Wrong Again PBS, UN Is Pushing Another False Climate Crisis Report

A recent story on PBS NewsHour, “UN says world must jointly tackle issues of climate change, pollution, biodiversity and land loss,” by Tammy Webber of the Associated Press (AP), reports on a new UN “Global Environment Outlook” that repeats the false assertion that the Earth is nearing a global tipping point that can only be avoided through “unprecedented change” and trillions of dollars in new spending to phase out fossil fuels. These assertions are bogus, lacking any basis in data or observable evidence. In fact, the UN has a long track record of failed disaster predictions tied to climate change, going all the way back to 1989, which PBS ignores.

Webber writes, “experts have warned that the world is nearing a tipping point on climate change, species, and land loss and other harms,” quoting Bob Watson, lead author of the UN report saying, “[i]t has to be done rapidly now because we’re running out of time.” Where have we heard that before? Oh yes, the last UN state of the planet report, and the one before that, and the one before that going back to the 1980s.

The story and report further assert that climate change is “contributing to wilder weather extremes, including more intense storms, drought, heat, and wildfires,” and that only a rapid, global transition away from fossil fuels can prevent catastrophe.

A history lesson is in order. This is not the first time the UN has announced that “we’re running out of time.” In 1989, 36 years of global warming ago, the UN Environment Programme’s Noel Brown told the Associated Press that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels” if global warming was not reversed by the year 2000, predicting up to three feet of sea-level rise by then, massive coastal inundation of Bangladesh and Egypt, and a wave of “eco-refugees.”

More than three decades later, each of these predictions have proven, not just false, but wildly inaccurate. Climate at a Glance’s “Sea Level Rise” documents long-term tide-gauge records and NASA satellite data showing global sea level rising at about 1.2 inches per decade, with, at best, a modest acceleration since the nineteenth century. Nor have we seen the millions of “climate refugees” that the UN forecast. The Maldives are still above water, Bangladesh has more people than ever, and the “10-year window” to avert disaster has been rolled over so many times it could qualify as a wrecked vehicle.

PBS/AP never mentions this failed track record. Nor does it acknowledge that the UN has now presided over 30 Conferences of the Parties (COPs) without changing the basic trajectory of global emissions or global temperature as seen in figures 1 and 2 below.

Figure 2. Plot of all U.N. Climate Conferences from 1992 to 2025 with global annual temperature. Base graphic from NOAA, annotation by A. Watts Source: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/tavg/12/12/1980-2024?filter=true&filterType=binomial

Even sympathetic analysts concede that the UN’s 2015 Paris Climate Agreement has not delivered; as Climate Realism noted in “Paris Agreement: Dead at 10 (James Hansen was right),” former NASA scientist James Hansen called the Paris Agreement “a fraud” and “worthless words” because there is “no action, just promises,” a verdict the subsequent decade has largely confirmed. When you hold 30 summits and emissions still hit a record high in 2024, as PBS  reports, that is not success; it is one more in a long-list of failed efforts to match the repeatedly failed predictions.

The article also exaggerates what the observational climate record actually shows about “wilder weather extremes.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) finds increased confidence only for certain types of extremes (such as hot extremes and heavy precipitation in some regions), while concluding there is low or limited confidence in global increases in many others, including hurricanes, floods, and droughts.

Climate at a Glance’s entries on “Deaths from Extreme Weather” and “Temperature-Related Deaths” highlight a crucial fact PBS never mentions: over the past century, climate-related deaths have plummeted by more than 95 percent, even as global population has quadrupled and temperatures have risen. Independent analyses, such as HumanProgress’ review of disaster mortality, show climate-related deaths falling from about 485,000 per year in the 1920s to fewer than 20,000 per year in the 2010s, a drop of more than 99 percent on a per-capita basis, as seen in their graph below.

That is not what “running out of time” looks like.

PBS/AP further blur the lines between measured science and political advocacy by repeating claims that we are on track for 2.4°C of warming by 2100 and that only an $8 trillion per-year transition away from fossil fuels can save us. These numbers are not the product of thermometers, tide gauges, or crop statistics; they are the output of flawed, not fit-for-purpose, economic and climate models built on long chains of assumptions about future technology, behavior, and policy. The UN’s AR6 report warns that modeled “pathways” entail large uncertainties, with global outcomes depending on highly speculative socio-economic scenarios. Treating these projections as inevitabilities rather than conditional “if-then” exercises is advocacy, not reporting.

PBS/AP also glosses over the fact that many of the harms it lists—land degradation, biodiversity loss, pollution—have causes and remedies largely independent of climate policy. Deforestation in the Amazon, soil depletion in parts of Africa, or plastic pollution in rivers are neither a cause of nor result of global warming, and won’t be solved by net-zero carbon dioxide emissions. By insisting that “if we don’t fix climate change, we’re not going to be able to fix these other issues,” as one quoted scientist puts it, PBS effectively uses legitimate environmental concerns as leverage for unrelated, highly speculative climate actions.

What the article and the UN report completely ignore is the role that affordable, reliable energy, overwhelmingly fossil fuels, has played in making human societies more resilient to environmental hazards. Mechanized agriculture, synthetic fertilizers, modern flood defenses, air conditioning, and rapid disaster response all depend on dense, on-demand energy. That is why climate-related deaths as documented by Climate at a Glance have collapsed over the past century. Yet the UN prescription, uncritically endorsed by PBS/AP, is to rapidly phase out the very energy sources that lifted billions from abject poverty, based on a track record of predictions that have repeatedly failed to materialize.

Climate Realism has chronicled this pattern for years. “UNFCCC Climate Report Lies About Its Own Science”  points out how UN political bodies routinely make sweeping claims about “intensifying destruction” that are not supported by the UN’s own scientific assessments, which identify little or no change in most types of extreme weather events and trends in natural disasters. In “The IPCC’s 1990 Predictions Were Even Worse Than We Thought”Climate Realism reviews the early IPCC forecasts of rapid warming and sea-level rise and shows how they overshot reality. Despite this, every new report is marketed as the “most comprehensive ever” and used to justify more urgent demands for unprecedented, wrenching, transformational remaking of the world’s economy and governing institutions.

PBS/AP could have told its audience that the UN has now spent more than three decades issuing countdowns to catastrophe, from the 1989 “10-year window” to the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target to the current call for $8 trillion a year in climate spending, and that after 30 COP conferences emissions and temperatures have followed essentially the same trajectory they would have without the meetings. These outlets could have asked whether having a perfect record of failed predictions merited continued confidence that the UN would now get their predictions right, or whether the UN’s past performance might justify skepticism concerning its current disaster claims. Instead, PBS presents the latest UN report as if the institution has no history of predictions or as if its previous predictions have been accurate.

By omitting the long trail of failed UN climate pronouncements, ignoring the dramatic decline in climate-related deaths, and treating speculative model outputs as inevitable futures, PBS and the Associated Press badly mislead their audience concerning the true state of the Earth. A truly public-minded broadcaster would carefully scrutinize the UN’s record and available data rather than uncritically regurgitate its latest false alarm report.

Anthony Watts Thumbnail

Anthony Watts

Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. Watts has been in the weather business both in front of, and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist since 1978, and currently does daily radio forecasts. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instrumentation, as well as co-authored peer-reviewed papers on climate issues. He operates the most viewed website in the world on climate, the award-winning website wattsupwiththat.com.

Originally posted at ClimateREALISM

5 14 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

27 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
gyan1
December 16, 2025 2:10 pm

They are lying fraudsters pushing propaganda that empirical measurements unequivocally refutes.

JTraynor
December 16, 2025 2:29 pm

Problem is there are many “bobble-head” people that eat this silliness up.

Edward Katz
December 16, 2025 2:36 pm

This is a regular occurrence as the the alarmist outlets take turns with their doom & gloom forecasts. If it’s not Time magazine, it’s PBS and NPR, or CNN, or The Guardian, or the BBC, etc. They’re much like a baseball team; i.e., after one batter takes his turn at the plate, another tries to get a hit except any team with as low a batting average as the Climate Alarmists would quickly find itself in last place. In Canada, the Climate Before Commonsense network, otherwise known as the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., is guaranteed to give listeners at least one weather/climate scare story per week. Yet for all their efforts and exaggerations an Environics 2024 survey found that since 2019 only 5% of Canadians rated climate fears as their #1 concern. Meanwhile a recent Angus Reid poll found 60% of citizens supported a new Alberta to British Columbia pipeline, and in 2023 Canada’s emissions were 15% higher than in 1990. So if anyone is worried about a changing climate, it certainly doesn’t seem to be Canadians.

