Thongchai Thailand

HIS ASTUTE OBSERVATION ABOUT COVID ALSO APPLIES TO CLIMATE CHANGE.

HERE IS WHAT HE SAID

IF SCIENCE CAN’T BE QUESTIONED IT’S NOT SCIENCE ANYMORE.

IT’S PROPAGANDA.

AND THAT’S THE TRUTH.

QUESTION: Does climate change affect the transmission of disease to create epidemics like the coronavirus?

THE HARVARD TH CHAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH HAS AN ANSWER

ANSWER: We don’t have direct evidence that climate change is influencing the spread of COVID-19, but we do know that climate change alters how we relate to other species on Earth and that matters to our health and our risk for infections. As the planet heats up, animals big and small, on land and in the sea, are headed to the poles to get out of the heat. That means animals are coming into contact with other animals they normally wouldn’t, and that creates an opportunity for pathogens to get into new hosts. Many of the root causes of climate change also increase the risk of pandemics. Deforestation, which occurs mostly for agricultural purposes, is the largest cause of habitat loss worldwide. Loss of habitat forces animals to migrate and potentially contact other animals or people and share germs. Large livestock farms can also serve as a source for spillover of infections from animals to people. Less demand for animal meat and more sustainable animal husbandry could decrease emerging infectious disease risk and lower greenhouse gas emissions. We have many reasons to take climate action to improve our health and reducing risks for infectious disease emergence is one of them.

TRANSLATION: We don’t know the answer and there is no way to relate climate change and epidemia but since the coronavirus epidemic happened during the global warming era maybe it’s safe to assume that there is a causation relationship and risky to assume that there isn’t.

So the answer is yes although the real answer is that we don’t have a clue.

THIS POST IS A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE UNITED NATIONS WORLD HUNGER PROGRAM.

LINK TO SOURCE: https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-summit/news/2021-going-be-bad-year-world-hunger

PART-1: WHAT THE UNITED NATIONS SOURCE DOCUMENT SAYS

#1: 2021 is going to be a bad year for world hunger

#2: How climate action can make a difference

#3: Today, the UN World Food Programme‘s live Hunger Map aggregates 957 million people across 93 countries who do not have enough to eat. The Global Humanitarian Outlook projects 239 million people in need of life-saving humanitarian action and protection this year. Of the factors driving global hunger, climate is the one that can best be predicted using science. Our technical abilities to monitor and forecast weather-related hazards have never been as good as today. There is no ethically justified reason to keep treating climate disasters as inevitable and ‘natural’ surprises. As countries are re-grouping to think about ways in which the COVID-19 crisis can be used as a springboard to build more resilient societies, climate foresight and preventive planning need to be part of the equation. Many countries have started to recognize the global climate emergency as a humanitarian issue. Climate change fuels conflict and economic risks, while compounding the effects of disease outbreaks. Like COVID-19, it is highly globalized and dynamic, and cannot be contained by one country, one institution or one academic discipline. It requires countries and organizations to work together to identify and implement solutions. Some of these solutions are emerging from new angles and directions, for example as part of a new global dialogue about food systems. WFP’s involvement includes anchoring the Resilience Action Track of the 2021 Food Systems Summit to discuss game-changing approaches for the transformation of imperiled and unsustainable food systems.

PART-2: CRITICAL COMMENTARY

WITH AN ANNUAL BUDGET OF 4.8 BILLION USD, THE UNITED NATIONS ENSURES THAT 957 MILLION PEOPLE {12% OF THE WORLD’S POULATION} WHOM THEY HAVE IDENTIFIED AS NOT GETTING ENOUGH TO EAT, WILL BE PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE NOURISHMENT.

IN A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM, JON ENTINE, LINK TO SOURCE: https://www.aei.org/articles/how-corrupt-is-the-world-food-program/ WRITES THAT THEREIS NOT ENOUGH TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND OVERSIGHT IN THE WFP FOR US TO EVALUATE THEIR CLAIMS: THE FULL JON ENTINE TEXT IS PROVIDED BELOW.

IN RELATED POSTS ON THIS SITE LINKED BELOW WE PROVIDE DETAILS ABOUT THE UNITED NATIONS OPERATIONS THAT SUPPORT THE ENTINE EVALUATION. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT:

{LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/02/25/un/ , “It is well known that public sector bureaucracies without adequate constraint, oversight, audit, and accountability can devolve into self-serving organisms. The United Nations and its many agencies and programs are ultimately funded by taxpayers but they are too far removed from those taxpayers to be directly accountable to them. But who will discipline the UN? Agency theory ensures that no single country will venture to absorb the cost of disciplining the UN while gaining only pro-rata benefits. United Nations agencies and programs like the UNEP, IPCC, UNCFCCC, the Montreal Protocol, the Kyoto Protocol and their related frameworks, conventions and other bureaucratic artifacts are therefore allowed to operate under insufficient constraint, transparency, oversight, or discipline. Under these conditions they can morph into bureaucratic organisms that operate for their own needs and no longer serve the public interest.

LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/03/18/the-eco-crisis-ambition-of-the-un/ , “Remember when the ILO did labor, the FAO did agriculture, the WHO did health, the World Bank did infrastructure loans for developing countries, the WMO did Meteorology, and the UNDP did economic development of poor countries? Now they all do Climate. This post is an examination of this anomaly in terms of the structure and function of the UN that are not constrained and that contain no provision for accountability, oversight, discipline, or budgetary constraint. These structural flaws have created a rogue public service organization that serves itself and not the public and they make it possible for the UN to use its self declared global environmental authority to invent global environmental crises that inflate its budget and serve its bureaucratic needs. That the World Health Organization (WHO) is busy with climate change these days with predictions that climate change is causing starvation and malnutrition, is best understood in this context. The WHO is no longer a World Health Organization but an agency of the UN that takes its orders from Antonio Guterres the climate guy.”

WHAT THE JON ENTINE ARTICLE TELLS US ARE THE DETAILS OF HOW THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM FUNCTIONS UNDER THESE CONDITIONS. THE ABSENCE OF OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY GIVES THEM FREEDOM TO TELL US WHAT THEY NEED US TO HEAR AND THAT THEREFORE WITHOUT OVEFRSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY WE DON’T REALLY KNOW WHAT USEFUL SERVICE THE WFP PROVIDES TO HUMANITY. THEY CLAIM THAT 12% OF HUMANITY DOES NOT GET ENOUGH TO EAT AND THAT THEY KNOW WHO THESE 12% ARE AND THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS TO THEM AND THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO FEED THEM. ALL WE KNOW IS WHAT THE RECIPIENTS OF THE THE BILLIONS IN PUBLIC FUNDS WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY, TELL US. A SPECIFIC ISSUE HERE IS THAT DATA SUCH AS THE NUMBER OF HUNGRY AND THE EXTENT OF THEIR DIETARY CARE ARE NOT VERIFIED. AND THE GROTESQUE RACISM IN THE GRAPHIC IMAGES OF THE HUNGRY ARE OVERLOOKED.

