Jump to content

Spike
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Good site for independent news -set up by disenchanted NYTimes and other journos who were fucked off with the corporate editorial control

Welcome to The Free Press

They seem honest and not with an agenda. 

For example here on this board they criticize RFK Jr as a conspiracy theory. 

Look at how they report it:

A Simple Litmus Test for RFK Jr.’s Ideas

The media describes the new HHS chief as a conspiracy theorist. But how many of his ideas are actually used in Europe? More than you’d think.

vinay-prasad.png?v=1670964483

By Vinay Prasad

November 18, 2024

 

A number of American commenters have been hand-wringing about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination to be the secretary of Health and Human Services, which would put him in charge of such critical agencies as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

“He supports people being able to purchase raw milk, don’t you know!” 

“He wants to discourage municipal water plants from adding fluoride!” 

“He says MMR vaccines cause autism!”

After Donald Trump nominated RFK Jr. for the post, Time magazine called him “a vaccine skeptic who spreads medical disinformation and conspiracy theories,” and quoted Lawrence Gostin, director of Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law as saying of his nomination, “I can’t think of a darker day for public health and science.”

But I think we need to draw distinctions. 

After looking at the whole range of RFK Jr.’s positions, I’ve come to the view that while some are extreme, others are genuinely worthy of debate—and still others are correct. And there is a way to sift the good from the bad and the debatable. When you hear one of RFK Jr.’s ideas, ask yourself a simple question: Do other nations do what he thinks the U.S. should do? If the answer is yes, then the HHS nominee’s idea is not necessarily apocalyptic, and we should be able to discuss it openly. 

Let’s take a look at some of his most controversial opinions:

 

Raw Milk

The government has mandated that milk be pasteurized since 1924. It is a process that prevents the growth of bacteria that can lead to illness. But RFK Jr. wants Americans to be able to buy raw milk, which has many adherents who believe, as Bon Appétit once put it, “the lack of processing makes the vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and fats easier for our bodies to absorb.” Others think it simply tastes better. This will mean, however, that healthy people will have to tolerate some risk of infection. Brown University economist Emily Oster calculates that this would mean an annual risk of infection of 7 in 100,000 unpasteurized milk drinkers. That might be a risk some people choose to accept. Soft cheese also carries health risks, and the FDA currently allows it to be sold in America. If the agency were to minimize all dangers, soft cheese would be banned, but it isn’t.

And now, for my litmus test: Do other nations do it?

The answer is yes. Raw milk is legally available from farms in England, New Zealand, France, Italy, Germany, Norway, and many other countries. I should also note that it is available in most American states via private buying clubs and farm gate sales but, as The Free Press has reported, the government has targeted those who make and sell it. 

Just because other nations do it doesn’t mean we should go all-in on raw milk. I personally think healthy adults should be able to accept the risk of choosing to drink raw milk if they want to. Americans are allowed to bungee jump, smoke cigarettes, and take part in all sorts of activities riskier than consuming raw milk. It is not the job of the state to eliminate all possible risks at the expense of pleasure.

The MMR Vaccine

For years, RFK Jr. has pushed the long-debunked link between the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine and autism. He has, in fact, made millions from peddling this bunk through a best-selling book and nonprofits that pay him a salary. He picked up on the idea from a disgraced British scientist, Andrew Wakefield, who argued a causal link in an article published in The Lancet in 1998. That article was retracted in 2010, and Wakefield was stripped of his UK medical license that same year, but unfortunately RFK Jr. has still continued to push the idea.

It is true that, in the U.S. and throughout the West, there has been a shocking increase in childhood autism, but as Jill Escher, the mother of two severely autistic children, noted in The Free Press last week, “Every epidemiological study on the topic has confirmed zero association between vaccination status and the development of autism.” I don’t know what is causing the rise in autism, and I would be hesitant to venture a guess. But I agree with both RFK Jr. and Escher that the rise in childhood autism needs to be studied more formally.

In the meantime, let’s return to my litmus test: All European countries recommend using MMR vaccines in children. No country I am aware of warns against using it because it leads to autism. If RFK Jr. uses his perch as HHS secretary to discourage parents from getting their children inoculated with the MMR vaccine, severe negative repercussions could result, including measles outbreaks and childhood deaths. This is not a good policy.

Covid-19 Policy

RFK Jr. has said a great deal about the government’s Covid-19 policy: He opposed masking kids. He opposed Covid-19 vaccines for kids. He said that Covid vaccines wouldn’t stop transmission. And he railed against lockdowns, noting they were not effective for children, and actually led to learning loss. Much of what he said was treated as “misinformation,” resulting in Facebook and other social media sites removing posts made by his organization, Children’s Health Defense.

But in each case he was right. Sweden never masked kids under the age of 12, nor did it mandate lockdowns or other severe measures. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in 2020 and 2021, the U.S. had a 19 percent excess death rate, compared to four percent for Sweden. Although cross-country comparisons are never perfect, all data suggests that Sweden did quite well, and did not pay a massive price for its decisions.

