Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org While this site is copyrighted material, feel free to copy and share.
Important climate fact: 20 times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150520193831.htm) And you are afraid of more warming? A couple of more degrees warming in a still abnormally cold world will not be “catastrophic warming” but will benefit all life.
“The whole aim of practical politics (and news media) is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” ― H.L. Mencken, In Defense Of Women
The climate alarm movement is the latest in an endless history of apocalyptic alarmism movements. Many of these movements were previously religiously-oriented but today they are often “secular/ideological” in orientation, as in environmental alarmism crusades. However, the same core themes- primitive mythical themes- dominate both versions of apocalyptic movements.
“… most people pay little attention to the study of history and the result is the ‘fallacy of presentism’: the tendency to assume that events of the present are larger, more important, or more shocking than events of the past”, James Payne in ‘A History of Force’.
The fallacy of “Presentism” in relation to climate: The belief that some extreme weather event or natural disaster is the worst ever because we experienced it firsthand. The larger context is critical for properly understanding weather events, natural disasters, and climate in general.
Nagging the public, Wendell Krossa
Politicians continue to bully the public to “believe in climate change”. “Its real”, they shout, and “we have to tackle it”. We have to act. Now.
Well yes, of course climate change is real. Unending change has always been the normal state of climate. There is no such thing as unchanging climate because climate is a complex, dynamic, and chaotic system and it is impossible for climate to be in stasis or to be static. It cannot but change.
So we all “know” that climate changes. It’s a daily fact of our world. And yes, of course, when alarmist politicians argue for us to “believe” in climate change, they really mean believe their narrative of “manmade climate change” with the consequent alarmist mandate to cease using fossil fuels and shift immediately and entirely to renewables- i.e. decarbonization. We get this meaning behind their badgering.
And tackle climate change? If you mean mitigate, as in decarbonization, then you are engaging a King Canute-like project because we do not yet even understand all that influences climate. It is certain that CO2 is not the sole driver, not even the main driver of climate change. Good scientific research shows that CO2 is “a bit player” in a complex of factors influencing climate to change. The dominant players are factors like water vapor and that is part of a larger complex that includes the influence of cosmic rays increasing cloud cover, the sun interacting with cosmic rays to reduce cloud cover, and much more.
Add to the mix of climate change factors the significant influence of multi-decadal oscillations in ocean currents.
Certainly, we can experiment with alternatives to fossil fuels (renewables) to lower emissions but there is no “existential crisis” obligating us to do so. Because there is no evidence that the climate change that we have experienced over past decades is becoming “catastrophic”. That claim is unscientific alarmist nonsense. Pure apocalyptic exaggeration. And it irresponsibly alarms the public.
And act ‘now’? Well yes, just as humanity has reacted and acted in response to changing climate all across history. Adapting to climate change.
So enough already with the endless setting of dates for the end-of-days, terrorizing people with a false urgency based on a mild and beneficial one degree of warming over the past century. That mild warming has rescued us from the bitter pre-industrial cold of the Little Ice Age (1450-1850). We need still more warming and that will benefit life even more.
The tragedy of being carried away by “crowd madness”, Wendell Krossa
A sense of tragedy is evoked when the natural human desire to fight a heroic and righteous battle against some evil is misdirected into alarmist movements that ultimately cause harm to others. And yes, a generous view of this would grant that the harm is the result of unintended consequences from otherwise well-intentioned people. We saw misdirected heroism in the past century battles of Marxism against industrial/capitalist civilization. Today we are watching this misdirected zeal in the nihilist destruction of Antifa rioting. But we see its most dangerous eruptions in environmental crusades like decarbonization. Point? Make sure your monsters are real and the outcomes of your “righteous” cause are benefitting others, not harming them.
Examples: Rachel Carson was undoubtedly a well-intentioned lady. But her fear-mongering based on shoddy science arguably contributed to the subsequent deaths of many people, often children, due to the bans on DDT that were influenced by her alarmism. See THE EXCELLENT POWDER: DDT’s Political and Scientific History by Donald Roberts, Richard Tren.
Greenpeace alarmism over GM crops has also contributed to the unnecessary deaths of millions of children denied Vitamin A in crops like Golden Rice. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-trashing-rice-killing-children
What themes are driving alarmism today? Wendell Krossa
I look at climate alarmism today and I see the same themes that have dominated the larger environmental alarmism movement over the past 70 years. Behind the environmental alarmism movement I detect the themes of the 19th Century ideology of Declinism. And Arthur Herman, in his brilliant history of Declinism (The Idea of Decline in Western History) acknowledges the presence of varied Christian ideas in this ideology- i.e. the myth of “an original paradise that was lost” (Eden) and the need for a “violent purging” of some evil that threatens life (as in the violent purging detailed in the book of Revelation, viewed as necessary before restoring the lost original paradise).
These ideas are part of the larger complex of primitive myths known as the “apocalyptic millennial” complex of themes that have been detailed in the good histories of Richard Landes (Heaven on Earth), Arthur Mendel (Vision and Violence), and David Redles (Hitler’s Millennial Reich). These authors have shown how varied religious ideas shaped the mass-death movements of Marxism and Nazism, and are now influencing environmentalism.
I trace these ideas further back thru history (reverse engineering) and I find the outline of Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth that brought the apocalyptic millennial complex into Western thinking, deeply embedding apocalyptic mythology in Western consciousness and civilization.
And then I trace those apocalyptic themes back right to their origin in Zoroaster’s apocalyptic theology and then further to the earliest mythologies of Sumeria (Sumerian Flood myth) and Egypt (Destruction of Mankind and Return to Chaos myths).
Joseph Campbell was right- the same core mythical themes have been repeated across all history and across all the cultures of the world. Identify those ideas and you have got to the root of the problem of alarmism- the ideas that feed apocalyptic alarmist hysteria in generation after generation. Apocalyptic millennialism descends down from ancient mythology, to world religions, to the ideology of Declinism, and down to present day alarmism as in the environmental movement, and even to “scientific” versions of alarmism.
Understanding the origin and historical descent of such themes helps to understand the ongoing curse of alarmism- why people still respond to alarmist narratives and exaggerations. Alarmist ideas resonate with deeply embedded themes, perceptions, and impulses. Some call them subconscious archetypes.
It is vital to change the fundamental narrative themes in order to change outcomes in human societies (i.e. to prevent unnecessarily alarmed people from endlessly embracing destructive alarmism salvation schemes like decarbonization).
A new narrative based on real world facts, not primitive mythological themes, is critical to alleviate irrational fear and counter the human tendency to intuitively embrace destructive apocalyptic narrative themes and salvation schemes.
I have summarized the themes/ideas of apocalyptic millennialism in ‘Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives’, in sections below.
