Are We Doomed
Summary
TLDRThe script discusses the climate change debate, focusing on the alarmist perspective warning of catastrophe versus skeptical scientists who argue the threat is overblown. It notes the lack of open debate between these sides despite attempts to foster discussion. The narrator then outlines and challenges four key claims made by climate alarmists: irreversible tipping points in 12 years, worsening storms, useless mitigation efforts, and CO2 as purely harmful pollution. Skeptics argue these are exaggerated, temperatures are rising slowly, adaptation is possible, CO2 boosts plant growth. The narrator suggests governments exploit climate fears for greater control, and wishes for genuine debate on these complex issues.
Takeaways
- 😕 The script discusses the climate change debate, focusing on criticisms of climate alarmists
- 😳 It claims climate alarmists make exaggerated claims like 'we have 12 years before climate effects are irreversible'
- 🤔 It argues alarmists refuse to debate skeptics to defend their position
- 🧐 It cites scientists who dispute connections between warming and extreme weather
- 😠 It alleges climate policy would have little impact yet harm economies
- 🌱 It contends CO2 boosts plant growth and crop yields, offsetting harm
- 🤨 It implies climate scientists and UN boards have political motivations
- 😮 It says alarmist climate claims are confusing and deserve more debate
- 😬 It portrays public concern over climate as driven by fear-mongering
- 💡 Overall, it aims to highlight uncertainties and downplay risks of climate change
Q & A
Why won't climate change alarmists debate the Heartland Institute?
-The transcript says alarmists declined Heartland's invitation to debate, with no clear reason given. It speculates alarmists may not want to debate facts and respond to those who disagree.
What evidence does the Heartland Institute provide against climate change alarmism?
-They argue hurricanes are not getting worse, temperature rises are modest and adaptable as in Holland, CO2 helps plants grow, and Obama policies would have little effect on warming.
What is the basis for the claim that we only have 12 years before climate change effects are irreversible?
-The transcript does not provide a clear basis for this claim. It simply states it's 'absurd' to think another 0.5 degree Celsius rise in global temperature would crash the entire system.
How might governments benefit from climate change alarmism according to the Heartland Institute?
-They argue governments use CO2 as an excuse to control people's lives and expand their power. More climate alarmism gives them more control.
What evidence shows hurricanes are not getting worse?
-The Heartland Institute panel says global hurricane activity since 1970 shows no significant increase in power when measured and added up.
How might Holland adapt to climate change?
-The transcript says Holland adapted to being a 'low-line country' by building dikes and pumps. This suggests adapting infrastructure.
How does CO2 help feed the world?
-The Heartland Institute says higher CO2 levels accelerate plant growth and make plants more water efficient.
Why does the IPCC go along with climate change exaggerations?
-The Heartland panel speculates it's because governments want more control and power over people's lives.
What temperature rise has occurred since 1900?
-The transcript states there has been around a 1 degree Celsius rise in temperature since 1900.
What evidence suggests people are not taking climate change seriously?
-The panel mocks the idea that people in Miami would just 'sit there and drown' as sea levels rise, instead of adapting.
Outlines
😕 Conflicting Views on Climate Change Threats
The first paragraph presents conflicting perspectives on the threat of climate change. It mentions various past environmental scares that didn't materialize as warned. It then acknowledges rising temperatures and extinction worries, but questions if the alarmist rhetoric and calls for urgent action are justified.
😠 Accusations of Climate Alarmism and Control
The second paragraph accuses climate activists and organizations like the IPCC of alarmism and exaggeration to further an agenda of government control and power. It wishes there was an open debate to address confusion on the facts.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡climate change
💡global warming
💡alarmism
💡mass extinction
💡adaptation
💡carbon dioxide
💡hurricanes
💡control
💡debate
💡science
Highlights
The climate alarmists who were invited didn't show up to debate
The UN predicts the temperature will rise another 2 to 5 degrees Celsius
The claim that the entire system will crash if the temperature rises another half degree is absurd
Even if the planet warms 5 degrees, humans can adapt like the Dutch did by building infrastructure
There is no significant increase in hurricane power when measured globally since 1970
The 12 year deadline and claims of worsening hurricanes are myths according to the panel
Government action today would have little effect on global warming according to Obama administration models
CO2 helps feed the world and makes plants more water efficient
Many people pretend to study climate change just to scare people into supporting their agenda
Governments tend to want more control over time, CO2 provides a means for control
It's confusing when serious people seem so worried, but won't debate the other side
If the alarmist claims aren't true, why does the IPCC go along with the exaggerations?
The IPCC name stands for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
CO2 allows governments to control people's lives and efforts
There should be an open debate between both sides on climate change
Transcripts
this environmental catastrophe bearing
down on us I keep hearing that we're
killing the Earth how dare
you you have stolen my dreams in my
childhood but wait I've been a consumer
reporter for years I've covered so many
scares plague famine and Perpetual war
will kill us we're going to run out of
oil nuclear power will give us cancer
Killer Bees swarm ever closer bird flu
flesh eating B bacteria the list of
terrible things that we're going to get
us is long and yet we're living longer
than ever none of those scares turned
out to be as frightening as the warnings
but I'm told global warming is different
and TI ecosystems are collapsing we are
in the beginning of a mass extinction
the alarmists have evidence that
supports their fears temperature is
rising the UN predicts that it'll rise
another 2 to 5 degrees what do we do in
the land we live on is under attack but
does that justify the fear climate
change is not a life of please don't let
our planet die does it justify this
claim we have 12 years to act we have 12
years we have 12 years before the
effects are irreversible really 12 years
it's warmed up around 1° C since 1900
and life expectancy doubled the
industrialized democracies and and yet
that temperature ticks up another half a
degree
and the entire system crashes that's the
most absurd belief I recently moderated
this debate on climate change at the
Heartland Institute well not a debate
because the alarmists who were invited
didn't show Heartland invited many
please come over here and sit next to
that place and let's have a discussion
there are a lot more people want to hear
what you have to say climate alarmist
never agreed to debate we'd love to
offer you the airtime we will give give
it to you I'll give you a special phone
number that goes to this phone I invited
Al Gore in my show often but he would
never come in order to solve the climate
crisis he makes a lot of speeches but
won't respond to people who disagree
it's too bad that the alarmists won't
debate because so much of what they say
deserves debate the world is going to
end in 12 years if we don't address
climate change 12 years well and in 12
Years it'll be 12 more years David
legates is a professor of climatology at
the University of Delaware Pat Michaels
is former president of the American
Association of state climatologists will
he soon is an
astrophysicist it's all about har waving
it's about emotion about sending out kid
in protest we have nothing to do with
the science this group pointed out that
even if the planet warms by 5 degre
humans can adjust people in Holland did
years ago they said we're going to adapt
to the fact that we're a low-line
country and we're going to build these
dkes and we're going to build these
pumps are you telling me that the people
of Miami are so dumb that they're just
going to sit there and drown you
acknowledge that the water is
rising yes water has been rising for
approximately 20,000 years and probably
will continue but we can adapt like
Holland has
except the alarmist say hurricanes and
other storms are getting worse it's
getting stronger and stronger the winds
are getting harder and harder no they
aren't you can take a look at all the
Hurricanes around the planet we can see
them since 1970 because we got global
satellite coverage and we can measure
their power and we can add up their
power and there is no significant
increase whatsoever there is no
relationship between hurricane activity
and the surface temperature of the
planet the claim that hurricanes are
getting worse and the 12-year deadline
were two of four myths I heard the
Heartland panel convincingly debunk myth
number three was that government action
today will save us we have to act now
the Obama administration's model
projects that the amount of global
warming that would be saved for going to
zero emissions tomorrow you don't know
how to do that put you back in the in
the Stone Age but let's just say we did
it uh would be 1400s of a degree celsus
so no real effect on the climate but
you'll sure have an impoverished Dark
Country won't you myth number four the
idea that carbon dioxide is carbon
pollution that just does harm and
threatens the food supply there are
places on Earth where it is just
Greening up like crazy so if you're
really concerned about the plants more
carbon dioxide makes them not just grow
faster but also makes them more water
efficient carbon dioxide is a greenhouse
gas but it also helps Feed the World a
lot of people pretend to know about
climate pretend to have studied it
pretend to come up with these answers
and then make these proclamations to
scare you so that you'll do what we want
you to do but if what the alarmists say
is not true why would the International
Panel on climate change the United
Nations go along with the exaggerations
governments like control most
governments want to keep control and
most want governments get bigger and
bigger over time ipcc does stand for
intergovernmental panel on climate
change carbon dioxide becomes that
molecule by which we can take control of
your lives of your efforts and
everything that goes on are they right
it's confusing when there are so many
serious people who are so worried I wish
there were a real debate why won't the
other side
debate
Ver más vídeos relacionados
The Effects of Climate Change: Crash Course Biology #9
New Challenges to Human Adaptation and Social Change
CO2 Facts
Piers Corbyn on alternative climate change | Energy Live News
Golfe persique : la mer du Moyen-Orient | Le Dessous des Cartes | ARTE
Causes and Effects of Climate Change | National Geographic
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)