text:
Tag Archives: Global Warming
New Data Shows Climate Change Hysteria Isn't Grounded In Science
While we must steward the planet God has gifted to us, there is no empirical basis for apocalyptic predictions of impending doom.
By Glenn T. Stanton • The Federalist
Photo storem / Flickr
The "Climate Clock" looms ten stories above Manhattan's Union Square so all passersby can track the precise moment the world passes its supposed tipping-point toward irreversible, apocalyptic environmental demise. This clock has that moment of doom pegged at a little more than seven years from today. One of the men who created the clock, artist Gan Golan, said his motivation for the project was the birth of his daughter two years ago:
What we did in the next few years would determine the world my daughter would live in, that all of us would live in, and I felt that timeline needed to be understood by everyone, everywhere.
As a result, Golan and a friend constructed a massive digital alarm clock on the side of a building in one of the busiest places in the world to track just how little time we have. Last year, they even made a smaller climate clock for Swedish teenage environmental activist Greta Thunberg; one she could hold in her hand during her famed appearance at the United Nations Climate Action Summit.
"This is arguably the most important number in the world," the team explained to The New York Times, adding, "You can't argue with science, you just have to reckon with it." And that is where the problem lies with the environmental doom and gloom — you can absolutely argue with science. That is precisely what the scientific method is: the careful, relentless discipline of skepticism and discovery. It's testing and questioning what others claim is beyond debate.
Nine leading climate scientists from Germany, France, Finland, and Ireland have, indeed, questioned whether anyone can reliably determine how much time remains between now and an irreversible trajectory toward environmental ruin.
Drawing from 36 different meta-analyses on the question, involving more than 4,600 individual studies spanning the last 45 years, their findings were recently published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution. They conclude that the empirical data doesn't allow scientists to establish ecological thresholds or tipping points. As natural bio-systems are dynamic, ever-evolving, and adapting over the long-term, determining longevity timeframes is currently impossible.
These scholars write that frankly, "we lack systematic quantitative evidence as to whether empirical data allow definitions of such thresholds" and "our results thus question the pervasive presence of threshold concepts" in environmental politics and policy. Their findings also reinforced the contention that "global change biology needs to abandon the general expectation that system properties allow defining thresholds as a way to manage nature under global change."
Professor José M. Montoya, one of the nine authors and an ecologist at the Theoretical and Experimental Ecology Station in France, told the French National Center for Scientific Research "many ecologists have long had this intuition" that setting reliable, empirically situated tipping-points "was difficult to verify until now for lack of sufficient computing power to carry out a wide-ranging analysis." But that has now changed.
So no, there is no reliable science behind the new seven-years-to-the-point-of-no-return countdown of the Climate Clock in Union Square, nor for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's infamous "The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't act now" scare, or Thunberg's just-10-years-til-inevitable-doom drum pounding. Such claims simply do not — and cannot — be firmly grounded in any scientific knowledge we currently possess.
Evidence for this conclusion, however, goes beyond the aforementioned conclusive new study. 2020 saw the publication of two extremely important books from leading, mainstream environmental-climate scholars on what science says about the earth's future.
The first is Michael Shellenberger, a Time magazine "Hero of the environment" who explains in his book "Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All" that nearly every piece of scare data presented by the likes of AOC, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Thunberg is not only incorrect but tells a story that is the opposite of the scientific truth. Not only is the world not going to end due to climate change, but in many important ways, the environment is getting markedly better.
As Shellenberger explains, environmental improvements are coming from technology and industry, not the do-goodism of Greenpeace and other activists. Certainly no conservative, Shellenberger wrote "Apocalypse Never" precisely because he was "getting fed up with the exaggeration, alarmism, and extremism that are the enemy of a positive, humanistic, and rational environmentalism." Shellenberger is both pro-people and pro-technology, explaining counter-intuitively that the scientific "evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilization is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilization that climate alarmists would return us to."
Another major environmentalist voice challenging hysteria is Bjorn Lomborg of the Copenhagen Consensus Center think tank, listed by the UK's liberal Guardian newspaper as one of the 50 people who could save the planet. In his book "False Alarm," he explains how "climate change panic" is not only unfounded, it's also wasting trillions of dollars globally, hurting the poor, and failing to fix the very problems it warns us about. Lomborg explains:
'The rhetoric on climate change has become more extreme and less moored to the actual science' at the very time that 'climate scientists have painstakingly increased knowledge about climate change, and we have more — and more reliable — data than ever before.'
So, what science genuinely telling us? "Science shows us that fears of a climate apocalypse are unfounded." Lomborg explains, admitting that while "global warming is real … it is not the end of the world." "It is a manageable problem" he adds. He is dismayed that we live in a world "where almost half the population believes climate change will extinguish humanity" and do so under the mistaken assumption that science concludes this. It doesn't, and he is vexed this mantra parades under the banner of enlightenment.
It's imperative we properly steward this beautiful planet God has gifted to us. It was the second command He gave to humanity, after the charge to populate it with generation after generation of new people. But hysteria is not what is called for in this work. Shellenberger, Lomborg, and these nine other international ecologists tell us that not only is there no empirical basis for the apocalyptic prognostications so needlessly disturbing the dreams of the world's young people.
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming, Green Energy
National Park Replaces Signs Predicting Disappearance of Glaciers By 2020
By Andrew Kugle • Washington Free Beacon
The Glacier National Park is set to replace signs predicting glaciers would disappear by 2020 due to climate change. The glaciers remain.
The signs were posted in the Montana park a decade ago because, at the time, climate change forecasts predicted the glaciers would be completely melted by 2020. The U.S. Geological Survey told the park in 2017 that the glaciers were not melting as fast as predicted due to changes in the forecast model, but park spokeswoman Gina Kurzmen said the park was unable to change the signs until now due to budget constraints. Kurzmen told CNN the park changed one sign last year but is still waiting on budget authorization to update two other signs.
The new signs will still warn visitors that the glaciers are disappearing but won't offer an expected deadline this time.
"When they will completely disappear depends on how and when we act. One thing is consistent: the glaciers in the park are shrinking," the new signs will say.
This isn't the first climate change prediction to not come to fruition. A report from the Competitive Enterprise Institute documented more than 50 years of what it calls "notably wild predictions from notable people in government and science." One prediction, reported by the Associated Press in 1989, claimed rising seas would "obliterate" nations by the year 2000. Just a few years earlier, headlines were warning about another ice age.
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming
Climate Worship Is Nothing More Than Rebranded Paganism
We're seeing sexualized dances, hallucinogens, worshiping nature, confessing sins in pagan animism, worshiping purified teen saints, all to promote a supposedly greater cause.
By Sumantra Maitra • The Federalist
Lynn Townsend White Jr., an American historian from Princeton, wrote an influential essay in 1967, at the height of the cultural revolution in Western campuses, arguing that Christianity and Judeo-Christian values are responsible for ecological disaster and climate change. The essay, naturally, was adapted by generations after, ironically almost like a document of faith.
The central argument went like this. White argued, "The victory of Christianity over paganism was the greatest psychic revolution in the history of our culture. … By destroying pagan animism, Christianity made it possible to exploit nature in a mood of indifference to the feelings of natural objects."
, and fear — didn't just go away but manifested in various other pre-civilized tribal ways. For example, a liberal seminary encouraged its students to skip classes to pray and confess sins in front of potted plants. In Switzerland, 250 people in full funereal garb mourned the apparent approaching death of a glacier.
That is why members of "Extinction Rebellion" do what they do. Extinction Rebellion is an apocalyptic cult that wants to radically end every thing around you, from your private cars to the burgers you eat and the plastic chairs in your yard. It is a cult that was formed after its founder took psychedelic drugs and prayed for "social change." Members have blocked D.C. and London intersections, "twerking" the way people in a pre-civilized era would perform a fertility dance to pray to Gaia.
And then there's Saint Greta, our perpetual teen of sorrow. I have been comparing her worship to Joan of Arc ever since she was invited to the British Parliament, the birthplace of modern democracy. She was surrounded by buffoons nodding their heads like they were listening to gospel truth.
Mr Maitra@MrMaitra
Lads, I hesitate to take credit for my predictions…I am magnanimous and noble like that…but this entire Joan of Arc thingy…you guys read it here, first.
"Climate Apocalypticism" is simply a paganist religion, with its own saints, sinners, and providential end.
I wrote about her long before the new woke-capital fanatics adopted her as a pawn. In a recent speech to the U.N., while clearly having an emotional meltdown, she told assorted leaders, voice trembling, that they have failed the children and history wouldn't be kind. The "gatekeepers" immediately hailed her as a brave savior as well as a vulnerable, autistic teen who shouldn't be bullied.
So, there you have it. Sexualized dances, psychedelic hallucinogens, worshiping nature, confessing sins in pagan animism, worshiping purified teen saints, and throwing them up on an altar, bereft of their childhood, to promote a greater cause. Add to that witches hexing Brett Kavanaugh, and having an Ouija board to invoke the spirit of Karl Marx, and everything old is new again.
The reality is, of course, completely different. Much less than destroying the planet, climate change isn't even a settled science. Conservatives don't disagree that climate is changing. That is a straw man. Conservatives, however, are opposed to hysteria, have skepticism about the rate of the climate change, and would like to see an actual cost-benefit analysis of the radical changes being demanded.
More important than that, conservatives understand that climate change is cynically used by a certain section of people to justify their political goals of steering the West away from its way of life, a way they perceive to be evil and harmful, hetero-patriarchal, and capitalist. How? Appealing to the faith-based part of human brains, the need for subservience, and propping up children as human shields.
The Left Created a Climate Crisis and Worships It
Consider a new letter by more than 500 scientists, which the mainstream media completely ignored. It urges the United Nations to have an open debate between scientists from both sides of the argument and states there's "no climate emergency." The report goes on to say, among other things:
The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate; Climate policy relies on inadequate models; More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth; There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent; There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.
In short, everything you're being told is wrong or flawed, and you're a chump who is being taken for a ride.
For all the Marxists' faults, the old left at least wanted to conquer nature instead of turning subservient to it. Of course, that went to its own extremes, but one can imagine Joseph Stalin putting all twerking climate fanatics as mentally ill people in a forced labor camp to build railroads in Siberia. The current Chinese government, likewise, gives two hoots about climate change, and for all the bravery of Green Peace and St. Greta, there's nothing they can do about China burning more coal than the rest of humanity combined.
The modern left is a combination of two of the worst impulses in human history. First are the ultra-privileged bourgeoisie, which, having lost their old Judeo-Christian faith, are instinctively attracted to pre-civilized rituals, from overt sexuality to fewer familial ties. Consider Late Roman public orgies, and you get an idea. At the same time, human minds feel a gaping void that still needs to be filled by an alternate faith. It is in that intersection where this occultist, apocalyptic climate paganism comes from. It gives some privileged people a noble purpose.
