The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change
Lomborg implies that sea level is caused by increased CO2. What utter rot! Well OK, I’m glad he steps up to the plate to say global warming is not a problem, not by a wide shot.
So far after 40 years of the left screaming about this, exactly what has happened, besides not too much. Sea level seems to be increasing about the same as it did two centuries ago when tide gauges first began to keep records, the polar bears are thriving, extreme weather, has not increased. We see more tornadoes only because there are more people and ways to see them, hurricanes haven’t changed much if at all, droughts seem to be less frequent.
Well anyway, the so-called mainstream media isn’t going to cover what Lomborg has to say except to “fact check” it as bunk and call him a denier.
Lomborgs book “false Alarm’ is worth reading. Whilst not coming from the same place as most on this board, he comes up with lots of facts and figures to demonstrate that we are not in an emergency and suggests in a pragmatic manner what needs to be done.
We may disagree with him about the basic problems that he sees, but bearing in mind the elite want to do something far more drastic than lomborg and hold the reins of power, then lomborgs solutions and analysis are better than the hysterical alternatives
Are you saying then that the walls of their Fortress of Something-something are crumbling? If they are starting to lose their grip on this thing they created out of whole cloth, it’s fine by me. It will take a long time to dissolve, but it’s worth the wait to wait that slowly disintegrate, isn’t it?
The Climate Crusaders should have been “Run out of town on a rail” after all those emails were dumped November 2009.
Yes, but they doubled down and the EMPLOYERS of the execrable participants said their employees were “just doing science,” so no harm, no foul, carry on, nothing to see here… Caught red-handed with a smoking gun of foul spin and fouler behavior and… Crickets… Meanwhile, the oceans rise at rates quite similar to the past 150 years, glaciers continue to melt SLOWER than the late 1800s to the 1930s, floods are NOT increasing, storms are NOT worse, yet people’s fear of normal climate and weather remains like an immoveable object, scared of their own shadow but confident in the ability of their government to tax away the climate boogeyman…
At first, I took Lomborg the same way as Steve Case, but if you listen to his talk, he was a year ago, at least initially, trying to get his message across without getting cancelled. The point was that even if sea levels were rising due to climate change, even ancient peoples were skilled and smart enough to at least move, if not engineer to counteract the tiny amount of sea level rise that was reported as the worst case measurement.
The ridiculous predictions of meters of sea level rise (implied multiple times even this last week by glaciologists apparently ignorant of water displacement physics), “Waterworld,” and the sunken Manhattan that have featured in so much film fiction weren’t even on the table. It isn’t even worth wasting time debating.
I don’t think it worked for Lomborg; despite soft pedaling the climate narrative he still got the denier label slapped on before he even got started.
Interview with Lomborg at Hoover Inst. +/- a year ago: https://youtu.be/VxWYglbtqnQ
Read about how they raised the height of many buildings in downtown Chicago back in the 1850s With Jack-Screws! !
Earth is now trapping an ‘unprecedented’ amount of heat, NASA saysNew research shows that the amount of heat the planet traps has roughly doubled since 2005, contributing to more rapidly warming oceans, air and land
Then why is it 50F at night where I live? Heated air rises upward, y’know. It seems that those know-it-alls have forgotten that simple factoid.
The enemy of your enemy is your friend.
I wonder if the Dems give a hoot about what the public thinks… If necessary, the voting machines are there to solve that problem…
Democrats know the public will think what they are told to think.
The money quote. And it gets worse every year.
NCSWIC. Now comes the pain. Attend to Q
“I wonder if the Dems give a hoot about what the public thinks”
The Democrats think everyone thinks the way they do, except for a few rightwing oddballs. Their arrogance blinds them to reality.
Lomberg is a realist, why does he keep saying GW is a problem we need to fix? It clearly isnt, it is not a problem and it is beneficial to the planet. Mild warming, big increase in plant growth, less deserts, more drought resistant plants, more food for all of us, less starvation, less hunger.