WHAT’S MORE IS THAT SINCE THE UN IS NOW RUN BY ANTONIO GUTERRES THE CLIMATE GUY, ALL UN PROGRAMS ARE PART OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROGRAM OF THE UN AS SEEN HERE IN THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM WHERE WE FIND THE RACIST USE OF LITTLE HUNGRY DARKIES TO PUSH FOR CLIMATE ACTION.

DETAILS OF THE JON ENTINE ARTICLE BELOW.

JON ENTINE FULL TEXT: How pervasive are the problems at the World Food Program, the largest hunger relief agency in the world and the United Nations agency responsible for food aid? It’s a $2.9 billion question—the amount of direct aid disbursed by the WFP. A significant part of its budget comes from U.S. contributors, and USAID coordinates some of its work through the WFP. It’s been a month since the leaking of a scathing evaluation of WFP’s Somalian relief program written by the UN Monitoring Group on Somalia. The body, created by the UN Security Council, alleges that three Somali businessmen who held about $160 million in WFP transport contracts were involved in arms trading while diverting the agency’s food aid away from the hungry. A New York Times report also claimed food was being siphoned off by radical Islamic militants and local UN workers. Allegations had been simmering for months. The WFP suspended the contracts of the three businessmen but continues to deny there were serious problems. It has tried to frame the findings as unfounded or exaggerated. Speaking from WFP headquarters in Geneva, Executive Director Josette Sheeran said there was “zero evidence” for the allegations of a large-scale diversion of aid. “These estimates of diversion are not apparently based on any documentation, but rather on hearsay and commonly held perception,” the UN’s aid chief in Somalia, Mark Bowden, wrote in the letter to the monitoring body. Bowden didn’t provide his own estimate. The WFP said it would welcome an investigation. Somalia is not the WFP’s only controversy, only its most recent and most public. Somalia is one of the most challenging places in the world for aid work, making the allegations difficult to verify. Food has to pass through roadblocks manned by insurgents and bandits. Investigators, who face the peril of kidnapping or even assassination, could end up relying on the people they are probing to provide for their protection. Certainly an agency as large and diffuse as WFP—it has offices in 80 countries and provides food relief to 100 million people a year—is bound to have some problems. But questions remain as to how WFP executives monitor their vast network and how transparent and responsive they are when questions arise. Somalia is not the WFP’s only controversy, only its most recent and most public. Its operation in Ethiopia, which is one of the largest recipients of food aid in the word, is reportedly in disarray, with the transport companies controlled by the country’s authoritarian government at the center of the controversy. According to the U.S. State Department, in 2008 only 12 percent of food aid (most of it overseen by the WFP) made it to its intended recipients in the poverty-stricken eastern region. The trucking situation is little better in Afghanistan, where reports suggest that WFP is paying two to three times more than commercial rates, taking large chunks out of the $1.2 billion, three-year relief effort. The WFP has admitted that it inflated its shipping costs in North Korea by funneling business through dictator Kim Jong Il’s government. In each case the WFP has denied the magnitude of the problem. But the responses miss the point. Why hasn’t the WFP, which portrays itself as a model of transparency, opened its books so the international community can exercise appropriate accountability and oversight? And what actions are other international agencies requiring of humanitarian aid agencies to ensure transparency? The Georgian Mess: The trucking situation is little better in Afghanistan, where reports suggest that WFP is paying two to three times above commercial rates, taking large chunks out of the $1.2 billion, three-year relief effort. The problems with WFP food aid now coming to light are not isolated. I experienced them firsthand while in the republic of Georgia from 2008 to 2009, where I was the post-war aid monitoring coordinator of Transparency International Georgia. I was researching my doctoral thesis about aid accountability in a country where I myself had been an aid worker between 2002 and 2006. The WFP had already been working in Georgia for several years when the brief but bitter conflict with Russia broke out in August 2008. Several days of intense fighting left hundreds of people dead. Nearly 130,000 Georgians were forced to flee their homes, suddenly displaced within their own country. Driven by strategic considerations and humanitarian concerns, international donors pledged to provide more than $4 billion in aid. One billion dollars of this money was pledged by the United States, making it the largest donor to Georgia. Millions of dollars were to be used to provide emergency food aid to tens of thousands of Georgians who had been affected by the fighting, including many who had been forced to flee their homes during the conflict and were now internally displaced. In the wake of the conflict, WFP and numerous other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) started delivering emergency humanitarian assistance in addition to continuing work on their longstanding development projects. My research in Georgia revealed that the WFP, in cooperation with four international charities, used donor money to distribute insufficient, inappropriate, and in some case useless food rations to thousands of Georgians traumatized by war and displacement. As appears to be the case in Somalia, there was at best spotty oversight of the relief effort; also, to date, no one has been called to account. In this case, the issue was not the transport infrastructure but the handling of the actual food rations. While most Georgians had been able to return home by the end of 2008, tens of thousands of people remained displaced and in need of support. Food aid was managed by the WFP and four aid agencies—CARE, the International Orthodox Christian Charities, Save the Children, and World Vision—all of which are still operating in Georgia. The food was delivered to people displaced by the conflict and to residents of the so-called “buffer zone,” a rural area where much of the fighting had taken place. According to the U.S. State Department, in 2008 only 12 percent of food aid (most of it overseen by the WFP) made it to its intended recipients in the poverty-stricken eastern region of Ethiopia. One of the key responsibilities of a food aid agency is to provide a daily minimum diet to prevent malnutrition and starvation. In Georgia, food rations were not adjusted upwards to account for the bitter winter, and therefore fell below globally accepted minimum standards, including those of Sphere, the guiding global humanitarian and disaster relief charter. Neither the Georgian government nor international donors realized that WFP and the four NGOs were delivering food that fell short of the minimum needs of those who were enduring the harsh Georgian winter. As a result, aid recipients experienced a food gap until February 2009, when—in an unrelated development—the UN distributed credit-like cards to food aid beneficiaries so they could buy fruits and vegetables. It was supposed to supplement their wheat-heavy regular aid, but many of the recipients instead had to use these cards to bridge the gap left by WFP in their basic food needs. The problems were compounded because the aid recipients had no way to communicate with WFP or its sister relief agencies. They had been provided with a nonworking hotline number that left Georgians helpless and frustrated. While the quantity of food was clearly insufficient, the quality of the rations at times was even worse. In early 2009, using its global procurement system, similar to what was in place in Somalia, WFP purchased 1,800 tons of wheat flour from a supplier in Turkey and began distributing it. It could not be used to make Georgian bread due to a problem with the flour’s gluten index, although it technically met WFP standards. When people tried to bake bread, it turned hard, making it inedible. Mixing this flour with flour from other sources did not solve the problem. The absence of edible bread left thousands of people with a huge calorie gap. Why hasn’t the WFP, which portrays itself as a model of transparency, opened up its books so the international community can exercise appropriate accountability and oversight? The WFP and its partner NGOs were fully aware of the problem but downplayed its significance. “There is an issue with the gluten index which results in poor performance when bread is