Title: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 09:35:41 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 09:35:41 PM
"But most scientists don't agree with this," said Neil. "I looked through IPCC reports and see no reference to billions of people going to die, or children in 20 years. How would they die?"
"Mass migration around the world already taking place due to prolonged drought in countries, particularly in South Asia. There are wildfires in Indonesia, the Amazon rainforest, Siberia, the Arctic," she said.
But in saying so, the XR spokesperson had grossly misrepresented the science. "There is robust evidence of disasters displacing people worldwide," notes IPCC, "but limited evidence that climate change or sea-level rise is the direct cause"
What about "mass migration"? "The majority of resultant population movements tend to occur within the borders of affected countries," says IPCC.
Last January, after climate scientists criticized Rep. Ocasio-Cortez for saying the world would end in 12 years, her spokesperson said "We can quibble about the phraseology, whether it's existential or cataclysmic." He added, "We're seeing lots of [climate change-related] problems that are already impacting lives."
That last part may be true, but it's also true that economic development has made us less vulnerable, which is why there was a 99.7% decline in the death toll from natural disasters since its peak in 1931.
In 1931, 3.7 million people died from natural disasters. In 2018, just 11,000 did. And that decline occurred over a period when the global population quadrupled.
What about sea level rise? IPCC estimates sea level could rise two feet (0.6 meters) by 2100. Does that sound apocalyptic or even "unmanageable"?
Consider that one-third of the Netherlands is below sea level, and some areas are seven meters below sea level. You might object that Netherlands is rich while Bangladesh is poor. But the Netherlands adapted to living below sea level 400 years ago. Technology has improved a bit since then.
What about claims of crop failure, famine, and mass death? That's science fiction, not science. Humans today produce enough food for 10 billion people, or 25% more than we need, and scientific bodies predict increases in that share, not declines.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) forecasts crop yields increasing 30% by 2050. And the poorest parts of the world, like sub-Saharan Africa, are expected to see increases of 80 to 90%.
Nobody is suggesting climate change won't negatively impact crop yields. It could. But such declines should be put in perspective. Wheat yields increased 100 to 300% around the world since the 1960s, while a study of 30 models found that yields would decline by 6% for every one degree Celsius increase in temperature.
Rates of future yield growth depend far more on whether poor nations get access to tractors, irrigation, and fertilizer than on climate change, says FAO.
All of this helps explain why IPCC anticipates climate change will have a modest impact on economic growth. By 2100, IPCC projects the global economy will be 300 to 500% larger than it is today. Both IPCC and the Nobel-winning Yale economist, William Nordhaus, predict that warming of 2.5°C and 4°C would reduce gross domestic product (GDP) by 2% and 5% over that same period.
Nobody is saying climate change doesn't need to be addressed. Lowering CO2 emissions is a good idea. But, we the alarmists underestimate industry and science's ability to adapt and flourish.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 09:41:45 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 09:41:45 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 10:08:58 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 10:08:58 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 10:53:35 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 10:53:35 PM
If history teaches us anything, it's that humans have a penchant for anticipating our End Times. Ancient mythologies from cultures all around the world describe catastrophic floods and religious cults continue to recruit followers with predictions of death by comet or solar flare.Quote from: "seoulbro"
Liz May is exaggerating.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 11:50:57 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 21, 2020, 11:50:57 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 22, 2020, 11:27:32 AM
Post by: Anonymous on February 22, 2020, 11:27:32 AM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Gaon on February 22, 2020, 03:12:59 PM
Post by: Gaon on February 22, 2020, 03:12:59 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 22, 2020, 04:43:55 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 22, 2020, 04:43:55 PM
Climate madness is the governing ideology in Canada.Quote from: "Gaon"
That is because there is so much foreign interference(money) in Canada's political economy.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on February 24, 2020, 07:26:58 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 24, 2020, 07:26:58 PM
Progs distort the science of climate change. They make false claims to scare children into despair. That is the consensus. The debate is over and anyone who disputes that is a alarmist denier.Quote from: "Herman"
I read something recently how alarmists cherry pick data to give some legitimacy to their doom and gloom agenda..
