After years of dire warnings, the climate panic is quietly fading. World leaders barely mention it, voters rank it near the bottom of their priorities, and even Greta Thunberg has moved on.
So what changed? Bjorn Lomborg, Hoover Institution fellow and author of False Alarm, investigates.
The alarmists are still around. Their proportion may have decreased somewhat, but I have no doubt that they will still do a great deal of harm in Western Europe. And the EU, which completely undermines the sovereignty of its member states, can still impose a great deal of suicidal nonsense on us. The U.S. Constitution is subject to no other authority. The French Constitution is partly subordinate to the European constitution. A denial of democracy.
Climate change was just a tool that worked for a while. They will find or create other tools – that is ALL they think about. They are obsessed with it. To create a great big marxist utopia where the few elites have all power, money and control.
I agree with you. The big circus might have left the town but clowns are around. They are not going to surrender. Moreover they are consistently advancing. They now fiercely promote the “triple planetary crisis” that, in addition to climate change, includes biodiversity loss and pollution. More room for maneuver, more tax-payers’ money to steal, more youth to indoctrinate and engage, more power to grab all in all. They also demand a so-called “just transition to a low-carbon economy” that is actually another cover name for a world anti-capitalist revolution. Anytime you hear anybody say “just transition”, beware of them!
And national power …
“Big Panda brilliantly exploits the ridiculous pontificating climate scam and has an interest in perpetuating -even emphasizing- the need for the EU/AU/RU/ASEAN countries to keep pushing their climate agenda. China even goes so far as to fund alarmism research about climate change because they are making money selling carbon credit certificates on the back end of the scam to the western fear mongers. This is friggin’ brilliant.”
Ummm…they’re running around like headless chooks still trying to stop their fantasy world from collapsing-
Decades in the making, world-class Beetaloo Basin finally set to deliver
Pauline Hanson calls for two nuclear plants on east coast and insists policy is nothing like Dutton’s failed plan
Oil giant’s retreat on clean energy shows limits of investor pressure
Coal miners, activists rally as IPC considers Hunter Valley Operations extension – ABC News
Is this a trick question?
Greta Thunberg remains CLUELESS that the word ENERGY is comprised of 3 topics:
1. Transportation fuels
2. Products
3. Electricity
She and Net Zero Green Energy Ideologists are OBLIVIOUS to reality that the “Energy Transition” is only an “Electricity Transition”.
• They demand that we shut down the energy and economic systems that make our lives, health and living standards possible, because they insist on forcing us to eliminate those that work – and replace them with just electricity generated by favorable weather conditions that bring blackouts, poverty, disease, deprivation, joblessness and shortened lives!
• They tell the poorest people on Earth that they must renounce their God-given right to modern technologies, health and living standards – and sacrifice their landscapes and wildlife with wind turbines, solar panels and occasionally generated electricity trash on their altar of climate fanaticism?
Wind Turbines and Solar Panels have limited capabilities:
1. CANNOT produce the transportation fuels required by airplanes, trucks, merchant and cruise ships, construction equipment, and vehicles.
2. CANNOT make any of the more than 6,000 products made from fossil fuels for today’s materialistic society and economies around the world.
3. ONLY generates electricity under favorable weather conditions.
When it comes to actually “energy”, wind and solar are barely a scratch, as REAL energy continues to provide the vast bulk of supply.
.
.
It should be pointed out that the REAL energy used to construct that tiny amount of wind and solar infrastructure is probably similar to, or larger, than the energy actually produced.
Sure, but in the UK your graph tells our glorious leaders that we must have even more solar and wind.
They are still fearful of the devil carbon dioxide.
Not really. They’re fearful that they could never get a real job with a real paycheck.
A EROI < 1 claim in 2026? That’s wild even for you.
When you compare EVERYTHING that is needed to implement erratic wind and solar onto the grid, and all the toxic chemicals and pollution produced, and environmental damage done during their short life, plus clean-up and landfill costs at end of life, already becoming a BIG problem…
… Almost certainly !!
The carbon footprint of Snowy Hydro 2 can never be recovered. There will be more carbon used in its construction than it will ever save. The project will be shut down as soon as ONP gain control. And I am banking on ONP being in power before SH2 is operational mid to late 2030s.
As for batteries….. they have an EROI of LESS THAN ZERO…
They don’t actually produce any energy at all, in fact, you can never get all the energy you put in, back out.
… all part of the needs of parasitic wind and solar.
You understand the concept of a storage medium and EROI?
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/energy-return-on-investment.asp
Let’s reiterate. How much usable energy is produced COMPARED to with the energy needed to obtain it.
No battery, regardless of efficiency, will ever produce all the energy it took to charge it. Internal resistance can be minimized but never eliminated using todays physics.
The energy generation cost to produce the energy put into the battery is not part of the EROI of the battery itself. That energy can be supplied by any means of generation and they each have their own EROI.
Thanks Jim, saved me the 30 seconds need for a reply. 😉
Great chart! I tried to find it on the world energy institute web site. There is so much information there that I couldn’t find this great summary. Do you know if it is available anywhere? I made a screen shot, but it’s a bit hard to read.
I can’t remember where I got it, either.. Sorry !
Still see plenty of true believers on SM .
I wonder how may are Bots.
The Marxist are already on to their next narrative to capture the people’s minds. They’ll leave behind useful idiots to carry on, and they will until the shine comes off the AGW narrative completely. In a Color Revolution only winning counts and losses aren’t considered.
There are reports that Soros is bankrupt. How much of the funding has gone ?
I don’t think that he is bankrupt. He just doesn’t want to spend his money. Instead he prefers spending taxpayer money and shutting down USAid pulled the plug.
Wonder how much USAID money was paying for the climate scam in total the Democrat party seems to have sucking very hard on that tit
Maybe one of his many “businesses/money troughs” is bankrupt but I guarantee you his fortune is intact. From what I read, who knows, he declared bankruptcy after paying the protesters who attended the ‘no kings protests’. He supposedly said “I had no idea so many people would show up” and it cost him $7M. A drop in the ocean for him. I bet most of the people didn’t even go, they just scammed him. Free money to protest, or claim to protest. Liberals are good at that.
Consider the climate alarmist’s view. They claim that CO2 added to the atmosphere by man will cause catastrophic global warming. They have succeeded in convincing governments to spend trillions of dollars and force citizens to give up certain goods and behaviors while accepting less reliable energy at a much higher cost. All of this and CO2 has continued to increase. I can’t think of a bigger failure.
communism ?
The EU has saved billions in the last year, and contrary to popular claims grids haven’t collapsed.
That’s because huge chunks the manufacturing has moved to China or India.
Utter nonesense!
“The EU has saved billions in the last year,”
PROOF ???
…. crickets ….
Dear Hillary Clinton, we’ve found your village idiot!
Billions for the leadership, definitely. Not for the common man.
If the EU has saved billions, why are its constituent countries like France and Germany almost insolvent?
The grid certainly collapsed for 24h in Spain, Portugal and Southern France on April 28 2005. Had you forgotten?
I expect that many are merely waiting for a Blue Sweep of the US Senate and House of Representatives, followed by a Blue Sweep of the Presidency in 2028.
That’s my thinking too. They’ve already been playing the long game, they can wait it out.
What are the current odds for a major blue shift in the midterms? I have no idea where to find trustworthy news about this on the interweb anymore.
That’s hard to say.
Normally, considering the current political situation, the Democrats would stand a good chance of winning a majority in the House or, less likely, the Senate.
But I think these radical socialists who are running as Democrats may be spooking the voters.
This election will tell us if a majority of Americans are smart enough to govern themselves properly by keeping Republicans in power.
In case you didn’t know, it is the Democrats who are perpetually the cause of the problems the country faces. Republicans are the ones who have to come in and fix things after the Democrats have screwed things up for the thousandth time, like trying to get prices down after Biden and the Democrats sent inflation through the roof. And the Democrats are clever: They screw everything up and then, when Republicans take over, the Democrats blame all the things they previously screwed up on Republicans! And the Leftwing Media runs with that theme.
Don’t like higher prices? Well then, don’t vote for Democrats. Is there something else in American society you don’t like? Well then, don’t vote for Democrats.
Democrats are the problem. Let’s see if a majority of the American people can figure that out.
The “conservative tide” does seem to be rising in Europe and Australia so maybe that same enlightenment is taking place in the United States.
Republicans/common-sense conservatives, are good for the world. Democrats/Socialists/Communists, and their delusional thinking, are Very bad for the world.
Your vote matters: In last week’s Oklahoma Republican governor’s race, the winner won by 2,000 votes, out of hundreds of thousands cast.
I think it is going to be difficult to convince people that this round of inflation is not the result of Trumps war he said he wouldn’t start and his tariffs he put in place. Trump owns this lot Tom.
As a result his popularity is at an all time low. Even lower than Nixon before he lost the job.
Frankemann, if you want a handle on how the mid terms are going to go, look no further than the betting odds that have the Dems cruising to the House and the Senate being razor close. These places don’t care who wins they just want to get the numbers right so they make money.
https://polymarket.com/predictions/midterms
Was that same polling that had Hilary Clinton a sure thing to win the 2016 presidential election?
(I read that she gets psychological meltdown every time she sees party balloons now).
How to rewrite history. I remember very clearly the polls favouring her till Comey opened his investigation in to her emails weeks before the election. At that point it all closed up. Go on google it…. And let’s not forget she got considerably more votes than him.
And anyway polls are only an indicator, but htey are interesting. But I quoted the betting odds for the house and senate. Interestingly fox News’s polls have Trump in the gutter. They are regarded as one of the better ones so it will be interesting.
This gives a very visual image of just why Trump is seriously in soooo much trouble with these mid terms.
https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/61845/
Appears to be the Trump effect – maybe DOGE as well.
NASA now tasked to produce concrete results rather than fostering climate alarm. Climate alarm disappears when the money for it gets cut.
Where have all the climate alarmists gone? Apparently, they are alive and well at National Geographic and Yahoo.
Yahoo recently posted this article about Chasing Ice, based on James Balog’s National Geographic’s documentary film assignment. https://www.upworthy.com/the-largest-proof-of-climate-catastrophe-ex1/. Yahoo describes Balog’s crew as just “hanging out” when a spectacular glacier-calving event happened that they filmed for an hour and 15 minutes then it “simply melted away.”
No, it did not. Calving is not melting, and a dramatic calving event is not proof of its cause, historical uniqueness or climatic significance. If they have video of a Manhattan sized ice berg melting in 1 hour and 15 minutes I will stop being a skeptic.
Worse, the article declares that “more Arctic landmass has melted away in the last 20 years than the previous 10,000 years.” That statement is not science. Landmass does not melt but snow, glaciers and ice sheets do. Plus, Arctic ice includes floating sea ice that melts seasonally and refreezes.
National Geographic and Yahoo are precisely why skeptics numbers have grown and alarmists are shrinking. Not because climate never changes or glaciers never retreat, but because emotionally powerful images are paired with carefully crafted and misleading claims. Alarmism may have lost political momentum, but it has not disappeared. Yahoo’s article reveals scholarships are still available at the National Geographic school of climate storytelling.
““more Arctic landmass has melted away in the last 20 years than the previous 10,000 years.””
Greenland ice area, including the archipelago region, is only just a tiny amount down from its highest extent in 10,000 year, which was during the LIA.
So they are talking abject nonsense… as most klueless klimate kultists tend to do.
The new “truth” is ignorance.
“We still need to fix climate change.”
No. There is nothing to “fix.” With all due respect to Bjorn Lomborg for his decades of published efforts against alarmism, I look forward to the day when he finally experiences what the ERA5 reanalysis model already shows – that incremental CO2 should never have been considered capable of a perceptible influence on our climate system.
More here about energy conversion within the general circulation, to demonstrate this point.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PDJP3F3rteoP99lR53YKp2fzuaza7Niz?usp=drive_link
Thank you for your patience as I keep posting about this.
Yes, Bjorn assumes too much, but we love him anyway. 🙂
Poor Lomborg. He gets so much right, particularly with regard to policy, but he still thinks that climate is a “problem”, and that there is some magical, mystical “solution” out there, waiting to be discovered. But if he would only do some research, he would realize that there is no problem with our climate, nor could we do anything about it if there was.
He’s still lazy, after all these years.
Bjorn cannot point to any evidence of a CO2 effect in Earth’s climate or weather so he should relax.
Bjorn, I’ve been looking for a CO2 effect for over 50 years. I haven’t seen one yet.
I have seen evidence against a CO2 effect such as the period from the 1940’s to the 1970’s, where CO2 increased all through that time period yet the temperatures cooled by about 2.0C, instead of warming. CO2 increases yet the temperatures cooled. Just the opposite of climate alarmist claims for CO2.
No evidence for a CO2 effect, Bjorn. Stop calling it a problem.
I am sure that Mr. Lomborg knows that global warming is not a problem but says otherwise to avoid irritation those diminishing numbers who think it is.
That is doubtful, and besides, they already hate him so, it isn’t accomplishing anything except annoying us Climate Realists.
Pour money into development of green energy sources? And just what might those sources be? Wind and solar very clearly do not work. Fusion – a materials problem; how to find materials to convert plasma at over 200,000,000 F and a neutron flux of 10^16/cm^2 at near light speed into electricity and still survive. Nuclear fission power? – Been around for approaching a century, very safe, no emissions but objected to by luddite politicians and some ignorant “scientists” who see only doom despite its success. Geothermal? – works somewhere, Iceland for example, but little elsewhere. Just what do you have in mind?
Where have the climate alarmists gone? I think they’ve all moved to Wokeachusetts- because this state is as fanatic as ever.
Global warming, astrology, bleeding sick people to make them better, the earth going around the sun. History is full of false beliefs that did a lot of damage and then eventually died out. The problem is that most people believe what they are told and just don’t think.
My concern it the hyperbolic trajectory of Ai/Data Centers is actually the next generation of the Trans-Reality scam.
The climate scam was all about controlling the economies and populations of the world.
Can we say with any level of confidence that AI/Data Centers are not?
As a math and science tutor for the last 15 years, the Chicken Little effect is starting to come true. Even biology teachers are having to include in their teaching that CO2 increases have beneficial effects on the earth. The Greening of earth and increasing food production are not being ignored. Those are the two largest factors that weigh against harms, if any. It makes the Chicken Little tale more poignant.
If you want to make a warmist cry, point this out. They have no answer to it.
I also tried this in a couple of classes. Heat one bar to 70F and another to 71F. Put one in one hand and the other in the other hand. See how many people can tell the difference in a blind test. Some can, but you would be surprised how many get it wrong.
Jim:
Your last paragraph reminded me of videos of organic vs conventional grown produce taste tests where they cut, say, a banana in half labeling one half organic & the other conventional. Of course, most people picked the organic — they could perceive a difference! LOL.
Do the alarmists still negate Zharkova’s theory with this reasoning?
“Solar Forcing vs. Radiative Forcing
Zharkova’s paper argued that the Grand Solar Minimum would lower the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) by roughly 0.22% to 0.3% (amounting to a drop of about 3 W/m²), which she claims could lower global average temperatures by up to 1.0°C. [1, 2, 3]
However, mainstream climate physicists point out a critical flaw in using this number to predict a global ice age:
Forcing ComponentEstimated Radiative ImpactExpected Climate EffectGrand Solar Minimum (Zharkova’s Model)Reduces forcing by roughly 0.25 to 0.3 W/m².At most, a temporary 0.1°C to 0.3°C drop in global average temperatures.Anthropogenic Greenhouse GasesIncreases forcing by over 2.0 W/m² (and rising).Continual 1.0°C to 5.0°C increase over the century.
The mathematical reality is that human greenhouse gas emissions exert a radiative forcing that completely overwhelms fluctuations in solar output. Mainstream scientists note that even if the Sun goes quiet, it would act like a “drop in the bucket”—briefly offsetting a mere decade’s worth of warming before the cycle reverses”
They don’t seem to deny her reasoning, only that warming from CO2 will cancel it out. I suspect some of these mainstream scientists stock up on blankets.
Actually, it has been the drop in cloudiness over the tropics, feeding a series of strong EL Nino events, that has most contributed to the warming in the UAH data since 1979.
I have arrived at the conclusion that UAH “global temperature increase” during El Nino’s is not a good indicator of a warming globe. It is merely an indication of “stirring” a tank to spread already heated water around. It is not “new” heat in the globe. It is not an indication of sudden temperature rise due to anthropogenic causes or even the sun’s variation.
It is an indication of the globe ridding itself of accumulated heat storage due to natural causes. In essence, it is a cooling process, not a warming process. Claiming that the global temperature increases due to anthropogenic causes is a misstatement of what is actually occurring.
It is an indication of climate sciences’ preoccupation with surface temperature rather than total thermodynamic heat in its forms of sensible and latent heat.
I would agree there completely. I do not believe there is one “control knob” of the atmosphere and that predicting future temperature changes is almost impossible considering the chaotic nature of the atmosphere and the host of variables that need to be taken into account. Milankovitch cycles set the gross parameters but everything including our position in the Milky Way will have an impact. One event like the Tonga eruption can completely mess things up. There is no doubt humanity has altered the chemical make up of the atmosphere but to maintain that it is human released CO2 that is causing the change is overly simplistic.
“https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/paper-that-claimed-the-sun-caused-global-warming-gets-retracted/
“Zharkova engaged in a spirited back-and-forth with Rice that generated more heat than light. Both agreed that the Sun is known to wobble around the precise gravitational balance point of the Solar System, pulled slightly off its mark by the attraction of the larger planets like Jupiter and Saturn. But the study seemed to ignore the fact that the Earth’s orbit also shifts in response to those giant planets, causing it to maintain a constant distance from the Sun. The paper instead assumed that Earth’s orbit was unaffected so that any motion of the Sun would alter its distance from the Earth. If that’s not true, then there has been no change in the strength of sunlight reaching the Earth, and there is no mechanism for their centuries-long warming trend.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycenter_(astronomy)#Inside_or_outside_the_Sun?
“If one of the two orbiting bodies is much more massive than the other and the bodies are relatively close to one another, the barycenter will typically be located within the more massive object. In this case, rather than the two bodies appearing to orbit a point between them, the less massive body will appear to orbit about the more massive body, while the more massive body might be observed to wobble slightly.”
Embarrassing!
I assume you are familiar with this paper? https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2025.2487058
From the abstract ….
”….However, orbital forcings may contribute to ∼0.25 °C cooling of Earth from 2027 to 2050, but this effect remains insufficient to offset the warming caused by CO₂”
and this? from
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:4091–4097
DOI 10.1007/s12665-014-3694-7
Jupiter’s effect on Earth’s climate
O. G. Sorokhtin · G. V. Chilingar ·
N. O. Sorokhtin · M. Liu · L. F. Khilyuk
This conclusion was also reached by a well-known
German climatologist Landscheidt (2003). He published an
article with the intriguing title: “New Little Ice Age Instead
of Global Warming?” In his estimate, despite the continuing
increase in the atmosphere of carbon dioxide partial
pressure, in the nearest future there will be only cooling
and the onset of “little ice age” like the one in seventeenth–
eighteenth centuries, with the average temperature decline
of 1 °C and greater. The first occurrence of a strong cooling
is expected about 2030, with considerably greater cooling.
Temperature drop to the level of the early seventeenth
century probably will occur in 2200. The estimates of a
leading Pulkovo observatory astronomer Abdusamatov
(2003) are different in that the start of a slow temperature
decline is anticipated as early as 2012–2015, reaching a
minimum approximately by 2055–2060. This will last
about 50–70 years and the next cycle of global climate
warming will begin early in the twenty-second century.
These climate variations are clearly defined by periodic
(pulsating) changes in the Sun luminosity. They, in turn,
may be associated with the fluctuations in the Sun’s size
and area, which depend on the intensity of its internal
nuclear reactions (Abdusamatov 2003).