Climate Change Hysteria

Use these two arguments to calm the panic

I am no scientist. I really don’t know much about climate science at all. What I am is an observer of human nature and a guy who sometimes designs good arguments based on human nature not data.

Above, from the Atlantic, “Why I am staying angry about climate change.”

In 2012, the American Enterprise Institute published a letter on their website that was sent to the United Nations. It expressed the agreement of 125 scientists that global warming would not be a threat to civilization. See it here:

https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/there-is-no-climate-emergency-say-500-experts-in-letter-to-the-united-nations/

Then, in 2019 they submitted a similar letter to the U.N. signed by 500 prominent scientists, professors and other experts. Again, the letter had no effect. Do you remember hearing about it from the press? That is because it was not covered by the press, just like any other news that is positive about the threat of global warming. This is just further background on how voices that are not alarmed by global warming are ignored.

Catastrophe Interrupted

In my last post I included a chart from the IPCC which lists commonly worried about items as no threat. To refresh, those items included:

River floods, Rain floods, Tropical Cyclones, Coastal erosion,

sand & dust storms, Relative sea level, Fire weather, Heavy snow/ice,

Pluvial flood (rain), Wind speed, Marine heatwaves, Coastal floods

According to the 2023 IPCC report none of these are a problem, but could start to show up from 2050-2100. See chart from 2023 on last week’s article Nov. 28-2023. It is interesting to note that climate alarmists notice these things as signs of climate change already hurting us, even as the IPCC says they are not occurring yet.

The two arguments to use when confronting a climate alarmist.

The true believers get cranky when we use the term “alarmist.” Why? Isn’t believing we are all going to be roasted alive by definition alarmist? Once the alarmist is convinced, they can rarely go back. They start to see everything day to day as climate caused. A heavy rain, a Thunderstorm, a winter without snow, or putting their hand in a stream that they swear was cooler “back in the day.” They don’t think about what months they stuck their hand in it. They are compelled to walk around getting triggered by plastic bags, etc. They start hating people who produce more carbon, neighbors and family that don’t agree with the ideology. Confirmation bias runs their lives.

There has been no global warming in the last 8 years

Argument One

Clmate.gov is a popular, accurate website that is “pro global warming,” and a reliable source for climate buffs, publishes the chart below. The first obvious thing is you can see is no global warming in the last 8 years. Why doesn’t everyone know that?

Alarmist talk constantly how this problem is getting worse and worse by the minute while we have experienced zero warming in 8 years. I carry this chart on my phone, just in case the general public comes up and asks my opinion. It comes in handy at cocktail parties.

The second and biggest thing to note on this chart. We have been told that the climate is warming up compared to the “pre-industrial” period. The start date of 1880 seems arbitrary. Industrialization had already began in 1880 and increased rapidly, so I am no sure why they call the era “pre-industrial.” Take a look at the chart. The period we are comparing to was way colder than normal! “Way colder,” or way hotter here is not that big of a deal because the total change in average temperature is about only 0.7 of a degree of change, on average in 150 years. The average temps in the cold period were about -0.2 on average below “normal.” The average on the later years is about -0.48 degrees Celsius above “normal.” Whatever normal means here. It is represented as a 0 which also seems arbitrary.

They unfairly pick a period to compare to that was way below the line they use for “average.” Also, you can see that the hottest year, 2016 was still slightly below a 1 degree Celsius difference, not coming that close to the dreaded 1.5 degree threshold that 5 years ago was claimed to be deadly. AOC predicted death for all by 2030 from “climate change.” They moved the goalpost. Now they say 2 degrees would be okay. Or higher. Overall we are now about 7 tenths of 1 degree warmer that 150 years ago.

This chart is fatal flaw to their obsession. They believe people are dying more and more each year, while the planet has not warmed in 8 years.

---

Second Argument

The second argument is from psychology and common sense. We have noticed more temperature change in the last 50 years or so. In 1880, when they listed temperatures, they can’t be as accurate as today. There are many arguments that say they were perfectly accurate. Obviously that is not right. 150 years ago, we did not have instruments anywhere near what we have today. Here is a picture of one.

The picture is 1930, 50 years after 1880. In 1880, there was very little photography and I can’t find a picture of a weather station. Now we have technology that makes the global average temperatures easier to calculate and gather. Weather stations were skewed very heavily to the northern hemisphere, where it is colder of course. The stations in South America and Africa were not represented near as much as Europe or the US for instance. As cities emerged, we had a better distribution. It still is changing, though.

There are 10,000 Cities on Planet Earth. Half Didn’t Exist 40 Years Ago

https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/there-are-10000-cities-on-planet-earth-half-didnt-exist-40-years-ago

Vancouver BC did not exist in 1880. Most people take the temperatures as accurate. Remember, we are talking tiny fractions of degrees made when climate change since 1880 is just taken as accurate by today’s climate obsessors. There was also no way to report simultaneously all over the globe. Readings now are simultaneous and more accurate around the world. Conclusion? We have no accurate reading of global temps that are apples for apples comparisons with today before around 1980.

The climate community predicting dire outcomes has commarodarie with like thinkers. All of the “noticing,” is noticed by people trying to confirm their biases. These people are in charge of the reporting. Are we rounding up? or down? This is like leaving only fossil fuel companies and pro fossil fuel people to report on harm from oil operations.

The climate community has already been busted. More than 1,000 emails were hacked in 2009 showing conversations among an inner circle of people who were the key to massaging data. And massage they did. This was called “climategate.” It has been (almost) blotted out of existence on the internet. If you look it up with Google you are fed a barrage of charges that the emails were “taken out of context, are a “conspiracy” or they didn’t prove anything. Or you may get the Hillary Clinton answer, Oh, that’s been debunked! This is just denial. It is a classic example of “who are you going to believe?-me or your own eyes?”

If you want to know the truth, look at the actual emails. It is clear the fix was in among those involved. The precedent has been set 1,000 times. They are humans. They are biased and have no balance. The emails in their entirely are published here: https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/there-are-10000-cities-on-planet-earth-half-didnt-exist-40-years-ago. S

There you have it. Get past the idea that there is no way a movement like this could be false. But, this is from the same species that brought you the heavily endorsed-by-the- public ideas such as witch hunts (lasting 300 years,) or Eugenics (80 years.)

See you soon,

Craig

How could they all be wrong? You have to look at historic hysteria to get the idea. We had witch hunts for 300 years that were widely popular. It is estimated that about 250,000 to 300,000 people were tortured to death in those mediaeval times.