Where is the downside?
OK, some country might get a bit more rain than they need, big deal! Look at Britain, we get thousands of times more rain than we need. OK, it made us leave our island and colonise the world, probably in the search for better weather, but thats not such a bad thing is it? 🙂
He had to ‘convert’ in order to retain his tenure.
I think he’s playing the long-game: ‘denier’>convert>lukewarmer>get real, guys.
I think it is more simple than that. It’s a rhetorical way of bypassing a huge mass of argument. It’s gets to the point by saying, ok you’re right. Now what are we going to do about it.
That’s probably a good strategy.
I have written Bjorn Lomborg on a few occasions.
Lomborg is an economist. I think he is not comfortable with the science and probably has no confidence in opining on it. So he takes the easy route – he goes along with the warmist BS, and then points out that even IF they are technically correct (and they are NOT), their solutions are grossly uneconomic. Slam dunk!
The fact that they slander him as a denier etc just shows how corrupt the radical greens are – for them, it was never really about the climate.
WHAT THE GREEN NEW DEAL IS REALLY ABOUT — AND IT’S NOT THE CLIMATE
By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., July 19, 2019
THE COST TO SOCIETY OF RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM
By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., July 4, 2019
CO2, GLOBAL WARMING, CLIMATE AND ENERGY
by Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., June 15, 2019
SCIENCE’S UNTOLD SCANDAL: THE LOCKSTEP MARCH OF PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES TO PROMOTE CLIMATE CHANGE
By Tom Harris and Dr. Jay Lehr, May 24, 2019
HYPOTHESIS: RADICAL GREENS ARE THE GREAT KILLERS OF OUR AGE
By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., April 14, 2019
Lomberg is far too alarmist for my tastes. The cold deaths reducing as heat deaths rise is a net WIN. CO2 fertilizing crops and forests is a huge WIN. A little longer growing season in the Northern Hemisphere would be absolutely terrific, if it were true, which it is NOT, because CO2 cannot warm the Earth enough to guarantee a longer growing season. But IF IT COULD, that would be fantastic. Lower heating costs in NH homes is a huge WIN, but again, CO2 cannot guarantee warmer winters.
The Panic over CAGW is a net failure, and net wrong, a net unnecessary evil thing. Lomberg should say as much.
I agree. They’ve had 30 years to show their models work. They don’t, nothing bad has happened, now they derserve only ridicule.
“Global Warming” will have at least its 40th birthday this year:
Warming Warning Thames TV You Tube
Have any models EVER worked in a system that is built on chaos?
Thank you, Gary Pearse.
Bjorn Lomborg’s comments are at least rational, up to a point.
However as all GW/CC™ prognostications are (tautology alert) about the future — as Niels Bohr famously said: ‘prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future’ — it would make more sense for him to prefix such comments with: ‘even if’ such-and-such were to happen etc.
That was Yogi Berra who said that. Niels Bohr said, the future’s so bright, I gotta wear shades.
“83% of all internet quotes are false.”
— Abraham Lincoln
The etymology of a word does not give us the meaning but the way it is used in a context does.
However, here is a fun derivation that “proves” that much of climate change “research” is simply people running around in circles like a dog chasing its tail.
research comes from the Old French word recercher
this comes from the Late Latin word circare (go about, wander, traverse) plus prefix re (again)
which comes from the word circus (circle)
QED much (most?) of climate change research today is truly a circus with the animals going around and around. 🙂
According to my French dictionary, one definition among others perhaps more commonly used, recherché– far-fetched, as in Expression recherchée.
Sadly, it is not just climate panic that causes distrust and bad decisions.
In the hills around Melbourne a week ago, strong winds blew down many big trees that had not been blown down before. There were broken houses, crushed cars and blocked roads. Water purification systems were disabled, unsafe to drink the water. Electricity supplies were forecast as I write one week in, to be out of action for several weeks to go. Clearing the trees from the roads is a high priority remedy.
Here is where high priority meets the rubber on the road of the bureaucracy.
The roadway between the white lines down the edges of the bitumen is the responsibility of the authority VicRoads, that collects and applies motor vehicle registration funds. The wider roadway between the white lines and the property fences belongs to the local councils, the third tier of government that collects and applies property owners’ rates. Over the fence (if you are in a forested area) the property is with either Parks and Wildlife or maybe Forests Commission Victoria or the Forest Conservation Regulator.
The trick is, as widely discussed on talkback radio, the trees are being cut up and pieces taken away along these dividing lines. It cannot be assumed that a single work group will attack a whole tree and remove all parts out of harm and for further treatment. Radio reports that there is a lot of work to be done, that the Federal Military should be called in.
Under Australia’s Constitution, calling in the Army like this requires prior discussion and agreement between the Feds and Victoria.
The Committee that signs this is reported to meet but weekly.
yeah usual Vic ballsup see we are now the state everyones leaving?
gee wonder why? not!
add to the issues is them decomissioning the powerplant last yr
now yallourns mines got cracks due to flooding and if they do have to reduce load(already have) further
then dan the mans dud solar n wind are NOT going to help
how many turbines n solar setups are now trashed????
ps west vis needs rain but last yrs or more we get sth dry winds pushing rain east or nth
east coast is due for another heavy rain cold event next few days
more trees will fall as grounds so soft they cant get a grip
Hard to fathom all this bureaucracy in organizing clean-up responses.
During the 60s conscription era, soldiers were routinely deployed to deal with the aftermath of storms etc.
Field engineer corps backed by grunts, signals & transport usually.
Lomborg does not believe the planet is overrun by unicorns threatening to create havoc in the future. He believes the number of unicorns on the planet is vastly exaggerated and that controlling them will be well within our capabilities.
The fact that he believes in unicorns is the problem.
His credentials prevent him from having an opinion on the science, so he takes the scientists at their word, but points out that ALL of the rest – the politics and economics and development and agricultural estimations – all those mathematical prognostications and calculations – are wildly incorrect and he proves that incorrectness which his credentials allow him to do…
If his credentials allow him to show that the “mathematical prognostications and calculations” are incorrect he is credentialed enough to conclude that the underlying thinking that led to the math and calculations are wrong.
By the by anyone is allowed to have an opinion on the science.
Yes….. The touble and crisis will estrange us and mislead us to make some inproper decisions. Always think about it twice. So I repress my eager to buy volvo v60. What I have is already enough for me….
Biden was at Mildenhall..
Explains why you couldn’t hear yourself think, in all of East Anglia these last few days, by legions of haha Magnificent Men magnificently self-pleasuring themselves in flocks of Tomcats, F111s and what other kerosene konsuming krates they could get off the ground.
Grow Up People. What is it all about? Why do you need that?
Are you really so lacking in self-confidence?
Yes you are and Lomborg, in a truly back-asswards way, perfectly nails it.
He mentions ‘panic’
And panic comes from where if not Paranoia.
And Paranoia comes from Chronic (chemically induced) depression
Lomborg raves about Obesity and Dementia, exactly as I do endlessly
Absolutely Spot On
And those things have One Root Cause
A diet revolving around cooked starch. Read= sugar
Even before it is washed down with ‘recommended limits’ of alcohol and now helped on its way by Cannabis
Depression, paranoia and panic made even worse by that diet lacking in ‘most all the things human brains, nerves and immune systems need to function properly, if at all.
Wake up Bjorn, you’re sooooo close.
You got all the pieces to the jigsaw – now just put it together properly
All those thunderous jet planes in the East Anglian skies all this week were in fact:
A Cry for Help
“Flocks of Tomcats” over East Anglia is something to be concerned about. I think Iran is the only country with them in active service.
Inflammatory rhetoric about global warming by Biden and other leaders like the Pope can incite “bad decisions” like they did in the past, when they turned to witch-hunts to stop climate change associated with the Little Ice Age … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff0z4kvJ9wk&t
Here’s the easiest and most accurate way to understand the HUMAN march to HEALTH and WEALTH over the last 200 years.
This BBC data video from Dr Rosling provides you with data from 1810 to 2010. AND THINGS HAVE ALSO IMPROVED SINCE 2010. Check it out.
That the USA military or the Biden donkey or the clueless DEMS etc can’t understand any of this is beyond belief.
And it takes just 5 minutes of your time. GEEEEZZZZ give me strength.
Yes, it is called impeachment. Impeachment is much more than a political process, it is an euphemism for prejudice. I am prejudiced against public hyperbolic statements, that I tolerate from a barstool.
In passing, I heard something on the radio about Fridays for Future cancelling themselves because of their “whiteness.” I didn’t find out any details via a quick search, but it seems that prejudice is a tool that the left uses indiscriminately.
Where are all the black climate scientists, BTW?
Climate change is racist. Why not, everything else is.
You may have something there. If someone were to tweet (I don’t tweet) that climate change is just a scare tactic foisted by white supremacists to maintain power and distract from racial equity, we might get the whole thing ‘cancelled’!
Lomborg’s contribution is extremely valuable. By starting from acceptance of the nonsense predictions of the alarmists, he shows that their solutions don’t help and adaption would cost less and be more effective.
They are more worried by him that by total sceptics because he shows up the fact that they are not really trying to solve the problem and have another agenda.
isn’t the point of scaring people to make them make the bad decisions that you want them to make? decisions that they wouldn’t make without your scares?
speaking of bad decisions, there is no way that we can replace our energy sources with co2 free energy sources, and there is no way that our economy won’t shrink with significant reductions in energy. indeed, part of that predicted growth as usual, will require massive growth in energy usage.
Nuclear is CO2 free.
and they don’t want us making that good decision either. and they sure have made it prohibitively expensive.
but even with unnecessary costs removed and a full on effort to implement safe weapons free nuclear power, we aren’t going to end co2 energy.
This entire report is nothing but a psyop. Paraphrasing but hear me out. Biden says the guys in the tank say GW is the biggest threat to the nation.
Then Lomgorg says no it is not. Then sites a couple of real threats like Russia and China. At this point in the video, who is his targeted listener?
Then in the same breath Lomborg says GW is a problem, just not the biggest problem we face. At this point in the video, who is his targeted listener?
So in just a few short moments Lomborg attempts to appease both deniers and alarmist by de-emphasizing the threat of GW while affirming it exists. And the path forward should be less lies and spend a little less money.
The alarmists will now say see, see GW is real. And unfortunately some deniers will say see, see, even your guy says GW is not the biggest threat to the nation.
And nothing changes. We continue to following the same road map on the same road but at 55mph instead of at 75mph.
I did not fall for it, Did you?
Lomborg gives credibility to alarmists they don’t deserve. He’s a unicorn minimalist.
So you aren’t interested in solving the problem. You just want everyone to agree that you are the only one who is right.
What problem, my little stalker? The only problem I see here is lukewarmers and Willis groupies and cheerleaders like you. Maybe if I had a B.A degree in Psychology like Willis I would understand.
What is it you said? I’ll need to paraphrase. “The GHE is real because CO2 is a greenhouse gas.”
There is no truth to the idea that CO2 controls to climate. The problem is people trying to solve a non problem by harmful policies. In that regard yes I want people to agree with me and stop harming people with bad policies.
MarkW believes back radiation from ghgs in the atmosphere controls the climate.
Of course, he doesn’t have a shred of evidence to support his belief.
