Skip to main content
Tag

report

The 75th Panhead Anniversary

By General Posts

by Rogue and others

I made plans to attend Harley Davidson’s 120th Anniversary in Wisconsin, when I got a phone call from Berry Wardlaw. He told me about the Panhead Anniversary and the event that was happening to celebrate it in the Milwaukee area.

The Event was June 22-24 and the Harley Reunion was July 13-16. That would mean two rides to Milwaukee from Florida and back. With almost a month between the events, so it was doable.

Click here to read this report only on Bikernet.com

* * * *

Follow Bikernet Free Weekly Newsletter to get latest Motorcycling news, updates, reviews, tech, tips, events & lot of fun. Click here & take a test ride.

Bikernet.com 2023 Indy 500 Race Report

By General Posts

by Prince Najar

Robin Performs Harikari: A Death Ducking Sportster Survives the Indy 500

At 6:00 AM on Sunday, May 28th I woke up to a crisp radiant morning in the eye of a swirling cold snap. Just 100 miles south of bustling Indianapolis, it took just a few moments to make a seismic shift to a mental, full-on party mode. Under dire deadline pressure, I prepped for the run on my Sporty, to see the Greatest spectacle in Racing, the Indy 500.

Click here to read this photo feature article only on Bikernet.com

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Visit the 5-Ball Racing Garage and get the gear for riding to your favorite events.

https://5-ballgarage.com/

Thorough analysis by Clintel shows serious errors in latest IPCC report

By General Posts

Amsterdam, 9 May 2023

* IPCC hides good news about disaster losses and climate-related deaths
* IPCC wrongly claimed the estimate of climate sensitivity is above 2.5
°C; it is more likely below 2°C
* IPCC misleads policy makers by focusing on an implausible worst-case emissions scenario
* Errors in the AR6 report are worse than those that led to the IAC Review in 2010

The IPCC ignored crucial peer-reviewed literature showing that normalised disaster losses have decreased since 1990 and that human mortality due to extreme weather has decreased by more than 95% since 1920. The IPCC, by cherry picking from the literature, drew the opposite conclusions, claiming increases in damage and mortality due to anthropogenic climate change. These are two important conclusions of the report The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC
, published by the Clintel Foundation.

The 180-page report is – as far as we know – the first serious international ‘assessment’ of the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report. In 13 chapters the Clintel report shows the IPCC rewrote climate history, emphasizes an implausible worst-case scenario, has a huge bias in favour of ‘bad news’ and against ‘good news’, and keeps the good news out of the Summary for Policy Makers.

The errors and biases that Clintel documents in the report are far worse than those that led to the investigation of the IPCC by the Interacademy Council (IAC Review) in 2010. Clintel believes that the IPCC should reform or be dismantled.

With the recently published Synthesis Report, the IPCC finished its sixth assessment cycle, consisting of seven reports in total. An international team of scientists from the Clintel network has analysed several claims from the Working Group 1 (The Physical Science Basis) and Working Group 2 (Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability) reports. This has now led to the report The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC.

In every chapter the Clintel report documents biases and errors in the IPCC assessment. The errors are worse in the WG2 report than in the WG1 report. Given the political relevance of what is known as “Loss and Damage” (at the yearly COP meetings, countries currently negotiate donations to a Loss and Damage fund) one would expect a thorough review of the relevant literature. However, Clintel shows that the IPCC has totally failed in this respect. For example, a review article on the subject, published in 2020, showed that 52 out of 53 peer reviewed papers dealing with “normalised disaster losses” saw no increase in harms that could be attributed to climate change. The IPCC highlighted the single paper that claimed an increase in losses. That paper is – unsurprisingly – flawed, but its cherry picking by the IPCC suggests they found its conclusions irresistible.

Climate-related deaths
We are on a highway to climate hell”, said UN-boss Guterres recently. But an in-depth look at the mortality data shows that climate-related deaths are at an all-time low. Well-known economist Bjorn Lomborg published that important information in a 2020 peer-reviewed paper, but the IPCC, again, chose to ignore it.
The strategy of the IPCC seems to be to hide any good news about climate change and hype anything bad.

