Essay by Eric Worrall
According to Curtin University academic Dr Diana Bogueva, “it is not too late for Gen Z to make a difference fighting for a sustainable future.” – but they mostly aren’t engaging.
Gen Z’s climate anxiety is real and needs action — for everyone’s wellbeing
05 MAR 2024 | Samuel Jeremic
…
Published in Sustainable Earth Reviews, the study surveyed Australian university students belonging to Generation Z (people born between 1995 and 2010) and found climate change was their number one environmental concern.
More than 80 per cent reported being ‘concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ about climate change, with many revealing they felt anxious over the issue.
…
Dr Bogueva stressed it wasn’t solely Gen Z’s responsibility to solve climate change — a problem they didn’t create — but taking meaningful action can help alleviate an individual’s feelings of anxiety and powerlessness.
“This can include finding out how they can be part of the solution in their personal lives, whether it’s choosing a career which has an impact or adjusting the products or food they consume,” she said.
“While the challenges of climate change can be scary it is not too late for Gen Z to make a difference fighting for a sustainable future.”
‘Australia’s university Generation Z and its concerns about climate change’ was published in Sustainable Earth Reviews.
Read more: https://www.curtin.edu.au/news/media-release/gen-zs-climate-anxiety-is-real-and-needs-action-for-everyones-wellbeing/
The abstract of the survey;
Australia’s university Generation Z and its concerns about climate change
Rodrigo Bardales Salguero, Diana Bogueva & Dora Marinova
Sustainable Earth Reviews volume 7, Article number: 8 (2024) Cite this article
Abstract
Despite scientific evidence about the imminent threat of climate change, people and governments around the world are slow in taking sufficient action. Against these bleak outlooks, Generation Z (Gen Z) born 1995–2010 will inherit the consequences of prolonged inaction. This research delves into the climate change concerns of Australia’s university Gen Z. A representative survey of 446 Australian university students conducted between September 2021 and April 2022 revealed that climate change is the top environmental concern for Gen Z with 81% of these young people being significantly concerned and many experiencing serious climate anxiety. Despite this pervasive concern, 65% of Australia’s university Gen Z is not engaged in traditional climate activism; however, these young people are using technology to voice their concerns. As the future decision-makers of the world, it is crucial for Gen Z to accelerate climate action in all of its forms, including engaging with scientific knowledge and other generations to shape policies and safeguard a liveable planet for all.
Read more: https://sustainableearthreviews.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42055-024-00075-w
The survey authors explain respondents are self selecting, and may not be a representative sample.
Even so, my first impression was that “climate indoctrination has clearly malfunctioned”.
For decades far too many schools have pumped kids full of climate propaganda and end of world messages, only to see their army of climate activists melt away like ice cubes in a glass of Tequila on a hot summer day.
The study authors seem concerned about the lack of engagement, though their focus appears to be the mental health of the climate worriers – “… Moreover, there is a pressing need to develop effective strategies aimed at assisting individuals, especially the youth, in channelling their climate-related fears in a positive direction, including through their employment and career choices. …”
Are GenZ climate worriers just expressing climate concern to fit in, but don’t actually care? Has despair overwhelmed their will to act?
Does sharing tweets or snap chatting their climate concern, and “lifestyle changes” like using the recycling bin count as climate action in their minds?
Are all but the most committed GenZ climate worriers just lazy?
Future generations will wonder at the failure of education which led to this mass hysteria, yet rendered hysterics mostly unable or unwilling to actually do anything to address their fear.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Despite scientific evidence about the imminent threat of climate change.” Where do these people get the idea that there’s “scientific evidence” of AGW? The newspaper or TV probably and they take the claims as true. That’s how propaganda works. Keep telling the lie long enough and people will believe it (Goebbels et al).
I flagged that phrase. When an author starts with a false assumption one can be sure the rest of the article is bullderdash.
So the cure for this fear is exposure to truth not some kind of ineffectual “action” to combat a fairy tale dragon.
“Safe and effective, squawk.”
Tyndall and Arrhenius established the properties of greenhouse gases like CO2, esteemed physicists like Prof Happer and Prof Lindzen have taken pains to explain the fundamentals to the public.
There is no doubt that anthropogenic CO2 enrichment of the atmosphere has a warming effect, the only question is the net sum of that effect and that certainly doesn’t appear to be catastrophic.
