Up to 90,000 people - delegates, observers, heads of state and media - are expected to attend COP26, over 12 days in November.
Jan 15, 2020 at 8:54 AM Mark

Frankly, 12 days in Glasgow in November is no more than they deserve. Perhaps they think global warming will save them from a Glaswegian November, but not even the climate modelers have yet claimed that CO2 affects the precession of the sun.

Tomo the poor guy was 2 miles away.

The company I worked for used lots of acetone and if you've ever lit that it goes up with something of a woof. The fire officer said that we were a six engine site - in that if we reported a fire, they'd send six engines ASAP with more on stand by. Even on a fire rehearsal excercise we had three engines plus crews. Although my mate almost had a heart attack when he caught a fireman smoking in front of a 'no smoking, highly flammable atmosphere sign'. We weren't on some outer industrial estate either. There were housing estates, schools, etc all around.

I said to the other attendees 'on the plus side, if it's a really big bang, I might not have to face the press'.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/01/06/matt-cartoons-january-2020/

Very climate change activist relevant Matt cartoon.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/15/while-noaa-nasa-claims-2019-as-the-second-warmest-year-ever-other-data-shows-2019-cooler-than-2005-for-usa/

"Today, at the big 100 year aniiversary shindig of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) there was a press release session that featured NOAA and NASA GISS talking about how their climate data says that the world in 2019 was the second warmest ever.

Here is their slideshow presentation, released today: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/briefings/20200115.pdf

In my opinion, the NOAA/NASA press release (and slideshow) is inconsistently presented. For example, they can’t even agree on a common base period for comparisons. Some graphs use 1951-1980 while others compare to 1981-2010 averages to create anomaly plots. NOAA and NASA owe it to the public to present climate data with a consistent climate period for comparison, otherwise it’s just sloppy science. NASA GISS has consistently resisted updating the 1951-1980 NASA GISS baseline period to the one NOAA and other datasets use, which is 1981-2010. GISS stubbornly refuses to change even though they have been repeatedly excoriated for keeping it.

That 1951-1980 perisod just so happens to be the coolest period in the 20th century, so by using that as a baseline, the peak amount of warming anomaly is magnified in NASA GISS plots. Most laymen will never spot this. A simple comparison of the two maps show the difference in the peak values: ...... "

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7890715/Grocer-killed-Spanish-chemical-blast-chunk-metal-flew-two-miles-landed-him.html

Sometimes fate is determined to get you, even when it gets the address wrong.

I was on a crisis communication course with banking and other PR staff who were there because they had been rattled by the Hoover flights scandal. They didn't believe me when I told them that I was there in case my employer's chemical company blew a large chunk out of a city. It never did but chemical companies are dangerous places.