Bjørn Lomborg: Questioning Spending Trillions on Climate Change Gets you Cancelled

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Bjørn Lomborg can trigger screaming climate hysteria, just by offering to talk to people. And he is not even a climate skeptic.

When climate alarmism meets cancel culture

BJORN LOMBORG Follow @bjornlomborg
12:00AM MARCH 24, 2021

Across the world, politicians are now promising climate policies costing tens of trillions of dollars – money we don’t have and resources that are desperately needed elsewhere.

Yet, climate campaigners tell us, if we don’t spend everything on climate now, nothing else matters, because climate change threatens our very civilisation. As US President Joe Biden says: climate change is “an existential threat”.

Yes, climate change is a real problem. However, it is typically vastly exaggerated, and the resulting alarmism is exploited to justify the wasteful spending of trillions.

Pointing this out will get you cancelled. I should know, because I have personally been on the receiving end of this climate alarmism enforcement for years. Last week, I was scheduled to give a public lecture at Duke University in the US when a group of climate-politicised professors – some who write for the UN Climate Panel – publicly asked Duke to cancel my appearance.

Certainly, the professors at Duke didn’t want anyone to hear dissenting facts.

Read more:

I once watched a dramatisation of the life of Galileo.

One of the most shocking scenes in the movie was when Galileo asked the Pope and his learned advisors to view the moons of Jupiter with their own eyes through his telescope, and they refused.

Obviously we have no way of knowing how historically accurate the dramatisation was, but the movie director clearly wanted to demonstrate the vast gulf between the intellectually repressed 16th and 17th centuries and our enlightened age, by presenting a shocking scene of learned people refusing to examine evidence placed right before their eyes, for fear of having to admit they were wrong.

I mean, nothing like that could happen today right?

h/t Izaak – I didn’t make it clear Bjorn ended up giving his lecture at Duke – my criticism was about the attempt to cancel him. Apologies for my oversight. Izaak also provided a link to the lecture.

4.7 28 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 24, 2021 6:16 pm

I recommend spending quadrillions. Where’s my check?

Reply to  Scissor
March 24, 2021 6:24 pm

Probably in Prague.

Bryan A
Reply to  Scissor
March 24, 2021 6:59 pm

I dunno about your czech
Here are your Bills…

Please remit $392,000 as your fair share of climate reparations.

Please remit $127,000 as your share of the GND fund costs.

Last edited 1 year ago by Bryan A
Reply to  Scissor
March 25, 2021 12:19 am

We are way beyond that sort of puny spending. We are now in urgent need of embracing Climazillions. I recommend in a ten year plan that we spend approximately 17 Climazillions in year 1 and increase it by 5 CT’s each year.

I am open to ramping this up to 90CT’s by the end of the period, but hope we will not need to consider Megaclimazillions, as that would infer that things are totally out of control and our moss and brackish water rations will need to be cut.


Reply to  tonyb
March 26, 2021 1:10 am

What? Are you some sort of cheap charlie? Nothing less than spending 1,000CT’s will save us!

Reply to  Scissor
March 25, 2021 8:19 am

Send me, please, a $5,000 US dollar handling fee and I’ll mail your check when I get around to it.

March 24, 2021 6:21 pm

There is a book, Galileo’s Middle Finger which points out the ruthless orthodoxy enforced on researchers by trans activists. It is corruption in its vilest form.

In Dark Age Ahead, Jane Jacobs points out that the corruption of the pillars of society, one of them being science, will lead to a dark age so profound that we won’t even be able to remember what we have lost.

It should be obvious to all but the most ideologically possessed that we are in serious doggie doo. The only way out is to quit tolerating lies, even from our own side.

We are indeed in an existential crisis.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  commieBob
March 24, 2021 6:35 pm

There is a book, Galileo’s Middle Finger which points out the ruthless orthodoxy enforced on researchers by trans activists.

And typically, they get the courts to do their dirty work for them. In Surrey B.C. (one of the cities close to metropolitan Vancouver, Canada) a father has been thrown in jail for calling his daughter … daughter. She’s only 14 yet he no longer has authority over his own flesh and blood because of medical quackery and pin brained judges. She will receive court ordered testosterone because she has convinced some quacks that she’s really a male.It’s outrageous.

How does the legal system think they can alter a biological fact in a court of law? Talk about hubris taken to an extreme.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 25, 2021 1:16 am

Theoretically at least, courts do what the law says. If the law says they can alter a biological fact then they can alter a biological fact. Indiana’s lower house unanimously passed a law that changed the value of Pi to 3.2. A senate committee recommended passing the bill too, but the senate then voted to postpone the bill indefinitely (not turn it down, just not decide!). If that bill had passed in the senate and become Indiana law, the courts would have had to apply it. Many of our politicians today are no more scientifically/mathematically literate than those Indiana legislators were back then. I see no reason to assume anything better of today’s lawyers.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
March 25, 2021 5:16 am

I thought the pi = 3.2 was a joke

Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
March 25, 2021 9:20 am

Close enough for Gov’t work.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
March 25, 2021 5:46 am

“If the law says they can alter a biological fact then they can alter a biological fact.”
Neither the law nor the courts can alter biological facts. They can only enforce the denial of biological facts. Just as if the law says that Mars does not exist, it doesn’t stop Mars from existing.

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  Alba
March 25, 2021 5:56 am

In Canada the Supreme Court throws out laws because it says they are “unconstitutional” without specifying what that means. So in Canada they are changing laws which is the duty of the elected members.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 25, 2021 8:07 am

I think he was jailed on a contempt of court charge because in speaking publicly he identified himself and, therefore his daughter. There is automatically a press ban on identifying minors in court cases.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Fran
March 25, 2021 10:24 am

It would be whatever media outlet that made it public violating the gag order, not the father. I believe the father was charged with contempt because he actually was contemptuous of the judge’s stupidity. They can’t turn a girl into a boy through a court decision. The girl was ordered to receive hormones. That is as criminal (or should be) as FGM.

Reply to  commieBob
March 25, 2021 12:21 am

It is the West that is in existential crisis. In ten years China will start to look like an alluring move.


Reply to  tonyb
March 25, 2021 12:07 pm

Your kidding, right?

Reply to  Mandobob
March 25, 2021 3:36 pm

Rephrasing it …

Is it possible that things could get so bad here that moving to China would look attractive?

Between WW1 and WW2, when America was in the depths of the depression, German immigrants were moving back to Germany. We all know how that turned out. Anyway, some people are old enough to remember that time so we can say it’s within living memory.

Could the Democrats screw things up enough that some Chinese people would move back to China? Oh yes they could.

Would non-Chinese people move to China? The occasional one does, even now but I wouldn’t expect the flood gates to open.

George Tetley
Reply to  commieBob
March 25, 2021 2:03 am

Nothing has changed, today we have RNA when you” know” the truth about the so called coronavirus”””vaccine” ! But ….