Actually there is no doubt there is a forcing but whether that has a warming effect is a different question and it looks like it has not had any effect.
Anthropogenic CO2 enrichment of the atmosphere has a theoretic warming effect all else being equal, it is impossible to quantify any net effect or AGW signal over the past century or so.
I would agree with that.
At present, there is no discernable effect from increased levels of CO2 on the Earth’s temperatures, weather or climate.
The climate over the past century with CO2 enrichment of the atmosphere is different to what it would have been without that enrichment.
That is a totally unscientific and unprovable nonsense statement…
… worthy of someone like Mickey Mann.
Are you getting a job with the climate attribution mob ??
You contradict yourself. You said it is impossible to “quantify any net effect of AGW signal over the past century or so” and then the “climate over the past century with CO2 enrichment of the atmosphere is different”.
Which is your position?
The statement is specifically included because the author knows it’s a lie. If it were true, it wouldn’t be necessary.
Yet another, “We’ve got to do something different
because “they” aren’t getting the message.”
No, I’ve gotten the message, and it’s mostly not true.
I expect that I am not alone in that opinion.
I got the message. That why I think that the message is made of male bovine excrement.
When I see John Kerry, AlGore and those others who fly to Davos or the various COPS in order to tell me that I can’t fly to those gatherings without destroying the Earth, the message is “don’t believe what I do, believe what I damn well tell you to believe.” I tend to not do that
When I see the President flying on AF1 the 200 miles to Delaware each weekend, I tend to not accept that he believes in AGW.
When millionaires and billionaires use more power in each of their houses each day than I use in a year, I believe that they have more room to improve energy efficiency than I do.
When I see all the things that I have been told that didn’t turn out that way (see the list at the top of the page) I wonder why I should respond the next time the boy cries Wolf.
The wolf has arrived, and it looks like a Chihuahua.
That made me laugh! 🙂
A good description. An IPCC Chihuahua growling and nipping at our heels, to no effect.
From the article: “Generation Z (people born between 1995 and 2010)”
So I guess that means people between 14 and 29 years old.
They have been subjected to scary, catastrophic climate change propaganda all their lives, and yet they are being criticized for not being politically active enough about catastrophic climate change.
I think the problem for the climate alarmists is they have “Cried Wolf” on the climate too many times when there is no Wolf, and even the young ones can understand that they are being manipulated.
If only our politicians were as smart as Gen Z.
Our politicians still think the Climate Change Wolf is real.
Except for Trump. He scoffs at the idea. He *should* scoff at the idea. It’s an unproven, unlikely idea that has not manifested itself in reality.
There is no evidence that CO2 is causing changes in how the Earth’s atmosphere behaves. None whatsoever.
You’ve gotten the message that the high priests of Climate Change don’t practice what they preach and probably don’t believe it. I’m of the opinion that some of them for sure don’t believe it.
Then there’s the obvious: Who actually believes that a warmer world is a catastrophic disaster? People my age remember that it was once “Global Cooling” when scientists were coming up with schemes to make the planet warmer.
“. . . I tend to not accept that he believes in AGW.”
When Greta quietly deleted her end-of-the-world claim from her website, I tend to think that she doesn’t believe in this nonsense either.
How to do a number on the young by Doana Bogueva….
Exactly.
The climate alarmists are trying to figure out the best way to brainwash Gen Z, and apparently their past efforts are not working out too well, because Gen Z isn’t clamoring for more windmills.
One can “cry wolf” too many times, and then people tune you out. I think that’s what is happening here.
I would say to Gens Y,Z, etc that the diminished energy future world that you guys are heading for has been foisted upon you by the deniers.
That is, the deniers of recorded history that informs us that there is nothing happening with climates that hasn’t happened before in human existence, nor is likely to occur in the near future.
Humanity has always adapted to environments, and thrived accordingly.
But past generations weren’t compulsorily deprived of the natural resources available for them to harness and make life eminently safe and comfortable in all seasons and weathers.
So take a deep dive into recorded natural history, youngsters, and quickly learn that the history deniers are trying now to deny you your abundant energy futures.
And they will cry – heretic
I remember during COVID, there were a couple of commenters here that said you were committing murder if you didn’t wear a mask, keep your distance, and get vaccinated. As it turns out, those activities failed to do what was claimed.