baked,” the WFP acknowledged in March 2008. “But since the flour is perfectly fit for human consumption, WFP is not planning to take back the distributed tonnages.” This statement flatly contradicted a qualifying line in the draft report that WFP kept from becoming public when the official report was released: “Anecdotal reports from the field suggest that some IDPs [internally displaced persons] are using the wheat flour as animal feed because they cannot use it to bake bread.” WFP together with its NGO subcontractors continued distributing this flour for weeks. In total, 800 metric tons—equivalent to the flour content of 1.6 million individual daily rations—costing more than half a million dollars were distributed to tens of thousands of people before WFP finally ordered a halt. The Accountability Gap: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has not yet responded to calls to authorize an independent investigation of the WFP operations in Somalia or elsewhere. But everyone, even the beleaguered food agency, acknowledges there is a problem. Bowden, the Somalian aid director, said UN bodies have spent over $350,000 to improve monitoring in Somalia since 2008, and adopted other steps to limit risks in a “complex environment where a war economy has predominated for many years.” What can the international community do to prevent the kind of problems that simmer in Somalia, Georgia, and other parts of the world that depend on international aid to feed the displaced and hungry? In theory, aid agencies are accountable to a variety of stakeholders, including private and institutional donors, their beneficiaries, the governments of the countries they work in, and the wider aid community. In practice, accountability is almost nonexistent because international standards either do not exist, are not enforced, or become victims of political crossfire. In Somalia, WFP has rejected one of the recommendations by the UN monitoring agency, to allow monitors to use UN Humanitarian Air Services to travel around the country. “The work of the monitoring group has been determined to be political in nature and therefore … it would not be appropriate to make UNHAS flights available to them,” Bowden said. In practice, accountability is almost nonexistent because international standards either do not exist, are not enforced, or become victims of political crossfire. The WFP has set up a firewall in Georgia as well. When I contacted them, the WFP and the four aid agencies refused to release the agreements governing their relationship—a violation of standards set by InterAction, an international coalition of humanitarian agencies, and of the Code of Conduct for NGOs in Disaster Relief (which WFP requires sub-contracting NGOs to follow). That made it impossible to determine how much aid money WFP pays to NGOs to distribute food. Private donors in wealthy countries simply lack the information needed to hold aid and development NGOs to account for how their donations are used thousands of miles away. The only information available is that which is voluntarily provided by the NGOs, which are extremely reluctant to open their operations to scrutiny. U.S. citizens concerned about the use of their tax dollars abroad may find it equally hard to discover how NGOs awarded grants by USAID are spending their money. I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with USAID in May 2009, requesting copies of all NGO project budgets financed with American taxpayers’ money during the second half of 2008. Almost a year later, USAID has still not released these documents. Institutional donors like USAID usually do have a presence on the ground in developing countries, but they rarely directly monitor NGO activities in the field. Instead, they usually, though not always, rely on information provided by their grantees. Interviews with dozens of donor and NGO representatives in Georgia, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan suggest that neither NGOs nor donor country offices have an incentive to document instances in which aid money is stolen, wasted, or unwisely spent. Projects are almost invariably portrayed as successful, irrespective of realities on the ground. Private donors in wealthy countries simply lack the information needed to hold aid and development NGOs to account for how their donations are used thousands of miles away. Government officials in Somalia or Georgia are unlikely to try to hold the WFP or other international NGOs accountable for their activities. They lack the capacity to do so effectively and NGO projects typically do not receive funding from host governments. When the flour scandal finally made headlines in the Georgian media, the opposition quickly blamed the government rather than WFP, so the UN agency was never called to account. The beneficiaries—the displaced and the hungry—are often caught in the middle. NGOs have a vested interest in presenting themselves as accountable to the needy to keep funds pouring in. But NGOs face no institutional pressures to meaningfully follow through on such commitments. They live off private donations and government grants, so being responsive to beneficiaries is irrelevant to organizational growth and survival. Most Georgians receiving food aid come from villages and do not speak English. They do not know (and frequently do not care) which NGO delivers what aid. Whether intentionally or not, NGOs fail to identify themselves, don’t provide contact details, or leave beneficiaries in the dark about their entitlements. Georgian beneficiaries did not know when to expect the next delivery or even whether there would be a next delivery at all. An Intractable Challenge? Aid organizations have responded to concerns about their lack of accountability through a variety of initiatives and mechanisms intended to create transparency within the aid community. Senior staff members at NGOs’ global headquarters readily sign up to noble-sounding initiatives and commit their organizations to meeting certain standards. But these measures lack teeth and often require organizations to act as a whistleblower against a partner agency. As a result, they are almost universally ignored in practice. Few field-level aid workers are aware of the various commitments that their organizations have made, so they are not in a position to press for reforms. Interviews with dozens of donor and NGO representatives in Georgia, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan suggest that neither NGOs nor donor country offices have an incentive to document instances in which aid money is stolen, wasted, or unwisely spent. When issues do come to light, as in Somalia, agencies in the crosshairs invariably claim that the food relief program is largely helpful and successful and there will always be some problems in emergency response situations. The WFP notes it faces enormous challenges in Somalia, where more than 3 million people—or about half the population—suffer from malnutrition and need aid. An independent investigation could be illuminating, but launching yet another NGO-to-NGO mutual accountability initiative likely would be fruitless. The problem is not a lack of standards and codes of conduct, but lack of enforcement and sanctioning of existing standards. Oversight by institutional donors such as USAID is inherently difficult because institutional incentives reward donor country offices for reporting successes and punish them for highlighting failures. Adding more of the same red tape, encumbering NGOs that are already drowning in bureaucratic requirements, could reduce the ability of committed NGO field workers to assist those in need, and would likely do little to address inefficiencies. NGO project budgets are the single exception to this rule. USAID could require all grant recipients to post their proposed project budgets online before funding is released. These budgets already exist as part of the formal project proposals, so publicly revealing them would require negligible additional effort by NGOs. At a minimum, this would act as a constraint on some NGOs’ tendency to pay grossly inflated tax-free salaries to their international staff. However, as Transparency International Georgia’s experience has shown, any such initiative might be resisted by NGOs, and probably also by USAID itself, and is therefore unlikely to succeed in the absence of serious and sustained congressional pressure. For the poor and hungry, the situation is daunting. Raising aid agency responsiveness towards beneficiaries may hold out the greatest hope of improving accountability in international aid. But exact mechanisms to make that happen are elusive. In order to have real effects, such transparency and disclosure must be backed by effective sanctions when the performance of aid agencies falls short of beneficiaries’ entitlements.