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  George Tetley
March 25, 2021 7:30 am
“Then the final thing I’ll say is that we worked over the last couple years to refine and articulate our core values of respect, trust, inclusion, discovery and excellence. And those values have guided our strategy all the way through, and I think they’ve been responsible for our success”

Duke is not the only one caving. The University of Texas, of which library I have been locked out of since March 2020, is more interested in football players’ tantrums. They may return to normal this fall. They seem to be worried about a new variant. No risk too small to ignore ?

March 24, 2021 6:25 pm

So why do we need to have net zero emissions by 2040 or ’50 and how is this possible?
Well Pres Biden the leader of the most powerful country tells us in this video that we are facing an existential threat for humans and he actually mentions this a number of times in a couple of minutes. He also tells us we can “feel this in our bones” , but I seem to have missed that feeling.
I certainly understand the data since 1800, 1900, 1950, 1970, 1990 etc and of course the human race is today much healthier, wealthier and has a life expectancy of about 72 years. All 7.8 bn of us and that average is made up of Africa ( 64) China (76) wealthy countries like Australia ( 83) etc.
And the Pres of the UN loves the EXIST….. word and always seems to use it in any number of interviews about SLR or whatever.
But even if we get all our electricity ( mission impossible) from dirty, toxic S&W etc how does that help us with the remaining 70%+ ( at least) of our energy needs until 2050 or 2100?
Don’t forget these loonies are telling us that the human race is threatened because of that extra 0.0065% of co2 in our atmosphere. Remember Dr Hansen and Bill McKibben etc ( org) tell us we must reduce co2 levels to a safe 350 ppm.
So at present we have about 415 ppm less 350 ppm= 65 ppm and that’s about 0.0065% too much co2 in our atmosphere.
But don’t worry because China, India+ developing countries are happily building hundreds of new coal power stns and couldn’t care less about any of Biden’s, delusional, stu-pid BS and fra-d.
Any sane comments?

Reply to  Neville
March 24, 2021 6:40 pm

”We know it in our bones” Hard to extract anything from bones!

Reply to  Neville
March 24, 2021 6:40 pm

He keeps using that word, but I don’t think he knows what it means.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
March 24, 2021 6:52 pm

Dementia Joe’s most important decisions this week should be what flavor jello he wants from the Memory Care center cafeteria with his lunch. Absolutely terrifying that he is the US Commander in Chief.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 24, 2021 10:17 pm

Joe has already stated he may have a mysterious disease within 2 years and have to handover to Harris .
That he knows .
Not sure if it will be before or after the midterm election .
Depends on the Dims and polling .
Not good for the USA or the world .

Reply to  george1st:)
March 25, 2021 5:54 am

Maybe Congress could pass a law declaring that the President is of sound mind and then anybody questioning the President’s ability to think straight could be sent to jail. Well, if laws can be passed that say that boys can be girls then anything is possible.

oeman 50
Reply to  george1st:)
March 25, 2021 6:53 am

C’mon, man!

Reply to  george1st:)
March 25, 2021 12:02 pm

You are fairly optimistic. I wouldn’t be surprised that in the next few months that he has some issue (stroke (?), etc) that requires him to “step down” paving the way for Harris to be….the First Woman POTIS. Sooner or later.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 25, 2021 5:32 am

How very gerontophobic of you to state this openly.
How dare you! How! Dare! Youuuuuuu….! =)

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 25, 2021 7:47 am

An American president who gets on national television and insults Putin by calling him a killer and saying Putin has no soul. You can say things like that in private. When you are the president you simply can’t go around saying things like that out loud in public. Whether or not Putin is actually a killer is irrelevant. It was a dumb thing to do.

Robert Austin
Reply to  Marty
March 25, 2021 2:03 pm

Note Putin’s response is to challenge Biden to a debate. No outrage. Putin knows that what Biden said was the ravings of dementia.

michael hart
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
March 24, 2021 7:56 pm

I am not at all sure Biden even usually knows what he says. And when, and where, and to whom.

But I can believe the bit at 1:03 where he says “We’re gonna to take money and…”

…Which is great, while you still enjoy seigniorage of the world’s most important currency.

But who knows? Maybe, while Chinese policies and other third-world expansion enforce deflation on the developed world, it might still make sense to print $loadsamoney at the Fed as an inflationary counterbalance. It’s certainly not going to come from the Bundesbank, I mean, the European Central Bank.

I would just appreciate some more honesty and openness, however frightening that could be for everybody.

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
March 25, 2021 5:57 am

He is reading speeches until the day he is removed.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Neville
March 24, 2021 6:49 pm

Net zero by some arbitrary date is just pulling feces out of one’s backside and calling it science. Those who do so use the logical equivalent of ascertaining the maximum number of angels on a pinhead to come up with when that pin will be full.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 25, 2021 5:34 am

The numbers of angels on a pinhead somehow reminds me of MMT.
Hope for the best & prepare for the worst…

John Shotsky
Reply to  Neville
March 24, 2021 6:52 pm

Net zero emissions means the entire population of earth will stop emitting 24 ppm per year of CO2. What of the other 375 ppm? That’s natural, and you aren’t going to get termites to go tonet zero.

Reply to  John Shotsky
March 24, 2021 9:14 pm

Next there will be a war on termites, as they produce as much or more CO2 than humans. Poor termites…they know not what they do.

Reply to  Earthling2
March 25, 2021 1:32 am

Termites living is like Drax producing electricity. If you don’t count it, it doesn’t count.

Reply to  Earthling2
March 25, 2021 1:40 am

If politicians really wanted to create clean climate jobs, they’d hire termite exterminators worldwide. Fighting climate change demands it and no coding is required.

Reply to  John Shotsky
March 25, 2021 4:39 am

A primal termite knocked on wood,
And tasted it and found it good;
And that is why your Auntie May
Fell through the parlour floor today.

Bill Parsons
Reply to  Neville
March 24, 2021 7:17 pm

Regarding feeling it in your bones

WASHINGTON—Administration officials are crafting a plan for a multipart infrastructure and economic package that could cost as much as $3 trillion and fulfill key elements of President Biden’s campaign agenda, according to people involved in the discussions.

The first proposal would center on roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects and include many of the climate-change initiatives Mr. Biden outlined in the “Build Back Better” plan he released during the 2020 campaign.

Are you feeling anything yet?

1.9 trillion for covid relief had a kind of bludgeoning anesthetic effect. Now comes the next tranche of spending. You’ve got to wonder how they can get away with it. Isn’t the patient expected to wake up after they’re finished?

Barnes Moore
Reply to  Bill Parsons
March 25, 2021 5:40 am

So, what energy source are they going to use to power the machinery required to build this new infrastructure?

Another question. How many wind turbines and solar panels are needed to power the machinery used to mine the raw materials, transport said materials, power the manufacturing process, power the site prep process, maintain said wind turbines and solar panels, and ultimately decommission and dispose of them? I’m just talking about the wind turbines and solar panels themselves, not the energy required to run the rest of our economy. I am trying to figure this out, but frankly, don’t know that I have the chops to do it. My assertion is that wind and solar are not able to produce sufficient energy to reproduce themselves when you consider the entire life cycle energy requirements. Any thoughts?