Erasing climate history
The Working Group 1 report is not free from bias and misleading conclusions either. The report documents problems in every chapter. The IPCC has tried to rewrite climate history by erasing the existence of the so-called Holocene Thermal Maximum (or Holocene Climate Optimum), a warm period between 10,000 and 6000 years ago. It has introduced a new hockey stick graph, which is the result of cherry-picked proxies. And it has ignored temperature reconstructions that show more variability in the past, such as the well-documented Little Ice Age.

The IPCC claims there is an acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise in recent decades. Clintel has shown this claim is flawed, because the IPCC ignores decadal variability in sea level. We also show that its sea-level tool – made available for the first time – shows a mysterious and improbable jump upward in 2020.

Climate sensitivity
Canadian economist Ross McKitrick has pointed out that all global climate models used by the IPCC show too much warming in the troposphere, both globally and in the tropics (where models predict a ‘hotspot’). This probably indicates some fundamental problems in the way that these models simulate the climate system.

A ’spectacular’ result of the IPCC AR6 report was the rise of the lower bound for the climate sensitivity likely range from 1.5°C to 2.5°C, therefore claiming that low values for climate sensitivity are now unlikely. The Clintel report shows this rise is not justified. The Clintel report suggests that observed warming and other evidence indicates that the true figure is more likely to be below 2°C than above 2.5°C. This also means that the best estimate for climate sensitivity, which the IPCC says is 3°C, is not justified.

On top of that, the IPCC is ‘addicted’ to its highest emissions scenario, so-called RCP8.5 (or now SSP5-8.5). In recent years, several papers have demonstrated that this scenario is implausible and should not be used for policy purposes. Deep inside the WG1 report, the IPCC acknowledges that this scenario has a ‘low likelihood’ but this very important remark was not highlighted in the Summary for Policymakers, so these important audiences are unaware of the issue. RCP8.5 is the scenario most often referred to in the IPCC report.

IAC Review
Back in 2010, errors in the WG2 report of the Fourth Assessment led to the investigation of the IPCC by the Interacademy Council (IAC). This review recommended, amongst other things, that “[h]aving author teams with diverse viewpoints is the first step toward ensuring that a full range of thoughtful views are considered.” This important recommendation is still being ignored by the IPCC. Worse, we document that Roger Pielke Jr, a scientist with considerable expertise in these areas, is regarded as a kind of ‘Voldemort’ by the IPCC, and they deliberately avoid mentioning his work or even his name. This leads to biased conclusions.

Reform
We are sorry to conclude that the IPCC has done a poor job of assessing the scientific literature. All countries rely on the IPCC reports to support their climate policies and most of the media blindly trust its claims. The Clintel report The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC shows that this trust is not justified.
In our view the IPCC should be reformed, and should include a broader range of views. Inviting scientists with different views, such as Roger Pielke Jr and Ross McKitrick, to participate more actively in the process is a necessary first step. If, for some reason, such inclusion of different views is unacceptable, the IPCC should be dismantled.

Our own conclusions about climate – based on the same underlying literature – are far less bleak. Due to increasing wealth and advancing technology, humanity is largely immune to climate change and can easily cope with it. Global warming is far less dangerous to humanity than the IPCC tells us.

The report can be downloaded here.

The press release (in English) can be downloaded here in pdf.
Dutch press release here.
German press release here.
French press release here.
Hungarian press release here.
Norwegian press release here.

 

ABOUT CLINTEL : The Climate Intelligence foundation (Clintel) was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok. Clintel’s main objective is to generate knowledge and understanding of the causes and effects of climate change, as well as the effects of climate policy. Clintel published the World Climate Declaration, which has now been signed by more than 1500 scientists and experts. Its central message is “there is no climate emergency”.

