University College London
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
A climate scientist has shared his insight into the dystopian future which will occur unless we do as he says.
Don’t despair – climate change catastrophe can still be averted
The future looks fiery and dangerous, according to new reports. But political will and grassroots engagement can change this
…
As a research scientist in this field, I can give some nuance to the headlines. One common way of thinking about climate change is the lower the future carbon dioxide emissions, the less warming and the less havoc we will face as this century progresses. This is certainly true, but as the summer heatwave and the potential hothouse news remind us, the shifts in climate we will experience will not be smooth, gradual and linear changes. They may be fast, abrupt, and dangerous surprises may happen. However, an unstoppable globally enveloping cascade of catastrophe, while possible, is certainly not a probable outcome.
Yet, even without a hothouse we are on track to transform Earth this century. The world, after 30 years of warnings, has barely got to grips with reducing carbon dioxide emissions. They need to rapidly decline to zero, but after decades of increases, are, at best, flatlining, with investments in extracting new fossil fuels continuing, including last month’s scandalous announcement that fracking will be allowed in the UK. Temperatures have increased just 1C above preindustrial levels, and we are on course for another 2C or 3C on top of that. Could civilisation weather this level of warming?
…
It is then easy to see these intersecting crises dovetailing with calls from the new far-right populists for strong authoritarian leaders to solve these problems. Inward-looking nationalists could then move further away from the internationalism needed to ensure the continuation of stable global food supplies and to manage migration humanely. And without cooperative internationalism serious carbon dioxide mitigation will not happen, meaning the underling drivers of the problems will exacerbate, leading to a lock-in of a deteriorating, isolationist, fascist future.
…
Who but a climate scientist could so eloquently establish the link between permitting fracking in the UK, and the global downfall of Democracy?
Time to threaten Google and Facebook with antitrust style actions if they don’t behave.
Amazing what the system produces to force its totalitarian policies upon populations… You disagree? You are a populist. More guilt spewing at every corner.
Totally confused by your labeling.
You write “Amazing what the system produces to force its totalitarian policies upon populations… You disagree? You are a populist. More guilt spewing at every corner.”
Guilt? At being a populist? According to Google (yes, Google) a populist is
“1. a member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.”
Why should one feel guilty about that?
It’s because the press has labeled Trump a ‘populist’ – therefore, it’s a bad thing and you should feel guilty about it.
Simple if/then statement.
The press is full of it. IMHO a populist Republican is a good thing.
The economic policies of most populists is indistinguishable from that of most socialists.
They only differ when it comes to social policies.
I remember one gentleman who was quite proud of his “populist” leanings. He told me that the way to fix Social Security was to remove the cap on “donations”, and install a cap on payments.
In other words, to force the rich to pay more, but only give the proceeds to people like him.
‘The economic policies of most populists is indistinguishable from that of most socialists’
I find the same is true of self-described ‘libertarians’ – at least the ones I meet here in Oregon.
Any “libertarian” who believes in taking money from one group and giving it another is no libertarian. (This is not a no true scotsman issue, since libertarianism is defined as a philosophy of small government and no initial use of force.)
It’s like a Christian who doesn’t believe in God. A contradiction in terms.
A poll of French people showed that most identified as Christians but that many of them did not believe in God…
The French also believe that socialism is a good thing.
“Populist” is codename for stupid, backward thinking, unenlightened.
Enlightened people must be in favor of futuristic stuff. (“Renewables”, “Smart Grid”, “Smart Meter”…) Enlightened people promote vaccines (usually unable to say anything precise about any vaccine). Etc.
The problem is that most politicians who claim the represent the little people, want to solve the problem of the little people by seizing the assets of the rich and giving it to the little people.
Socialism by any other name.
The only way to help the little people is to get government out of their way.
Or, build an economy they can participate in. Ok, I see how “populism” is being interpreted as Marxism. Too bad.