Huh? Vaccinating gave you a far better outcome than not. Easily provable fact. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-vaccine/art-20484859
Way better than hydroxychloroquine, bleach, light, or the other silly bollocks touted by some. Here is a whole bunch of ideas tried by those with limited understanding of how the virus spread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unproven_methods_against_COVID-19
I’ve trusted my life to the Mayo Clinic for their treatment of my Prostate cancer. That said, their discussion of COVID vaccines is wholly inadequate. In this link, they only discuss known short term reactions to any vaccine, and dismiss long term known issues in the Vaccine Adverse Reaction System (VARS) database. ALL of the data needs to be covered, not just only supporting facts.
Your discussion of “silly bollocks” is also inadequate. NO one is seriously offering “bleach or light”, but there are PROVEN treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin that have cured far more patients than those killed by the ventilators in use at the time. Hydroxychloroquine was given to health care workers in the Ford Hospital system in Michigan early on in the COVID era in a double-blind study. It demonstrated considerable effectiveness. The study results were suppressed by the media and the CDC and were rarely published.
Simon only ever reads the even numbered pages of his newspapers.
That is – the left side ones.
“Simon only ever reads the even numbered pages of his newspapers.
That is – the left side ones.”
Easy to write nonsense it seems when you offer nothing to back it up. Let’s see any serious studies that say the vaccines don’t work otherwise you are just a lightweight.
You could start with articles like this Simon, then read a few uneven numbered pages in the newspapers.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/yes-they-claimed-the-vaccines-would-prevent-transmission/news-story/a176eb002c29e603fc29ef9fe0b33b18
PS – “vaccines” do work. I’ve had 18 in my lifetime.
But the mRNA-delivered COVID-19 concoctions are not “vaccines” as traditionally conceived and developed.
As eventually admitted by Pfizer, Moderna, etc – they were not subjected to thorough clinical human trials, and were never claimed by them to prevent acquisition or transmission.
Which turned out to be absolutely the case.
Which makes them no more than therapeutics as used for say Malaria treatment, of which many already existed, and proved extraordinarily effective in place like Africa, Brazil and India.
So I read the article…..
First, it is two years old, so may as well be written a lifetime ago in the world of covid and the ideas have been superseded by numerous generations of facts.
Second, it is just a newspaper article and not something I would take seriously. The language is highly emotive which is always a giveaway. If I read a serious attempt at discussing climate change I stop when I read the words “alarmist” or “denier.” Waste of time.
Third, we have long known now that they don’t stop transmission, but what they do very well, is save lives by reducing the chance of serious illness, particularly among the at risk groups. there is just no denying that now.
The point was / is that there were / are many more tried, tested, proven, available and affordable medications that also reduce the chance of serious illness from the COVID strains.
As you said, if you’re going to get “triggered” by words you don’t like because of your sensitive feelings, so you stop reading a range of perspectives on issues, you’re sentencing yourself to remain as uninformed as you apparently are (by your own admissions).
Ideology and rationality can’t occupy the same mind space at the same time Simon, and your leftist ideology is always on open display.
“Ideology and rationality can’t occupy the same mind space at the same time Simon, and your leftist ideology is always on open display.”
Except it was Trump who took responsibility for the development of the vaccines and I am supporting his sensible decision.
You’ve clearly granted Trump permanent residency in your head Simon.
Most rational adults don’t see the real world through a prism of negative obsession with a politician like you do.
Are you mourning Jacinda’s abandonment of NZ or something?
Sad (as your bete-noire would say).
She no more abandoned NZ than John Key did. Both left near the end of their second terms. Both were great for the country.
The CDC just announced the new, improved current vaccine offers some protection for 2 months. That sounds awesome.
Sorry these are just words. Lets see references to your…
“Hydroxychloroquine was given to health care workers in the Ford Hospital system in Michigan early on in the COVID era in a double-blind study. It demonstrated considerable effectiveness.”
Here is the ignoramus of an ex president touting the use of disinfectant and light. Can’t argue with his own words…. can you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33QdTOyXz3w
“but there are PROVEN treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin that have cured far more patients than those killed by the ventilators in use at the time.”
Well let’s see a reference.
I have many that say the use of both is silly and potentially dangerous…
https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19
This was interesting if nothing else
https://www.wlwt.com/article/man-217-covid-shots-what-happened/60109661#:~:text=to%20CDC%20data.-,One%20German%20man%20has%20redefined%20%22man%20on%20a%20mission.%22,one%20jab%20every%20four%20days.