Censorship: Michael Shellenberger testifies before Congress

By General Posts

EXPOSED: America’s Secret Censorship-Industrial Complex

U.S. government officials, agencies, and contractors are violating the First Amendment

Friends —

Over the last three months, a small group of independent journalists, including Leighton and I, have, thanks to the Twitter Files, exposed the ways in which social media platforms have, under pressure from U.S. government agencies, censored ordinary Americans and spread disinformation.

Today, at 10 am ET, journalist Matt Taibbi and I will testify before Congress and reveal the existence of a secret censorship-industrial complex in the United States.

Our findings are shocking. A highly-organized network of U.S. government agencies and government contractors has been creating blacklists and pressuring social media companies to censor Americans, often without them knowing it.

We and others have already reported on some of the actions of this complex, including its disinformation campaigns. But the extent of its censorship was unknown to us until very recently. And, as importantly, we now understand the ways in which this complex simultaneously spreads disinformation and demands censorship.

What my 68-page testimony to Congress shows is an effort by U.S. government intelligence and security agencies to wage “information warfare” against the American people.

I do not doubt that some people will try to justify the behaviors we have documented. They will say such censorship is necessary for “fighting disinformation.”

But there is no moral or legal justification for the acts of state-sponsored censorship we document, much less for the fundamentally unAmerican censorship-industrial complex.

I believe that any reasonable person reading our report, no matter their politics, will be horrified by what is taking place and demand an end to it.

With our testimony, we are calling on Congress to defund and dismantle the censorship-industrial complex immediately.

Democracy depends on freedom of speech. Both are under attack.

Michael

PS: A written transcript of my verbal testimony, which summarizes our findings, is below. I hope you will consider reading the full 68-page document, which can be downloaded by clicking the “download” button.

DOWNLOAD FILE

SUBSCRIBE at https://shellenberger.org/

* * *

The Censorship-Industrial Complex
My verbal testimony to Congress

by Michael Shellenberger

In his 1961 farewell address, President Dwight Eisenhower warned of “the acquisition of unwarranted influence… by the military-industrial complex.” Eisenhower feared that the size and power of the “complex,” or cluster, of government contractors and the Department of Defense would “endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” How? Through “domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money.” He feared public policy would “become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”

Eisenhower’s fears were well-founded. Today, American taxpayers are unwittingly financing the growth and power of a censorship-industrial complex run by America’s scientific and technological elite, which endangers our liberties and democracy. I am grateful for the opportunity to offer this testimony and sound the alarm over the shocking and disturbing emergence of state-sponsored censorship in the United States of America.

The Twitter Files, state attorneys general lawsuits, and investigative reporters have revealed a large and growing network of government agencies, academic institutions, and nongovernmental organizations that are actively censoring American citizens, often without their knowledge, on a range of issues, including on the origins of COVID, COVID vaccines, emails relating to Hunter Biden’s business dealings, climate change, renewable energy, fossil fuels, and many other issues.

I offer some cautions. I do not know how much of the censorship is coordinated beyond what we have been able to document, and I will not speculate. I recognize that the law allows Facebook, Twitter, and other private companies to moderate content on their platforms. And I support the right of governments to communicate with the public, including to dispute inaccurate and misleading information.

But government officials have been caught repeatedly pushing social media platforms to censor disfavored users and content. Often, these acts of censorship threaten the legal protection social media companies need to exist, Section 230.

“If government officials are directing or facilitating such censorship,” notes George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, “it raises serious First Amendment questions. It is axiomatic that the government cannot do indirectly what it is prohibited from doing directly.”

Moreover, we know that the U.S. government has funded organizations that pressure advertisers to boycott news media organizations and social media platforms that a) refuse to censor and/or b) spread disinformation, including alleged conspiracy theories.

The Stanford Internet Observatory, the University of Washington, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and Graphika all have inadequately-disclosed ties to the Department of Defense, the C.I.A., and other intelligence agencies. They work with multiple U.S. government agencies to institutionalize censorship research and advocacy within dozens of other universities and think tanks.

It is important to understand how these groups function. They are not publicly engaging with their opponents in an open exchange of ideas. They aren’t asking for a national debate over the limits of the First Amendment. Rather, they are creating blacklists of disfavored people and then pressuring, cajoling, and demanding that social media platforms censor, deamplify, and even ban the people on these blacklists.

Who are the censors? They are a familiar type. Overly confident in their ability to discern truth from falsity, good intention from bad intention, the instinct of these hall monitor-types is to complain to the teacher — and, if the teacher doesn’t comply, to go above them, to the principal. Such an approach might work in middle school and many elite universities, but it is anathema to freedom and is an abuse of power.

These organizations and others are also running their own influence operations, often under the guise of “fact-checking.” The intellectual leaders of the censorship complex have convinced journalists and social media executives that accurate information is disinformation, that valid hypotheses are conspiracy theories, and that greater self-censorship results in more accurate reporting. In many instances, censorship, such as labeling social media posts, is part of the influence operation aimed at discrediting factual information.

The censorship industrial complex combines established methods of psychological manipulation, some developed by the U.S. military during the Global War on Terror, with highly sophisticated tools from computer science, including artificial intelligence. The complex’s leaders are driven by the fear that the Internet and social media platforms empower populist, alternative, and fringe personalities and views, which they regard as destabilizing. Federal government officials, agencies, and contractors have gone from fighting ISIS recruiters and Russian bots to censoring and deplatforming ordinary Americans and disfavored public figures.

Importantly, the bar for bringing in military-grade government monitoring and speech-countering techniques has moved from “countering terrorism” to “countering extremism” to countering simple misinformation. The government no longer needs a predicate of calling you a terrorist or extremist to deploy government resources to counter your political activity. The only predicate it needs is simply the assertion that the opinion you expressed on social media is wrong.

These efforts extend to influencing and even directing conventional news media organizations. Since 1971, when the Washington Post and New York Times elected to publish classified Pentagon papers about the war in Vietnam, journalists understood that we have a professional obligation to report on leaked documents whose contents are in the public interest, even when they had been stolen. And yet, in 2020, the Aspen Institute and Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center urged journalists to “Break the Pentagon Papers principle” and not cover leaked information to prevent the spread of “disinformation.”

Government-funded censors frequently invoke the prevention of real-world harm to justify their demands for censorship, but the censors define harm far more expansively than the Supreme Court does. The censors have defined harm so broadly, in fact, that they have justified Facebook censoring accurate information about COVID vaccines, for example, to prevent “vaccine hesitancy.” Their goal, clearly, is not protecting the truth but rather persuading the public. That is the purpose of open debate and the free exchange of ideas.

And, increasingly, the censors say their goal is to restrict information that “delegitimizes” governmental, industrial, and news media organizations. That mandate is so sweeping that it could easily censor criticism of any part of the status quo, from elected officials to institutions to laws. This extreme, reactionary attitude is, bluntly, un-American.

Congress should immediately cut off funding to the censors and investigate their activities. Second, it should mandate instant reporting of all conversations between social media executives, government employees, and contractors concerning content moderation. Third, Congress should limit the broad permission given to social media platforms to censor, deplatform, and spread propaganda.

Whatever Congress does, it is incumbent upon the American people to wake up to the threat of government censorship. “Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry,” Eisenhower noted, “can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.”

* * * *

EDITOR’S NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the author Michael Shellenberger and is shared here only as part of diverse perspectives. This article or author does not represent Bikernet.com, its Sponsors or their products & services.

What We Know About the 2023 Harley-Davidson X350 and X350RA

By General Posts

by Dennis Chung from https://www.motorcycle.com

Streetbike for Asia and a Riding Academy bike for the US

Harley-Davidson held its big 120th anniversary reveal last week, and for the most part, the announcement included the bikes we expected, such as the Nightster Special, and the return of the Breakout with a Milwaukee-Eight 117ci engine. What we also expected to come for 2023 but was not included in the announcement were the X350 and X350RA. Still, despite not being part of the big Jan. 18 announcement, we managed to get our hands on some information confirming more details of the Chinese-built models.

The X350 is the product of Harley-Davidson’s partnership with China’s Qianjiang Motors that was first announced in 2019. After some regulatory delays, the QJ-built X350 is finally close to production as a small-displacement model for Asian markets. The X350 and an X350RA variant appeared in Vehicle Information Number data submitted by QJ to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and as we recently reported, Harley-Davidson included the X350RA in its 2023 model year VIN information.

Following the Jan. 18 announcement, Motorcycle.com has secured a copy of the X350RA’s official owner’s manual, plus a single image of the model, with clear proof it is intended for use for Harley-Davidson’s Riding Academy. We’ve also briefly got a look at the official parts catalog, confirming some of the differences between X350 and X350RA.

The image above briefly appeared on Harley-Davidson’s Service Information Portal, showing a roadster with neutral riding ergonomics and, tellingly, bright orange bars bolted on to either side of the radiator.

The owner’s manual includes an illustration of the X350RA from the rider’s perspective, and it offers another view of the radiator guards. The added protection further confirms our suspicions that the “RA” version of the X350 is intended for the Riding Academy.

The owner’s manual further confirms some specifications of the X350RA. The bike is powered by an eight-valve liquid-cooled Parallel-Twin engine displacing 353cc. The engine isn’t entirely new but a larger version of the engine employed by the QJ-built Benelli 302S. The X350’s 45.2 mm stroke is the same as the Benelli’s, but its 70.5 mm cylinder bore is larger than the 302S’ 65.0 mm. The X350’s 11.9:1 compression ratio is just slightly off the 12:1 ratio of the Benelli 302S.

The X350 reportedly claims an output of 36 hp, but the Harley-Davidson VIN information confirms the X350RA will only claim 23 hp. An executive order issued by the California Air Resources Board further confirms that the RA model has been restricted, as it certifies the X350 and X350RA alongside a “derating removed” version of the RA which would presumably offer its full power output.

The owner’s manual further confirms the X350RA will have a circular instrument module with an analog speedometer and a small digital screen displaying mileage, time or engine speed.

The manual provides instructions for adjusting the damping on the inverted fork and rear shock. Also present are ABS and dual petal-shaped disc brakes, which is a bit of a surprise as many of Harley-Davidson’s larger, more powerful models still only use a single front disc brake.

The X350RA runs on 17-inch wheels, front and back. Pirelli supplies its Angel CT tires with a 110/70-17 up front and a 150/60-17 at the rear. From the parts catalog, we can confirm the non-RA model will have larger tires, with a 120/70-17 up front and 160/60-17 at the rear.

According to the owner’s manual, the X350RA claims a running weight of 440 pounds,with its 3.6-gallon fuel tank at 90% capacity. We expect the non-RA model to come in a bit lighter as it lacks the protective bars. The X350RA also has a 55.5-inch wheelbase, 5.6 inches of ground clearance, and a 30-inch seat height.

We don’t expect to have much longer to wait before Harley-Davidson officially announces the X350 and X350RA. While we thought there was a chance it would have been part of the Jan. 18 announcement, we can see how a small-displacement Chinese-manufactured Riding Academy model would stick out in an event focused on Harley-Davidson’s 120th anniversary. Harley-Davidson likely has a coordinated launch plan with Qianjiang for both the X350 and X350RA

Last Traditional Sportster from H-D: Why?

By General Posts

by Bandit, Reg Kittrell, Lance Onan and Willie G. Davidson

What Happened to the Sportster?
H-D Factory Built the Last Traditional Sportster in November 2022

Last week the final production Sportster rolled off the Harley-Davidson assembly line with grand fanfare including signatures by each member of the crew. I’m sure they were very proud.

So, what killed the iconic Sportster? Was it diminishing sales, technology, the EPA, a marketing push, Indian competition, what gives?

And will it ultimately die or be kept lively and vibrant with the current technology afforded the aftermarket?

Click Here to Read this Report only on Bikernet.com

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DON’T MISS This Week’s Thursday News, only on Bikernet.com – click to view News Department.

Chopper Time Biketoberfest 2022

By General Posts

by Rogue, Dale, Christy

“This event has a big turn out and has for as long as I can remember. I never miss it, and it appears many others feel the same way.

Wille from Tropical Tattoo, some sponsors and a lot of volunteers come together to present this great bike show twice a year.

While the motorcycles on display are all great, Roadside Marty the MC is always a hit with the mic.”

Click Here to see the Winning Bikes and Event Report only on Bikernet.com

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Come Ride With Us, Ride Free Forever !!!

RIDING FAST AND FREE SINCE 1996

From the streets – 2022 Sturgis Rally Report

By General Posts

by Bandit with photos from the Redhead and Wrench

This is going to be good, like the party of parties. I’ll stay between the white lines as I attempt to cover the rally and my first wild experience after relocating to the Black Hills and available for action every day.

Constant hum of action prevailed daily, with the rumble of V-twins, non-stop shows, concerts, celebrations, parties and jamming bars are just the tip of the chromed mountain leading up to the rally. Last year, my shop wasn’t complete, and I was attacked by the deadly Covid virus. I found myself locked down in my basement dungeon.

Only semi-prepared this year, the rally kept coming like it or not.

Read the real adventure on your saddle and get ready for another – Click Here

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Join the Cantina — or Shop for rare Goodies at 5-Ball Racing — We are Riding Free for 25 Years & ensure you do so too !!!

Laconia Motorcycle Week 2022

By General Posts

Paul Cote, Bill Niland (owner Chop Shop), Rogue and Billy Grotto (Twisted Tea)

The Original Rally is Back!

by Rogue

Usually I ride my motorcycle to the rallies and am there to take photos and do an article on the event.

This year I am here to be part of an event celebrating and honoring people in motorcycling put on by Paul Cote with Check Twice – Bikers Helping Bikers.

https://checktwice-savealife.com

I am honored to be invited to this event.

CLICK HERE to read this Photo Feature Article only on Bikernet.com

* * * *

Get the unique motorcycling leathers and more, exclusively on 5-Ball Racing Online Shop. Designed and Sold by lifetime motorcyclists based on daily riding to Events such as Rallies, Functions and many Motorcycle Shows. Click Here To See the New 5-Ball Racing Website.

The Motorcycle Battery Files

By General Posts

Lowbrow Battery Line-Up and J&P about Testing

By Bandit, the Lowbrow Team and Anthony Todd from J&P Cycles

We found ourselves in the battery market again recently. We ran into a couple of issues. First, trying to fit a battery into an almost stock 1948 center oil tank. Lowbrow has an option, but it involved a very small anti-gravity lithium battery. Unfortunately, they were out of stock. Plus, they didn’t have a gel option. They did have a cool, stock, replica battery case.

I did find a stock replacement battery but only in 6 Volt. I needed a 12-Volt unit for my 1948 UL. It had been modified for a 12-Volt system. Then the Lowbrow crew came up with this handy battery guide, so I thought I would share it with an article by Anthony Todd, of J&P Cycles, about testing charging systems.

I went to J&P Cycles, but they don’t list battery dimensions on their website. I would think that would be a major drawback to sales, especially involving custom bikes. We all face custom oil bags with odd size battery holes. Or worse, we have limited space for a battery and need to adapt. We need to know the dimensions. Let’s roll through the Lowbrow report.

The development of motorcycle batteries has really advanced in recent years. Back in-the-day a conventional motorcycle battery with an acid pack was the standard. You would open the top caps, pour in your acid pack, and throw it on a charger for 24 hours. This was the typical process for a lead acid classic motorcycle battery.

There are a variety of types of motorcycle batteries for you to choose from these days. AGM maintenance free batteries, Gel AGM batteries, and Lithium motorcycle batteries are all on the market.

Click Here to Read this Important Tech with Photo Guide on Bikernet.com

Join the Cantina for all 25 years of Tech and Tricks for custom motorcycles

Click Here to Sign-up for the exclusive Cantina access