This doesn't apply to New York alone
New York’s commercial real estate sector is in crisis, as office
workers are increasingly unwilling to come back into a physical office.
It’s an opportunity to rethink what a city that serves its residents
rather than commercial landlords could look like.
What are the IPCC report’s most important overall messages in your
view? At the most basic level, the facts about climate change have been
clear for a long time, with the evidence just continuing to grow. As a
result of human activities, the planet is changing at a rate
unprecedented for at least thousands of years. These changes are
affecting every area of the planet. Line chart showing influence over
time of different sources of warming. Only human-caused emissions are on
the same trajectory as the actual temperature rise. Humans produce
large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, primarily through fossil fuel
burning, agriculture, deforestation and decomposing waste. IPCC Sixth
Assessment Report While some of the changes will be irreversible for
millennia, some can be slowed and others reversed through strong, rapid
and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. But time is
running out to meet the ambitious goal laid out in the 2015
international Paris Agreement to limit warming to well below 2 degrees
Celsius above preindustrial levels (2 C equals 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).
Doing so requires getting global carbon dioxide emissions on a downward
course that reaches net zero around or before 2050
FAKE NEWS, MISINFORMATION AND TRIVIA EXPOSED
Greens
leader Adam Bandt was the most shameless hysteric, shrieking that this
week’s big global warming report was “a death sentence for Australia”.
Many journalists also hit the panic button.
They
claimed this Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report warned of
worse cyclones, huge fires and “deadly heatwaves”, and the ABC aired
vision of cars swept away in raging floods.
First the virus terror and now this. Why this addiction to frightening people out of their wits?
I’m guessing almost none actually read the IPCC report.
When Adam Bant was in short pants Andrew Bolt was the most "shameless hysteric shrieking" the world was cooling not warming and the IPCC was a left-wing corrupt organization of conspirators posing as scientists to defraud and control the global energy industry. How far has he come from being a total denier to today declaring oh "climate change turns out to be not so scary" .
Meanwhile record temperatures have been recorded across the planet. Fires never seen before are burnining in several countries never seen before and floods are creating havoc. The IPCC is warning that things will escalate even more if the global average temperature rises above a 1.5 degrees and Bolt says "that's not scary". Extreme weather will become common place and we will have got used to it. That is scary because it's coming out of the mouth of someone who won't be affected to the same degree as the poorest peoples on the planet. Andrew Bolt isn't part of the millions living in the Bay of Bengal or in the growing desert regions of the planet. He will however be most effected if we mobilize to change that. Scary for Bolt is the social and economic changes that will be required to be made by the socially and economically privileged if the direction of the continuing rise in proven man-made global warming isn't controlled. The phenomenon he spent years declaring himself the expert over and above science and telling us don't worry the planet is actually cooling.
Why is the ABC running a protection racket for journalist Louise Milligan, after she’s smeared so many innocent men?
And
why have taxpayers had to pay $1m for the ABC to save her from the
consequences of her untruths?Milligan’s latest false accusation – that
federal MP Andrew Laming broke the law and photographed a woman under
her skirt – has just cost us $79,000 in court-ordered damages, and an
estimated $50,000 in Laming’s legal fees. That’s not counting the ABC’s
own legal costs.
Laming was actually innocent of “upskirting”,
even if foolish. He’d photographed a woman in shorts – not a skirt –
filling a fridge.
It is astonishing that the ABC is now picking up
Milligan’s costs, when she’d smeared Laming on her private Twitter
account, and on an issue unrelated to her work for the ABC.
PS: A question for lawyers. Does the ABC even have the legal right to essentially give and employee a $130,000 gift to cover Nothing
to see here really other than Andrew Bolt whose on record of being in
the courts for false reporting and defamation more times than Milligan and has cost Murdoch's insurance companies mega dollars is squawking.These days the
number of complaints issued against Bolt and Newscorp are kept hidden by
the media watch dog. All settlements even apologies come with non disclosure clauses and are hidden. The media watch dog has it appears no teeth. The ABC is a statuary independent
body entitled to do what it sees fit and by charter isn't beholding to
either the government or Andrew Bolt who tries to suggest otherwise.
What
is amusing is Bolt hasn't been away from Murdoch's teat or umbilical chord since a baby starting his career
. He's hung on to that teat like a leach since birth quite unlike anyone at the ABC. So the notion of Milligan being "protected" by an ABC board appointed by the LNP these past 8 years with ex- Murdoch employees on it is a bit ridiculous in the circumstance. Particularly given the protection Bolt has.
Let it be said everywhere else Bolt has moonlighted while firmly attached to mother Murdoch has ended badly and hasn't continued. The ABC pays for Milligan's IP what does Murdoch recieve for paying Andrew Bolt other than a chap suit and desk?
Abbott is back and it seems he wants skin in the game. Mr "nope nope nope" is offering advice he never took himself when PM. Royal Commission into the Trade Unions was shredded as it found no systemic criminal conduct in the way the unions operated. Nevertheless Abbott's term set out to neuter them which turned the Commission into a pantomime. We were told it was rational move to improve our Democracy and it did but absolutely the reverse of what the LNP intended to diminish it.
"Abbott criticised the fact that political leaders
had rarely released health advice underpinning their decisions, which he
said was a “little irksome” given “so much that is so out of character
has been asked of us on the basis of health advice, in inverted commas”.
For Christ sake this crap posturing is coming from someone that turned his back on the 97% consensus among scientists that the planet was in a critical state due to man made CO2 emissions warming the planet. Abbott was an outright denier of that "science" substituting it for his "own". Given his podcast is IPA sponsored and named Australia's Heartland podcast we know he hasn't changed. He's always been a "science" a "university" "an expert" sort of a guy trying to force his "experts" into positions of power that defined his narrow political reality. Abbott was the "no tax cuts" sort of guy who took bipartisan problem solving out of parliament and replaced it with what we have in place now. The Trumpist single minded electioneering that denies the very structure of representative democracy and replacing it with business of political autocracy in it's place to serve the wealthiest and most powerful 1%. It's why he's an honarary member of the IPA.
Abbott's problem was not everyone liked the transition he and the backroom tried to foist on MPs even in his party let alone the people of Woollhara. He was neither charismatic or diplomatic just a pugilist and still is.
No comments:
Post a Comment