10-08-2018, 10:43 PM
*** 9-Oct-18 World View -- UN: We have just 12 years to prevent global warming catastrophe
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
****
**** UN: We have just 12 years to prevent global warming catastrophe
****
![[Image: g181008b.jpg]](http://Media.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2010/g181008b.jpg)
China's largest open-pit coal mine is in Inner Mongolia, and is estimated to contain 1.7 billion tons of coal. It has an estimated life of 75 years. (MiningGlobal)
According to a new report issued on Monday by the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), climate change
scientists are saying that the world is approaching climate change
catastrophe much faster than climate change scientists have said in
the past.
In the past, the climate change scientists were saying that the
temperature of the earth would increase by 3 degrees by 2100, if
nothing changes. They said in the past that we have to cut carbon
emissions so that the temperature of the earth would only increase by
2 degrees. But according to Monday's report, even a 2 degree increase
leads to world catastrophe.
Typical media headlines read, "UN report on global warming carries
life-or-death warning" and "Planet has only until 2030 to stem
catastrophic climate change, experts warn" and "Trump ‘poses the
single greatest threat’ to our climate, bombshell UN report makes
clear."
What to do? What to do? The BBC World Service interviewed Christiana
Figueres, a Costa Rican diplomat, a key architect of the 2015 Paris
climate change agreement. Figueres was asked what people should do
now, and she listed "four things that we all can do":
I wonder if it ever occurs to anyone at the United Nations how
ridiculous and incompetent it looks to have this spokesman making
these truly idiotic statements. Nobody's going to give up meat
because this lady says so. Nobody's going to give up their cars for
her.
Donald Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Treaty because,
among other things, it allows China, the biggest polluter in the
world, to continue polluting, while imposing enormous financial
burdens on the United States and Western Nations.
The principal purpose of the Climate Change Treaty is to specify money
payments from "developed countries," like the United States, to
"developing countries" like Costa Rica. Christiana Figueres is a
Costa Rican diplomat, so we can assume that Costa Rica will benefit
financially from the treaty, and she may even personally benefit
financially from the treaty, and we can assume that's why she supports
it. United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and CNN and Vox and Mining Global
****
**** Fallacies in the climate change story
****
Climate change treaty supporters like to claim that anyone
who disagrees with them is denying established facts.
So let's assume that all the climate change assumptions are true:
Let's assume that all of this is true. Then there are still
major fallacies in the climate change argument.
There are two major flaws in the climate change argument that I've
pointed out on several cases to climate change advocates. They do not
make any attempt to respond, but all these people just blow me off.
If they had a response, they would respond. By just ignoring
me or blowing me off, they prove that they don't have a response.
****
**** Fallacy #1 in climate change story: Ignoring war
****
The climate change scientists say that if nothing changes,
then the earth's temperature will increase by 3 degrees.
We're assuming that's true, but the climate change scientists
are failing to take into account things that will certainly change.
First, there's war. There were two world wars in the last century, as
well as numerous other massive wars (Russian civil war, Spanish civil
war, Cambodian civil war, Rwandan genocide, etc.) on every continent,
and in every region.
The 20th century was not unique. In every century for millennia,
there have been massive wars on every continent in every region, such
as China's Taiping rebellion, Africa's Mfecane, India's sepoy
rebellion, the 30 years war, 100 years war, and so forth.
It's 100% certain that there will be massive wars, including one or
two world wars, before 2100. A world war in the 21st century will
kill 20-50% of the population, through nuclear war, ground war,
starvation and disease. Since we're assuming that carbon emissions
are caused by human activities, that means that carbon emissions will
be reduced by 20-50%.
When I ask climate change scientists about this, they just blow me
off.
Climate change scientists won't even consider this, but it completely
blows away their theories. If you don't believe me, then ask them
about it, and see them duck the question.
****
**** Fallacy #2 in climate change story: Technology
****
There are probably hundreds of thousands of companies, big and small,
around the world, developing solutions to carbon emissions, because
everyone knows that a working solution will make billions of dollars.
In the United States, emissions are down to their lowest point since
1991, thanks to many new technologies, including everything from
fracking to better windmills to better batteries. Climate change
scientists can't stand to even think about new technologies, because
it blows all their theories out of the water.
Several years ago, when thousands of East Anglia e-mail messages by
climate change scientists were hacked, I did a search for the word
"Singularity," and it never appeared once. You'd think that these
scientists would have at least asked one another, "Hey, what about the
Singularity?" But apparently it was such a forbidden subject that it
couldn't be mentioned.
Even if you've decided that the Singularity won't occur, there will
still be nanotechnologies, materials technologies, advanced artificial
intelligence algorithms, and lots of new technologies that will tackle
the emission problem.
So go ahead and ask climate change scientists how new technologies
will affect their climate change predictions. What they'll answer is:
Climate change is 100% certain, and world war is 100% impossible, and
new technologies are irrelevant. Once again, you'd have to be a
complete idiot to believe that.
At the start, I said we would assume that all the climate change
scientist conclusions are true, including the one that says that if
nothing changes, then the earth's temperature will increase by 3%.
Well, we've identified two changes that are 100% certain, and will
affect their conclusions: technology and war. Here's a riddle: How do
you make a climate change scientist run for his life? Answer: Ask him
about war and technology.
Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, climate change, Christiana Figueres, Costa Rica
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- UN: We have just 12 years to prevent global warming catastrophe
- Fallacies in the climate change story
- Fallacy #1 in climate change story: Ignoring war
- Fallacy #2 in climate change story: Technology
****
**** UN: We have just 12 years to prevent global warming catastrophe
****
China's largest open-pit coal mine is in Inner Mongolia, and is estimated to contain 1.7 billion tons of coal. It has an estimated life of 75 years. (MiningGlobal)
According to a new report issued on Monday by the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), climate change
scientists are saying that the world is approaching climate change
catastrophe much faster than climate change scientists have said in
the past.
In the past, the climate change scientists were saying that the
temperature of the earth would increase by 3 degrees by 2100, if
nothing changes. They said in the past that we have to cut carbon
emissions so that the temperature of the earth would only increase by
2 degrees. But according to Monday's report, even a 2 degree increase
leads to world catastrophe.
Typical media headlines read, "UN report on global warming carries
life-or-death warning" and "Planet has only until 2030 to stem
catastrophic climate change, experts warn" and "Trump ‘poses the
single greatest threat’ to our climate, bombshell UN report makes
clear."
What to do? What to do? The BBC World Service interviewed Christiana
Figueres, a Costa Rican diplomat, a key architect of the 2015 Paris
climate change agreement. Figueres was asked what people should do
now, and she listed "four things that we all can do":
- Give up eating meat. "The production of animals leads to
climate change."
- Transport: use public transportation, or walk or ride a bike.
"Transport is a huge emitter of greehouse gases. and we all need to
make a better job at that."
- Investors: you have a "huge responsibility" to invest in
supporting low carbon products and services.
- Politics: You can vote for politicians that suppport climate
change.
I wonder if it ever occurs to anyone at the United Nations how
ridiculous and incompetent it looks to have this spokesman making
these truly idiotic statements. Nobody's going to give up meat
because this lady says so. Nobody's going to give up their cars for
her.
Donald Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Treaty because,
among other things, it allows China, the biggest polluter in the
world, to continue polluting, while imposing enormous financial
burdens on the United States and Western Nations.
The principal purpose of the Climate Change Treaty is to specify money
payments from "developed countries," like the United States, to
"developing countries" like Costa Rica. Christiana Figueres is a
Costa Rican diplomat, so we can assume that Costa Rica will benefit
financially from the treaty, and she may even personally benefit
financially from the treaty, and we can assume that's why she supports
it. United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and CNN and Vox and Mining Global
****
**** Fallacies in the climate change story
****
Climate change treaty supporters like to claim that anyone
who disagrees with them is denying established facts.