The ignoramus is the closed-minded fool who didn’t listen to what Trump said. He was brain-storming, throwing out ideas that might be tested. Idiots like you can’t accept anything he says so you misquote him. #fjb
I supplied a link to him talking…. that’s not a misquote. And you have to be pretty far into the Trump cult to justify the idiotic things he said that day…. “light” “disinfectant?” I mean, look at the look on the Dr’s face here at 27 seconds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BalDN6iGYpE
So, if you think brainstorming like that in front of the worlds media is smart, on any level, I can see why you are in his cult.The man looked like and and came across as, a bullshitting moron.
It is too a misquote. Listen to what you linked. You obviously are a pathetic little twit who has just wants someone to tell you what to do and can’t stand the idea that your leader may not have all the answers to new problems. Trudeau is probably your idea of a leader.
How can a recording be a misquote? He said use light and disinfectant. If I’m wrong then you tell me what he said? I’m guessing a fascist lying mango haired dictator is your kind of leader? Am I right?
You could listen to him or even try reading the subtitles, rather than just reading the poster’s title of the clip. “Again, I say maybe you can, maybe you can’t? I’m not a doctor”. He asked if they were going to test other options, not just use the drug companies to come up with ineffective vaccines.
Your description of Trump shows the maturity level of a seven-year old. I doubt if Trump would be my best friend, but he says what he is going to do and then does his best to get it done. The Dims and RINOS blocked him as much as they could but he was still better at everything than the dementia patient who only opens his lips to lie and is a paid flunky of the CCP.
“Your description of Trump shows the maturity level of a seven-year old.”
Haha says the man who called me a “pathetic little twit.” Typical Trump cultist. Can hand it out but doesn’t like it coming the other way.
You should look in a mirror. “Pathetic little twit” is a perfect description for the person who writes your comments.
Myocarditis has entered the chat.
“Myocarditis has entered the chat.”
Yes it has. You have far more chance of suffering myocarditis is you don’t have the vaccine than if you do.
https://theheartgroup.co.nz/gp-info/covid-resources/covid-19-vaccinations-and-myocarditis/
“Risk vs benefit of the vaccinationIn short, the risk of getting seriously ill from COVID-19 is greater than the risk of getting seriously ill after the vaccination – even in patient groups who are at higher risk of an adverse event post vaccination.
People are also more likely to develop myocarditis as a result of COVID-19, than they are as a result of the vaccination.
Even in younger cohorts, early research suggests the risk of myocarditis from COVID-19 is still higher than the risk of myocarditis from the vaccination.”
Now if you have a credible references that say this information is wrong, then lets’ see it.
Even if your information is correct, your logic is not. If you don’t get vaccinated and don’t get COVID-19 you are unlikely to get myocarditis. If you get vaccinated you are at risk and then you can still get COVID-19 and therefore myocarditis.
I have never seen someone who goes out of its way to take every wrong position. You must be the greatest wrong position person in history.
So I’m the one referencing studies and I’m the one taking the wrong position? what a crazy world.
Are you a doctor? Can you make a judgement about medical studies and their methodology? You seem to be an expert on everything. I know I wouldn’t use a New Zealand cardiac practice as my source for medical papers.
Oh and I see Trump is once again taking credit for the vaccines. Now that is one thing he did do right… the vaccines I mean.
“‘The Pandemic no longer controls our lives. The Vaccines that saved us from COVID are now being used to help beat Cancer – Turning setback into comeback!’ YOU’RE WELCOME, JOE, NINE MONTH APPROVAL TIME VS. 12 YEARS THAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN YOU!”
Yeah. He believed the SCIENCE! “Experts” just like you retards.
So did the world end in 2023 like your hero Greta believed?
“I” never said it would and while I respect a young person for taking a stand, particularly on a topic that she believes will affect her generation and the generations to come, I have people I consider to be far more worthy of my worship.
Hitler and Stalin?
Don’t forget Mussolini.
Ah yes the Mango Mussolini? No I leave him for his cultists to follow.
it’s amazing the way alarmists “brainwash” young people into thinking nonsense about climate. But when George Romney said they “brainwashed” him about the Vietnam war, it ended his political career. And he was speaking metaphorically–I’m not.
“The challenges of climate change can be scary.”
