Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to The Conversation, we listen to disease experts but ignore climate experts, even though they are both groups of experts, because we have an instinctive fear of disease.
Coronavirus response proves the world can act on climate change
Eric Galbraith Professor of Earth System Science, McGill University
Ross Otto Assistant Professor of Psychology, McGill University…
The alarms for both COVID-19 and climate change were sounded by experts, well in advance of visible crises. It is easy to forget, but at the time of this writing, the total deaths from COVID-19 are less than 9,000 — it is the terrifying computer model predictions of much larger numbers that have alerted governments to the need for swift action, despite the disruption this is causing to everyday life.
Yet computer models of climate change also predict a steady march of increasing deaths, surpassing 250,000 people per year within two decades from now.
As scientists who have studied climate change and the psychology of decision-making, we find ourselves asking: Why do the government responses to COVID-19 and climate change — which both require making difficult decisions to avert future disasters — differ so dramatically? We suggest four important reasons.
Instinctive fear
First, COVID-19 is deadly in a way that is frightening on an instinctive, personal level. People react strongly to mortal threats, and although the virus appears to have much lower mortality for otherwise healthy people under 60, those statistics do not quell universal personal safety fears.
…
Read more: https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-response-proves-the-world-can-act-on-climate-change-133999
There are a few details the professors left out, like that disease epidemic models have a firm foundation of observational evidence. Climate predictions of imminent catastrophe not so much.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Obviously these people are masochists. Only happy when it hurts.
More like sadists. They are only happy when someone else is hurting.
Plus lots!
Auto
The part the climate “scientists” don’t understand is that they need to provide an economic reason why we should worry about any tiny “climate change”. They can’t, so no one is interested!
“we listen to disease experts but ignore climate experts, even though they are both groups of experts, because we have an instinctive fear of disease.”
…or could it be that we ignore Climastrologists because most of us know bovine excreta when we smell it?
I’m reminded once again of Sir Sydney Camm’s response to claims that all the experts said his Harrier ‘jump jet’ would never work; an ‘ex’ is a has-been and a ‘spurt’ is a drip under pressure.
Make no mistake, when the virus issue is over, the Climate Alarmists will try to draw similarities to their cause. The COVID19 virus has effectively thrashed the Climate emergency into oblivion, and the reality of that is killing the alarmists. 🙂 It has stolen their thunder, but they will attempt to emerge better (worse) than ever, and use the virus emergency to their advantage.
The Climate scare is abstract. It’s credibility is finished by the hard facts of the virus emergency. I must admit, the images of the Military trucks in a long line. driving through the streets (of Bologna, I think) in Italy, were quite shocking. At first, I thought It was a display of heavy handed tactics, and that angered me. But, it was actually a convoy of trucks carrying the dead bodies.
When the basic principles of, Observe, measure and quantify, have to be contrived and manipulated to create the illusion of an emergency, then it will fail when confronted by reality.
“when it’s over”? They are not waiting for that, witness Dr Mann’s rebranding of AGW (again ) as not ‘climate change’ but ‘climate pandemic’.
Anthony and all:
Just reported. Boston hospital now using malaria drug for treatment of Covid.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wcvb.com/amp/article/drug-that-treats-malaria-being-used-by-boston-doctors-to-treat-covid-19/31803741
For those of you who choose to take this, you might want ask your doctor if eye supplements like lutein might be beneficial to offset possible side effects
john
Seems chloroquine is working, as they are giving it to anybody with any symptoms. Chloroquine was first made in the 1930’s some people have been taking it for years and years, so everything about it is know.. taking 500 mg a day for 6/10 days isn’t bad as stated by the french professor who didn’t a clinal trial on chloroquine..
— Boston Medical Center is already using the drug to treat patients with coronavirus.
A BMC infectious diseases specialist told the Boston Herald the hospital is administering the drug to anyone who is either confirmed or suspected of having the virus.
They said it appears to stem inflammation and may decrease the virus’ ability to reproduce.
Does anyone know how difficult it would be to ramp up production of this drug?
With the obligations to stay home for Covid-19, there have been improvements in pollution. Air and water seem cleaner. Will we be able to change our habits after this global emergency situation? This situation has shown how pollution levels can drop thanks to greener solutions.
The world will respond to real problems.
Persuading 7 billion to act on Climate mitigation during the very best and mildest Climate in history and no cohesive proof to the contrary will be a challenge.
This won’t be made easier when the only group screaming loudly about the Climate are the same people we see lying to us daily about almost everything else.
The problem is that a surprisingly (in my view) high number of otherwise intelligent people are adherents of the climate change meme, and as such don’t need persuading.
Well, I do see a public more willing to do absolutely anything self-denying to address a potential threat if it means potentially saving the life of a single person living 36 miles away. And I see that unquestioningly embraced by school children. Opposed? How dare you!
So an ecological disaster that only exists within speculative computer models is just as real as a viral epidemic that is killing people today right in front of us?
Got it.