Climate change is manageable without putting a contract on Canada's besieged middle class.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on March 12, 2020, 04:27:18 PM
Post by: Anonymous on March 12, 2020, 04:27:18 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 13, 2021, 04:54:43 PM
Post by: Anonymous on August 13, 2021, 04:54:43 PM
The problem with climate science today isn't so much the science as shoddy reporting that over-simplifies and over-dramatizes—and a toxic political climate (pun intended) that forbids deviation from the politically correct narrative.
The computer models used by the U.N. and every other climate-focused entity around the world are statistical projections, not precise calculations. The specific models cited in the latest U.N. report are designed to offer a broad range of possible outcomes and formulated using highly suspect and outdated criteria. Yet the report focuses heavily on the model scenarios known to be extremely unlikely—garnering over 40 percent of mentions and almost 100 percent of media coverage.
These same models show that even totally eliminating fossil fuel consumption would have a microscopic influence on global temperatures—less than two-tenths of a degree Celsius even if the full Green New Deal was enacted immediately.
Global weather data shows hurricane activity and frequency have not increased over the long term. News articles fueling climate anxiety usually cite spurious graphs that start the timeline in the 1980s. But the world didn't begin in the 1980s, and there have been several periods in history that saw the same, or worse, hurricane activity as we're experiencing now.
Similarly, although you wouldn't know it from the news, wildfires and floods are on the decline, and recent heat waves in the Pacific Northwest are small potatoes compared to the 180- and 240-year megadroughts the planet experienced between 800 and 1400 A.D.
The even better news? You and I are 99 percent less likely to die in a severe weather event than our great grandparents. In 1920, global climate-related disasters killed almost 500,000 people every year. Today, even though the world's population has quadrupled, fewer than 20,000 die from climate-related disaster. In fact, cold-related deaths are over 40 times more common than heat-related deaths in the United States and Canada.
If we're becoming more resilient to disasters that are happening less often, what's the crisis? It's not a climate crisis, but a crisis of truth.
The climate activists who demand "follow the science" appear remarkably uninterested in the nuances and uncertainties of the research they believe supports their ideology.
While activists march against fossil fuels and let their children believe their future has no hope amid rising seas and dying rainforests, they've turned a blind eye to the fact that humanity is better off now than it ever has been. Extreme poverty is at its lowest rate in recorded history, and people are living longer, healthier, freer, and more comfortable lives than ever before. Climate change or no climate change, the future is bright if we only look past the hysteria and seek to truly understand the world around us.
As former Obama-era undersecretary for science Steve Koonin explains in his book "Unsettled," climate reporting is like a game of telephone. The U.N.'s Sixth Assessment Report is a 3,949-page PDF. It's easy to understand why reporters on deadline fail to meticulously comb through the entire document or the catalog of research it cites. They simply don't have time to dig past the simplistic talking points, so they select the most shocking and click-inducing claims without delving into the methodology or scientific uncertainties. It's understandable, but it's also a disservice to the public. Something needs to change.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 14, 2021, 02:15:08 AM
Post by: Anonymous on August 14, 2021, 02:15:08 AM
"UN scientists found that temperatures on Earth will rise by about 1.5C in around two decades."
No, the report predicts that in two decades there will be a total rise of 1.5C since the 1800s.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 14, 2021, 02:24:03 AM
Post by: Anonymous on August 14, 2021, 02:24:03 AM
Inconvenient Truth 2: Fossil fuels' CO2 emissions have contributed to the warming of the last 170 years, but that warming has been slow and masterable—1 degree Celsius, mostly in colder parts of the world. And life on Earth thrived when CO2 levels were more than 5 times today's.
Inconvenient Truth 3: Fossil fuels have actually made us far safer from climate by providing low-cost energy for the amazing machines that protect us against storms, protect us against extreme temperatures, and alleviate drought.
Inconvenient Truth 4: Low-cost, reliable, versatile, global-scale energy from fossil fuels has made humanity so productive that since 1980, the fraction of people living in extreme poverty—less than $2 a day—has gone from more than 4 in 10 to less than 1 in 10.
Inconvenient Truth 5: Cold is a far greater danger to humans than heat--and thus, as a recent Lancet publication explained, we should expect warming to save more cold-related deaths than it causes heat-related deaths.