THE ESSENTIAL ARGUMENT MADE BY JON ENTINE IS THAT WITHOUT ADQUATE CONSTRAINT, OVERSIGHT, AUDIT, AND ACCOUNTABILITY PUBLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS FUNDED BY TAX DOLLARS SERVE THEIR OWN INTERESTS AND NO LONGER SERVE THE PUBLIC AND SO WITHOUT THAT OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY WE DON’T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE WFP IS DOING OR WHETHER THE

without adequate constraint, oversight, audit, and accountability can devolve into self-serving organisms.

LINK TO SOURCE: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24833040-900-how-the-coronavirus-has-impacted-climate-change-for-good-and-bad/

PART-1: WHAT THE NEW SCIENTIST ARTICLE SAYS

How the coronavirus has impacted climate change – for good and bad.

Global warming has become a forgotten crisis during the coronavirus pandemic. But a year that has set worrying climate records also shows how we can remake the world for the better. : Smoky skies from the northern California wildfires casts a reddish color in San Francisco, Calif., on Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2020. THE orange skies looked more like a smoking hellscape from the film Blade Runner 2049, but this was California 2020. The images of the huge wildfires there, and in Australia earlier in the year, are perhaps as emblematic of 2020 as those of queues of people wearing face masks. Climate change hasn’t stopped because of a global pandemic. Yet our turbocharged heating of Earth has become an almost forgotten crisis. Climate change has been put on the back burner according to climate scientist Corinne Le Quéré at the University of East Anglia, UK, who advises the UK and French governments on climate action. In the meantime, the world has seen a welter of uncomfortable records or near-records this year on measures related to climate change, from global temperatures to Arctic sea ice loss, with ever-clearer consequences for global health, wealth and happiness. It’s understood the covid crisis is a short-term public health crisis and an economic crisis for a few years according to Petteri Taalas at the World Meteorological Organization. “But it should be understood that the magnitude of the crisis we face if we fail with climate mitigation would be something very different.. Coronavirus is far from over, but it is time to think what we want the world to look like 10, 20 and 30 years down the line. What has been happening with the climate crisis while the world’s attention has been diverted? How has the pandemic changed.

TRANSLATION: CLIMATE SCIENCE IS WORRIED THAT THEY ARE NOT THE BIG SCARE ANYMORE NOW THAT THE COVID IS HERE. A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS FOR THESE FEARMONGERING CONSENSUS SCIENTISTS WHO WORKED SO HARD TO BUILD THEIR FEAR APPEAL MOVEMENT AGAINST FOSSIL FUELS. AND HERE WE ARE IN THE UNACCEPTABLE SITUATION WHERE THE COVID HAS STOLEN THE FEAR APPEAL SHOW AND THE CLIMATE HAS BEEN LEFT BEHIND.

PLEASE HELP: YOU CAN HELP BY MAKING SURE THAT YOU LIVE A LIFE OF FEAR WHERE YOUR FEAR IS NOT LIMITED TO THE COVID. PLEASE SHOW SOME KINDNESS AND SOME RESPECT FOR THE CLIMATE SCIENTISTS WHO WORKED SO HARD TO BUILD THEIR FEAR APPEAL MOVEMENT AGAINST FOSSIL FUELS.

THANK YOU

RELATED POST ON THE FEAR APPEAL MOVEMENT AGAINST FOSSIL FUELS

LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/07/22/fear-appeal-in-climate-change/

LINK TO SOURCE ARTICLE: https://www.scmp.com/business/article/3161184/climate-change-typhoons-coastal-asia-and-china-could-be-twice-powerful

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF WHAT THE SOURCE ARTICLE SAYS

Climate Change: Typhoons in coastal Asia and China could be twice as powerful by 2100. Their overall destructive power could double by the end of the century in the worst-case climate change scenario. The projection also suggests that an average typhoon by then will last 56% longer and travel 50% further inland. The average wind speed of typhoons at landfall could strengthen by 6%. The death toll from Typhoon Rai in the Philippines is up to 375 and climbing. Between 1979 and 2016 typhoons increased in duration by two to nine hours and penetrated 30 to 190km further inland. Global warming will continue the increasing trend in landfalling typhoons and their impact on inland regions. This assessment derives from high-resolution climate model projections. More Asian inland regions will be exposed to severe typhoon-related hazards in the future as a result of climate change.

CRITICAL COMMENTARY

RELATED POSTS ON TROPICAL CYCLONES THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/01/30/list-of-posts-on-tropical-cyclones/

1. TRENDS IN TROPICAL CYCLONE ACTIVITY: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/11/28/trends-in-tropical-cyclone-activity/
2. TROPICAL CYCLONES AND SST: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/03/22/ace-sst/
3. TROPICAL CYCLONES OF THE PRE-INDUSTRIAL ERA: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/04/04/1737/
4. TROPICAL CYCLONES AND CLIMATE CHANGE 2019: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/08/01/tropical-cyclones-climate-change/
5. TROPICAL CYCLONES AND CLIMATE CHANGE 2020: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/03/04/agwcyclones/
6. A FAILED OBSESSION WITH TROPICAL CYCLONES: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/09/20/a-failed-obsession-with-tropical-cyclones/
7. THE HURRICANE OBSESSION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/11/14/hurricane-obsession/
8. CLIMATE CHANGE AND HURRICANES: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/09/18/climate-change-hurricanes/
9. TOTAL HURRICANE ENERGY AND FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/09/15/emissions-hurricanes/

