right now. Wasn't that fun? An anonymity. If you were supposed to be in something else, you probably should leave. My name is Khan and I'll be talking about stealth data dispersion. And I think after me will come Len Sassman, Tracing Anonymous E-mail. Okay. Okay. The whole concept here is that it started with the concept of what if you could have data that was mobile and could survive if nodes started getting removed from some sort of a network. So it could move around the network and be survivable. But this is a part of that research which is still ongoing, which has come up, which has some interesting uses for privacy-related issues. So you can talk about what if you wanted to hide data securely without having it on any local physical device. More importantly, the data wasn't in any one place at any given time. So it's moving. And more importantly, what if you could use existing protocols to do it so that it doesn't seem like something strange is going on to IDSs or otherwise snooping folks. I'm sure some of you are aware that sometimes you have a piece of data that is possibly shouldn't be in your possession or even if it is in your possession, you don't want anyone else to ever know that you had it. I'm sure you can come up with what that might be, such as keys, et cetera. And the concept was it is my understanding that most forensic experts when they appear or some sort of legal action or what have you takes place, people usually walk in, grab everything you own and take it to their local federal office or what have they. And how do you defeat that? Just to add one of our projectors to go out guys, DEF CON people. Anybody? Yeah, maybe the plug thing that came in. Sorry, I just put it back in. Probably. Yeah, it's broken. Is it broken? Yeah, the wall jack's broken. Can you switch it? Well, I mean you might have to turn it on. That's what happens when you're the first speaker. Quality testing here. The new guys always get the first. We'll let them work that out. Sorry. We'll let them work that out. So let's move on. So the goal was to recite small amounts of data. I think that's sort of crucial to understand. You can't have megs of data flying around. We want small amounts. And I'll get into that. What it comes into when we start looking at actual protocols, it has to do with your empty use in your protocols such as Ethernet or usually around 1,472 bytes after the header. So that's about what each packet we're going to talk about. I'll explain it a little bit later, but small means small. It doesn't mean thousands of megs or even one meg even. I'm sure you could do a meg, but we'll talk about it later. The simplest way to describe it is it's a drop safe. Like you go to 7-Eleven and they've got a $20 bill. And what do these guys do? They don't want anybody to come in and rob them. So they have a safe there that they stick the $20 bill in. And it's a very safe safe. And only the guy who needs to come and get this $20 bill later such as an armored car or what have you can retrieve that money. I think the main crux of this is an anti forensic tactic. Somebody had mentioned to me when I submitted my abstract, isn't this just another covert channel? I mean, you could consider it an asynchronous covert channel. The goal is not to communicate. The goal is to hide data. So I'll leave it to you guys to figure out. What's the main benefit? The main benefit is that the data will disappear. If the hosts, the seeding hosts, and I'll get into that are removed. So that can be useful in some cases. After looking at, I mean obviously we're going to use the internet to do some of this. Small amounts of data at this case is less than 1,500 bytes, which is based on a PPP and to you my understanding is that the Ethernet is almost the same. The actual, as I said, it's 1,472 bytes that you can keep per packet. And it'll become obvious why. So the data will stay alive on the wire versus a storage device as long as possible. Data is never stored on a host. The concept as I said again is you don't want it anywhere, anybody can reach it. And data is retrieved or refreshed before data expires on the wire. If you look at TCPIP implementation, the biggest issue is that you can't have data around longer than 255 hops. Because the TTL, as soon as it gets to zero, the packet gets dropped. So that's something you have to be aware of, but to be perfectly honest with you after playing around and I was trying to bounce data off Australia, Japan, Fiji, Mongolia even, I got in there doing trace routes. I was getting to most places in 30 hops or less. So I don't think you're going to have an issue of getting close to 255 hops on a single packet. Okay, so what are existing protocols we can talk about? One of the more obvious ones is ECOService. It's on Windows. If you load the internet server, the thing that they have, it's available on TCP, it's available on UDB. That's pretty good. I'll talk about each one of these a little bit more. It's good enough to start off with, but it's not very good because port seven, ECHO, it's sort of obvious for anybody who's looking at your traffic. You can use ICMP ECHO requests. Those are far more interesting and far more useful, I think. The third I would have liked to have more data on I don't yet is multi-casting or somehow tricking IGMP into working for you. Multi-casting is great because then you could send one piece of data out and it goes out to, I don't know, 100,000 hosts over the world. There's a lot of that data going around. I'm sure people are listening to real audio streams and all that business. It's all multi-casted. So that's very useful and these are the three main candidates I came up with. I tried looking for more. I really haven't found anything that'll natively echo back data that you push out. The point is that I only want one host that I control and I want to somehow use all the rest of the hosts on the Internet to comply with me in bouncing my data back. It's pretty easy to say, okay, well, I have 100 hosts dispersed over the planet and we'll all talk to each other encrypted. Well, there's not much to talk about there. You can do that if you have that. But we want to use native protocols to do the echoing. Okay, let's talk about the INID Echo Service. The pros and cons. It's implemented mostly on all UNIX machines. The UDP implementation will be better because we don't need a TCP handshake. Only difference is most people who do follow, you know, on somewhat some security or other guidelines almost always turn these services off. So it's not usually active. Also, it's rather obvious. Port seven, as I said before. My preferred candidate right now is the ICMP Echo Mechanism. The greatest thing about it is the ICMP is required on all TCP IP stacks. Every printer needs it. They have to have it. We're about to put in the RFCs that actually require it. It's part of a, I think there are two RFCs that clearly define that you must have ICMP on all TCP IP stacks. You must also have it echo back pieces of data as required. And almost every ready stack has it. I haven't found a stack that doesn't have it yet. So that's extremely useful. They are required to echo back the original data. You know, how many folks actually play with ICMP more than doing the ping and doing a trace route. But within the pings you can actually put your pieces of data and check it, make it bounce back. And it's actually quite useful if you're having problems, if data is getting dropped or down the stream or something, what you do is you can put a specific piece of data that you think is getting dropped. And that's why they have this mechanism. So you can send it down, you know, down your route and see where it might possibly not get forwarded properly or get cut off or fragmented or what have you. It's universally available and there's a huge amount of ICMP traffic always present on the wire. So it could be very stealthy as long as, you know, somebody doesn't know exactly what you're doing. I might mention, you know, I mean, there's a lot of network management products out there that actually use ICMP echo requests to just check the status of the machine if it's up or not. I mean, you know, obviously that's not the best way to check it. I remember a couple of versions back. Big brother used to do it and I mean, you name it and everybody's using it. So you should be able to submerge your data within that traffic very easily. Okay. What would be even nicer is if I could get the equivalent of that in a multicast or an IGMP-based protocol. Try researching it. I really didn't find anything. Somebody said, hey, why don't you try sending a multicast message to the echo service? That should work. Well, it's not supposed to work because those of you are familiar with multicasting. You can't. Regular TCP services are not supposed to be registered to receive multicast messages. So this is something worth looking into. I don't know the answer yet. That could be really cool if you could do it. This way, instead of having separate pieces of data being dropped to different hosts, target hosts that echo them back, you could have one stream of data go out and get bounced off every real audio server or a real audio client that would be even cooler. There's a lot of people out there, you know, all the time listening to something or the other. So still working on it needs a little bit more research. Okay. So which one is it? It's ICMP. Again, it's available. More importantly than that, it is required and can be bounced. The bouncing case is where you... I'll get into the details of that later, but that'll double your hops if you have more than one seating host where you want to have some sort of redundancy and the data that you keep on the wire. Okay, let's talk about more theory of operation, et cetera. There are two phases to it, a seating phase and a bounce phase. You have a seating host. You start these two processes on it, and here we'll show it a little bit better. Okay, so you've got this red piece of data that you want to hide and you're on your host. The seed injects data onto the network and then quits. Data size has to be 1,472 bytes in this case with a 1,500 byte MTU. So you put these two processes, you seed them, bounce on there. Seed grabs the data, pushes out ICMP echo request. It proceeds by removing itself and all associated data from your machine permanently. Now, obviously permanently doesn't mean you necessarily just do an RM on the file in Unix or Windows or whatever. You better make sure your data has gone zero at the file storage. I'll leave that up to you how you're going to do it. That's really not something I'm going to get into. There's a lot of products, et cetera. Just don't delink it and think your data is still there, obviously. If those are you, I'm sure you'll have this kind of data know this. Okay, now the bounce phase begins. So again, seed's gone, data's gone. All you've got is a process left that's called bounce. So at this point, there is no data on your local machines of any sort. Bounce will provide and keep this data bouncing back and forth between this host and another host. Now, let's make sure we understand this. Bounce has to be written well. You do not want a machine that's swapping a lot or otherwise. With small amounts of traffic, we don't expect it to go to disk or swap to disk at any time. Obviously, it'll be in the RAM. It is my understanding that with some cards and their drivers, it's even possible to have the ICMP business take place right on the cards or it bounces right back. But I'm sure there are other people who know better about this. I don't have the details yet. Point is, please make sure your code is written well. You don't want it somehow ending up on your disk, even in a temporary file of some sort. It shouldn't. I mean, it's too small a amount of the data in Linux or otherwise.  So it's anything's possible. Okay, so this guy keeps replying. Boom, it comes in, it calls out. But there's no data, it's no longer left on there. How do you get the data back out? Well, you harvest it. But you don't have a process that does the harvesting and it sits there and it's quite obvious because if they do get it, then they have an idea of something was going on. It's strongly recommended that you sniff the data back out on the segment while it's bouncing back and forth. You could have a harvest process, but that's a bad idea. That in itself, sitting on the machine, if the machine is in someone else's power, they'll be able to see it and figure out what that was. What happens if your seeding host disappears? That is, somebody comes, grabs the machine, goes away. Well, the response to the ICMP will come back and won't have anybody to echo it back. So therefore, the data will auto-destruct. Therefore, it won't be no longer there. This will make it a little bit more obvious now when I start looking. The happy faces are all targeted machines that you're going to find on the internet somewhere. Try to find less than 255 hops, although I'd love to know if somebody can even find 200 hops. I haven't been able to. So as I said, you'll get 30 hops. Just to give you a very quick example, so you identify your hosts that you want to bounce off. So get an ISP. Don't get, you know, Josh Moore down the road with the cable modem or dial PPP. All the PPP is useful because he slows down his response time. So if it's a very fast link, you're going to get very fast responses. You actually want to find people with slow links if you can. What that'll do is it'll keep the data away from your machine for a long time. That's what you want. A long time here means one second maximum. Usually I was bouncing off Australia, New Zealand and Fiji and even India, Pakistan, 0.5 seconds for one single 1,500-byte packet. So half a second is the best I was getting. Let's say in this case we have four hosts that we've targeted. So we'll have four ICMP. What we'll do is we'll seed it and send it to four different hosts situated wherever you might. And they'll continue to echo it back and you'll bounce or grab this data and immediately echo it right back to these hosts. I want to mention something interesting. The CSS scramble.c, the first piece of code written for the DCSS code compressed with zip is 2704 bytes, which is in this case two packets. Because each packet is 1,472 data payload on it. So that's just a simple example. If you had that you could actually keep it bouncing around with just two packets echoing back and forth between different machines. I think what happens is at least I do over time and I hope somebody else does as well. You keep thinking you need a lot of packets to do a lot of stuff. You really don't. I mean text files and such are really, really small if you compress them well. So you don't need a lot of data to do this.  Then they reply back to you and add infinity and it keeps going on and on. Data stays on the wire. And then you can get a little bit more interesting. In this case, let's say I have two machines of my own and I want them to echo all the data back and forth without talking to each other. I can have them each have four hosts. This is for redundancy purposes. Let's say one machine goes with the other doesn't go. Well, I could have both of these machines echoing this one piece of data back and forth and if one fails and they're both on the local LAN, obviously the other can pick up the data and also continue making sure it exists on there. A more interesting scenario appears if you talk about bounce mechanisms in the TCPIP protocol. I shouldn't say bounce mechanisms but an issue where you can screw around and make things bounce. This has been seen in many different things, no rocket science here. If you wanted to transfer data from A to B, you could grab a host, V in this case, and send a spoofed packet from A with the data in it with the source saying that I am B really. And what that will do is, and the destination is of course the victim host, the packet goes, hits the victim host, the victim host says, Oh, my destination should be B because that was a source and therefore it turns around and bounces the data back to B. So you have indirectly transferred data from A to B. This is actually, excuse me, there's some covert channel related issues also on this stuff. It's quite useful to do something like this. Let's say you have source filters of destination filters in the network you're in and they say, well, you can't go to B. Well, you know, as long as they don't check that you're doing this, you can go to B as long as you find the victim host who implements the ICMP protocol which would be any TCP IP machine. So that in itself is a very interesting scenario but if you read covert channel stuff, it's been discussed before and it's very useful. But we can put it to use here as well to make our data live longer and to provide more redundancy. Looks like I'm going really fast here. But in any case, the moon bounds multi-dispersal. In this case, we don't have hosts that are on the same land. Imagine if you will, and if I can get my mouse here. If I'm bouncing between from A to this guy, this guy, this guy and this guy and I'm doing the same thing with B to these four guys. You'll notice that the four victim hosts are shared between your seating hosts. I can get A to send a packet to the victim host and have it bounced back down to B and B to do exactly the same thing and keep doing that. Now, you can put, these are no longer on the same land yet the data is now on two different networks bouncing around between back and forth. And either of those networks would pick it up when they needed to. This is actually also extremely useful if you're thinking in terms of IDS, et cetera. IDS is unless they make a filter to specifically look for this, won't find it or wouldn't care most of the time. Somebody has to be looking at raw traffic to grab this stuff. More importantly, even if you're not allowed to go directly from A to B, you're not using the victim host not only directly to your data for you. It's echoing down to some other, you know, your friend's computer or what have you where there's another bounce process running. You know, use your imagination a little bit if you take five of these machines located over the internet. Let's say one's in Australia, you know, I don't know, somewhere in Mongolia, USA, South America. You now have data that will remain alive between all five continents using this. And you could take out most of the sites and as long as one is left, this guy can recover, or at least two. They will recover the data. I mean, that's a big interesting concept. I mean, I don't think I'm describing rocket science here, but the issue to understand is what we're really talking about. We're not really talking about, oh, wow, what kind of a really cool thing that everybody else has done a million times. I think the point to understand here is law enforcement can go to five different continents simultaneously. Well, not yet. I think that would be interesting to see if they can. But since they cannot, and I'm not saying it's just a law enforcement issue. I mean, I understand France won't allow you to keep, you know, encrypted communications and all the rest. And I don't know the rest of the government laws and regarding privacy, et cetera, in other countries. And either way, the point is that you will have, try not to look at it so much as a technical advancement. It's not that big a technical big deal, but the concept is to start thinking, well, hey, I can get this data to be all over the world at any given point. I don't need a lot of machines to do it. I don't have to write some hardcore code to do it. Let's say I encrypt some key, put it out there, which is sort of silly to encrypt a key, sorry, but let's say it's an image or something. I don't know. And you start bouncing it around. Well, you know what, if they get me and three of my friends, there's still two of my friends that could recover this in somewhere else on the planet. And I think that's really what I'm trying to talk about here. So again, just give me some very quick examples. I wish I'd gotten more apologized. I didn't. I had the DCSS codes and compressed it and checked it out. It was 2704 bytes. It only required two ICMP ECHO request packets. I mean, that's minimal. I don't know if those of you who saw that shall source code to the patchy worm.c, which is not a really good example. But still, I wanted to give an example. I'm sure it's linked with binaries and all that would be a lot better. In this case, the compressed text C file is 15446 bytes, which would require 10-point-something packets, which is 11 ICMP packets to keep this code. Let's say I was developing this code, which I would never do. And I strongly urge you all to stop. But maybe you don't want to keep it on your machine. I'm sure there are people here who can tell you better about that. Well, 11 ICMP ECHO packets is not a bad way to keep this code out there while you're editing and bringing it on to Emacs every now and then. Possible uses. Well, you can save keys if you have some key of some sort for encryption purposes or decryption purposes more hopefully. You have some sort of source code or otherwise. Emails. I don't know if you snagged somebody's email. It's got some sort of information that you can use later. And you probably shouldn't have it. Well, emails are notoriously small files most of the time. Usually, being text files, you can compress them. Images. That's another story. I think those would be pretty large. And I guess you guys can tell me better than what other things you could save. I think one interesting thing I wanted to mention was if, theoretically, we could reach the 255 hops limit, which again I'll mention for the 50th time, I haven't been able to do, using the bounce you could double it. You could have 510 hops. Because you put it on a victim host, let's say, theoretically, 255 hops one way, 255 hops to the other machine. Theoretically, you could get 510 hops, which is useful because the longer you keep the packet on the wire before bouncing, the longer you don't have it and therefore it's autonomous someone. You can have delayed packet releases on the multiple routes. What I showed was a very simple way of bouncing between two machines, but imagine you're doing delayed releases over multiple routes. Therefore, you can work out some very simple protocol to make sure intermediary hosts are capable of detecting failure and responding accordingly. I'm already at conclusions. That was fast. Felt data disperser. So we can do it using current TCPIP protocol manipulation. It can be achieved very efficiently. I think that's somewhat crucial. I just have to write one seeding host and have it. I don't need a cooperating host to have this thing happen. It is very stealthy unless people are grabbing raw traffic.  The ICMP moonbound has been used as a covert channel by dark government agencies. That's what I read. I think it was Security Monday or something. One of the first time they discussed it. I don't know what that means. What I put it there for those who do. I'll be looking at IGMP stuff in the future and here's the URL and all that. And by the way, I just want to mention, I'll give you one second please. I substantially changed the presentation from what it was on the CD-ROM. Or at least what they've put on the CD-ROM. So if you need the latest one, it's substantially different. That one was talking about something more limiting. But I was able to get something else done. Okay, thank you. Yeah, go ahead. So you're going to be using a lossy print color or a lossless print color. If you're using a lossless print color, there's going to be a copy of the data kept on your machine. That's extra. That will happen.  Or a copy of your data. And if you've got to use it, you're going to see the four places. If they all come back at once and you have a network, you can use all your data. So how do you get around that? Well, that's why I was talking about multiple seeding hosts. I don't think if you have something really critical, you should be putting it on just one machine and hoping it's the same old issue if you have redundancy. I mean, if you have one hard drive and it fails, you better have a backup, right? Because I have more than one host doing it. So to catch your hosting, you've got the location where the other hosts are. I'm sorry, I can't hear you. Well, they wouldn't have the other hosts. The processes, the minute you turn it on, bounces code is not sitting on your host, right? The process running and you remove the executable. What I'm saying is that it's only running in memory at the time. And once it's running in memory, I think he has a very valid point that he would have the destination of the host. Sure. Actually, he would be in the ICMP source packet that goes out, right? If you're using a bounce. Sure, that's great. Right. I'm trying to understand your question. Tell me what your exact concern is that we know what the other host is or... If you don't know what the other host is and why it's been like storing the data on the other host. So when you're comparing this to what existing people do, why is this what you're comparing? What they do right now is they're worried about their host being stored on a traffic light, right? Right. So if you don't know what the other host is, why now is the data in your schema and if you have the data stored on the other host? Let's say you have two seating hosts that are apart in two different networks, okay? And you go ahead and start bouncing the data on those hosts and they are bouncing it off two totally separate sets of victims, okay? If I get rid of one host, the other one's still functioning and has nothing to do with this host unless they're cooperating. If you're cooperating, obviously, then you're opening up a can of worms, but that's up to you. But if I take this one out and I take it home, there's no way I know that there's a B machine out there doing the same thing. What's the connection between the two? How would there be a connection between the two? That's true, but more interestingly enough, let's say they do get to the other machine also. Again, they won't find anything, right? I mean, these guys can get anywhere they want. Most of them don't usually watch the ICMP packets with the whole point. After our little discussion here today, that's a different story, right?  I mean, you can keep taking this to the nth level. They got to watch you type it in or get it in the first place. The point is to have a vault that you can put this data away and have some security. There is no such thing as 100% security. We can only get more and more secure, right? That's a very good question. I don't know exactly... When I'm forging the packets, I was putting an ID in there, like 666 or something, and that's the way for my bounds to be able to identify. I actually haven't done that exact test, but my guess is I'm hoping. I don't know how codes on all ICMP stacks are written, but I think that's a good point. One would have to be careful, but I am already using a different ID on my request packets. I don't remember the exact where the ID field goes or whatever, and all the other packets, unless you're sending your own data in your case, usually have that from 66 character onwards, sort of a string of characters. But I haven't done it simultaneously. That's a very good point. I don't know what it will do. I'm using a LibNet to make the packets and PCAP to capture it. I don't know exactly what it will do if there's two packets coming in. I'm hoping that the session of some sort is held. I can't say for a fact. This seems like anyone who had access to the monitor or the traffic, anyone who seems to be able to monitor it for a few seconds, can get a copy of any data that needs to be stored. Yes, they would. They're going to take the whole thing and capture it. Yeah, sure. The gentleman here said all anybody would need to do is then grab all your raw traffic and watch it and then grab the data. That is absolutely correct. It's such a short amount of time though. You only need 10 seconds of traffic. Well, the issue is which time? I'm sorry. The gentleman said, well, you know, it won't even take but 10 seconds. You're completely right. But the point is, if you give them so much raw traffic, they can't capture it. Let's not think in terms of just one person they're trying to watch, okay? Usually, you know, supposedly the NSA captures all raw traffic. I mean, Jesus Christ, raw traffic is going through the roof. And that's what you want. You want everything submerged in raw traffic and encrypted possibly in some way. So that at least if he's running a sniff or he goes, oh, you know, that looks like something strange going on. I'm going to capture that whole stream in some way. There's no doubt that if you're looking for the specific thing, you will find it. The point is to submerge it in so much data that it becomes difficult. I mean, if I know what I'm looking for, I'm going to find it most of the time. There's no such thing as I can't put it in space, you know? Right. Again, a safe is not a 100% protected thing. If I come in with, you know, all my equipment from the CIA or what have you, but it certainly makes it safer. And this is if unknown to the people who are monitoring you will submerge the traffic. That's just the whole concept. I mean, I'm not trying to say I've come up with some way. It appears forever only you can somehow bring it back. Right. Gentlemen said just camouflage it. You know, some sort, exactly. Some sort of a coding scheme or encryption or what have you. Or make it look just like, I don't know, windows or something. Any other question? You got all the time you want. Feel free to grill.


Hi everyone, happy Thursday, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com with our last break of the night. It's going to be 2020 Panini Absolute Football Six Box Intercase. Pick your team at number 10, and a big thank you to all of these wonderful people for getting into the action. There was a nice little late night rally. It was just kind of sitting at like eight or nine teams left all night until just recently. So thanks everyone for making this happen. Really appreciate it. Ryan Kason with that last spot mojo down for Broncos, little oppo Joe mojo as well as a Raiders fan. There it is. Pick your team 10, 2020 Absolute Football. Let's do this. There's two, four, and six right here. We're looking for some kabooms. We're looking for autographs, memorabilia cards, all sorts of fun stuff in Absolute Football. Actually a pretty fun break. Here's a crazy football rule that I learned not too long ago, because I think it happened in an NFL game and maybe in a college game in the last few weeks.  Under two minutes, if you fumble the ball, I think you have to be the one that recovers it. Otherwise it's someone correct me and I'm saying this wrong, but it's something like that. Someone explain this rule here. Under two minutes, if you're an offensive player that fumbles the ball, you have to be the one that recovers it. If someone else recovers it, I forget what happened. Something happens. If someone else recovers it, then it's a penalty. I don't know what happens, but you can't do that. Isn't that wild? No one can recover it to advance it. There you go. That's it's you. If I fumble it, if I'm rushing it and I fumble it and Pat comes in and gets it, he can't advance it. Under a certain time, yeah. That was wild. I didn't realize. I didn't learn that. Learn something new every day, folks. Learn something new every day. Here's AJ Dillon. I think Juan wanted the AJ Dillon, didn't you? Accept it. Not denied. 37 out of 75, AJ Dillon, rookie, jersey, and autograph. Hold on to that. Maybe he goes off in the playoffs. There's David Johnson. Right. Then you start, you're exactly Pat. Then you start thinking of why would that rule even be in place and then Pat saying that must have been like an old trick back in the day and they had to make a rule for it. There's Van Jefferson to 75 for the Rams. That's going to be for Kurt Disser. Pat, Juan, you can go to bed now. There's Jonathan Taylor to 199, war room relic for the blue horseshoes that goes to Ale Fonzo. There's Terry McLaurin to 75. Wait, so Joseph, it's only on fourth down situation too, right? Is that what you're saying? Yeah. I think there's a special, like what a random rule. You got to, sometimes, I know refs screw things up a lot. There's Jalen Johnson to 149, there's Jeremy Harder. Right. Fourth down and under two minutes. Refs have to remember this. There's a dual relic, Miquel Harman to 99. I don't know if this is still true, but I think at one point a majority of refs have some sort of legal background. They were either practicing lawyers or they have gone to law and school but were not practicing lawyers or something like that. That dual relic goes to the chiefs, Diane, with that one, because I mean just to be able to know the rules, just memorize the rules and then be able to adjudicate the rule. And you have to kind of know when is this, when is this, at what point does a normal football play become a hold? Right? Because everyone holds, right? There's the old argument. You can call hold every single play, but you really can't under the spirit of the game. So at what point in a split second do you decide that activity is not within the spirit of a game that's holding number 75 on the offense, five yard penalty, repeat first down. Or is that a loss of doubt? See? I can't be a ref though. Ten yards. See?  What is everyone's favorite referee signal? There's the 199, Daryl Taylor, and there's Denzel Mims, quad relic and autograph, 32 out of 75. Maybe the, is there a, there has to be like some kind of tripping penalty or something like that, right? I feel like that always cracks me up because the ref just kind of, you can't see it, but you just kind of kicks out his leg. There's Denzel Mims to the Jets, Patrick Davis, and there's Ben D'Nucci. I think in NBA, I feel like the, the blocking, the blocking, that's, I think that's the blocking signal in NBA or the blocking signal always that kind of cracks me up too, especially when refs do it with, with such gusto, to 75, 55, 75, Clyde Edwards-E-Lair, and goes to Diane and the Kansas City Chiefs, nice autograph there, CD Lam, war room relic for Dallas, that's going to go to Jonathan Pete's giving him the business foul. Actually, NBA refs can be pretty, can be pretty fun. I've seen some like, I've seen some refs tee up some guys pretty well. I need a, I need a good tee motion. You know, if I'm, if I'm going to tee up somebody, there's Anthony Gordon, 35 out of 50, but a good energetic tee is always, is always fun. Brent, what's going on? Happy New Year.  That horn sounds like it'd be terrifying. I'd be scared. Seattle, that's for Joshua B., and some chub, Bradley chub, some big chub right here, 92 out of 99 for Denver, that's for Ryan Cason, and the Denver Broncos last spot mojo. Horns just sound, that Viking horn sounds terrifying. It sounds like, you know, it sounds like when, was it, was it Boromir in Lord of the Rings? Like, he was signaling that the Urukhae were coming, and it's like, that's what I think of.  There's Ujusmus Chusur at 50. That's what it makes me think of. Where's the Urukhae? I did not. Someway, I think Jack mentioned that earlier. He said that someone was, someone tested positive for COVID before the game or after the game. All the 76ers have to quarantine in New York? All right, Seth Curry tested positive. So now what was, do the sixers have to stay in their hotel rooms for like a week? Yeah, that's, that's, yeah, it was Jack.  There's Kyle Duggar, autograph for the Patriots to 149. That'll be for Karen and her Pats. I guess the NFL have to figure it out. There's Heinz Ward, Canton Absolutes to 199. That'll be for Pittsburgh. That's going to go to Justin Ward and the Steelers. And there's T Higgins to 100. And there's Brandon Iac to 199, a redemption. Any guesses on that redemption? And Ryan Tannehill to 50. Let's see how him and the Titans do this weekend. Should be exciting to see. We got David Tyree, signature standout. That's not the photo I would have used of David Tyree to 99. No one wants to see David. Christopher Lord. Like, if I'm getting a David Tyree autograph, that better have that picture in the Super Bowl, right? David Tyree knows what he's David Tyree-ing for. David Tyree knows why he's famous now. It's Kishan Vaughn to 199. That'll be for the Buccaneers. We'll see him this weekend too. Richard with the Bucs. Red zone, DJ Chark to 50. DJ Chark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo. All right, Cascade's guessing Justin Jefferson. It's gonna be, focus. Chase Young, rookie premier materials autographs. Matt McLaughlin with the Washington football team. And a free top loader, Matt. All right, we are halfway through this six box intercase break. Pick your team 10. This is the last break of the night, folks. I don't know, I don't think anything else has sold out or was close to, but anything else that has sold out, we will do tomorrow. I'll be back at one o'clock Pacific four o'clock Eastern on a Friday. We're starting off with two eminence breaks, by the way.  Those eminence breaks sold out before any of tonight's breaks. Already on the docket, on the break schedule. Check it out. All right, next one, good luck. What that NBA protocol is now. Do they just keep them in the hotel? I guess maybe if they test negative, they can continue to travel, but you know, I can incubate for a little bit, for a few, you know. I don't know. Tough, tough decisions. There's Clevon Chasen to 199 and Denzel Mims. Triple relic and autograph, another one for the Jets, another one for Patrick Davis. Jack, have I ever experienced an earthquake? Yes, many earthquakes. I've lived in Southern California nearly my entire life. There's Chase Claypool for the Steelers for Justin. And we've got Steven Montez for Washington. That's to 199. No, thankfully, I've not been through any bad ones. You know, I lived in Southern California during, I was, there were maybe a couple major, the Northridge earthquake in the 90s. Like I felt where I lived pretty strong, you know, enough to close down the schools. And I was maybe about 100 miles away from that earthquake. That was a pretty strong, but no, there was no damage or anything like that. Joey Bosa quadrally goes to the Chargers, Jonathan Peetz. There's Josh Jacobs. Stargazing, five out of five. Josh disappointed. I'm sure he's disappointed himself for the DUI. That's not cool. Come on, man. You know better. Robert Runkle on the Raiders. All aboard the Big Head Express. Woo-hoo. You know it better. Oh, that's true. Logan remembers a few years back in our old store, maybe three or four years back, there was actually an earthquake in the shop. Like it was just off the coast of LA or something like that. There was an earthquake. There's D-Rob. To Marcus Robinson, nine out of 10. Dual relic and autograph. That's a cool looking one. Piece of the pig skin in there for the Chiefs. Diane. If you remember, it was during the summer, there was baseball happening. So at Dodger Stadium, you can see like, let's say this is the center field camera, right? And there's like the pitching mound right there and the batter's right there. Like the, you can see the camera shake. And then some of the players come out into the field being like, is that an earthquake? They said it was kind of freaky. There's Baker Mayfield, nine out of 60. Sean, no, Sean did not even exist back then when that happened. It was at the old store. And I was breaking, and I didn't think anything happened because at the old store, it was a office complex that also had storage units behind our building and stuff. And so cars, and we were kind of near like this, this sort of circular thing that takes you up the different levels of the storage units. And like people, like big trucks would just rumble and roll around that at probably really high speeds. And that would rattle, that would rattle the entire building. In the early months of being in that store, we thought every second there was an earthquake, every time a truck rolled by. But we just got immune to it at that point because we just thought it was always like a truck. So we got immune to it. And then one time it was actually an earthquake. And I think Nick came on in the chat and Nick was like, did you feel that earthquake? And I was like, that was an earthquake? It felt a little different, but there was maybe a little more rumbling underneath my feet. It felt a little different. But yeah, I think it was a decent quake, maybe a three, seven, maybe close to a four. Oh, Sean, so Teddy and Sean had, oh, there was an earthquake right before you were break with Teddy last year on IG. And Sean was on a stream, he had an earthquake too. And then Sean had, John never mentioned that to me. Yeah, so there's been earthquakes, Jack. And it's kind of a thing out here, kind of a thing out here. Shake, rattle, and roll. I'm sure our building's fine. Are we retrofitted for an earthquake? The thing I remember though, I was watching the Dodgers game and like to see that the TV cameras shake up and down. I guess it was a decent size quake. I forget how big it was now that I think about it. Big enough to get all the way to downtown LA. It was kind of the Murray. There's records of it. Antonio Gandy Golden out of 399. I'm sure someday they'll be, oh, okay, tonight, no. You saved yourself from a snarky response, Logan Kluster. Logan knows better. Logan realized, I don't have to say tonight, otherwise. Otherwise Joe's gonna be like, well someday we'll get Dynasty. Some point, no, yeah, we ran through the few cases we had tonight, but you know us, Logan, we're always on the lookout for stuff like that. Keenan Allen 25 for the Chargers. And we've got 28 out of 49, Michael Pittman, Jr. Colts, Ali Fonzo. Then we've got Anthony McFarlane, Jr. 42 out of 49, War Room, two-color patch, going to Pittsburgh, Justin Ward. And there's Mosley and Keenan Allen. We got Jalen Hertz to 100, introductions, insert. That'll go to Philadelphia, that goes to Jonathan Pete. We got Jader Grossmatos, 40 out of 75. I'm a man, I'm 40. That goes to the Panthers. That will be Brian and Carolina. I think Carolina's record really didn't reflect how well they played at times this season. Behind that group of two cards right there, Air Raid, Dwayne Haskins. Where does Haskins go? 133 out of one, who picks up Dwayne Haskins? I guess I'll wait for his contract to expire or whatever. No one wants to take on that contract, obviously. Wait till that's off the books and then who picks him up? I'm sure he's cleared waivers by now. Daniel thinks CFL? Uh-oh, King saying, I never get anything good with absolutely done with this product. We're not done yet. We got three mini-boxes to go. Dwayne Haskins, CFL. That could be interesting. Maybe marinate a little bit in this CFL. All right, there's Antonio, nope, Anthony Gordon to 75. Yeah, there's always, I feel like everyone has a break that's just no good for them. There's James Morey into 399. Everyone has like that one product where they want to get, they like it, but they never hit in it, and they're like, forget it. So you know Benjamin for the Cardinals to 199? It's Jonathan Taylor to 50. And we've got, look at that, five out of 25 absolute heroes, Tim Tebow. Goes to Ryan Case and last spot mojo, Denver Broncos. We done opening Immaculate Soccer. We've never even started. Golden Bear, there's TJ Hawkinson. Duel Relic, that's kind of a, what is that? Some raised lettering there or something like that? That's pretty cool. 7 out of 49, TJ Hawkinson. Lions, that'd go to Tony. Immaculate Soccer doesn't drop until tomorrow, by the way. I'm not sure if that's gonna end up on the personal break side, at Jasper's Breaks on Instagram, or if it's gonna end up, or if we're gonna get cases on the YouTube side as well, but keep an eye on them both spots. Jasper's CaseBreaks.com and Jasper's.com. Tony with the Lions gets that Duel Relic. We've got three out of 25, Jerry Rice, Fantasy Flashback, behind Debo, we've got Willis McGahey, Signature Standouts. King, you're done with breaks after National. Hopefully we'll have to get you something huge in National Treasures Baseball to bring you back. That's what I'm hoping, anyway. There's Debo, it's Joey Bosa and behind the Joey Bosa is a Duel Relic. Gardner Minchu, Leonard Fournette, Team Tandem to 199. Jaguars, Alifonzo Mendoza with that one. Thanks for getting in. And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Appreciate everybody getting in, whether you hit or not. Thanks for giving this a go. This was Six Box, Intercase, Picker Team number 10, 2020, Panini, Absolute Football. I'm Joey for Jasper's CaseBreaks.com. I'll see you tomorrow at 1 o'clock Pacific 4 o'clock Eastern, bye bye. Jason, Jasper's still live on Instagram, at Jasper's Breaks Instagram Live, bye.


If you think about the world we have today, the challenges are just enormous. We've got greater displacement of people than at any time in our history and yet the world's more centrophobic. A re-emergence of misogyny that is just extraordinary has been unleashed by the kind of strong men mentality of leadership around the world as we see emerging dictatorship even from democratically elected leaders. Unemployment is still way too high. Lost generation of young people and 40% of mostly women and young people in an informal economic environment where they have no rights, no minimum wage, no social protection. This is not a world that we want. We don't want it for ourselves and we don't want it for our children and grandchildren. I think there are some very, very good examples of people using technology for democratic purposes to build cooperatives that you know you can call digital cooperatives if you like but we still have a whole range of conflicts that are really about vested interests and how we make money at any cost versus how we actually keep things in balance with people, with their communities, with our planet and indeed with a global economy. It's not whether people are keeping up, it's whether we are actually thoughtful about shaping a future where people matter, people are at the centre of it. The World Economic Forum has generated a debate about technology. The fourth industrial revolution is the framing it's given. The real benefit of that debate is bringing people together across a whole range of institutions because we are as a people across all of our common interests and our communities actually working together to build the future we want.


How's it going everyone Caleb here with late and sports cards next night? We're gonna be working on WWE select. This is gonna be break number 16 of WWE select Random pack style. Thanks again for joining. Here are the results from that random This is the order that we will be rick on your packs in one second here There you go Thanks everyone for joining and good luck Pack number one will be right here down to pack number 12 right there at the back right Front left number one back right number 12 my very best to keep them in Their places as I take him out of the box. Good luck here. Wow. Nice Kha. That's really nice. Oh Very very nice it I heard right out there. Yeah, I heard him for a second to spot number one is Daniel W Yeah, that's that's really nice super tough to land that thing Good luck Dan John Cena Bay Shawn Michaels silver of Blair Davenport Charlotte flair you go Dan six to go on Star Wars. Awesome guys six left Spot two is John B. Good luck John B spot two Gigi Dolan Charlotte flair the rock championship. We have a blue of Mark Kofi.  All right, Tony D'Angelo Roman Reigns. We have Odyssey Jones this time NXT 2.0 autograph You go John B on the auto Tricolor of Seamus And a Grayson Waller John Mexican John five spot is Brett C Good luck Brett C at the five spot. We go Brett. I'll ignite the Miz So you know vile. There's a filler Cedric Alexander Tricolor in Randy Orton It's bad there Brett. You're not forgiven for throwing that. It's not away yet Jeremy P at six. Here we go Jeremy. Right as I did I was like, no Here we go Jeremy six spot Brett the hitman hearts All of fame selection Rikishi And big ye on the red big ye to 249. They go Jeremy And that is a ricochet nice man. Number seven is Brett C. We go Brett Bobby Lashley, it's gonna be Sasha Banks this time on the patch.  That's number to 35 25 and 35 Hair color match there nice one Stacey To 35 and Mandy Rose Good stuff Stacey Number nine is Brett C Nice hair color match I see it. Here we go Brett I heard I heard It's awesome. Yeah, it's a great design. Oh, that's so cool. That's so beautiful. It's crazy. Good luck Brett number nine I'm so happy about that. I called it too. That's crazy. Io Shirari Uh shinsuki Nakamura this time. That's patch autograph to 199 Here you go Brett C solid man Bad news barrett silver ultimate warrior. You go Brett Spot number nine in the break here. Oh, excuse me spot number 10 in the break scott tea Good luck here scott tea We can repeat the magic edge brawn breaker Seamus phenomenon And Jey Uso scope we go scott Drew Gold Stacey you number 11 Shinsuke Nakamura Shinsuke, thanks appreciate Jason great Kali Sasha Banks I'm gonna filler there. Dolph Ziegler. Try color Stacey. There you go Man and Nina Samuels Nice and Victor It's ups and Victor. Welcome back. Number 12 is Jeremy P Last one of the break here I was in this out Uh, if you're Mahan silver rye Ripley Nice one there Jeremy and Caden Carter. That'll do it guys. Thanks again for joining there WWE select. We got a couple more coming up. Appreciate you guys Good luck on the next one


This study investigates the potential benefits of incorporating remote sensing near-surface soil moisture observations into an operational hydrologic model. The study found that the model's dry bias in precipitation was reduced by nearly half when the remote sensing data were assimilated. However, the model's surface moisture state was quickly lost due to increased surface fluxes caused by the wetter soil moisture states. Therefore, it may be more effective to address the precipitation bias directly rather than correcting it through data assimilation. This article was authored by C. Draper, J. F. Mafouf, J. C. Calvitt, and others.


So on Moosehide Campaign Day, which is a different calendar day every year, but is always in close proximity to Valentine's Day, we say more than flowers and chocolates. And we invite men in organizations and communities throughout the province and indeed throughout the country to participate and that can look very different. Anything from holding their own local event and organizing for men to get together and to embrace this healing and community mobilization, but also to fast with us, to share and talk with the young boys in their family or their community in that very important intergenerational transmission of knowledge about what it is to be a healthy man. And so yes, in fact, we are inviting men and communities all over the country to join us for Moosehide Campaign Day.


Skin healing involves a sequence of molecular and cellular events, including exutative, proliferative, and extracellular matrix remodeling phases which are regulated by signaling proteins such as hedgehog in order to restore damaged tissue. This article was authored by Ana Cristina de Oliveira Gonzalez, Tila Fortuna Costa, Zilton de Arojo Andrade and others.


Welcome back to Behind the Glass. In this episode, we are going to be answering your top three most asked questions to us about the boat building process. So let's get started. To kick things off in this episode, we are going to be answering the age old question of hand-laid versus chopped construction method. Before we go any deeper though, let's go ahead and define what each of these methods mean. A 100% hand-laid fiberglass construction method refers to using pre-cut sheets of fiberglass that are laid dry on the mold. Then an operator will soak the fiberglass with resin. Using rollers, a team will remove any air that is trapped between the layers and spread the resin evenly throughout the part. The primary advantage of using this method is that the pre-cut sheets of fiberglass are engineered to have a very specific thickness. This allows the builder to have very consistent laminate and ensures an even amount of fiberglass. At the surface, this method certainly delivers. But let's talk about one major disadvantage. On large, flat areas of a boat, such as a hull side, hand-laid fiberglass is fairly easy to work with. The problem starts when building more complex parts such as decks. The tight radii cause the large sheets of glass to not follow the contours perfectly. A good analogy for this would be gift wrapping a box versus an oddly shaped item. To get the gift wrapping to sit perfectly without any creases would be nearly impossible. In boat building, when the fiberglass doesn't sit perfectly tight on the mold, it creates an air pocket. These are commonly referred to as air voids. While air voids are not 100% avoidable, fully hand-laid parts have a higher level of rework in tight areas. Now, let's talk about the other common construction method, sometimes referred to as chopped or chopper gun. In this method, a coil of continuous fiberglass strand called gun roven is fed into a pneumatic piece of equipment. At a very rapid speed, blades inside chop the continuous strand into one-to-one-and-a-half inch long pieces of fiberglass, hence the name chopper gun or chopped. At the tip of the gun, the fiberglass is met with a stream of resin and catalyst and the material then travels at a rapid speed and gets stuck on the mold. One important feature about this equipment is that the operator can fine-tune the ratio between the materials. Using adjustment knobs, the operator can adjust the speed the fiberglass chop is running and the amount of resin being put out. Too much resin adds unnecessary weight to the part and too little causes dry and weak spots. Following each layer, the team jumps into action to roll out any air that might be trapped and removing any excess resin. Unlike a hand-laid part, the individually chopped strands of fiberglass make easy work of even the tightest of corners. Commonly, the biggest argument against exclusively using this method is that the quality of the part is directly linked to the skill of the operator. This is where robust training and quality control plays a critical role. A top priority is making sure that each operator is highly skilled at their craft. Expert operators can yield very consistent results at a rapid rate with minimal rework necessary. Question still remains. Is sportsman boats a hand-laid boat or chopped? And the answer is simple. It's both. Through rigorous testing and years of experience, we've concluded that a combination of both methods is the ultimate way to build a production boat. Using a chop method for things like skin coats and geometrically complex parts gives the best final product in those scenarios. While using the advantages of quickly bulking up a hull side is best done by hand-laying precision-cut fiberglass, each method has unique advantages in certain areas and applications. Let's move on to question number two. Does sportsman boats use wood in the construction method? And the short answer is no. To some, it may come as a surprise that wood is still commonly used in production boats built today. Here at Sportsman, we have never used wood as a construction material for any of our boats. While fiberglass is the primary building material for a modern boat, if you've been following the Behind the Glass series, then you're used to seeing the many other materials that get laminated into our boats. The use of highly engineered composite materials achieves two important things that wood would never be able to achieve. The first one is an obvious one. Composite materials never rot. It is a common misconception that encapsulation of wood protects it enough. The fact is that simply drilling or screwing into these materials breaks the encapsulation and can lead to premature failure. The second is that each area receives composite materials perfectly matched with the properties necessary for that area. For example, where we need extreme strength like on a transom, kusa board is used for an incompressible cord transom. Other areas that need insulation like cooler boxes will receive a high r-value PVC core material that keeps the ice from melting. Another great example is the material that we use around cleats. This material is called aquasteel and it has a similar density to aluminum but has one important difference. Aquasteel will not seize around stainless steel cleats the way that aluminum would, making it ideal for this application. All in all, if we used wood, we wouldn't have the longevity, quality or selection available in highly engineered composite materials. This allows us to choose the perfect material for each area. The last commonly asked question that we get is how long does it take to build a boat? And the answer to this varies depending on the model, engines and options. However, the general timeline is as follows. The process of building a boat starts months before the first ounce of fiberglass is laid on the mold. Our purchasing and warehouse staff oversees forecasting, ordering and stocking over 10,000 parts for each boat. And that is no easy feat. They work closely with engineering at the introduction of a new model or at the start of a new model year to compile the list of parts needed to complete each boat. The parts vary from large engines to precisely cut hoses that need to be trimmed to exact measurements and delivered to the floor at a precise time. The purchasing team works around the clock to ensure that we have the parts necessary to build our boats. Recent events have caused incredibly long wait times on components which adds complexity to this already complex operation. Next, we start our lamination process. The lamination of the large parts of a boat can take anywhere from 7 to 14 days. The parts are built simultaneously in different areas of the building allowing us to shorten the total time it takes to build a boat. Each area is carefully scheduled to ensure that the next team down the line has the parts they need to complete their tasks. Medium-sized parts such as consoles and hardtops require multiple parts to be bonded together to create a completed part. These parts take anywhere from 2 to 5 days to complete with some of them requiring additional time for finishing. Small parts like lids, live wells, windless trays and cooler boxes take 1 to 2 days to be completed and each boat requires anywhere from 10 to 20 of these small parts. At this stage, we're ready to start putting it all together. This area of the plant is known as assembly and it encompasses several processes. In the main assembly lines, the halls and decks travel down from cell to cell. On average, a boat will spend 10 to 30 days in the assembly room while a crew of expert boat builders add the thousands of parts required to complete the boat. At this stage, the boat is almost complete. The boats are moved to a staging area where they wait for transportation. Our transportation department is in charge of delivering the hundreds of boats that we build every month. Depending on where the boat needs to be delivered, the time the boat spends here is anywhere from 1 day to a week. Our drivers drive over a million miles a year to deliver our beautiful boats to dealers across the country. Just like the questions that we tackled on this episode, we receive hundreds of different questions through all of our different channels. If there's anything that we missed that you'd like to see answered in a future episode, leave it in the comments below. The techniques shown in this episode are part of our sport tech advanced fabrication process. These proprietary manufacturing steps yield the best results and have been thoroughly tested for durability, longevity and finish. All sportsmen boats feature a 100% composite construction with no wood, NMMA certification and a 10-year haul limited warranty. In the next episode of Behind the Glass, we pack our bags again and head to Reading, Pennsylvania to visit the SeaKeeper manufacturing facility. From Somerville, South Carolina, my name is Victor and thank you for watching.


we must now see a shift in ideology from this Government away from the pursuit of private finance initiatives and towards community wealth building so that as we restore nature, as we meet our climate targets, it is the people of Scotland, not multinational corporations, who see the benefits. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. It is fair to say that this has been a mixed debate. I was interested to hear John Swinney strike a conciliatory tone during his contribution, and he appealed for consensus. There has been some consensus. We all want to get to net zero. I would like to get to net zero by 2050, and the Prime Minister would like to get to net zero by 2050. That has not really changed, but we have seen this debate has been used by some as an excuse to simply bash Rishi Sunak. It could have been a more positive debate. Douglas Lumsden was right. The SNP has no reason to crow about this. Their own record is appalling. They have failed to achieve 8 out of 12 of its own emission targets to date. I recognise why the Tories might want to criticise the SNP that is their raise on debtor. Does he recognise that it is communities and businesses that have ensured that we have made the progress that we have? They should be commended for what they have done over the past few decades. I was going to come on to Ms Forbes' earlier excellent contribution, and I thought that one of the more positive contributions from the SNP benches was that she was quite right to say that we need to bring communities with us. Spot on, I completely agree with her. Back to those missed targets, the climate change committee said that despite the scale of the challenge in the 2020s, Scotland is still not delivering on key milestones such as energy efficiency in homes and peatland restoration. Further, it noted that the trend of failure will continue without urgent and strong action to deliver emissions reductions. I am grateful for the member taking an intervention. On the point about targets, how he reconciles what he has just said with his own party's wreckage of DRS, the refusal to back low emission zones. What kind of contribution has that made to Scotland's targets? I did not hear most of that, but I thought that the language was not very helpful at all. Audit Scotland has said that the SNP's climate change governance arrangements are missing core elements. It did a report into how well the Scottish Government is set up to deliver climate change and noted that, quote, we have found some key elements of good governance are missing from the Scottish Government's climate change governance arrangements or are used irregularly and inconsistently. The Scottish Government's heat and building strategy will fail to meet its 2030 climate target. The Scottish Government itself admitted last week to falling short of its own climate change laws by failing to set out how its emissions cutting targets are compatible with infrastructure investment. They have not published an assessment yet showing how those investments will impact targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions. So what of the Prime Minister's recent announcements? To me, they were a dose of realism. We're still committed to hitting net zero by 2050, but Rishi Sunak just wants to give the public a little more time. You know, Presiding Officer, the SNP say they are in lockstep with the EU. They love the EU and everything it does. So why the outcry over bringing our own ban on the sale of petrol and diesel cars into line with Europe? What's that all about? You'd have thought they would be happy about that. The move to push back the date when a new boiler has to be replaced by a heat pump where appropriate to 2035 is also just common sense. And speaking of being in line with Europe, in July, the EU passed a law that requires fast recharging stations for cars and vans every 60 kilometres, that's 37 miles in real money, along the EU's main transport corridors by 2025. How about we fall into line with Europe? On that one, cabinet secretary, people will be falling over themselves to buy electric vehicles if we did that. Presiding Officer, there's been some interest in contributions this afternoon. In some cases it's been more heat than light, but not so with Morris Golden, the award-winning green giant who makes a lot of sense on these matters, though I don't agree with him on everything. Mr Golden spelled out the long list of SNP failures, biodiversity, peatland restoration, wooden creation, renewable heat. I could go on and he did. He also reminded us that those missed targets are a symptom of failing to build a circular economy. We used to call that reusing things. There's nothing new in the circular economy, we've just forgotten how to do it. Whether a circular economy bill will make any difference remains to be seen. I have my doubts alongside Mr Golden. Of course, we heard from that strident defender of the North Sea oil and gas sector, Douglas Lumson, who reminded us that we need that sector to be strong, because we don't want to have to rely on imported oil and gas. That's about energy security. He and myself, as he said, visited a couple of power stations recently. We're in Peterhead yesterday, where they're planning to build a power plant that will store its own carbon emissions before sending them off to St Fergus. Peterhead, which can produce enough power for everything north of Dundee, is the only non-nuclear power station north of Leeds. Scotland is pulling its weight in wind power and hydro, but in helping towards the base load, we could be doing a lot more. We've yet to see a plan from the SNP to hit that other target of theirs, cutting car miles by 20 per cent by 2030. That must involve dramatically improving public transport, as Alex Rowley said, and making it cheaper so that people have alternatives to the car. We will keep being promised a road map, but we've yet to see it. Maybe when the minister closes, he could tell us what will be in that road map. I don't think he will, but we'll wait and see. Scotland has added just 169 charges, that's the electric vehicle charges, between October 2022 and August 2023. That's nowhere near enough. We're not getting there. Presiding Officer, I haven't even touched on homes, but that was mentioned by Kate Forbes and Edward Mountain. Improving your home's energy efficiency is a good thing, but it can be runously expensive. The UK actually has a good story to tell when it comes to cutting our carbon emissions, and we should celebrate that. Instead of creating division, the Scottish Government should seize the opportunity presented by the Prime Minister to set more realistic goals that bring people with us. Pointless fights and made-up gripes will not save the planet. Pragmatic politics might. Thank you. I call on Patrick Harvie to wind up the debate, if you might take us to 5 o'clock, Minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'd like to thank many of the people who've spoken in this debate, perhaps slightly less so that last piece of absurdist performance art that we just heard. This has been a debate that has, of course, marked climate week. This year, more than ever, perhaps, it's felt that every week is climate week, with news media full of frequent vivid reminders of the climate breakdown that's already happening, floods, wildfires, land destroyed, species pushed to the brink. John Swinney painted that picture extremely powerfully in his remarks, and Mark Ruskell said that we're reaching a tipping point for the climate emergency. In relation to his reflection on how he feels looking at his children and thinking about their future, I think that anyone who isn't fearful of what young people's future is going to look like simply isn't paying attention. However, climate week feels different this year for another reason, too, because just as we are at the point where the signs of breakdown are at their most stark, when the need for action is having been greater, we find ourselves also at a political pivot point in our recent history. The UN stock take report recently told us very clearly that we need a systemic transformation of every aspect of our society, and we need it fast. However, inevitably, almost every member who has spoken today has responded to the Prime Minister's extraordinary announcements last week, both the content of those announcements and the way that it was announced with no detail attached and no prior discussion or co-operation with the other Governments in these islands. We are now faced with two scenarios, one where leadership prevails, where Governments respond with urgency and give stability for businesses and investment, ensure fairness and support for households and communities to cope with the rapid change that is needed, or another scenario that is characterised by policy reversals and where the next general election is the only horizon in sight. Douglas Lumsden. I thank the minister for taking the intervention. In press today, Fergus Ewing, an SNP member, well, I presume he's still an SNP member, warned that the Government's boiler policies were damaging and utterly unaffordable. Does he not agree with that point of view? No, I don't. And the Prime Minister's speech last week signalled a very clear—I mean Mr Lumsden's laughing away—his own party cheer Mr Ewing to the rafters on most of his announcements, and that's one of the reasons why I take them with a pinch of salt. The Prime Minister's announcement last week signalled a very clear intention to choose that latter scenario in which short-termism is the order of the day. It took some gall for him to stand behind a podium with the slogan, long-term solutions for a brighter future, while reading a speech that amounted to a betrayal of both current and future generations. I'll give way to Mr Swinney. John Swinney. I'm grateful to the minister for giving way. Does the minister not accept that the necessity in all of this activity, whatever the intervention is, whether it's the boiler system that Mr Lumsden was rather rudely interrupting or laughing at the minister about after his intervention, or any of these other issues, requires policy certainty? And isn't the lesson of the Prime Minister's actions last week has been to undermine the entire United Kingdom's efforts by crashing political certainty on these issues? It certainly does that. Mr Swinney makes that point well. The Prime Minister's announcements, if it's created any unity at all, is created unity between the car industry and Greenpeace about the lack of certainty and the lack of clarity that these announcements create. He spoke about being honest with the public, and he proceeded then to knock down straw men in his hunger to generate a climate culture war. Listening to that speech, I lost count of the number of entirely non-existent policies he reeled off before saying, I've scrapped it. What he scrapped was any shred of credibility that he had on climate, not only betraying our future, not only breaking his own manifesto pledges, but debasing the office that he holds. There are some on the right who are sincere in their belief that free market economics can solve this crisis, even though it's been the cause. I profoundly disagree with them, but they do at least acknowledge those people, the reality of the climate emergency. They want to respond, even if I think they're misguided, in how. The Prime Minister could have listened to the likes of Alex Sharma, for example, a Conservative colleague, who chaired COP26, who said that he was concerned about the fracturing of UK political consensus on climate action. He said that chopping and changing policies creates uncertainty for businesses and the public. Ultimately, that makes it more difficult to attract investment and pushes up costs for consumers. Instead of working with that kind of agenda, Rishi Sunak finds that his cheerleaders are the likes of Liz Truss and Jacob Rhys Mogg, as Christine Grahame reminded, as the notorious climate denier Donald Trump has weighed in to support the Prime Minister as well.  I'm very grateful for the Minister for Giving Way. Does he not accept, though, that just coming into this chamber and giving us these fantastical ambitions of the Scottish Government require the Scottish Government to come into this chamber also with a route map, and in a million homes you're going to retrofit, every part of the community says you cannot achieve that? Isn't it time that the Scottish Government were honest with a climate change? The member knows very well that we will be completing work on the new climate plan and we will be consulting on a heat in building strategy. When that comes out, he will see that it's a hell of a lot more ambitious than the level of backtracking that we're seeing from the UK Government. It seems very clear that the Conservative benches here in Holyrood are firmly behind the Prime Minister in watering down and delaying action. Those are the same people who, exactly a year ago, were urging Scotland to copy Liz Truss's economic policies in which she crashed the economy, and they are now urging Scotland to follow Rishi Sunach's policies, which will do the same to our global life support system. With very few exceptions, there are simply no lessons learned, no reflection and no backbone from the Conservatives. I appreciate the Minister for Giving Way because he has spent seven years attacking the easy target. Could I just ask him in terms of his homes and retrofitting what lessons he learned from last year's failure of spending £133 billion and what difference it will make, particularly to people who live in flats and tenements, where decarbonisation is more of a challenge but hugely important? I know that Sarah Boyack is aware because we've discussed it before that demand-led grant and loan schemes are vulnerable to low take-up in the likes of the last few extraordinary years that we've all been living with. That's one of the reasons why we've committed to consult on a supplier-led model, which we think may be less vulnerable to those kind of external shocks. It won't come as any surprise to anyone in the chamber that I disagree with the Conservatives and their Prime Minister, but it's also clear that most of the public doesn't trust them on this issue either. It's also clear that this is not just about policy differences, it's also about the role of this Parliament. What the UK chooses to do has a very significant impact on what we are able to do in Scotland. It couldn't be otherwise with the limits of the devolution settlement, which is being undermined year on year by the UK Government. When the climate targets were set, of course we didn't agree with the UK Government on details of policy delivery. There were reasonable disagreements of that nature, but there was at least some reason to think that the UK would have a hope of government that was vaguely rational and which was willing to communicate and co-operate despite our differences. That need for co-operation was set out very clearly by the UK Climate Change Committee recently, telling all the Governments of the UK that we had to try harder to work together. We agree, but within days comes this wrecking ball through climate policy without a word of communication, either with us or with the Welsh Government. Of course they've got form for this, Presiding Officer. This is the same UK Government, which, a few months ago, very deliberately sabotaged the deposit return scheme that this Parliament voted for. It did so by insisting that our scheme had to align with their scheme, a scheme that doesn't exist, a scheme that increasingly clearly will never exist under this UK Government, as cynical an act of political vandalism as I have seen. Not just to our green ambitions, but to this Parliament's ability to legislate as well. The direct harm done by this change of policy will be bad enough, but there is also a huge missed opportunity in the positive steps that could have been taken instead. Let's take the heat in buildings agenda. There are important things that we can do with the powers that we have. That's why we will have a new build heat standard in place from next April, well ahead of the rest of the UK, which ensures that new buildings will have a climate-friendly heating system from the outset. We want all homes to reach good levels of energy efficiency, and we know that private tenants need that improvement urgently. Ben Macpherson is right that there are different challenges in relation to our historic tenement stock, in which I declare a personal interest as a resident of one, and the heat in buildings consultation will have more to say on that. That's why we are making good progress towards improving energy standards in new homes, towards a passive house equivalent with the support of Alex Rowley, who I thought spoke very well, challenging us, but doing so constructively, not opportunistically. We have the most generous grants and loans for heating and energy efficiency works in the UK, including rural uplifts, which Mr Lumsden seemed unaware of when he spoke about them. When we have the levers here in Scotland, we match ambition with action, but we don't have control over the capacity of the grid to match the increasing electrification of heat and transport. That's controlled at UK level. We don't control the difference in unit price of gas and electricity, which the UK has repeatedly promised to put right and failed to deliver. That's perhaps the biggest step that could make the heat transition more affordable for people, and we go some way to addressing the concerns about a just transition that was raised by Kate Forbes. We don't have levers over the regulation of products and installers, which is being used as one of the main routes to heat transition in other European countries. It's needed to give that clear signal to industry to guide their investment. Mr Whittle and various other Conservatives said that we need to create markets in great certainty. Will the UK Government's announcements undermine and cloud that clarity and certainty that this Government is trying to provide? I thank the minister for giving way, and there is most definitely an undermining of business confidence, but there is also an undermining of the confidence of people. I was at Dayton's Sustainable Homes in Aberdeen on Friday, and a guy there pontificating about the big change that he made with a heat pump, which has made a real difference and made real savings. As well as that confidence being ripped out of business, what Mr Sunak has done is also done the same with people. Does the minister agree? Completely. The language and the anti-environment rhetoric that the UK Government uses is undermining the belief that people have that we can move forward in this together. We also don't control large-scale installation programmes such as Eco4 and Warm Homes' Discount, which are now rebadged as the Great British Insulation Scheme. We repeated requests for well over a year for the UK Government to join them more effectively with our schemes. Those requests weren't even turned down, they were simply ignored. All of Parliament should be supporting the ambition that we are bringing to this agenda, not just on the heat and building side, but on developing renewables, on record investment in active travel, on leading the fight back for nature with a nature restoration fund, a five-year delivery plan and the natural environment bill. As Christine Graham told us, it's time to hit the accelerator, not the brakes. Mr Sunak spoke about being brave in the decisions that we make and said that people wonder why, in the face of the facts as they have them, choices are made as they are. I'm afraid, Presiding Officer, that I don't wonder why he has done this. He has done this to create a new partisan dividing line when what our politics needs is united determination.  In closing, the climate week might be an annual event, but this year, more than ever before, we need to recapture the shared sense of urgency that shaped the First Climate Change Act and led all political parties to work to strengthen it. Across the political spectrum, there are those who know that we need to act with urgency and there are others who would prefer to downgrade, delay and dilute climate action. We need to have the courage of our convictions and make sure that the next climate plan not only delivers but recreates that sense of unity. I move the motion in the Government's name. Thank you. That concludes the debate on climate emergency, ambition and action. It's now time to move on to the next item of business, which is consideration of business motion 10621, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on a change to the business programme. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press their request to speak button. I call on George Adam to move the motion. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and moved. Thank you, Minister. No member has asked to speak against the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 10621 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. There are four questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first is the amendment 10597.1 in the name of Douglas Lumsden, which seeks to amend motion 10597 in the name of Mary McCallan on climate emergency, ambition and action. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed. Therefore, we will move to vote. There will be a short suspension until our members to access digital voting.