Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-Pocalyptic Predictions
cei.org
cei.org
1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’
The treaties to deal with this are literally one of the best examples of success around international pollution
1969: ‘Everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue steam by 1989.’
The clean air act was passed in 1970
1967: ‘Dire famine by 1975.’
Writing just after the green revolution, it would be easy to miss that the trajectory had changed
Are some statements overblown sure, but calling some of the articles that directly lead to change liers because they successfully inspired change is pretty low
I don’t need doomsayers or keep calm carry onners while we collect data to generate directionless statistics chiming in anymore.
Experts have to accept their professional title does not make them smarter than others with the same quantitative ability.
Specific forecasts are wrong. That nothing is wrong is wrong too.
Chanting the ways in which someone else is a hypocrite is exhausting at this point.
“Do nothing until it’s an actual problem.” - people old enough to die before it’s a problem.
Ok we get it; you aren’t part of the solution.
Imagine being a developing country and people saying "yeah well, you can't become developed because... you know ... climate change. Think of humanity and stay undeveloped while we keep exploiting you"
I'm in no way saying we should not care, but if the data is not collected the right way we could end up focusing on the wrong solution.
In one of these examples looks like tearing down airports and grow grass fields back could lower the temperatures collected by those climate stations. But would it be the right thing to do?
Just asking.
in this light the article is not completely useless or "not part of the solution", after all.
Designer drugs that leave behind the same memory markers as the real thing seem possible given bio-electric therapies and growing understanding of psychedelics in emotional therapy.
VR goggles for everyone seem prosaic, corny af to me relative to such ideas. Traveling to every continent a huge waste.
If you're referring to me, I ask myself if the largest country of the western world (and the worst offender in terms of dangerous emissions for 40 years straight) built cities where people cannot walk and need cars to move, can be still considered developed or it should be considered irresponsible.
There are plenty of industrialized endeavors that are enabling a financed minority to endanger the entire species. Trying to carve out exceptions that many will still be too poor to participate in is some self serving gibberish.
Accept figurative death as a necessity and disabuse ourselves of delusions of grandeur. As minds adjust we’ll find new things to be titillated by.
Don’t get me wrong; given politics and public agency, YOLO it is. Zero fucks. If the present is not going to concern itself with others future, why concern myself with the present? Why mold myself to expectations of indifferent moral relativists, implicit ageists, a perspective built on observation of their indifference to adjustments agency, virtue signaling rhetoric be damned.
Dedication to inaction or action that comes way too late in deference to equivocating, is nihilism about the state of the future. Let’s dispense with calling ourselves anything else.
for clarity: I'm not opposing to the idea that we could survive without planes or any other post industrial comfort.
But perhaps embedding thermometers in the asphalt of an airport track it's not the smartest of the moves if you want to reliably measure changes in temperature over time.
I believe people give themselves too much credit: politics, planes, cars, it doesn't matter, it's not the people that will solve the climate crisis, but how well the system as a whole is going to adapt.
I can do whatever I want, but it's factually (not cynically, it is what it is) completely useless when all the population of my country put together represent 2% of India+China population.
It's like trying to fix high blood pressure when only the thumb is following doctor's orders.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/07/15/net-zero-global-warming-...
>> Professor of Economics Ross McKitrick from the University of Guelph in Ontario noted that the number of weather stations providing data to GHCN plunged in 1990 and again in 2005. This had the effect of increasing the contribution from airports to around 50%.
>> About one half of all land surface temperature measurements used to show global warming and promote the command-and-control Net Zero agenda are taken near or adjacent to airport runways.
>> According to the satellite record, rarely mentioned in the mainstream media, the recent run of global warming started to run out of steam over 20 years ago.
>> McKitrick noted that the cuts reduced the average latitude of source data and removed relatively more cooler, high altitude monitoring sites. GHCN is said to apply correcting adjustments, but after 1990 their magnitude “gets implausibly large”.
>> Chicago’s O’Hare Airport was an orchard field with a measuring thermometer in the late 1800s and retains the ORD code to this day.
Obviously then if you use the O'Hare Airport past (when it was a grass field) vs present (a tarmac heat sink) temperature readings that you will get a huge increase that is unrelated to the temperature of the climate.
About what you would expect from someone who made his career as a paid shill for mining companies.
If someone is an expert, but is consistently wrong, I’d stop listening to them.
For example, how much of the predictions that have been made in the past have come true? Does climatology have a different track record of predictions being incorrect than other fields? Are predictions that have been made decades ago and published in the media relevant to the current state of things?
Also, as an example of how using failed predictions is fallacious, in the past it was predicted that in the 2000s we'd all have domestic robots in to do cooking and cleaning. There aren't such robots generally available. Does that mean that we can say that robotics today is all bunk and robots don't exist?
Lots of people have made predictions that have turned out to be wrong. You can read many of those in the Business section of your newspaper.
This article takes articles from newspapers and magazines, but not from refereed scientific journals. As to climate change: at present, there's a heat dome in Northern Canada that is resulting in record-breaking temperatures; we had one in southern BC last year that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people. Lake Mead is at record lows. The arctic ice pack has shrunk by a yearly average of 2.5±0.9% from 1979 to 2002 [1].
Science and scientists are often wrong. That's why they gather further data to confirm or refute their theories. There's a famous apocryphal quote from Einstein when a reporter asked how a conference was going: “Wonderful! Everything we knew about physics this morning is wrong!”
So: this article is not in anyway a refutation of climate change, or a useful analysis of where science goes “wrong”. It is merely a collection of out-of-context quotations presented in order to affirm a point of view.