US government report warns of not so dire consequences from Climate change and economy could lose hundreds of billions. CNN reports.
This report less than dire consequences depends on all the things I have railed against in article after article. This is a rehash not new research. They are simply stating the things they’ve said before all of which have fallen on deaf ears before and prove nothing new.
This report presumes the 1400 ppm scenario for co2 which is impossible to reach and is put into analysis simply so they can do reports like this to scare people. It means an extreme level of Co2 output that would be 5 times what we put out today. They do this because it leads to lots of scary things according to their overheated models which show a 9F rise in temperature.
This rise is not what would happen anyway if we ever got to 1400 which we won’t because it is absurd. So, they come up with ridiculous assumptions and then using models that are unproven and overheated (meaning they produce too much warming than we see) they project all kinds of bad things, none of which have been proven or seen either.
The MSM claims these people are scientists. They aren’t. These are public policy politicians. They have rehashed the same tired and disproven ideas. It’s pathetic and irresponsible to publish this.
Let’s assume what they say is true what should we do?
On the one hand they say spending trillions now on their favorite projects they are investors in we could save hundreds of billions in 2100. Instead of reaching 8F higher temperatures we could keep temperatures to just 1F. Apparently they think something we could do would chop our Co2 output down by 80% from their absurd assumption.
Guess what I saved 14,000 calories I was going to eat today. I decided to keep it at 2,000. See, I saved 80% of calories on my diet by simply not eating the other 12,000 calories I imagined I might eat. 🙂
First off the US has actually decreased co2 output in the last few years. What does the report want the US to do?
If you want to cut co2 the rest of the world like China and India and others must sacrifice their future, possibly millions and millions of people to die and trillions of future income foregone. They must be the ones to change because their CO2 output now dwarfs the US and is rising.
Guess what? That’s not happening. Zero chance. If you think these countries have Al Gore’s in their dictatorial leadership who are just chomping at the bit to sacrifice themselves to save the world you are insane.
The world will not get to 1400ppm even with rapacious dictators running these countries. The fact is there is a limit to how much energy you can use and many countries are approaching first world levels so the energy use of the world isn’t going to be quintupling. This is a matter of a projection.
In other words. I ate 1800 calories yesterday. I ate 2000 calories today and therefore in a week I will be up to 3400 calories and by 2100 I will be eating 4 million calories a day. Boy I will be fat and having heart disease. Reality never plays into their thinking. These are scientists who think insane things are possible.
So, whether the US cut output to 0 and went nuclear for instance or doubled our CO2 output would amount to plus or minus 32ppm difference in 80 years. That’s a small fraction of the 1000ppm they expect the world needs to save. We aren’t the problem. It’s the other 970ppm they need to convince.
It’s not going to change the temperature of the Earth 0.1 degree one way or the other what the US does. What we do is irrelevant. Their projection of 1400 or whatever is based on exponential use of energy by the rest of the world which is already producing more CO2 than us.
We are already demonstrating there is a limit to co2 output. Ours is decreasing. In time they will all be decreasing or stabilized and CO2 will never reach 1400. So their fantasized hyper hot temperatures from their overheated models won’t materialize and the fantasized damages won’t materialize.
We have gotten 1F in the last 80 years. They are saying 10F in the next 80 years. They really expect you to swallow this. If this were so wouldn’t we see some massive acceleration in temperature already evident? We should. For science to be involved it would have to be evident. In fact, we should have seen a lot more already according to their theory but their theory is wrong obviously.
I have a theory I lose weight when I eat more. The fact the theory doesn’t work doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Some days I eat a lot and lose weight. See, it’s true. The problem with science is it is based on prediction. They are predicting but the problem is none of their predictions are coming out. Yet they keep predicting and expecting you to believe it. That’s what I call astrology. Climate Science is closer to astrology than real science.
So, why do they do this? Obviously because these people have a stake in this “Global Warming Theory” and make money off it or are ideologically fixated on hating man, hating oil, hating Donald Trump or something but they are not focused on reality. If you’ve ever read highly environmental magazines you see what I’m saying. They are constantly predicting the end of the world from this or that. I’m sure they think this is helpful to motivate people to do good but it isn’t science. It’s advocacy.
Some will say advocacy for a good cause is good. In general maybe. However, if advocacy causes the rest of the world to lose billions of people or is immoral for other reasons or is deceptive and claims to be proven settled science then it is evil advocacy.
We can’t spend trillions and trillions to fix these other countries co2 output. It’s absurd. If they want to cut hundreds of ppm from the atmosphere in 80 years and they think it is the third world they need to convince the third world to sacrifice their future to their vision. Believe me it’s going to be a lot harder to convince them than it is Donald Trump. So, why lecture America and impugn Donald Trump? Because that is all they know what to do and they can’t criticize all these black and asian and other countries. Better to blame the white guy.
