The three myths of climate change | Linda Mortsch | TEDxToronto


Translator: Maria Gelrud
Reviewer: Riaki Poništ As a scientist, I made
lots of trips to communities to talk about the impact
of the climate change and how to adapt to them. And I’d like to share
one memorable experience, I guess, I had while I was on the road. It was the year 2000. And I was at a workshop
for Canadian and U.S. professionals from the Great Lakes Basin. My presentation was “Why adapt?” And my goal was to motivate
these people to rethink, to plan and take action,
or adapt to climate change. I used maps, graphs, tables
with lots of numbers. You know the things
we scientists love to use. But I also talked about the impacts
and the economic costs, and implications
for people’s quality of life. I thought I had done a bang-up job laying out the scientific case
for climate change adaptation, and I actually hope
that I might inspire them to take some action. When the floor opened for questions, a rather agitated participant
was the first to stand up. “Ma’am, ma’am, you’re talking about changes
in the future, 2020s, 2050s. That’s a long way away. Plus, those impacts
that you’re taking about, they’re only projections. We’re well prepared so I don’t see that happening
in my community. Plus, if changes start to happen,
we’ll have enough time to react. Plus, ma’am, you’re advising us
to adapt to climate change. Why should we listen? Why should we act? Besides, how certain are you
of your climate change science? Would you be willing to offer up
your first born child?” I went, “Wow, I’ve never had
a question quite like that.” I thought, “Oh, my goodness.” You know, we scientists, we like facts. So I was expecting to get
nitty-gritty technical details. So I was really taken aback. I was no longer allowed to be the rational,
by-the-numbers scientist. I had to be, think,
and feel like a mother. This gentleman was making it personal. I stopped and thought. But, you know, it is personal. Now, no mother wants to offer up
their child as a sacrifice. But my children and future generations
motivate my research. In a sense, I can see potential futures, not like a soothsayer
but with the tools of my trade. Hard scientific tools, climate models, climate projections,
and impact assessments. They help me diagnose
threats, opportunities, and where action would be prudent. The evidence is overwhelming. Climate adaptation
is necessary and urgent. And didn’t this guy get it? Also, didn’t he understand that he was a participant
in climate change adaptation whether he wanted it or not? I paused and thought. You know, my case is really strong,
so I said yes to him. And I offered up not one but both
my children, Patrick and Alison. (Laughter) Now, many of you here
believe in climate change, and that something
has to be done about it. But I suspect that you may still
hold a few preconceptions about the nature of climate change
and how to do adaptation. In my experience, I’d like to sort of get at three myths and slash them. Myth number one: climate change will happen
sometime in the distant future. Myth number two: climate change
will happen to someone else and not me. Myth number three: it will be easy
to adapt to climate change. So, myth number one: climate change
will happened in a way distant future. Actually, we are now in midst
of climate transformation. We just don’t know it. Statistics would tell us that. But how many of us collect data and know the statistics
of our air temperature? Slowly unfolding changes
just creep up on you. You know, the fabled
freshman-15-weight-gain, (Laughter) or worse, white hair and wrinkles
magically appearing? And doesn’t it seem
when you first notice those changes that they seem to accelerate, and you are getting older faster,
and there is no going back? Well, that’s what’s happening
with climate change. So, if we are in the midst
of climate transformation, how do we know it? We scientists, we are on it. Since 1990, we’ve tabled and presented five climate change assessment reports
to the governments of the world. I participated in most of them. And I tell you, you have to be at the top
of your game to participate; it is a rigorous demanding process. Our assessments use
the highest caliber research. We use millions of observations
from around the world taken over hundreds of years. And that is the foundation for us making statements
on the state of climate system. I’d like to share some
of those statements with you, and I’d like you to listen
very carefully to the words. They were chosen with painstaking
care by the scientists and approved unanimously by over 150 countries of the world. I’d say that’s a pretty
awesome accomplishment. We’ve done it five times. So, what’s the statements? In 1995, we were detecting a human influence
on the climate system. In 2001, there was a discernible human
influence on the climate system. In the 2013 report, warming of the climate system
is unequivocal, and human activity is the dominant cause
of warming since the 1950s. So when international scientists
and world governments use the word like “unequivocal,” they mean it in a literal sense: “leave no doubt.” So, if we’re in the midst
of a climate transformation, and we can measure it, what are the consequences? Let me take you to Houston, Texas, which was recently hit
by Hurricane Harvey. Some scientist say that climate change
may have made Harvey worse. How is this so? Well, we know warming heats the ocean,
which feeds hurricanes. Warming also heats the atmosphere, and it lets hurricanes hold more moisture
or water that can fall as rain. But that’s only one example. What really, really, really concerns me is that warming fuels extreme events. That’s not just hurricanes. That’s heat waves; that’s droughts,