Watching a madness movement in real time, Wendell Krossa
Future generations will look back on the contemporary demonization of CO2 as a “pollutant… poison” and shake their heads in stunned disbelief. CO2 is the main food of all life. Over the past millions of years of our “ice-age era” CO2 levels have declined to dangerous lows, approaching the die-off point of all life some 20,000 years ago. CO2 had descended to 185 ppm, and all plant life dies at 150 ppm. We have experienced some recovery today (a “mild” increase to 400-plus ppm) and plant life is once again thriving with a 15% increase in green vegetation across the earth over just the past 40 years (30% over the past century). Earth is still far below the optimal, healthy levels of most past history. CO2 often averaged in the multiple-thousands of ppm and life flourished. There was no “climate crisis”.
What has prompted the mass fear and hysteria over CO2? Could it be that fossil fuels are the life blood of capitalist society, the inexpensive driving force of industrial civilization that has lifted billions out of the misery of poverty? Industrial, capitalist civilization is hated by those under the spell of Declinism ideology. That narrative of nihilist despair embraces the myth that humans will continue to degenerate and their civilization will consequently collapse and end.
Declinism argues that humans in industrial civilization have degenerated and are destroying the natural world, despite overwhelming evidence that the wealth creation of industrial society has enabled humanity to, not only vastly improve the human condition, but also to care for nature as never before. The evidence is clear in the improving condition of all the main resources of the world (See “The true state of life on earth” just below).
Attacking and demonizing CO2 has been an effective approach used by declinists. The demonization of CO2 is a direct attack on the life blood of the hated industrial society. But CO2 demonization is anti-science, anti-human, anti-nature, and anti-life lunacy. Future generations will judge this mass insanity harshly and rightly so.
Other good reads- Michael Hart’s Hubris: The Troubling Science, Economics, and Politics of Climate Change.
Features of alarmism movements, Wendell Krossa
Alarmism is commonly used by people seeking power and meddling control of others. Prehistorian John Pfeiffer noted the early human use of fear/alarm to control others in “Explosion: An inquiry into the origins of art and religion”. He suggested that the ancient cave art in places like Lascaux France revealed the effort of shaman/priests to take others into disorienting darkness and frighten them with anamorphic art (figures appearing to move in flickering candlelight). The intention of the shaman was to attain power over others with claims of knowing the secrets to the invisible realms. After terrorizing people with metaphysical threats, the priests/shaman would them tell them what sacrifices they had to make to appease the threatening spirits.
Additionally, alarmism is used to gain resources. In early ‘central temple’ versions of religion the priests took the best cuts of meat for themselves, along with the other produce that was obligatorily brought to the temples. Today, the same use of alarmism to gain resources is manifest in jockeying for cuts of the massive funding made available for green projects. Climate alarmism has become the new “big business” where those who do best at panic-mongering gain the most funding.
Alarmism also plays with and incites the tribal impulse in people (i.e. the felt need to take action against threatening “enemies”). Both sides in social/ideological divides engage alarmism crusades against their opponents.
We are observing a major alarmism movement today in relation to climate change. Though climate alarmism is often presented in “secular” language, even scientific language and terms, it is a profoundly religious-like movement embracing the same complex of primitive themes and protocols as all past apocalyptic movements, with the same archetypal religious divide between true believers and unbelievers (i.e. “deniers… they don’t believe in climate change”).
Other notable correlations and actions/responses in alarmism movements.
First, my rough definition: Alarmism is the exaggeration of problems in life to apocalyptic scale thereby distorting the true state of problems/issues in the world and irresponsibly frightening people.
Alarmism is a form of mental and emotional terrorism. Persistent alarmism pushes people into an agitated state of fear. The fear generated by alarmism narratives eventually creates panic among people and that promotes the spread of irrationality. The hysterical panic-mongering of alarmist-type people (“we’re all gonna die”, existential catastrophe is just up ahead on the horizon) arouses the survival impulse in populations and renders people susceptible to unscientific, illogical, and irrational salvation schemes.
Frightened people are then willing/open to embrace the destructive salvation schemes that are often responses to problems that can cause more damage than the original problem purportedly posed.
A striking example of a response that is more harmful than the purported threat is the climate alarm salvation scheme of ‘decarbonization’ which is an irrational and destructive response to the mild climate warming of past decades. There have been immense benefits from the mild 1 degree C warming over the past century. But this mild warming has been exaggerated as the onset of an “existential crisis” that will soon catastrophically damage and even destroy life. In response, climate alarmists are agitating for a fundamental transformation of industrial civilization that involves abandoning the inexpensive fossil fuels that have lifted humanity out of poverty and into the improved human condition of our modern world. Remember, we get some 5000-plus products from fossil fuels, many of them essential to human well-being.
Another example is the all-encompassing and harsh lockdown responses to Covid that has caused immense (and largely unreported) damage among populations (i.e. loss of businesses, unemployment, depression and other social maladies, neglected treatment of other diseases, etc.). While Covid is a serious problem, the lockdown responses have often been excessive and harmful. We know now that it was more important to protect vulnerable sectors of the population, while others could cautiously maintain normal patterns of life.
Additionally, alarmism salvation schemes often demand “instantaneous transformation” of societies based on the alarmist claim that the apocalypse is always imminent (i.e. the end is nigh, we are approaching “the last tipping point” or “point of no return”, or there are just a few years left to save the world, with dates repeatedly set for the “end of days”).
Alarmists then unleash the totalitarian impulse with claims that freedom and normal democratic processes (i.e. skepticism, questioning, free and open discussion/debate, freedom of choice) are too obstructionist to save the world in time. Further, demands for “instantaneous transformation” are usually accompanied by demands for “coercive purging” of threats/evil (i.e. silencing, banning, de-platforming, even criminalizing opponents). Efforts to coercively purge “obstructionist” opposition can lead to state-authorized force/violence by alarmists, and that force may evoke reactionary defensive force from people who realize that their rights and freedoms are being taken from them by their political opponents.
Other recent historical examples of alarmist crusades unleashing terror on populations- the Marxist alarmism over the claimed threat of capitalism, the Nazi panic-mongering against Jewish Bolshevism, along with today’s environmental alarmism movements promoting activism against industrial civilization. Again, across history both Left and Right have been guilty of using alarmist approaches though today the Left is doing so more prominently.
Emotions associated with alarmism movements- anxiety (i.e. eco-anxiety in children), despair, resignation/fatalism, hopelessness, depression. Fatalism/resignation? Note the response of young couples refusing to have children out of fear of bringing them into a world facing an apocalyptic future, or children losing interest in school because they have been indoctrinated that they may die before reaching adulthood.
Remember, exaggeration of looming apocalyptic catastrophe has always been the great lie that distorts the true state of life entirely. There has never been a better time to be alive on Earth and all the major indicators of life show amazing improvement with much more to come. We need more courageous voices to challenge the irrational, insane, and irresponsible alarmism over environmental issues and states.
Useful sources on themes and patterns in alarmism movements: Arthur Herman’s The Idea of Decline in Western History, Richard Landes’ Heaven On Earth, Arthur Mendel’s Vision and Violence, David Redles’ Hitler’s Millennial Reich, and David Altheide’s Creating Fear: News and the construction of Crisis.