Inconvenient Truth 6: Thanks in part to CO2 fertilization, but in larger part to fossil fueled productivity, humanity has never been better fed than today. There is no danger of not being able to feed humanity if we have low-cost, reliable, global-scale energy.
Inconvenient Truth 7: UN spokespeople have a 50-year track record of making 180° wrong catastrophe predictions. They are *catastrophizers* who wildly overstate the negative side-effects of industry and ignore the huge benefits, including climate mastery.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 19, 2021, 08:16:05 PM
Post by: Anonymous on August 19, 2021, 08:16:05 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 29, 2021, 07:14:18 AM
Post by: Anonymous on August 29, 2021, 07:14:18 AM
And contrary to claims by Guterres that deforestation is a growing problem, the CO2 enrichment of Earth's atmosphere in recent decades has led to a planetary greening—a net addition of areas covered by vegetation that is over twice as large as Australia.
It is also important to realize that the IPCC is a political, not a scientific body (hence its name, the Intergovernmental Panel ...). The political powers behind the IPCC have explicitly stated that their main goal is to transform the global economy. We should also realize that the charter that governs the IPCC explicitly grants discretionary power to the political overseers of the project to modify statements made by scientists to fit the desired political narrative and agenda. What we desperately need—especially in light of the broken peer review process (one Nobel Prize winner calls it "very distorted" and "completely corrupt," with some asserting that published scientific research is "untrustworthy"; then there's the corrupting influence of government money) is a separation of science and state.
With all that having been said, let us acknowledge two sobering realities: One, the climate will continue to change. Whether the temperature will be warmer or cooler in coming centuries, I don't know and neither do the world's climate scientists, but it definitely will change. Two, extreme weather events will continue to batter humanity periodically regardless of what the overall climate is.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: cc on August 29, 2021, 12:11:46 PM
Post by: cc on August 29, 2021, 12:11:46 PM
Efforts to enshrine the reality of climate change in official Conservative party policy failed this weekend, marking a blow to Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole's efforts to position his party as serious on environmental issues.
A vote on the matter came at the party's official policy convention, which concluded on Saturday.
Though the party's policy declaration already contains a lengthy section on that subject, 54 per cent of delegates voted against expanding it to include the sentence "we recognize that climate change is real. The Conservative Party is willing to act."
During the debate on the resolution Friday, speakers opposed to the motion had quibbled over the focus on emissions at the expense of other pollutants.
"Conservatives need to lead with clarity, focus and intelligent solutions, not buzzwords," said one delegate from the Toronto-area riding of Scarborough Centre.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 29, 2021, 02:57:38 PM
Post by: Anonymous on August 29, 2021, 02:57:38 PM
But, it's an easy target for opposition parties.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: cc on August 29, 2021, 03:01:50 PM
Post by: cc on August 29, 2021, 03:01:50 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on August 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
Post by: Anonymous on August 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
Conservative party members vote down resolution to officially recognize climate change(//https)
Efforts to enshrine the reality of climate change in official Conservative party policy failed this weekend, marking a blow to Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole's efforts to position his party as serious on environmental issues.
A vote on the matter came at the party's official policy convention, which concluded on Saturday.
Though the party's policy declaration already contains a lengthy section on that subject, 54 per cent of delegates voted against expanding it to include the sentence "we recognize that climate change is real. The Conservative Party is willing to act."
During the debate on the resolution Friday, speakers opposed to the motion had quibbled over the focus on emissions at the expense of other pollutants.
"Conservatives need to lead with clarity, focus and intelligent solutions, not buzzwords," said one delegate from the Toronto-area riding of Scarborough Centre.
O'Fool wants the Conservative Party to be as woke as Justine's party.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on December 13, 2021, 10:14:22 AM
Post by: Anonymous on December 13, 2021, 10:14:22 AM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on December 13, 2021, 03:13:25 PM
Post by: Anonymous on December 13, 2021, 03:13:25 PM
Without any evidence, Biden is pointing his finger at climate change as the cause of the deadly tornados. Never let a tragedy go to waste eh Joe.
