published during covid. I told a colleague, “I can’t wait to see all the retractions.”
I joke that the competition in science is so high because the rewards are so small.
Cheers!
"...on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference,.."
quote from MIT's Richard Lindzen. Analogy applies here.
This history of Scientific American from an old Ecofascism.com article, now closed due to death threats from the Antifa bunch, you know the watermelons, green on the outside, red on the inside. They're hard core Stalinist/Maoists but when the climate change bandwagon started they jumped on board with blessings from the Malthusian, Misanthropist Financial Parasite Overlords, more useful idiots, like the poor Ukrainians dying in the muddy fields to facilitate another regime change operation.
"...Closely tracking Reinhard was Westphalia aristocrat and publisher Georg von Holtzbrinck (1909-1983). Georg was a Nazi Student League activist in 1931 and a Party member soon after. His publishing business benefited enormously from his Party contacts. During the Third Reich's death throes, Georg volunteered for the Wehrmacht. After the war he was condemned and fined by the denazification commission, but was back publishing by 1948.
The Holtzbrinck media empire has been divided among Georg's three children. In the 1980s they began accumulating key English language assets. They own such famous imprints as Palgrave, Macmillan, Henry Holt, and St. Martin's Press. They purchased Scientific American in 1986 and Nature in 1995. These latter two companies produce over a dozen monthlies, supplements, and online editions reaching millions of scientifically involved people. The Holtzbrincks also own a stable of German newspapers with a combined daily readership of over two million.
Dieter Holtzbrinck quit the board of Dow Jones when it was rumored News Corp was attempting to acquire the company. News Corp is one of the few media conglomerates airing climate skepticism. Dieter denounced News Corp's lack of journalistic integrity. In 2008 Nature endorsed Obama for President, on scientific grounds.."
"..However nebulous, and distant from the gaze of the mainstream media, the universe does contain a German Global Organization. This consists of state agencies and philanthropic foundations marching in step with the following ultra-green, German-based corporations:
Adidas, Allianz, BASF, Bayer, Continental, DHL, E.ON, Evonik, Heidelberg Cement, Henkel, Bosch, Siemens, Evonik, Heidelberg Cement, Linde, RWE, Siemens, Thyssen Krupp, TUI, Vodafone, Volkswagen Group (includes Audi et al.), BMW, German Railways, Deutche Bank, Lufthansa, SAP, Deutsche Bourse, Nordbank, Munich Re, Bertelsmann, Holtzbrink, and Commerz Bank.
These commanding heights of the German economy are governed by tightly interlocking boards of directors. These companies are often customers of one another and partners in joint ventures. To advance the German Energy Concept, the uniform propaganda coming out of these enterprises regarding "global warming" is as shrill and militant as anything coming out of Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth.
The German Energy Concept seeks to overcome Germany's lack of natural energy resources with renewable energy and electro-mobility. .."
Good color.
Thx!
Cynical conclusion: Get out there while you can, before they take your driver's license away and you can no longer get to the trailhead.
Ha! I'll Uber when it gets that bad!
Well. I’m putting the iPad down and going for a walk in the woods. Thanks for this very helpful piece.
Stay out as long as you like!
You're welcome!
People often question the concept of "wokeness", but Scientific American is great example of Exhibit A in the debate.
Don't have to walk very far without stepping on these days.
Helps us, no complaint.
The worst (and i mean the worst) was the SA obituary of Edward O. Wilson, he of bee behavior fame who dared to suggest that genetics may impact behavior see https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-complicated-legacy-of-e-o-wilson/ Some really sick pooh
Your customary standard of excellence, thank you. A few comments/questions.
Does the paper you reference define “greenness?” “wilderness?” Is ‘greenness’ a physical place, or a state of mind? I’ve known some ‘greenies’ who have certainly lost their mind, and it had nothing to do with where they took a walk every day.
If they talk about forests, do they discriminate between deciduous or coniferous forests?
Does Dr. Heying offer an opinion on the value of this work?
It would seem that their hypothesis could be bolstered, or trashed, by comparing dementia diagnoses between urban and rural populations, specifically farmers and ranchers. In my opinion, the entire kerfuffle seems like yet another example of decision-based evidence making!
Thank you for your good work!
The 12 underlying studies did, each in their own manner. They did appear to differentiate between deciduous and coniferous forests.
Yes, Dr. Heying called it crap. Suggested Elon or someone needs to get all these types of efforts knocked off. Waste of time/money.
Thanks very much. Junk science tied with a pretty green bow!
😉
A very well written piece, thank you.
A darn shame, but we need to remember that the Scientific American and most heretofore respected academic publications have morphed into political publications. Theses are the tools of propagandists who have already established an outcome as an objective and twist data attempting to support it.
Thanks!
Heather Heying went on a good rant on the Dark Horse after describing the research article on the SA piece covering it, suggesting the current administration start sending messages to researchers about govt. funding crap science.
Gotta start somewhere.
Not to disagree, but if this administration threatens to kill federal funding for crap science, the communists will be screaming “censorship”. These faux ‘scientists’ (note, they don’t even rate a full quotation mark) are a virus on the process of true science, but have the loudest voice. They have turned science into a cheap veneer of knowledge like social media has done to communication, a mile wide and a film deep.
Is my back yard too geen or just green enough? 🤔 Things that make you say hmmmm.
Right!?
Don't spend too much time thinking about it indoors. Just get outside.
While harboring the same opinion as the authors regarding SA, it occurs that, if team chemtrails is correct and millions of pounds of aluminum and other metal dust are being sprayed into the atmosphere, those tons may be far more likely to wash away down paved surfaces, roofs, etc., than when falling on vegetation and dirt. This would leave a far larger and more neurotoxic load in the wilderness than in the city.
Something to consider.
In our opinion, it would be rather difficult for that level/duration/large spatial area of intentional release of any known pollutant to be kept secret for one year, much less decades.
But that opinion is worth what you just paid for it. B/c based on that opinion it never occurred to us to spend much time investigating it.
The below is from the Substack of Elizabeth Nickson.
FTA: Whenever you see trails now, you are looking at metals. When you see a haze, aluminum. Every breath you take is filled with highly toxic particles, 2.5 microns per breath at best. On heavy spray days, people complain of headaches, sinus problems, irritability. It is destroying the lungs of babies.
Alan Buckman, former USAF Meterologist: “We are finding aluminum, barium, strontium is being poured into lower stratosphere. Fly ash, the detritus from refining coal is now used in the lower atmosphere – fine particles are enriched by the toxic elements of mercury, chromium, creating a toxic nightmare. It is harmful for everyone.
Wiginton decided to test for chemicals named in geoengineering patents, (US Patent 29,142) : “combustible compositions for generation aerosols, particularly for cloud modification and weather control and aersolization processes: barium, strontium, aluminum.” He raised enough money to take up a NOAA flying lab and test at altitude to measure the particulate trails three separate times. They sampled point to point above and below the cloud layer as well as through and found exactly the same elements listed in climate engineering patents and found in surface tests from all over the globe. They tested the glacier up on top of Mount Shasta, found 61,000 micrograms of aluminum per liter in the snow water. There should be none. Aluminium does not occur in nature on its own. They tested ponds in northern California, soil, farm animals, bees, insects, and sampled the dirt to show that the arthropods, microorganisms in the soil, were dying off. In air and water, they found 375 parts of aluminum per million, an escalation of 50,000% in five years.
Here are [her] credentials. I was trained at the London Bureau of Time Magazine, spent seven years there, ending as European Bureau Chief of LIFE Magazine. I published a novel, The Monkey Puzzle Tree with Knopf and Bloomsbury. I’ve written for the Telegraph, the Globe and Mail, Harper’s Magazine, the Sunday Times Magazine, British Vogue, the Independent, the Guardian, the Observer. I have moonlighted writing for the Daily Mail (fun!) and covered the collections in Paris and London for the Toronto Sun and the LA Weekly.
In 2012, I published Eco-Fascists, How Radical Environmentalists are Destroying Our Natural Heritage, with Adam Bellow at Harper Collins New York.
To research the book, I drove 20,000 miles into the American backcountry, deep into the towns and counties no one visits. Over a full decade, I talked to thousands of men and women negatively impacted by the regulatory regime put in place by activists in government. They care deeply about the land and its health and no one listens to them. Regulations are put in place by people who live thousands of miles away and who are utterly heartless in their orientation, because the devastation is extreme. 20 million have been driven from their lands in the developing world, and I counted 14 million in the USA. Those lands more often than not, degrade. No one else has done that reporting in any systematic way, and I am, God help me, an authority on zoning, regulations, rules, legislation, land use, environmental NGOs, and the bitter fight over land, water and resources in the US, and to a lesser extent in Canada.
https://open.substack.com/pub/elizabethnickson/p/geo-engineering-is-the-most-dangerous?r=ownpk&utm_medium=ios
will check it out!
Scientific American= woke mindvirus. Sad.
Chasing clicks? Advertisers? Going with the political flow for fear of not being at the cool kids lunch table?
Ultimately, the reason doesn't matter.
Inefficiencies in the market create opportunities for others. Knowledge is no different.
Thank you, Substack.
You nail it on the head with this one- and it reminds me of the findings from EPA and several other studies I have seen from Beijing and Mexico City about the deleterious effects of PM on glutathione levels and chronic inflammation.
I was surprised to learn that the metals in the airborne particulates cause inflammation in the same way metabolic pathways that chronic stress, poor diet, and activity do. And interestingly, those studies, suggested modest omega-3 supplementation insulated people from the relatively high background levels of PM2.5.
In other words- rather than focusing solely on reducing pollution to zero, which puts what remains of our manufacturing capabilities in the US at risk, focusing on improving life choices and access to nutrients that reduce chronic inflammation may be a much more effective use of time and resources.
As you noted in this article, even the Fed EPA acknowledged the findings in 2022, and has been mum. You can’t suggest people get a little healthier and suddenly the background levels of ambient air pollution that’s left in the US doesn’t matter. No, we have to get to absolute zero.
Looks like the price of nat gas driving coal out of the electricity gen market in the U.S. since 2007 thanks to fracking is helping reduce PM 2.5 nicely over time. Displacing more with nuclear wouldn't hurt.
Substack came along just in time…….
We can hope.....