The anti-liberalism of modern Liberalism, Liberalism abandoning Classic liberal principles, Wendell Krossa
Significant elements of modern Liberalism, notably in the US and Europe, have transitioned to become advocates of highly illiberal crusades. Various public “Lefties” (i.e. people like Bill Burr, Jimmy Dore, Joe Rogan, and others) have acknowledged the contemporary abandonment of Classic Liberalism by groups of people self-identifying as Liberal, or now more commonly as Progressive or Woke.
Contemporary Liberalism appears to have forgotten the fundamental principles of Classic Liberalism- principles/practices like inclusion, tolerance, equality, and freedom for diversity of opinion and speech.
Most disconcerting in Western Liberalism is the ongoing eruption of an authoritarian spirit, leaning totalitarian at times. The Liberal sector of society now openly censors and silences dissent and disagreement. We have seen this crusade against freedom for decades in the climate debate. We are also witnessing this anti-freedom crusade promoted by public Liberals in politics, media, and entertainment who frequently engage in de-platforming, banning, and cancelling their opponents.
Western Liberalism has been agitating for more central control through state law and state coercion and that shows a disconcerting affiliation for classic collectivism/Marxism, where the state is venerated as the representative of the greater or common good (Hegel’s state as deity and “true freedom” as subjection to the state). Collectivist central control then becomes the state as the highly centralized enforcer of elite views, interests, and laws. Consequent to such centralized control of populations, inclusive diversity, equality, and freedom are no longer tolerated.
It used to be conventional wisdom that modern Liberalism would stand above all for tolerance. But now many Liberals openly exhibit an easily offended and enraged intolerance toward differing others. We see these disturbing features in movements like Wokism, Progressivism in general, and in environmental alarmism.
Add here the strengthening dualist and tribal elements in the worldview of modern Liberals that seeks to exclude and label the differing other as criminal and intolerably dangerous to public good. Remember that President Obama’s AG, Loretta Lynch, tried to criminalize skeptical science that contradicted, with sound evidence, the “manmade climate catastrophe” narrative.
Contemporary Liberalism has forgotten basic Classic Liberal tenets like “I may be offended by what you believe and say but I will protect, to the death, your right to believe and say what you choose”. Such tolerance understood that protecting the diverse/different other would also ensure the protection of one’s own freedom when the other side attained governing power.
The collectivist strain emerging in modern Liberalism repeatedly argues that individual freedom and rights are not as important as the concerns of the larger group, the “greater or common good”. The greater good must take precedence over individual freedom and rights. This was the central error of Marxist collectivism that resulted in the mass-death movements of last century (100 million deaths).
Individual freedom is the foundational issue at play here. We best counter the dangerous collectivist centralizing of power, and the inevitable unleashing of the totalitarian impulse with centralizing of societal control, by dispersing power among diverse and competing individuals/entities.
Collectivism centralizes power under the control of “enlightened vanguards”, based on the collectivist principle that some elite has to define and run the collective or greater good for all others (i.e. for the good of the masses- the “intolerables”- that are too dumb to know what is best for them). Who said that the most dangerous people are those who believe they know what is best for all others and will coerce others to embrace that elite-defined good.
The counter approach, oriented to the free and equal individuals, was a foundational principle from Magna Carta on down- that all members of a society would be assured equal rights, responsibilities, protections, and freedoms under law. See Daniel Hannan’s great history of the development of the individual freedom approach (“Inventing Freedom”), and Arthur Herman’s treatment of the history of the two main approaches to organizing human societies (the free individual versus collectivism approaches) in “The Cave and the Light”.
We ought to be careful of embracing ideological positions that permit us to meddle in and control others, taking away their freedom and self-determination. Controlling types like to claim that their “enemies” pose a dangerous threat to the greater whole (i.e. imminent threat of catastrophic harm) hence they must be constrained and stopped by state force. Climate apocalypse narratives push this story line. They claim their activism is a righteous battle against evil and vital to “save the world”. They imagine they are on a heroic quest of utmost importance and can brook no dissent as the stakes are the very future of life on Earth. They are crusaders against what they claim is the inevitable and looming apocalypse. They repeatedly set dates for the “end-of-days” because it endlessly recedes away into the future as real life denies their apocalyptic vision and continues to improve over the long term.
Note: David Boaz (Libertarianism) pointed out that both sides in the US situation fail on the issue of respecting the freedom of differing others. Boaz said that Republicans need to embrace more freedom in social issues (gay rights, women’s freedom of choice, ending the drug war) and Democrats need to embrace more freedom in relation to economic issues (i.e. less taxation and redistribution of other’s income, less regulation of other’s businesses). His comments apply to other countries also as the same Liberal/Conservative divide is common today.
Further note: Conservatives feel they must meddle in and control the lives of others for a “greater good”. This busy-body impulse is based on the religious belief that if some in a society “sin” then God will punish all in that society. So to save the nation they must prevent others from “sinning” as necessary to protect all.
Liberals also feel they must meddle in and control the lives of others for a greater good. They base this on their myth of looming apocalypse from climate change, that all will die if they do not stop others from using fossil fuels.
Now more on climate alarmism because of its high visibility on the alarm movement landscape…
Challenging the alarm narrative, Wendell Krossa
Where is the promotion of basic science with its healthy skepticism, questioning, inclusion of contrary evidence, debate, and balancing falsification? (This comment is aimed mainly at politicians)
It is interesting to watch across the spectrum (Left to Right) politicians unquestioningly affirming the main unproven assumptions of the climate alarm movement. Those assumptions are not “settled, consensus science” by any respectable empirical measure. They are assumptions/exaggerations that have more to do with apocalyptic mythology than climate science.
Two prominent unproven assumptions:
(1) That CO2 is mainly responsible for warming climate. This assumption ignores or dismisses the varied other natural factors that show much stronger correlations to the climate change that we have seen over past decades. Note, for example, the cosmic ray/sun/cloud interaction (See Henrik Svensmark’s ‘The Chilling Stars’), or the multi-decadal oscillations/shifts in ocean currents from cooling to warming phases, among others. These natural factors overwhelm the CO2 influence on climate.
(2) That warming will be “catastrophic” if it rises and passes another 1.5-2.0 degrees C.
First, we have had only a 1 degree C warming over the past century and that is part of the natural recovery from the earlier descent into the bitter cold of the Little Ice Age of AD 1450-1850. Who in their right mind would want to return to the pre-industrial cold and dangerously low levels of CO2?
Scenarios of another 3-6 degrees C. warming are based on discredited computer models. More to the point, a few degrees more warming would not be catastrophic but would be a return to the more normal, optimal averages of most of past history when all life flourished with much warmer average temperatures (i.e. 20 degrees Centigrade-plus, versus the average 15 degrees C of today’s world). A much warmer world means extended habitats for life (i.e. no ice at the poles as was the state of the world for over 90% of world history), longer growing seasons, less severe gradients between the warm and cold areas that produce more severe storms, and more evaporation which means less drought, and more.
