A search of Google news for the phrase “climate change,” today turned up a refreshing article in the Washington Examiner, chock full of data, demonstrating climate change does not pose an “existential threat.”
In the Washington Examiner article, titled “Climate change is not an ‘existential threat,’” the author, David Simon writes:
The Biden administration’s climate change policies have sharply increased oil prices, damaging the domestic economy and increasing the cost of nearly everything consumers buy. By increasing revenues for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime, they also made Russia stronger and more dangerous at a critical time, thus damaging national security. …
But worst of all, the Biden administration’s basis for these policies, the claim that global warming presents an “existential threat,” is fraudulent. It is not based on any scientific consensus, and in fact, it ignores evidence of environmental benefits of global warming that offset its harm.
It is at this point Simon schools other journalists concerning how to examine the issue of climate change. He presents data and research which conclusively demonstrates temperature and climate related deaths have significantly declined during the period of modern warming. Climate Realism has also pointed this fact out on numerous occasions, refuting alarmists’ claims to the contrary.
Using readily available data, Simon then proceeds to dismantle various climate fictions about worsening natural disasters, writing:
The facts regarding natural disasters also do not support the “existential threat” claim. The number of hurricanes per year, a 2021 EPA report shows, has not increased since the late 19th century. Moreover, although you wouldn’t know it from the panicky, sensationalized news coverage, the total acreage burnt by forest fires annually has decreased, and most rivers flood less today than they used to.
Since 1920, Earth’s average temperature has risen by 1.12 degrees and the world population has quadrupled from less than two billion to almost eight billion. Even so, the number of people killed each year by natural disasters has declined by about 90 percent. That statistic, more than any other, puts the lie to claims of an existential crisis due to climate.
There is also the global air pollution death rate, which has declined by about 45 percent over the last three decades. Again, no “existential threat” here.
Simon is correct. Research published on Climate Realism has also refuted assertions about worsening wildfires and hurricanes on multiple occasions.
Not content to refute false climate change alarms, Simon also discusses research showing the positive side of climate change, to wit, “global warming has increased both agricultural yields and growth of forests, grasslands, and tree leaves.”
Because I couldn’t sum up his argument better myself, I’ll close with Simon’s conclusion:
Biden administration climate change policies are sensationalizing the threats while ignoring all the benefits. They rely on speculative “models” that supposedly project global temperatures and predict disasters. But these models are highly unreliable … unable even to reproduce the temperature changes of the 20th century.
The Biden administration’s campaign against U.S. oil production and pipelines is not just harmful — it is an environmental fraud.
We need a new leftist boogeyman.
Climate change is getting stale.
I propose an attack by aliens from outer space
That would be an exciting new leftist boogeyman.
But it really doesn’t matter what the new boogeyman is
Because the “solution” will always be the same:
More government power, mandates and spending.
And building lots of solar panels and windmills.
We’ll fry those aliens with the solar panels, and chop them up with the windmills.Because, scientists say, every problem in the world can be solved by building more solar panels and windmills.
To save the planet for the children, that’s why.
Otherwise they’ll have to move to other planets. And will rarely come back to Earth to visit their elderly grandparents.
Yu wouldn’t want that, would you?
NOTE: This comment is serious, not satire, and was written without the influence of excessive adult beverages.
And a tip of the hat to H. Sterling Burnett, whose excellent columns I have been reading for many years. “Burnett” in the byline is an automatic must read for me. Only a few other authors are in that esteemed category for me. And they include Richard Lindzen, William Happer, Patrick Moore and Michael Shellenberger.