But with climate science that doesn’t seem to matter.
lomberg started out that way. he started with the premise that everything they said was true, then came up with a list of things to spend the money on that would give much more bang for the buck in lives saved. still very progressive point of view, that good can derive from government spending. still saying it would be good for governments to spend so much additional money. just taking those additional monies from alarmists and giving them to others.
lomberg was immediately treated as a denier. castigated and ostracized.
their treating someone so badly, despite his giving them credibility they don’t deserve, just shows that they are total frauds.
Lomborg is the lukewarmer version of Nicholas Stern. You don’t crush a lie by pandering to it.
Bjorn To Be Mild.
He wants to keep his job in the midst of religious enforcement and threats.
He still does not connect the dots. It is managed chaos that benefits the Party in its selection and targeting of bad decisions that in fact benefits Party leaders and the management of their armies of special interest groups. In other words, this is not the random process he supposes.
As far as I can tell no negative observable changes have been measured from rising CO2. None. But we do have increased greening, increased crop yields using less land, increased total arable land and then all of the economic and social advantages of having ample reliable and inexpensive energy. So when exactly does this gentle warming and rising CO2 turn into a negative???? And don’t answer that using unproven computer models. I wont’t accept crystal ball gazing as science.
Earth is now trapping an ‘unprecedented’ amount of heat, NASA says
New research shows that the amount of heat the planet traps has roughly doubled since 2005, contributing to more rapidly warming oceans, air and land
Why are you reading the Washington Compost and believing it?
“Earth is now trapping an ‘unprecedented’ amount of heat, NASA says
New research shows that the amount of heat the planet traps has roughly doubled since 2005″
It should have been obvious to you that this was an entirely unscientific statement. The fact it has NASA attached to it means little since that refers to an organization that liberally and frequently adjusts observational data to suit their propaganda wishes. What exactly is “heat the planet traps” and how does it trap it.
Anyone who understands a bit about climate and radiation physics would know the planet doesn’t trap heat but rather the surface absorbs radiant energy and then re-radiates it to space in a different form. It is the dynamics of energy flow, the natural cycles of atmosphere and ocean circulation and a host of other natural phenomena that largely determine the atmosphere and surface temperatures.
And how exactly could it be unprecedented if climate on earth has been much warmer in the distant past and CO2 levels as much as 17 times the current level.
Did it not cross your mind that “trapping” twice as much heat since 16 years ago would have been noticeable? Certainly the IPCC hasn’t found any evidence of it.
And since when is the Washington Post a science publication?
I want to debate the science here. Any takers?
As the First Affirmative Speaker, the floor is yours.
Then don’t refer us to Tik Root at the Washington Post.
In what regard?
While warmist skeptics are usually, but not always loathe to admit that CO2 increases cause global warming, even just a little (a reasonable person has to admit that CO2 increases might contribute to warming), the fact of the matter is that virtually 100% of climate change skeptics agree to the following:
Warming is happening anyway, regardless OF and to what degree (pardon the pun!) CO2 contributes to that warming … and BESIDES – WARMING IS GREAT. IT BEATS THE HELLOUTA GLOBAL COOLING.
What is worse? Living with a 2 km thick icesheet stationed over my current abode? Or spending a few more bucks each month on air conditioning instead of heating, and drinking pina coladas and ice cold beer instead of hot toddies.
So really there is no reason whatsoever to take issue with Bjorn Lomborg, likely the world’s foremost “lukewarmist”. Because that is essentially the same thing that he says:
WARMING? SO WHAT?
Lomborg is definitely not anti science. If you can show him data that contradicts his viewpoint he will change it. The people on the far left are the most anti science people I know. Instead of looking for evidence that disproves their hypothesis they say the science is settled. If the actual data showed the warming had a enormous positive feedback and a non intermittent solution like nuclear was being advocated for I would change my viewpoint. But instead the warming is not overwhelming to the point that natural changes often overwhelm the slight warming from co2. And even if CO2 is a problem the proposed intermittent solution will not work and is a total waste of money.