Add here that more basic plant food in the atmosphere- CO2- has resulted in a much greener world (a 15% increase in green vegetation since 1980) along with record crop production over recent years. All life is benefitting from more CO2 and more warmth. It is irrational madness to claim that more warming will devastate life when past history shows a much warmer world benefitted life immensely.
Remember also that the past warm periods of our interglacial (i.e. Holocene Optimum/Minoan, Roman, Medieval) were all warmer than our modern warm period and civilizations and all life flourished during those previous warm periods.
More climate facts…
Deaths from climate and natural disasters are down 96% over the past century. There is no increase in hurricane frequency or intensity. Wildfires have declined notably across the past century. Sea level rise continues at the slow and mild rate of about 1.5-3.0 mm per year. Sea levels have risen steadily since the onset of our interglacial, the Holocene. There has been 120 meters of sea level rise so far (over 10,000 years).
Extreme weather events (heat waves, cold snaps) are common all through warm and cold periods. They are weather events, influenced by varied other factors than climate.
One more: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/the-medieval-warm-period-a-global-phenonmena-unprecedented-warming-or-unprecedented-data-manipulation/
Note: The arguments in the comment below are not intended to downplay the obligation to care for and use resources responsibly, conserving them for future generations. The comment is intended to counter the irresponsible fear-mongering over population growth and environmental issues. My comment is a counter to doom narratives that ignore the human success in caring for world resources and creatively finding alternatives to scarce resources.
A counter narrative to the great fallacy of too few resources, too many people– Wendell Krossa
A dark meta-narrative dominates much public consciousness today. It is doom-oriented and has a darkening and debilitating influence on the human spirit. It claims that too many people exist on Earth today, and they are greedily consuming Earth’s limited resources to the point of exhaustion, and thereby destroying the planet. Hence, the doom narrative claims that overall “life is getting worse” (YouGov survey in Ten Global Trends). (PS- And you wonder why so many people, including many children, suffer from anxiety and depression today? Irresponsible alarmist exaggeration has a potent harmful impact on people.)
Proponents of this gloomy narrative look for negative incidents/events and iconic images that affirm the doom message. We have all seen the starving polar bear on the ice floe accompanied by the entirely wrong claim that polar bears were going extinct when in fact their populations are thriving. Media have repeatedly shown us burning patches of forest or piles of garbage somewhere followed by the misleading propaganda that such anomalies illustrate the decline of life toward disastrous ending. And no, I am not dismissing the problems of wildfires, deforestation, or careless disposal of waste. But those media portrayals (often anecdotal incidents/images) do not communicate the true state of those issues.
Additionally, negative anomalies (e.g. downturns in long-term trends) do not affirm the decline of life toward disastrous ending.
Remember when oil prices rose in the mid-Oughts. Immediately, media were awash with renewed claims that we had reached “peak oil” and the final decline of that resource was then beginning. The “end” was nigh, once again. Numerous claims have been made by prophets of doom over past decades that varied resources would become exhausted and mass-death would result.
Note these predictions made around 1970: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/18-spectacularly-wrong-predictions-made-around-the-time-of-first-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year-3/
Harvard biologist George Wald said in 1970- “Civilization will end within 15-30 years”.
At that time Paul Ehrlich stated- “The death rate will increase at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years (1970-80)”. And “(between 1980 and 1989) some 4 billion people… would perish in the Great Die-Off”.
Peter Gunter said in 1970 that famine would cover the entire world except Western Europe, North America, and Australia. In 1970 Life magazine reported that scientists had evidence that city dwellers would have to wear gas masks to survive.
Ehrlich also claimed that life expectancy would decline to 42 years by 1980. Kenneth Watt declared that by 2000 there would be no more crude oil. Harrison Brown predicted that humanity would run out of key metals by 1990 (Ehrlich affirmed the same). Senator Gaylord Nelson claimed that by the mid-90s between 75-80 percent of all species of animals would be extinct. And on and on the doom predictions went. These apocalyptic prophets affirmed their message by endlessly and repeatedly setting the dates for the ‘end-of-days’.
This doom narrative distorts entirely the true state of life. It is a message of despair that incites fear and fortifies a sense of tribal exclusion and stinginess, even hoarding. It tells people that nature is stingy, resources are limited, and there are too many people clamoring for those limited resources, so fight for your own survival/success and that of your tribe. The doom narrative promotes the “limited good” fallacy of primitive societies- that if some are getting more then others must be losing out. The fallacy of limited resources generates fear, envy, resentment, desperation, and collectivist activism that views the only solution to the problems of life as confiscating the resources of successful people and redistributing them.
And on the other hand…
The true state of life affirms an entirely different narrative. All the main indicators of resources on Earth show stunning abundance in the natural world, even superabundance, and natural generosity that continues to amaze us (Marion Tupy of Humanprogress.org is preparing to publish a book on ‘Superabundance’). With more people arriving on Earth we find endless new exhibitions of creative action to solve problems and find solutions that benefit all. More people continue to produce inventive new technologies (goods and services) to improve the human condition and nature. The result has been ongoing improvement in all the major features of life. Consequently, there has been no limit to the resources that humanity needs.
Joanna Szurmak and Pierre Desrochers (Population Bombed) detail some of the main indicators of the real state of the world and life.
They note that people live longer and healthier lives and are wealthier and better educated. Reserves of oil are more abundant than ever, air and water quality are better, and forest cover has expanded significantly over recent decades. Critical to note in their book- “economic prosperity and a cleaner environment are the direct results of both population growth and humanity’s increased use of fossil fuels” (p.xvi).
They add further, taking cues from the earlier research of Julian Simon, that more people are more hands to work and more brains to innovate. Also, people are able to decouple from local limits through trade. They conclude that the pessimist narrative has been proven entirely wrong. Two centuries of evidence has disproven the pessimist narrative on population growth and resources. More people on Earth has resulted in economies of scale, more efficiency and productivity, and progressively less damaging ways of doing things (i.e. better outputs with fewer inputs).
We see the evidence of this widespread improvement of life in the fact that with billions more people there has not been mass starvation as the prophets of doom claimed but, instead, a stunning and ongoing increase in crop production with no limits in sight. More people, means more Norman Borlaugs to invent hi-yield crops and feed far more people, while saving more forest as hi-yield crops mean more agricultural product on the same or less land. And more people contributing to more human creativity and technological improvement feeds into ongoing trends like “de-materialization” which is the declining per capita use of material resources.
Others (i.e. Julian Simon) note the historical evidence of a process that kicks in to solve apparent resource scarcities if people are left free to solve problems. When there is a shortage of some resource, prices rise and that incentivizes people to discover more reserves of that resource, or to find/create alternatives. We saw this process operate in the 19th Century transition from whale oil to fossil fuels, in the discovery of fracking that opened massive new reserves of fossil fuels, and we are now watching this process operate in the ongoing discoveries regarding portable nuclear and fusion technologies (e.g. https://www.wsj.com/articles/mini-nuclear-reactors-offer-promise-of-cheaper-clean-power-11613055608). And what about futurist Arthur Clarke predicting that we would tap into dark energy in this century, giving us an infinitely unlimited source of energy?