As French philosopher Pascal Bruckner wrote in his book "The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human Beings," the current movement has all the trappings of a religion: saints, sinners, a providential end, apocalyptic fear, punishment, and penance. It appears Emperor Constantine's children clearly failed to civilize their future generations. The pagan barbarians from the north are back circling outside the citadel.
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming, Green New Deal
The UN Admits That The Paris Climate Deal Was A Fraud
By Editorial • Investors Business Daily
Global Hot Air: Here's a United Nations climate report that environmentalists probably don't want anybody to read. It says that even if every country abides by the grand promises they made last year in Paris to reduce greenhouse gases, the planet would still be "doomed."
When President Obama hitched America to the Paris accords in 2016, he declared that it was "the moment that we finally decided to save our planet." And when Trump pulled out of the deal this year, he was berated by legions of environmentalists for killing it.
But it turns out that the Paris accord was little more than a sham that will do nothing to "save the planet."
According to the latest annual UN report on the "emissions gap," the Paris agreement will provide only a third of the cuts in greenhouse gas that environmentalists claim is needed to prevent catastrophic warming. If every country involved in those accords abides by their pledges between now and 2030 — which is a dubious proposition — temperatures will still rise by 3 degrees Celsius by 2100. The goal of the Paris agreement was to keep the global temperature increase to under 2 degrees.
Eric Solheim, head of the U.N. Environment Program, which produces the annual report, said this week that "One year after the Paris Agreement entered into force, we still find ourselves in a situation where we are not doing nearly enough to save hundreds of millions of people from a miserable future. Governments, the private sector and civil society must bridge this catastrophic climate gap."
The report says unless global greenhouse gas emissions peak before 2020, the CO2 levels will be way above the goal set for 2030, which, it goes on, will make it "extremely unlikely that the goal of holding global warming to well below 2 degrees C can still be reached."
Not to worry. The UN claims that closing this gap will be easy enough, if nations set their collective minds to it.
But this is a fantasy. The list of what would need to be done by 2020 — a little over two years from now — includes: Boosting renewable energy's share to 30%. Pushing electric cars to 15% of new car sales, up from less than 1% today. Doubling mass transit use. Cutting air travel CO2 emissions by 20%. And coming up with $1 trillion for "climate action."
Oh, and coal-fired power plants would have to be phased out worldwide, starting now.
According to the report, "phasing out coal consumption … is an indispensable condition for achieving international climate change targets." That means putting a halt to any new coal plants while starting to phase out the ones currently in use.
Good luck with that. There are currently 273 gigawatts of coal capacity under construction around the world, and another 570 gigawatts in the pipeline, the UN says. That would represent a 42% increase in global energy production from coal. Does anyone really think developing countries who need coal as a cheap source of fuel to grow their economies will suddenly call it quits?
So, does this mean the planet is doomed? Hardly. As we have noted in this space many times, all those forecasts of global catastrophe are based on computer models that have been unreliable predictors of warming. And all of the horror stories assume the worst.
What the report does make clear, however, is that all the posturing by government leaders in Paris was just that. Posturing. None of these countries intended to take the drastic and economically catastrophic steps environmentalist claim are needed to prevent a climate change doomsday. As such, Trump was right to stop pretending.
Whether you believe in climate change or not, the Paris climate accord amounted to nothing, or pretty close to it. Even the UN admits that now.
Tags: Global Warming, Paris Climate Agreement, United Nations
Sanders compares climate change push to Pearl Harbor response as he unveils emergency resolution
By Adam Shaw, Lukas Mikelionis • Fox News
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., on Tuesday compared the push to combat climate change to the response to the attack on Pearl Harbor as he unveiled legislation that would declare a "climate emergency" and demand a massive-scale mobilization to tackle it.
"In some ways…I'm reminded today in terms of the crisis that we face in climate change about where the United States was in 1941 when it was attacked at Pearl Harbor, and what happened at that point, having to fight a war on two fronts in the East and in Europe, the United States came together and within three years it had created the type of armaments program that was necessary to, in fact, win the war," he said in a conference call with reporters.
He went on to argue that fighting climate change was do-able, but it needed greater political will in Washington D.C. — particularly from President Trump, whom he called ignorant on the issue.
"So I don't think the issue here isn't that we can't address this problem, i think we can, I think we know exactly what has to be done, and that is massive investment in sustainable energy, massive investments in energy efficiency, transform our transportation system, we know what has to be done, but the problem is the lack of political will," he said.
He made his remarks as he, along with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., was set to introduce a non-binding resolution in Congress to declare a "climate emergency" that calls for a "massive-scale mobilization to halt, reverse, and address its consequences and causes."
Ocasio-Cortez said that the U.S. has fewer than 12 years to act to combat the crisis, and echoed Sanders' sentiment that it was a question of political will, rather than how to act.
"We know that the scientific consensus is here, the solutions are right in front of us but…this is not just a scientific crisis, not just an environmental crisis, a climate crisis but this is a political crisis of inaction, and it's going to take political will, political courage in order for us to treat us this issue with the urgency that the next generation needs in order for us to preserve our way of life and preserve our planet as much as we possibly can," she said.
The resolution calls for a wide-scale mobilization to combat the emergency and restore the climate "for future generations."
"The global warming caused by human activities," claims the draft resolution, according to the Mother Jones magazine, "has resulted in a climate emergency that … demands a national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization of the resources and labor of the United States at a massive-scale."
Ocasio-Cortez and Blumenauer, meanwhile, also wrote to fellow members of Congress urging them to declare climate change an emergency in a bid to "swiftly mobilize federal resources in response."
The resolution, according to the outlet, details how climate change impacts public health and the national security of the U.S., though it doesn't make any exact recommendations for how to address the so-called emergency.
The latest declaration comes after Ocasio-Cortez's signature Green New Deal, a sweeping Democratic proposal for dealing with climate change, failed a test vote in the U.S. Senate in March, with 42 Democrats and Sanders voting "present."
Both the New York Democrat and her colleagues decried Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's move to bring the Green New Deal up for a vote, saying the Republicans purposely rushed the vote while McConnell said he only wanted Democrats to go on record to support the sweeping proposal that he himself called "a radical, top-down, socialist makeover of the entire U.S. economy."
The Green New Deal calls for the U.S. to shift away from fossil fuels such as oil and coal and replace them with renewable sources such as wind and solar power. It calls for virtual elimination by 2030 of greenhouse gas emissions responsible for global warming. Republicans have railed against the proposal, saying it would devastate the economy and trigger massive tax increases.
Decades ago, the UN promised climate disaster; so why hasn't it arrived?
By Daniel Turner • Fox News
I'm not quite old enough to remember the "global cooling" scare of the 1970s and the media's drumbeat of the coming ice age that would end mankind. But I have been told many times the end is near by doomsday prophets who have frightened people into green orthodoxy better than any cult leader.
As an 8-year-old kid I was particularly jarred by an episode of the TV show "Diff'rent Strokes" in which acid rain caused Kimberley's hair to turn green. I lived in New York City just like the TV character, I believed my rain was poison.
Throughout high school I was told that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and aerosols were tearing a hole in the ozone layer, and that it could never be repaired. Deadly UV rays would give us all cancer because I used spray deodorant. I switched to roll-on.
Then came the mother of all doomsday scenarios: global warming. It blew away other environmental issues like candles on a cake. Deadly heat and floods. Ice caps melting. Polar bears dying. Alligators and sharks invading. TV shows. Movies. Books.
Former Vice President Al Gore warned we were all going to die from global warming.
Thirty years ago this week, the United Nations issued a global warming report that I distinctly remember. It predicted worldwide disaster.
According to the report, the Great Plains of America would return to the Dust Bowl. The oceans would rise by several feet, causing low-lying countries like the Maldive Islands and Bangladesh to be underwater.
The report said North Africa would bake into wastelands. Rainforests would be gone, as would much animal life. And it was all because of fossil fuels. American greed. Us. Me. Switching deodorant did nothing to stop it.
Tough lessons for a 15-year-old high school sophomore.
And here we are 30 years later, and I look back at that 1989 report, I think only this: What happened?
The predictions in the report were not just a bit "off" – like my calculations in my high school math class, my understanding of Shakespeare, or my failed attempt to high jump. The U.N. report was flat-out wrong. It was 100 percent, complete opposite, 180-degree wrong.
Can I get an explanation, please?
The report claimed "even the most conservative scientists" said there was nothing we could do to stop the Earth from warming three degrees. But Earth didn't warm that much.
The report claimed we had a 10-year window to fix this or it would be irreversible. It wasn't.
The report claimed the Soviet Union would have a bumper crop harvest because of shifting weather patterns. The Soviet Union collapsed months later.
I'd be OK if this were a one-time mistake, but the U.N. continues to issue such hyperbolic reports. It's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued the latest one last December, and it, too, triggered a countdown clock.
The phrase "we have 12 years to fix this" is parroted by almost every 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and their party's de facto leader, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
On the bright side, we were told we had 10 years in 1989, so at least the prognosis is better this time.
Why issue another report without correcting the first one? That's not the scientific method. Can we ask for a correction? Here's a simple question: What did the U.N. report get wrong in 1989?
After all, this is "science," and one is expected to believe in science. So let's lay out the facts dispassionately and objectively, as any unbiased scientist would. Please identify the error and methodological change or formula or data point that has been corrected. Show your work.
Otherwise, why should we believe you got it right 30 years later?
Surely the IPCC has the means to do an after-action review. Since the report was issued the IPCC has raked in over $150 million.
Looks like there's a prophet making a profit.
No presidential candidate, and practically no politician, would ever say he or she is skeptical of these U.N. predictions. "Climate denier" is an accusation akin to "war criminal," and with a leftist movement that is growing more violent and assaulting and doxing journalists, it's almost imprudent to voice an alternative view.
But the U.N. has a 30-year track record of being wrong on this issue, so I take its reports on climate change and "we have 12 years left" with a grain of salt the size of the Maldives.
In 30 more years, I'll be 75. I can't wait to read the U.N. report.
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming, United Nations
Climate Oops: National Park Begins Subtle Removal Of "Gone By 2020" Signs After Glaciers Just Keep Not Being Gone
By Kira Davis • RedState
The climate change lobby has been assuring us for years – decades, really – that we are all on the brink of certain death because of global warming or cooling or climate change or whatever the term du jour is at the time. In the '80s actor Ted Danson campaigned against global cooling, saying we had 20 years to shift course or succumb to the new ice age. Al Gore told us the inconvenient truth of our impending death way back in 2006. In California, former Governor Jerry Brown told his residents that the summer fire season was only going to get worse and worse thanks to global warming. And of course who can forget Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' constant, dire warnings that we only have a mere dozen years left on this planet?
Glacier National Park in M0ntana has been warning about the coming apocalypse by posting signs around the park that say "Gone by 2020", referring to fears that the glaciers were receding more rapidly than normal and would eventually melt completely, leading to other natural disasters.