Bill Parsons
Reply to  Barnes Moore
March 25, 2021 10:18 am

I’m no expert. Just a tax payer with growing indignation. Anyone who’s not appalled at government spending over the last several years doesn’t have a brain. Here’s a good discussion from Colorado’s “Independence Institute”, Interview of Chris Wright by Jon Caldera:

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  Bill Parsons
March 25, 2021 6:20 am

The patient died but the operation was a success.

Reply to  Bill Parsons
March 25, 2021 6:36 am

No need to worry! Bills in the US Congress are usually quoted with a ten-year price tag, and generally funded like the camel’s nose invading the tent with the bulk of the beast out beyond the next election. This means that a “$3T proposal” might “only” involve $100B spending in FY2021. Buried in this year’s spending of around $5T, it’s hardly worth mentioning. Remember that when you’re spending $100 million for a dozen eggs.

Reply to  Neville
March 24, 2021 8:47 pm

Here’s the censored version of Biden’s speech …

Reply to  Neville
March 25, 2021 1:37 am

We need to reduce CO2 to slow warming… the target dates are based on levels of warming which are likely to occur at particular emissions rates.

That’s what science says… opinions about leftists and ‘socialist social engineering’ are political opinion

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 3:14 am

“We need to reduce CO2 to slow warming…”

More scientifically unsubstantiated BS from griff

The science ??.. WTH would you know about “the science”

You are an evidence-free fool, that has proven his knowledge of science is on par with that of a turnip.

The “targets” are based on NOTHING but assumption driven GARBAGE. !!

Opinions OF leftists and ‘socialist social engineers’ are political opinion,

You are one of those leftist/socialists cultists….

…. its not even opinion with you, it just basic brain-washed nonsense regurgitation.

Reply to  fred250
March 25, 2021 10:10 am

I seem to make you very excited with my simple factual statements.

Looks like they are hitting the spot!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:32 am

I missed the facts! Where were they? Do you have a factual rebuttal to the recent posting by Middleton showing that there is little correspondence between CO2 levels and paleotemperatures? What are your facts destroying the claim by Dr. William Happer that the absorption bands for Earth IR radiation are saturated?

I really would like to see some facts instead of your opinions, or quotes of the opinions of others similarly deluded.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:54 am

Simple? Yes. Factual? No.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:59 pm

“simple factual statements.”

You didn’t make any FACTUAL statement.

Your posts always contain manifest LIES, and are totally unsupported by any real science.

I suspect you KNOW that.

Nothing you say is based on any sort of SCIENTIFIC REALITY.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 3:49 am

Why do we need to slow warming you claim we will have?

What is your plan for China?

Reply to  Derg
March 25, 2021 5:20 am

Griff doesn’t plan. Not sure it can think.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 5:20 am

Hi, griff. Your usual innumerate illiterate insanity, then?

Barnes Moore
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 5:42 am

Right. Using models to manipulate data to achieve a predetermined desired outcome. That’s not science. It’s called fraud.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 5:59 am

Griff makes the common mistake of confusing what some scientists say with what science says.
And could he give us, as an example, what the level of warming will be in 2030 at a particular rate of emission. I might just live long enough to check it.

Reply to  Alba
March 25, 2021 10:11 am

Heck, you can google it. I’m not here to save you from typing

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 12:00 am

You remain an ABYSS of any scientific evidence, griff-tard.

Too much of a COWARD to even try to post anything based on scientific reality..

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 6:00 am

Correction: That’s what “fear-mongers” say.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 9:50 am

Science is a process not a result, so it can’t say anything about anything. Facts don’t tell us anything either, as they must be interpreted within a specific context and time frame. You can choose to listen to the interpretations and advice of others you consider “experts”, or you can make your own evaluations, but this whole idea of “science says” is a canard and a sign of scientific illiteracy.

Reply to  Paul Penrose
March 26, 2021 10:54 am

It’s not even “science says”, it’s “THE science says”. The entire concept has been perverted.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 3:35 pm

Which science say it ? Climate or real ?

Gunga Din
March 24, 2021 6:42 pm

What place does “Cancel Culture” have in Science?

Reply to  Gunga Din
March 25, 2021 5:37 am

I can answer that: it means cancellation of the scientific method.
So no more replication, measuring, verification and calculation. Basta!

Rory Forbes
March 24, 2021 6:44 pm

Yes, climate change is a real problem.

I don’t care who he is and what his credentials are. He’s WRONG. The lukewarmers are as dangerous to the facts as the RINOs were to Trump’s reelection. This has now been going on for over 30 years with 100s of false and ridiculous predictions, 10s of thousands “scientific” papers no better than ass-wipe, all being funded for political expedience. Most, if not all of the authors of those papers know how thin the “science” is. Climate is what it is, a natural force that life on this planet must either adapt to or perish. Anyone who says they understand it is lying to you.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 24, 2021 7:11 pm

Of course, you’re right and I apologize for venting, but after over 30 years of utter “scientific” baffle-gab I’m rather on a short fuse, especially with the O’Biden/Harris administration throwing its weight behind the fraud. I admit that Lomborg’s method of ‘catching them with their own do-do’ has had its successes. Thanks for another ‘stimulating’ post.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 25, 2021 5:06 am

Climate alarmists continue to command the world view of a climate crisis because of lukewarmers. The MSM feel confident in promoting this view and people are ready to accept it because of the niggling fear that alarmists may be correct. Just look at the AstraZeneca scare in Europe put about by a few dissenters. People believe the worst.

People like Lombard should be stating loudly that there is absolutely no evidence that the climate is driven by anthropogenic CO2 in any way whatsoever and pay no lip service at all to the climate fraudsters.

Reply to  leitmotif
March 25, 2021 5:39 am

Government through crisis, or to quote Greta’s handlers:
“The need to act as if the building is on fire.”

Rory Forbes
Reply to  leitmotif
March 25, 2021 10:30 am

The people have been assaulted by expedient lies for over three decades and it is growing steadily worse. We’ve been lied to non stop for over a year on covid. The media repeats these lies 100 times an hour. No wonder people are scared. There’s nowhere they can turn to learn the truth.

Joel O'Bryan
March 24, 2021 6:46 pm

“… by presenting a shocking scene of learned people refusing to examine evidence placed right before their eyes, for fear of having to admit they were wrong.”

The Climate Dowsers do that everytime they get together and discuss their CMIP ensemble, an ensemble of Cargo Cult Science that they refuse to subject to observation.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 24, 2021 7:13 pm

Also, those taxpayer-provided troughs of $$$ are impossible for climate carpetbaggers to resist.

Whenever a leftist government is elected, the first thing they do is organize a conference somewhere exotic. And all that can be heard is –
“squeel, squeel, squeel. squeel, slop, slop, slop, slop . . .”

