Like clockwork, the United Nations is out with yet another climate report and the usual suspects are already blaring the global warming alarm sirens.
The New York Times warned the planet is on track “to cross a critical threshold for global warming within the next decade” and the only way to “hold global warming to relatively safe levels” would “require global cooperation, billions of dollars and big changes.” [emphasis, links added]
The Associated Press declared the world is on “thin ice” due to warming. The BBC characterized the UN report as a “survival guide” — if we don’t follow it, we’ll see “the worst effects of climate change.”
The alarmist frenzy was joined by prominent scientists, eco-activists, Democratic politicians, and even the UN chief himself, who called the report a “how-to guide to defuse the climate time-bomb.
In other words, the media, elites, and the scientific establishment want you to take this report very, very seriously. The problem is no one who actually cares about sound science should give it the time of day.
Any scientific credibility the new UN report might have otherwise had is immediately called into question by its extensive use of “woke” buzzwords.
Variations of the words “equity” and “inequity” appear 31 times in the 36-page document. Variations of “inclusive” and “inclusion” appear 17 times. The document even mentions “colonialism” and repeatedly refers to climate and social “justice” for “marginalized” groups.
“Equity,” if you remember, is the word then-candidate Kamala Harris famously described as a system where “we all end up in the same place.” Sounds a lot like socialism, doesn’t it?
The UN report also contains an entire section titled “Equity and Inclusion,” which states “[e]quity remains a central element in the UN climate regime.”
The report goes on to state that “[r]edistributive policies … that shield the poor and vulnerable, social safety nets, equity, inclusion and just transitions, at all scales can enable deeper societal ambitions and resolve trade-offs with sustainable development goals.”
In other words, the “woker” the policies, the better. How’s that for science?
Now, if you think “equity” is a fundamental pillar of scientific knowledge, then this is the report for you.
But if you’re like most people and don’t think far-left political priorities have a place in scientific documents meant to advise policymakers, this should alarm you.
No reading between the lines is necessary to decipher the real goal of this new UN report. In fact, the report’s accompanying press release is quite explicit about its goal: “Taking the right action now could result in the transformational change essential for a sustainable, equitable world.”
The release goes on to quote one of the report’s authors, who says: “Climate justice is crucial because those who have contributed least to climate change are being disproportionately affected.”
Sounds like political science, not climate science.
Another author calls for “prioritizing climate risk reduction for low-income and marginalized communities, including people living in informal settlements,” adding that: “[i]nsufficient and misaligned finance is holding back progress.”
The report’s scientific rigor is further called into question by its insistence that warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times represents a catastrophe.
There is precisely zero verifiable peer-reviewed science supporting a 1.5-degree climate threshold, but there’s tons of research on the staggering costs of complying with UN models.
One 2020 study in Nature found the cost of meeting the 1.5-degree goal would be “5 trillion dollars per year in 2020.” Given it’s 2023, the price tag is likely even higher.
An analysis by McKinsey & Company illustrates just how meeting the UN’s goal means more than shelling out trillions to overhaul global energy supplies.
They note “a 1.5-degree pathway would imply a large dietary shift: reducing the share of ruminant animal protein in the global protein-consumption mix by half.”
Sounds like a dream for wannabe dictators. And they seem more than willing to peddle junk science in order to get it.
Read more at Daily Caller
is a real general? from Trevor in New Zealand.
Not even close. A socialist.
Almost two decades ago the former director of the CRU at East Anglia University in the UK, Phil Jones, uttered these words, something to the effect…” the 1.5 degree limit was plucked out of thin air”. I think this quote came out in the Climate Gate papers but this says everything about the UN organization and particularly about the IPCC. So there is really no science supporting the rhetoric concerning the so called temperature limit but when these eco freaks meet there is no common sense or science anywhere in site; it is just made up stuff to shove down the line for the media and governments to broadcast 24/7 to the public. I find it difficult to believe that anyone with average intelligence can swallow this garbage. Most of these people in the global positions are either Communists or at the very least radical left wingers. Guterres is a radical socialist and obviously doesn’t have a clue what is going on but he shines for inventing alarming zingers, which will be broadcast on CBC TV tomorrow. He recently called a “CODE RED” for the planet and now it’s a “time bomb”. (make up your mind Toni). I am waiting for King Charles to once again count down the months while we casually watch his tipping point come and go where he then seemingly and simply shrugs off his ridiculous, baseless prediction. Let’s face it, none of this talk concerns climate. It is about world governance and and fear mongering of the public of some apocalyptic event somewhere in the distant future, never specified in time. Now they have added woke world governance into the picture. This would be laughable if it weren’t so serious. How long can this clown act continue?
Carbon dioxide does not affect the warming of the planet in a linear fashion. Methane and Nitrous Oxide are small players, nearly irrelevant as a climate threat, but there are those, who wish to gut the agriculture industry in countries to satisfy their globalists masters by imposing reductions in nitrogen fertilizer. I am talking about Canada and the Netherlands. The leaders of these countries are wing nuts who, along with the IPCC, and the WEF have politicized climate and introduced pseudoscience to intimidate and fear monger the entire planet. This needs to stop and I commend the farmers in the Netherlands in their gallant effort to fight totalitarianism.
Well said, Terry. Good summary.
Why are people so gullible? People who are now in their 40’s were brainwashed by teachers. Parents didn’t think it was “alarming”.