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE POSTS LISTED ABOVE

WHAT CLIMATE SCIENCE SAYS ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GLOBAL WARMING AND TROPICAL CYCLONES IS SUMMARIZED IN THE RESEARCH PAPER BY KNUTSON ETAL AND HERE IS WHAT TOM KNUTSON SAYS: “Tropical cyclones and climate change.” Nature geoscience 3.3 (2010): 157-163. In the paper, Tom Knutson spells out exactly what climate science claims in terms of the impact of AGW climate change on tropical cyclones with climate model predictions of the effect of rising SST on tropical cyclones. His main points are as follows: (1) Globally averaged intensity of tropical cyclones will rise as AGW increases SST. Models predict globally averaged intensity increase of 2% to 11% by 2100. (2). Models predict falling globally averaged frequency of tropical cyclones with frequency decreasing 6%-34% by 2100. (3). The globally averaged frequency of “most intense tropical cyclones” should increase as a result of AGW. The intensity of tropical cyclones is measured as the ACE (Accumulated Cyclone Energy). (4). Models predict increase in precipitation within a 100 km radius of the storm center. A precipitation rise of 20% is projected for the year 2100. (5) Extremely high variance in tropical cyclone data at an annual time scale suggests longer, perhaps a decadal time scale which in turn greatly reduces statistical power. (6) Model projections for individual cyclone basins show large differences and conflicting results. Thus, no testable implication can be derived for studies of individual basins. NOTE: CO-AUTHORS INCLUDE EMANUEL, KOSSIN,

THIS MEANS THAT THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING ON TROPICAL CYCLONES CAN ONLY BE UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF A LONG TERM TREND OF MORE THAN 30 YEARS IN THE TOTAL CYCLONE ENERGY OF ALL TROPICAL CYCLONES AROUND THE WORLD IN ALL SIX CYCLONE BASINS.

TROPICAL CYCLONES IN THE WEST PACIFIC BASIN ARE CALLED TYPHOONS. IT IS JUST ONE OUT OF SIX BASINS. NO INFORMATION ON THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING ON TROPICAL CYCLONES CAN BE FOUND BY STUDYING ONE SINGLE CYCLONE BASIN.

THE DATA MUST INCLUDE ALL SIX BASINS. THE OTHER FIVE CYCLONE BASINS ARE THE NORTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH ATLANTIC BASINS WHERE TROPICAL CYCLONES ARE CALLED HURRICANES, THE NORTH INDIAN, THE SOUTHWEST INDIAN, AND THE SOUTH PACIFIC BASINS WHERE TROPICAL CYCLONES ARE CALLED “CYCLONES”. MOREOVER, THE CYCLONE DATA MUST SPAN MORE THAN 30 YEARS.

BASED ON THESE REQUIREMENTS BY CLIMATE SCIENCE FOR THE STUDY OF TROPICAL CYCLONES IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBAL WARMING, WE CONCLUDE THAT THE FINDINGS PRESENTED BY HONGKONG UNIVERSITY ABOVE DO NOT CONTAIN USEFUL INFORMATION.

THIS KIND OF GOOFY ANALYSIS THAT IS PRESENTD AS CLIMATE SCIENCE BUT THAT IS ACTUALLY INCONSISTENT WITH CLIMATE SCIENCE HAS BECOME THE NORM IN CLIMATE ACTIVISM.

MEANWHILE OVER AT QUORA

When Did Globalization Start?

#1: INVESTOPEDIA: LINK: https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020915/when-did-globalization-start.asp : Economic globalization is a historical process driven by innovation and technology. In the most general sense, globalization is the increasing integration of economies around the world as a result of the movement of goods, services, and capital across borders, in addition to the movement of people and knowledge across borders. This process is not a modern innovation of industrial age because conquering empires throughout history had the same result in terms of the the sharing of ideas, mixing of cultures and people, and trade across those conquered lands. The other important historical context is the Age of Exploration initiated by innovations in ocean going vessels in the 1400s, when Europeans set sail across oceans looking for trading opportunites in far away places across oceans as for example China and India. So perhaps it was people like Christopher Columbus that opened up commercial trade routes across the world and maybe that marks the beginning of globalization. An opposing view is that globalization is a modern post war innovation that began in the 1950s post war economic and migration boom across the world but the word “globalization” popped up decades later in 1980. But what does the word mean exactly? Does it mean the rise of America’s global dominance? Most will disagree because at its core, globalization is the exchange of ideas, capital, and goods across national borders and across the world. The process is driven by technology that facilitate the spread of goods and ideas across the world. A key innovation in thie regard was the Gold Standard in the 19th century because it facilitated trade across different currencies. The weakness in the gold standard theory is that there was significant global trade prior to that with actual gold used in trading. Gold had been used as currency for thousands of years. Many analysts still hold on to the idea that globalization is a post war thing that got started after World War II when nations around the world were eager to break down barriers of trade which in turn created the Bretton Woods Conference, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and that therefore globalization had to have started in the 1950s post-war economic boom and the rise of the USA as the economic powerhouse of the world.

THE BOTTOM LINE is that we’ve always had globalization in different forms and so it depends on how you define globalization to pick your start year. So therefore, neither the question about a fixed start for globalization nor its many answers contain useful information.

THE OTHER BOTTOM LINE

In modern times since the end of the 20th century, globalization as a net benefit to man has been questioned because it is thought that globalization not only created trade and cross border transfers of ideas, technology, and people, but also created things like terrorism, economic fluctuations, increasing inequality, increased migration of foreign workers cause unemployement problems. Also although the global venue for economics creates and selects the strong and the mighty, that leaves many companies behind. Some environmental issues are also cited as described in a related post: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/21/anti-globalization-environmentalism/

AND OF COURSE, IN THE AGE OF GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE, IT IS CLAIMED THAT GLOBALIZATION INCREASES ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND THEREBY PLAYS A ROLE IN WORSENING THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM.

CONCLUSION:

WE TEND TO DISCUSS GLOBALIZATION GLIBLY AND WITH GREAT APPARENT INSIGHT INTO THE PHENOMENON AND ITS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS THAT WE ASSUME ARE ALL WELL UNDERSTOOD EXCEPT THAT WHEN IT COMES RIGHT DOWN TO IT, WE DON’T REALLY KNOW WHAT IT IS EXACTLY AND WHETHER IT IS SOMETHING WORTH WORRYING ABOUT OR SOMETHING WORTH CELEBRATING, OR WHETHER IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND. ALL WE KNOW FOR SURE IS THAT IT IS A WORD THAT WE INVENTED AND NOTHING MORE.

RELATED POST WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY DATA: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/12/20/does-climate-action-work/

WHAT THAT DATA SHOW IS THAT IT TOOK OVER 5 TRILLION DOLLARS TO CONVERT 15% OF THE WORLD’S ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO RENEWABLES. THIS MEANS THAT THE CLIMATE ACTION DEMANDED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE HAS A PRICE TAG OF OVER 33 TRILLION DOLLARS, OR OVER $4,000 PER MAN WOMAN AND CHILD ON EARTH.

