The climate change mitigation activists frequently assume the characteristics of a “prepper” group that claims the end of the world is near, frequently with a specific date and time for world’s end.
The biggest difference I see is that the mitigation activists have formed a much larger group. But like an end-of-the-world group, the activists like to choose as their leader a non-scientist who somehow captures attention through able public speaking skills. Al Gore, for example, and, most recently, Greta Thunberg. These people are good at outlining the details of an imaginary global catastrophe and attracting others to the cause, but they are not educated scientists of any sort let alone climate scientists.
Toss in a specific end date “If we don’t act now the world as we know it will end in 12 years” and the activist recipe is complete. This is a slight variation on the tactics quasi-religious preppers use to justify what they are doing but without the specific day in the year and time of day.
Sadly, there are those who fall for all of this and once this happens, many of them assume the same characteristics of members of any prepper cult. Except they do not realize they are part of a cult, but “simply engaging in a ‘battle’ to ‘save the planet’ from its own humanity’”
All of this is crazy stuff involving people who are basing their views not on “scientific facts” as they would have you believe but instead on closely held values that are only loosely based on “scientific evidence” if at all.
To this end, it is going to take a lot more than quality conflicting science to change the views of those who have joined the cult. I keep coming back to the sheer inaccuracy of most predictions that extend out 10 or more years regardless of the field of study. Why were their no cell phones in the 2015 envisioned in the 1985 “Back to the Future” movie? How come 2015 came and went and I didn’t see a single flying car, thought to be commonplace in the 2015 as envisioned in the 1985 movie. The forecasters (story writers) simply got it all wrong.
I’ve already noted that Malthus got it way wrong when he argued that population growth would soon outpace food production. But most if not nearly all forecasts that predict something will happen bad in 10 or more years, if we don’t drastically change the bad things we are doing right now, have gotten it wrong.
Maybe the CO2 coalition needs to worry less about coming up with new science that conflicts with the science 97 percent of scientists agree with (ROFL*), and spend more effort to better communicate the importance of realizing that most (if not nearly all) predictions and forecasts 10 year or more out end up being wrong (but that becomes known only as the time passes).
Al Gore’s first movie on climate change captured a lot of attention. It made a lot of doomsday predictions if humanity did not act now to change its evil (fossil fuel-burning) ways. The global surface temperature was supposed to go up in a hockey stick fashion like Mann’s graph. Polar bears would be on the verge of extinction. Food supplies would be plummeting because of all the hot, dry weather.
A number of years passed. None of what was forecast happened. There might be more polar bears now roaming the arctic than when the first movie came out. We can debate if the global surface temperature has risen at all over the years, but any small increase in no way mimics the hockey stick-and-ladder scene in the first movie.
Then Al Gore comes out with a follow up movie. MOST of the forecasts made in the first movie ended up being flat-out wrong. One might expect that Gore would use the second movie to explain why the first movie got it all wrong, like any prepper trying to rationalize why the first end-of-the-world date and time was wrong. But no, just another round of gloom and doom. This is like a prepper who had a specific date for the end of the world and that date comes and goes with the earth still spinning. Instead of admitting this the prepper simply comes up with a new date another 10 years out and tells everyone to forget that old date without explanation because the new date is now certain!
So, the public bought the first movie, but the second movie was largely an attention-grabbing failure, even with most of the mitigation “prepper” activists. You can fool some of the people some of the time!
Then Greta Thunberg, the teenager, comes along. She has a “gift” for rallying people to causes, and climate change mitigation certainly represents a great global cause. She is even less familiar with climate science (or science at all) than Gore is. But, no problem, because she has “this gift.” Time magazine buys into it all. This concerned teenager, if we only listen to her, knows how to save the planet from the horrors of fossil fuels.
Then all of this gets messed together with liberal and conservative politics. It’s Democrats versus Republicans, Trumpers versus Anti-Trumpers. Frackers versus anti-frackers, those who want to keep coal miners mining coal and those who think the miners ought to learn carbon neutral computer programming instead. The Green New Deal is perfect. The Green New Deal is idiotic. Wild and crazy stuff.
Let me get this right. America is serious about transporting human beings to Mars and have them live there in a place without oxygen or food, and a place where the temperature makes the Antarctic look like a warm spot. This is the same country where there are people who claim that the earth will collapse if the global surface temperature rises by only 2 degrees C.
Tell me another funny story. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– *Rolling on the floor laughing