Many European nations did not give Covid vaccines to kids, and that makes sense. Although the CDC was never willing to acknowledge this, children were at far lower risk from becoming infected than their elders. And it is now widely accepted that school lockdowns harmed the health of kids long-term a great deal more than they ever protected them in the short-term.

RFK Jr. also said Covid was a great opportunity for corporations like Pfizer and Moderna to make hundreds of billions selling vaccines to people who didn’t need them. I think the vaccines did save lives—especially when given to the elderly or the immunocompromised when they were first made widely available in early 2021—but here too, I also think he is mostly correct. The companies pushed vaccinations and repeated boosters on kids to make more money without proof this was ever necessary.

Finally, this all relates to another RFK Jr. policy: that vaccine manufacturers should not be indemnified from prosecution for negative side effects. A 1986 law prevents vaccine makers from being litigated in court—even though drugmakers can be litigated. This is based on the idea that the manufacturing of vaccines is not a lucrative business, and indeed this has been true for the tried-and-true vaccines that have been in use in the ’60s and ’70s. Yet, in the modern world, vaccines can generate large profits. For example, the new maternal RSV vaccine costs nearly 10 times the cost of DTap, the series of shots for kids under 7 that protect against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. For Pfizer alone, the Covid vaccine earned $100 billion just in 2022. 

I tend to agree with RFK Jr. that makers of the new, costly vaccines should be held accountable when their products lead to harm. This means vaccine makers could be sued for Covid vaccines that caused myocarditis in young men, and Johnson & Johnson could be sued for causing VITT (vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia thrombosis) in young women. Litigation is an important check and balance on drug safety.

What’s more, RFK Jr. wants to put an end to FDA officials cashing in on their government stints by joining pharma companies as soon as they leave the agency. To give just three examples: Mark McClellan, who was the FDA commissioner under George W. Bush, is on the board of the giant pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson. Scott Gottlieb, who headed the FDA during the Trump administration, is on the board of the giant pharmaceutical company Pfizer. And Stephen Hahn, who succeeded Gottlieb at the FDA, is now the CEO of Flagship Pioneering, the venture capital firm behind the Covid-19 vaccine manufacturer Moderna. In The BMJ, my research team showed that over 60 percent of FDA cancer drug reviewers go to work in biopharma when they leave the agency.

This policy proposal from RFK Jr. is most definitely not a crazy idea. In fact, I think it would be incredibly popular with Americans—and might help restore trust in the government’s vast health apparatus.

Fluoride

Like pasteurization, adding fluoride to drinking water has been going on for a long time—since 1951. The primary reason is it prevents cavities and other forms of tooth decay in children. But on November 2, RFK Jr. tweeted that “the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water. Fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease.” 

It is true that the benefits of fluoride have eroded over the years, especially since most toothpastes contain fluoride. Harvard researchers state that there have been reductions in cavities even in countries without routine fluoridation of water. Finally, some economic literature has sought to connect fluoride in the water to lowered cognitive performance, but in my opinion, these papers remain weak and uncertain. Having said this, I think this is a topic that warrants further discussion and cannot be summarily dismissed.

Just look at this recent piece from The Economist on Kennedy’s concerns that excessive fluoride consumption could lower IQ: “As far-fetched as that sounds,” the outlet says, “it is something scientists are investigating. A report by the National Toxicology Program within HHS found that high levels of fluoride exposure, at twice the legal limit, were associated with lower IQ in children. Other researchers found that even fluoride levels within the legal range were associated with that risk. And one study of American mothers found that pregnant women who drank fluoridated water were more likely to give birth to children with lower IQs.”

And again, here is the litmus test: Germany, Norway, and Sweden don’t put fluoride in water. Neither does Portland, Oregon. Again, we can debate the policy, but it is not crazy to think fluoride is unnecessary.

Hepatitis B Vaccine

In the U.S., the hepatitis B vaccine is recommended within 24 hours of a baby’s birth, and that’s what happens most often. The likely reason is that doctors worry parents won’t come back in, so they insist all vaccinations are done as soon as a child is born. 

RFK Jr. does not like administering this vaccine at birth, and he has good company in countries like Switzerland and Austria, which do not recommend hep B vaccination at birth for low-risk babies.

But take a look at the chart below. It shows all sorts of different schedules in 14 European countries for the hep B vaccine. Only two of them follow the U.S. recommendation of inoculation immediately after birth. Three countries—Finland, Hungary, and Iceland—don’t require it at all. 

 

A Simple Litmus Test for RFK Jr.’s Ideas (via European Center for Disease Prevention and Control)

The point here is that an honest scientist would admit that we have no idea which country has the correct schedule, and some childhood vaccines should be reconsidered. 