Who knows what human creativity will break open for the future. Past long-term trends (our track record) affirm the hope that we will continue to solve problems, invent new technologies that cannot even be imagined yet, and ultimately create a better world and future. As Julian Simon said, we (humanity) have been more creators than destroyers. And we have done well in making life ever better.
Further, observe the natural beneficence of nature. As Bob Brinsmead oft reminds us, “Think of the sunshine that radiates the earth with abundance that never runs out. Think of the prodigious world of nature- how plants do not merely reproduce but reproduce an overflow from which all creatures feed. The generosity of nature is such that the harvest tends to be far greater than the sowing.”
An example of this profligate generosity of nature: One seed of corn will produce 2-4 new cobs of corn, each with 600-800 seeds. That is 1 seed of corn producing roughly 2000 new seeds of corn. And nature does most of the work once the seed is planted, with sun and rain provided freely for growth.
It is incontrovertible that there is a superabundance and generosity built into life, and with the addition of conscious human creativity and innovation tapping into that abundance, the result is endless improvement over the long term. The human mind introduces the limitless element into the mix because human freedom and creative thought opens infinite potential in all directions (Freeman Dyson).
This narrative of superabundance and ongoing improvement of life inspires hope, love, generosity, and should encourage the affirmation of human freedom to innovate, invent, and create. The narrative of hope undermines the stingy tribal reaction that views others as threats to one’s survival and incites the hoarding of resources from others. The narrative of unlimited generosity encourages more freedom to share the abundance of the world.
For extensive detail and data sources that affirm that more people are a benefit to life, and that human creativity transcends limits on resources, see the research of Julian Simon (Ultimate Resource) and Desrocher and Szurmak in Population Bombed, among others.
Doom narratives fail to grasp and present the true state of life because they ignore the fundamental goodness of people and they dismiss the unlimited creative potential of human minds.
Note: Feel free to toy with the idea that the generosity of nature speaks to the stunning generosity of metaphysical reality behind nature.
Note: The themes of doom narratives are currently manifest in the hysteria eruption over “natural climate change”.
Further note: Its the story that matters:
Varied scientists have bemoaned the fact that detailed scientific evidence, critical as it is, does not change the minds of those trapped in doom narratives. This is because there are subconscious factors involved- i.e. deeply embedded themes and impulses that intuitively orient people to embrace apocalyptic doom narratives. Those deeply embedded mythical themes, primitive ideas, still dominate the world religions and are widely embraced in the “secular” ideologies of today, and even in science.
Here is a partial list of archetypical themes of apocalyptic-like narratives (see full lists below- “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives”)
(1) There was a better past but (2) corrupt people (i.e. fallen humanity, original sin) ruined the original paradise world. (3) Life is now declining toward something worse, toward collapse and ending/apocalypse. Hence, (4) the need for salvation and redemption and (5) the obligation to purge the evil threat to life in order to save the world. Then (6) paradise can be restored. (7) Dualism is also a prominent feature of doom narratives and that feature incites the tribal impulse in people. People are called to courageously fight for their tribe in a “righteous battle” against their “evil” enemies.
I have noted elsewhere on this site, that scientific detail does not move many people because most people live by story and story themes. Hence, the need for a counter narrative/story to the doom narrative. A story with an authentic hero’s journey and quest. A story that offers something to conquer and make right. Something to engage the human spirit and its dreaming impulse, its imagination, and its desires for heroic conquest. But a story based on empirical reality, affirmed with good evidence on the true state of life.
The doom narrative abuses the human spirit and distorts the basic features of human story by appeal to the dark side with threat and fear. Yes, it also offers a righteous battle and salvation scheme but it is tribally-oriented righteousness framed by the base feature of primitive dualism.
The key differences between doom and hope narratives have to do with features like the evaluation of humanity. In doom narratives people are considered essentially corrupt/evil and deserving of punishment. Consequently, humanity is threatened with destruction/apocalypse- with the ending of life in disaster. Doom narratives are stories of nihilist meaninglessness.
The hope narrative affirms humanity as fundamentally good, not deserving punishment, but instead, deserving of the generous bounty of this world. And the heroic struggle of humanity (the righteous battle) is to make this imperfect world something better, to contribute something to make life more beautiful. That is the true “salvation” of our world. Humanity’s true quest is to conquer problems/imperfections and take life into an open and infinitely better future. The authentic hero’s journey is making some unique personal contribution to this overall human quest of improving life. And the best evidence affirms that we are doing this successfully.
Beating a mantra into public consciousness Wendell Krossa
We hear the repeated mantra in news media today that hot days or heat waves are the “hottest on record”. The alarmist mantra of “hottest on record” refers only to the formal record of the last 150 years. That brief snippet pulled out of the larger climate history permits alarmist distortion of the true state of climate. The hottest days and years of the last 150 years were actually during the 1930s (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/07/15/the-deadly-heat-wave-of-july-1936-in-the-middle-of-arguably-the-hottest-decade-on-record-for-the-us/). But that hotter period was before CO2 could be blamed for climate change so it is ignored as it doesn’t suit the larger narrative point that climate alarmists are trying to make.
Why do we hear this particular mantra of “hottest on record” repeated endlessly by news media, politicians, and celebrities? Why are today’s hot days and heat waves not placed within the larger climate history to give the public a proper perspective on things?
The exaggerated slogan of heat threat (along with other extreme weather events) is repeated to affirm a larger background narrative- that climate is warming dangerously and will become catastrophic if it warms past another 1.5-2.0 degrees C. Further to the narrative, “hottest on record” affirms that any warming is evidence of a human-caused “existential crisis” (“manmade” climate change) because we are burning too much fossil fuel and causing atmospheric CO2 levels to rise. And the only permissible response, according to climate authoritarians, must be the immediate and radical decarbonization of our societies and a massive shift to renewables. This salvation scheme (to “save the world”) is already causing immense harm to the poorest people with rising energy costs.
This environmental apocalypse story of looming climate crisis (one of an endless series of environmental alarms over the past 70 years) is part of an even larger background political narrative that is anti-industrial civilization, anti-capitalism, and fundamentally anti-human. (See, for example, “Hubris: The troubling science, economics, and politics of climate change” by Michael Hart.)
This site challenges the narrative of looming disaster caused by humanity using fossil fuels. While there are elements of truth in the mix- i.e. that it is warming and CO2 contributes to the warming- good evidence from the best climate scientists on the planet does not support the alarmist exaggeration that we are mostly responsible for rising CO2 levels, or that CO2 is mainly responsible for climate warming, or that the warming will become catastrophic. As noted often before on this site, there is no climate crisis and there is no scientifically sound reason to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies.
The true state of life on Earth (a revised reposting) Wendell Krossa
While problems exist everywhere, they are solvable and humanity has done well in caring for and preserving world resources. For detailed research on the true status of world resources see Julian Simon’s ‘Ultimate Resource’, Bjorn Lomborg’s ‘Skeptical Environmentalist’, or ‘Population Bombed’ by Szurmak and Desrochers, among many similar studies. Below are some basic facts on the main resources of our world. They are the main indicators of the true state of life on our planet. They all show that life is not declining toward something worse. There is no looming environmental apocalypse.
