MSM have presented multiple stories about the Northern Hemisphere’s recent summer, emphasising the severity of its heat and the catastrophic consequences. (No doubt, soon we will have a re-run of such comments for NZ.) But, as that same hemisphere transitions into winter, will we hear about the catastrophes of its cold? Will we get a balanced portrayal or is everything a disaster?
The MSM conveys an impression climate change is causing significantly more casualties than ever before! However, when we assess all four seasons, is this portrayal accurate, or could it be…“misinformation”?
We can all see that the weather changes from season to season; is it also possible that there are seasonal hazards but also benefits, producing a different narrative than just one long tragedy? Are there multiple perspectives regarding climate change, some of which rarely receive attention?
Climate change is acknowledged, specifically global warming, but do we need to catastrophise every event? With this understanding, can we explore whether climate change solely brings about negative consequences? Why do we need to catastrophise everything – where is the balance?
According to MSM, summer spells disaster! The planet is “boiling”, and us along with it! Here is how summer is presented by the MSM:
The MSM conveys an impression climate change is causing significantly more casualties than ever before! However, when we assess all four seasons, is this portrayal accurate, or could it be…“misinformation”?
We can all see that the weather changes from season to season; is it also possible that there are seasonal hazards but also benefits, producing a different narrative than just one long tragedy? Are there multiple perspectives regarding climate change, some of which rarely receive attention?
Climate change is acknowledged, specifically global warming, but do we need to catastrophise every event? With this understanding, can we explore whether climate change solely brings about negative consequences? Why do we need to catastrophise everything – where is the balance?
According to MSM, summer spells disaster! The planet is “boiling”, and us along with it! Here is how summer is presented by the MSM:
Click to view
MSM reports (it’s ‘scientific’) that the human-caused climate crisis is undeniably to blame for the deadly heatwaves that struck Europe and the US and would have been virtually impossible without the global heating driven by burning fossil fuels. Ramping up our dire situation, MSM reports a study published in the journal Nature Medicine, which found that 61,672 people died in Europe from heat-related illnesses between May 30 and September 4 last year (2022), during Europe’s hottest “summer” on record!
It is indeed concerning that people are suffering from heat-related deaths. However, it is also important to note that the complete narrative is often censored because it doesn’t align with the ‘climate-change catastrophe’ story. We don’t hear both sides of the story. The situation might not be as alarming as it seems.
As evidence consider the following study and how the narrative is slanted: Gasparrini A, Guo Y, Sera F, et al. Excess mortality attributed to heat and cold: a health impact assessment study in 854 cities in Europe. Lancet Planetary Health, 2023; 7: e301–12.
The paper reports a comprehensive “mortality impact assessment” due to heat and cold, considering geographical differences and age-specific risks. The paper estimates that, across the 854 urban areas in Europe, there was an annual excess of 203,620 deaths attributed to cold and 20,173 attributed to heat, ie 10 times as many people die due to cold as die due to heat. Could this mean that climate change, in Europe, could be saving lives? Crazy!
Of course, the results were not presented in this context. Take a close look at the left-hand-side graph and note the labelling on the X-axis. Compare with the accurate rendering of the information in the right-hand-side graph. It tells a very different story.
Click to view
As a result of a temperature rise since 2000, we are now experiencing 166,000 fewer “temperature-related deaths” each year.This is a combination of over 116,000 fewer deaths due to heat and nearly 283,000 fewer deaths due to cold.
Click to view
“Climate change” would be less of a ‘catastrophe’ and we couldn’t declare a ‘climate crisis’ when there exists evidence that global warming can be a positive thing.
Take the “greening of the Earth” as another example. In a NASA study using satellite data to measure ‘leaf cover’ across the world’s vegetated regions, from 1982 to 2015, researchers noted significant changes. The image below depicts these alterations, with green representing growth and brown indicating decline. The study found that more than 25 per cent of Earth’s vegetated lands have seen substantial greening in the last 35 years. Carbon dioxide fertilisation is the primary driver, contributing to 70 per cent of the greening effect, while factors such as nitrogen, land cover changes and climate variations – like shifts in global temperature, precipitation and sunlight – also played a role.
The significant absorption of CO2 by vegetation is likely to have a greater, ongoing and increasing impact in mitigating global warming. Do the MSM inform us that the carbon sink is expanding? (In large part without human help.) What are the potential outcomes?
www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth
Click to view
In the run-up to the election, the MSM has prominently highlighted the calls from the Greens, Labour and the Maori Parties to declare a “climate emergency”. MSM media does this to bolster support for their favoured agenda and to intensify and justify ‘their’ climate-change narrative. They present climate change as an established matter with only one accepted perspective: theirs. In many ways, in NZ, it is the tail (MSM) wagging the dog (politics). They even get paid for it.
I call for a thorough and nuanced discussion of climate change’s consequences and the potential solutions before we entrust our votes to parties or individuals who may endorse further harmful and ineffective strategies.
Rather than adopting a partisan stance and presenting a biased perspective, the MSM should take the lead in fostering these discussions. This could go a long way to restoring their integrity and credibility and greatly aid voters in making informed decisions.
Michael John Schmidt left NZ after completing postgraduate studies at Otago University (BSc, MSc) in molecular biology, virology, and immunology to work in research on human genetics in Australia. Returning to NZ has worked in business development for biotech and pharmacy retail companies and became a member of the NZ Institute of Directors. This article was first published HERE
2 comments:
Excellent article.
As is well known to all scientists, the climate is changing all the time, throughout Earth's history. This happens regardless of human actions.
To put the current situation in perspective:-
Using the IPCC data:-
Human CO2 emissions are only 3% of total global emissions.
Natures contribution to the 400ppm is 97%. (or 388ppm).
Mankind’s contribution is just 3% or 12ppm. The other 97% is natural.
New Zealand’s CO2 emissions only 0.17% of human emissions.
So New Zealand’s CO2 emissions are 3% x 0.17% of the total global CO2 emissions each year.
3% x 0.17% = 0.0051% !! This is 1 in 20,000.
So the other 99.9949% is generated by all other sources, NOT NZ !!!
This is NOT a “climate emergency”
NOT a “matter of life and death” as described by Comrade Ardern.
I get confused.
People say their island is being flooded by global warning. But they do not show that their surrounding ocean is having corresponding effect on other islands. And the Atlantic, Pacific and others are ultimately all the same body of water so surely this should all be measurable?
But in the next breath I hear that global warming is causing islands to sink. Flooding and sinking seem to be different processes to me.
The natural geological structure of many of these islands is never mentioned unless to say in generic terms it is all the fault of global warming.
Please explain in simple terms.
Thank you.
Post a Comment