If they want to warn us the world is going to end according to their prediction, we’ve heard it before. Like when they told us that polar bears were going to die or the arctic sea ice would be gone (which doesn’t make a hill of beans difference even if it happened which it hasn’t) or that storms would be accelerating which they aren’t (even though they repeat that falsified idea.) .
As soon as they start demanding these other countries take action these countries are going to make Donald Trump look like a believer. They aren’t going to sacrifice their future unless we buy them all their power plants and all their change. We can’t afford to subsidize and change all these countries even if the effect was actually real and not in their fantasies.
Fantasies that are completely made up based on ridiculous assumptions. As soon as someone has to take a real hit to their economy because of this they are going to look at this science and realize it is a load of crap. Look at France. Just a tax increase on gasoline has driven them to riot and ignore the made up scary future being marketed by these advocacy maniacs.
The third world goes along with this fantasy of global warming because Obama and others promised them we would give them trillions. As long as we are willing to pay they would be happy to believe whatever poppycock we told them. However, as soon as they are asked to sacrifice one penny they will change their tune 180 degrees. You know it and I know it. Why deny it.
We are going to get the Co2 we are going to get. That will depend on the market for energy. If you want to change the future then we need more research and less lecturing and posturing and ridiculous ideas about dangerous future and realistic assessments of what is the real problem here and what can be done.
Their predictions are based on no improvement in technology for 80 years when the rate of technology change is exponentially increasing.
I have said this before. In the last 100 years we have cut the mortality from natural disasters by 99%. With improved and accelerating technology NOBODY will be dying in 2100 from any storms or environmental disaster fantasy they have. Certainly nothing they are talking about today.
Are they saying that if we do some piddling thing that will make a difference between 1400ppm and 550ppm? The difference between 8F and 1F? It’s insane. It’s going to mean the destruction of the entire fossil industry overnight and the loss of trillions of dollars and probably billions of people’s lives worldwide thrust into abject poverty and death if they wanted to change the result by that much.
Fortunately, we don’t have to make that much change because their projection is bull. We will get to 550 or 600 and we will get there no matter what they say or do and the technology will change. Eventually we will use other power sources. The only thing we can do is make that technology cheaper today and then it will be adopted readily by everyone without lecturing us on the scary future.
So what do these scientists want the US to do? I mean besides for Donald Trump to die or be removed from office so they can put in some person who will finance their global warming graft schemes and fund their idiotic advocacy and parrott their fright lines?
The US could move to all nuclear power and the result would be 540ppm by 2100. The change in temperature by 2100 according to their own completely repudiated theory less than 0.1 degrees.
Of course destroying our oil, coal and other energy industries would cost the US trillions in new costs and loss of revenue to industries that now are doing quite well. It wouldn’t mean the loss of millions of lives in the US like in the third world but it would cost trillions of dollars and make 0.1 degrees difference. Is that what they want? No. They don’t like nuclear power. But in any case no matter what we would do to change our co2 output we know the difference is minor. We are already cutting our Co2 output. The difference if they want to change the final total from 800 to 550 or something will be to convince the rest of the world to sacrifice themselves to their cause. Good luck with that.
Millions of people will lose their jobs and thousands will die today from the economic devastation if we tried to do this. They claim we will have hundreds of billions of loss in 80 years and thousands will die in 2100. But if we did anything to substantially change our use of fossil fuels today we will have those bad consequences today and still won’t have any impact on the future temperature because they have fantasized 90% of the future.
A future that they cannot predict and are 100% wrong about I have proved half a dozen ways.
What are their policy ideas? A 1% change to some new technology that they have personally invested in and will reap billions for them?
They claim the energy industry is fighting them and climate change research. There is NO MONEY in refuting climate change. There are billions made from the climate change industry. The US alone invests billions in research and grants. There are also numerous startups doing things looking for money and making people millions and millions each.
In the meantime the energy industry employs millions of people who have good middle class jobs that support families that they want to destroy. That’s in the US. In the rest of the world they want to sacrifice their future all because of a fantasy they can’t believe themselves.
The biggest problem is not their incredibly stupid ideas but the deceitfulness of their statements.
I am certain these people are not stupid enough to believe their own predictions. They never debate any of these things because they know they would lose. If this was real science they would be happy to debate any time.
My professor’s were always willing to debate science. These people will only come out when they are surrounded by morons who parrott what they say unquestioningly.
They claim that a broad range of things are happening today which aren’t
Listening to FOX news they have people claiming that the storms this summer and the fires in California are evidence. These are STUPID people. Really stupid. I have shown if anything storms increase with LOWER temperatures not higher. There is no evidence of increasing storms and we just went a record 12 years without a storm before the recent cooldown from the 2015 El Nino.