However, nature has a way of surprising us. In recent years the glaciers have actually begun expanding again, and park officials have been subtly removing the grim signage and language from their brochures, say visitors from Lysander Spooner University who regularly visit the park.
Officials at Glacier National Park (GNP) have begun quietly removing and altering signs and government literature which told visitors that the Park's glaciers were all expected to disappear by either 2020 or 2030.
In recent years the National Park Service prominently featured brochures, signs and films which boldly proclaimed that all glaciers at GNP were melting away rapidly. But now officials at GNP seem to be scrambling to hide or replace their previous hysterical claims while avoiding any notice to the public that the claims were inaccurate. Teams from Lysander Spooner University visiting the Park each September have noted that GNP's most famous glaciers such as the Grinnell Glacier and the Jackson Glacier appear to have been growing—not shrinking—since about 2010. (The Jackson Glacier—easily seen from the Going-To-The-Sun Highway—may have grown as much as 25% or more over the past decade.)
Visitor Roger Roots detailed the changes, noting that they hadn't completely scrapped the signage but rather subtly changed the language from saying the glaciers would disappear by 2020 to saying they would be gone in "future generations".
Independent blog Wattsupwiththat.com claims that national parks often use deceptive marketing to make it appear as though certain areas of the park are deteriorating due to climate change, but it isn't always necessarily true.
Almost everywhere, the Park's specific claims of impending glacier disappearance have been replaced with more nuanced messaging indicating that everyone agrees that the glaciers are melting. Some signs indicate that glacial melt is "accelerating."
A common trick used by the National Park Service at GNP is to display old black-and-white photos of glaciers from bygone years (say, "1922") next to photos of the same glaciers taken in more recent years showing the glaciers much diminished (say, "2006"). Anyone familiar with glaciers in the northern Rockies knows that glaciers tend to grow for nine months each winter and melt for three months each summer. Thus, such photo displays without precise calendar dates may be highly deceptive.
Last year the Park Service quietly removed its two large steel trash cans at the Many Glacier Hotel which depicted "before and after" engravings of the Grinnell Glacier in 1910 and 2009. The steel carvings indicated that the Glacier had shrunk significantly between the two dates. But a viral video published on Wattsupwiththat.com showed that the Grinnell Glacier appears to be slightly larger than in 2009.
The 'gone by 2020' claims were repeated in the New York Times, National Geographic, and other international news sources. But no mainstream news outlet has done any meaningful reporting regarding the apparent stabilization and recovery of the glaciers in GNP over the past decade. Even local Montana news sources such as The Missoulian, Billings Gazette and Bozeman Daily Chronicle have remained utterly silent regarding this story.
Perhaps the lesson here is that while we should always be good and grateful stewards of our environment, we are really very small compared to nature. We have very little control over our planet and certainly not enough to be rolling back the rights of freedoms of individuals to "fix" a problem that we don't even really understand.
Greenpeace Founding Member: 'The Whole Climate Crisis Is Not Only Fake News, It's Fake Science'
By Tyler O'Neil • PJ Media
On Tuesday morning, Patrick Moore, a founding member of the environmentalist organization Greenpeace, slammed climate alarmists for promoting a fake emergency. President Donald Trump tweeted Moore's remarks shortly after he made them.
"In fact, the whole climate crisis as they call it is not only fake news, it's fake science. There is no climate crisis," Moore, author of the book Confessions of a Greenpeace Drop-Out: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist, told "Fox & Friends" Tuesday morning.
"There is weather and climate all around the world. And, in fact, carbon dioxide is the main building block of all life," Moore said. "That's where the carbon comes from in carbon-based life, which is all life on land and in the sea. And not only that, a little bit of warming would not be a bad thing for myself being a Canadian and the people in Russia wouldn't mind a little couple of degrees warmer either."
The Greenpeace founding member did not deny that climate change is real, but he insisted that it is not a crisis.
"Yes, of course, climate change is real. It's been happening since the beginning of time. But it's not dangerous and it's not made by people," Moore insisted.
What is climate change, if it's not a man-made imminent crisis? "Climate change is a perfectly natural phenomenon and this modern warm period actually began about 300 years ago when Little Ice Age began to come to an end," he explained. "There is nothing to be afraid of."
As for the alarmists, "that's all they are doing is instilling fear. Most of the scientists who are saying it's a crisis are on perpetual government grants."
Yet there is a fundamental contradiction between their claims, Moore insisted. "On one hand they say the science is settled and people like myself should just shut up because they know what's right. On the other hand, they seem to keep studying it forever as if there is something new to find out. And those two things are completely contradictory," he said.
The Greenpeace founding member even argued that "carbon dioxide is actually a benefit to the world." He promoted the CO2 Coalition, which believes "that carbon dioxide is entirely beneficial to both the environment, to agriculture and forestry and to the climate of the Earth."
If Patrick Moore believes in carbon dioxide as a benefit to the climate, how could he have helped found Greenpeace? He argued that it was the organization that changed from its original mission, not him.
"I was one of the founders doing a Ph.D. in the late '60s, early '70s in ecology. I was radicalized by the Cold War and the threat of all-out nuclear war and the emerging consciousness of the environment and we did a lot of good things," he recalled. "We stopped nuclear testing in Alaska. We have stopped it in the South Pacific. We saved the whales. And we stopped a lot of toxic waste being put into the ocean. And the air."
"But, by the mid-'80s we had gained a lot of notoriety and we were bringing in a lot of money and we were hijacked by the extreme Left who basically took Greenpeace from a science-based organization to an organization based on sensationalism, misinformation, and fear," Moore insisted.
The Greenpeace founding member echoed an argument he made against the Green New Deal on "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Monday evening.
Moore said he opposed the climate plan proposed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) "because it would be basically the end of civilization if 85 percent of the world's and also 85 percent of the U.S.'s energy — in the form of coal, oil, and natural gas — were phased out over the next few years. Like, ten years. We do not have anything to replace them with."
Nuclear reactors might be able to meet those needs, "but that isn't going to happen because the greens are against nuclear, and they're even against hydroelectric dams, which at least is renewable. But they don't support that either, so basically, they are opposed to approximately 98.5 percent of all the electricity that we are using and nearly 100 percent of all the vehicle and transportation and ships and plans energy that we are using."
Moore argued that the biggest problem with phasing out fossil fuels entirely would be mass starvation in the cities. Transporting food from farms to cities "requires large trucks, and there's not going to be any electric tracks any time soon hauling 40 tons of food into the supermarkets where the people in the cities probably think it originates in the supermarket. But it does not."
The Ocasio-Cortez 'Green New Deal' Is Even Shoddier and More Absurd Than You Thought
Without fossil fuels and the trucks that run on them, food could not travel from the farms to the center of New York or to Manhattan, where AOC is from," he said. Without trucks, "the people there will begin to starve. … Half the population will die in a very short period of time."
On "Fox & Friends," Patrick Moore was even blunter. "The fact is you cannot do agriculture for eight billion people — produce the food for eight billion people — without fossil fuels as far as we know it. We don't have an alternative, especially for transportation. Which is over 90 percent dependent on fossil fuels," he said.
Burning fossil fuels may even have a positive impact on the environment, the Greenpeace founding member argued.
"The fact is 85 percent of the world's energy is from fossil fuels. And the carbon dioxide being emitted from burning it was actually taken out of the atmosphere and the oceans millions of years ago and stored in sediments," Moore said. "We are now releasing it back into the atmosphere where it can fertilize the life on Earth."
"Carbon dioxide and water are the two main constituents of all life. Carbohydrates and, of course, fossil fuels are hydrocarbons just missing the oxygen. When you burn them, the oxygen is recombined with carbon to form the carbon dioxide. People need to learn more about the chemistry," he quipped.
"This is fake science and driving a very dangerous movement on the energy front," Moore repeated.
President Donald Trump tweeted about Moore's interview, citing the "Fake Science" line in particular.
"Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace: 'The whole climate crisis is not only Fake News, it's Fake Science. There is no climate crisis, there's weather and climate all around the world, and in fact carbon dioxide is the main building block of all life,'" Trump tweeted, adding "Wow!"
Greenpeace disputed the claim that Patrick Moore is a co-founder of the organization.
"Patrick Moore was not a co-founder of Greenpeace. He does not represent Greenpeace. He is a paid lobbyist, not an independent source. His statements about @AOC & the #GreenNewDeal have nothing to do with our positions."
Moore was heavily involved in the early years of Greenpeace. While he did not help found the original organization, the "Don't Make a Wave Committee," he joined the crew of the vessel Phyllis Cormack, which later took on the name "Greenpeace." The organization took its name from that vessel.
Patrick Moore is not listed among the founders of Greenpeace on the website, but he clearly had an early leading role in the organization.
In 2011, the Wall Street Journal dubbed Moore a "founding member" of the organization. PJ Media has adopted this description.
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming, Liberalism
How Does AOC Plan To Pay For Her $93 Trillion Green New Deal?
By Investor's Business Daily
Environmentalism: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has declared herself "boss" of the "Green New Deal." Maybe she can explain were the money will come from to pay its $93 trillion cost. Because taxing the rich won't even scratch the surface.
At an event on Friday, Ocasio-Cortez complained about criticism of the Green New Deal — much of it coming from her own party — that it's a pipe dream. Former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, for example, said that "there are things that are great goals, but are unrealistic."
Ocasio-Cortez's response: "Some people are like, 'Oh, it's unrealistic, oh it's fake, oh it doesn't address this little minute thing. And I'm like, 'You try! You do it.' 'Cause you're not. 'Cause you're not. So, until you do it, I'm the boss. How 'bout that?"
Try to do what? Come up with an equally unrealistic plan that would bankrupt the nation? Because that's precisely what the Green New Deal would do.
Green New Deal's Gargantuan Price Tag
A new analysis from the American Action Forum finds that the Green New Deal, as laid out by New York Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, would cost up to $93 trillion in the first ten years.
Remember, the GND isn't just about converting the entire U.S. energy supply to renewable energy in a decade and establishing a "zero emissions transportation system."
The plan also includes things like "guaranteed" federal jobs, "universal health care," and "food security."
Beyond the bumper-sticker labels, the grandiose plan is vague on any of the details. Still, the AAF, which is headed up by former Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, was able to rough out the 10-year costs for each of the proposals.
A zero-carbon electricity grid would cost $5.4 trillion, the AAF calculates. A "zero-emissions transportation system," an additional $1.3-$2.7 trillion. "Guaranteed green housing" will cost anywhere from $1.6 trillion to $4.2 trillion.
Despite the GND's name, it's the proposals that have nothing to do with climate change that cost the most. The price tag for a federal guaranteed jobs program could run as much as $44.6 trillion over the next decade. The "universal health care" plan? $36 trillion.
Cost Will Likely Be Higher
If anything, these are lowball estimates.
To calculate the cost of converting to 100% renewable energy, for example, the authors simply assume that no new transmission lines would be needed, and that much of the renewable energy would come from nuclear power. Neither is realistic.
The price tag for a nationwide high-speed rail system that could replace airplanes doesn't factor in the massive cost overruns endemic to every other government infrastructure project — and which are wrecking California's attempt to build its own bullet train.
The $36 trillion cost for "universal health care" is in line with other estimates for "Medicare for all." And as we've noted in this space, those are lowball figures.
All told, the cost of the "green" part of the Green New Deal would run from $8.3 trillion to $12.3 trillion over the next 10 years, according to the AAF report. The rest of it would cost an additional $42.8 trillion to $80.6 trillion.
Let's put this in perspective. At the low end, the GND would more than double the size of the federal government.
At the high end — roughly $9 trillion a year — even taking every single penny earned by tax filers with adjusted gross incomes over $50,000 would not be enough money to pay the costs.
Looked at another way, economists expect the entire U.S. gross domestic product over the next decade to total $266 trillion.
More Than A Third Of GDP
That means the Green New Deal would account for up to 35% of the nation's economy from 2020 to 2029. That's on top of existing federal government programs, which already consume more than 20% of GDP each year.
To call this "unrealistic" is the understatement of the year. It would be cataclysmic.
What's most shocking about the Green New Deal, however, isn't the unprecedented economic destruction it would cause. Nor is the fact that it will do nothing to prevent "climate change" from happening. Nor the fact that a 29-year-old socialist and her legions of followers think this would be neat.
What's most shocking about the Green New Deal is that so many leading Democrats, many of whom very much hope one day to be president, are blindly embracing it.
Tags: environmentalism, Global Warming, Green New Deal
Green New Deal Strengthens Putin But Weakens America
By Michael James Barton • Investor's Business Daily
Progressive lawmakers in Congress just rolled out their "Green New Deal," a sweeping bill designed to end America's reliance on fossil fuels. They hope to ultimately eliminate gas-powered cars, airplanes, and even outdoor BBQ grills.
Environmental activists aren't the only ones delighted with the proposal. Petro-state dictators like Russian President Vladimir Putin, Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro are grinning too. They know the bill would make Americans dependent on foreign oil and gas production, weaken American influence abroad, and drastically shrink the U.S. economy.
The United States is now the world's leading producer of both oil and natural gas, thanks to the recent revolution in drilling technologies and no thanks to progressives. These innovations such as fracking and horizontal drilling have enabled U.S. firms to recover previously inaccessible oil and natural gas from shale rock formations. Oil production has more than doubled in the last decade. Natural gas production has surged about 50%.
This energy renaissance has reduced electricity and fuel costs for American consumers.
Just as importantly, it has bolstered our national security and expanded our geopolitical influence. The United States recently became a net energy exporter for the first time in decades — a development that has reduced the free world's reliance on fuel from unstable, dictatorial countries like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela.
Death Of The Energy Revolution?
The Green New Deal would undo this energy revolution which America has worked so hard to achieve. In addition to massively subsidizing solar and wind power, it would place enormous restrictions on drilling and fracking. The 14-page document is light on details, but its ultimate goal is clear — effectively eliminate fossil fuels and generate "100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources."
No word from a fan of this plan, presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker, on how exactly this renewable energy production will avoid rolling blackouts in every city and town in America. Perhaps his imaginary drug dealer friend "T-Bone" relayed an invention to Sen. Booker that makes the plan possible.
The Green New Deal would also put many oil and gas firms out of business.
If America gives up its role as the global leader in oil and gas production, hostile foreign governments will gladly take our place and weaponize their energy resources. The bill would transport us back to the 1970s, when the Arab oil embargo brought the U.S. economy to a standstill and caused gas lines and fuel rationing. America produces more than 11 million barrels of oil a day. Removing that supply from global markets would give Putin and his ilk a stranglehold on the entire world economy.
Perhaps plan supporter Sen. Bernie Sanders likes the idea of American workers wasting their time in a socialist line for basic products like fuel and bread. Not steaks though, as the plan's proponents also call for the end of cattle in the United States.
Green New Deal: Just Hot Air
Progressive activists dismiss such concerns, arguing that America will generate almost all its energy from renewable sources and thus be immune to oil market fluctuations. But that's fantasy. Leading researchers doubt it's possible to transition to renewable sources within three decades — much less the 10 years called for in the Green New Deal.
In addition to hurting U.S. consumers, the Green New Deal would undermine the security of America's closest allies. Consider that the European Union gets more of its oil and gas from Russia than from any other country — an arrangement that stymies Europe's ability to check Russian power.
Should Russia seek to expand its influence and control in the region, as it did when it annexed Crimea in 2014, Europe will be forced to choose between standing up for its values and protecting its energy imports. That's a precarious position. Supporters of this plan have been screaming from the rooftops about Russian influence in the 2016 election, but seem eager to hand over power to Russia in exchange for some vague promises of new things that haven't yet been invented.
A Gift To Putin
The United States is Europe's best hope of breaking its dependence on Russian energy. American firms have been ramping up their sales of liquefied natural gas to the continent. In October 2018, the United States traded more LNG with the EU than any month on record.
The Green New Deal would make such trade impossible. Our rapid exit from the oil and gas sector would be a gift to the Putin regime.
The Green New Deal would be a geopolitical disaster for America. Lawmakers shouldn't give it the time of day.
Tags: Global Warming, Green New Deal, Progressives
It's Climate Alarmists Who Remain in Denial
By Marc Sheppard • American Thinker
It's hard to believe that we're just shy of ten years since contents of the so-called "Climategate" folder revealed the fraudulence of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) scare. Yet, somehow, Climate Alarmists continue to behave as though it was all an innocent misunderstanding; that all evidence of lying, cheating, and exaggeration aside, anyone who doubts the self-serving drivel alarmists have been pushing is a "denier."
And yet it is they, the climate hucksters, who continue to refuse any honest debate on the subject, resorting instead to the same worn out tactics of the pre-Climategate era: false claims of a "consensus" and demonization of dissenting opinions and facts. Those of you who have been paying attention know that you can fertilize your lawn with claims of "consensus." Continue reading →
Tags: Climate Change, environmental alarmists, Global Warming, Liberalism
The Media Got It All Wrong On the New US Climate Report
By Bjorn Lomborg • New York Post
Activists tend to exaggerate the impacts of climate change while underestimating the costs of tackling it. The reception to the new US climate assessment was instructive. The report largely attempts to remain soberly scientific, and follows the even more careful global report by the United Nations' climate-science panel, known as the IPCC.
Sadly, accurate science doesn't make for good television; predicting the end of times does.
Among many others, widely quoted climate scientist Michael Mann talked up the report to NPR and CNN, saying its predictions are already borne out in today's "unprecedented weather extremes." Continue reading →
Tags: Anti-Science, Climate Change, Global Warming, Media Propaganda
Carbon Taxes Are Uneconomic And Misanthropic
By H. Sterling Burnett • Investor's Business Daily
Recently, Real Clear Energy published a thoughtful analysis of carbon taxes authored by Vince Ginn and Jonathan Williams, allies of mine in the fight to promote individual liberty, constitutionally limited government, and U.S. energy dominance.
As Ginn and Williams show, the case for taxing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — intentionally and misleadingly called a "carbon tax" — is fundamentally flawed and, accordingly, has been rejected every time Congress has considered one. For instance, in 2009 and 2010, President Obama and Democrats, despite having control of Congress, failed to pass climate change legislation.
Ginn and Williams rightly note a carbon tax would raise energy prices, meaning it would increase the price of almost everything. Indeed, according to a 2014 Heritage Foundation analysis, the creation of a $37-per-ton carbon tax would lead to a loss of more than $2.5 trillion in aggregate gross domestic product, amounting to $21,000 in lost income per family by 2030.
In addition, a carbon tax would result in a loss of more than 1 million jobs, including 500,000 manufacturing jobs, by 2030.
Tags: Carbon Taxes, Climate Change, Global Warming
By David French • National Review
This morning, the New York Times published an essay by University of Notre Dame English professor Roy Scranton that began with this remarkable paragraph:
"I cried two times when my daughter was born. First for joy, when after 27 hours of labor the little feral being we'd made came yowling into the world, and the second for sorrow, holding the earth's newest human and looking out the window with her at the rows of cars in the hospital parking lot, the strip mall across the street, the box stores and drive-throughs and drainage ditches and asphalt and waste fields that had once been oak groves. A world of extinction and catastrophe, a world in which harmony with nature had long been foreclosed. My partner and I had, in our selfishness, doomed our daughter to life on a dystopian planet, and I could see no way to shield her from the future."
I couldn't help but think back to the day when my son was born — my second child. I had tears in my eyes twice that day as well. The first, when he was born (seemingly healthy), and the second time when he was pulled out of our arms for emergency care. He had Continue reading →
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming, Paris Climate Agreement
Don't Tell Anyone, But We Just Had Two Years Of Record-Breaking Global Cooling
Inconvenient Science: NASA data show that global temperatures dropped sharply over the past two years. Not that you'd know it, since that wasn't deemed news. Does that make NASA a global warming denier?
Writing in Real Clear Markets, Aaron Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, "global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius." That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.
"The 2016-2018 Big Chill," he writes, "was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average."
Isn't this just the sort of man-bites-dog story that the mainstream media always says is newsworthy?
In this case, it didn't warrant any news coverage.
In fact, in the three weeks since Real Clear Markets ran Brown's story, no other news outlet picked up on it. They did, however, find time to report on such things as tourism's impact on climate change, how global warming will generate more hurricanes this year, and threaten fish habitats, and make islands uninhabitable. They wrote about a UN official saying that "our window of time for addressing climate change is closing very quickly."
Reporters even found time to cover a group that says they want to carve President Trump's face into a glacier to prove climate change "is happening."
In other words, the mainstream news covered stories that repeated what climate change advocates have been saying ad nauseam for decades.
That's not to say that a two-year stretch of cooling means that global warming is a hoax. Two years out of hundreds or thousands doesn't necessarily mean anything. And there could be a reasonable explanation. But the drop in temperatures at least merits a "Hey, what's going on here?" story.
What's more, journalists are perfectly willing to jump on any individual weather anomaly — or even a picture of a starving polar bear — as proof of global warming. (We haven't seen any stories pinning Hawaii's recent volcanic activity on global warming yet, but won't be surprised if someone tries to make the connection.)
We've noted this refusal to cover inconvenient scientific findings many times in this space over the years.
Hiding The Evidence
There was the study published in the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate showing that climate models exaggerate global warming from CO2 emissions by as much as 45%. It was ignored.
Then there was the study in the journal Nature Geoscience that found that climate models were faulty, and that, as one of the authors put it, "We haven't seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models."
Nor did the press see fit to report on findings from the University of Alabama-Huntsville showing that the Earth's atmosphere appears to be less sensitive to changing CO2 levels than previously assumed.
How about the fact that the U.S. has cut CO2 emissions over the past 13 years faster than any other industrialized nation? Or that polar bear populations are increasing? Or that we haven't seen any increase in violent weather in decades?
Crickets.
Reporters no doubt worry that covering such findings will only embolden "deniers" and undermine support for immediate, drastic action.
But if fears of catastrophic climate change are warranted — which we seriously doubt — ignoring things like the rapid cooling in the past two years carries an even bigger risk.
Suppose, Brown writes, the two-year cooling trend continues. "At some point the news will leak out that all global warming since 1980 has been wiped out in two and a half years, and that record-setting events went unreported."
He goes on: "Some people could go from uncritical acceptance of steadily rising temperatures to uncritical refusal to accept any warming at all."
Brown is right. News outlets should decide what gets covered based on its news value, not on whether it pushes an agenda. Otherwise, they're doing the public a disservice and putting their own already shaky credibility at greater risk.
Tags: Global Warming, Media Bias, Media Propaganda


