By Vijay Jayaraj
Much of the world was optimistic after a peace deal ended months of conflict in the Middle East that had disrupted the global oil trade. But peace in that region has long been a tenuous matter, and how long it lasts is anybody’s guess. Nonetheless, there are other reasons for optimism that are not subject to the vagaries of geopolitics.
For the past two decades, the media have reported a “climate crisis” with a conviction that presumed dissent to be insane if not immoral. Yet, the very atmospheric changes over which reporters hyperventilated about impending doom are in fact delivering measurable benefits.
History and evidence ignored
For most of human existence, weather ruled daily life. A cold winter or a run of bad harvests could wipe out an entire village. Infectious disease swept through communities unchecked. There were no vaccines, no antibiotics, and very limited capacity to move food and resources over long distances. Access to energy was limited to muscle, wood, and a bit of wind or water power. Life expectancy in many regions hovered around 30 years.
Compare that to the 21st century. Global life expectancy has more than doubled over the last two centuries, now more than 70 years. This was unimaginable in the 19th century, when Earth was a bit cooler but daily life far harsher.
The per capita food supply has climbed substantially, while population has soared. Protein availability has increased by roughly one-third. Rates of undernourishment have fallen even as billions of people were added to the global population.
Earth is not a fragile planet on the edge of collapse. Instead, its dominant species has learned to produce more food on less land, in part because crops grow faster and yield more fruits, grains, and vegetables. This bounty is a product of modern agronomy, beneficial warmth, and an air enriched by industrial emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).
Yes, increased atmospheric CO2 acts as a free fertilizer of plants. This claim acknowledges basic science: Plants require CO2, water, and sunlight. Satellite observations over recent decades show a measurable “global greening,” with vegetation densities rising in many regions, including India and China, the two most populous countries.
Natural disasters are another subject that draws news coverage bordering on hysteria, while quiet progress in protecting life through technology and engineering goes unnoticed. Decadal death from natural disasters have declined rapidly.
Similarly, in the past unsafe water killed vast numbers through diarrheal disease and other infections. The share of deaths from bad water have fallen dramatically, as have the relevant death rates. Also declining in spectacular fashion have been the rates of death from infectious disease.
The media obsess endlessly over summer heatwaves while deliberately overlooking the far deadlier threat of cold. A comprehensive study on deaths from temperature reveals that cold-related mortality dwarfs heat-related deaths across almost every region.
Being a lover of wildlife, I’m often surprised how the recovery of various animals is seldom recognized by the public. India’s tiger population has more than doubled and now exceeds 3,600, representing about three-quarters of the global total. Humpback whale populations, once reduced by more than 95%, have rebounded strongly, with several distinct population segments now matching pre-exploitation abundance. Polar bear numbers worldwide stand between 23,000 and 26,000, with multiple subpopulations stable or increasing after heavy hunting pressure was eased.
Look for the Bigger Picture
A picture of a world racing toward collapse is inconsistent with these threads: longer lives, more food, notable wildlife recoveries, and fewer deaths from infectious disease, tainted water, and natural disasters.
Climate change exists concurrently with a story of human adaptation powered by abundant energy sources, technology, a modestly warmer climate, and CO2-enriched plant growth. A fair-minded observer would ask why this story is largely absent from mainstream news coverage.
Though not utopia, the world of 2026 is characterized by conditions for human thriving that are stronger than ever—cleaner, healthier, better fed, and safer than any time before.
Originally published at American Greatness, July 5, 2026.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.
Can you remind me where we are on the carbon dioxide guilt scale?
Man-made carbon dioxide emissions are:
1. The sole cause of climate change
2. The main cause of climate change
3. A minor cause of climate change
4. An insignificant cause of climate change
5. Have no effect on climate change
I ask because I am in correspondence with the author of a Daily Telegraph article headlined: The best cars for surviving climate crisis Britain:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/advice/the-best-cars-for-surviving-climate-crisis-britain/
The author maintained in correspondence with me that Google told him the withdrawal of RCP8.5 showed that Net Zero policies were being effective 😀
Google told him … probably Google AI, Gemini, now bundled with Chrome browser. It can provide him with endless hours of correspondence, without ever bothering a Google human.
> “a Google human.”
A ‘what’ now?
Option 4
If Net Zero is having an effect, why is CO2 concentration now at 431 ppm but was 330 ppm in 1975? And still going up!
The only effect Net Zero is having is it is bankrupting Europe, and Australia and a few American States.
Yeah, but the politicians in those American states are doing just fine. They are well-paid by the public and even better by lobbyists. When all goes to hell, they’ll just move to another state and retire. And I’d bet the same is true of European and Australian politicians.
They’ll move to Florida and prove they never believed it in the first place.
“The author maintained in correspondence with me that Google told him the withdrawal of RCP8.5 showed that Net Zero policies were being effective”
So Google AI doesn’t know what it is talking about.
It is repeating a climate alarmist meme that has arisen since RCP8.5 was blackballed.
Not science, just politics. A political AI.
AI is artificial but definitely not intelligent;
It’s just a fast consensus engine that also uses Wiki as a source of ‘facts’…
… How dumb is that !!
Exactly. At best it’s a source for statistics
Every time socialism fails, the excuse is always the same. We didn’t implement enough socialism.
And never forget. You can vote socialism in but you have to shoot it out.
You should have a lot more up-votes.
“someone/something/somebody” told me RCP8.5 was being diminished because of net-zero policies and increasing percentages of power by windmills and solar panels.
So dealing with the “some” cult demonstrates the same characteristic that creatonists always use.
“A fair-minded observer would ask why this story is largely absent from mainstream news coverage.”
Good point.
And a fair-minded climate investigator would first ask the question, “What is the magnitude of the computed warming tendency for a doubling of CO2, compared to dynamic energy conversion within the general circulation, which we know to be operating throughout the depth of the troposphere?”
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1knv0YdUyIgyR9Mwk3jGJwccIGHv38J33/view?usp=sharing
Spoiler – that magnitude is a small fraction of the thickness of the index mark at “0” on the vertical axis in this plot of the ERA5 hourly parameter “vertical integral of energy conversion” for 45N for 2022.
In other words, there has been no good physical reason all along to have ever expected a perceptible influence on ANY trend of ANY climate variable arising from the acknowledged IR properties of CO2.
Thank you for your fair-minded attention to this matter.
2nd to last paragraph: Bingo! Thanks, David. Well stated and based on physical evidence, not consensus or hear-say.
All sounds positive. There are, however, some downsides to the progress we have made – not necessarily all AGW related.
During the 60s, 70’s & 80’s, we were encouraged to think for ourselves, explore options, apply logic and learn from our mistakes – be it education, courting or socialising. Today’s younger generation are conditioned into being easily hoodwinked and believe almost everything they are being told. ‘The Truth’ is more often deliberately hidden from many – and worse, their freedom to explore, establish facts and make up their own minds is diminishing.
When I was aged 18-years in the mid 70s, me and all my mates had the time of our lives learning in a promiscuous society. You are not allowed to touch someone on the arm anymore for fear of being arrested.
And as for man-made climate claptrap, many of us who regularly visit WUWT are only here because our inquisitive minds led us here – and only once we had established all the facts (ie. CO2 is only 0.042% of the whole sky – of which about 95% is entirely natural).
Ok, 0.0432% – I checked to find it’s ‘dangerously increased’ by 0.0012%.
[“When I was aged 18-years in the mid 70s, me and all my mates had the time of our lives learning in a promiscuous society“]
The pill came out in 1961, so by the mid 60s, we were all at it; we were swamped with girls coming from Catholic countries … France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Ireland, Nigeria & our own uk girls ( a real league of nations); that plus I was learning engineering & physics & some biology at night (:-)), don’t know where I got the energy, but we all had a wonderful time; happy days.
The promiscuity of the 1970s probably had something to do with the AIDS crisis of the 1980s. This is more complicated than you’re making it sound.
“Similarly, in the past unsafe water killed vast numbers through diarrheal disease and other infections.”
A history lesson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Sanitary_and_Ship_Canal
Note the word “sanitary”: The canal was built to solve a public health problem.
Still solving problems-bodies are found in the Canal on a pretty regular basis. Ok, so it’s a snide remark, but a true one. It’s that kind of a day folks- cloudy, humid, sarcastic making…oh, and hot which is cranky making. So laugh a bit at the irony.
I agree. Two things are worth considering.
Because of these two points in addition to the one you raised, it could be argued that engineering has saved more human life than the medical profession could ever hope to achieve. Water purification and sewage treatment alone have saved the lives of hundreds of millions.
A sewage worker is worth far more to society than a dozen doctors … but we still need the doctors !!
Engineers have a much broader impact, and do not generally operate at a person to person level… so yes, you are probably correct.
You couldn’t get to a hospital if the roads, bridges, and hospital had not been built.
A tee shirt I saw a few years ago
In wine there is truth
In beer there is strength
In water there is bacteria
Only a fraction of CO2 in the atmosphere comes from burning of fuels. Most comes from outgassing from the sea where most of free CO2 is dissolved!
Some from the sea? Yes. Most? Not likely.
Most is not dissolved by the sea – but you are correct that only a fraction (a microscopic amount) of the sky is our fault
Very nice.
Largely because to their credit humans don’t lie awake nights worrying about something that may not even exist. Instead if there is a developing problem, they look for ways to solve it. The climate issue is a good example. If temperatures have been departing from the norm, new methods of heating and cooling were devised. If storms, floods, droughts posed an increasing threat, new more weather-resistant structures were built, new types of crops were developed along with more versatile farming techniques. If new diseases threatened us, medical science found ways to control them, etc., etc. The only ones who want us us to roll over and accept these threats are ones that want to profit from such inaction by accepting new taxation, restrictions and mandates that helps them line their pockets while solving none of the problems that posed few threats in the first place.