Are the fires in Caifornia related to Climate Change? Did they spark the fires? No. They came from campfires and possibly PGE sparking towers. A 1 degree change or even hot temperatures don’t spark fires otherwise everybody in the middle east and other hot areas would be spontaneously bursting into flames. A fire needs a trigger not hot temperatures. Then it needs fuel not hot temperatures. Does hot temperatures trigger more campfires? What exactly are they saying? Hot=Fire? These are really stupid people. Stupid. They don’t have the first grade understanding of science.
The biggest problem with all this analysis is that the most authoritative study of effect of temperatures has shown that for every increase in 1F temperatures 23 times fewer people die from cold effects as die from the increased temperatures.
This study of 74 million actual deaths (Lancet) shows that millions of people will be SAVED by higher temperatures. All the reasons they have for people dying are dwarfed by the massive drop in people dying from pneumonia, heart disease, lung problems which are among the biggest killers.
They claim thousands will die from the effects but fail to mention the millions saved from more common diseases that won’t die because of warmer temperatures.
Remember this is assuming that their projections of 8-10F change come true which is the stupidest thing. Ask one of these morons how they expect to get to 1400 ppm when we are adding 200ppm / century now and they need 1000ppm in the next century. That’s 5 times the current rate. How is that possible? It’s not. It’s garbage science.
They rehash the most absurd already disproved studies
They make absurd claims about food production. There is no way the US or anyone has a problem with food production in 2080 or 2100.
The average food productivity improvements which of course they don’t consider will make any possible drop in food production absurd. In the last 70 years the world has tripled food output. Far faster than the population growth.
Even if the rate of growth slowed in the next 80 years which is incredibly unlikely because the technology is exponentially expanding the ways we can improve productivity.
Today we spend in the us 2% of gdp on food. In 80 years it is likely to be 0.5% of GDP. Even if you assume that they are right that we are too dumb to shift production of food to areas that will experience massive gains in arability and growing season and we are stupid enough to keep growing food where it is less productive we could spend another 0.1% of GDP and produce vastly more food.
It is incredibly likely that in 2100 we will be so good at producing food that we will have a huge excess food capacity.
There is zero probability or chance we will have a food shortage in 2080. Nobody who is sane could possibly argue otherwise.
Consider that this is one of their best studied predictions and it’s total crap. If this is the best of their analyses then what are the chances the other studies are crap? 100%.
They claim storms are getting worse. They aren’t. This has been categorically proven. There are no more extreme droughts or anything.
I would remind people to look at history. In 1858 there was a drought that killed 50 million people. In the early 1900s we had floods, droughts pestilence that killed millions a year.
Natural disasters killed 10 million people a decade for the early part of the 20th century. Today we have a huge disaster and 100 people die. 14000 houses are destroyed sounds bad but millions were destroyed in events in the past.
There is no study that can show storms or anything is getting worse.
Yet they continue to profer these bogus studies and this report depends on every failed and disproven effect.
They talk about ocean acidification. The idea that raising co2 from 400 to 1400 ppm in the atmosphere or 1 in a thousand parts of the atmosphere could acidify the ocean which is millions of times the mass of the atmosphere is one of the stupidest ideas ever put forward. It couldn’t stand the slightest actual scientific study.
The acidification we are seeing in some places is undoubtedly the effect of effluent by humans in waste materials and industrial processes totally independent from co2.
This is typical of moron leftists who claim one thing is a problem and want to spend trillions to fix only to leave the problem only worse because it isn’t the reason for whatever they are complaining about.
They claim all kinds of effects are hurting us but they never consider how higher temperatures are saving people or improving. They only focus on anything they can find negative.
This is similar to what they’ve done with the temperature record which is to only look for reasons to adjust the record higher and never adjust down. 30 of 32 times they made global warming worse. This is a one in a billion probability of being true.
They are liars and they never question their statements always making outrageous claims no serious non political scientist could take seriously.
It’s hard to believe such people are being paid by the federal government and that we have to pay for people to fabricate and lie to us.
What about the billions lost in 2100?
Remember the US economy today is $20 trillion dollars. By 2100 we will probably be $100 trillion. We won’t even notice hundreds of billions even if that actually happened which has zero probability as I’ve shown.
Why spend trillions now which will drastically destroy lives and cut people off and probably kill millions in the process to save what they claim are thousands of lives and hundreds of billions 80 years from now considering their ability to predict at best is a one in a thousand chance?
Who would take this bet?
Donald Trump is the only one willing to question these lecturing justice warrior morons
Let’s face it. Most people don’t want to face the criticism that comes when you question these morons on the networks. Their lecturing even as they show no actual knowledge of the subject and say stupid things like Global Warming causes forest fires.
Donald Trump is the only one willing to speak the truth. He said there is disagreement and he didn’t believe the economic projections. He is of course absolutely right. Why can’t people speak the truth anymore? Donald Trump is the only one. Global Warming Climate Change is overhyped and the report is insanely stupid prediction of impossible things which if taken seriously would cause us to do things like we did during the Obama administration that cost us trillions and left the US weaker and poorer and more dead.