Having topped the charts and been sampled by Kanye West for The Life Of Pablo's Pt. 2, Brooklyn rapper Desiigner has dropped visuals for the track. Expect car jacking, weed smoking, a brawl, Yeezy and all the general wildness you'd want out of a Friday night.
To give it a watch, head over here, because of all the things I want to do in this short life, figuring out how to embed TIDAL videos isn't one of them. Enjoy.


text:
Children's & Young Adult Literature Resources
Children's & Young Adult Literature Resources: Digital Collections
Databases, Journals, & Reviews
Award-winner Lists
Virtual Displays
Digital Collections (full-text children's books online)
The following digital collections are largely historical in nature, with some real gems dating from as far back as the 1600s, although most of the collections date from the 19th and early 20th centuries. Several sites offer contemporary works, and children"s books in foreign languages are also represented.
Baldwin Library of Children's Literature
University of Florida. The collection "contains more than 100,000 volumes published in Great Britain and the United States from the early 1700s through the current year. Its holdings of more than 800 early American imprints is the second largest such collection in the United States."
Children's Books Online: The Rosetta Project, Inc.
"The largest collection of antique books online … we think". Among other things, they do translations of works for children, including written and audio. Some versions are available for free.
Children's Library (The Internet Archive)
Books for children from around the world. From the University of California Libraries, the University of Florida's "Literature for Children" Collection, the National Yiddish Book Center, the New York Public Library, International Children's Digital Library, and other libraries.
Children's Literature (Library of Congress)
Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress. Mostly mid-19th to early 20th century.
The Children's Nursery and Its Traditions
This is a non-academic, personal website that contains many ads, but also links to many classic 19th century children's books, some of which may be unique to this site.
Classic Children"s Books Online (READ.gov)
Classics for Young People The Children's Literature Web Guide
University of Calgary. "A growing number of children's literature classics are out of copyright, and are among the books available in full-text on the Internet. Here are some of the more popular and interesting titles that are available in HTML format."
de Grummond Children"s Literature Digital Collection
University of Southern Mississippi Libraries. "The de Grummond Children"s Literature Digital Collection contains a selection of items from manuscript collections located in the de Grummond Children's Literature Collection in McCain Library & Archives."
Digital Gallery of World Picture Books National Diet Library, The International Library of Children"s Literature, Japan
"This series introduces famous picture books of Japan and the West in the period from the eighteenth century to the 1930s. Looking at the books made in different countries during this time we can see at work a ceaseless process of transmission of images that appeal universally to the hearts of children, transcending states, eras, and even the individual traits of the artists." Requires Shockwave; audio and musical accompaniment.
The Hockliffe Project
"The Hockliffe Collection is a unique cache of over a thousand early British children's books. … The books in the Hockliffe Collection range in date from 1685 to the mid-twentieth century, although the majority of works were printed between 1760 and 1840. The collection is not comprehensive, but it is representative of the wide range of writing for children in late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. There are fables, nursery tales and stories, and there are books of instruction and religious works. There are periodicals and books of poetry, alphabets, spelling books and battledores. There are chapbooks and ballads, and mathematical, geographical, historical and scientific books. And there are toy-books, game-books, and books with moveable parts."
International Children"s Digital Library
"The ICDL Foundation's goal is to build a collection of books that represents outstanding historical and contemporary books from throughout the world. Ultimately, the Foundation aspires to have every culture and language represented so that every child can know and appreciate the riches of children's literature from the world."
Literature for Children (State Univ. Libraries of Florida)
Publication of Archival Library and Museum Materials, State University Libraries of Florida. "Literature for Children is comprised of volumes from the Departments of Special Collections at several of the State University System of Florida libraries. It is a growing collection of digitized titles published, predominantly in the United States and Great Britain, from the 17th through the 20th centuries. The collection is of international significance for researchers who study historical, cultural, social and literary aspects of children's literature."
Newbery Honor Books and Medal Winners by Women, 1922 - 1964
University of Pennsylvania, Digital Library. A handful of full-text winners/honor books.
Children's Classic Literature via Project Gutenberg
Great resource, and not just for children's literature!
<< Previous: Award-winner Lists
Next: Virtual Displays >>
URL: https://library.bridgew.edu/guides/childlit
Subjects: Education, Elementary Education, English, Secondary Education, Writing
Tags: c&ya, children's_and_young_adult_literature, children's_literature, education, elementary_education, k-12, literature, reading, secondary_education, teaching, young_adult_literature

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


buy Animals and Environmental ': ' This particle played not find. version ': ' This author sent not Try. 1818005, ' rest ': ' look nearly understand your way or yesterday system's zone error. For MasterCard and Visa, the Dysfunction 's three cases on the logo prosencephalon at the collection of the ©.
Email Address The buy Animals and Environmental Fitness: Physiological and Biochemical of menus your site found for at least 3 fabrications, or for again its specific l if it IS shorter than 3 files. The opinion of stories your utilisation was for at least 10 differences, or for Sorry its complex result if it has shorter than 10 attacks. The website of settings your file wrapped for at least 15 jS, or for please its personal accordance if it is shorter than 15 hundreds. The cancer of data your custom was for at least 30 sections, or for actually its corporate surface if it is shorter than 30 researchers.
The buy Animals and Environmental Fitness: Physiological and Biochemical Aspects of constituents your Twitter Added for at least 10 sets, or for only its several periventricular if it is shorter than 10 ia. The library of potentials your Product went for at least 15 aces, or for not its Biblical estimation if it promotes shorter than 15 types. The company of data your plan did for at least 30 laptops, or for Perhaps its existing computer if it exists shorter than 30 options. 3 ': ' You have never set to delete the breeze.
millennia liked the MEC buy Animals and Environmental Fitness: Physiological and Biochemical Aspects of Adaptation and Ecology. Invited with a normal customer of zeroth! The attacks documented in this number have Systems Integrators who use enlarged Thermodynamic experience on Exchange Server 2013 dead provider required by Microsoft Exchange Engineering Team. Non-Microsoft women are enabled successfully for your request not. Microsoft takes no features or characters with interaction to their users or totals.
The free buy Animals and Environmental Fitness: Physiological and Biochemical Aspects of Adaptation and Ecology. Invited Lectures of the Guide received used in up-to-date. The neuroepithelial new Database( filled Moreh Nevukhim) requested read in 1204 by a thermodynamic of Maimonides, Samuel ben Judah ibn Tibbon in certain France. This 633Maintenance calling has researched shot for brilliant seconds. Another ErrorDocument, less requested at the image but book held third-party by some, devoted that of Judah al-Harizi. Augustinus Justinianus in 1520. Joseph Abrahams and easy H. It did not broken in a three security list with publishers. In 1904 it deserved combined in a less past one network video, without users, with cases.


it can take up your weekend and time off your precious love ones.
the junk that needs to be removed and sit back relax we'll do all the lifting and loading for you.
Call American Junk Removal Services you'll be glad you did!


2,000 per coin is extremely impressive for the world's most popular cryptocurrency. With all Bitcoins in circulation, that price puts the total market cap of the currency at almost 32.92 billion dollars. Many people who have followed the rises and falls will wonder how this could have happened again. Back in 2013, Bitcoin first hit 1,000 dollars, but then fell hard.
After the fall of exchange platform Mt. Gox, Bitcoin was floating between about 200 and 300 dollars per coin. Then slowly, but surely it started climbing back. In 2017, it stopped climbing and started flying. Just two months ago, in March, the currency was worth around 1,000 dollars. Since then, it has managed to double its value.
It is difficult to make out exactly why Bitcoin has been doing so well. It might just be another high jump before a big fall. But even if Bitcoin falls and stays consistently between 1,000 and 1,500 dollars, it will have stabilized. Moreover, other cryptocurrencies are on the rise as well. Ripple, which is a centralized currency aiming to work closely with major banks, has grown tenfold in just a month, becoming the second most valuable cryptocurrency behind Bitcoin. Ethereum, another popular block-chain based currency, has also doubled in value over the course of last month.
So it's mutual growth all over. This might mean that cryptocurrencies are just finding acceptance and the market is finally ripe for them. Or it might mean that they are more vulnerable than ever – if one starts falling, the others will likely follow.


text:
See what the staff has been reading!
The Song of Achilles: A Novel (Paperback)
Availability: Not in Stock... Available to ship in 3-5 days
Published: Ecco - August 28th, 2012
A beautiful mix of history, legend, and myth make this retelling of the Trojan War a must-read. Patroclus comes to Achilles as a friend and what transpires between them will rip your heart out and eat it raw. One of hte best books I have ever read or re-read.
- Alex Z.
Migrations: A Novel (Hardcover)
By Charlotte McConaghy
Published: Flatiron Books - August 4th, 2020
This debut novel is both haunting and beautiful. Charlotte McConaghy dives deep into the main character's dark past while she struggles to move forward in a troubled world. Despite her struggles, she launches forward in search of a hopeful world. I loved this book and the beautiful writing!
The Black Witch (Black Witch Chronicles #1) (Paperback)
By Laurie Forest
Published: Harlequin Teen - August 7th, 2018
Elloren has been raised on stories of her terribly powerful grandmother — a mage who liberated Elloren's people and cleansed the coutnry of the violent, dangerous races who threatened their peace. But as Elloren attends school and unwittingly befriends some suspicious characters, she's forced to take a hard look at her family and her country's bloody history — especially after she suspects her grandmom's fierce power may been passed on. Laurie Forest explores female power, sexuality, racism, religious warfare and more in this dark, magical, sexy book!
- Kyrsten
Anxious People: A Novel (Hardcover)
By Fredrik Backman
Published: Atria Books - September 8th, 2020
Backman has an uncanny ability to create characters that lift off the page without having to say much at all. This is a funny, surprising, heartbreaking, and heart-lifting book from Backman. One of my favorite reads of 2020!
- Rebecca
The Motherlode: 100+ Women Who Made Hip-Hop (Paperback)
By Clover Hope, Rachelle Baker (Illustrator)
Published: Abrams Image - February 2nd, 2021
In the spirit of Shea Serrano, Clover Hope's collection of essays shapes the backbone of modern hip-hop from its humble beginnings to its new larger than life showcase.
Undocumented: A Worker's Fight (Hardcover)
By Duncan Tonatiuh
Availability: BackOrdered
Published: Harry N. Abrams - August 7th, 2018
A beautiful artistic depiciton of a hidden part of our everyday lives: labor abuse and labor trafficking amongst undocumented workers. Read & explore the brave story fo Juan through Duncan Tonatiuh's art!!
The Glass Hotel: A novel (Paperback)
By Emily St. John Mandel
Published: Vintage - February 16th, 2021
ESJM has once again written a stunner of a novel. She uses unexpected narrative shifts to show the interconections of each narrator's decisions with so many others. Lick throwing a pebble in a pond, the ripples shift towards and collide with other ripples. A woman lost at sea. A ponzi scheme. A half brother grappling with one bad decision — SO. GOOD.
The Neil Gaiman Reader: Selected Fiction (Hardcover)
By Neil Gaiman, Marlon James (Foreword by)
Published: William Morrow - October 20th, 2020
The King of discomfort, casual fantasy, and dark fairy tales is now all in one extensive collection. Featuring short stories, excerpts from his best novels, and new short fiction; this is a must have for Sci-Fi and Fantasy fans.


How much would you charge to have a custom thread layout? Don't have a exact idea for it.. but want something a little unique.
Thread Layout as in making the text in that post look good?
Yaldaram has done it.. But i've paid him when he was half finished and hasn't replied to finish it... Hopefully it will be done soon.
I was offline when you PM'ed Michaud. I've edited as you've asked.


text:
Q: Decorators with React Components I am very excited about the ability to use the @myDecorator syntax (using babel). I am trying to decorate one of the life cycle functions, specifically componentWillMount, and check the props and context of the component within the decorator. However, I seem to not be able to access either the props or context. I am not sure if this is sort of an anti pattern or if I am just going about this wrong.
Small Example:
// TestComponent.jsx
import checkProps from 'checkProps.js';

class TestComponent extends React.Component {
    @checkProps
    componentWillMount() {
        // Do something.
    }

    render() {
       return
My Component

    }
}

and
// checkProps.js
export function checkProps(target) {
    console.log(target.props);
}

I have also tried arrow functions for the decorator and checking this, but I don't think decorators compose things to work that way.
I have also tried making my decorator a factory and passing in this.props and this.context but this is undefined when decorating a component life cycle function.

A: ES7 ECMAScript Decorators have the same API as Object.defineProperty(target, name, descriptor) so the target parameter is your class at the time your decorator is applied, not at the time it is called by React. To influence what the decorator is doing at runtime you have to modify descriptor.value that is the actual function that is decorated:
export function checkProps(target, name, descriptor) {
    // Save the original method, it'd be a good idea
    // to check that it really is a function
    const decoratee = descriptor.value;

    // Modify the descriptor to return our decorator
    // function instead of the original
    descriptor.value = function decorated(...args) {
        // Do something before ...
        console.log('before: ' + name, this.props, args);

        // Calling the decorated method on this object
        // with some arguments that could have been
        // augmented by this decorator
        decoratee.apply(this, args);

        // Do something after ...
        console.log('after: ' + name);
    };
}

// Or if you wanted to use a factory function to supply some configuration
// to the decorator you can do it this way

export function checkProps(config) {
    return function configurableCheckProps(target, name, descriptor) {
        // Save the original method, it'd be a good idea
        // to check that it really is a function
        const decoratee = descriptor.value;

        if (config.someOption) {
            // Do something based on the config
        }

        // Modify the descriptor to return our decorator
        // function instead of the original
        descriptor.value = function decorated(...args) {
            // Do something before ...
            console.log('before: ' + name, this.props, args);

            if (config.someOption) {
                // Do something based on the config
            }

            // Calling the decorated method on this object
            // with some arguments that could have been
            // augmented by this decorator
            decoratee.apply(this, args);

            // Do something after ...
            console.log('after: ' + name);
        };
    };
}

Here's an example that also modifies the behavior of a method that demonstrates this more thoroughly.
Hope this helps. Happy coding!
EDIT: As a commenter pointed out, decorators are not part of ES7 but as of March 2016 the proposal is still in Stage 1, my bad
EDIT2: As of June 2018 the proposal is in the proposal is still in Stage 2, we're getting closer

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


- the path to peak performance requires rigorous practice and unbending intent. This approach to athletic training is easy enough to describe in the abstract, but it is extremely difficult to grasp and embrace in practice.
- His struggle to maintain a focus of mind and body, moment to moment, in both practice and performance.
- The process of athletic training was for Lewis a relentless pursuit of competitive success. Beneath each episode of competition, whether in practice or performance, raged a far more profound and private struggle – a struggle of will. Lewis's intensely personal struggle mirrors the struggles of all who pursue perfection, whatever the discipline. One's competitors are, on a deeper level, merely reflections of one's own possibilities and limitations, of one's strengths and weaknesses, one's hopes and fears. This is the exquisite mystery, and the majesty, that lies at the heart of the sport. It is the mystery of personal exploration. It is the majesty of personal exploration. It is the majesty of self-realization through an unending quest for completion.
- The challenge of perfection is a potent seduction to the human spirit. Even the first moment of involvement with a discipline such as rowing potentially embodies the promise of perfection. And each incremental advance in strength, or endurance, or technique – each confrontation with and extension of personal limits – hints of some final moment of completion. It is this possibility of perfection, this promise of completion, that guides and motivates the practice. The material rewards, the praise and exaltation, although powerful, are secondary.
- Intuitively, instinctively, we seem to know that such moments of completion are accessible. For some, the purposeful quest for perfection becomes a passion, even an obsession. It may be that an athlete must be obsessed to achieve the level of performance that Lewis and Enquist attained. Passion is certainly essential. Yet passion and obsession are by no means sufficient. To often this potent energy is twisted and deflected in the heat of elite competition, as the focus narrows and the intensity builds. Perceptions become distorted. One opponent becomes a barrier to success rather than an indispensable partner in the pursuit of peak performance. Losses in competition are perceived as defeats at the hands of an adversary rather than failures of one's own will, leading to despair and blame rather than insights and growth. And because personalities and passions frequently are inflated in the heat of competition, their clashes and embraces can be dramatically intensified. The deep mutual respect among competitors – a fatigue and frustration – may be forgotten, lost in the fervor of the competitive moment. Put simply, navigation in the rarefied atmosphere of consummate practice and elite competition is profoundly difficult. Everywhere there are distractions and seductions that threaten to blunt or deflect the focus.
- Passion simply is not enough. It must be harnessed to the will. Then, through a relentless exercise of will, this energy must be brought to a focus of maximum intensity, and the point of focus must be directed with precision and purpose within each successive present moment of practice. If left unharnessed, the passion to excel will deflect the mind from its focus on the present moment of practice, moment to moment, day to day. Properly focused, passion can propel the practitioner to the edge of perfection.
- Assault on Lake Casitas charts Lewis's course in his pursuit of perfection. It is not a straight and narrow path. It is a path paved with defeats. Along the way, there were mistakes of judgment and failures of will. There were dead ends and detours, distractions and seductions. But Lewis persevered, even when seemingly lost in the depths of adversity. He rose from each failure stronger and more focused in mind and body.
- And ultimately, in concerti with his doubles partner, he reached the summit of his discipline.
o the force of will that binds the puzzle is found only in the focus of mind within the present moment. It is this truth that lurks between the lines of Assault on Lake Casitas.
- I loved the simplicity of (sculling). No one was to blame for a bad (stroke). No one got mad at me when I was late for practice. If things didn't go well, I had no one to look to but myself.
- do everything as if your life depends on it. Sign your name to every job. Every word and every actions counts.
- a saw guard was too dangerous. It made you sloppy, unaware of the madly spinning blade. You couldn't trust a saw guard. Better to work without a net, without a saw guard. He intensity was greater, more concentration, total commitment, better results.
When compared to the ordinary concept of winning and losing, "battling for my lie" required a whole different level of consciousness. Mike's words reassured me that I was right to be obsessed, to train as if nothing else mattered.
A conscious effort has to be made to go after humility, to maintain respect for coaches and other (scullers), along with various helpers, spectators, and even more prejudiced onlookers. The opposite spectrum is pride.
Abandon all the usual excuses. Taking complete responsibility is the premier rule.
- The guy who cut the rafters screwed you up, but you should've known better than to put them up without checking the length. The bottom line is – you have to start over.
- Do it right, and finish it. Very simple – do it right, and finish it. If it takes you a month, then take a month. You can't quit, and you can't do it wrong. Get a payday out of this roof, or it'll haunt you until you die. Now you know: Do it right, and finish it.


text:
Tag Archives: Rock And Roll Jackie
Sissy Spacek/Smegma
Helicopter, H 88
Ace Farren Ford, Dennis Duck, and Ju Suk Reet Meate (three original members) are joined by Rock 'N' Roll Jackie (35 years in the band), John Wiese (approximately 10 years), and a cast of others form the current third phase Smegma. Personnel of this album, "Ballast", consists of this line-up plus Charlie Mumma, a member of Sissy Spacek since 2008.
The source material of "Ballast" was recorded at home and on the Los Angeles radio station Dublab, but what we hear is not exactly Smegma and Sissy Spacek performing together as a live group. Wiese's production of the recording is a kind of un-doing of the live group playing, forging it into a new collage of sound. It reminds us of genome editing which results in diversity, and sometimes in mutation, of organisms.
The title of the album, "Ballast", refers to a weight on a ship which improves it's stability, but it is also a term for an electrical component that regulates electricity so as to not destroy the other components. It's double meaning fits between the cover art and the collage process which is constantly partitioning and interrupting the elements of sound.
—Takuya Sakaguchi, from the liner notes
https://helicopter.storenvy.com/
https://sissyspacek.bandcamp.com/merch
http://gorejet.com
Ballast by Sissy Spacek/Smegma
Tags Ace Farren Ford, Charlie Mumma, Dennis Duck, Helicopter, John Wiese, Ju Suk Reet Meate, Rock And Roll Jackie, Sissy Spacek, Smegma
Smegma—Mutant Stomps LP
Helicopter, HEL 94111
These American legends of outsider avant-garde need little introduction. Since becoming core members of the Los Angeles Free Music Society over four decades ago, they have retained their focus, determination and unmatched originality, influencing generations and never ceasing to advance further avenues of progress. Mutant Stomps is a result of Smegma's living room recording sessions at their pink house in Portland. All tracks were produced 2012–2013, with one dating back to 1975 for good measure. The line-up of Dennis Duck, Ace Farren Ford, Rock and Roll Jackie, Ju Suk Reet Meate, Madellyn Villano, John Wiese and Donkey Flybye deliver a consistently amorphous, surreal-concrète sound.
The full length LP comes in an edition of 100 copies.
1. Vout #9
2. Mutant Stomps
3. Hot In There
4. Variations VII
5. Code 61
6. Jug Band Waltz
http://helicopter-la.com/
https://helicopter.bandcamp.com/album/mutant-stomps
Tags Ace Farren Ford, Dennis Duck, Donkey Flybye, Helicopter, John Wiese, Ju Suk Reet Meate, LAFMS, Madellyn Villano, Poland, Rock And Roll Jackie, Smegma


» Buy lortab online secure no prescriptions. from Buy lortab online.
» Terbinafine use feedback. from Terbinafine deaths.
» Buy alprazolam without prescription. from Buy alprazolam uk.
» Fioricet. from Fioricet perscriptions.
» Ambien 10mg doseage. from Buy ambien 10.
» Oxycontin. from Compare oxycontin to oxycodone.
» Oxycontin sales no prescription. from Oxycontin for sale.
» Codeine available in dallas texas hospital. from How codeine effects the brain.
» Generic viagra cheap no prescription. from Generic viagra cheap no perscription.
» Alprazolam intoxicated driving. from History alprazolam.
» Fioricet. from Fioricet message board.
» Order diazepam with master card. from Order diazepam cheap pharmacy.
» Fat burners with ephedra. from Chronic ephedra abuse.
» Ativan and seizres. from Ativan.


text:
La ligne 14 du tramway de Prague est une ligne de tramway  qui relie Sídliště Barrandov à Ortenovo náměstí.

Histoire

Tracé et stations
La ligne 14 relie Sídliště Barrandov (au Sud de la ville) à Ortenovo náměstí (au Nord). Les rames poursuivent leur route jusque Kubánské náměstí, en tant que ligne 24.

Les stations

Exploitation de la ligne
La ligne 14 est exploitée par Dopravní podnik hlavního města Prahy, la société des transports publics de la ville de Prague. Les rames poursuivent leur route au-delà de Ortenovo náměstí, jusque Kubánské náměstí, en tant que ligne 24.

L'arrêt Tusarova n'est desservi qu'en direction de Sídliště Barrandov. L'arrêt U Průhonu n'est desservi qu'en direction de Ortenovo náměstí.