Moreover, doctors who say “all vaccines are safe and effective” are usually idiots. They haven’t studied the topic or thought about it for one second. Some vaccines are vital. Some are debatable, and some can be harmful (mRNA for young men during Covid, for instance, too often led to myocarditis). Vaccines are like drugs. We need better evidence.

A simple way to answer definitively which childhood immunization schedule works best is to conduct a series of cluster randomized control trials in the U.S. Have different states or counties or cities give vaccines with different schedules. This would allow researchers to account for additives or combined side effects, a claim that vaccine-hesitant folks have made for years. If he were the head of HHS, RFK Jr. could certainly do this. And he should.

Additives in Food

RFK Jr.’s stance on food dyes in breakfast cereals was recently fact-checked by The New York Times. And, as a result, The New York Times ended up with egg on its face

In the original version of the Times article, reporters stated that RFK Jr. objects to the U.S. version of Froot Loops because it contains artificial colorings that are not used in the Canadian and European versions. On this point, he is correct. Those foreign versions use “concentrated carrot juice, annatto turmeric, concentrated watermelon juice, concentrated blueberry juice” instead of the American version, which uses the colorings Red 40, Yellow 5, and Blue 1. 

In a later version of the article, the Times claimed RFK Jr. was objecting to the total number of ingredients being lower abroad—which the outlet said is untrue. But, when you consider all of Kennedy’s statements, it is clear he objects to the dyes, not the number of ingredients. By the Times’ twisted logic, Kennedy would object to Indian food over sushi because it has more spices added. That is not his position.

What’s more, he might even be right about fewer ingredients appearing in U.S. cereals. Just look at this example:

 

A Simple Litmus Test for RFK Jr.’s Ideas via (FoodBabe.com)

In Conclusion

Just because another nation does things differently does not mean it is correct. What it usually means is the other country’s health rules are worth studying and debating. Right now, the media is covering RFK Jr. poorly and unfairly, giving him no credit for ideas that are well within the bounds of discussion. My simple rule makes sense: If other nations are doing it, we should be willing to look into it. And RFK Jr. should not be called a conspiracy theorist for holding that view.

 

https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.ama

 

Vinay Prasad is a hematologist-oncologist and a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco. This article is adapted from his Substack, Vinay Prasad’s Observations and Thoughts. You can follow him on his YouTube channel Vinay Prasad MD MPH, or on Twitter (now X) @VPrasadMDMPH.

 

Edited by Fernando
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump administration to give Farage his own kennel

Kennel.jpg

DONALD Trump’s transition team has already secured a kennel and water bowl for Nigel Farage to use when he visits America.

Having proven his worth by barking ‘MAGA’ on command and obediently performing tricks at Trump’s rallies, Farage will be given his own dog house to shelter in during his many future trips to the White House.

Republican party spokesperson Norman Steele said: “In an ideal world he’ll wish he was curled up in bed with the President himself. We can’t allow that though as he’ll get hair everywhere and stink out the place.

“A small wooden kennel at the far end of the White House Rose Garden is the next best thing. He can stay in there and longingly gaze at his owners doing their important work in the Oval Office while gnawing on an old bone we’ll get him from the butchers.

“We won’t neglect him though. At least twice a day we’ll pop him on a lead for a walk and so he can do his business in a bush. Then once he’s worn out he can sleep on the top of his kennel like Snoopy.”

Panting excitedly, Farage said: “Can I hump Trump’s leg? Can I?”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Trump administration to give Farage his own kennel

Kennel.jpg

DONALD Trump’s transition team has already secured a kennel and water bowl for Nigel Farage to use when he visits America.

Having proven his worth by barking ‘MAGA’ on command and obediently performing tricks at Trump’s rallies, Farage will be given his own dog house to shelter in during his many future trips to the White House.

Republican party spokesperson Norman Steele said: “In an ideal world he’ll wish he was curled up in bed with the President himself. We can’t allow that though as he’ll get hair everywhere and stink out the place.

“A small wooden kennel at the far end of the White House Rose Garden is the next best thing. He can stay in there and longingly gaze at his owners doing their important work in the Oval Office while gnawing on an old bone we’ll get him from the butchers.

“We won’t neglect him though. At least twice a day we’ll pop him on a lead for a walk and so he can do his business in a bush. Then once he’s worn out he can sleep on the top of his kennel like Snoopy.”

Panting excitedly, Farage said: “Can I hump Trump’s leg? Can I?”

Sarmer is a fool for not raising the brexit issue.
Brexit will kill him just like it did kill five Tory prime ministers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

Greek communists attack Ukrainian expats gathering in commenoration of the holodomor:

https://www.tovima.gr/2024/11/25/politics/oukraniki-presveia-kke-allilokatigories-gia-ta-epeisodia-se-ekdilosi-sti-mandra/

Too many Commies in Greece ?

Also what the fuck is it with hundreds of Russian 'fur shops' all over the Greek islands ?

