The climate change “consensus” is increasingly being challenged on all fronts From climatedepot.com:
Dr. Mototaka Nakamura received a Doctorate of Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and for nearly 25 years specialized in abnormal weather and climate change at prestigious institutions that included MIT, Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke University.
In his book The Global Warming Hypothesis is an Unproven Hypothesis, Dr. Nakamura explains why the data foundation underpinning global warming science is “untrustworthy” and cannot be relied on:
“Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data,” writes Nakamura. “Before full planet surface observation by satellite began in 1980, only a small part of the Earth had been observed for temperatures with only a certain amount of accuracy and frequency. Across the globe, only North America and Western Europe have trustworthy temperature data dating back to the 19th century.”
From 1990 to 2014, Nakamura worked on cloud dynamics and forces mixing atmospheric and ocean flows on medium to planetary scales. His bases were MIT (for a Doctor of Science in meteorology), Georgia Institute of Technology, Goddard Space Flight Center, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Duke and Hawaii Universities and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.
No other system has come close to benefiting humanity the way capitalism has. From Robert P. Murphy at instituteforenergyresearch.org:
Presumably bolstered by the fiery claims of Greta Thunberg and the general theme of Climate Week, people on Twitter have been declaring that capitalism threatens humanity. This angst rekindled interest in a Guardian article that ran a few months ago, in which author George Monbiot argued that the very nature of capitalism is “incompatible with the survival of life on Earth.” Not only do such claims ignore the obvious progress of humanity staring us in the face—and the environmental activists are supposed to be the empirical ones in this debate—but even if Monbiot’s worries about the climate were correct, capitalism would still be the best social system to deal with the crisis.
Monbiot’s Case Against Capitalism
The following excerpt summarizes Monbiot’s two-pronged argument for why capitalism threatens our entire species:
Capitalism’s failures arise from two of its defining elements. The first is perpetual growth. Economic growth is the aggregate effect of the quest to accumulate capital and extract profit. Capitalism collapses without growth, yet perpetual growth on a finite planet leads inexorably to environmental calamity.
…The absolute decoupling needed to avert environmental catastrophe (a reduction in material resource use) has never been achieved, and appears impossible while economic growth continues. Green growth is an illusion.
Voices of sanity and rationality in the climate debate! From Richard Trzupek at theepochtimes.com:
The message was clear: “There is no climate emergency.”
With those five simple words, a global network of scientistsand professionals attempted to inject reasonableness and decorum into what should be a robust discussion about a complex scientific and public policy issue, but has instead degenerated into an ever more intense mud-slinging contest over the years.
People on one side of the argument dismiss their opponents as wild-eyed socialists attempting to leverage public fear and ignorance to further their political agenda. On the opposite side, people dismiss those who disagree with their supposedly settled scientific conclusions as nothing more than knowing shills or ignorant dupes of evil energy interests.
In between those extremes that are so popular with armies of public relations professionals, who shape the messages of public interest groups and professional politicians to maximum effect, are a not-so-quiet silent majority of scientists and professionals who take a more measured, reasoned view of the science when considering the supposed climate emergency some say we’re facing.
The climate change hoax is “supported” by a lot of junk science, junk scientific procedures, money, political opportunism, and outright lies. From Doug Casey and E.B. Tucker at caseyresearch.com:
Chris’ note: “How dare you!”
“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words.”
On Monday, 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg delivered a powerful speech to world leaders at the United Nations Global Climate Action Summit in New York.
Her message was clear. She accused them of not doing enough to save the planet.
And leading up to the summit, New York City announced that its 1.1 million public school students could skip class to join the global climate strike protests. Thousands of teenagers ended up flooding the streets of Manhattan, demanding change.
All of this kicked the climate change debate into high gear.
Greta Thunberg is 13 minutes into her 15 minutes of fame and SLL wants to take a couple of shots at her before she disappears back into well-deserved obscurity. From Onar Åm at libertynation.com:
Climate activist Greta Thunberg’s recent speech to the United Nations seemed to reveal a deeply troubled individual. She said her childhood was taken away from her by the looming threat of climate change, and she blamed world leaders for letting it happen. She has every reason to be upset, but she is directing her anger at the wrong people. The real culprit is the green catastrophe industry that manufactures crises out of nothing.
The critical ingredient in Thunberg’s climate anxiety is her youth. Had she been older, she would have lived through so many false alarms that she would have grown numb and wary of green catastrophists.
Greta Thunberg is no humanitarian. From Ryan McMaken at mises.org:
On Monday, celebrity climate activist Greta Thunberg delivered a speech to the UN Climate Action summit in New York. Thunberg demanded drastic cuts in carbon emissions of more than 50 percent over the next ten years.
It is unclear to whom exactly she was directing her comments, although she also filed a legal complaint with the UN on Monday, demanding five countries (namely Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany and Turkey) more swiftly adopt larger cuts in carbon emissions. The complaint is legally based on a 1989 agreement, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, under which Thunberg claims the human rights of children are being violated by too-high carbon emissions in the named countries.
Thunberg seems unaware, however, that in poor and developing countries, carbon emissions are more a lifeline to children than they are a threat.
As the term justice has come to be used, whenever you hear it, if you’re an honest, productive citizen, put your hand over wallet and run. From Kai Weiss at mises.org:
According to the organizers of the global climate strike — the biggest in history — more than four million people went to the streets on Friday to demand more drastic action in the fight against global warming. 250,000 protested only in New York City, 330,000 in Australia, and perhaps most impressively, a full 1.4 million in Germany. If it wasn’t before, the environmental activism, led by the 16-year-old Swedish schoolgirl Greta Thunberg, has become a global mass movement. Throughout the West, the “Green Wave” has been picking up steam politically as well, with Green New Deals being planned on both sides of the Atlantic and environmental parties surging ever further in the polls.
With this many people heading to the streets and so many being worried of the coming climate crises, it seems to be just a matter of time until politicians would react, fearing a massive loss of voters. And in Germany, they did on Friday, when Angela Merkel’s government presented its Klimapaket, i.e., climate package. Under pressure, the government decided to act — and as expected, it wasn’t pretty for taxpayers of all stripes, though particularly for low-income earners.