Weekly Safety Meeting Cold Weather Safety Meeting Contents: Fill & Download for Free

It is a very demanding move to make. Just because people speak English, do not be deceived. It is an utterly alien place from America culturally and I found (and still find) the adjustments frustrating and still can get furious by the difficulties.One of the biggest realities is the drop in the material standard of living. British wages are generally not as high as in the US and things are more expensive. Obviously, this impacts on lifestyle.Houses are very expensive and you will live in a property half the size you would expect in the US, often attached to your neighbour and with a one car garage —if you are lucky. There are no basements, so you feel cramped and everything is cluttered. I've never seen a walk-in closet to date. You will cram everything into a 'wardrobe' the size of your coat closet.My friends living like this include high flying professionals in London, teachers, engineers, journalists -- graduates from top-flight universities. There are of course higher levels up from this, but it is generally those connected to the City, oil executives or the like. Doctors will live higher up the scale but not to American standards. Pharmacists have low five-figure salaries even though they hold chemistry degrees - a huge disparity, same with nursing.You will eat sandwiches in your office, not go out for lunch as is done daily in the US. You will not have a garbage disposal and will be expected to hang your laundry out to dry, fighting the rain the whole time (having to check weather reports, can you believe?). Household work is more time consuming as the conveniences built into newer housing just aren't there.But there are pubs! Pubs are an Englishman's refuge and the place where you meet up with mates for a quick pint as a routine part of 'friend maintenance.'Our groceries are ordered on the internet and delivered to our front door -- as is typical for all supermarkets. We live on the 'High Street' in our village -- bakeries, cafes, barber, grocery store and bus stop are located there, and three pubs of course. The train station to London is an 8-minute walk.My daughter is fourteen and has 11 subject areas: Latin, Greek, French, Chemistry, Biology, Physics, Advanced Maths, History, English, English Lit and Music (theory, performance and composition). She anticipates fluency in French at 17. The education system is exam based; there is no such thing as a GPA. She wants to study medicine; the course begins freshman year and she has already begun pre-med coaching sessions at school.Brits get a lot more time off -- 5 weeks as a rule -- and travel is a priority. The cultural aspects of the country are fascinating. Tiny it may seem but it takes a lifetime to know this place and with Europe at the back door opportunities are expanded even further.A massive advantage of living here is the National Health Service. If an American could understand it, they would be amazed by its scale and the overall quality of service provided to every single citizen of the realm.In this past week I have seen an ENT consultant surgeon and have surgery scheduled in a few weeks' time. There was no direct cost to me.Tonight my GP (family doctor) rang at 8pm to check in on another health issue. She is chasing a consultant to authorise a new medication and will ring me back next week. Her services did not cost me a penny.So three doctors and one medical procedure without a form to fill in or a bill to pay. Pretty damn impressive stuff. Yes I know it is in our taxes, but the system works well. It is 'cradle to grave' care all woven together into one service. The ambulance ride, GP appointments, in-patient hospital and hundreds of offshoot services (such as mother and baby home visits by nurse-midwives) are included. There are all kinds of synergies created by such a system. It is to be deeply respected, emulated and not feared. And if you have any doubts about its quality, then consider this, a tearjerker . . . http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/jan/18/intensive-care-ill-baby-heart-defect — and remember this did not cost the parents a penny out of pocket.Another advantage is the lack of gridlock in politics. We are being spared the current ugliness in the US and the greater degree of safety nets in employment law, disability rights and family leave are reassuring.The infrastructure of the country is in a much better state... I never see derelict buildings or crumbling roads. There is greater acceptance and less stigma in being a racial minority (although still far from easy). Gay marriage has been in place since July 2014 and is culturally a non-issue, no angst.And best of all: the deeply inbuilt intellectualism -- world-class museums, theatres, concerts, bookshops, lectures everywhere across the land. I have lived fifteen years in the county of Sussex and have yet to exhaust its cultural offerings, never will.People jump to conclusions about Brits being unfriendly but this is simply an American reaction to the British cultural norm of avoiding relationships that are superficial. Once you are a friend it is sincere, and has a depth and permanence that has outlasted many of those I had in the U.S.I do miss the affiliation to college sports, homesick when my friends all gather for all the big football games at our university and have a great party. There is no equivalent here. There is the Premier League for football, and indeed it has a massive following but it is geared as a professional sport just like the NFL. Wimbledon is a delight, however, and when the World Cup rolls around it is the same thrill as the Super Bowl.I would give my right arm for an American washer and dryer, and you won't understand this unless you've seen the laundry situation here. As I type this our laundry is hanging in the family room damp and when dry will need to be ironed to get to American dryer-only standards. British life features ironing as a core task. My good friend’s husband spends two hours every Sunday tackling it for his family. This is a personal 'I hate Britain' pet peeve for me. No place is perfect, I know. But attempting to dry clothes outdoors in February? Infuriating.In spite of this Britain is a place that you can come to love as your own. The countryside is stunningly beautiful and I am grateful for the hours I spend driving in it. Bunnies hop, pheasant fly and fox dash around me every day. Yet London remains close at hand.The Brits have extremely strict zoning restrictions and there are no 'strip malls' -- not anywhere. So you drive for an hour straight and won't see a petrol (gas) station or any commercial building sticking out like a sore thumb.There is a deep love and care for the countryside that makes it compelling, and you can never tire of it. It is the work of a thousand years -- a landscape built by humans, layer by layer. A masterpiece.When you watch Downton Abbey, you are seeing the actual house and landscape of an aristocratic family in Hampshire - one hour from where I live. Just look at the size of those cedar trees outside the front of the house. All the rooms and lands you are seeing are real without alteration (except for the studio built downstairs servant quarters).I live minutes from Petworth House - a house of equal magnificence, built in the Palladian style with a 1000 acre deer park. It is breathtaking to behold, landscaped by 'Capability' Brown. The inside is just as amazing, filled with paintings by Turner, Van Dyke and endless architectural treasures. These houses span across the countryside and are open to the public.There is so much of which the British are rightly proud. The subject of 'the War’ has an awesomeness all of its own. Brits are stubborn and would rather die than be beaten -- the Nazis discovered