floods, and wildfires. ِِAll becoming stronger, lasting longer,
and becoming more frequent. That is climate change. Now, myth number two is, “climate change will happen
to someone else but not me.” This is really interesting. I have observed that most people feel that the worst impacts
will happen to someone else. They deflect. But climate change
is going to happen to you. And it’s going to affect you directly. And it will also affect your families,
your communities, your cities, your natural areas, your regions. And it will also affect you by what happens in some
of the other countries around the world. Let me use sea level rise as an example. Bangladesh has often been identified as a place with humanitarian
crisis in the making. Bangladesh sits just
a little above sea level, it’s at the mouth of three huge rivers, and it’s exposed to tropical cyclones, and there is very little protection. About 10 percent
of Bangladesh’s population may be displaced by sea level rise
caused by climate change. That’s 18 million environmental refugees, or about half of Canada’s population. And that’s not just the end of it. Bangladesh is only one of many
other countries in coastal areas that are going to experience sea level
rise, flooding, and displaced people. It becomes a world problem. I’d also like to draw
your attention to fact that climate change will also
affect you closer to home, and use Vancouver,
British Columbia, as an example. Coastal communities in British Columbia are already planning for sea level rise
because of climate change. 50 centimeters by 2050, 100 centimeters by 2100, and 200 centimeters by 2200. There has also been neighbourhoods that have been identified
as potential future flooding hot spots. Their names you’ll recognise: English Bay, Kitsilano Beach, Gastown, and Downtown Eastside, for example. Now, imagine that you’re a business owner
or a resident here. Your neighborhood is in transformation. You are likely to experience
more flooding. And risk to displacement,
emergency evacuation, loss of income and property
will also be an increasing risk to you. So, what can you do? How can you adapt? These are the difficult questions. This leads me to addressing
myth number three. “It will be easy to adapt
to a changing climate.” You know, change is difficult. Think about losing weight. The first five bounds are OK;
they come off relatively easily, but the next 10, 20, or 30 pounds require planning, commitment and effort, and also may require a transformation
in your diet and your lifestyle. That’s the same thing with climate change. Let me take you back to the example of sea level rise in Vancouver. In the early stages of adaptation, the climate threat
is increased flooding during storms. So our goal is to protect
health and safety, and the built environment. I call it “the sandbags-and-dikes phase.” That means that the adaptation
is traditional and incremental. What we do is that we do
risk assessments, for example. We look at who’s vulnerable,
what’s at risk and where, and we think about retrofitting
existing dikes and building new ones. But if you take the longer view, you’re going to recognize
as the climate system transitions, we are likely to tip
into uncharted extremes. That means our plans will no longer
function as they should, or maybe we won’t be able
to afford them anymore. The adaptation gets really, really messy. Think again to those hot-spot
neighbourhoods that are hot spots for flooding. At what point would the community decide
that the flooding risk is too great that they would relinquish the land,
abandon their homes and businesses, and retreat from the rising sea levels. Can you imagine how that conversation
or conversations would be? And how difficult those choices might be? That’s the challenge of adaptation. Now, dare I also talk about innovative, out-of-the-box adaptations. Planners, architects, and engineers
are re-imagining the coast, the relationship between land
and water line along the coast, and they’re designing
amphibious subdivisions. Now, that’s a transformative adaptation. In my talk, I’ve dispelled three myths. I’m going to replace them with the three realities
of human-caused climate change. It’s happening, it’s going to affect you, and it’s going to require
transformational adaptation. Now, I don’t want you to be discouraged. I’m not, and I’ve been working
on the climate change issue for over 30 years. And I am hopeful and I am certain that we can and will meet
this adaptation challenge. Remember how I said that we’re all in this adaptation journey
whether we want to be or not? I’d like you to think
about how you can contribute, what roles you can play. We need thinkers, people who can look
at a problem in a new way and find innovative,
transformative solutions, things we hadn’t thought of before. We need doers, people who can shepherd
these innovative ideas through the natural controversies
and inevitable barriers when you bounce up against the status quo. We also need supporters. Supporters are fundamental
to enabling the thinkers and the doers. And we also can’t discount when supporters use
their voices like voting to build social and political support for those innovative
and transformational ideas. I offered up my children, Patrick
and Alison, for climate change. It wasn’t a joke. I was serious. I was going at that guy. I was serious about my science, and I was serious about the need to adapt. And if we all don’t act, we will be offering up
our children to climate change. So, looking forward
to the challenges of adaption, let’s not offer up our children,
grandchildren and future generations. Let’s think transformational adaptation. Let’s be innovative, energetic, and brave, and let’s build a better future. Thank you. (Applause)

100 thoughts on “The three myths of climate change | Linda Mortsch | TEDxToronto

  1. Climate change is a myth. I say this sat in my mustang eating a burger with the engine turned on.
    Have a nice day ya’ll

  2. This beautiful earth, this beautiful universe, is more than capable of dealing with changes to the climate. The earth has healed and adapted to much more than a few degrees of higher or lower temperatures over billions of years. Carbon Dioxide is the gas of Life. How we underestimate the power of our Mother Earth. Trouble is, man doesn't change it's habits easily. Vast amounts of bovine cattle farming contributes huge amounts of methane to our atmosphere, but the Vegans are mocked and ridiculed for their plant based diet. Many people who protest against climate change are probably meat eaters. It is all so hippocritical.

  3. Matthew 16:3 "And in the morning, 'There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.' Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times? GOD'S influence – He hold all in His hands. Man's influence is through sin, and we are reaping the results. Repent and trust in God.

  4. I've met many "Boomers" who rationalize apathy because they believe they'll be dead before Climate Change affects them.

  5. If we don’t take drastic actions immediately to slow down the global warming we all not only offering our first born children but spitting on all our children’s and grandchildren’s future

  6. 1990? LOL I found out in 1974 , it was confirmed to me in 2004 when I saw something that science has not yet told the world about, it`s worse that what this women is saying.

  7. Not told about the IPCC studies: the UN overseers of the project told Mann and scientists doing the IPCC studies to ignore all possible causes except man-made ones. The public record spells this sordid business out. Mann was found guilty of fraud in Canada and was charged with contempt of Congress for refusing to show his data to the Senate Committee. Phil Jones did the same thing in England to the outrage of a panel of ten climatologists. This post, above, is just another piece of nonsense. Propaganda. The weaponization of climate change. The truth is that temperatures are cooling. And CO2 follows temperature, not the other way around.

  8. earth changes on its own, to which we have no power to stop. yes, we peoples are an impact and we should do what we can on our end, but again, mother earth will do her thing and all we can do is prepare an hang on…

  9. We will adapt like we always do no matter how terrible it is. Expecting the world to change radically in case something might happen is ridiculous. This is a problem that can't be solved if you think differently then good luck and tell me how you are going to sort this in 12 years. Drastic times will bring drastic solutions like a massive population cull.

  10. When dinosaurs walked the earth CO2 levels were at vastly higher levels, 4000 ppmv plus, there was no runaway green house effect then. CO2 is less than 2000 ppmv today. CO2 is a trace gas, a rather wimpy green house gas. especially compared to water vapor which is the main greenhouse gas. I note the models and prediction have proven to be inaccurate which means the hypothesis they are based on were clearly wrong. Governments are pouring hundreds of billions of tax payers money into this, lots of people are getting very rich out it. a lot of vested interests at play here.

  11. Sea level rise… The Maldives just built a new $800 million airport with financing. Who gives loans to countries that will be underwater in 10 years?

  12. Interestingly, of the 30 plus government sponsored climate models around the globe only Russia's is the most accurate to actual base line verifiable data. Everybody else's is a 'moonshot' exaggeration that has perpetuated this 'eyes -wide-shut' geo-political narrative.

  13. Doomed…not enough people are willing to change..even people that believe this still drive more than they need to..eat things they don't need to..fly more , use more, buy more..than they need to…

  14. Suppose Climate Activists are correct. Then the total carbon budget for the Earth means all countries, including China, India, Indonesia, and other third-world countries need to also massively reduce their carbon production. Not just United States, Europe, and other 'first-world' countries. There is a brutal, cold truth that these Activists are not willing to confess. There are too many people, who need too much energy, and any level of civilization that would approach modern 'first-world' conditions would require a population under about 1.0-1.5B people. And even at that level of population, energy usage would need to be drastically reduced from the current high levels of consumption. The alternative is (nearly) everyone would need to live on an energy budget far below 2KWhr per day – which means basically forget refrigeration, heating, air conditioning, transportation, modern medicine, et al. Which means massive starvation and disease (and a massive die-off beyond anything anyone can imagine). Which elites get to decide which people are allowed to live in their "Brave, New World"? Certainly the wealthy and politically well-connected expect their "place". They are all hypocrites, flying from conference to conference, driving large SUVs, because they are privileged. Has anyone studied history, has everyone forgotten the lessons of the early 20th Century?

  15. the narrative should be POLLUTION REDUCTION,(unpopular politically) this challenge is a difficult path to follow and each new generation slides 2 steps back because the POPULATION is increasing faster than Improvements in emissions technology .the politicking of the phrase CLIMATE CHANGE is a misleading one. naturally population expansion is going to consume more and more of everything to sustain life. the last glacial event is in the warming phase still and is predicted by SCIENTISTS to soon in geologic time to end and a new cooling trend heading into a new ice age. the sea level is still rising from the last glacial meltdown in process. the sea level had dropped approximately 120 METRES at the peak of the last ice age from present levels most of what we see today is the result of these natural events obviously. so what can people do, the most invasive human causes ,fossil fuel use and removal of natural forests …. we need to eat but a lot of travel is not as important since the internet has become a icon of communication . JET travel , cars and so on, our living space reducing more and more . the grim realities are the end to population growth, no traditional anything, oh but that is not a popular political platform to run on. if you can successfully accomplish these basic ? problems maybe we can prolong survival as a species……oh yeah ,what killed the Dinosaurs (astroid.)or the permian extinction which a huge volcano set life on the planet back 300 million years. unfortunately it looks like a political directive to engulf the worlds populace into subjugation . coined phrases like globalization, agenda blah blah, it seems this hard drive to the present situation has come about once space exploration has realized this is the only decent habitable planet anywhere in our neighbourhood. maybe thats why they made the movie TOTAL RECALL. we live on mars while the privileged play on earth after the great population reduction. planet of the apes here we come or is it terminator ??? We have been groomed for this but maybe we can change the course ?

  16. The climate is changing – always has, always will.

    There is nothing unusual or human-driven about any climate change we've observed over the past 1,000 years, with the exception of LOCAL and REGIONAL changes based on land use changes.

    Global and long term trends are still driven primarily by the sun, modulated by the oceans.

  17. Linda Helped and did research for Fracking COMPANIES in Canada. Environmental research What a sham!

  18. Fun facts for ya; Phanagoria, Russia has been under water for centuries, because of sea level rise, LONG before "human global warming". Based on climate models, the Maldives should have long been swallowed by the ocean. Germany is in the top ten for it's usage of "renewable energy", but still is the 6th highest emitter of CO2, in the world. Deforestation makes up to 25-29% of CO2 emissions, almost doubling that of transportation, but is never talked about as a cause for CO2 emissions. The geological devastation of land and animals would be 10 fold that of CO2 emissions, if we got rid of nuclear power and replaced with wind and solar, because of the land mass needed to produce the level of energy consumed. But hey, keep telling yourself global warming and current solutions aren't political.

  19. The people and the critters who can adapt to climate change and all of the problems, thereof , will survive, all else will not. The end.

  20. Myth number 1: Man causes Climate change. LIE. Myth number 2: Man produced carbon dioxide heats the planet and causes global warming. LIE and NOT VERIFIED ONLY BY SCIENTIFIC MODELS which are no more than glass balls. THERE IS NO DISCERNIBLE WARMING- IF ANYTHING THE PLANET HAS COOLED AND IS CONTINUING TO COOL!

  21. I just checked data and NASA data shows the sea level falling for the last 2 years- just as I mentioned in my comment below. The planet is cooling and soon globally Scientists will be jumping from the Al Gore Ship an "inconvenient truth" because it is LIE!

  22. Mmmmmmmmm……………. When carbon-credit salesman Al Gore (and failed presidential candidate)  joined the climate fray with his “documentary” An Inconvenient Truth in 2006, the climate lies only worsened. Gore’s film predicted a 20-foot sea-level rise in the “near future” owing to ice melt from Greenland and Antarctica. As you can see, it hasn’t happened yet. Gore also predicted the devastation of low-lying Pacific Island nations such as Tuvalu because of sea-level rise. But Tuvalu and some other island nations have actually grown in size since Gore’s pronouncement. A British judge concluded in 2007 that the film contained at least nine factual errors and was, therefore, a political film — not a scientific one.

  23. CO2 IS NOT A POLLUTANT!!! PLEASE LEARN ABOUT THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE WITH PLANTS!!!

  24. i like that this jewish lady talks about child sacrifice….no lady we dont that here in the west…

  25. Fake News Propaganda! Predictions by global warming alarmists have yet to come true. Why is it… the leftists continue to complain about there being too many people on the planet, yet, they're the same people that are very happy to live in the most populated cities?

  26. Absolute bollox.
    It's not going to affect any of us.
    She doesn't know how high the sea level is going to be and neither does any other scientists.
    I wonder how many years it's going to take before they realise it's a load of bollox. I would hazard a guess of about another 30 years before the public wake up and realise things still haven't changed as they have been predicted to.

  27. What she means is: "For the low, low price of your rights and freedoms, leave it to a communist government and all will be fine. Upfront payment required."

    Millions starved to death under the planned economy of communist Russia. They drained Lake Ural, their largest Lake in the process and they poisoned all of eastern Europe, when the communist run nuclear power plant blew up in Chernobyl. The government higher-ups were taken care off, while the people starved.

    In Chicago, government operated highrise s had to be taken down, because they couldn't even follow their own regulations.

    Government is always the first, not to follow the plan so better don't bet on any promises.

    After 50 years of party loyalty, blanks live in the worst neighborhoods, with the highest crime, the worst education, the highest single mother households, highest incarceration rates, highest murder rates, lowest income, lowest homeownership, highest unemployment. One would think, that after 50 years reliance on government planning,at least some would begin to question their political choices.

    This is communist infiltration at it's best. Don't give away the rights and freedom of your children and leave them a fighting chance to deal with whatever they will encounter in their lives.

  28. Good Lord this drivel was a waste of time. I’m gonna bet she’s also a one-worlder socialist too. Supports a central authoritarian government to rule the world. In the name of preserving the planet and the pace of climate change. 30 freakin YEARS!!!… of making her living off spreading this horse manure.

  29. science is great at saying what has happened, its good at saying what is happening, but its really bad saying what will happen. And if you reply on models rather than real actual data, then be prepared to make your excuses

  30. I can't watch her, she is so boring. I don't care what the subject is. Maybe at bed time I will run this : )

  31. The earth is greening as we warm. The idea of CO2 causing climate change was sold by Maurice Strong who said I can sell a global climate Crisis and with the help of the IPCC He obviously did. Solar forcing causing several cycles. The climate alarmist need to check there facts. Past prediction for the last 30 years have so far been wrong

  32. I've got the perfect solution, India is dying from lack of water, so just have the entire world chip in for large scale desalinization plants, and they can just convert the rising sea level water into potable drinking water and drink up the excess and we can monitor the change…boom…problem solved.

  33. Her term "nature of climate change is appropriate. Climate change is a natural event and has been occurring on a continuing basis since the planets beginning. The geoengineering and other activities being carried out are NOT natural. What these people are pushing is a fight against nature. Just how successful is anything going to be when pitting humanity against nature? Why not work with nature to mitigate the effects, such as replanting the forests, and refraining from building on the water. We regularly spend the money to blow artificial snow on the hillsides for the skiers. Why not use the same tech to build icepacks back up using water from the 'rising' oceans? The reasons are clear, this is the same old Eugenics plan to cut populations of humans who exhale, and cows that flatulate. Why does she not speak about solar cycles and carbon caused by volcanism.? This is all about global government and control. Otherwise, we would have already begun replanting and rebuilding the snow mass. Not pushing for carbon credits which they have admitted does nothing to change the change in climate. Why not work on something far more pressing such as nuclear contamination of the Pacific, or the trillions of tons of plastics and other foreign objects choking off animal life. What difference will a higher ocean level or warmer temperatures make if we have long since succumbed to the more pressing and far more dangerous threats to human life? The answer is because that is just a small part of the Eugenics NWO agenda. Thank you so much for sharing, are you not due at a Clinton or Obama rally?
    My money's on we'll see a new ice age long before the oceans rise high enough to worry about. Not interested in Agenda 21 / 2030 nor paying the elite carbon taxes.

  34. She's hypnotized by her own stories AND She can tell us what will happen in two hundred years. What a boring human being

  35. a friend said to me "there are dinosoaur bones in Minnesota so the world was a lot warmer in the past" of course they did not consider that Minnesota was not at it current latitude during 65 million years ago.
    Funny how people think. or don't think.

  36. doesn't take much to get a Nobel these days… anyone connected to the corrupt IPCC is a shonk and yep she has a terrible voice . Not one that keeps you interested for more than 30 seconds… 423 likes out of 53,500 views tells the story…..

  37. Warming does not cause extreme events, the mixing of heat and cold produces results proportionate to the temperature difference between them

  38. replacements. Science is all predicated on flat earth mathematics. Look up Joseph Postma on YouTube to see it laid out

  39. Cherry picking facts. And this wasn't a debate but a one sided talk ot naive people. There have been worse hurricanes and heat waves. There was dinosaurs once upon a time and no man on earth. It was hot then. The polar caps have been melting for 50 years and still no noticeable rise in sea level. It is impossible for sea level to rise in india and not in New York. It water! Gravity is the same on both sides of the earth!. This is bogus. What does she know about weight loss is less than what she knows about sea level.

  40. We are all dumber for listening to this rambling, incoherent, and zero evidence or science based explanation. This lady must be trying to sell something. Stopped watching halfway thru because absolutely no evidence or half truths were presented. Just the same ole catch phrases. THE CHURCH OF CLIMATE SCIENTOLOGY needs to be burned to the ground.

  41. She talks about the science as being "unequivocal", then states… "some scientists say…hurricane Harvey "MAY" have been stronger due to warming". With all due respect, which is it… Unequivocal or May have been?

  42. There is no causal relationship between CO2 emissions and global temperatures. In all of her scare stories she says "may happen", well you could say the same thing about the earth getting obliterated by aliens. This is not a scientific word, "may". There is nothing going on in today's climate or weather that is out of place in the past 10,000 years. The earth has slightly warmed since the end of the Little Ice Age. It has been a slow and steady warming, the same rate from before CO2 emissions as after.

  43. Anthropogenic climate change deniers are completely rebuked just with the study of refrigerants, the ozone, GWP chemicals and Cement Plants (a huge source of CO2). There are literally hundreds of other arguing points showing mankind taking the planet down with fossil fuels.

  44. Wonder why A Gore bought a $10 beach mansion in malibu ??? This joke of catastrophic warming is becoming boring, its gaining the same following as Erich von Daniken and his `god was an astronaut` did in the 70`s . Cults come and go but the sun keeps shining.

  45. Nowhere in this discussion did I hear her once talk about the Nexrad Doppler tower Weather manipulation program's going on right now The Power plant water vapor injection systems feeding these freak storm cells that dump 10 inches of water in one day The Chemtrail aircraft flying above our homes 24 hrs a day 7 days a week .. Oh and did I mention todays modern turbofan engine's cannot generate contrails like they used to because of the Hi Bypass ratio of todays turbofans .. So what you are seeing is in fact sprayed out of aircraft intentionally and used as the media necessary to manipulate weather systems .. I don't care if you believe me or you don't it's still take place everyday so you buy it or not matter ZERO to me..

  46. the talk appears to be a myth. we really need to stop looking at a select data set ie. 1950-2000 and make policy and financial commitments based on that. change the dates and it's a whole different scenario. much like a financial advisor that wants your money! pick the starting point and the ending point that best shows your competence. not!

  47. So she just takes a matter of faith that man made CO2, which is about ..O7 of 04% of the atmosphere that is CO2 is predominant driver of global warming and will cause a catastrophic change in the planet.

    At the face of this bold assertion should give EVERY thinking person pause. The claim is that .003% of the atmosphere drives the temperature. I would posit that if the atmosphere was so fragile it would be fundamentally unstable to support life.

    Such a stupendous claim requires stupendous proof. Not just a few non scientists forming a consensus.

  48. a claimed rise of 15mm in the oceans is due to CO2. It is 'accurately' measured to plus or minus 1mm. The average depths of our oceans is said to be 3.6km or 3,600,000, 000mm. Has nothing to do with continental drift, solar activity, or the ~1km rise of submarinar vocanoes of which there is estimated to be 75,000. Clearly science is being driven by an agenda that has litlle to do with fact but much more to do with fantasy and funding.
    Oft quoted as evide ce for rising oceans is the Island of Tuvalu's whose total land area actually grew by 73 hectares, or 2.9 per cent.
    The expert behind this research told Fact Check the nation's islands were continually adjusting, and that the new land was habitable

  49. unbelievable how so many fools are focused on critiquing the messenger. meanwhile we have about 25 years left on this earth before our ecosystem implodes. I had hope for this world, until I read some of these terrible comments

  50. The consenus now is we are heading into a long term solar minimum….our concern should be this – will the heat energy enertia of the earth combined with our added greenhouse effect be enough to carry us through this period and prevent a much worse scenario of global cooling.

  51. 3 reasons why climate change is a myth:

    1: history. The earth was warmer in the triassic, Jurassic, and cretaceous period.
    The earth was also 1 to 1.4 degrees Celsius higher in 900 to 1300 ad in the mid holocene period.

    2: inconsistent naming. It was originally called global warming then they change it to climate change. Why change the name if it is a real problem? Explanation please?

    3: it's a political belief. Its mainly a liberal belief, take bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Alexandria ocasio Cortez's actions as an example.

    These are why climate change is a myth.

  52. It disturbs me that this discussion is only focused on the negative aspects of climate change.
    Increased temperature, also increases rainfall, due to increased evaporation, which is good for plants.
    And Increased rainfall with stronger winds mean greater rainfall distribution and it brings more cloud cover to reduce atmospheric temperature. Plants love storms. Which is good for plant growth. Similarly with higher concentrations of CO2, means more food for plants, to create the oxygen we breathe, the food we eat and the carbon atoms which make up our body. Warmer weather also helps plant growth by speeding up the chemical reactions and metabolic rates that occur inside body tissue. So plants grow faster. Warmer conditions open up vast areas of land under ice so that land plants have a greater area of land mass where they can flourish. Warmer climate means lifting us out of the last 2.5 million year old Ice Age Cycle we have been trapped in. No Climate Warming, would mean that our earth's temperature would have dropped an average of 8 degrees C, from our current average world temperature of 14 degrees C to average 6 degrees C, due to the orbital variations of the earths, rotation around our Sun. Which would mean a return of the huge Glacial Ice Sheets from our current 13,000 year Inter Glacial Warm Period to a 90,000 year Cold Glacial Period.
    Global Cooling is a much greater threat than Global Warming. It is not a coincident that the variety and biomass of an eco system flourishes more in the tropics rather than in the more temperate regions of the earth. We humans evolved out of tropical Africa, not frozen Siberia, which we adapted to.
    The Earth has lived under much higher temperatures in earlier Epochs where the Biomass of the planet was much greater than it is today, like during the Carboniferous Period where the CO2 atmospheric percentage was 30 times greater than today, while it's atmospheric oxygen content was as high as 36%. This meant that plants flourished as never before or since, and so did the animal biomass life.
    The Earth is becoming GREENER. Carbon Dioxide is the bases of ALL aerobic life on this planet, and creates every atom in your body, every bit of food you eat, provides the oxygen you breathe which gives you life, and plants just love it.
    Do not give into "The End of the World Hysteria" All successful species adapt. Climate Change is inevitable, and natural and can be positive as well as negative. The mastery of fire, by any living intelligent and manipulative land animal species, on any habital planet, will lead to increased CO2 levels is a Natural event in the evolution of life on that planet in a Universe composed of the same 92 base elements that are found where ever one looks.

  53. I thought it was a good talk to undo some misunderstandings that people have about Climate Change – she is a scientist and trained to present information accurately, not like someone trying to sale a car or get you do buy and use their product. Just the facts mam, we need the facts. All the people denouncing her are the type of folks that are continuously be conned and duped by unscrupulous folks that exploit them. Had the speaker presented her information in a dynamic charismatic way – she would of been denounced by her peers and colleagues. We need more science in our society and more people that can engage in objective thinking, be able to study and understand important scientific principles and make sound decisions based on the findings we are in great peril if we can't.

  54. Man-made climate change is totally bogus, is NOT based on objective, rigorous, verifiable scientific research, and is an excuse/smoke screen for the real agenda by socialist and/or communist government elites, namely, the total takeover and control of our energy sector.

  55. this is only manipulation of peoples minds…making people to just only believe……….a trick known for thousands of years…….

  56. sorry but this woman is a puppet of the globalist U.N ( the U.N are the one's who made up the myth of climate change for there own agenda they pay there climate scientist like this woman to manipulate the facts to fit there agenda)

  57. in 1970's I was told that the Maldive Islands would be under water by 2000. No, 50 years later, they are flourishing more than ever. Since climate has become politicised and monetised, we the plebs, are used for a few to become extremely wealthy. Follow the agenda – it all fits in. MAN is not in control of the universe and cannot change anything about it. Some seem to confuse POLLUTION with climate.

  58. I read that this lady works for the IPCC and that immediately explains everything. It is hilarious that in this speech she contradicts her own IPCC reports and that is why it is nice to hear. I had a great time while wondering if her nose would grow. It is sad that this may call itself a scientist but for such a salary…….

  59. Een paar opmerkingen van haar collega’s :
    "We need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public's imagination…
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts…
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."
    – Prof. Stephen Schneider,
    Stanford Professor of Climatology,
    lead author of many IPCC reports

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    
"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
    Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
    we will be doing the right thing in terms of
    economic and environmental policy."
- Timothy Wirth, 
President of the UN Foundation 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    
"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
    climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
    bring about justice and equality in the world."
- Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    
“The data doesn't matter. We're not basing our recommendations
    on the data. We're basing them on the climate models.”
- Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“The models are convenient fictions
    that provide something very useful.”
- Dr David Frame, 
climate modeler, Oxford University

  60. I have not been able to find any credible evidence that the Sea levels are rising at a faster rate than before, they have to the best of my knowledge risen 100mm in the last 100 years, furthermore it seems to be a matter of Geological record that an increase in CO2 follows Temperature rise not the reverse. And just why did they take it upon themselves to alter historical Temperature records to make it look like there was even more warming than there is, did they think no one would notice? What happened to the hottest years in the 1930's? what happened to the new ice age in the 1970's? they start their Graphs from the late 1970's the end of the new ice age to show the earth is getting warmer well of coarse it is it is recovering from a cold period, do you ever hear any of them talking about the benefits of more CO2? such as a greener Planet, increased food production and growth, funny that|

  61. Who said these are "Myths" or even main issues?
    The lady pretends to be a scientist but does not talk scientifically. No wonder the climate issue is so bogus and driven by charlatans.
    None of the myths mentioned worry me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *