Sabine Hossenfelder: Climate Action is Like Preventative Cancer Surgery

Essay by Eric Worrall

Sabine Hossenfelder is a high profile science influencer. I’m a fan – except for her misconceptions about climate change.

Why I fear for the future of mankind

0.00 We’ve given up on climate change. This  is what I take away from the news.

0:36 About 10 years ago I was diagnosed with  a tumour. The doc said I should have it  removed as soon as possible. I had  a preventive surgery. I voluntarily  made myself temporarily miserable,  to avoid worse consequences later.

Climate change is like that, just not on an  individual level, but on a species level.  

1:59 Another problem has been all the people who  claimed that solving this problem would be “simple” and that the energy transition is  a win-win solution. Everyone is going to  be better off with renewables, because it will  create jobs and wealth and prosperity and so on. The most vivid demonstration of this  problem has been Greta Thunberg. A child  of a reasonably wealthy family in a wealthy  country who has never had to work to heat a house or feed a family. Most people knew  that these “win-win” tales were always lies. 

2:50 energy transition that isn’t happening because it’s never been realistic. It’s because everyone knew they were being lied to about the  true cost. And that’s why they’re against it.

3:07 isn’t just an American thing, we have this  here in Europe too, just not as explicitly. It’s no longer because they don’t believe that  the climate is changing or that we’re causing it. It’s because they think they’re being lied  to about what the “green deals” will actually  mean for them. And it’s why now, I think, a  lot of people are relieved that it’s over.

5:01 This failure worries me not so much about  climate change itself. It will be bad for  my retirement savings, it will be bad for our  children, but maybe in two or three generations,  progress will resume. No, it worries me because it  means we are almost certainly also too stupid to solve other problems. Regulating artificial  intelligence is a good example.

Read more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBHSmwxgLfQ

Sabine’s video from which the above transcript was taken;

Who am I to criticise a famous physicist like Sabine? Thankfully I’m not alone in calling out Sabine’s climate change blind spot;

I had a conversation with Dr Peter Ridd, the author of the video above, about this time last year. He’s still hopeful Sabine will make that same final leap of understanding which helped his awakening.

There is so much Sabine gets right – she calls out Greta Thunberg’s hollow posturing, she calls out the fatal engineering flaws of the green energy revolution and hydrogen economy, a year ago she called out the absurd attempt to link the LA wildfires to climate change. But like an electron trapped in a potential well of misplaced trust in the scientific community, she can’t quite tunnel her way to intellectual freedom, to the realisation that claims we face an imminent climate crisis are just as nonsensical as claims that renewables are a viable solution to the world’s energy needs.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
5 4 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 22, 2026 2:09 pm

Totally agree. Aside from the climate change blind spot and the… awkward… pretend phone calls from “Elon”, she’s worth watching for science news. And she changed her blouse at last…

February 22, 2026 2:20 pm

I don’t know any current physicist who still insists that this supposed climate change is definately caused by humans, highly certain and cause for alarm.
Because you need all those elements to keep the narrative going and that means people force themselves into dogmatic thinking and work backwards from a foregone conclusion. Once you start to doubt any element the narrative disappears as does the alarm. So Sabine holds on to the pain to gain idea. Exactly how much she would like humans to suffer to get to the promised non climate change land is not known. I guess it is an uncomfortable question for any alarmist. They’d rather avoid it, for obvious reasons. Just like the ‘population bomb’, another avoided real life equation. Will she ever get to Lomborg territory? Unlikely..

Meisha
February 22, 2026 2:30 pm

Sabine is very smart, obviously. Unfortunately, it is clear she has not dug into the nature and quality of the science that supports claims of man-made CO2=>global warming. Her analogy is laughably inappropriate in at least two ways. It’s sad. She really ought to know better….

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Meisha
February 22, 2026 3:02 pm

She doesn’t need to dig into climate science. When people lie as much as the climate alarmists have, about their own science and about their opposite thinkers, it’s because they have run out of logic and facts. You don’t need to cover up the truth, or lie about it, or force all your round pegs into square holes.

Editor
February 22, 2026 2:32 pm

“I had a preventive surgery. I voluntarily made myself temporarily miserable, to avoid worse consequences later.”.

Voluntarily.

skitheo
February 22, 2026 2:44 pm

Flawed premise callout:

 No, it worries me because it means we are almost certainly also too stupid to solve other problems. Regulating artificial intelligence is a good example.

Assumption that government regulation is the solution for hard problems.

Erik Magnuson
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 22, 2026 3:04 pm

IIRC, there are some standards on how to develop safety critical software, which is probably driven by liability concerns.

February 22, 2026 2:53 pm

I used to be a regular viewer, but her climate change fanaticism makes her a menace, so I deleted her channel.

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Brian.
February 22, 2026 2:58 pm

That’s silly. No one is 100% perfectly aligned with your thoughts.

February 22, 2026 3:02 pm

“Look at it from space.”

OK I did that. I conclude there is no risk of harm from the emissions of CO2 resulting from our beneficial use of natural hydrocarbons as fuel.

Physics. (Stop the video and read the text description for a more complete explanation)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yarzo13_TSE

Thank you for listening.

NotChickenLittle
February 22, 2026 3:03 pm

Really, can anyone who is a fanatic true believer in Man-caused catastrophic climate change be accurately described as “intelligent”? Certainly not wise. Maybe “otherwise intelligent”, like a PhD in some semi-scientific field who also firmly believes in elves? Or that cats can read humans’ minds? Wait, that one is real…

February 22, 2026 3:12 pm

It’s so very tedious to see in 2026, supposedly intelligent well-connected people discovering something that was evident in 2001.

I posted links under Sabine’s videos years ago. She never changed her story.

Also, I doubt Sabine will mention (or perhaps doesn’t know) that the reason modelers use anomalies is because they think all the simulation error is a constant. Supposedly all of the error is already present in “the base-state” and carries on unchanged in the iterated simulations.

Differencing is supposed to subtract away the constant base-state error, leaving behind nothing but an absolutely correct anomaly. The idea is mind-numbingly stupid, but so blindingly wonderfully self-serving that the modelers just can’t let it go.

This is also why modelers carry on about simulations being a boundary-value problem, not an initial-value problem. They hold that forward simulation is free of any change in the error-structure – an implicit assertion of possessing a perfect physical theory.

All of this escapes Sabine, the self-elected spokesperson of physics.

February 22, 2026 3:19 pm

She looks a bit like that guy who heads up “The American Federation of Teachers” union, Rhonda “Randi” Weingarten.
comment image