Leading indicators for evaluating the true state of life:
(1) World forest cover in the 1950s was 3.8 billion hectares (FAO stats). World forest cover today is 4.1-plus billion hectares, despite the world population tripling from 2.4 billion people in the early 1950s to almost 8 billion today. Deforestation rates continue to decline and reforestation/afforestation projects continue to succeed. We are not destroying the world’s forests. http://www.fao.org/forestry/fra/52045/en/
(2) Proven species extinctions. While any species extinction is unacceptable, we have dramatically improved our care of nature. Species extinctions are on a notably declining trend line and have decreased from about 5 per year in 1870 to about 0.5 per year today (see the IUCN Red List All Extinct Species by Decade on p.101 of Patrick Moore’s new book ‘Fake Invisible Catastrophes And Threats of Doom’). While nature has destroyed over 95% of all species over the span of life on this planet, compassionate humanity is now protecting species as never before.
See Julian Simon’s chapter on the IUCN report on species loss (in Ultimate Resource and other books) and the discredited assumption/correlation between habitat loss and species extinctions. The wrong assumption was that with habitat loss of 90% some 50% of species would go extinct. Both the Northeastern US and Northeastern Brazil study areas disproved that assumption. The assumption did not understand the resiliency, adaptability, and toughness of life. There is no species holocaust occurring. Nature is not “fragile”.
(3) Climate change (the atmosphere as a main resource): There has been a mild one degree Centigrade of warming over the past century and a half. That slightly warmed our still abnormally cold world. We are in an “ice-age era”. Average surface temperatures today are around 14.5 degrees Centigrade. That is 5 degrees Centigrade below the more optimal average surface temperatures of the past 500 million years (19.5 degrees Centigrade). For over 90% of the past 500 million years there was no ice at the poles. That is a more normal and optimal world. And contrary to the falsified climate models, there is no settled evidence of much more warming occurring in the future. There is no “climate crisis” looming.
Also, most of our Holocene inter-glacial, that began around 11,000 years ago, has been warmer than today. The Holocene Climatic Optimum (roughly 10-5,000 years ago) was about 1 degree C. warmer. The Roman Warm Period (250 BCE to 400 CE) and the Medieval Warm Period (950- 1,250 CE)- were also warmer than today. Life overall and human civilization have flourished during such warming periods. From about 5,000 years ago our interglacial began a long-term cooling trend (the “Neoglacial” period).
(4) Ocean fisheries are not collapsing and aquaculture is meeting the growing human demand for fish. See Ray Hilborn reports and FAO summaries on fisheries. The world fisheries are not being decimated. Wild fish consumption has peaked over past decades and aquaculture has been growing rapidly to meet the growing demand for fish. https://www.washington.edu/news/2020/01/13/fisheries-management-is-actually-working-global-analysis-shows/
(5) The overall agricultural land-base is not severely degrading. Also, any soil erosion must be understood in net terms, as related to new soil regeneration rates. Further, over the past century and more, we have returned several hundred million acres of agricultural land back to nature as hi-yield GM crops enable farmers to produce more crop on the same or less land. We have probably already passed “peak-agricultural land” use. Humanity now produces 25% more food than we need. Hydroponics will also meet much of future food demands.
These, and other indicators, show that the overall long-term trajectory of life is improving, not worsening.
A note to all our children: Do not fear the future of life on our planet. With continued wealth creation we will continue to solve the remaining world resource problems and life will continue to get ever better than before. Your personal contribution to making life better will add to humanity’s overall success. Do not let false alarmism narratives rob you of hope.
Keep the big picture in view
The climate change that we have experienced is exceedingly mild compared to past climate change. Note the graph on page 33 of Professor Ian Plimer’s paleo-climate history in “Heaven and Earth”. The changes in climate over the last 30,000 years of the last glaciation (50,000 to 20,000 BCE) were swings of up to 20 degrees C between cool and warm period averages. The climate changes over the 20,000 years of our interglacial have been swings of only a few degrees and so Plimer concludes, there have been “far more stable temperatures during the current interglacial”.
And over the past 5000 years of our interglacial we have been on a long-term cooling trend with each warm period cooler than the previous ones. Our current Modern Warm Period is the coolest of the last four warm periods (i.e. the Minoan, Roman, Medieval, and Modern). We are heading toward a possibly cooler future and a few more degrees of warming would be a beneficial respite from cooling which is far more destructive to all life. We should welcome more warming.
Climate warming alarmists have the true state of long-term climate trends all wrong. We ought to be more concerned about cooling than warming.
The basic issues of the climate debate Wendell Krossa
Yes, climate change is occurring. We all agree on this. But no, it is not a “crisis” or “catastrophic”.
Yes, CO2 plays a role in warming climate. But it is only a “bit player” because other natural factors play a much larger role. CO2 is not the main cause of climate change (see new report and sources below). So a “no” here as it is not scientifically correct to claim that climate change is “manmade”.
Yes, we need to “do something about climate change”. But adaptation strategies are better than mitigation policies that will devastate our societies with costly and ineffective approaches like renewables.
And our primary concern should be the current cold status of many areas of our planet (see comments just below), not more warmth.
Because CO2 is a bit player in climate change, and hence, human use of fossil fuels and emissions of CO2 are not the main cause of climate change, we do not need to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies. Plentiful and cheap fossil fuels are critical for lifting people out of poverty, for creating the wealth that enables us to improve the human condition and properly care for the natural world.
The climate alarmism narrative is wrong on many of its main claims.
Climate has always changed, and always will change. It is a complex, dynamic system that is never static. And a multitude of natural factors influence climate change. The human influence is minor and is overwhelmed by other natural factors (“natural variability”).
Add the fact that warmer climate periods are more beneficial than colder climate states because colder climate conditions produce more droughts (less evaporation), more extinctions, and more severe storminess due to more severe differences (gradients) between cold and warm fronts meeting.
There are many other variables that could be brought into climate discussions- for example, the fact that there are many places across the world that are experiencing climate cooling just as there are areas experiencing climate warming. Or that “perturbations” in carbon cycles (i.e. the land biomass/atmosphere exchange, the ocean/atmosphere exchange and the differences in such exchanges), such perturbations overwhelm the human emissions of CO2, thereby raising questions about what is really causing the modern era rise in atmospheric CO2 levels- humanity or nature? And, of course, the strong correlations of natural factors to climate change, correlations that are stronger than the human emissions correlation to climate change. Notable natural factors include the cosmic ray/cloud/sun interaction, or the multi-decadal oscillations in ocean currents like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and so on.
Further, there is the concern among some scientists that significant evidence points to possible cooling becoming the trend over coming decades https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/02/03/the-new-pause-lengthens-from-5-years-4-months-to-5-years-6-months/
Aside from notable El Ninos (1998, 2015/16) we have also experienced long-term pauses in warming over past decades and climate has also been subjected to the influence of extended solar minimums. The world is currently in another extended warming pause- https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/09/01/the-new-pause-lengthens-yet-again/
Climate is a very complex, dynamic system and CO2 is not the controlling variable in climate change. It is a “bit player” and trying to turn a CO2 knob and control climate is as futile as King Canute trying to prevent the rising tide. Remember President Obama’s Canute-like moment when he claimed right after his election- “This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow”. Good one, Prez.
Among all the complexity that we continue to discover regarding climate variables it is manifestly premature speculation to claim that the exceedingly minor trace greenhouse gas- CO2- is mainly responsible for climate change. With the high levels of uncertainty around so many variables influencing climate, it is foolish to dogmatically focus on that one minor variable in the mix and then commit to shutting down fossil fuels that have been so critical to the success of industrial civilization. Fossil fuels have been vital to improving the human condition and enabling humanity to create the wealth that helps us to properly care for our world.
You’re afraid of global warming? That is misplaced fear.
“Cold weather kills far more people than hot weather” at https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150520193831.htm
“Cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather, according to an international study analyzing over 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries. The findings published in The Lancet also reveal that deaths due to moderately hot or cold weather substantially exceed those resulting from extreme heat waves or cold spells.”
My conclusion from this study: Global warming will save far more lives from cold mortality than will be lost to warming.
Anthony Watts site offers some of the best reporting on climate and other environmental issues. https://wattsupwiththat.com/
Wildfire and climate expert Jim Steele regularly posts on Watts’ site. A recent example: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/11/national-public-radios-misinformation-on-wildfires-and-climate-part-2/
And data showing wildfires were much worse in the past. There has been a notable decline in wildfires over the past century:
Further, this new report “Challenging the UN, Study Finds Sun—not CO2—May Be Behind Global Warming”. The report states that natural factors, not human emissions of CO2, may be responsible for warming over coming decades. From- https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/16/climate-scientists-accuse-the-ipcc-of-cherrypicking-datasets-which-support-their-alarmist-narrative/
Quote from the report: “The sun and not human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) may be the main cause of warmer temperatures in recent decades, according to a new study with findings that sharply contradict the conclusions of the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“The peer-reviewed paper, produced by a team of almost two dozen scientists from around the world, concluded that previous studies did not adequately consider the role of solar energy in explaining increased temperatures.
“The new study was released just as the UN released its sixth “Assessment Report,” known as AR6, that once again argued in favor of the view that man-kind’s emissions of CO2 were to blame for global warming. The report said human responsibility was “unequivocal.”
“But the new study casts serious doubt on the hypothesis.
“Calling the blaming of CO2 by the IPCC “premature,” the climate scientists and solar physicists argued in the new paper that the UN IPCC’s conclusions blaming human emissions were based on “narrow and incomplete data about the Sun’s total irradiance.”
Stop the irrational, irresponsible panic-mongering
Again, the Lancet study- 20 times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. 20 times more. With the slight 1 degree C of warming over the past century, deaths from cold are declining more than deaths from warming are rising. See Bjorn Lomborg’s comments on this evidence at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/climate-change-is-actually-saving-lives/news-story/3e85efcacd10118331de4f92cb6cdfe9
Global warming has been a net benefit to humanity because more people are alive now due to the mild warming of recent past decades. And yet we are still significantly below the more beneficial temperature averages of past warm periods of our Holocene interglacial (i.e. Holocene Optimum, Minoan, Roman, Medieval) and the past interglacial, the Eemian, was 3-5 degrees C warmer than our interglacial. Life flourished during those much warmer periods. Further, our modern era temperatures are still far below most of the past 500 million years that averaged 5-10 degrees C warmer than today. Again, life flourished during those much warmer eras and there was no “climate crisis”. For over 90 percent of the past 500 million years there was no ice at the poles and that meant extended habitats for plants and animals. The irrational fear of ice melting in today’s world expresses ignorance of what has been the normal, healthy state of life on our planet for most of life’s history.
Note: More heat energy entering our world does not necessarily mean more warmth in already warm areas- i.e. tropics- as heat is distributed via ocean and atmospheric convection currents to colder regions, colder seasons, and colder times of day (i.e. night).
Alarmists need to stop the hysterical panic-mongering over the mild climate warming of the past century. Four centuries ago (around 1645) the world descended into the bitter cold of the ‘Little Ice Age’ that devastated Europe with missed summers, crop failures, and starvation. Over the past three centuries we have been recovering from that descent into cold and life is now doing better. But world average temperatures today (about 15 degrees C.) are still abnormally cold compared to most of past paleo-climate history.
Further, good climate science shows that natural factors, not humanity, are most likely more responsible for this mild warming of the modern era.
A couple of degrees additional warming would benefit life immensely in net terms. Why do panic-oriented media ignore such things? Because it does not support their hysterical fear-mongering over the widely believe myth of looming apocalypse (see also “Creating Fear: News and the construction of crisis” by David Altheide). Warming that benefits all life does not affirm the ideological biases behind environmental alarmism.
Even more concerning, over the past millions of years atmospheric levels of CO2 have been declining dangerously, leaving us in a “CO2 starvation era”. Plant life has suffered from such low levels of basic plant food. With the mild recovery of CO2 over the last century, from pre-industrial levels of 285 ppm to 400-plus ppm today, plant life is now again thriving with a 15% increase in green vegetation across the Earth just since 1980. That has benefitted animal life with more food and humanity with increased crop production. We now produce 25% more food than we need, and crop production records continue to be broken yearly.
We ought to be celebrating CO2 for the net benefits that it has provided to life.
Climate change is a valid concern in any era, but there is no clear evidence that we are facing a “climate crisis”, contrary to the exaggerated claims of the IPCC’s recent ideologically-shaped “Summary for Policy Makers 2021”. Instead of radical and costly mitigation policies, we should adapt to whatever change occurs just as people have adapted across past history. It is insanity to be embracing mitigation policies to decarbonize our societies when cheap fossil fuels enable us to create the wealth that helps us adapt to climate changes. It is especially irresponsible to decarbonize when the evidence does not show that fossil fuels are the main cause of the climate change that we have observed. The public mantra of “climate change crisis” is more the expression of hysterical apocalyptic fever than climate science fact. And blaming humanity for climate change (i.e. “manmade climate change”) is too often the expression of anti-human, anti-industrial civilization, and anti-market ideologies.
No rational reason to go green
This site has repeatedly challenged the push for renewables as an unnecessary energy source given that we have plentiful cheap fossil fuel resources. This is not to say that renewables may not play a role in future energy supplies especially if they are financed on private and not public dime which harms the poorest people the most as energy costs are a larger factor in their budgets. My argument for pulling back on renewables is that fundamental climate science evidence does not affirm the claim that CO2 is mainly responsible for climate change. And aside from discredited climate models, there is no evidence that climate change will be catastrophic. Further, other natural factors consistently show stronger correlations to the climate change that we are observing.
The climate models have been consistently proven wrong in their exaggerated projections of warming, hence, alarmists are wrong in claiming that further warming will be “catastrophic” to life. We have observed evidence that warming in our abnormally cold ice-age era has been very beneficial and more warming will continue to be beneficial in net terms. Note the decline in cold deaths that far exceed the mortality from warmth. And note the massive increase in green vegetation from more atmospheric CO2 and how that has benefitted animal life with more food and humanity with increased crop production.
Add to the above comment on renewables the problems of intermittency, energy storage, energy density, and major unreported costs issues that renewables have not tackled or solved.
More on celebrating CO2
Future generations will look back at the contemporary demonization of CO as a pollutant, even poison (Bill Maher), and consider this one of the looniest episodes of irrational mass insanity in human history. Familiarize yourself again with this basic component of all life- read some articles on CO2 and the wonder of photosynthesis (for example- https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/photosynthetic-cells-14025371/). Then recognize that over the past millions of years of our ice-age era, CO2 levels have been precipitously declining as never before in world history. CO2 levels recently (20-30,000 years ago) declined to 185 ppm, almost to the level (150 ppm) that would have ended all plant life. All plant life dies at 150 ppm.
Fortunately, we have been experiencing a slight recovery in CO2 levels but are still far below the healthier levels of the past that were in the multiple-thousands of ppm (e.g. 6000 ppm during the Cambrian Explosion). Life flourished during such times. Today, with just the little recovery to 400-plus ppm, starving plant life is once again flourishing with a 15% addition of green vegetation since 1980. Animal and human life benefits immensely with more food. More CO2 also enhances crop production (see “CO2science.org” for detailed studies on crop enhancement from aerial CO2 fertilization).
Confusing weather events with climate
A new article at Wattsupwiththat.com explains the difference between weather and climate, a difference repeatedly distorted by alarmist media trying to capitalize on extreme weather events to affirm their “manmade climate crisis” narrative. See full article at https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/17/does-climate-change-cause-extreme-weather-now-heres-a-scorcher-of-a-reality-check/
The June heatwave in the Pacific Northwest illustrates how alarmist groups use extreme weather events to push their apocalyptic narrative and demand political action, costly action that will devastate our societies. Media like the New York Times (along with CNN, TIME, CNBC, Washington Post, USA Today, and others) pronounced the heatwave as proof that climate was changing catastrophically. Others stated the heat “was virtually impossible without human-caused climate change”.
But an atmospheric scientist, Cliff Mass, running weather models, had predicted the heatwave. He rejected the claim that global warming was to blame. “With or without climate change, Mass wrote, the region ‘still would have experienced the most severe heat wave of the past century’”. Mass said that “the heatwave was the result of natural variability”.
Mass, and others, have affirmed the fundamental rule when considering extreme temperature events. “Weather… refers to conditions during a short time in a limited area, climate (describes) longer-term atmospheric patterns over large areas… There is a fundamental difference in scale between what weather is and what climate is. ‘What’s going on in one small corner of the world at a given moment does not reflect what’s going on with the climate’”.
Despite this fundamental rule of difference between climate and weather, surveys show that most people have been swayed by media alarmism and admit their views about climate change are shaped by extreme weather events. This suits alarmist goals for mobilizing political action even though it misrepresents science and distorts the difference between local natural variability and larger climate change.
Mass concludes that global warming alarmism has become a religion with true believers and infidels/unbelievers (“deniers”). Skeptics, while accepting global warming is occurring, do not accept the exaggerated catastrophism of alarmists.
And a bit on human oneness
On race https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/09/human-genome-genes-genetic-code
One conclusion from the Human Genome Project was that “’race’ is a social construct not rooted in biology: there is much more genetic variation within conventional racial groupings than between them”.
A good exposure of the fallacy of “climate crisis” from https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/24/heres-why-climate-alarmists-are-ignoring-all-time-record-crop-production-in-india/
“Here’s Why Climate Alarmists Are Ignoring All-Time Record Crop Production in India”
From THE WESTERN JOURNAL, By Vijay Jayaraj August 21, 2021
“All-time record crop production in India belies the doomsday narrative of climate alarmists. To no great surprise, the U.N. and media ignore the remarkable achievement of this country of 1.4 billion people because it contradicts a political agenda pursued with religious fervor.
“Even as the world’s largest democracy enhances global food security, the media spread news of the U.N.’s “code red” for humanity over August’s specious report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that rising temperatures threaten the earth.
“In fact, India’s record food production contradicts claims about adverse climatic effects on crops.
“Countries across the globe are experiencing improved environmental health: Pollution levels are down in the developed world and nations are increasingly using their financial wealth for reforestation and betterment of ecosystems, including that of the agricultural sector.
“India has outperformed the previous year’s crop production by an incredible 3.7 percent — 308 million tons for 2020-21 compared to a previous 297 million tons.
“The agricultural ministry noted that all major crops — including wheat, maize and oilseeds — registered record output this year. India has also had its highest-ever horticulture production in 2021, which includes fruits, vegetables, aromatic and medicinal plants, spices and plantation crops.
“Several factors have contributed to the massive crop output that is a welcome departure from continual famines of the 1950s and ’60s stemming from insufficient food grains.
“In the 1970s, India’s agricultural sector entered the Green Revolution spawned by Norman Borlaug’s improved, gene-edited crop varieties. With the economic liberalization of the 1990s, the country further opened doors for its agricultural sector to flourish so that today it is one of the world’s top producers.
“Also important to note is that this remarkable success in food production would not have been possible without an environment favorable to crops. What the media call a curse — increased levels of carbon dioxide and greater warmth — has been a blessing to farmers and consumers.
“Yields of food crops — in India and worldwide — have benefited from the fertilization effect of carbon dioxide and the longer growing seasons resulting from natural increases in temperature. Overall, agriculture certainly has not been hurt by weather; otherwise, such record harvests likely would have been impossible.
“India’s experience, for example, has allayed fears about the region not receiving enough rainfall due to climate change.
“Data of rainfall for the last 100 years reveal that there has been no declining trend in the monsoon, with the rainfall pattern largely being typically unpredictable except for few short periods of consistency.
“Cold weather — what climate doomsayers seem desperate to have — is the bane of crops.
“In 2021, 80-90 percent of vineyards and orchards in parts of France died during a cold wave that a government official called the “greatest agricultural disaster” in recent memory. Likewise, in Brazil and Paraguay, cold waves in June and July reduced crop yields in many regions. Citrus fruits, sugarcane and coffee were most affected.
“Today’s global average temperature contrasts favorably to that of the 17th century’s Little Ice Age, when cold temperatures caused widespread death of plants and people. The gradual increase in warmth since the 18th century has ensured improved environmental conditions for flora.
“So media stories of a warming climate endangering global food security are absurd. Real-world data reveal that the modern climate has been a boon to crops.
“There is no climate emergency. Earth and its people are in fact flourishing in a time of relative warmth and plenty.” (End of article)