Only if you believe the ‘scientific’ nonsense being put out by alarmists.
GBR gonna die—NOT.
Polar bears gonna die—NOT.
Pacific coral atolls gonna drown—NOT.
Tipping points gonna tip—NOT.
Hey you peasant children down there, why are you not doing as your elitist masters tell you? It is time to take the Great Climate Leap Forward! So get up and get busy and stop using fossil fuels, in other words sit down and do nothing.
Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.
“Despite scientific evidence about the imminent threat of climate change”
What a load of utter garbage. !!
Start with a moronic comment, you immediately show your bias and make anything from your survey totally worthless.
As models are NOT scientific evidence…
… there is no scientific evidence of any imminent threat.
:… there is no scientific evidence of any imminent threat.”
__________________________________________________
BINGO!
The climate alarmist author is assuming way too much. As all climate alarmists do.
They think their assumptions are equivalent to evidence. They obviously have not delved too deeply into the science, otherwise they wouldn’t be making such claims because the science doesn’t support their claims about CO2 and the Earth’s atmosphere. They apparently cannot distinguish between what is evidence/facts, and what is speculation, assumptions and unsubstantiated assertions.
Speculation, assumptions and unsubstantiated assertions are *all* the Climate Alarmists have. It’s all they have ever had. They have NO evidence for the claims they make about CO2 and the Earth’s atmosphere.
Surveys like this should always start with the qualifying question: “Have you stopped beating your significant other? Yes/No”
Answer could be – YES
(but I still give the missus a good walloping every day)
When I was married, I used to beat my wife often…
.
.
.
… at Scrabble.
She beat me occasionally, too. !
I stopped beating my wife when I explained my strategy. She does crossword puzzles and is hard to beat.
… significant other…
_______________________________________
I see you’ve allowed wokeism to tell you what words you shall and probably shall not use.
You have to know your survey audience.
Might be married, or have an ‘it’-friend.
But is ‘it’ really significant ??
It depends on what the meaning of “it” is.
Here’s a an avenue to make this kind of survey more granular that climate worriers should welcome with open arms! Ask each respondent which side of the average IQ of 102 possessed current undergrads they fall on. My hunch is the intractable problems created by failed renewables, failed EV replacement transport, failed climate forecasts, failling hydrogen replacement for fossil fuels and a failed education system, pretty much explains why a large proportion of students aren’t rising to the challenges. The challenges faced have even been hopelessly misidentified. Resolution of the real problems is going to take a blunt-nosed Trump-like personage to fix this cluster fuddle
That is exactly what the arsonists who torched the Tesla factory in Germany were doing.
For comparison:
I heard a report yesterday that leftwing billionaires are donating funds to high schools with the aim of turning high school students into political activists.
The radical Left is in control of our school systems. The Saving Grace is high school students are naturally resistant to pressure from above.
But the radical Left can, and are doing, a lot of damage, even so.
Radical Leftwing Billionaires are actively trying to take over Western democracies. They are trying to spend their way to power. The Human-caused Climate Change scam is just one of the avenues they use.
We need to start following the money to see who is involved and just exactly what they are doing. Secrecy is the radical Left’s shield.
It is the same problem with State churches. One can get superficial compliance with The Church, and very little faith.
As one is not to challenge The Church, actually knowing anything has no value.
I think it’s weirder than that. They are every bit as worried as they claim, but they have also been taught to obey, and not to think for themselves, so they’ve had the initiative trained out of them. If someone was to knock on their door and demand they join a street march right in front of their home, they would comply, but they lack the initiative to go out and find a march.
I suggest that gen z isn’t as concerned about climate change rather they are concerned about chicken littles going around crying the sky is falling and don’t bother to substantiate their wailing. People like Dr. Bogueva are evil.
There’s a certain logic to this psychobabble- Pretend there is a crisis, pretend to do something about it, and feel good for real. Only objection is from Big Pharma, so we may need to allow them to sell climate-anxiety placebos.
Let’s do university students in China now. Do they feel anxious about the climate? To what extent are they engaged in climate activism?
To what extent are they engaged in any activism not state sanctioned?
This is standard alarmist doctrine so we see it everywhere the issue of anxiety comes up. “The cure for anxiety is activism.”
