Fear’s a great motivator, right? So what better way to motivate people to care about climate change than to scare the crap out of them? Even if you have to leave out some details to do it?
New York Magazine climate columnist David Wallace-Wells seems to be a student at the School of We’re Hurtling Toward Global Environmental Catastrophe and We’re All Gonna Die. Last night, he shared a short piece by James Dyke, a senior lecturer in global systems at the University of Exeter, explaining some of the horrible things humanity is in for:
’”Oh, I think we’re heading towards 3°C at least,” he said. “But what about the many millions of people directly threatened,” I went on. He gave a sigh. “They will die.”’ https://t.co/CRiHEza6wg
— David Wallace-Wells (@dwallacewells) June 3, 2019
“I was born in the early 1970s. This means in my lifetime the number of people on Earth has doubled, while the size of wild animal populations has been reduced by 60%. Humanity has swung a wrecking ball through the biosphere.”
— David Wallace-Wells (@dwallacewells) June 3, 2019
“The most effective guard against climate breakdown may not be technological, but a fundamental reimagining of what constitutes a good life on this planet. … So far our response to the challenge of climate change exposes a fundamental failure of collective imagination.”
— David Wallace-Wells (@dwallacewells) June 3, 2019
Speaking of fundamental failures of the imagination, if climate change is such a serious threat, why do climate change alarmists insist on addressing it in such unserious ways? Author and “Skeptical Environmentalist” Bjorn Lomborg, for one, is fed up with the fearmongering, and
Unbridled climate alarmism:
"But what about the many millions of people directly threatened, living in low-lying nations?"
"They will die"Sorry, no:
1) Over 81 years, they will move, not die
2) Adaptation means almost none will moveUnfounded terror scaring people needlessly https://t.co/fMdJqja2tN
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Take this new alarmist paper, which made the rounds in the last weeks. It talks about 187 million people displaced — not flooded, not killed.
Obviously, people will not stay and drown.https://t.co/aB2sYpoEfQ, I wrote about how badly wrong this is here: https://t.co/bIQhgowdGQ pic.twitter.com/2XDWa5fYRk
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
But notice their reference for the 187 million (#38)
Here is the paper.
It says the following in the abstract:
187 million, but can be avoided by paying 0.02% of GDPShould reporters not be responsible for pointing this out, so people don't get so scared?https://t.co/HYNe9dM0PI pic.twitter.com/DD4VGKONSx
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Will adaptation happen — absolutely:
Everyone will accept paying <0.02% to avoid >5% of GDP costsAnd then, instead of 187,000,000 displaced, you have less than 305,000 (at least 600x less)
Shouldn't reporters be obliged to tell people that?
Or okay to just scare them silly? pic.twitter.com/bFGqRBHRvN— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Claim: Millions will die from rising seas
Fact: They won't die, and almost none have to moveThe outcome of this climate alarmism porn is to frighten children and many adults needlessly
How is such outrageous scare campaigning okay?
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
It’s not. At least it shouldn’t be.
PS. I only analyzed first part of scare:
'many millions directly threatened: low-lying nations farmers affected by abrupt changes in weather, kids exposed to new diseases?”
Others similar: 5.4 million kids die from entirely well-known, easily curable diseases, not new ones
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Dispelling the faulty “science” behind climate change alarmism is no easy task, but Lomborg is up to the challenge:
Eh, you may want to read all the way to the middle of the first tweet: "Adaptation means almost none will move"
No mass immigration
But thanks for making my point of how climate alarmism takes a bit of unscary truth and turns it into Armageddon
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Adaptation. Well good luck with that!! I don't currently see Mozambique adapting very well…
— 🌳Felix Doran🍾 (@felixd0r) June 3, 2019
Maybe because of blinkered prejudice of Mozambique?
According to the UN's middle-of-road climate scenario (SSP2), the average person in Mozambique will at $42,000 be as rich as a Dutchman today
(and adaptation will cost 0.02% of that)https://t.co/pEht1X27dG pic.twitter.com/UWB7NkyV8q— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
At what certainty can you predict "adaptation" when this is the first time humans will live in a planet warmer than 1.5 or 2 or 3C? Genuine question. Armageddon only happens once.
— 🌳Felix Doran🍾 (@felixd0r) June 3, 2019
Because humanity has many times before handled relative sea level rise, e.g. from massive land movement from water extraction (5 meters in Jakarta) or from earthquakes (1 meter for Tubigon in the Philippines)
— and tackled it finehttps://t.co/yInawvjE2s pic.twitter.com/2JFacoKk2h— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Bjorn, what formal training in the climate sciences do you have again? – #climatechange #sciencematters
— @GeraldKutney (@GeraldKutney) June 3, 2019
Ah, how constructive:
Climate alarmist: millions will die
I point out the research showing: 1) none will die 2) very few will moveAnd then PhD in chemistry joins —not with a substantial contribution (maybe challenging my points)
but instead trying to disallow conversation https://t.co/KCpG3czyIB— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
A claim of 187 million displaced when right number <305K — 600x less
Or someone claiming millions will die, when right number is ~zeroIf you missed this, maybe try to read twitter-thread again?
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
Alarmist: someone who *incorrectly* say millions will die, when right number close to ~zero
Not a complicated definition, I would think
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) June 3, 2019
I do appreciate your response, and now I understand. I am not aware of any peer-reviewed studies that have suggested such things. "Alarmist papers must be quite rare. Or are you saying that only some public press are alarmist?
— @GeraldKutney (@GeraldKutney) June 3, 2019
"Zero"? People dying in climate driven heat waves already.
— 💧Rob Mailler (@rlmailler) June 3, 2019
It goes on and on.
See the whole epic thread here.
H/T Richard B
That was, I’m not sure how to put it, frickin AMAZING!!! I love this guy. He literally shredded these fear mongers to shreds. And yet Bjorn is a villain to be hated across the globe. Man, this world is a mess.
Gerald Kutney: Asks Lomborg what are his bona fides to question alarmist drivel of 183 million deaths.
Also Gerald Kutney: Tells Lomborg there is no science behind the 183 million deaths malarkey, and acts like that is on Lomborg too.
Not Gerald Kutney: Agreeing with Lomborg that 183 millions deaths is unsupportable crap.
So, the apparent logic is that only alarmists can dispute alarmist drivel, but that the only time it is proper to do so is when criticizing a skeptic for disputing alarmist drivel.
This is how we know Kutney is a gen-u-whine dyed in the wool climate science eggspurt.
The climate is dominated by natural variation and the scale of any human affect is minuscule compared to what nature will do. Fortunately, the one thing nature abhors is getting warmer in an interglacial – or to be precise UNFORTUNATELY, because almost no one is going to be concerned about getting a few degrees warmer but a lot MORE people (as a lot already do) will die if we get colder.
“…but a fundamental reimagining of what constitutes a good life on this planet. ” So, do we want someone like David Wallace-Wells telling us what constitutes a good life?
“but a lot MORE people (as a lot already do) will die if we get colder.”
That “if” should probably be a “when”.
Paradoxically for that generation the problems will be how to maximise the greenhouse effect and decrease albedo. I can only imagine what they will think of our contribution to their misfortune.
“Climate driven heatwaves” 😀
No. Lomborgs PhD is in applied statistics.
The climate fear industry know ‘s their con game results in 10’s of thousands of fuel poverty deaths each year
and is racist suppression of some of the poorest people on the planet, so their solution is make up absolute fiction about how scary climate changes are going to wipe out untold millions.
You don’t have to spend a great deal of time with a true believer to know they want half the worlds population eradicated . What better way … rob them of energy .
The ring leaders know what they are doing and need to be held to account .
Aldo Leopold:
“I have no hope for conservation born of fear.”