Media, politicians and activists frequently promote positions on climate change that are at variance with those of the scientific community. This was a major part of philosopher and writer Alex Epstein’s latest book- “Fossil Future: Why Global Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas — Not Less,”
UK television channel GB News a few days ago presented a perfect example of this lack of connection. Just Stop Oil activist Ben Larsen said his group’s recent attack on Stonehenge was justified by the perceived need to raise public pressure on politicians and force them to begin constructing a real plan to deal with climate change.
This plan must include the cessation of all use of oil by 2030, and if that doesn’t happen, Mr Larsen says, we are all doomed.
Appearing on the same GB News show was rebel climate scientist Paul Burgess. He confronted Mr Larsen with page 1856 from the latest AR6 IPCC report. The page contains a table that directly challenges common perceptions that human activity is causing changes in the climate.
When the page is handed to Ben Larsen he screws it up and throws it away. Immediately, without even giving it a glance.
Paul Burgess tries to explain Alex Epstein’s thesis to Ben Larson, that what media and politicians say is often at variance to real science, and this would be an example. Mr Larsen of course will not listen.
So what was on page 1856?
It shows a table relating to Climate Impact Drivers (CIDs) in three columns. The overall aim is to identify events that are 1) already affected by climate change and 2) likely to be affected in the future. (2050 and 2100)
What is astonishing is the list of events the categorise as “lacking evidence” and/ or having “low confidence in direction of change”. Some of the more acute items are-
“River flooding, landslides, hydrological drought, fire weather, severe wind storm, tropical cyclone, heavy snowfall, hail, coastal flooding, coastal erosion”.
Read that list again, & then ask yourself why you’re seeing so much in NZ media about how these events are all on the increase & insurance rates have to increase blah blah blah. Apparently its all chicken little scare mongering garbage.
There is no evidence they are being affected by climate change today, and no evidence they will be affected in the future. (Up til 2100 anyway) Page 1856 of the latest IPCC report says so right there.
The graphic below is the page in question. Click on it for an enlarged view. It can also be downloaded from the link at the bottom of this post.
THE REDBAITER on X 
Commenting? Only two rules: 1) Stay on topic. 2) Don’t insult the owner.