I do wish Sociologist and psychologists would sit down and shut up about “How to brainwash the public to believe our chicken-little just so story”. It is very simple: give me the data and show your work – if it can add up logically and show with verifiable data that the conclusion is true, I will investigate your solutions. If your solution is ultimate government control of all aspects of life, you have lost me again.
This is the problem of CAGW adherents: They don’t show their work, if you uncover their techniques, they claim you are doing it wrong, and they always want totalitarian government as the solution since we are all too stupid to fix ourselves.
There are all sorts of people that claim they’re concerned about a variety of issues; e.g., health and physical fitness, immigration, rising living costs, national security, personal safety, debt levels, etc., but that doesn’t mean they’re going to make enough or even any lifestyle changes to combat the problems. Likewise with climate change because despite all the alarmism, people don’t see anything beyond the usual weather events that they’ve learned to live with for years now. So they’re not going to run to buy EVs, or renounce air travel, or stop eating meat, or install heat pumps, or switch to public transportation, or do anything that costs them more money and forces them to adopt inconveniences just to supposedly save the planet. And this is the reason that that the eco-alarmists are fighting a losing battle for so long; yet they don’t seem to realize it yet.
Do you get the feeling leftys are under siege from a conservative backlash?
Irish voters reject push to overhaul references to women, family in constitution (msn.com)
They got a shock getting soundly rejected in a recent Woke referendum in Oz too.
PS: Yep they’re definitely on the run when the MSM start asking the question-
Is this the beginning of the end of America’s woke madness? The Democrat cities rolling back progressive policies (msn.com)
Not long now climate changers so avoid the stampede and walk back briskly for the exits.
Yes, the Democrat New York governor is now putting the National Guard in the New York subway system to stop the rampant crime created by soft-on-criminals Democrat policies of the recent past.
Crime has exploded because of these lax policies of not locking up the criminals and now elections are coming up and the radical Democrats are scrambling to crack down on crime and not just in New York City, either, but in Washington DC and other Democrat strongholds.
The Radical Democrat’s soft-on-criminals policy has backfired on them bigtime. People are very unhappy with the crime spree going on now.
There are no such crime sprees going on in Red States (with the exception of a few Blue Cities in Red States, like Austin, Texas). That’s because Red States are not soft on criminals.
If you lock crininals up, there will be fewer crimes committed. Most crimes are committed by a very small percentage of the population. Repeat offenders. If you lock that small percentage up, and keep them locked up, you eliminate most of the crime.
For some crazy reason, radical Democrats don’t like locking criminals up. Obviously, radical Democrats don’t have a clue about how to solve society’s problems. All they do is make things worse. Why would anyone vote for a radical Democrat?
I heard a New York police officer in an interview earlier today and he said the problem was the judicial system won’t lock up the criminals after they are arrested. He said in the last few months 1,150 crimes had been committed by just 38 people, which just demonstrates the problem. Just a few people can create havoc, all out of proportion to their numbers, if you don’t take them off the streets and keep them off the streets.
Let them out, they are going to commit more crimes.
We need to implement a “Three Strikes and You’re Out!” law. If you are convicted of committing three violent crimes, you go to jail for life.
We should also have a law where if you deliberately injure a police officer or other first responder, you go to jail for life, and if you kill a police officer or other first responder, you get the death penalty.
Being soft on criminals is counterproductive, as should be obvious to everyone.
I’m have more anxiety over the destruction of the dollar and a total economic collapse exacerbated by destructive energy policy. Clearly, these people are telling me that I should be more active in that regard.
Rather than spending time being paranoid about global warming they need to dedicate that time doing an honest investigation into all sides of the science involved in this issue. They will find it is all politics and very little science. They will find that CO2 is not the scare they have been lead to believe.
Future generations will wonder at the failure of education
which led to this mass hysteria.That’s if we get the charlatans out of power and concentrate on fundamental education in at least the three R’s otherwise future generations won’t know any better.
Turning the population into drones is sure to result in a lack of initiative.
Many negative comments have been made about this article revolving around whether there is “scientific evidence about the imminent threat of climate change” and by extension AGW.
It would be informative if the author would provide a rebuttal.
I guess you can cry wolf till you lose your voice, but if all that shows up are cute little bunnies, people will stop paying attention.
GenZ will be inoculated to Catastrophic Climate Change like GenX was to Nuclear War. After hearing the end of the world predictions for 20 years, you don’t believe the ‘experts’ and you don’t care what they say anymore.