We knew he would do that and use it to promote his build back better billionaires plan.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on December 13, 2021, 06:50:10 PM
Post by: Anonymous on December 13, 2021, 06:50:10 PM
Without any evidence, Biden is pointing his finger at climate change as the cause of the deadly tornados. Never let a tragedy go to waste eh Joe.
Meteorologist responds with data after Joe Biden seemingly blames climate change for deadly tornados
Meteorologist Joe Bastardi fired back at President Joe Biden for seemingly blaming the devastating tornado outbreak that struck multiple states last week on climate change.
The famed meteorologist accused Biden of weaponizing tornados and shared data showing that severe weather this year has not been as severe compared to previous years.
"Clueless Joe Biden In action again with his weaponization of Tornados. 1) Violent tornadoes not increasing. 2) this year tornados, hail and wind all together near-record low," Bastardi said. "Mindless media should do their dang job and call him on it, I called Trump out on Dorian jibberish."
The data Bastardi included, coming from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, directly contradicts claims from Biden and Criswell that severe weather is more intense because of climate change.
The first graph shows that, as carbon emissions increased between 1954 and 2014, the number of annual tornados did not increase; in fact, it went down.
The second graphs shows that the number of recorded tornados through Dec. 11, 2021, is, in fact, close to a record low.
The third graph shows that the number of local storm reports of hail — 3,714 through Dec. 11 — is significantly under the average of 7,979 through the same time period.
The fourth graph shows that the number of local storm reports of damaging winds — 12,780 through Dec. 11 — is also under the average of 13,996 through the same time period.
Climate change hawks love to exploit isolated weather events to promote a certain narrative about the climate. However, climate, by its very definition, describes observable patterns of weather over long periods of time — not isolated events.
Thus, if climate change were truly driving more intense weather, such a phenomenon would be observable over a substantial period of time. But as Colorado University professor Roger Pielke Jr. pointed out on Sunday, the U.S. government's own data shows that tornados, for example, are becoming less common in the U.S.
"According to data from the U.S. National Weather Service from 2000 to 2020 only four of the strongest category of tornadoes were observed (which are labelled as F/EF5 tornadoes) In comparison, from 1954 to 1974 36 (!) such powerful tornadoes were observed," Pielke explained. "Our research on tornado damage in the United States over many decades shows a decline that is suggestive of an actual decline in tornado incidence."
Pielke also highlighted an important point to consider when politicians and those with an agenda begin blaming climate change for weather disasters.
"If it is so well known that disasters are the result of a complex interplay of social and climate factors, why then is climate typically the main focus of attention after every extreme event?" Pielke wrote.
His point: If a tree falls in a forest, but no one hears or sees it, did it make a sound? In a similar way, weather disasters — like the one that happened last week — are only disasters because they impact a significant number of people. If a severe tornado with 200mph winds touches down in rural Nebraska, but causes no damage, no one blames climate change for such an extreme event.
As geographer Gilbert White, known for his work in helping society mitigate the impact of natural disasters, wrote: "Floods are 'acts of God' but flood losses are largely acts of man."
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on April 14, 2022, 08:23:46 AM
Post by: Anonymous on April 14, 2022, 08:23:46 AM
The global elite's obsession with climate change takes away from many other major problems facing the planet
The biggest task facing humanity today remains lifting most of the world out of abject poverty. This can only happen by providing poor countries with comprehensive, reliable energy sources. That's how the rich world became prosperous, and it is how China lifted almost a billion out of poverty. Yet, while the world's rich countries are overwhelmingly powered by fossil fuels, the elite has worked hard to make these energy sources both more expensive and less available for the world's poorest.
Right now, we're still recovering from the worst pandemic in a century. Inflation, supply shortages, and possibly even recession loom over the global economy. Autocracies are reasserting themselves, while food crises are already being experienced by the most vulnerable. Tuberculosis, malaria and malnutrition — each effectively handled in the rich world — still claim millions of lives each year across poor countries.
Yet major donors and development organizations have become increasingly focused on climate solutions instead. One month after Ukraine was invaded, the head of the United Nations — an organization focused on ensuring world peace — was instead warning about "climate catastrophe," and the "mutually assured destruction" that fossil fuel "addiction" could cause.