Every time i go to Crete or Rhodes there are more of them. Fur hats, fur coats its not like its fucking cold over there. Money laundering ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Too many Commies in Greece ?

Also what the fuck is it with hundreds of Russian 'fur shops' all over the Greek islands ?

Every time i go to Crete or Rhodes there are more of them. Fur hats, fur coats its not like its fucking cold over there. Money laundering ?

I have never seen fur shops owned by Russians.
After all I don't go to fur shops.
The one I knew was a Greek-Georgian kebap house, gone now. The proprietor was saying Stalin was the greatest world leader ever.
But I wonder if the commie leadership know the language.
The old one yes of course, but now ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question, climate warming is real and this is being put on the humans. But I have a problem with this, climate warming is not the first time it happen to this earth.

Was reading this about the great lakes and how in the past there was climate warming. Well in that time there was no human activity. So if climate happen in the past without humans then can we just say it's a normal cycle and not just solely the humans fault? 

 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just found out this while looking at deaths in 2024 Wikipedia page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_in_2024

Germany owned a Russian version of Soviet Union before is became USSR.

The Volga German Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic

ASSR of the Russian SFSR

1918–1941

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_German_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic

 

Native name 

Мария Филипповна Лиманская

Born 12 April 1924

Staraya Poltavka, Volga German ASSR, Russian SFSR, USSR

Died 26 November 2024 (aged 100)

Russia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Limanskaya

This 100 year old Russian woman traffic controller died on my birthday today 26 November 2024.

Edited by KEVINAA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fernando said:

I have a question, climate warming is real and this is being put on the humans. But I have a problem with this, climate warming is not the first time it happen to this earth.

Was reading this about the great lakes and how in the past there was climate warming. Well in that time there was no human activity. So if climate happen in the past without humans then can we just say it's a normal cycle and not just solely the humans fault? 

 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

 

oh come on now

do not tell me we have to litigate anthropogenic global climate change denialism now on here

smdh

 

4eabb27dcae7306e0e94416ac57ad9ad.png

Evidence

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

Takeaways

  • While Earth’s climate has changed throughout its history, the current warming is happening at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years.
  • According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on the warming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact."1
  • Scientific information taken from natural sources (such as ice cores, rocks, and tree rings) and from modern equipment (like satellites and instruments) all show the signs of a changing climate.
  • From global temperature rise to melting ice sheets, the evidence of a warming planet abounds.

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

co2-graph-072623.jpg?w=1536&format=webp&

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution.
Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record. Find out more about ice cores (external site).

 

The current warming trend is different because it is clearly the result of human activities since the mid-1800s, and is proceeding at a rate not seen over many recent millennia.1 It is undeniable that human activities have produced the atmospheric gases that have trapped more of the Sun’s energy in the Earth system. This extra energy has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, and widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have occurred.

Earth-orbiting satellites and new technologies have helped scientists see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate all over the world. These data, collected over many years, reveal the signs and patterns of a changing climate.

Scientists demonstrated the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases in the mid-19th century.2 Many of the science instruments NASA uses to study our climate focus on how these gases affect the movement of infrared radiation through the atmosphere. From the measured impacts of increases in these gases, there is no question that increased greenhouse gas levels warm Earth in response.

Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal. - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly 10 times faster than the average rate of warming after an ice age. Carbon dioxide from human activities is increasing about 250 times faster than it did from natural sources after the last Ice Age.3

327a6a30bbc6219f567e2932dba0fbf2.png

a6590d84c511a76aef5120e2cd925f03.jpg

63d0cc5058d6f8bf74f1cff134f9fa7d.png

a335a994716e61a14e958b393bb20add.jpg

07e33babe5bbbd6f8918b893adb6d968.jpg

66ca4f1cb3a7dfafe253394dbb32550b.jpg

e3b616497aa83bdac42f6f797097218b.png

7f5ca21dcda9a3066392ae9782dc4081.png

100b1c671924ce778a57b3420fd45707.png

References

1. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WGI, Technical Summary.

B.D. Santer et.al., “A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere.” Nature 382 (04 July 1996): 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1038/382039a0.

Gabriele C. Hegerl et al., “Detecting Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change with an Optimal Fingerprint Method.” Journal of Climate 9 (October 1996): 2281-2306. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009<2281:DGGICC>2.0.CO;2.

V. Ramaswamy, et al., “Anthropogenic and Natural Influences in the Evolution of Lower Stratospheric Cooling.” Science 311 (24 February 2006): 1138-1141. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122587.

B.D. Santer et al., “Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes.” Science 301 (25 July 2003): 479-483. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084123.

