“Please note: Desert Report editors have retracted ‘The Silent Menace’ articles from both the June and September issues; our forthcoming December issue will cover the reasons why.” When the retraction took place during the second week of September, they hadn’t found an official excuse yet that they were comfortable publishing as an explanation….

… the formerly controversial topic of potential infrasound hazards associated with industrial wind turbines had been demonstrated by enough prestigious studies to be harmful beyond any level of doubt. As an environmental tribunal in Ontario, Canada officially explained, the issue was no longer one that questioned the harm but had evolved into a question of the degree of harm that industrial wind turbine–generated infrasound causes.

One of Murphy’s Laws states, “No good deed goes unpunished.” Along those lines, after working without any compensation for months to uncover the most revealing, current scholarly studies, and thought-provoking news reports on the known health hazards associated with infrasound from industrial wind turbines, a two-part series of articles that was written at the Sierra Club’s request was suddenly retracted from one of their club’s magazines.…

The plaintiffs claim that developers built the project too close to their homes and as a result, have created a number of hazards and adverse health effects, including sleep disturbance, annoyance, headaches, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, motion sickness, bodily sensations, fatigue, stress, depression, memory deficits, inability to concentrate, anxiety and an overall reduced quality of life. The complaint says that these effects are largely due to the shadow flicker and loud noise that comes from the turbines when they are in motion.

As if the news for wind developers weren’t seriously bad enough: 1200 layoffs at Siemens and Vestas, controlled demolitions of demonstration size, mega size turbines in Scotland, deemed too dangerous to remain in place, planned demolition of another demonstration single turbine in Pickering Ontario, because leaving it in situ is dangerous, and communities all over the world railing against rate payer gouging, toxic homes, damaged health, harmed or dead animals, or even forced displacement.…

The Paris agreement’s nosedive has been expedited by the growing skepticism about man-made global warming.

However, the most significant threat to the agreement has come from countries that refuse to quench their addiction to coal.  Among them is the largest consumer of coal: China.

China’s continued defiance of the anti-coal establishment has dealt a lethal blow to the future prospects of the Paris agreement. Here are some key indicators from China which suggest that the chance of a comeback for the Paris agreement is slim to none.

China’s Significance to the Paris Agreement

The Paris agreement is the United Nations’ flagship climate agreement that originally came into effect in 2015. Donald Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the agreement served as the first blow to the agreement.…

“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow, even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

 –  Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia (Climategate e-mail, July 8, 2004)

“[Climate change is] a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know…. they say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the [Climategate] scientists…. Terrible. Where they got caught, you know. So you see that and you say, what’s this all about. I absolutely have an open mind.”

 – President-elect Donald Trump (November 23, 2016)

The assumptions and outcomes of the physical science of climate change are open for wide debate.…