Pirate's Cove

I’ve been saying for over two decades that it’s hard to take it seriously when the people who push it the hardest rarely practice what they preach

Let’s see that article, which has a slightly different headline

The Climate Crisis Needs a New Catchphrase

For half a century, scientists have been warning about the risk of the planet warming by “2 degrees.” It’s a catchphrase that plagues the conversation about climate concerns, including at the United Nation’s COP30 meeting in Belém, Brazil, this month. Take U.N. General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock’s remarks to the press this week, in which she stated that member countries had previously committed to limiting global warming “well below two degrees.” That’s a huge mistake. Well, the math is right. But the wording, at least where Americans are concerned, is dead wrong.

“Two degrees” is a benchmark in Celsius. And the world’s leader in per capita carbon emissions—a leading culprit of the greenhouse gas effect warming the planet—is the United States. Americans speak in Fahrenheit. Many folks are already loath to take action to combat climate change. Thanks to the rallying cry of “2 degrees,” people in the U.S. are likely to mistake the dangerous warming of the planet as happening almost half as slowly.

Most Americans aren’t going to know that it means 2 Celsius, which is 3.6 Fahrenheit. And there has only been a 1.7F rise in global temperatures since 1850, a good chunk of which will be from land use and Urban Heat Island effect, especially as it pertains to nighttime in big cities where you get low radiative cooling.

In some ways, the 2-degree communication debacle is a home-grown problem for the United States. It was 50 years ago, within its borders, that Yale University economics professor William Nordhaus started the conversation around this benchmark by publishing papers warning that a rise in global temperatures of 2 or 3 degrees Celsius “would take the climate outside of the range” that humans had been living in for millennia. The focus around 2 degrees gained traction and became a central “speed limit” for climate change. Back in 2015, a report from the Carbon Brief noted that, “Limiting warming to no more than two degrees has become the de facto target for global climate policy.” That same year, a global treaty known as the Paris Agreement (which the U.S. had signed on to and, under Trump, has withdrawn from) set a target to keep global warming under a limit of 2 degrees. Nordhaus likely spoke in Celsius because it remains the temperature scale for researchers, regardless of where they are on Earth. This is similar to the way professional bakers, even in the States, measure in grams. People are willing to do those conversions to make sure their pastry doesn’t burn. They don’t seem willing to do the same for their planet.

See, the problem is not that it’s a doomsday cult full of climahypocrites, nope, it’s the catchphrases.

Between 1970 and 2023, the global average temperature already increased about 1.7 degrees Fahrenheit. We’re warned that at 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit warmer—the equivalent of the famous 2-degree Celsius benchmark—somewhere between 800 million to 3 billion people would face chronic water scarcity. And, unfortunately, the United Nations Environment Programme has stated that at the rate we’re going, we’re on track for a 5-degree Fahrenheit rise in average global temperatures by the end of the century. Perhaps no issue is more important than global warming when it comes to the future of the world and the lives our children will lead. If a conversion can help even a few more Americans understand it, it’s worth a shot. (I left the links in for this paragraph)

It’s nice when they lie. Much of the warming was erased during the downturn from the late 40s thru the late 70s from the spikes that occurred from 1850, the end of the Little Ice Age, through the late 40s. Then notice the scaremongering. And 5F by the end of the century? Bullshit.

I’m not suggesting that the temperature conversion could solve the problem of climate apathy. But a few small changes could help: Headlines in U.S. outlets should be in Fahrenheit. U.N. leaders need to go to greater lengths to translate their message into Fahrenheit, in addition to Celsius. To put it another way, they don’t need to go the extra kilometer to make sure we all know how dire things could become—they need to go the extra mile.

Right, right, that should totally do it. But, would Warmists then practice what they preach? All the tens of thousands who took long fossil fueled trips to the Brazil climate conference and use Celsius would disagree.

Read: Bummer: “Americans Don’t Take Hotcoldwetdry Doom Seriously” »