T. Westerhold et al., "An astronomically dated record of Earth’s climate and its predictability over the last 66 million years." Science 369 (11 Sept. 2020): 1383-1387. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094123

2. In 1824, Joseph Fourier calculated that an Earth-sized planet, at our distance from the Sun, ought to be much colder. He suggested something in the atmosphere must be acting like an insulating blanket. In 1856, Eunice Foote discovered that blanket, showing that carbon dioxide and water vapor in Earth's atmosphere trap escaping infrared (heat) radiation.

In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.

In 1938, Guy Callendar connected carbon dioxide increases in Earth’s atmosphere to global warming. In 1941, Milutin Milankovic linked ice ages to Earth’s orbital characteristics. Gilbert Plass formulated the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change in 1956.

3. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WG1, Chapter 2
Vostok ice core data; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record
O. Gaffney, W. Steffen, "The Anthropocene Equation." The Anthropocene Review 4, issue 1 (April 2017): 53-61. https://doi.org/abs/10.1177/2053019616688022.

6. S. Levitus, J. Antonov, T. Boyer, O Baranova, H. Garcia, R. Locarnini, A. Mishonov, J. Reagan, D. Seidov, E. Yarosh, M. Zweng, "NCEI ocean heat content, temperature anomalies, salinity anomalies, thermosteric sea level anomalies, halosteric sea level anomalies, and total steric sea level anomalies from 1955 to present calculated from in situ oceanographic subsurface profile data (NCEI Accession 0164586), Version 4.4. (2017) NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index3.html

K. von Schuckmann, L. Cheng, L,. D. Palmer, J. Hansen, C. Tassone, V. Aich, S. Adusumilli, H. Beltrami, H., T. Boyer, F. Cuesta-Valero, D. Desbruyeres, C. Domingues, A. Garcia-Garcia, P. Gentine, J. Gilson, M. Gorfer, L. Haimberger, M. Ishii, M., G. Johnson, R. Killick, B. King, G. Kirchengast, N. Kolodziejczyk, J. Lyman, B. Marzeion, M. Mayer, M. Monier, D. Monselesan, S. Purkey, D. Roemmich, A. Schweiger, S. Seneviratne, A. Shepherd, D. Slater, A. Steiner, F. Straneo, M.L. Timmermans, S. Wijffels. "Heat stored in the Earth system: where does the energy go?" Earth System Science Data 12, Issue 3 (07 September 2020): 2013-2041. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2013-2020.

7. I. Velicogna, Yara Mohajerani, A. Geruo, F. Landerer, J. Mouginot, B. Noel, E. Rignot, T. Sutterly, M. van den Broeke, M. Wessem, D. Wiese, "Continuity of Ice Sheet Mass Loss in Greenland and Antarctica From the GRACE and GRACE Follow-On Missions." Geophysical Research Letters 47, Issue 8 (28 April 2020): e2020GL087291. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087291.

9. National Snow and Ice Data Center
D.A. Robinson, D. K. Hall, and T. L. Mote, "MEaSUREs Northern Hemisphere Terrestrial Snow Cover Extent Daily 25km EASE-Grid 2.0, Version 1 (2017). Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi:
https://doi.org/10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/nsidc-0530.001. http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/snow_extent.html
Rutgers University Global Snow Lab. Data History

10. R.S. Nerem, B.D. Beckley, J. T. Fasullo, B.D. Hamlington, D. Masters, and G.T. Mitchum, "Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era." PNAS 15, no. 9 (12 Feb. 2018): 2022-2025. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717312115.

12. USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp, https://doi.org/10.7930/j0j964j6.

15. C.L. Sabine, et al., “The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2.” Science 305 (16 July 2004): 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403.

16. Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, Technical Summary, Chapter TS.5, Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities, Section 5.2.2.3.
https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/technical-summary/

Header image shows clouds imitating mountains as the sun sets after midnight as seen from Denali's backcountry Unit 13 on June 14, 2019. Credit: NPS/Emily Mesner
Image credit in list of evidence: Ashwin Kumar, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Vesper said:

oh come on now

do not tell me we have to litigate anthropogenic global climate change denialism now on here

smdh

 

4eabb27dcae7306e0e94416ac57ad9ad.png

Evidence

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

Takeaways

  • While Earth’s climate has changed throughout its history, the current warming is happening at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years.
  • According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on the warming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact."1
  • Scientific information taken from natural sources (such as ice cores, rocks, and tree rings) and from modern equipment (like satellites and instruments) all show the signs of a changing climate.
  • From global temperature rise to melting ice sheets, the evidence of a warming planet abounds.

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

co2-graph-072623.jpg?w=1536&format=webp&

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution.
Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record. Find out more about ice cores (external site).

 

The current warming trend is different because it is clearly the result of human activities since the mid-1800s, and is proceeding at a rate not seen over many recent millennia.1 It is undeniable that human activities have produced the atmospheric gases that have trapped more of the Sun’s energy in the Earth system. This extra energy has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, and widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have occurred.

Earth-orbiting satellites and new technologies have helped scientists see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate all over the world. These data, collected over many years, reveal the signs and patterns of a changing climate.

Scientists demonstrated the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases in the mid-19th century.2 Many of the science instruments NASA uses to study our climate focus on how these gases affect the movement of infrared radiation through the atmosphere. From the measured impacts of increases in these gases, there is no question that increased greenhouse gas levels warm Earth in response.

Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal. - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly 10 times faster than the average rate of warming after an ice age. Carbon dioxide from human activities is increasing about 250 times faster than it did from natural sources after the last Ice Age.3

327a6a30bbc6219f567e2932dba0fbf2.png

a6590d84c511a76aef5120e2cd925f03.jpg

63d0cc5058d6f8bf74f1cff134f9fa7d.png

a335a994716e61a14e958b393bb20add.jpg

07e33babe5bbbd6f8918b893adb6d968.jpg

66ca4f1cb3a7dfafe253394dbb32550b.jpg

e3b616497aa83bdac42f6f797097218b.png

7f5ca21dcda9a3066392ae9782dc4081.png

100b1c671924ce778a57b3420fd45707.png

References

1. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WGI, Technical Summary.

B.D. Santer et.al., “A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere.” Nature 382 (04 July 1996): 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1038/382039a0.

Gabriele C. Hegerl et al., “Detecting Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change with an Optimal Fingerprint Method.” Journal of Climate 9 (October 1996): 2281-2306. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009<2281:DGGICC>2.0.CO;2.

V. Ramaswamy, et al., “Anthropogenic and Natural Influences in the Evolution of Lower Stratospheric Cooling.” Science 311 (24 February 2006): 1138-1141. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122587.

B.D. Santer et al., “Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes.” Science 301 (25 July 2003): 479-483. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084123.

T. Westerhold et al., "An astronomically dated record of Earth’s climate and its predictability over the last 66 million years." Science 369 (11 Sept. 2020): 1383-1387. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094123

2. In 1824, Joseph Fourier calculated that an Earth-sized planet, at our distance from the Sun, ought to be much colder. He suggested something in the atmosphere must be acting like an insulating blanket. In 1856, Eunice Foote discovered that blanket, showing that carbon dioxide and water vapor in Earth's atmosphere trap escaping infrared (heat) radiation.

In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.

In 1938, Guy Callendar connected carbon dioxide increases in Earth’s atmosphere to global warming. In 1941, Milutin Milankovic linked ice ages to Earth’s orbital characteristics. Gilbert Plass formulated the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change in 1956.

3. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WG1, Chapter 2
Vostok ice core data; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record
O. Gaffney, W. Steffen, "The Anthropocene Equation." The Anthropocene Review 4, issue 1 (April 2017): 53-61. https://doi.org/abs/10.1177/2053019616688022.

6. S. Levitus, J. Antonov, T. Boyer, O Baranova, H. Garcia, R. Locarnini, A. Mishonov, J. Reagan, D. Seidov, E. Yarosh, M. Zweng, "NCEI ocean heat content, temperature anomalies, salinity anomalies, thermosteric sea level anomalies, halosteric sea level anomalies, and total steric sea level anomalies from 1955 to present calculated from in situ oceanographic subsurface profile data (NCEI Accession 0164586), Version 4.4. (2017) NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index3.html

K. von Schuckmann, L. Cheng, L,. D. Palmer, J. Hansen, C. Tassone, V. Aich, S. Adusumilli, H. Beltrami, H., T. Boyer, F. Cuesta-Valero, D. Desbruyeres, C. Domingues, A. Garcia-Garcia, P. Gentine, J. Gilson, M. Gorfer, L. Haimberger, M. Ishii, M., G. Johnson, R. Killick, B. King, G. Kirchengast, N. Kolodziejczyk, J. Lyman, B. Marzeion, M. Mayer, M. Monier, D. Monselesan, S. Purkey, D. Roemmich, A. Schweiger, S. Seneviratne, A. Shepherd, D. Slater, A. Steiner, F. Straneo, M.L. Timmermans, S. Wijffels. "Heat stored in the Earth system: where does the energy go?" Earth System Science Data 12, Issue 3 (07 September 2020): 2013-2041. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2013-2020.

7. I. Velicogna, Yara Mohajerani, A. Geruo, F. Landerer, J. Mouginot, B. Noel, E. Rignot, T. Sutterly, M. van den Broeke, M. Wessem, D. Wiese, "Continuity of Ice Sheet Mass Loss in Greenland and Antarctica From the GRACE and GRACE Follow-On Missions." Geophysical Research Letters 47, Issue 8 (28 April 2020): e2020GL087291. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087291.

