Ed. Note: With the multi-decade climate movement in crisis, the blame game is on. Today’s post follows a similar one earlier this week, Climate Messaging: The Alarmists are Alarmed.
Nathan Truitt, executive vice president of climate funding at the American Forest Foundation (a ‘carbon management’ entity), explained his “theory of what’s wrong with the climate action community and how to fix it.” He began:
First off, why do I think something is wrong? Well, we are facing an existential threat to human civilization, but the community that works to promote climate action is riven with internal disagreements, easily spending more time arguing with itself than trying to convince others.
Really? An existential crisis? Will he read the new DOE report on climate science and economics? Truitt continues in fantasy land:
…This shouldn’t be the case.
“This report supports a more nuanced and evidence-based approach for informing climate policy that explicitly acknowledges uncertainties…. [I]t will be important to make realistic assumptions about future emissions, re-evaluate climate models to address biases and uncertainties, and clearly acknowledge the limitations of extreme event attribution studies … for informed and effective decision-making.”
The Climate Working Group of the U.S. Department of Energy (John Christy, Ph.D.; Judith Curry, Ph.D.; Steven Koonin, Ph.D.; Ross McKitrick, Ph.D.; Roy Spencer, Ph.D.) published a new study that injects realism and humility into the politicized, climate-model-driven debate. This 141-page summary of CO2 science, climate science, climate economics, and related public policy reverses the John Holdren et al. bias of prior like reports.
The executive summary and conclusion from “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S.…
“It is time for free market energy policies to replace crony capitalism and the termite aspirations of the Climate Industrial Complex. To all climate alarmists and forced energy transformationists, check your premises for mid-course correction. Climate anxiety not.”
Gilad Regev, self described as “empowering people to take climate action,” is very discouraged. Government climate policies are all pain, no gain, and the general public has alarm fatigue. And even climate campaigners are moving toward adaption instead of (futile) mitigation.
He recently stated:
…Maybe the problem isn’t climate denial. Maybe it’s climate messaging. We’ve been attempting to scare or shame people into caring, and it’s not effective. Is it time to completely rethink how we talk about climate and sustainability? We’ve spent years trying to influence people through fear, data, and moral urgency.