Reply to  Edward Katz
December 16, 2025 5:35 pm

In Canada in winter, CO2 hibernates!

December 16, 2025 2:38 pm

They are not running out of scams and money; they are running out of time.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
December 16, 2025 2:39 pm

The only thing that has failed more than AGW doomsday predictions is the UN failing to stop wars.

ResourceGuy
December 16, 2025 3:04 pm

Or in other words, the world donors need to further aid China in building military airstrips and radar stations on tiny islands and islets.

Michael Flynn
Reply to  ResourceGuy
December 16, 2025 5:04 pm

Luckily, the US didn’t need world donors to fund its military efforts on islands and atolls – unless you count the money the US borrowed from “world lenders”.

Pot. Kettle.

December 16, 2025 3:33 pm

When you hold 30 summits and emissions still hit a record high in 2024, as PBS reports, that is not success…

Well, it is a success, of sorts.

It’s a success for the fossil fuel industry and fossil fuel-rich states that exert their influence on the UN and the pointless COPs, etc.

There is zero chance of us missing 1.5C warming and probably zero chance of 2.0C (re pre-industrial average).

So, congratulations, you won. Our grandchildren will be so proud. Enjoy!

1saveenergy
Reply to  TheFinalNail
December 16, 2025 4:49 pm

Thank you; at least our great-grandchildren may get to enjoy the climate that our medieval ancestors lived in, plus bountiful harvests due to improved photosynthesis provided by increased CO2.

BUT, I note there is a vast amount of cold in the Northern Hemisphere,
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-3.74,90.61,616/loc=63.151,59.625
I fear I may not live long enough to see this improved climate, so I may have to move 750 miles south.

Reply to  1saveenergy
December 17, 2025 5:29 am

I doubt anyone in Siberia is fretting over a warmer planet.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
December 17, 2025 5:28 am

The warmer the better! This December has been extremely cold here in Wokeachusetts and we have snow on the ground. Many years in my 50 years as a forester, we had no snow even at Christmas.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  TheFinalNail
December 18, 2025 10:38 am

“It’s a success for the fossil fuel industry and fossil fuel-rich states that exert their influence on the UN and the pointless COPs, etc.”

I had to read that 3 times before I saw that you claim the oil, gas, coal industries have exerted their influence on the UN which is trying to shut them down.

Pointless COPs? Spot on.

You do know the 1.5 C and 2.0 C were political goals, not based on science.

Bob
December 16, 2025 3:47 pm

Very nice Anthony. The United Nations, AP and PBS what could go wrong? Losing is an ugly thing just look at them.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Bob
December 17, 2025 10:03 am

Maryland has had the coldest December in 20+ years and the first December snow since 2017.

What happened to global warming? It’s cold out there.

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
December 18, 2025 9:30 am

But…but…Maryland is just LOCAL!
I’m sure it didn’t snow in Death Valley or the Sahara! 😎

Chris Hanley
December 16, 2025 4:21 pm

A short skip down memory lane:

Time March 26, 2006
Earth at the Tipping Point: Global Warming Heats Up.

The Guardian 23 May 2006
British efforts to combat climate change have focused on preventing carbon dioxide levels rising above 450 parts per million, equivalent to a rise of 2C. If the world warms by more than this, many climate experts believe fragile ecosystems will be pushed beyond their “tipping point”, triggering runaway global warming.

NASA News & Feature Releases May 30, 2007
Research Finds That Earth’s Climate is Approaching ‘Dangerous’ Point
NASA and Columbia University Earth Institute research finds that human-made greenhouse gases have brought the Earth’s climate close to critical tipping points, with potentially dangerous consequences for the planet.

James Hansen 23 Jun 2008
Tipping Points near …
… the Arctic soon will be ice-free in the summer. More ominous tipping points loom.

NBC News Aug. 28, 2008
Arctic sea ice drops to 2nd lowest recorded level …
… More ominous signs have scientists saying that a global warming “tipping point” in the Arctic seems to be happening before their eyes.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
December 18, 2025 9:34 am

Sound like they reached their own “tipsy point” more than once.

Michael Flynn
December 16, 2025 5:00 pm

“. . . experts have warned that the world is nearing a tipping point on climate change, species, and land loss and other harms . . .”