9. National Snow and Ice Data Center
D.A. Robinson, D. K. Hall, and T. L. Mote, "MEaSUREs Northern Hemisphere Terrestrial Snow Cover Extent Daily 25km EASE-Grid 2.0, Version 1 (2017). Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi:
https://doi.org/10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/nsidc-0530.001. http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/snow_extent.html
Rutgers University Global Snow Lab. Data History

10. R.S. Nerem, B.D. Beckley, J. T. Fasullo, B.D. Hamlington, D. Masters, and G.T. Mitchum, "Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era." PNAS 15, no. 9 (12 Feb. 2018): 2022-2025. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717312115.

12. USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp, https://doi.org/10.7930/j0j964j6.

15. C.L. Sabine, et al., “The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2.” Science 305 (16 July 2004): 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403.

16. Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, Technical Summary, Chapter TS.5, Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities, Section 5.2.2.3.
https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/technical-summary/

Header image shows clouds imitating mountains as the sun sets after midnight as seen from Denali's backcountry Unit 13 on June 14, 2019. Credit: NPS/Emily Mesner
Image credit in list of evidence: Ashwin Kumar, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic.

Good stuff. 

So in the past we did had the planet getting hot and colder, because it was part of the system right?

This time is the humans fault. 

I take that. Then the question is if we are producing climate change then will it have the same effect in the past?

As you have their in your analysis that we have had periods of ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a global warming, so can we use the previous model to see how far we will go into global warming before we reverse and enter into an ice age?

Because on the analysis it seems to indicate that we had global warming and eventually ice age....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fernando said:

Good stuff. 

So in the past we did had the planet getting hot and colder, because it was part of the system right?

This time is the humans fault. 

I take that. Then the question is if we are producing climate change then will it have the same effect in the past?

As you have their in your analysis that we have had periods of ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a global warming, so can we use the previous model to see how far we will go into global warming before we reverse and enter into an ice age?

Because on the analysis it seems to indicate that we had global warming and eventually ice age....

there has never before been this level of anthropogenic climate change-inducing inputs that we have seen introduced now over the past 120 or so years, asn especially the last 125 or so years

never in the entire history of the planet

 

Climate change denial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

Climate change denial (also global warming denial) is a form of science denial characterized by rejecting, refusing to acknowledge, disputing, or fighting the scientific consensus on climate change. Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none.[4] Climate change denial includes unreasonable doubts about the extent to which climate change is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, and the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions.[5][6][7]: 170–173  To a lesser extent, climate change denial can also be implicit when people accept the science but fail to reconcile it with their belief or action.[6] Several studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism,[8]: 691–698  pseudoscience,[9] or propaganda.[10]: 351 

Many issues that are settled in the scientific community, such as human responsibility for climate change, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon academics and scientists call climate change denial. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported government and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject publicly. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on climate change.[11][12]

Industrial, political and ideological interests organize activity to undermine public trust in climate science.[13][14][15][8]: 691–698  Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates, ultraconservative think tanks, and ultraconservative alternative media, often in the U.S.[10]: 351 [16][8] More than 90% of papers that are skeptical of climate change originate from right-wing think tanks.[17] Climate change denial is undermining efforts to act on or adapt to climate change, and exerts a powerful influence on the politics of climate change.[15][8]: 691–698 

In the 1970s, oil companies published research that broadly concurred with the scientific community's view on climate change. Since then, for several decades, oil companies have been organizing a widespread and systematic climate change denial campaign to seed public disinformation, a strategy that has been compared to the tobacco industry's organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking. Some of the campaigns are even carried out by the same people who previously spread the tobacco industry's denialist propaganda.[18][19][20]

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/11/2024 at 16:25, Fulham Broadway said:

Good site for independent news -set up by disenchanted NYTimes and other journos who were fucked off with the corporate editorial control

Welcome to The Free Press

that is a pretty RW site, headed up by the hardcore US zionist Bari Weiss, her progressive-bashing wife Nellie Bowles, plus the RW British journo Douglas Murray, and the Thatcher/Reagan-loving RW US/British historian Niall Ferguson

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bari_Weiss

According to The Washington Post, Weiss "portrays herself as a liberal uncomfortable with the excesses of left-wing culture"[70] and has sought to "position herself as a reasonable liberal concerned that far-left critiques stifled free speech".[71] Vanity Fair called Weiss "a provocateur".[6] The Jewish Telegraphic Agency said that her writing "doesn't lend itself easily to labels".[72] Weiss has been described as conservative by Haaretz, The Times of Israel, The Daily Dot, and Business Insider.[73][74][75][76] In an interview with Joe Rogan, she called herself a "left-leaning centrist".[77] The Times of Israel reported that her public fight with The New York Times made her a hero among some conservatives.[78]

Weiss has expressed support for Israel and Zionism in her columns. When writer Andrew Sullivan described her as an "unhinged Zionist", she responded that she "happily plead[s] guilty as charged".[79] As of 2024, Weiss had visited Israel over 15 times, including after the October 7 attacks, and compared pro-Israel social media commentators to former Soviet refusenik Natan Sharansky, whose years in prison made him an icon of the movement to free Jews from the Soviet Union.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Murray_(author)

Douglas Murray (born 16 July 1979)[1] is a British author and conservative political commentator, cultural critic, and journalist. He founded the Centre for Social Cohesion in 2007, which became part of the Henry Jackson Society, where he was associate director from 2011 to 2018.