March 24, 2021 7:19 pm

Some politicians will justify digging an underground tunnel from A to B using teaspoons as economically viable, because all the teaspoon diggers will put their paycheques back into the economy immediately, and it’s like you got the tunnel for free. That kind of twisted logic is behind the economics of the GND.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 25, 2021 4:56 am

Thanks, it’s always good to remind people of the wisdom of Bastiat.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 25, 2021 8:06 am

This also applies to CO2 taxes. If the shop keeper didn’t have to spend his money on CO2 taxes, he could use that money to better himself and his business and his community.

CO2 taxes will raise the cost of everything everyone buys.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 25, 2021 9:58 am

And who is to say that the money spent on replacing the glass would not have been otherwise spent on something that had an even greater benefit to society, not to mention the shopkeeper? This is the danger in assuming that all games are zero-sum. In fact, if you think about it, most are not.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
March 25, 2021 10:09 am

Oh: you’ve heard about the UK govt’s proposals for a tunnel to Northern Ireland?

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 7:08 pm

No but I have heard about it’s plan to go full left retard … lets see how it pans out shall we.

Popcorn anyone?

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 12:02 am

WOW, won’t that need a HUGE AMOUNT OF RELIABLE POWER to construct. !

All that CEMENT, STEEL, all that luvly CO2 🙂

You are a MORON, griff.

March 24, 2021 7:30 pm

Born did speak at Duke, and the frantic, extreme and misleading letter by a few professors did not succeed in cancelling Dr. Lomborg. Much of what Lomborg discussed is sensible (i.e., energy R&D, adaptation and increased wealth). However, he chose implausible worst case model projections as the basis for his economic forecasts. Choosing plausible yet improbable outcomes would further underscore Dr. Lomborg’s proposals, if not negate their need entirely. He kept saying 3 feet of sea level rise by 2100 and 3.5 to 4.2C temperature rise by that same year. As of now, assuming a monotonic change, sea level would likely rise by well under 1 foot, and global mean temperature by about 1.2C. Neither of these would require much adaptation and certainly not a carbon tax. Plus, there is no reason to believe that the next 80 years will witness only a continuous increase in temperature.

He also keeps talking about “green” energy innovation, as if some magic silver bullet technology will be invented, proven and rolled out at societal scale, unless he really means improving efficiency and expanding nuclear power innovation. As long as the basis for his optimism is low-energy density, intermittent and unreliable wind or solar, there will be no innovations that can overcome these barriers without causing major environmental damage.

Anytime I hear anyone proposing new taxes, I conclude that they are just finding other ways to steal people’s hard-earned prosperity and hand it over to the rich and powerful. Carbon tax? How much? Spent where? By government?

Reply to  Pflashgordon
March 24, 2021 7:31 pm

Bjorn. Stupid auto-correct.

Reply to  Pflashgordon
March 25, 2021 4:30 am

is not an
auto-corret… 🙂

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Pflashgordon
March 25, 2021 6:31 am

Darn, for a moment I thought “Max is back!”

March 24, 2021 7:40 pm

When big money flows it is always the same. And this time it is the Environmental Industrial Complex, the Green Energy Lobby (the green doesn’t stand for what you think it stands for) and the Titans of Wall Street who have joined forces. And this time there won’t be an environmental movement to stand in their way, because they are the environmental movement. (lol)

In about ten years, we will be seeing headlines from the NYT and WaPo like: “Anti-environmentalists stage protest to shutdown rare earth & lithium mine.”

I have to say I do like Big Wind over Big Oil, because of the double entendre. (lol)

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
Abolition Man
Reply to  Anon
March 24, 2021 11:02 pm

Do you really think we have ten years? As the US continues to borrow money and buy cheap goods from China we are paying for the military development of our chief global rival!
The Chinese are facing a demographic trap; due to their one-child policy their population will age rapidly without adequate young people to support the economy and care for the elderly. At the moment they have millions of military age males who cannot find wives due to selective abortions of daughters for decades, so they need to act soon!
The US is weak due to ChiCom interference in our 2020 election as the culmination of their well orchestrated campaign to subvert the national elites in politics, media and academia! This puts a great deal of pressure on Beijing to act; probably within the next two or three years, before the US can recover from the insurgency within our own government against our own laws and Constitution!
I think China will make a move on Taiwan; likely before the 2022 election! With the current leadership in DC, they have a good chance of pulling it off without repercussions; a modern version of the Sudetenland! If Russia and China cooperate to replace the US dollar with the yuan or some kind of crypto-currency we are toast! In ten years we could be Venezuela! The GND is just one of the arrows the ChiComs have used to injure the American eagle; the Antifa and BLM riots were likely financed and coordinated with help from Beijing as well!

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Abolition Man
March 25, 2021 4:37 am

“I think China will make a move on Taiwan; likely before the 2022 election!”
Just curious about this. Taiwan has had 70+ years to prepare for this. When you think how difficult it was for the American military to conquer some tiny islands in the Pacific in WWII- I would think taking over Taiwan would be almost impossible unless Taiwan just quits the fight.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 25, 2021 7:21 am

China can easily embargo Taiwan and the only group that could stop them, the US military, now has a CinC who has received millions of dollars in bribes from the CCP!
At the meeting in Alaska the chief ChiCom diplomat lectured the US on OUR civil rights violations; spouting every Marxist or BLM talking point while our feckless elites said nothing about the ChiCom-19 virus that was developed at one of the bio weapons labs in Wuhan! Of course, they were probably worried about the Chinese revealing that the US government helped fund the gain of function experiments, but you have to wonder if there is anyone in the regime who isn’t on the payroll of our biggest rival!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Abolition Man
March 25, 2021 8:11 am

“but you have to wonder if there is anyone in the regime who isn’t on the payroll of our biggest rival!”

Isn’t that the truth. And it includes Republicans, too.

Our “leadership” is making it much to easy for the Chicoms.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Abolition Man
March 25, 2021 9:42 am

“the US government helped fund the gain of function experiments”

What’s that about? Never heard of it.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 25, 2021 12:15 pm

Fauxi was funding them in the US when Obama Admin banned them as too dangerous! He then helped finance them in China through a cutout, Peter Daszak, who was part of the WHO team investigating viral sources in China! Hollywood would never buy the screenplay we are living in right now!
Gain of function (GOF) research is the process of altering pathogens to make them more deadly and infectious. It is used in hopes of developing new vaccines or as part of a bio-weapons program! The Wuhan Institute of Virology is still receiving funds from our government although the leak of the virus appears to have occurred at a lab two miles away.

March 24, 2021 7:55 pm

We have spent trillions globally over decades already. Net Nope…..

Data & Statistics – IEA

March 24, 2021 8:01 pm

“Yes, climate change is a real problem.” Really? From one day to the other the temperature changes by 10 C degrees or more. This is not a worry. The Climate is continually varying, but it does so within limits that are very hard to exceed because of multiple feedbacks built into the World. I can see no difference of any mentionable sort from the weather of seventy years ago here or in a large number of other place around the World. Let’s get a grip and take more water with it.

Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
March 24, 2021 10:02 pm

Especially when we know that any warming is being recorded as a bit warmer at night and the winters not as severely cold as it was 150 years ago. If the average temps of Antarctica warmed up two degrees from an average of -57 to -55, (which they haven’t) that is a whole two degrees of warming, but it is still damn cold. How can some people not understand simple common sense, or care that we are being swindled out of truth?

Izaak Walton
March 24, 2021 8:33 pm

You do seem to selectively quote articles to make a point. It is worth noting that not only was
Dr. Lomborg’s lecture not cancelled but it can be seen at online at:
Furthermore it is immensely amusing reading people complain about being cancelled but somehow find a forum in the op-ed pages of national newspapers in which to do it.

Finally I would suggest you read a decent biography of Galileo rather than a dubious movie. You would find that the story is more complex than your simple presentation above. For instance Jesuits were teaching the Copernican theory at the same time as Galileo was being banned from discussing it.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
March 25, 2021 12:11 am

The point was that there was even an ATTEMPT to cancel his lectures.

FAILED though.. This time, anyway.

More cancellation attempts will follow.

The AGW cult that you are part of, Izzy, ..


or to allow anyone else to hear the truth..

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Izaak Walton
March 25, 2021 12:47 am

The point – as I understand it at least – with Galileo was that he made the mistake of mocking the Pope. The writing style back in this era was to provide concepts by use of a conversation. A typical method would to have a wise character sitting around while lesser student type characters asked him questions.

“But”, said Steve, “How exactly did this system work?”
“That is simple,” replied the wise and clever man who clearly wasn’t a proxy for the author, “You will ask me leading questions and I will answer them so that the entire book feels like a casual after dinner conversation.”
“Oh. Will there be any car chases?”
There as an awkward pause.
“Not sure you grasp the concept, Steve.”

Galileo, in populating one of this books with characters in a book with a ‘fool’ type comic character and made it blatantly clear that this character was modeled on the current Pope.

Pope was no amused. Pope asked Galileo to retract. Galileo failed to do so. Pope flexed his might. Galileo’s followers responded by saying that Pope was anti-science.

Remember the church at the time was completely excited about science. God created everything, so the more you knew about how everything worked, the closer you came to understanding God. Understanding the solar system correctly wasn’t an insight about the universe. It was an insight into the mind of God.

Apparently. 🙂

Reply to  Craig from Oz
March 25, 2021 2:14 pm

If you allow me to add my understanding to yours and your point made, about Galileo.

The principal point in the Galileo case is similar for not saying the same as that of Martin Luther.
Kinda of very same as you put it.

In the proposition of a catholic, regardless of status or nobility,
infringing or clearly contradicting a given public position or the position of the Pope’s word, subjects one to the excommunication
by default.
The only thing standing in the way of application of it, is the Pope’s discretion on that decision.

But in the case that one brought before an Inquisition religious court, one faces the consequence of losing the grace of the Pope’s discretion.

One has no way out of the excommunication in such a case, regardless of found or not guilty in the end, still ends up excommunicated from catholicism, or the body of the catholic church.

One facing charges in an Inquisition court does not get the “luxury”
of the Pope’s discretion in the matter of the excommunication,
in relation to an offense against the Pope… regardless of the outcome of the verdict of that court case.
The Pope himself can not grant anymore his power of discretion there… at such a given circumstance.

Well, just saying.

As far as I know and can tell, both, Galileo and Martin Luther were not found guilty of any charges brought against them in the religious courts, but still excommunicated at the end of the day, by the default position of their respective infringing acts against the known Pope’s word and position.


Last edited 1 year ago by whiten
Reply to  Izaak Walton
March 25, 2021 7:29 am

Oh right, Izod, the cancelling of skeptics has never really happened — it’s all a right-wing conspiracy theory.


Reply to  Izaak Walton
March 27, 2021 5:55 pm

So as long as someone is not made absolutely invisible, unperson, unable to express himself on any mass or small media support, he isn’t being cancelled?

CD in Wisconsin
March 24, 2021 9:04 pm

“..Bjørn Lomborg can trigger screaming climate hysteria, just by offering to talk to people. And he is not even a climate skeptic…”

“… some who write for the UN Climate Panel – publicly asked Duke to cancel my appearance…”


The video below is in German with English subtitles. It is a popular video on Youtube with millions of hits. Hitler’s downfall…


Hitler would not accept that the downfall of Germany in WWII had anything to do with him even though he conducted the war. (I have heard it said that he was sleeping during the Normandy invasion.) His ego-maniacal mindset precluded him from accepting personal responsibility, so he blamed the failure of the war on his generals and the German people.

Perhaps the comparison here is unjustified, but I keep thinking of Hitler in the link above when ever today’s climate alarmists are challenged or when they are attempting to suppress those who dare to question and refute the alarmist narrative. In my mind, their behavior tends to mirrors Hitler’s somewhat in that they cannot or will not accept that anything is wrong with them or the narrative. In both cases, there is an ego at work that is just too massively overinflated.

I probably don’t need to name any specific climate alarmists here….regular WUWT readers know who I am talking about. It is not difficult to confuse arrogance, egotism and hubris for a sense of morality, self-righteousness and infallibility. Those who do that are some of the most dangerous kind of people.

To whatever extent these canceling Duke University professors fit into the picture I am painting here, I do not think I would even bother arguing the climate issue with them. It is a waste of time and effort. It is best to just shake one’s head and walk away.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
March 24, 2021 9:45 pm

In the private sector, it’s actually easy. You just fire them. I’ve had experience with this, and they get time to think it over at home. It can be quite amazing what getting a paycheck versus not getting a paycheck can do to cognitive dissonance.

Reply to  philincalifornia
March 25, 2021 4:00 am

Bingo, but it’s hard to stop paychecks in the public sector. When Obama came to office all of his people took various jobs within government and when he left where did these people go?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Derg
March 25, 2021 8:15 am

I think a lot of them are still there in government undermining the Republic.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
March 25, 2021 5:03 am

Don’t be surprised about the story of Hitler sleeping during Normandy invasion.
That guy had already met
his creator, one to one
in a bunker,
the bunker where almost every one else ended up as charcoal paint,
and Hitler alone walked out
with just some very minor
eardrum tingling.
Amazing. 🙂

Another Scott
March 24, 2021 9:52 pm

Here’s his mistake:
However, it is typically vastly exaggerated, and the resulting alarmism is exploited”
Pull back the curtain at your own risk!

David Tallboys
March 25, 2021 12:17 am

It is really like a religion. Everywhere companies are having to publicly state their belief in the threat from the devil carbon. And they are being urged on by consultants and politicians.

This is a report by Price Waterhouse – the accountants and consultants.- and similar stuff is available from Bain and McKinsey.