that one! A few ugly cement blocks plonked around my village’s main street are legally protected as important ‘heritage’ relics and shall forever remain undisturbed. Leftovers of a brave resistance plan to block Hitler’s Panzer tanks as they raced towards London, it represented typical British resolve even when the odds were deeply against them. The military has a proud heritage and is so highly regarded that the Royals feel a deep attachment to it -- including Princes William and Harry.The weather... it does drizzle off and on here but it doesn't get very cold. People get on with cycling, hiking, and the like quite stoically but it can mess up summer weddings. It certainly is not a Californian sun zone. For that people hop over to Spain, Portugal and Greece.I found the financial drop in living a lot harder than I thought it would be. The differences between me and my American friends in terms of material possessions is significant. They replace their furniture and cars quicker than I can. Their financial goals seem easier for them to achieve. However, a lot of this feeling about financial difference has been lost to me over time. I now tend to reference my life against my British peer group and am comfortable to be living in a less materialistic way.When we go back home there is a massive shock and whoops of laughter at the bigness of everything. Yes, I do envy those closets and everything on sale at deep discount. Yet it also brings awareness of the wastefulness of American culture -- those gallon size soft drink containers and hundred other excesses are fun for a few weeks of holiday but then we've had enough. Being in England teaches carefulness with resources (gas $8/gallon), and I am happy my children live within these constraints.To make a move here you should be fully prepared for how expensive it is, the lower wages, and the resulting drop in your (material) standard of living. If this is not of concern to you, and you want all the gains outlined above, then living here is quite good.Britain has afforded me a window into a world beyond my wildest Midwest imagination. For this I am grateful. I don't know if I could happily reintegrate into America now. Perhaps on the coasts. Saying that, I hold America dear and defend it daily. It was once explained to me by another ex-pat that I am 'mid-Atlantic' . . . caught in the middle of the ocean, no longer able to decide which direction is home. I love both countries dearly.Edits in response to comments: if you work in the City, you will find things comparable to Wall Street. It is a separate world - entirely - from how normal Brits live. In America, laundry is an invisible activity done quickly and discreetly. Yes, tumble driers exist in the UK but they have nothing like the massive capacity of American ones which dry fast and mostly eliminate the need for ironing. British ones are expensive to run for those with families and the contents come out wrinkled. Yes, you can put your clothes on airing racks within your house -- and live with your house looking like a Chinese laundry for at least part of every day. Laundry in Britain is, from an American viewpoint, a rather miserable business.

No, AUSTRALIA wildfires and the weather in 2019 are not evidence of climate change. Bush fires have a long and natural history down under. The fires have been more severe in the past than this year, for example as recent as 1974 much greater fires when there was fear of global cooling. Most important bush fires have not been a problem for most of the past two decades. The bush fires today cannot be evidence of a trend or climate change as they only provide statistics for the weather of one year. We need many decades or better yet centuries of bush fires to see if there is a trend.HOT DRY WEATHER DOES NOT CAUSE BUSH FIRES.Overwhelming evidence shows humans are to blame for bush fires either intentionally or accidentally. In fact the weather is unusually cold in Australia with record cold temperatures in parts of the country.Weather is not the issue as most of the fires are started by humans either intentionally or accidentally. In fact temperatures are record cold in many parts of Australia.25+ LOCATIONS ACROSS SOUTH AUSTRALIA HAVE JUST SUFFERED THEIR COLDEST JANUARY DAYS EVER — MAINSTREAM MEDIA SILENTJANUARY 6, 2020 CAP ALLONParts of South Australia have just shivered through some of their coldest January days on record — with Adelaide missing out on beating its 1970 record by just 0.7C.The temperature at Adelaide’s West Terrace weather station reached just 16.6C on Sunday — about 13C below the average for the time of year, and below the city’s previous lowest January max temp on record, the 17.1C from 1970.However, because of the controversial way the BOM now measures Australia’s maximum temperatures “as the highest reading during the 24 hours to 9am each day,” an observation of 17.8C at Adelaide’s West Terrace site just before 9am on Monday has gone down as the official max for the 24 hour period.So Adelaide may have narrowly –and conveniently– missed out, but more than 25 locations across South Australia have just endured their coldest January days on record, as reported by www.adelaidenow.com.au and quietly logged by the BOM.Just look at the temp departures during the first week of the year:25+ Locations across South Australia have just suffered their Coldest January Days ever - Mainstream Media Silent - ElectroverseOne very hot year of bush fires in Australia cannot possibly be evidence of climate change (distorted meaning human forced change). One year of weather hot or cold is just weather because the climate is chaotic and non-linear incapable of prediction more than a few days out and changes very slowly.There must be weather data for a long time at least measured in many decades or centuries or thousands of years to see any trend, otherwise the weather data for a year or decade is just noise and irrelevant until more data happens.CLIMATE CHANGE IS UNSEENClimate change is any significant long-term change in the expected patterns of average weather of a region (or the whole Earth) over a significant period of time. Climate change is about abnormal variations to the climate, and the effects of these variations on other parts of the Earth. W.ROSS MCKITRICK“Climate change is as remote from our experience as the world of atomic movements, and we are just as unable to see or experience it directly in our daily lives. But that is because climate is too large and slow to see, rather than too small and quick…When you look out the window, the weather you see is not climate. As with atoms and molecules, you can only get some idea of it through indirect means. There may be palm trees or there maybe snow outside to give you a clue, but you cannot actually see climate itself with your own eyes. Our knowledge and experience of it is fundamentally indirect, accumulated from years of experience or from the prevailing plant life. We often defer to elders and look at records accumulated over generations to get a sense of it.”Taken by Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy, and Politics of Global Warmingby Christopher Essex (Author), Ross McKitrick (Author) page 64.“We have shown, page after page, that certainty on the subject of the future direction of climate is impossible; that anyone who thinks we can predict the climate only courts the laughter of the gods...BLACK THURSDAY 168 Years Ago : Bushfires Burn 5 Million Hectares or A Quarter Of VictoriaPosted: February 7, 2019 | Author: Jamie Spry |Black Thursday, February 6th. 1851, as depicted by William Strutt in 1864“People have been imagining that the climate is changing,exaggerating every weather event, getting widespread press coverage,and blaming it on man – for as long as there have been newspapers.”– Tony HellerClimate Change Insanity Never Changes“The only way to get our society to truly change is tofrighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.”– emeritus professor Daniel Botkin***THE Black Thursday bushfires were a devastating series of fires that swept through Victoria on February 6, 1851. They are considered the largest Australian bushfires in a populous region in recorded history, with approximately 5 million hectares, or a quarter of Victoria, being burnt. Twelve lives were lost, along with one million sheep and thousands of cattle.THE year preceding the fires was exceptionally hot and dry and this trend continued into the summer of 1851. On Black Thursday, a northerly wind set in early and the temperature in Melbourne was reported to have peaked at 47.2 degrees C (117 degrees F) at 11:00am.“The temperature became torrid, and on the morning of the 6th of February 1851, the air which blew down from the north resembled the breath of a furnace. A fierce wind arose, gathering strength and velocity from hour to hour, until about noon it blew with the violence of a tornado. By some inexplicable means it wrapped the whole country in a sheet of flame — fierce, awful, and irresistible.” (Wikipedia)…IN 1851, carbon dioxide levels were around 285 ppm. Today, carbon dioxide“pollution” levels are around 400 ppm.CLIMATE change alarmists, like Tim Flannery ,their ABC, and The Greens claim Australian bush fires are unprecedented and becoming more extreme, thanks to human carbon dioxide “pollution” emissions.THEY tell you this because the ultimate prize of the Climate Crisis Industry is the control of carbon dioxide (energy). Virtually every human activity, including breathing, releases carbon dioxide. Consequently, greenhouse gases have become weaponised in the global effort to control every aspect of your life and lifestyle.WHY AUSTRALIA’S BUREAU OF METEOROLOGY HIDES PRE-1910 TEMPERATURESOn February 6, 1851 – Melbourne was 117°F at 8AM. Data like this wrecks the global warming story, so BOM simply makes them disappear..ASSOCIATE editor at The Australian and Sky news presenter Chris Kenny hits back with logic and reason to the lazy correlation by Leftist media and celebrities who associate every weather event and bushfire to man’s emissions, in an effort to improve ones virtue and morality over the next.The inanity of a) pretending we haven’t always faced horrendous fire conditions b) pretending Australian action can change the climate while global emissions growth dwarfs anything we do.This debate is conducted at an embarrasssingly low intellectual level. Fact averse. Quentin Dempster on TwitterBLACK THURSDAY 168 Years Ago : Bushfires Burn 5 Million Hectares or A Quarter Of Victoria— Chris Kenny (@chriskkenny) February 4, 2019 Yes 2019 is a very bad bush fire time but look at the previous two decades where bush fires were modest and the fact in 1974 bush fires far exceed today. These anomalies mean it is impossible to attribute today’s fires to climate change. There is no trend up or down.Ref for data is Climate Fraud Could Crush Australia’s EconomyWhen you see there were almost no bush fires in 2018 you are surely fooled by randomness to think one swallow doth a summer make. Climate change does not start and stop like a yoyo.The fires are often started by humans sometimes deliberately for managing grassland. The Australian soil is enhanced with grass fires from time immemorial and in fact Aborigines have used fire sticks for this purpose. Sometimes controlled burns get out of control.Aboriginal burn practices again used on countryA recent burn conducted at a bush reserve near Wedderburn held significance beyond being a land management tool.Members of the Dja Dja Wurrung community applied the burning practices of their ancestors to Bush Heritage Australia’s Nardoo Hills Reserve, a parcel of land set aside for bush regeneration and conservation.“Our fire management practice, which we call Djandak Wii, is an obligation we have to the land, and we love to see the greater biodiversity it brings, and the gradual return to health it brings to country,” Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation chief executive officer Rodney Carter said.“BushfireIgnition SourceBushfires can originate from both human activity and natural causes with lightning the predominant natural source, accounting for about half of all ignitions in Australia. Fires of human origin currently account for the remainder and are classified as accidental or deliberate. Fires lit deliberately can be the result of arson or might be designed to achieve a beneficial outcome but conditions have changed, resulting in uncontrollable spread.Unfortunately deliberate and accidentally lit fires are more prevalent near populated areas and have a disproportionately higher risk of infrastructure impact. Arsonists place people and property at serious and unnecessary risk, particularly when igniting fires on extreme fire weather days.Where do bushfires occur?The Australian climate is generally hot, dry and prone to drought. At any time of the year, some parts of Australia are prone to bushfires. The widely varied fire seasons are reflected in the continent's different weather patterns. For most of southern Australia, the danger period is summer and autumn. For New South Wales and southern Queensland, the peak risk usually occurs in spring and early summer. The Northern Territory experiences most of its fires in winter and spring.Grassland fires frequently occur after good periods of rainfall which result in abundant growth that dries out in hot weather. Bushfires tend to occur when light and heavy fuel loads in Eucalypt forests have dried out, usually following periods of low rainfall.The potential for extreme fire weather varies greatly throughout Australia, both in frequency and severity. When potential extreme fire weather is experienced close to populated areas, significant loss is possible. In terms of the total area burnt, the largest fires are in the Northern Territory and northern areas of Western Australia and Queensland. Most loss of life and economic damage occurs around the fringes of cities where homes are commonly in close proximity to flammable vegetation.”Bushfire | Geoscience AustraliaBut weren't solar panels supposed to stop bushfires? Not a #ClimateEmergency it's a #ScienceEmergency. Don't leave a lot of fuel lying around. It's chemistry. 67 years of WA fires show..Climate Fraud Could Crush Australia’s EconomyPosted on December 28, 2019 by tonyhellerThe climate fear mongering being pushed by the press in Australia is off scale. Latest being that the five day Boxing Day cricket test match (Australia’s biggest sporting event according to MP Craig Kelley) is going to get too hot…>Climate Fraud Could Crush Australia’s Economy (Climate Fraud Could Crush Australia’s Economy)This year, which still has six weeks to run, sits fractionally behind 1984. Both are a long way behind 1974, when more than 3.5m hectares burned.COMMENTSCeri PhippsDecember 8, 2012 at 8:51 amI spent three weeks in the out back as a junior geologist doing field mapping back in 1986, I think it must have been October (ish) and I was on the north coast on the border of Wester Australia and the Northern Territories. While I was there, you could see wild fires every night in most directions. Mostly they were small areas burning at at any one time, and most were deliberately set to burn off dead grass to encourage the new growth. What surprised me, was although the fires would move through very quickly, you always ended up with a few old stumps and logs burning for up to a couple of days afterwards. We speculated that some of the bright spots you could see in the distance might be natural gas seeps burning, but we never investigated (we had other things to do) as I recall, the Australian geologist I was with referred to the night lights as ‘Ning Bings’JimboDecember 8, 2012 at 1:01 pmIf you want to know how to reduce fire risks in Australia – just ask the Indigenous Australians.Fire ecology and Aboriginal land management in central Arnhem Land, northern Australia: a tradition of ecosystem managementWe attribute the ecological integrity of the site to continued human occupation and maintenance of traditional fire management practice, which suppresses otherwise abundant annual grasses (Sorghum spp.) and limits accumulation of fuels in perennial grasses (Triodia spp.) or other litter. Suppression of fuels and coordination of fire use combine to greatly reduce wildfire risk and to produce and maintain diverse habitats. Aboriginal people derive clear economic benefits from this style of management, as evidenced by abundant and diverse animal and plant foods. However, the motives for the Aboriginal management system are complex and include the fulfillment of social and religious needs, a factor that remains important to Aboriginal people despite the rapid and ongoing transformation of their traditional lifestyles. The implication of this study is that the maintenance of the biodiversity of the Arnhem Land plateau requires intensive, skilled management that can be best achieved by developing co-operative programmes with local indigenous communities.http://tinyurl.com/d9qo7nnAs for earning carbon credits for what the have traditionally done is insane. A bit like paying oil companies for pumping co2 into wells when they have been doing it for almost 40 years now.http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=enhanced-oil-recoveryjanamaDecember 8, 2012 at 7:57 pmI agree with John Gardner – the bush fires in the top end occur in the winter and are all started by man. Station owners start them to get extra green grass for their cattle, indigenous peoples start them as it’s supposedly their tradition. Local land councils have people employed to start fires. Driving from Kununurra to Wyndham at dusk I noted fires had been lit every kilometer, the resultant fires burnt for days. From Broome in the west to Karumba on the Gulf was on fire!There’s a big difference between the original nomadic tribes wandering the area with a fire stick and a Toyota landcruiser troopee with 5 guys with diesel guns as occurs today.The burning of the top end of Australia every winter is IMHO one of the worst nature disasters on the planet. The vegetation can hardly survive it – small gum trees that have been ring barked by fire every year eventually give up and fall over – you see them everywhere. We called them “falldown trees” and they were great for firewood as they shattered into small pieces when they hit the ground. Broome to Fitzroy Crossing will eventually become like the Nullarbor – no trees – yet I eventually found a patch that hadn’t been burnt. It had tall beautiful trees, birds, roos and wildlife everywhere. The burning of the grasses takes away the seed for birds so you see few birds where there once used to be huge flocks. According to the owner of the Bird Park south of Broome whilst they continue the burning we’ll never see the huge flocks again.https://realclimatescience.com/2019/12/climate-fraud-could-crush-australias-economy/Man charged after allegedly starting fire with fireworksBy Sarah KeoghanIs climate change to be blamed for Australia’s fire?AllPhilip Brown, JD Law & Politics, St. John's University School of LawAnswered Nov 12No—in fact most scientists say there is no link between fires and Climate Change.Heat and hot weather do not cause fires! The Sahara Desert gets hotter and dryer and there ain’t no fires there!The biggest problem is the Green propaganda. The propaganda proscribes that everything in the forests/the bush to fully be allowed to grow. And there ought not be reasonable management and control of the forests. So, with all that can burn, it burns. Without management and control.That’s a helluva difference from Western Civilization. In which, the success of Western Civilization has been man’s ability to control nature. However, now we have developed this culture in which nature is glorified.And, as to the dryness of the forests, there is technology to do something about that—desalination, However, the Green movement opposes desalination. That is notwithstanding the people is Africa are starving due to the lack of water. Yet, the dogma provails.Philip BrownWith the impact of climate change, is Australia reaching a point where it becomes functionally uninhabitable for significant populations?Richard Simpson, lives in Sydney, AustraliaAnswered 10h agoMost of Australia has been “functionally uninhabitable for significant populations” since well before Western Settlement.Most of Australia has poor soils and low (or very intermittent) rainfall, which is why those parts of Australia do not now, and never have had “significant populations”.Australia is known as the “sunburnt country”, dry to an extent that other countries don’t understand. To try and give you some context, California (40 million people) has less than 20,000 firefighters. NSW (my state - 7.5 million) has more than 70,000 firefighters.Australia burns. Every year.But its critical lack is water. That is what makes parts of Australia unable to support significant populations.We have made it worse than it need have been, treating water like it was in boundless supply, granting “water rights” well beyond what can be supplied.For the last 20 years we have been working on ‘fixing’ that, but it is slow going, but we have to fix it if we are to thrive, so fix it we will.Is climate change making this worse?“climate change’ is a slow process, with small year-on-year effects, compared to the dramatic swings in the weather systems that bring “drought and flooding rains” - so it is hard to pick the “data” (from climate change) from the “noise” (the natural variation in the multi-year weather patterns).It is only when we look at multi-decade data that the trends become clearer - and even then it is possible that we are just seeing a multi-decade weather cycle. We don’t have enough recorded history to be sure.But yes, if climate change is indeed leading to a slow decline in rainfall across Australia (as the data suggests it is) then it will be an increasing problem for us, putting more and more pressure on our water supply and nibbling at the edges of what parts of Australia are lush and rich. (Note: I am using “lush” and “rich” in an Australian context, it would seem quite dry to a European)It is also possible that the warming of the oceans will result in dramatic changes in Australia’s weather and drive much more rainfall across currently arid regions. Possible but not likely and not something I would want to bet my kid’s future on.So in summary, climate change will likely present Australia with significant ongoing challenges to manage the impact, but we are a rich country with considerable skills and a functional political system (at least compared to much of the rest of the world) so I expect we will meet the challenges and Australia will not - even with a 4C world temp increase - become “functionally uninhabitable for significant populations”Much better to avoid the problem of course, but the world (and Australia’s Federal Government) appears intent on not acting in time to do that, so it seems we will just have to manage.With the impact of climate change, is Australia reaching a point where it becomes functionally uninhabitable for significant populations?It's weather, not climate change, Governor BrownGuest Blogger / February 16, 2018Weather, not human-caused CO2-fueled global warming, is responsible for California wildfiresGuest essay by Robert W. Endlich2017 featured incredibly intense, damaging wildfires in California: first the Wine Country fires of October, and later the massive Thomas Fire in December. Each destroyed hundreds of homes, the latter in many of the affluent suburbs and enclaves northwest of Los Angeles and Hollywood.The Thomas Fire is the largest in modern California history, with over 1000 structures destroyed. The fires and subsequent mudslides killed over 60 people and left many others severely burned or injured.California Governor Jerry Brown almost predictably blamed human-caused, carbon dioxide-fueled global warming and climate change, specifically droughts, as the cause of these conflagrations. During a December 9 visit to Ventura County, he again insisted that the drought conditions were the “new normal.” While acknowledging that California has experienced “very long droughts” throughout its history, he claimed that the returning dry spells of recent decades were “very bad” and would be “returning more often” because of manmade climate change.It’s a nice attempt to deflect blame from his state’s ultra-green policies and poor forest management practices. Moreover, Governor Brown is just wrong about the alleged role of manmade climate change, as an examination of meteorological and climate data demonstrates. NOAA’s rainfall records for California show rainfall slightly increasing in California over the 125-year period since rainfall records began.Meteorological conditions, as they develop over the course of a year, and during the multi-year El-Niño to La Niña cycles known as ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation), result in conditions that favor wildfires in California. Fire is a part of nature, much to the consternation of those who blame manmade climate change, and much to the dismay of those whose lives are disrupted by wildfire events such as these.Of course, they can be – and are – worsened and even made catastrophic by failures to manage forests properly, especially when hundreds of homes are built near forests, and when weather and climate cycles intersect with those failures and incidents that start a wildfire.In the United States, the “Sun Belt” from California to Florida receives that name because a feature of global circulation causes descending air about 30 degrees north and south of the equator. At the surface, this “Hadley cell” is evident in high pressure monthly and annual means (or averages); it’s also called the subtropical high and subtropical ridge.In the northern hemisphere, the position and strength of the subtropical ridge changes over the course of the year, getting stronger and moving further north in the summertime.In California that poleward migration of the subtropical ridge diverts rain-producing storm systems poleward to the north, resulting in an almost complete loss of rainfall in the summer. The annual Los Angeles climatology illustrated in Figure 1 helps tell the story of the California wildfire season.With this information, if we think critically, the usual situation is for vegetation to sprout in wet winter months, grow – and then dry out because of the lack of summer rainfall, causing vegetation to be driest in late summer and early fall.This is exactly the situation described in a recent article that mentions October as the worst month for wildfires and quotes University of California fire expert Max Moritz, who says “By the time you get to this season, right when you’re starting to anticipate some rain, it’s actually the most fire prone part of the year.” Power line and other management failures increase the likelihood of disaster.Yet another factor is the failure or refusal of government agencies to permit the removal of dead, diseased and desiccated trees and brush from these woodlands – especially in the broad vicinity of these communities. In fact, California forests have 129 million dead trees, according to the US Forest Service. Together, these factors all but ensure recurrent conflagrations and tragic losses of property and lives.As autumn sets in, the first cold frontal passages and cold air masses build into Nevada and adjacent states, and a northeasterly pressure gradient develops over California. Because of atmospheric physics, a process called adiabatic compression causes hot, dry winds to develop, often quickly and dramatically.The Wine country fires of 2017 began suddenly during the evening of October 8, with development of the first fierce Diablo Winds of the season. Contemporary news accounts link the onset of ten fires within ninety minutes to PG&E power poles falling, many into dry trees. In one account, a Sonoma County resident said “trees were on fire like torches.”The Mercury News carried a story saying that Governor Brown had vetoed a unanimously-passed 2016 bill to fund power line safety measures. But the governor wants to spend still more money combating manmade climate change and compelling a major and rapid shift from fossil fuels to expensive, unreliable, weather-dependent wind and solar power for electricity generationThere was a significant cooling of Pacific Ocean temperatures from the peak of the 2015-16 El Niño to December 2017, such that La Niña conditions have developed in recent months. This distinct pattern shift brought distinctly drier conditions from southern California and Arizona to Florida and South Carolina.This pattern shift is part of the evolution of temperature and precipitation change areas characteristic of the ENSO sequence of events. Contrary to Governor Brown’s politically inspired assertions, it clearly is not the result of human-caused, CO2-fueled global warming.This brings us to the devastating Thomas Fire, which began on the evening of 4 December 2017, and was not completely contained by New Year’s Eve, 31 December. Behavior of this fire was controlled by a large-in-extent and long-in-duration Santa Ana Wind event, and like the previous Wine Country Fire, was dominated by high pressure over Nevada and persistent hot, dry, strong down-slope winds that commonly occur during such meteorological conditions.In short, it is meteorological conditions which create the environment for the spread of such fires. This year’s changeover from wet El Niño to dry La Niña conditions played a significant part in the atmospheric set-up for the 2017 fires.In Australia, it is widely accepted that fuel reduction actions are an accepted practice in fire management.This is not the case in the USA, where considerable debate still rages over the issue, and where environmentalists, politicians, regulators and courts have united to block tree thinning, brush removal and harvesting of dead and dying trees. The resulting conditions are perfect for devastating wildfires, which denude hillsides and forest habitats, leaving barren soils that cannot absorb the heavy rains that frequently follow the fires – leading to equally devastating, equally deadly mudslides.In fact, environmental regulations associated with ill-fated attempts to help the spotted owl have eliminated logging and clearing throughout California and most of the Mountain West – with catastrophic results. Special legislation has been drafted to begin to address this problem.However, it is uncertain whether the legislation will be enacted and whether timber harvesting and/or fuel reduction strategies can be implemented in time to address the fuel excesses that exacerbate these dangerous conditions, setting the stage for yet another round of infernos and mudslides that wipe out wildlife habitats, destroy homes and communities, and leave hundreds of people dead, injured or burned horribly. When will the responsible parties be held accountable, and compelled to change their ways?Remember Australia endured a very early and record cold winter in 2019 that filled the mountains with snow.Australia ski resorts in heaven with record snowfall this year.Mother nature often causes a balance with an unusually cold winter followed by an unusually hot summer.The Snowy Mountains Is A Year-Round Attraction in AustraliaA region well worth visiting while on your Australia vacation is the Snowy Mountains. Ideal during both summer and winter months.The Snowy Mountains Is A Year-Round Attraction in Australia | GowayThe media have been fooled by this chaotic randomness and have ignored the record winter snowfall because it doesn’t fit their bias to prove runaway warming.IN fact the record mountain snowfall in Australia in 2019 winter (our summer) is making the climate colder through the albedo process of reflecting as much as 90% of sunlight away. Mountain snow climate impacts last beyond the winter cooling temperatures.The media are distorting reality once again. Wildfires do not have a continuing impact like the snowfall albedo.Are Australia’s wildfires natures balance from unusually cold winter (August 2019)? The August 9-12 weather event in Australia was one of the longest cold stretches and greatest snowfall totals so far in this century, according to climate and atmospheric scientists.”It was cold in Australia last weekend | EarthSky.orgKangaroos in the snow in Lyonville, in Victoria’s central highlands. Image via Nicholas Dunand/The Conversation.Australian climate and atmospheric scientists noted that it was one of the longest cold stretches and greatest snowfall totals in Australia in the 2000s. They said that, although snow falls on Australia’s mountains almost every year, it “only rarely” spreads down onto the plains and cities. And they explained:Last weekend’s event was probably the most significant snowfall since 2000 in parts of Victoria north of the ranges, and in southern inland New South Wales. In central and northern New South Wales, the last snowfall on this scale was in 2015, while in the hills around Melbourne it was on a par with 2008.FORTUNATELY THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR A GLOBAL CLIMATE CRISIS90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”**90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”** (90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”)By P Gosselin (P Gosselin) on 4. July 2019*In 1517, a 33-year-old theology professor at Wittenberg University walked over to the Castle Church in Wittenberg and nailed a paper of 95 theses to the door, hoping to spark an academic discussion about their contents. **Source* (What Was Luther Doing When He Nailed His 95 Theses to the Wittenberg Door?). *The same is happening today in Italy concerning climate science as dogma*.**90 Italian scientists sign petition addressed to Italian leaders** (L'Opinione delle Libertà)**To the President of the Republic****To the President of the Senate****To the President of the Chamber of Deputies****To the President of the Council****PETITION ON GLOBAL ANTHROPGENIC HEATING (Anthropogenic Global Warming, human-caused global warming)**The undersigned, citizens and scientists, send a warm invitation to political leaders to adopt environmental protection policies consistent with scientific knowledge.In particular, it is urgent to combat pollution where it occurs, according to the indications of the best science. In this regard, the delay with which the wealth of knowledge made available by the world of research is used to reduce the anthropogenic pollutant emissions widely present in both continental and marine environmental systems is deplorable.But we must be aware that CARBON DIOXIDE IS ITSELF NOT A POLLUTANT. On the contrary, it is indispensable for life on our planet.In recent decades, a thesis has spread that the heating of the Earth’s surface of around 0.9°C observed from 1850 onwards would be anomalous and caused exclusively by human activities, in particular by the emission of CO2 from the use of fossil fuels in the atmosphere.This is the thesis of anthropogenic global warming [Anthropogenic Global Warming] promoted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations, whose consequences would be environmental changes so serious as to fear enormous damage in an imminent future, unless drastic and costly mitigation measures are immediately adopted.In this regard, many nations of the world have joined programs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and are pressured by a intense propaganda to adopt increasingly burdensome programs whose implementation involves heavy burdens on the economies of the individual member states and depend on climate control and, therefore, the “rescue” of the planet.However, the anthropogenic **origin of global warming IS AN UNPROVEN HYPOTHESIS**, deduced only from some climate models, that is complex computer programs, called General Circulation Models .On the contrary, the scientific literature has increasingly highlighted the existence of a natural climatic variability that the models are not able to reproduce.This natural variability explains a substantial part of global warming observed since 1850.The anthropogenic responsibility for **climate change observed in the last century is therefore UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED and catastrophic predictions ARE NOT REALISTIC.**The climate is the most complex system on our planet, so it needs to be addressed with methods that are adequate and consistent with its level of complexity.**Climate simulation models do not reproduce the observed natural variability of the climate** and, in particular, do not reconstruct the warm periods of the last 10,000 years. These were repeated about every thousand years and include the well-known Medieval Warm Period , the Hot Roman Period, and generally warm periods during the Optimal Holocene period.These PERIODS OF THE PAST HAVE ALSO BEEN WARMER THAN THE PRESENT PERIOD, despite the CO2 concentration being lower than the current, while they are related to the millennial cycles of solar activity. These effects are not reproduced by the models.It should be remembered that the **heating observed since 1900 has actually started in the 1700s**, i.e. at the minimum of the Little Ice Age , the coldest period of the last 10,000 years (corresponding to the millennial minimum of solar activity that astrophysicists call Maunder Minimal Solar ). Since then, solar activity, following its millennial cycle, has increased by heating the earth’s surface.Furthermore, the models fail to reproduce the known climatic oscillations of about 60 years.These were responsible, for example, for a warming period (1850-1880) followed by a cooling period (1880-1910), a heating (1910-40), a cooling (1940-70) and a a new warming period (1970-2000) similar to that observed 60 years earlier.The following years (2000-2019) saw the increase not predicted by the models of about 0.2 ° C [two one-hundredths of a degree]per decade, but a substantial climatic stability that was sporadically interrupted by the rapid natural oscillations of the equatorial Pacific ocean, known as the El Nino Southern Oscillations , like the one that led to temporary warming between 2015 and 2016.The media also claim that extreme events, such as hurricanes and cyclones, have increased alarmingly. Conversely, these events, like many climate systems, have been modulated since the aforementioned 60-year cycle.For example, if we consider the official data from 1880 on tropical Atlantic cyclones that hit North America, they appear to have** a strong 60-year oscillation, correlated with the Atlantic Ocean’s thermal oscillation called Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation** .The peaks observed per decade are compatible with each other in the years 1880-90, 1940-50 and 1995-2005. From 2005 to 2015 the number of cyclones decreased precisely following the aforementioned cycle. Thus, in the period 1880-2015, between number of cyclones (which oscillates) and CO2 (which increases monotonically) there is no correlation.The climate system is not yet sufficiently understood. Although it is true that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, according to the IPCC itself the climate sensitivity to its increase in the atmosphere is still extremely uncertain.It is estimated that a doubling of the concentration of atmospheric CO2, from around 300 ppm pre-industrial to 600 ppm, can raise the average temperature of the planet from a minimum of 1° C to a maximum of 5° C.**This uncertainty is enormous.**In any case, many recent studies based on experimental data estimate that the climate sensitivity to CO2 is CONSIDERABLY LOWER than that estimated by the IPCC models.Then, it is scientifically unrealistic to attribute to humans the responsibility for warming observed from the past century to today. The advanced alarmist forecasts, therefore, are not credible, since they are based on models whose results contradict the experimental data.All the evidence suggests that **these MODELS OVERESTIMATE the anthropogenic contribution** and underestimate the natural climatic variability, especially that induced by the sun, the moon, and ocean oscillations.Finally, the media release the message according to which, with regard to the human causeof current climate change, there would be an almost unanimous consensus among scientists that the scientific debate would be closed.However, first of all we must be aware that the scientific method dictates that the facts, and not the number of adherents, make a conjecture a consolidated scientific theory .In any case, **the same alleged consensus DOES NOT EXIST.** In fact, there is a remarkable variability of opinions among specialists – climatologists, meteorologists, geologists, geophysicists, astrophysicists – many of whom recognize an important natural contribution to global warming observed from the pre-industrial period and even from the post-war period to today.There have also been petitions signed by thousands of scientists who have expressed dissent with the conjecture of anthropogenic global warming.These include the one promoted in 2007 by the physicist F. Seitz, former president of the American National Academy of Sciences, and the one promoted by the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), whose 2009 report concludes that “Nature, not the activity of Man governs the climate”.In conclusion, given the CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE THAT FOSSIL FUELS have for the energy supply of humanity, we suggest that they should not adhere to policies of uncritically reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere with THE **ILLUSORY PRETENSE OF CONTROLLING THE CLIMATE**.http://www.opinione.it/…/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-…/… (L'Opinione delle Libertà)**PROMOTING COMMITTEE:**ref. 90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC” (90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”)**Smoke And Deception Blanket Australia: NASA GISS Fudges Data, Cooling Turns Into Warming** (Smoke And Deception Blanket Australia: NASA GISS Fudges Data, Cooling Turns Into Warming)By P Gosselin (P Gosselin) on 3. January 2020**By ****Kirye** (キリエ on Twitter)and P GosselinWe’ve been hearing much fake news about the Australian bush fires supposedly having been caused by man-made climate change. Yet it has emerged that Australian authorities were warned years ago that poor land management practices were in fact escalating the risk of devastating fires, according to an expert.**Forest fuel level highest in 1000 years**In 2015, bush fire scientist David Packham warned (Bushfire scientist David Packham warns of huge blaze threat, urges increase in fuel reduction burns) of a “huge blaze threat” and urged an “increase in fuel reduction burns”.“Forest fuel levels had climbed to their most dangerous level in thousands of years,” wrote Darren Gray here (Bushfire scientist David Packham warns of huge blaze threat, urges increase in fuel reduction burns) in 2015. Today the public is being misled by climate alarmists and the media on the real causes of the devastating bush fires now taking place.In fact NASA data shows that the area burned by global wildfires dropped by 25% since 2003, according to the Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) (NASA: Area Burned By Global Wildfires Dropped By 25% Since 2003 - The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF))**Misleading temperature trends**Unfortunately, deception is not only taking place in the communication of Australian bush fires, but also authorities (NASA GISS) are grossly misleading the public in terms of temperature trends in Australia.What follows are the curves of six Australian station that go back to the late 19th century. The comparator shows the plots of GISS “unadjusted data compared to the “homogenized” data:*Data: **NASA GISS* (https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data_v4_globe/)**Before the homogenization, the unadjusted data from 4 of the 6 stations showed cooling.**But after NASA changed the data, the cooling disappeared and all 6 stations showed warming!Looking at the three stations Yamba. Moruya and Darwin, here we see that NASA dropped the early part of the temperature record (because they showed warm temperatures?). The result of course is a greater warming trend.Look at NASA GISS data plots for Darwin Airport (https://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/stdata_show_v4.cgi?id=ASN00014015&dt=1&ds=15) for example. See the huge differences between the versions:So whenever people claim warming is man-made, they are right. But it’s not so much because of the CO2 emitted by man, but rather it is because of the statistical fudging of data at NASA GISS."Not here to worship what is known, but to question it" - Jacob Bronowski. Climate and energy news from Germany in English - by Pierre L. Gosselin "Not here to worship what is known, but to question it" - Jacob Bronowski. Climate and energy news from Germany in English - by Pierre L. Gosselin ("Not here to worship what is known, but to question it" - Jacob Bronowski. Climate and energy news from Germany in English - by Pierre L. Gosselin)

Go for a trip of at least 1 week alone.There's nothing quite like discovering a new place on your own; taking it all in without anyone but yourself. Anyone who's done it can tell you that the benefits of solo travel are endless. Still, that's not stopping us from spotlighting 20 of the most compelling perks of travelling alone. (Looking to take off on your next solo adventure? Let our local experts create a tailored trip, just for you.)1. You can be completely selfishThis may be the only context in which selfishness isn't really a bad thing. Travelling with others means making plans with others. Checking out local landmarks, museums, restaurants, and so on can be challenging when each traveller has something different in mind. But what if you could spend each day anyway you like?"I discovered this on my first solo city break to Warsaw last year, when I spent six hours (yes, six!) in one museum and trekked for what seemed like miles in the cold weather to uncover another," says Insight Guides' own Daisy Cropper. "I’m fairly certain none of my normal travel companions would have put up with that!"2. You meet interesting peopleAs Agness Walewinder of eTramping points out, when you travel with others, you typically stick together. In other words, you're less likely to wander away from your tribe. But travelling alone brings something truly valuable to the table."I’ve noticed that when I am on my own on the road, I’m definitely more eager to chat with locals, meet travel buddies, team up with other travellers and generally reach out more in order to socialise," she writes.3. You can devour as many books as you wantFor me, there are two major perks of escaping day-to-day life while on vacation: sleeping in and reading as much as I please. But when you're travelling with others, you're usually nudged to put your book down and come back to the group. Solo travel gives you the opportunity to read to your heart's content.Adventurous Kate echoes the same: "When you travel with a companion, you’ll always be talking," she writes. "When you’re on your own, you’ll have a lot of time to fill. And while you could spend it engrossed in your phone, scrolling through photos on Facebook, you could just as easily spend it reading a book."4. You come to know yourself more intimatelyThese days, we're constantly bombarded by stimulation; relentless connectivity to others, as well as the Internet. Rarely do we get the chance to sit with ourselves and simply be. Solo travel provides the opportunity to do just that. Being on your own in a new place serves as a permission slip to slow down, without the distractions you'd feel buzzing around you when travelling with companions. Being alone, and really embracing it, is a beautiful part of solo travel.5. You can rest without feeling guiltyFeeling wiped out from a long flight? Or from exploring a new city on foot? Let's face it, there's only so much running around you can really do. But when you're travelling with friends, the pressure to keep going can be huge. When travelling alone, on the other hand, you can head back to your room for a guilt-free mid-afternoon nap."Want to take a break from the hustle and bustle of city life? No worries, just head to the nearest beach and laze around for a while," writes Rory from Planet and Go. "It’s easy to take time out for yourself while travelling solo and this may even have been the one reason you decided to take this trip in the first place!"Travelling alone can give you the restful break you really need.6. You step outside your comfort zoneWhen travelling with friends or family, you often troubleshoot travel hiccups together. Can't find your way around? The solution usually comes by talking it over."Sometimes when you travel with other people, you become used to relying on them when something goes wrong," adds Daisy. "Taking a trip on your own means you have to get out of any tricky trip situations by yourself, which can help with problem-solving, dealing with pressure and (without sounding cliché) developing a little self-belief. I took on a solo hiking and camping trip in Wales last year that had a few issues, including getting slightly lost, but which I was able to resolve (and continue onwards!) on my own. Having more confidence allows you to challenge yourself in greater ways too, whether that’s on a future trip or back at home."7. You're less likely to feel stressed outWhen you're out and about with your regular crew from home, it's easy for old routines and group dynamics to creep up on you. Not so when you're on your own."You’re not with your usual friends so wave goodbye to the regular drama – no crying on night’s out or dependent friends that need taking home," writes Natalie Siagian of six-two by Contiki. You’re there for you and you alone, so the only drama you’re going to experience is if you make it."8. You'll have time (and inspiration) to work on creative projectsBeen dying to delve into a creative project? Whether it's writing poetry, fleshing out a new business plan, or playing the guitar, travelling alone provides the time – and inspiration – to tap into these desires. When you're untethered to the demands of others (and away from your day-to-day routine), you'll probably find it easier to nurture your creativity.9. It might make you happier in the long termResearch suggests that getting into vacation mode has the potential to increase our happiness levels. And as Carolyn Gregoire at The Huffington Post points out, spending time alone has also been shown to stave off depression. The takeaway here? Heading off on a solo adventure just might be good for your overall well-being.10. Travelling looks great on your resuméThis probably isn't the first thing that comes to mind, but solo travel can actually give your career a boost. According to Career Savvy, travelling demonstrates adaptability, financial planning, and optimal communication, among other job-related skills. Amanda Kendle at Vagabondish takes it a step further, writing that discovering the world also showcases cross-cultural understanding, self-sufficiency, and decision-making abilities to prospective employers.Solo travel can help you develop new skills.11. You'll probably improve your language skillsWhat better way to learn a new language than to throw yourself in head first? Experts at We Are Teachers say that full immersion in a foreign culture (and tongue) is perhaps the best way to dismantle the language barrier. When travelling with others, you're more likely to rely on them for help with translating. And, let's face it, chances are high that you'll communicate with one another in your native language. When you're alone, on the other hand, you're forced to constantly practice the new language.12. It'll give your confidence a boostThere is something to be said for heading out into the world on your own with no social safety net, so to speak. As longtime solo traveller Janice Waugh points out, forging a path in solitude and making your way through unknown terrain can do wonders for your self-confidence and personal authenticity."You discover who you are when no one is looking," she tells CNN. "At home people expect you to act a certain way. When you travel solo, you can be whoever you want to be with no one to judge."13. It's more cost efficientIt doesn't take a math wizard to see that travelling solo is easier on your wallet. Being on your own means only purchasing one set of flights, as well as single accommodations, excursions, meals, and so on. This may not sound like much, but if you're planning an extended trip, these expenses can add up fast. Going it alone means you'll have more cash leftover to spend as you choose.14. You're less likely to be hassledRobin Lee over at the Sabotage Times is a firm believer that solo travel makes you less susceptible to being hassled."A rip-off merchant is far less persistent with a single person, as there’s less return," writes Lee. "Being alone means you can blend in with the locals easier which gives you more license to barter goods, fares, street food."That said, travelling alone doesn't automatically mean that you're totally safe from hustlers. In other words, it's always wise to watch your back when abroad; whether alone or with a group.15. A bit of loneliness is good for youBeing alone doesn't have to mean being lonely. In fact, it can have the opposite effect. Torre Deroche, the travel writer behind the Fearful Adventurer, says that attending a 10-day silent meditation retreat opened her eyes to this fact."I found out how to comfortably sit inside of uncomfortable feelings," she writes. "I discovered that if I don’t hook into my worries and instead focus on the present moment — the smells, sounds and sensations of Now — then there is no such thing as awkwardness or loneliness. In fact, loneliness can bring you back to your centre."16. It can help your problem-solving and decision-makingExpert traveller and writer Janice Holly Booth uses solo travel to channel her courage, especially during times of personal growth and change."It’s a gift I give myself whenever I have a big life question to tackle or when I just want to crack open my daily routine and scramble things up," she writes. I’m always surprised at what I find and how I feel, and that’s what keeps me going back for more."The takeaway: travelling alone can clear your head, creating some much-needed space to mull over the big stuff.