He is currently an associate editor of the conservative British political and cultural magazine The Spectator, and has been a regular contributor to The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Sun, the Daily Mail, New York Post, National Review, The Free Press, and Unherd.[2][3][4][5][6][7]

Murray is known for his criticism of immigration and Islam. His books include Neoconservatism: Why We Need It (2005), The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam (2017), The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity (2019) and The War on the West (2022).

Murray has been praised by conservatives, but strongly criticised by many progressives.[8][9][10][11] Articles in the academic journals Ethnic and Racial Studies and National Identities associate his views with Islamophobia[12][13] and he has been linked to far-right political ideologies[14] and the promotion of far-right ideas such as the Eurabia, Great Replacement, and Cultural Marxism conspiracy theories.[15][16][17][18]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_Ferguson

Sir Niall Campbell Ferguson, HonFRSE (/niːl/ NEEL; born 18 April 1964)[1] is a British-American conservative historian who is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University.[2][3] Previously, he was a professor at Harvard University, the London School of Economics, New York University, a visiting professor at the New College of the Humanities, and a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford. He was a visiting lecturer at the London School of Economics for the 2023/24 academic year and at Tsinghua University, China in 2019–20.[4][5] He is a co-founder of the University of Austin, Texas.[6]

Ferguson writes and lectures on international history, economic history, financial history and the history of the British Empire and American imperialism.[7] He holds positive views concerning the British Empire.[8] In 2004, he was one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world.[9] Ferguson has written and presented numerous television documentary series, including The Ascent of Money, which won an International Emmy Award for Best Documentary in 2009.[10] In 2024, he was knighted by King Charles III for services to literature.[11]

Ferguson has been a contributing editor for Bloomberg Television and a columnist for Newsweek.[12] He began writing a semi-monthly column for Bloomberg Opinion in June 2020 and has also been a regular columnist at The Spectator and the Daily Mail.[13][14] In 2021 he became a joint-founder of the new University of Austin. Since June 2024 he is a bi-weekly columnist at The Free Press.[15] Ferguson has also contributed articles to many journals including Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy.[16][17] He has been described as a conservative and called himself a supporter of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.[18][19]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Vesper said:

there has never before been this level of anthropogenic climate change-inducing inputs that we have seen introduced now over the past 120 or so years, asn especially the last 125 or so years

never in the entire history of the planet

 

Climate change denial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

Climate change denial (also global warming denial) is a form of science denial characterized by rejecting, refusing to acknowledge, disputing, or fighting the scientific consensus on climate change. Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none.[4] Climate change denial includes unreasonable doubts about the extent to which climate change is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, and the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions.[5][6][7]: 170–173  To a lesser extent, climate change denial can also be implicit when people accept the science but fail to reconcile it with their belief or action.[6] Several studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism,[8]: 691–698  pseudoscience,[9] or propaganda.[10]: 351 

Many issues that are settled in the scientific community, such as human responsibility for climate change, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon academics and scientists call climate change denial. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported government and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject publicly. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on climate change.[11][12]

Industrial, political and ideological interests organize activity to undermine public trust in climate science.[13][14][15][8]: 691–698  Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates, ultraconservative think tanks, and ultraconservative alternative media, often in the U.S.[10]: 351 [16][8] More than 90% of papers that are skeptical of climate change originate from right-wing think tanks.[17] Climate change denial is undermining efforts to act on or adapt to climate change, and exerts a powerful influence on the politics of climate change.[15][8]: 691–698 

In the 1970s, oil companies published research that broadly concurred with the scientific community's view on climate change. Since then, for several decades, oil companies have been organizing a widespread and systematic climate change denial campaign to seed public disinformation, a strategy that has been compared to the tobacco industry's organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking. Some of the campaigns are even carried out by the same people who previously spread the tobacco industry's denialist propaganda.[18][19][20]

 

 

Climate change is real, I'm not denying. 

I was saying how it happen in the past and in the past we had more stronger climate change then today. 

Based on your article it was because of the rotation:

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

 

So the question is if we had that in the past right now we are not nowhere near the level of the past. Because you form lakes in the past that are big. Example on this article: 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

We had ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a trend of global warming, but this time based on your article the human fault not the orbit. 

Question is if we can use the model of past global warming to see how far we will go into the warming of the planet before we enter into an ice age?

That is the vibe I'm getting from your article, that we will produced these types of cycles from warm to cold. 

 

 

Edited by Fernando
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

talk chelse forums

We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Talk Chelsea relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online because over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this website and help us by switching your ad blocker off.

KTBFFH
Thank You