“Every sector of the global economy needs to transform and radically decarbonise in just over two business cycles”

March 25, 2021 12:34 am

From the Duke letter:

Duke’s Center for the History of Political Economy is hosting a lecture by Bjørn Lomborg of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, a professional climate denier whose career has been funded by other climate deniers, from Charles Koch to Exxon Mobil

Way to go scientists, play the man not the ball

And this tells you everything you need to know about these “scientists”:

Or, will we stand for scientific integrity, reason, and human rights, and with them, just solutions to address the massive crisis we are facing and build a better world in the process? 

Reply to  Redge
March 25, 2021 5:50 am

” …and build back a better world in the process?”

Hey, waitaminute! Shenanigans! I calls ’em! =)

dodgy geezer
March 25, 2021 1:18 am

Any consideration of Galileo needs to point out that the Pope and Galileo were talking about two different things. Galileo was proposing the ‘new science’, in which observation was key. But the Pope supported the mediaeval religious view, which held that the heavens were holy and unchangeable, and the Devil had power on Earth to deceive your senses. The Pope would have seen no point looking through a strange evil instrument purported to destroy the whole Catholic religion which was almost certainly the Devil’s work…

March 25, 2021 1:31 am

Yes, climate change is a big problem, especially for tax payers and polar bears. The funny part is that neither group knows it.

Be that as it may, to fight climate change, you have to be able to change the weather first, because climate is, after all, defined as the average weather for 30 years.

So, how do people plan to change the weather? Dancing and throwing virgins into volcanoes doesn’t work. Neither does burning witches. I am unaware of any theory that can demonstrate that changing CO2 levels in the atmosphere will change the weather. I seriously doubt throwing money into volcanoes will work either. If throwing money away changed anything, we would have seen the results already.

So there is the task ahead for young people who want to fight climate change. First, you have to be able to change the weather for 30 years. That is the definition. I’ll be long gone before that can happen, so I don’t worry about it too much. But I’d love to hear your ideas.

Reply to  Doonman
March 25, 2021 1:54 am

Speaking of Duke makes me wonder whatever happened to Robert? I quite respected him and miss his comments.

March 25, 2021 1:35 am

Yes, but Galileo was right: Lomborg is church based orthodoxy in this story…

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 3:07 am

And griff is a LYING, evidence-free non-entity. !

And yes griff, Lomborg is CORRECT in the economic aspects of the AGW FARCE.

They spent trillions, to accomplish absolutely NOTHING except to harm western civilisation.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 4:03 am

Why do we need less plant food?

Reply to  Derg
March 25, 2021 10:04 am

Because it warms the atmosphere and because more CO2 does not translate to simply more green stuff

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:16 am

By how much does CO2 warm the atmosphere per ppm level, and how can you explain the fact that the planet has lived through higher temperatures at lower CO2 concentrations

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Lrp
March 25, 2021 12:29 pm

“By how much does CO2 warm the atmosphere per ppm level”

I would like to know the answer to that question myself.

Griff gives the impression that he knows this answer. Do you know this answer, Griff?

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 6:48 pm

According to?

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 2:52 am

Because it warms the atmosphere “


You are Fantasizing in your little brain-washed la-la-land, as usual, griff-fool.

Dave Yaussy
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 6:09 am

Really, Griff? Wouldn’t you have to say that your side is winning the public message battle, and falls more into the realm of the current orthodoxy? To the extent people think about climate change, a majority acknowledge its existence and say something should be done about it. You’ve won on that score for the time being, although it remains to be seen whether you will keep winning when people are aware of what it will cost them to fix the problem you have been telling them about.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dave Yaussy
March 25, 2021 8:21 am

“You’ve won on that score for the time being, although it remains to be seen whether you will keep winning when people are aware of what it will cost them to fix the problem you have been telling them about.”

Yes, I think that’s where the rubber is going to meet the road. People start paying attention when something starts costing them money. It’s all been theoretical up to now, but it will become real soon here in the U.S. if the alarmists have their way.

Tax increases are not popular in the United States. The year 2022 is looming.

Last edited 1 year ago by Tom Abbott
George Daddis
Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 25, 2021 9:03 am

The “canary” currently is gasoline prices. I am surprised I do not hear much reaction so far.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  George Daddis
March 25, 2021 11:53 am

Who would you hear the reaction from? Certainly not the leftist MSM that has been and is supporting the Democrat party.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  George Daddis
March 25, 2021 12:36 pm

Gasoline prices are up around 30 cents per gallon around here.

Remember: For each increase in the price of gasoline of $0.80 per gallon, reduces the GDP of the U.S. by about one percent. That is a huge reduction in economic activity which will lead to unemployment for many.

Each move Biden takes causes more harm to the economy than the last move.

If he was smart, he would have just left Trump’s economy in place and then he could take credit for a booming economy that’s coming, but his every action is cutting into this boom.

If he was smart, he would have left Trump’s immigration policy in place and he wouldn’t have the problems he is having on the southern border.

But Biden isn’t that smart.

Reply to  Dave Yaussy
March 25, 2021 10:06 am

Well yes, we are winning. Hardly any point commenting here – just habit on my part.

But I was trying to describe a monolithic and entrenched opinion which is wrong… what the church thought about Galileo’s observations and what the US right thinks about climate science and increasing and successful renewable energy

Bill Toland
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 10:31 am

Griff, you really do lack any sense of self awareness. If you want to see an example of a monolithic and entrenched opinion which is wrong, just look in the mirror.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:21 am

You sound more like a zealot, all mantras no understanding. The measure of success is meeting the goals, I.e. reducing CO2 emissions, and on that account renewables have failed

Reply to  Lrp
March 26, 2021 2:56 am

The push for renewables in once solid western cultures…

… has actually lead to a MASSIVE INCREASE IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2

Griff is just TOO DUMB to realise it.

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 2:54 am

“But I was trying to describe a monolithic and entrenched opinion which is wrong”

You are, of course, referring to the AGW fantasy

You know there is absolutely no scientific evidence to back that little anti-science scam, don’t you griff-twerp.

Bill Toland
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 7:11 am

Griff, I find it amusing that you are pretending to identify with Galileo. If Galileo was alive today, he would regard you as representing the church.

Reply to  Bill Toland
March 25, 2021 10:07 am

Why? I am for the new paradigm… you are for the old failed ideas.

Bill Toland
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 10:55 am

What old failed ideas, Griff? Unlike you, I believe in science, not fantasy. Or do you think that “truth” matters now, not science or reality?

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 1:32 pm

If you want to see half a century of old failed ideas, you only have to look at the thermageddonists and their predictions of doom.
It’s the CAGW religion that is entrenched and unbending (and repeatedly and hilariously wrong). It amuses me to think that you regard half a century of failure as a “new paradigm”

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 6:52 pm

Since 1988 you guys have been claiming the worst. When are you going to embrace CO2 like the plants do.

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 2:58 am

“you are for the old failed ideas”

You have NO IDEAS that are not COMPLETE FAILURES, griff

You are an EMPTY ABYSS of rational thought and any ideas you have are mindless regurgitated brain-washing.

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 10:28 am

I agree that you’re the new parasite — you do suck.

Last edited 1 year ago by beng135
Matthew Sykes
March 25, 2021 2:12 am

How can he even say climate change is a real problem when all the data shows it to be a big benefit to the planet?

The tropics have the highest biodiversity, the ideal temperature for man is 22 C (Lancet), CO2 is causing huge greening of the planet (NASA LAI) , crop yields globally are at record levels(our world in data), shrinking of deserts due to CO2/increased rainfall.

We should be trying to get CO2 up to 1000 ppm at least.

March 25, 2021 4:40 am

Buy land in Vietnam now. Ironically that’s where many of your offspring will end up. USA/Canada and much of Europe will be too dangerous and expensive (energy & taxes).

Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 25, 2021 10:03 am

And massive uptake of solar power. 39% of Queensland homes have solar power…

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:59 am

Not much of it at night.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 1:34 pm

And fossil fuelled back up for when the sun refuses to shine (such as night time)

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 2:58 am

Saving the COAL for future generations…

… once this idiotic anti-CO2, anti-science, anti-LIFE nonsense comes to an inevitable end.

Last edited 1 year ago by fred250
March 25, 2021 6:59 am

Did anyone question the Crusades? anyone?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
March 25, 2021 10:02 am

Not on the Crusader side, afaik.

They just kept on doing the same stupid thing – if you read a history of the (real) Knights Templar their grand master charged a vastly numerical Muslim force on no less than 3 occasions: every time all his knights were killed and he was imprisoned. Very depressing.

Reminds me of people here banging on about baseload, how nuclear power is the answer and how DDT, ozone, PM2.5 etc weren’t/aren’t a problem.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 1:36 pm

Watching unreilables repeatedly fail to provide 24/7 power rather reminds me of stupid failure.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 6:11 pm

DDT was the only thing available that kept billions of people from getting malaria. Since DDT was banned, the malaria rate in some African countries is over 100%. That’s because even with anti-malarial drugs, people contract it more than once.

Its obvious that Griff cares nothing about billions of people who are powerless to control their own destiny. He is an elitist who believes in elitism for the sake of “Saving the Planet” without regard to billions of inhabitants who have neither the power or medical intervention to improve their lives.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 6:48 pm

I’ll just leave this here

“We must take a position based on the science and the data,” said Dr Arata Kochi, Director of WHO’s Global Malaria Programme. “One of the best tools we have against malaria is indoor residual house spraying. Of the dozen insecticides WHO has approved as safe for house spraying, the most effective is DDT.”

Abolition Man
March 25, 2021 7:00 am

We should celebrate that Bjorn has realized that CAGW is a financial scam beyond belief; just as we should be glad that Michael Schellenberger and even Marxist Michael Moore are waking up to the unreliable energy swindle and calling for more nuclear power!
That doesn’t change the situation greatly, but every additional shoulder helps lighten the load for Climate Realists and gives us more strength to push back against the REAL deniers; the useful idiots that ignore the science and claim that the climate now is somehow different and more catastrophic then ever before; a total lie! Only an idiot or an ignoramus would keep on spouting the GangGreen mantra as it veers further and further from reality; right griffter?

Reply to  Abolition Man
March 25, 2021 9:58 am

The science says its warming and that the climate is changing in a number of ways as a result.

In which case, spending to slow the change is entirely justified.

If you want to criticise the spending which is on account of the proven warming, you first have to disprove the warming, using only science (not wild assertions about communists etc)

Janice Moore
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 10:43 am


“The science” has never demonstrated causation between human CO2 emissions and any significant climate effect.


The burden of proof is on you.

We are still waiting for you. Still waiting, after all these years, for you to cite even one observation, one piece of data, proving AGW.

Abolition Man
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:38 am

The adjusted data and the models say it is warming; the mindless cult members echo their claims! You sound more and more like a broken record, griffter; just as enjoyable and informative!

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:57 am

But you are a marxist

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 11:57 am

The science says its [sic] warming …

The issue is whether humans are making a significant contribution to the warming, or if it is just a continuation of the warming that started at the end of the Little Ice Age.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 1:45 pm

Has it warmed? Most definitely, since the turn of the 20th Century. Is there any proof that warming is not natural? No, none. Should we be throwing money down the drain to try and solve a non-problem? No.
As for communists, the Chinese are laughing at you. They’re building coal-fired power and watching their economy grow, whilst the hair-shirted Westerners such as yourself cheer on the green zealotry that is shafting Western economies with windmills and sun catchers.

Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 3:41 pm

Not justified, only declared, as usual in church

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Abolition Man
Reply to  griff
March 25, 2021 3:47 pm

…wild assertions about Communists, etc.
I believe I have asked you before, griffter; which policy of Communists do you find most to your liking? The slave labor camps and organ harvesting of the ChiComs, or the new support for human sex and drug trafficking at the US southern border from the Biden regime!
Showing support for Marxist/Leninist/Maoist philosophy merely shows incredible stupidity or ignorance of the history of the 20th Century! The only other option is insanity; but you seem rational and very “useful” per Lenin!
I would contend that the Progressive/Communist movement is a de facto religion, and in saner times would be called slave statehood, or something to that effect! Try reading some Solzhenitsyn or Hayek’s “Road To Serfdom.” I know it’s difficult for you to understand; but if you start with a reversal of your rectal/cranial inversion you might find that many things become easier to comprehend!

Reply to  griff
March 26, 2021 3:02 am

You are LYING AGAIN, griff.

Making blind anti-science regurgitated spew comments with absolutely ZERO-EVIDENCE.

You have proven that you are TOTALLY CLUELESS about anything to do with actual science.

Tom Abbott
March 25, 2021 7:44 am

From the article: “Yes, climate change is a real problem.”

Bjorn Lomborg should stop saying this. He has no definitive evidence that would allow him to say this. He is just repeating the alarmist’s narrative without any evidence to back up his statement.

Bjorn, stop saying something exists when you can’t prove it exists. You are spreading misinformation.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 25, 2021 10:12 am

Yes, he should stop at “Yes, climate change is real”, and if he’s really courageous, he can add “and net beneficial to mankind and the rest of the planet, as far as I can tell.”

Michael in Dublin
March 25, 2021 7:46 am

Yes, climate change is a real problem.

I am not a scientist or engineer or mathematician or statistician. However, as one who has specialized in languages, I understand the importance of logic and how we reason. This is why I have found “How to Solve It” (1945), by the Mathematician, George Polya, a delightful book with wise guidance.