Too many people define “populism” as anything that helps me.
https://youtu.be/3jFqhjaGh30
These guys have to do something to earn their pay. Never mind that it’s publishing elegantly phrased crap, … as long as they are involved, … doing something to make it look like they are doing something worthwhile, … to justify their grants, … to justify their tenured employment, … to put those degrees to … “work” [did I say, “work”– I meant, “put those degrees in play”].
This clown obviously doesn’t know what fascism is. He is simply using the lexicon of the radical left. How droll!
Historically, It’s always been difficult to mount a revolution/insurrection in a country where the people are doing reasonably well. In order to have a chance of toppling the government, you need to create hardship and insecurity. The Watermelons are having a good try at it right now.
Expect to read that Global Warming will lead to the splitting of Homo sapiens into warring camps of Gays and Lesbians and the extinction of the species.
Ha ha jajajajajajaja
Must be a bummer to have this twisted dude as a teacher and have to blow this crap back at him to get an ‘A’.
The attempt to control CO2 will lead to fascism because it leads to control of the means of production.
get help mate – there are professionals out there who *can* help you.
Global warming will result in fascism. In order to prevent that we must install fascism now.
That reminds me of that book teaching advanced techniques for political discussion:
Isn’t this precisely what the IPCC is? If you don’t vote “yay” with them they put your ass in the gulag and deny you ever existed.
No, it is worldwide communism that is taking over.
IOW. We need to implement fascism so we don’t get fascists.
No, “controlling” CO2 emissions IS fascism. CO2 is not a pollutant, it is in fact plant food, and makes the “climate” healthier.
Hard to think of a more perfect example of a self-fulfilling prophecy. CAGW has brought the world ecofasc1sm.
Oh no not Fascism, CO2 is an alt-right monster we need zero emissions of it.
Need ANTIFA on the case,
You read through these articles and start to wonder who actually writes and believes this bollocks.
Then you get to the bottom and find the link to The Guardian and you wonder no longer.
Basically it is a sulking Leftie complaining that his type of totalitarian government might become be pushed aside by someone else’s type of totalitarian government.
Control is the goal of the Left. ‘Everything will be better if only the right people were in charge’. They may talk the talk of the Worker’s Paradise, but if you look closely they always cast themselves in the role of administrator.
The goal of the Left is to be in charge. They demand rules.
The goal of the Right is to be left alone. They request freedom.
Sheesh we have social scientists-lite waxing strongly on alarmist climate science and the horibble things we should do with sceptics and we have global warming geographers, who should be out their graphing the geo, offering political prognostications on fascists overpowering the marxists! Its amazing how few comments on the subject are being made by scientists and when they do speak, they dont offer any science, only on the need for global command politics.
To quote an old pub philosooher at the St James Hotel in Winnipeg, “These bums got nuttin.” This philosopher had other apropos insights into the green field. He came into the pub with an armful of groceries he’d promised his wife he’d bring straight home. He approached our table as we raised fingers to order one for him. He took out two smoked Winnipeg Goldeye and my unc said arent they full of mercury? He said yeah, but just hold a lighter under their tails chop off their heads.
The old boy should actually read Orwell (as a warning, not a content guide).
It’s actually harking to people like (and such as) Simon Lewis that will lead to Fascism.
“manage migration humanely”
the cultural marxism of the NWO is writ large. Climate Change Hysteria is a tool of the Kalergi plan
“Inward-looking nationalists could then move further away from the internationalism needed to ensure the continuation of stable global food supplies and to manage migration humanely.”
And who knows more about internationalism without a vote and forced migration against the wishes of the migrants than any other group in history? Why, it’s your friendly neighbourhood totalitarian ready and willing to decide what the whole world needs and deserves.
And who better to manage the food supply than unelected, unanswerable, self-righteous totalitarian? After all, someone has to take charge, right? It is everyone’s best interest I am sure.
I recall a lady commenting on the Soviet Union just after the fall of the Empire: “Communism is a very good system, if they could just invent people who didn’t need to eat.”
“…However, an unstoppable globally enveloping cascade of catastrophe, while possible, is certainly not a probable outcome.”
==========
Thanks for that vote of confidence, I’ll sleep better tonight.