CAGW GAVE US THIS. It proved we are most likley completely willing to just roll over and die. No fighting back, no resistance, just off to the fields of gold in the beautiful nirvana coming. So when the government locked down the entire economies worldwide, we rolled over and obediently played dead. I am waiting for the riots from places being locked down, unless we send out armed soldiers from the National Guard to keep the peace. If there is not resistance, the dictators have WON and we are toast. Learn to love the hell that is dictatorship and no freedom, though I must say, that seems to be what most want.
There is cause for both mistakes; poor experimental data replaced with mathematical modelling. There is has been a trend for more academics since WW2. Consequently fewer large scale experiments collecting data over large areas of time and space combined with poor maths and computer skills in environmental science and medicine . Darwin spent decades collecting his data and from a vast numbers of sources. Darwin had a private income , as did Newton and did not need to publish. Newton and darwon only published a few books, yet changed the World. Quality not quantity.
The result is academics with poor stats and maths skills analysing too little confusing data in order to obtain a grant. The natural world is chaotic and unless one is a Freeman Dyson or Prof R Lindzen one is unlikely to have the skills to perceive thecomplexity, let alone quantify it. If there is inadequate field work, do not model. Barely 20 people gave us the Italian Renaissance or Industrial Revolution. What develops civilisation are a few brilliant types with lesser skilled doing much of the devlopment work.
The solution is to have a few top research universities in each country and ensure entry requires high levels of maths, physics and chemistry test. Forget SATS look at the Cambridge Entrance exams for STEM subjects mid pre -1980s. Most people would be taught at Polytechnics. Academics justifying their jobs are a threat to common sense.
Questions should be:
Does the investigation adequately assess the complexity over time and distance such that a clear answer can be given? If not, more sampling and only then statistical analysis by people with good maths skills.
These words will be soon forgotten amidst the economic destruction. 2 renowned doctors are destroying millions of jobs and a good bit of the US economy. And they will not care. They will be glorified for “defeating” the virus. Chavez, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hitler, et. al. are still revered by many despite the destruction they caused. Those 2 magnificent doctors will join that list. God help us all.
Repeating several points I’ve been making on WUWT and on Climate Etc for the last three years:
— The EPA has legal authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate all of America’s carbon emissions, not just emissions from coal.
— The EPA, working in cooperation with the state governments under the authority of the Clean Air Act, could impose a system of carbon pollution fines which is the functional equivalent of a legislated tax on carbon.
— The Executive Branch of the US Government has legal authority under existing national security legislation to declare a carbon pollution emergency and to then impose a system of carbon fuel rationing throughout the American economy.
— All of these Executive Branch actions could be taken by a climate activist president without another word of new legislation being enacted by the US Congress.
As long as the carbon emission regulations, the carbon pollution fines, and the system of carbon fuel rationing were being applied with equal force to all sources of America’s carbon emissions, it is probable that all of these Executive Branch actions would survive any lawsuits filed against them in the courts.
How these actions might fare in the court of public opinion would be a very different matter, of course.
In addition to sparking the appearance of our own Yellow Vest protesters, the imposition of these kind of draconian anti-carbon regulations here in America would cause the public debate over the validity of today’s mainstream climate science to go critical mass, something we have not seen happen here before.
It’s quite simple. The climate scaremongers are being paid to increase the scare. The health worrymen are being paid to reduce it.
And as the weeks turn into months and the months to years. The experts of epidemics will start to be questioned. As this will go on too long, in two weeks either few people are infected or many are infected. With most countries in the world reporting and also every state, the question will be – lockdown for how long….and it only takes one to start another cluster and continue the lockdown. I think the stopping everything because of a health threat is valid in people’s eyes because it is expected to be short term and governments tell them to do it by act of law. Short term this is viable and people see value. Climate change mitigation they talk about isn’t short term nor see benefit to peoples lives that a warm house, showers, personal transport and food from faraway places do. And they haven’t been wrong for 70 years….we give them the benefit of the doubt.
Two weeks may be just enough that people get weary of the over reporting in the news and tune out. Then the governments can declare victory over Corona. After that, the virus will just do what it always was going to do, being somewhat worse than a typical flu. And since summer is on its way and flu season over, it may not look too bad. By next flu season it will be out of the public consciousness and it will appear to everyone as just a somewhat worse flu season if there is any reporting at all.
Maybe when we get through the current virus crisis people will reflect on what a pain shutting down modern life is and decide not to repeat it for what most people think is a crock of donkey climate crap anyway.
One upside already is that no seems to be complaining about a bit of chlorinated chicken. And they seem to be quite happy spraying kitchen and bathroom disinfectants over everything – wonder if the eco-loons are agonising over this course of action … feel their pain (ha ha)
Mr watts and this site mentioned on breitbart? Is it a good site for news??
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/20/delingpole-chloroquine-malaria-coronavirus-stunning-correlation-claimed/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
You really got to shake your head at the unerring opportunism and exploitation.
Real Crisis vs. Fake crisis designed to destroy the ONLY successful model of an economy the world has ever known. Never mind the hundreds of millions killed under autocrats. People may fall for it a bit, but when the real crunch comes the emperor is naked and people can clearly see that. Goodbye fake CO2 crisis- you’ve had your 15 minutes.