What Polya writes applies far more widely than Mathematics. It can benefit both a language teacher and engineer, a meteorologist and economist, an agronomist and manufacturer. Polya, was a sharp observer and able to use these for practical purposes. I think he would have laughed at the folly of trying to engineer the climate and at attempts of climate alarmists to scare people. Consider two extracts from his book:

“Solving problems is a fundamental human activity. In fact, the greater part of our conscious thinking is concerned with problems. When we do not indulge in mere musing or daydreaming, our thoughts are directed towards some end; we seek means, we seek to solve a problem.” (2004 ed. pp. 221-2)

On the twofold task of a teacher: “First, to help the student to solve the problem at hand. Second, to develop the student’s ability so that he may solve future problems by himself.” (2004 ed. pp. 3-4)

Polya would have rejected the reduction of CO2 as the one and only solution to climate change. He was familiar with the proverb of the ant gathering food at harvest when it was available and storing it for the winter. He would have know the ancient Jewish story of Joseph advising the Pharaoh to store surplus grain during the good years for the years of drought. He recognized how often people have successfully adapted through human ingenuity to external circumstances.

Is Bjørn Lomborg correct in seeing climate change as a real though exaggerated problem? Responsible people want to live in a clean environment – which many environments are not. Is the problem CO2 and climate change or the politicization of science and education and every activity that would lessen the power of governments? Polya encouraged sound logic, careful reasoning and hard questions. This cannot be allowed because they are real threats to both our modern authoritarian governments and mega companies that are exploiting the climate scare. They want to milk the climate alarmism for as long as they can and for all it is worth. Bjorn has helped expose this.

Bruce Cobb
March 25, 2021 8:15 am

One would think that after all these years, Mr. Lomborg would stop being content with being only half-right.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 26, 2021 10:33 am

I’d agree, but his foundation-from-birth is leftist — almost impossible to crack that other than a near-death experience or emergency deprogramming.

Last edited 1 year ago by beng135
willem post
March 25, 2021 11:24 am

Here is a CAPEX estimate of implementing 50% RE and 100% RE.


World energy consumption is projected to increase to 736 quads in 2040 from 575 quads in 2015, an increase of 28%, according to the latest from the US Energy Information Administration, EIA. 
See URL and click on PPT to access data, click on to page 4 of PowerPoint

Most of this growth is expected to come from countries that are not in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, and especially from countries where demand is driven by strong economic growth, particularly in Asia.
Non-OECD Asia, which includes China and India, accounted for more than 60% of the world’s total increase in energy consumption from 2015 through 2040.
China, India, and other developing Asian countries, and Africa, and Middle and South America need to use low-cost energy, such as coal, to be competitive.
They would not have signed up for “Paris”, if they had not been allowed to be more or less exempt from the Paris agreements

Obama agreed to commit the US to the Paris agreements, i.e., be subject to its financial and other obligations for decades. 
However, he never submitted the commitment to the US Senate for ratification, as required by the US Constitution. 
Trump rescinded the commitment. It became effective 3 years later, one day after the US presidential elections on November 3, 2020.

If the US had not left “Paris”, a UN Council likely would have determined a level of renewable energy, RE, spending, say $500 billion/y, for distributing to various poorer countries by UN bureaucrats. 
The Council would have assessed OECD members, likely in proportion to their GDPs. 
The US and Europe would have been assessed at 100 to 150 billion dollars/y each.
The non-OECD countries likely would continue to be more or less exempt from paying for the Paris agreements.


The analysis includes two scenarios: 1) 50% RE by 2050, and 2) 100% RE by 2050.
The CAPEX values exclude a great many items related to transforming the world economy to a low-carbon mode. See next section.

50% RE by 2050

World CAPEX for RE were $2,652.2 billion for 2010-2019, 10 years
World CAPEX for RE were $282.2 billion in 2019.
World CAPEX for RE would be $24,781 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 5.76%/y
US CAPEX for RE were $494.5 billion for 2010 – 2019, 10 years.
US CAPEX for RE were $59 billion in 2019.
US CAPEX for RE would be $7,233 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 8.81%/y

100% RE by 2050

World CAPEX for RE were $2,652.2 billion for 2010-2019, 10 years
World CAPEX for RE were $282.2 billion in 2019.
World CAPEX for RE would be $60,987 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 10.08%/y
US CAPEX for RE were $494.5 billion for 2010 – 2019, 10 years.
US CAPEX for RE were $59 billion in 2019.
US CAPEX for RE would be $16,988 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 13.42%/y

willem post
Reply to  willem post
March 25, 2021 11:25 am

Addition to above comment


World More-Inclusive CAPEX

The above CAPEX numbers relate to having 50% RE, or 100% RE, in the primary energy mix by 2050, which represents a very narrow area of “fighting climate change”. See Appendix for definitions of source, primary and upstream energy.
This report, prepared by two financial services organizations, estimates the world more-inclusive CAPEX at $100 trillion to $150 trillion, over the next 30 years, about $3 trillion to $5 trillion per year
US More-Inclusive CAPEX
The ratio of World CAPEX for RE / US CAPEX for RE = 16,988/60,987 = 0.279
A more-inclusive US CAPEX could be $27.9 trillion to $41.8 trillion
The US CAPEX could be less, because, at present, the world is adding a quad of RE at about $58.95 billion, compare to the US at about $102.78 billion.
It is unclear what accounts for the large difference. 
Part of it may be due to differences of accounting methods among countries. 

NOTE: The CAPEX numbers exclude costs for replacements of shorter-life systems, such as EVs, heat-pumps, batteries, wind-turbines, etc., during these 30 years. For comparison:
Hydro plants have long lives, about 100 years.
Nuclear plants about 60 years
Coal and gas-turbine plants about 40 years
Wind turbine systems about 20 years
Solar systems about 25 years

Reply to  willem post
March 26, 2021 10:38 am

One of the coal-units were I worked was built in 1944 and lasted to 2016 & only forced out-of-service from EPA regs. There was another, even older operating coal-unit in Ohio that was also forced-out on the utility.

Last edited 1 year ago by beng135
March 25, 2021 12:26 pm

After the Mt Pinatubo cooling there was the massive spike of warming which was basis of the scare about exponential run away warming which they started promoting with Jones’ fraudulent WMO2000 graphic.

After both El Chicon and Mt P, there was about 18 mo of warming in the stratosphere followed by a persistent cooling. That cooling means more solar energy was making it into the lower climate system.

There is a good case that those two stratospheric erruptions were the CAUSE of the late 20th c. warming we are all supposed to be crapping ourselves over.

March 25, 2021 12:53 pm

Here comes the next DOE waste, fraud, and abuse with concentrating solar….

U.S. pledges to slash solar energy costs by 60% in a decade (

Reply to  ResourceGuy
March 25, 2021 6:50 pm

The Democrat Party still has plenty of corrupt minions who didn’t get in on the massive defrauding of the public in the Obama administration, after all.

March 25, 2021 5:04 pm

Oh, he’s getting feeling in his bone alright. He’s doing it to the American people and doing IT hard!

He also has a very experienced at that sort thing, coach, standing behind him helping him.

March 26, 2021 1:06 am

“Across the world, politicians are now promising climate policies costing tens of trillions of dollars – money we don’t have and resources that are desperately needed elsewhere.”

Well,if spending trillions on climate crap will save just one polar bear, it will be worth it!

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights