Is There Really a Climate Emergency?
The climate is the most complex system on Earth. Is it really possible to project with any precision what it will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now? Steve Koonin, former Undersecretary for Science in the Obama Administration, challenges the confident assumptions of climate alarmists.
🚨 PragerU is experiencing severe censorship on Big Tech platforms. Go to https://www.prageru.com/ to watch our videos free from censorship!
SUBSCRIBE 👉 https://www.prageru.com/join/
Take PragerU videos with you everywhere you go. Download our free mobile app!
Download iOS: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/prageru/id1115115779
Download Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cappital.prageru
To view the FACTS & SOURCES and Transcript, visit: https://www.prageru.com/video/is-there-really-a-climate-emergency
Join PragerU’s text list! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
SHOP!
Love PragerU? Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/
Script:
Hubris is a Greek word that means dangerously overconfident. Based on my research, hubris fairly describes our current response to the issue of climate change.
Here’s what many people believe:
One: The planet is warming catastrophically because of certain human behaviors.
Two: Thanks to powerful computers we can project what the climate will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now.
Three: That if we eliminate just one behavior, the burning of fossil fuels, we can prevent the climate from changing for as long we like.
Each of these presumptions—together, the basis of our hubris regarding the changing climate—is either untrue or so far off the mark as to be useless.
Yes, it’s true that the globe is warming, and that humans are exerting a warming influence upon it. But beyond that, to paraphrase a line from the classic movie The Princess Bride, “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”
For example, government reports state clearly that heat waves in the US are now no more common than they were in 1900.
Hurricane activity is no different than it was a century ago.
Floods have not increased across the globe over more than seventy years.
Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was 80 years ago.
Why aren’t these reassuring facts better known?
Because the public gets its climate information almost exclusively from the media.
And from a media perspective, fear sells.
“Things aren’t that bad” doesn’t sell.
Very few people, and that includes journalists who report on climate news, read the actual science. I have. And what the data—the hard science—from the US government and UN Climate reports say is that… “things aren’t that bad.”
Nor does the public understand the questionable basis of all catastrophic climate change projections: computer modeling.
Projecting future climate is excruciatingly difficult. Yes, there are human influences, but the climate is complex. Anyone who says that climate models are “just physics” either doesn’t understand them or is being deliberately misleading. I should know: I wrote one of the first textbooks on computer modeling.
While modelers base their assumptions upon both fundamental physical laws and observations of the climate, there is still considerable judgment involved. And since different modelers will make different assumptions, results vary widely among different models.
Let’s just take one simple, but significant assumption modelers must make: the impact of clouds on the climate.
Natural fluctuations in the height and coverage of clouds have at least as much of an impact on the flows of sunlight and heat as do human influences. But how can we possibly know global cloud cover say 10, let alone 50 years from now? Obviously, we can’t. But to create a climate model, we have to make assumptions. That’s a pretty shaky foundation on which to transform the world’s economy.
By the way, creating more accurate models isn’t getting any easier. In fact, the more we learn about the climate system, the more we realize how complex it is.
Rather than admit this complexity, the media, the politicians and a good portion of the climate science community attribute every terrible storm, every flood, every major fire to “climate change.” Yes, we’ve always had these weather events in the past, the narrative goes, but somehow “climate change” is making everything “worse.”
Even if that were true, isn’t the relevant question, how much worse? Not to mention that “worse” is not exactly a scientific term.
And how would we make it better?
For the alarmists, that’s easy: we get rid of fossil fuels.
For the complete script as well as FACTS & SOURCES, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/is-there-really-a-climate-emergency
source
We can get the weather fir next week right. Why should I expect the climate creating the weather in a hundred years right? Give me a break. This hoax is about power and domination. Nothing more.
Scientists 1970s: Earth is warming because of CO2.
Scientists 1980s: Earth is warming because of CO2.
Scientists 1990s: Earth is warming because of CO2.
Scientists 2000s: Earth is warming because of CO2.
Scientists 2010s: Earth is warming because of CO2.
Scientists 2020s: Earth is warming because of CO2.
Kooning: Yah, but do you know what March 2024 in southern NJ will be like? Know the temp to the nearest 0.001°C? HA! All of the world's scientists are wrong, and Trump U and Prager U have this figured out.
Brought to you by the chief scientist for BP
Throughout history the rumers of civilisations have found ways to frighten the plebs into fear and submission. Religion of many different gods for example. Stonehenge? The pyramids, South American temples? Climate change is another religion in this instance. Anything to increase taxes, cow the population int submission is good for the political classes. Now they take it a step farther to a world government and total control of the sheep, those that are left after covid derivatives and even more nasty strains. All related to power of the few. Wake up from your stupor, use your common sense, look at the facts and if you disagree say so.
Fossil fuel is here to stay
I can’t believe this planet is burning and people are denying it. This whole comment section is full of elderly people who caused this global catastrophe who have ruined life for the future generations.
Only once reality itself is shaken into people, will people go back to this video and laugh at it
Not a single citation for these claims made.
Ok so what you’re saying is we shouldn’t get off of fossil fuels because it will only slow the planet warming? And instead just keep going and warm the planet more? I’m so confused.
Perfect example of a STRAW MAN argument, for those who want to learn about argumentative fallacies. A Straw Man is when someone fabricates, or deliberately misinterprets something said by their opponent. This creates a Strawman to knock down, an easily winnable argument, but one which they themselves created.
Climate scientists have NEVER used the term 'Climate crisis', not one. Climate science has said one thing for the last 40 years…that man's CO2 and methane are causing the atmosphere to warm.
Yes the Democratic Brainiacs can't offer away to make renewable Green Energy economically viable that doesn't piss off environmentalists. Bureaucrats aren't offering a scenario either. What really pisses all of them off is an observant conservative "C" student is offering away that collides with all 1st world economies need with what all living entity requires to enable desert land flow with Milk and Honey. The only reason this same observant conservative "Ç" student rationalizes he isn't overstepping his authority given in Genesis 1:26-31 is God allowed man to invent Fuel Cells and man for decades has been talking about the glories of hydrogen for fuel.. These same environmentalists are unwilling to go nuclear.
oh you mean the propaganda network founded by fracking billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks is telling me…. the overwhelming scientific consensus that the fossil fuel industry is gonna melt the ice caps isn't compelling enough to stop getting filthy rich?
is that what theyre trying to tell me?
Oh please OPEN YOUR EYES. You don’t like living in 110 degrees day after day and hurricane threats. This is repulsive HUBRISTIC propaganda.🤑
Sponsored by fracking billionaires
Damn, Wilks brothers are getting their money worth!
"Don't worry people! Climate change isn't that bad and you don't have to do anything! We're financed by the oil industry BTW but don't pay attention to that ;)"
Excellent synopsis of the issue.
At the end of the day I believe climate change will be considered a nothing-burger.
Koonin says we are having an impact on climate. He also states that we cannot expect to see real change for centuries if we dial back on burning fossil fuels. These are the most salient points of his talk. WE are impacting climate by burning fossil fuels. We can't expect to see change for a long time even if we reduce the amount of fossil fuels. Then he makes the illogical conclusion that we should do nothing. Now, I am not a climate alarmist, but I am able to see the grand flaw in his logic. To admit human activity is warming the planet and that it will take centuries to undo the impact of CO2 and then to conclude there is nothing we can do is illogical.
"I read the hard science" wtf does that even mean
We survided the Ice Age with sticks, stones, bones, and animal hides. We have far more resources at hand to survive whatever climate change comes our way
What if we plant trees, does that eliminate the CO2 in the atmosphere? He said it's difficult to remove CO2 and we can't just turn a knob and it reduces. My question is, how do we lower CO2 emissions. My other point is, CO2 causes warming but it's not a toxic pollutant, and my stronger stance (in life) is we should try to reduce pollution. (in general)
Thank you very much!
So, basically, this is claiming that the rest of the developed world other than the U.S., particularly the better educated European countries like UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and Sweden, have this all wrong when they are following guidance from predominant scientific consensus. Hmm…A little more homework reveals that PraqerU is an unaccredited right-wing advocacy group. One of the keys to science is to have critical thinking skills, something obviously lacking in the U.S.
The IPCC's initial scientific assessment (page 202) outlines the medieval warm period and holocene maximum were as warm or warmer than today. Also the 19th century was the coldest point in almost 10,000 yrs, so it's likely that most of the warming is natural and that these temperatures aren't unusual
why are people with 2nd grade education allowed to make videos, this is embarrassing
Even if a climate catastrophe isn't in the works, fossil fuels are not indefinite and they DO have a measured effect of adding co2 to the atmosphere. So, regardless of the politics, we must eventually move away from them.
As for the rest of the video, the heatwave thing didn't age well did it. Hottest year on earth in thousands of years. Temps exceeding 120 in multiple parts of the globe. Climate change is a runaway effect. As the global temp increases due to co2 buildup there are a myriad of effects. Less ice to reflect sunlights, permafrosts unthawing and releasing more greenhouse gasses, ocean temp rising which can change the location of currents, migration of species which can disrupt biomes, etc. If you don't know or haven't heard about any of this you aren't educating yourself on what is peer reviewed, repeatable fact. Taking a single year at the onset of global climate change (weve only increased warming by 1c) and saying "see? No change!" Is refuting all the information we have from the past, and all the information we have on the future. This guy talks about hubris, i would argue that pride is finding a narrative that makes you feel comfortable, despite the facts and peer reviewed science, and deciding what YOU think is true.
This video is full of false equivalency. Yes, fear and death sell on the news this is true. But to equate that to climate change denial is dishonest at best. Just because it is bad news, does not mean it is untrue. He acts like the news is fearmongering, when almost all news outlets are reporting the same thing on this topic.
Lastly the information we have about the co2 buildup already includes his argument on cloudcover. We are seeing a temp rise based on temps and co2 levels that were recorded hundreds and in the case of co2 via ice dating, hundreds of thousands of years ago. The earths cloud cover was a constant that whole time. What a bizarre angle to take on predicting co2 and global temps. What a dishonest video.
Plant more trees
Yup. This needs to be exposed. See below.
The United Nations has overstayed its usefulness and needs to be disbanded.
Green Guru Al Gore would disagree…tut, tut! He's flying over in his private jet now.
The deniers call us deniers. How good is that?
The carbon tax in Canada costs over $ 1.50 per gallon of gasoline. It would be stealing except Canadians keep voting for this. Gotta keep em scared.
I went to share this video on Facebook, and before I could, Facebook informed me this was false information.
I shared it anyway, of course!
You predicted how long it will take to be rid of co2 after saying it was impossible to make these predictions. The CO2 isn't a problem because plants balance CO2 out.
Steve makes some good points here, but the ending is fundamentally mischaracterizing the goal of those trying to stop fossil fuel emissions. If you actually read the plans, nobody expects that cutting fossil fuels today will stop climate change. The goal of stopping fossil fuel emissions or drastically decreasing them is to prevent continued warming decades down the road. This isn't about us as much as it is about the future of our civilization.
Prager u spreads lies and misinformation.Youtube should label nearly all of Prager u videos as containing misleading and often incorrect information.
Instead of reducing oil, coal and natural gas production, why are we don't build a massive infrastructure for capturing co2 that has released during fossil energies production process? So we don't need to reduce or even banning fossil fuel energy but still can manage co2 pollution.
he is spot climate change is a tool used for dictatorial enterist groups or a new political dictatorship 1984 is in your face – vote against the climate loby who has only got nefarious interest in there agenda – depopulation agenda is one of them – wake up humanity
The Only One Who Controls the Weather /Climate,,is GOD….!!!!
We should use their ways on them: ridicule and constant repetition of truth, loud mouthing it! Its funny that those like kerry, schwab and the rest of the clowns never produce anything. In their immature minds, they see everything shrinking, everything less instead of having an abundant mindset regarding all the resources just here in the US!
But this is the way of the religion of atheism, it is void of the purpose of increasing everyone's welfare and well being as is a Biblical world view. One pushes diabolical lack and the other increase and abundance if allowed to grow in Liberty without any government interference … with that, the whole world benefits!
"There is virtually no empirical evidence, NONE!! That proves that man made global warming exists!" – Rush Limbaugh
During the ice age, global warming was a good thing. Now that most of the ice is gone, somehow humans caused global warming.