LINK TO SOURCE: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/22/follow-the-green-leader-why-everyone-from-jeff-bezos-to-boris-johnson-is-looking-to-costa-rica-aoe

PART-1: WHAT THE SOURCE ARTICLE SAYS

Follow the green leader: why everyone from Prince William to Jeff Bezos is looking to Costa Rica
Billionaires, princes and prime ministers are among those keen to learn from the Central American country, which has long put nature at the heart of its policies. ‘It’s in our DNA’: tiny Costa Rica wants the world to take giant climate step. If there had been a popularity contest at Cop26, the Costa Rican president, Carlos Alvarado Quesada, would have been a clear winner. Leonardo DiCaprio, Jeff Bezos, Boris Johnson and Prince William all wanted to speak with the leader of the tiny Central American country, eager to bask in its green glow. The climate summit in Glasgow was, in effect, Costa Rica’s Super Bowl, another chance to show off its impressive environmental credentials. It is the only tropical country that has successfully halted and reversed deforestation, a commitment dozens of others made at Cop26 but are far from achieving. Costa Rica, which celebrated its bicentenary in 2021, is aiming for total decarbonisation by 2050 – not just a net zero target – and is helping lead the world on efforts to protect 30% of the Earth by the end of this decade. From Christiana Figueres, who was head of the UN climate convention that achieved the Paris agreement in 2015, to Carlos Manuel Rodríguez, chief executive of the Global Environment Facility, Costa Ricans are routinely found in international leadership positions on the environment. Alvarado was proud of Costa Rica’s record when he spoke with the Guardian in early 2021. But in his final interview at Cop26, after an exhausting schedule, Alvarado cautioned that his country’s example should not be taken as a blueprint for others to follow. Costa Rica’s policy of paying citizens to protect and restore ecosystems is credited with reversing deforestation rates, which threaten the species. “The Costa Rican example ought not to be taken literally. Take whatever is good that we have, but also adapt it locally. The thing about our example is the possibility of change and not the particular change itself”, he said. “We have seen the world make global decisions in Glasgow but we cannot be tempted by the idea that they can be a one size fits all solution.” But Alvarado, who is coming to the end of his term as president, does not want to stop there. He acknowledges Costa Rica is “green – but not blue”, prompting the announcement at Cop26 of his country’s involvement in a vast new marine-protected area. “The more we provide an example, the more moral and political leverage there is for others to follow. That’s our approach,” he says. In Glasgow, Denmark and Costa Rica launched the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (Boga) to speed up the end of the fossil fuel industry, attracting intense media attention. While the initiative was set up by a small group of countries that had already committed to phasing out fossil fuels, it is hoped a coalition of the willing can translate into global change. Costa Rica’s environment minister, Andrea Meza announces the Republic of Costa Rica as the winner of the Earthshot prize “protect and restore nature award” in London, October 2021. Environment minister Andrea Meza appears on screen as the Duchess of Cambridge announces Costa Rica as winner of the Earthshot protect and restore nature award. Andrea Meza, Costa Rica’s environment minister who helped announce Boga, says winning the Earthshot prize was a moment of national unity akin to winning a football match. She underscores the importance of combining the inherent value of nature with financial realities to ensure its protection, along with environmental education for all citizens. Carlos Alvarado Quesada says “It’s in our DNA”. Tiny Costa Rica wants the world to take giant climate step. What we have learned from the Costa Rican case is that you need to put nature in as part of your development model. It’s not about development and protecting nature. It’s understanding that nature needs to be part of the kind of development that you want. After one or two generations, you’ll see the change. We can see the different species: the sloth, the hummingbird … and we feel proud.”Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on Twitter for all the latest news and features.

PART-2: CRITICAL COMMENTARY

IT IS VERY NICE AND VERY COMMENDABLE THAT THE TINY COUNTRY OF COSTA RICA HAS ADOPTED A VERY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENALISM PRIORITY AND THEY SHOULD BE COMME3NDED FOR THESE ACHEVEMENTS.

HOWEVER, WHAT CLIMATE SCIENCE SAYS IS THAT THE GLOBAL WARMING ISSUE IS A CREATION OF HUMANS BURNING FOSSIL FUELS AND THE SOLUTION SOUGHT AND DEMANDED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE IS THAT HUMANS MUST STOP BURNING FOSSIL FUELS IN A GLOBALLY COORDINATED MANNER TO BRING GLOBAL FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS TO ZERO. THE REASON WE HAVE COPS IS THE NEED FOR SUCH GLOBAL COORDINATION.

THERE IS NO RELEVANCE OF THE ECO WACKO ENVIRONMENTAL CREDIENTIALS OF COSTA RICA IN THIS CONTEXT. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE ONLY RELEVANT VARIABLE IN THE GLOBAL WARMING ISSUE IS GLOBAL FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS. THERE IS NO OPPORTUNITY HERE FOR CLIMATE HEROISM OF NATION STATES MUCH LESS THE ECO WACKO ENVIRONMENTALISM HEROISM OF A TINY COUNTRY.

THAT GLOBAL LEADERS AND THE MEDIA ARE LOOKING UP TO COSTA RICA AS A CLIMATE ACTION HERO IN THE COP26 CONTEXT IS MYSTERIOUS. THE TWO LOGICAL FLAWS IN THE ANALYSIS PRESENTED IN THE SOURCE ARTICLE ARE THAT

(1) GLOBAL WARMING IS A GLOBAL ISSUE AND ONLY A GLOBAL ISSUE AND THAT THEREFORE THERE IS NO OPPORTUNITY HERE FOR CLIMATE ACTION HEROISM OF NATION STATES MUCH LESS A TINY AND INSIGINFICANT LITTLE COUNTRY WITH 0.07% OF THE WORLD’S POPULATION AND LESS THAN 0.05% OF THE WORLD’S ECONOMY.

AND (2): ENVIRONMENTALISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL CREDENTIALS SUCH AS FORESTS HAVE NO ROLE IN THE FOSSIL FUEL ISSUE PRESENTED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE. THE ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING ISSUE IS THAT HUMANS BURNING FOSSIL FUELS CAUSE ATMOSPHERIC CO2 TO RISE AND CAUSE WARMING. THIS IS PURELY A FOSSIL FUEL ISSUE WITH NO OPPORTUNITY FOR CARBON CYCLE INTERVENTIONS AS A SUBSTITUTE CLIMATE ACTION. IN THE SAME VEIN, THERE IS NO ROLE FOR FORESTS IN THE CLIMATE ACTION DEMANDED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE.

RELATED POSTS

RELATED POST#1: THE UNIQUE AND PECULIAR ROLE OF FOSSIL FUELS IN THE GLOBAL WARMING ISSUE: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/06/19/vegandiet/

RELATED POST#2: THE RELATIVE INSIGNIFICANCE OF AFORESTATION AS A CLIMATE ACTION ALTERNATIVE: LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/20/the-power-of-trees/

RELATED POST#3: THE RELATIVE INSIGNIFICANCE OF AFORESTATION AS A CLIMATE ACTION ALTERNATIVE: LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/08/07/amazonia-lungs-of-the-earth/

RELATED POST#4: THE IRRELEVANCE OF CLIMATE ACTION HEROISM OF NATION STATES: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/05/22/climate-catch22/

THIS POST IS A PRESENTATION OF THE FINDING BY CLIMATE SCIENCE THAT A WHEEL OF TIME SIMULATION SHOWS THAT THE CURRENT GLOBAL WARMING CYCLE OF THE HOLOCENE COULD LAST FOR ANOTHER 18,000 YEARS

LINK YO SOURCE: https://theconversation.com/wheel-of-time-is-set-thousands-of-years-from-now-yet-its-still-burdened-with-todays-climate-change-174088

PART-1: WHAT THE ONLINE ARTICLE SAYS

A study of the Wheel of Time, the 14-book epic fantasy suggests that the show takes place around 18,000 years from today. For climate scientists like us, this poses an interesting question: would today’s climate change still be experienced in the World of the Wheel, even after all those centuries? About a quarter of carbon dioxide emitted today will remain in the atmosphere 18,000 years from now. According to biogeochemistry models, carbon dioxide levels could be as high as 1,100 ppm at that point. That’s compared with a present-day value of 415ppm. This very high value assumes that the Paris climate goals will be exceeded and that many natural stores of carbon will also be released into the atmosphere. But the high carbon dioxide concentrations do not necessarily mean a warmer climate. That’s because, over such a long period, slow changes in the orbit and tilt of the planet become more important. This is known as the Milankovitch Cycle and each cycle lasts for around 100,000 years. Given that we are currently at the peak of such a cycle, the planet will naturally cool over the next 50,000 years and this is why scientists were once worried about a new ice age. But will this be enough to offset the warming from the remaining carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? The image below shows a version of the classic warming stripes, a ubiquitous symbol of the past 150 years of climate change, but instead applied over 1 million years:

Annotated stripes: Warming stripes of Earth (and the World of the Wheel) for a million years. Today’s climate crisis will disrupt the Milankovitch cycle and its effects will last for many thousands of years.
You can clearly see the 100,000 year Milankovitch cycles. Anything red can be considered anthropogenic climate change, and the events of the Wheel of Time are well within this period. Even the descending Milankovitch cycle won’t be enough to counteract the increased warming from carbon dioxide, and so the inhabitants of the World of the Wheel would still experience elevated temperatures from a climate crisis that occurred 18,000 years ago. However, some of the weather changes from the still-elevated temperatures could be offset by other factors. Those 18,000 years aren’t very long from a geological perspective, so in normal circumstances the landmasses would not change significantly. However, in this fantasy future magical channelers “broke” the world at the end of the Second Age, creating several new supercontinents.To find out how the climate would work in the World of the Wheel, we used an exoplanet model. This complex computer program uses fundamental principles of physics to simulate the weather patterns on the hypothetical future planet, once we had fed in its topography based on hand-drawn maps of the world, and carbon dioxide levels of 830ppm based on one of the high potential future carbon pathways. According to our model, the World of the Wheel would be warm all over the surface, with temperatures over land never being cold enough for snow apart from on the mountains. No chance of a white Christmas in this future. Here the story and the science diverge, as at times snow is mentioned in the Wheel of Time. The long-term effects of climate change may have surpassed the imagination of its author, the late great Robert Jordan.

An animated map with arrows

A simulation focused on where The Wheel of Time events take place, showing surface winds (white arrows). climatearchive.org. The World of the Wheel would have stronger and wavier high-altitude jet streams than modern-day Earth. This is likely because there are more mountain ranges in the World of the Wheel, which generate atmospheric waves called Rossby waves, causing oscillations in the jet. There is some limited evidence that the jet stream gets wavier with climate change as well, although this is likely to be less important than the mountain ranges. The jet would bring moisture from the western ocean on to land, and deposit it north of the Mountains of Dhoom. Surprising then, that this region (The Great Blight) is so desert-like in the books – perhaps there is some magic at play to explain this. Our simulation of the World of the Wheel, showing the jet stream (red and yellow arrows), surface winds (white arrows) and cloud cover (white mist). Source: https://climatearchive.org/wot. Winds would often revolve around two particularly enormous mountains, Dragonmount and Shayol Ghul, before blowing downslope and reaching far across the land masses. The peak of Dragonmount itself is nearly always surrounded by clouds, and this is because the mountain is so large the winds travelling up it force surface moisture to higher altitudes, thus cooling it, and forming clouds. The fact winds would be so different from modern-day Earth is predominantly caused by topography, not the underlying increased temperatures from climate change. Nevertheless, in the World of the Wheel, it is clear that despite the extremely long time since carbon polluted the atmosphere, the inhabitants are still exposed to warmer than usual temperatures. Acknowledging just how long the effects of climate change will persist for should be a catalyst for change. Yet, even after accepting the facts, we face psychological barriers to subsequent personal action, not least because comprehending the timescales of climate change requires a considerable degree of abstraction. But, given the known changes in extreme weather from climate change, and given how long these changes will remain, we must ask ourselves: how would the mysterious and powerful Aes Sedai stop the climate crisis?

PART-2: CRITICAL COMMENTARY

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AND THEIR CLIMATE MODELS ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED CREDIBLE AND CAPABLE OF PRIVIDING USEFUL FORECASTS SO PERHAPS WE SHOULD TAKE THESE FORECASTS FROM CLIMATE SCIENCE SERIOUSLY.

HOWEVER, THE DATA FROM THE PAST SHOW A VERY DIFFERENT PATTERN THAT IS GROSSLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE FORECAST OF AN INTERGLACIAL WARMING CYCLE OF 18,000 YEARS.

LINKS TO RELATED POSTS ON THIS ISSUE

AS SEEN IN THE RELATED POSTS LINKED BELOW, THE DATA FOR THE LAST TWO GLACIATION CYCLES SHOW CLEAR PATTERNS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE CLIMATE SCIENCE ASSESSMENT OF AN 18,000-YEAR INTERGLACIAL WARMING CYCLE.

RELATED POST#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/25/youngerdryas/

RELATED POST#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/06/11/chaoticholocene/

RELATED POST#3: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/11/18/chaotic-interglacial-temperatures/

RELATED POST#4: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/11/09/the-issue-is-human-cause/

WHAT WE SEE IN THESE RELATED POSTS IS THAT GLACIATION CYCLES ARE CHAOTIC AT CENTENNIAL TO MILLENNIAL TIME SCALES AND THAT THIS CHAOTIC BEHAVIOR IS FOUND IN ALL THREE LEGS OF THE GLACIATION CYCLE, VIZ, GLACIATION, DEGLACIATION, AND INTERGLACIALS . WHAT WE ALSO FIND IS THAT THE TIME SCALE FOR GLACAITION CYCLES IS 200,000 YEARS WITH APPROXIMATELY 100,000 YEARS IN EACH PHASE OF THE CYCLE VIZ GLACIATION AND DEGLACIATION. IN BETWEEN DEGLACATION AND GLACIATION WE FIND THAT THE DEGLACIATED STATE CALLED “INTERGLACIAL” EXHIBITS THE SAME CHAOTIC BEHAVIOR AT THE SAME TIME SCALE. THIS MEANS THAT INTERGLACIALS ARE NEVER AT A STEADY STATE TEMPERATURE BUT THAT INTERGLACIALS TOO GO THROUGH VIOLENT AND CHAOTIC WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES AT MILLENNIAL AND CENTENNIAL TIME SCALES.

THE PROPOSITION THAT AN INTERGLACIAL WARMING CYCLE WILL PERSIST FOR 18,000 YEARS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE PALEO DATA FOR GLACIATION CYCLES WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THE INTERGLACIAL [JHASE OF GLACATION CYCLES.

HOWEVER, NONE OF THIS IMPLIES A REASON FOR HUMANS TO TAKE CLIMATE ACTION BECAUSE THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE, THOUGH IT DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB OF FORECASTNG THE HORRIFIC IMPACTS OF GLOBAL WARMING THAT COULD HAPPEN WITHOUT THE CLIMATE ACTION DEMANDEDBY THE CLIMATE SCIENCE, THIS DEMAND IS NOT SUPPORTED BY EMIPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE. EVEN AS CLIMATE SCIENCE SEES THE GLOBAL WARMING ISSUE AND THE DEMAND FOR CLIMATE ACTION IN TERMS OF ITS HARMFUL IMPACTS TO THE POINT OF A FORECAST OF 18,000 YEARS OF WARMING, THE ONLY ISSUE HERE IS HUMAN CAUSE. WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE THE DEMAND FOR CLIMATE ACTION DOES NOT MAKE SENSE EVEN WITH A HORRIFIC EXTENSION OF THE TIME SCALE OF THIS WARMING CYCLE TO 18,000 YEARS.

CONCLUSION: CLIMATE SCIENCE IS MORE FEAR APPEAL ACTIVISM THAN IT IS SCIENCE

RELATED POST ON ACTIVISM BY CLIMATE SCIENTISTS: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/02/03/hidden-hand/

UPDATED 12/24/2021

IN THIS POST WE PRESENT EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE THAT DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CLIMATE SCIENCE POSITION OF A CAUSATION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND GLOBAL WARMING.

NOTE: THE RELEVANT TIME SCALE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE IS ANNUAL. WHAT THE SCIENCE SAYS IS THAT ANNUAL EMISSIONS CAUSE ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION AND THAT ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION CAUSE ANNUAL CHANGES IN GLOBAL MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE {GMST}. THE DATA PRESENTED HERE ARE AT A DECADAL TIME SCALE.

#1: AIR TRAVEL: THE PANDEMIC AND INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS: A SPECIFIC IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC WAS THE REDUCTION IN GLOBAL AIRLINE TRAFFIC FROM 39 MILLION FLIGHTS PER YEAR TO 16 MILLION FLIGHTS PER YEAR. THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING.

#2: CLIMATE ACTION AND RENEWABLE ENERGY: OVER THE DECADE 2009 TO 2019 MORE THAN $2.5 TRILLION WAS INVESTED IN RENEWABLE ENERGY WORLDWIDE. THIS IMPLEMENTATION WAS MOTIVATED BY THE CLIMATE SCIENCE CLAIM THAT INVESTMENT IN RENEWABLE ENERGY IS REQUIRED TO ATTENUATE GLOBAL WARMING. YET WHAT WE SEE IN THE DATA IS THAT THE INVESTMENT OF $2.5 TRILLION IN RENEWABLE ENERGY DIDN’T CHANGE THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING.

THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING.

#3: GLOBAL RENEWABLE ENERGY CAPACITY: World Total Renewable Energy Capacity: 2010 to 2019 are: 2010=1,226,853, 2011=1,332,236, 2012= 1,445,233, 2013= 1,563,196, 2014= 1,692,680, 2015= 1,846,060, 2016=2,008,547, 2017=2,182,449, 2018=2,361,061, 2019=2,536,853.

THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING.

CONCLUSION:

NO EVIDENCE IS FOUND THAT THE RATE OF WARMING IS RESPONSIVE TO CLIMATE ACTION. BUT PLEASE ALSO SEE THE POSTSCRIPT BELOW

POSTSCRIPT:

THE CHART ABOVE PROVIDED BY {OUR WORLD IN DATA} SHOWS THAT ALTHOUGH THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN RENEWABLE ENERGY 1985 TO 2020, THE SHARE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY IN 2020 IS STILL LESS THAN 15% AND THAT SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE SHARE OF RENEWABLES IN TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION MAY EXPLAIN WHY NO EFFECT IS VISIBLE ON THE RATE OF WARMING. WHAT THAT DATA ALSO SHOW IS THAT IT TOOK OVER 5 TRILLION DOLLARS TO CONVERT 15% OF THE WORLD’S ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO RENEWABLES. THIS MEANS THAT THE CLIMATE ACTION DEMANDED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE HAS A PRICE TAG OF OVER 33 TRILLION DOLLARS, OR OVER $4,000 PER MAN WOMAN AND CHILD ON EARTH.

$23 TRILION

THE NEW YORK TIMES REPORTS: LINK: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/climate/climate-change-economy.html , THAT THE COST OF NOT TAKING CLIMATE ACTION AND SUFFERING THE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IS THAT THE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS WILL DEPRESS THE GLOBAL ECONOMY AND CAUSE A LOSS OF $23 TRILLION.

COMPARING THE COST OF ACTION ($33 TRILLION) TO THE COST OF CLIMATE INACTION ($23 TRILLION), WE FIND A ($10 TRILLION ) ADVANTAGE FOR NO ACTION.