So let's assume that all the climate change assumptions are true:
- Global warming is occurring.
- Global warming is caused by increased carbon emissions.
- Increated carbon emissions are caused by human activity.
- If nothing changes, then the earth's temperature will increase by
3 degrees by 2100.
Let's assume that all of this is true. Then there are still
major fallacies in the climate change argument.
There are two major flaws in the climate change argument that I've
pointed out on several cases to climate change advocates. They do not
make any attempt to respond, but all these people just blow me off.
If they had a response, they would respond. By just ignoring
me or blowing me off, they prove that they don't have a response.
****
**** Fallacy #1 in climate change story: Ignoring war
****
The climate change scientists say that if nothing changes,
then the earth's temperature will increase by 3 degrees.
We're assuming that's true, but the climate change scientists
are failing to take into account things that will certainly change.
First, there's war. There were two world wars in the last century, as
well as numerous other massive wars (Russian civil war, Spanish civil
war, Cambodian civil war, Rwandan genocide, etc.) on every continent,
and in every region.
The 20th century was not unique. In every century for millennia,
there have been massive wars on every continent in every region, such
as China's Taiping rebellion, Africa's Mfecane, India's sepoy
rebellion, the 30 years war, 100 years war, and so forth.
It's 100% certain that there will be massive wars, including one or
two world wars, before 2100. A world war in the 21st century will
kill 20-50% of the population, through nuclear war, ground war,
starvation and disease. Since we're assuming that carbon emissions
are caused by human activities, that means that carbon emissions will
be reduced by 20-50%.
When I ask climate change scientists about this, they just blow me
off.
Climate change scientists won't even consider this, but it completely
blows away their theories. If you don't believe me, then ask them
about it, and see them duck the question.
****
**** Fallacy #2 in climate change story: Technology
****
There are probably hundreds of thousands of companies, big and small,
around the world, developing solutions to carbon emissions, because
everyone knows that a working solution will make billions of dollars.
In the United States, emissions are down to their lowest point since
1991, thanks to many new technologies, including everything from
fracking to better windmills to better batteries. Climate change
scientists can't stand to even think about new technologies, because
it blows all their theories out of the water.
Several years ago, when thousands of East Anglia e-mail messages by
climate change scientists were hacked, I did a search for the word
"Singularity," and it never appeared once. You'd think that these
scientists would have at least asked one another, "Hey, what about the
Singularity?" But apparently it was such a forbidden subject that it
couldn't be mentioned.
Even if you've decided that the Singularity won't occur, there will
still be nanotechnologies, materials technologies, advanced artificial
intelligence algorithms, and lots of new technologies that will tackle
the emission problem.
So go ahead and ask climate change scientists how new technologies
will affect their climate change predictions. What they'll answer is:
Climate change is 100% certain, and world war is 100% impossible, and
new technologies are irrelevant. Once again, you'd have to be a
complete idiot to believe that.
At the start, I said we would assume that all the climate change
scientist conclusions are true, including the one that says that if
nothing changes, then the earth's temperature will increase by 3%.
Well, we've identified two changes that are 100% certain, and will
affect their conclusions: technology and war. Here's a riddle: How do
you make a climate change scientist run for his life? Answer: Ask him
about war and technology.
Related Articles
- Climate change conference collapses as China backs down from emission commitments (12-May-2018)
- UN Climate Change conference appears to be ending in farce (14-Dec-2007)
- African leaders once again furious that they won't get a climate change bonanza (18-Nov-2017)
- 175 countries sign farcical climate change agreement (23-Apr-2016)
- Artificial Intelligence and Climate Change (29-Dec-2015)
- Horse manure and climate change (23-Sep-2014)
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, climate change, Christiana Figueres, Costa Rica
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