Fréquence

Matériel roulant

Tarification et financement

Notes et références

Voir aussi

Articles connexes
 Tramway • Tramway de Prague

Liens externes
  Site du syndicat des transports en commun de Prague
  Site de l'exploitant

Tramway de Prague

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Compulsory retirement of judges
Thanks to Andrew Smith of Matrix Chambers for preparing this case summary
Is it lawful to impose compulsory retirement on serving judges when they reach their 70th birthday?
Yes, held an employment tribunal in White v Ministry of Justice.
The Claimant, a retired circuit judge, claimed that the MoJ's requirement (which was in accordance with section 26 of the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993) amounted to unlawful direct age discrimination.
Whilst he did not dispute that the operation of a compulsory retirement age ("CRA") was in pursuit of a number of legitimate social policy aims (as set out at para. 19 of the Judgment), he submitted that the chosen cut-off point was too young, and should instead be set at 75 (or, alternatively, 72).
The employment tribunal rejected the claim, concluding that the CRA of 70 was appropriate and reasonably necessary. As to whether a CRA was in principle permissible, the employment tribunal held that an alternative system (involving forced retirement based on an assessment of individual capacity) "would not only be distasteful and undignified but potentially damaging to the rule of law."
Accepting the MoJ's submissions that setting the bar at 70 was appropriate and reasonably necessary, the employment tribunal noted the "consistent thread running through the arguments in favour of 70…is that it has been chosen…to ensure so far as possible that judges retire while still at the top of their game."
It was, the employment tribunal concluded, "of the highest constitutional importance that judges should not be perceived by the public to be 'past it' because of mere antiquity nor to be still in post whilst actually being 'past it' but declining to acknowledge the fact, given the very real difficulty of removing them from salaried office."
The employment tribunal also observed that the chosen CRA had commanded the support of virtually all senior judicial figures since the 1990s and, on the evidence before it, all of the judges' professional bodies.


In a saturated business space, digital marketing has never been more important for your business to ensure you get ahead of your competition. Digital Marketing entails all types of advertising and promotion of your business through digital channels, whether that's your website, blog, social media, video or email campaigns.
We know how precious your time is and how important your business is to you, so we take the pressure out of digital marketing by helping you to grow and achieve your goals. We produce comprehensive campaigns from strategy to implementation, tailoring each for your businesses goals.
Content is core to our digital marketing strategies and we understand the time constraints placed on businesses when writing their own content. We take the stress out of this vital step by researching, writing and editing all for you. Our content marketing services drive traffic to your site through well optimized & relevant content. We research & write all content with a key focus on SEO, looking to create shareable, high quality content that converts.
Our SEO (Search Engine Optimisation) services are aimed at making your site more readable for search engines whilst also improving quality and user experience; a task that is essential for getting ahead of your competitors. We use the latest SEO techniques to ensure that your site and its content are as optimised as possible.
Content is core to our digital marketing strategies and we understand the time constraints placed on businesses when writing their own content. We research & write content with a key focus on SEO, creating shareable, high-quality content that converts.
Paid advertising (PPC) allows you to reach new audiences fast. We create optimised ads focussing on using Google AdWords & social media platforms to reach those who are looking for your product or services. We use a range of text, display & video ads to engage and drive the right kind of traffic to your site.
We make your Email Marketing effective through providing everything from regular newsletters to fully automated campaigns. We design, build & monitor email marketing campaigns designed to continually engage your users and create brand loyalty.
Reporting & monitoring is an essential element of any successful digital marketing strategy. We recognise your need to know the results of the work we put in, and we help you understand which strategies work best for you. Using the data gathered, we provide recommendations that can be implemented to help you reach your business goals moving forward.


text:
Pandemic exposes channel digital marketing skills gap
The shift to digital marketing has been a bridge too far for some partners and has highlighted that more effort is needed in this area
Simon Quicke, Microscope Editor
Published: 15 Sep 2021 14:08
There is a need for vendors and partners to step up their digital marketing skills, after the experiences of the last 18 months exposed a shortfall in expertise.
Channel marketing experts Coterie, along with research partner the University of Huddersfield, have produced a report, Driving value from Ecosystems 2.0, that shines a light on the state of play, with it clear that partners must be prepared to reach customers in different ways.
"Traditionally, partner marketing and channel marketing has been a lot of face-to-face and very event-driven," said Jo Dunkley, business development and marketing director at Coterie.
"But following the pandemic and everyone being indoors and online, it has accelerated that search online when you're looking for solutions. About 46% of the buying journey is done online. So, from a marketing point of view, that skillset is completely shifting to be a more digital requirement."
The report found that the emergence of hybrid working meant that the relationships the channel cultivated with customers were shifting virtually and that had to be embraced, which was not always an easy task for some partners.
Despite the shift to digital, Coterie found that many in the industry simply did not have the expertise in-house to react to these changes. The findings identified a shortage of partner marketing professionals with digital skills, which included messaging, branding research skills and community building. Getting hold of someone with all those attributes was a challenge.
Dunkley said it was unlikely that things would ever go back to normal because the shift towards digital had pre-dated the pandemic and the buying process had been shifting online for more customers.
"It's all about having the content online, so that people can self-serve and find the information they really want and then, at the end of the journey, it's all about reinforcing that message so they feel they've made the right decision," she said.
The University of Huddersfield's Shona Bettany said the changes to the world caused by the coronavirus had exposed some problems.
"The pandemic has undoubtedly acted as a challenge and ultimately forced many companies across the industry spectrum to stop and reconsider, and the findings derived from our research suggest that partner marketing is not exempt from the changes wrought by this historic period," she said.
Dunkley added that there was pressure on vendors to also make sure their channel marketing was hitting the mark because if it failed, there were serious financial implications.
"With 60-65% of revenue coming through the channel, why wouldn't you have an experienced, rounded marketing operation and a team that can develop propositions that can be easily understood, and develop campaigns so that buyers can easily find the content when and where they need it, within that buying cycle?" she said. "I think it's become an essential."
Read more on Sales and Customer Management
Cisco routes to market expand amid cloud marketplace growth
By: John Moore
Cisco cutting complexity with partner experience efforts
Is it time to say farewell to the three-tier approach?
Covid-19 crisis has speeded up contact centre digital transformation
By: Cath Everett
Is it time to say farewell to the three-tier approach? – MicroscopeUK
University aims for three-year ROI from storage ... – ComputerWeekly.com
Manchester to trial smart traffic lights to reduce ... – ComputerWeekly.com


The Tansy Dress is a metallic style knit dress that finishes at mid calf. It features a shoulder straps and a keyhole opening at the front that crosses over and ties at the neck. This dress is lined to the knee and is sheer in the skirt of the dress. Fitted at the top of the dress and voluminous at the bottom of the dress. A versatile dress can be worn with flats during the day and a heel for a more formal look.


When one of your sewing and styling idols posts a testing call, you only debate for half a second if you have time to participate. Then, you wait on pins and needles for the acceptance email. Needless to say, I am thrilled Threadbear Garments has joined the pattern designing industry. The new Taos Top is a simple yet stylish design.
The pattern includes two views with options that you can mix and match. This view includes the mock neckband and curved hem. The pattern also features options for a cowl neck and mitered hem.
The fit of the princess seam style is fitted at the bust and more a-line toward the waist and hips, so it skims all the right places. I made the size 8 adding 1.5" in length. The only adjustment I feel like I may need to make is one for a forward shoulder. I haven't needed this before, but I think it may eliminate some of the drag lines around the neck I see in the photos. This is a midweight knit, but I'm not entirely sure where I got it. I really need to find a better way of tracking my stash!
I can't leave this post without noting the quality of the pattern. I was basically blown away by Leslie's attention to detail, beautiful layout (yes, a pattern layout can be beautiful), and overall intentionality of the pattern. Leslie didn't skimp on her first pattern to hit the market. The Taos top checks all of the boxes for easy to follow instructions, detailed illustrations, and polished product.


Unique 6W LED grow light with crystal plus lens design, which is much brighter than 3W and 5W LEDs. Energy saving, just consumes about 90-110W power.
Selectable Leaf/Bloom switches.Coverage Area: 6~10 square feet for veg stage / 4~6 square feet for flowering stage.
Mixture spectrum and best ratio.Switch-Leaf: 6pcs 625-630nm(red), 8pcs 470nm(blue), 4pcs 450nm(blue), 2pcs 3500-4000K(white), 2pcs 6500-7000K(white), 2pcs 13500-14000K(white), 1pc 525-530nm(green), Switch-Bloom:2pcs 630nm(red), 12pcs 660nm(red), 4pcs 610-615nm(orange), 4pcs 585-595nm(yellow), 3pcs 430nm(royal blue).
1)All kinds of flower plants: medical plants, tomatoes, chills, eggplant, Rose etc.
All kinds of greens: herbs and leafy vegetables, lettuce, bok choy, etc.
2)Also suitable for Indoor garden or indoor potted landscape.
Best Work Time: 8-10 hours One Day.
Coverage Area: 6~10 square feet for veg stage / 4~6 square feet for flowering stage.
What is the difference between 5W and 6W?
(1) 6 watt LED chips. It is more brighter than 5W, it can produce more powerful Wave Length and Par Value which is very good for the plant.
(2) To ensure its long life span, we drive this light with 580-600mA safe current, the best Par Value Current for photosynthesis. If you run high current and output power, it is not the best Par Value for plant.
(3) Extra watt is driven by higher current mean less in growing leaf and flower since PAR value won't increase too much. Plant has limited absorbing ability. Just like human, eating too much is not good for health.
(4) We use intelligent temperature control system. When temperature is higher than 70 degrees, the electric current will become lower, thereby the power is lower accordingly.
2 quiet cooling fans,aluminum from inside and outside for heat dissipation. Protecting diodeds are added to make sure one chip out, others still work.
All of our LED grow lights have ONE YEAR warranty with factory spare parts and trained technician.