It would be an exaggeration to say that while real threats were mounting, the rich world was tinkering with solar panels and banning plastic straws. But only a small exaggeration.
So how have the elites managed to get things so wrong? One reason is that for years, the media has portrayed climate change impacts as horrendous. Today, almost every natural disaster routinely gets blamed on the climate crisis, with every new hurricane held up as another exhibit of man's folly. Yet, hurricanes killed many more people in the past. A major scientific paper from last month documents "decreasing trends" in global hurricane frequency and strength. The data shows that last year the world experienced fewer hurricanes than ever before in the satellite era, and their combined strength was one of the lowest.
The real impact from climate change is much more nuanced. The UN climate panel of scientists finds that a warmer world will mean fewer (good) but stronger (worse) hurricanes. In total, this will increase damages (bad), but because the world will also get richer and more resilient, relative damages will keep declining, just slightly more slowly. This is a problem that we mustn't ignore. But it is far from a catastrophe. Global climate damage in per cent of GDP keeps declining and climate disaster deaths have dropped 99 per cent in a century.
For the best sense of what to really expect from a warming planet, we should turn to the damage estimates from the models used by President Joe Biden's Administration, and president Barack Obama's before that to set climate policy. This research reveals that the entire global cost of climate change — not just to economies, but in every sense — will be equivalent to less than a 4.0 per cent hit to GDP by the end of the century.
Remember, by the UN's own estimates the average person in 2100 will be 450 per cent as rich as today. Global warming means she will be "only" 434 per cent as rich. This is a problem, but — contrary to the histrionics — far from catastrophic.
For wealthy countries, the narrow focus on climate objectives undermines future prosperity. The world already spends more than half a trillion dollars annually on climate policies, while rich-world government spending on innovation in such areas as health care, space, defence, agriculture and science has been declining as a percentage of GDP over recent decades. This investment underpins our future growth. Together with a stagnant or declining education performance, rich-world income has almost stalled this century. Compare this to China, where innovation spending is up 50 per cent, education is rapidly improving, and average incomes have increased five-fold since 2000.
Alarmingly, despite the extraordinary focus, we're failing even to solve climate change itself. Last year saw the largest CO₂ emissions ever.
Earlier this year, the world's elite gathered for the World Economic Forum and were asked to name "the most severe risks on a global scale over the next 10 years." They absurdly chose "climate action failure" — right before Russia started bombing Chernobyl and Kyiv.
The world has many challenges, not just the ones that get the most media attention. Climate should be tackled more effectively by funding R&D in green energy sources so they eventually outcompete fossil fuels. We need to confront authoritarian expansionism in Ukraine and elsewhere. And to ensure long-term prosperity, the world needs more and cheaper energy, better education and more innovation. We need our perspective back to overcome the elitist hyperbole on climate change.
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on April 14, 2022, 03:10:24 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 14, 2022, 03:10:24 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on April 19, 2022, 11:03:20 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 19, 2022, 11:03:20 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on April 27, 2022, 10:13:23 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 27, 2022, 10:13:23 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on April 27, 2022, 10:29:34 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 27, 2022, 10:29:34 PM
Title: Re: Why apocalyptic claims about climate change are wrong
Post by: Anonymous on April 28, 2022, 12:24:52 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 28, 2022, 12:24:52 PM
(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://scontent.fyqr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/279163573_10160215295416096_4468370854476440382_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_p843x403&_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=4KRs5IiNQDkAX9Md18R&_nc_ht=scontent.fyqr2-1.fna&oh=00_AT_gOgqu7jyVuuS-ESrJGVscsrQ_CE1SqmxvOnZniK9QMA&oe=626F8EFA%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://scontent.fyqr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/%20...%20e=626F8EFA%22%3Ehttps://scontent.fyqr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/279163573_10160215295416096_4468370854476440382_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_p843x403&_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=4KRs5IiNQDkAX9Md18R&_nc_ht=scontent.fyqr2-1.fna&oh=00_AT_gOgqu7jyVuuS-ESrJGVscsrQ_CE1SqmxvOnZniK9QMA&oe=626F8EFA%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
And we shall see if the world ends in ten years.