Good for a wry grin or two. Feynman opined that “Science is belief in the ignorance of experts”, and apparently the experts don’t care much for the theory of evolution.

Supposedly, 99.99% of all species in history are extinct due to “natural causes”, and the present ones have presumably evolved to occupy their present habitats. Species die out, species appear. Man does his best to exterminate some – viruses, bacteria, vermin, mosquitos, Japanese knotweed, political opponents, but the objects of attempted extermination fight back – and evolve to survive. That’s Nature.

Nature always wins.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Michael Flynn
December 17, 2025 10:05 am

I read an article recently (lost the bookmark) that some 200 (or maybe 500) new species have been identified this past year.

December 16, 2025 6:50 pm

For a US temperature check, I went to:
https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/countries/united-states/average-temperature-by-year. The Tmax and Tmin from 1901 to 2024 are displayed in long table. Here is the data for these two years:

Years—–Tmax—–Tmin—–Tavg
2024——16.8——-4.3——-10.5 Temperature are ° C
1901——14.9——-1.6——–8.2
Change–+1.9—–+2.7——-+2.3

Note that the increase in Tavg is 2.3° which exceeds the Paris Agreement limit of 1.5° C. Has this excess temperature had any effect on the recent US weather and climate? No effect as far as I can tell by watching the weather reports on the TV for over 60 years.

NB: Be sure to go to: https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com. On the home page there are links in light blue to many sites located around the world. To get data for a city use:
https://www.extremeweatherwatch/cities/city name. For the city name, enter the name in lower case letters. If the name is two words connect these with a hyphen. At the bottom of the city home page there is a list of options for acquiring and displaying weather data. Most useful option is:
“average-temperature-by-year”.

hdhoese
December 16, 2025 7:14 pm

“You can’t think of climate change without thinking of biodiversity, land degradation and pollution,” said Bob Watson, one of the lead authors and a former top NASA and British climate scientist. “You can’t think of biodiversity loss without thinking about the implications of climate change and pollution.”

I taught ecology near the end of the last century and there was no such thing as now invented biodiversity, we called it species diversity with a complex of measurements. As for ‘climate change’ it was over geological time, paleoclimatology. Pollution and land degradation were problems well considered and largely conquered in civilized countries, but not completely with our new century’s ‘competence.’ Sustainability was largely taken for granted, even necessary with certain animals like salmon’s ‘big-bang’ suicidal reproduction as a real example of a ‘tipping point,’ another newly invented phrase. There were ‘pseudocommunities,’ at least in a model but don’t tell them. 

Corky
December 16, 2025 7:31 pm

Tipping like Guam…..

Tom Johnson
December 16, 2025 7:34 pm

Any time you see an article using the phrase “Climate Change”, immediately stop reading. It’s lying to you. It doesn’t even mean changes in the climate it’s actually trying to make you fear “Catastrophic man-made global warming.
Catastrophic” means that immediate action must be taken
“Man-made” means that it’s caused by humans burning fossil fuels
“Global” means everywhere on earth
“Warming” means that it’s getting hotter.

Don’t let it fool you. None of these are happening. We are presently living in a “climate optimum” temperature period that is but a brief warm interlude during the Ice Age epoch called the Pleistocene. During most of the several million years or longer of the Pleistocene Ice Age, glaciers have covered New York, Chicago, Seattle, Scotland, and all the other land at similar latitudes and higher. It has only been during brief ” interglacials” like this Holocene that the glaciers melted. The Holocene at about 12,000 years, has been already a bit longer than most of the previous interglacials.

So, sit back and enjoy the warm weather while you can, and ignore the noisy scaremongers. In a few centuries or hopefully linger, it will be a whole lot colder.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Tom Johnson
December 17, 2025 10:08 am

Funny, isn’t it, that the temperature this year (bogus GAT) is have a degree C colder than last year.

December 17, 2025 1:22 am

Yelling “fire” is speech that can be censored, but due process is required.
Due process is the scientific method.
The CAGW crowd are the ones yelling “fire” I’m the one yelling “not fire.”

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
December 17, 2025 10:09 am

“Runaway greenhouse effect” had been replaced with “runaway global warming.”
The first was disproven so it was replaced to keep the hysteria alive.