Hmmm . . . McGill University . . . never heard of it before reading this article. It is a repository of elevated scientific thinking, or just another for-profit diploma mill?
One might conclude the latter from the the above extract of statements by Professors Galbraith and Otto. Both need to go back to school to learn that computer models follow the acronym GIGO ( Garbage In, Garbage Out).
The title of their article, “Coronavirus response proves the world can act on climate change” shows how out-of-touch they are with reality. Taken literally, it implies the solution to climate change is to shut down most businesses, practice “social distancing”, self-quarantine, and eliminate all group gatherings exceeding 10 people. Really???
There are much more than “a few details the professors left out.”
Two weeks may be just enough that people get weary of the over reporting in the news and tune out. Then the governments can declare victory over Corona. After that, the virus will just do what it always was going to do, being somewhat worse than a typical flu. And since summer is on its way and flu season over, it may not look too bad. By next flu season it will be out of the public consciousness and it will appear to everyone as just a somewhat worse flu season if there is any reporting at all.
because we have an instinctive fear of disease.
===≠=========/
More likely because we have an instinctive ability to detect BS.
Until recently we had no idea what disease was, except that bloodletting was the cure.
In point of fact, cutting fossil fuel use is to climate change as bloodletting is to disease. They both do more harm than good and don’t solve the underlying problem.
Coranavirus has killed actual people. Climate change hasn’t.
The economic damage from Coranavirus mitigation has already done far more damage than the projected economic impact of +2.5C, and it’s done it to the *current* economy not a projected far-richer future economy. However, coronavirus mitigation will end up doing far *less* economic damage than a permanent Green New Deal would.
Actually what it proves is what WOULD happen if we DID follow the direction of the lunatic climate change freaks. “Climate change” as an “existential threat” is an absolute fraud. This isn’t. Therein is the difference. The “climate change” industry is dead….all efforts now are to defeat this virus and then get the REAL economy working again. A truck driver today is worth all the “climate change scientists” put together.
Actually, many, many people do NOT listen to disease experts. Consequently, if climate catastrophists are making this argument, then they are simply using a false argument. Want proof? Read on.
Do we listen to disease experts who tell us the following:
https://www.cdc.gov/…/data…/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm
Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure. This is about one in five deaths annually, or 1,300 deaths every day.
https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sheets/alcohol-facts-and-statistics
An estimated 88,000 people die from alcohol-related causes annually, making alcohol the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States. The first is tobacco, and the second is poor diet and physical inactivity.
https://www.heart.org/…/documen…/downloadable/ucm_491265.pdf
About 2,200 Americans die of cardiovascular disease each day, an average of 1 death every 40 seconds.
ANSWER: Apparently not.
Why isn’t the news media raging about all those deaths per day? Oh, they are well established, socially acceptable, and already monitized to make some people lots of income.
The current corona virus, on the other hand, is still in the phase of media weaponization to cause fear that leads to eventual business monitization to make profit. After that, it will likely be yesteryear’s news.
If it’s an old established way of killing ourselves that we know that we can prevent, but don’t, then we’re okay with that. But if it’s a new way of killing ourselves that we don’t know that much about, then we’ll “listen to the experts.”
Where’s the … “social distancing” … that prevents people from driving while drunk? … that prevents people from gorging themselves to 400 pounds and dying of a heart attaack? … that prevents people from smoking two packs a day of Camel unfiltered for decades on end?
Let’s close down businesses that we KNOW, for sure, will cause extreme hardships, while not knowing (but fearing) what happens if we don’t. Even better, let’s continue to allow business to flourish that encourage/enable people to smoke, drink and eat themselves to death — that’s all good business.
Close down business, out of fear of the unknown, yet encourage business that is known to kill. It makes so much sense now.
Censorship at “TheConversation” is alive and well. I received this today….
“Hello Steve,
Your comment on ‘Coronavirus response proves the world can act on climate change’ has been removed.
There are several reasons why this may have occurred:
Your comment may have breached our community standards. For example it may have been a personal attack, or you might not have used your real name.
Your comment may have been entirely blameless but part of a thread that was removed because another comment had to be removed.
It might have been removed for another editorial reason, for example to avoid repetition or keep the conversation on topic.
For practical reasons we reserve the right to remove any comment and all decisions must be final, but please don’t take it personally.
If you’re playing by the rules it’s unlikely to happen again, so feel free to continue to post new comments and engage in polite and respectful discussion.
For your reference, the removed comment was:
The first error in this article is: “The alarms for both COVID-19 and climate change were sounded by expert”.
Equating ‘experts’ from different fields to each other.
There is a world of difference between medical doctors, virologists, those who study epidemiological matters and, ‘climate researchers’.
The difference is so great it makes one wonder why the article was written!
For more information you can read our standards.
Kind regards,
The Conversation”
“Hello Steve . . . don’t take it personally . . .”
ROTFLMAO.