Just as no amount of flat temperature data would dissuade the climate cult, so no amount of flat (or even negative!) data on mask effectiveness will shake the faith of the Church of Covid. Beautiful Theories cannot be disproven by mere information.

Minimum wage hikes are an easy pander - thank politicians for "giving you a raise," and don't think about all the jobs they destroyed! - but they're also an important weapon in the Left's war on the middle class.

Around the world, very much including the Western world, real power is measured by the ability to silence criticism.

The highest reaches of power are measured by the ability to force people to speak in politically-approved ways.

The ability to silence criticism is a signifier of power. It's how truly powerful groups and regimes recognize each other. If free people can challenge your ideals or mock you without fear, you aren't TRULY powerful, no matter how much authority you might nominally possess.

And if you can force people to speak, force them to use your preferred language, penalize them socially or legally for failing to signal their support for your agenda, then you've entered the winner's circle. Your government or movement has taken a seat at the highest table.

This is one of the reasons people with authoritarian or totalitarian inclinations are constantly screaming that opponents are trying to silence them, even when it's manifestly untrue. It's a means of signaling their contempt for the opposition, of diminishing its stature.

These people would cheerfully allow themselves to be silenced by a regime or movement they truly respected. They pretend to be victims of oppression as a means of signaling the illegitimacy of leaders they despise.

Every modern effort to crush free speech begins as a crusade against "disinformation." China's massive Internet censorship apparatus was initially justified as an effort to control the spread of false information, and the Chinese state still describes it that way.

Censors begin by claiming that they only want to control the spread of deliberate falsehoods and push back against propaganda campaigns. They always begin by saying their primary concern is disinformation spread by hostile foreign powers. China constantly says that to this day.

The definition of "disinformation" begins to expand as the censors seek more power. Soon they aren't just going after DELIBERATE falsehoods pushed by malevolent conspiracies - they're suppressing everything from honest mistakes to predictions and "wrong" opinions.

It soon becomes clear that the censorship rules - like all other rules in totalitarian societies - are not applied evenly. The ruling party and its friends are judged much less harshly than dissidents. They get far more latitude to make unfounded statements or outright lies.

The censors move on, suppressing not just "disinformation" or demonstrably false statements, but even completely true statements that lack some vital "context." The censors declare that even pure truth is deceptive when it's not packaged and delivered "correctly."

The U.S. central government grew relentlessly larger, richer, and more powerful during the decades that every problem faced by Americans got worse. Why does anyone think making the government even bigger would *solve* any of those problems instead of making them even worse?

This is not just a matter of government ineptitude and corruption, although both of those are major factors. Our problems get worse as the government gets bigger because the Leviathan State and its clients have a vested interest in making them worse.

One of the biggest lies of statism is that government and its employees are utterly selfless and immune to the incentives that drive people in the private sector. This is absurd. Every government agency seeks to increase its "business" and "profits," just like corporations.

The key difference is that government increases its "market share" by giving BAD service and FAILING to provide value for money. Its "revenues" grow through coercion, not customer satisfaction. Agencies go out of business if they succeed too well at their tasks.

Time is money and money is time. The more of its time and money a nation pours into the fundamentally corrupt and inefficient engines of the State, the less it has for the private enterprises and VOLUNTARY cooperative endeavors that could actually resolve society's problems.

Every crisis becomes a religion if it lasts long enough.

One factor in that transformation is the Beautiful Theory phenomenon: the power elite insists its remedies are logical and politically correct so they MUST work, even if the actual evidence shows they obviously don't.

Earth has a fever in more ways than one. Some places averaged + 5-7 °C warmer than normal for the ENTIRE YEAR of 2020.

An enormous area of anomalous warmth plagued Arctic Siberia effectively all year but it was not just the Arctic where we saw record shattering warmth.

THREAD

Another way of looking at it... Very few cold blobs left. La Niña developed and shows up in the Pacific.

The climate is not changing uniformly, the Arctic is warming much faster than the rest of the world.

Data: @CopernicusEU and compares to 1981-2010 average.

JANUARY was joint hottest January globally on record according to NASA GISTEMP v4 (joint record with 2016).

Profound winter warmth for North America plus Europe and Asia.

FEBRUARY was second hottest on record (1st place is still held in 2016).

The winter 'warmth' in Europe and Asia was just insane.

MARCH: A cold Canada, Greenland and Svalbard... but obvious warmth still striking across the continents, particularly northern/central Asia.

This was the second hottest March on record (2016 still holds the record).

Comparing two environmental regulation

Preventing emissions vs improving water quality,

Which one better?

https://t.co/zLrVNWIPXm

What is the Difference?
We certainly often hear the term better to prevent than cure. Of course, we all agree on that. But what about improving quality, is that better than preventing?

A researcher named Dan Pan tries to compare 2 different regulations on environmental impacts.

One of the regulations is based on environmental quality limits. the other is based on the market, but we will call it improving water quality because it gives reward and punishment on environmental performance.

Preventing Emissions:

• Restrictions or closings of companies that violate environmental quality standards

• Restricted areas must protect their water

• Implementing comprehensive water conservation

• Strengthens water recovery and protection

Improving water quality

Give awards to mayors whose evaluation scores are good, and adequate, whose evaluations are bad. There are several parameters defined in determining water quality such as: COD intensity, water quality, and industrial wastewater standards

A brilliant talk that punctures current discourse on climate ambition in Scotland, setting out what's really needed, by @KevinClimate for @ScotClimateCA

📽️ https://t.co/i02FtSkJT8 📽️

Well worth watching. Otherwise, here's a summary thread 👇
1/10

Want scientific assessment of what Scotland should do to achieve Paris Agreement temperature targets? Look to carbon budgets. See that a failure to rapidly reduce emissions will eat up the carbon budget in just a few years, leaving impossible burdens for future generations. 2/10

Are UK emissions down 45% in 30 years? Not when including emissions from aviation & shipping, and imports & exports – then they are only down 10%. Over three decades, we have had reductions of less than 0.5% per year. 3/10

Scotland’s average per person consumption emissions are still double the global average. Scotland’s consumption emissions have not meaningfully reduced in the last 20 years… 4/10

Principles of global equity and justice mean that Scotland’s fair slice of the global carbon budget is just a few hundred million tonnes of CO2, which is less than ten years of Scotland’s emissions at current levels. 5/10