They’re called “climate doomers” and the Washington Post says that their belief in the unstoppable and inevitable end of human civilization is even more dangerous than climate “deniers.”
In essence, the doomers have given up on humanity’s ability to survive. Some have become preppers but most appear to be satisfied to feed their paranoia by immersing themselves in the end-of-the-world cult online.
“It’s fair to say that recently many of us climate scientists have spent more time arguing with the doomers than with the deniers,” said Zeke Hausfather, a contributing author to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
What else is to be expected after more than 30 years of pronouncements that climate change would destroy civilization unless we stop the engines of industry and outlaw automobiles? The fact that these hysterical predictions of doom haven’t come true doesn’t appear to matter. The doomers simply shrug off the errors and make new, even more hair-raising predictions.
One such “climate scientist” is the University of Arizona’s Guy McPherson who said in 2017, “I can’t imagine that there will be a human left on the Earth in 10 years.” The video has 328,000 views and more than 2,500 comments. A sample:
“I generally feel very lonely as most people don’t understand the situation we are in, nor do they want to know the truth. I find great comfort in your video’s [sic] and I would like to thank you for your work.”
Finding “great comfort” in videos about the end of mankind is pathological. And that describes the climate doomers perfectly.
The most difficult think I face being a “climate doomer”, is recognising the shear pointlessness of everything that isn’t focused on mitigation or limitation.
Earning money to pay bills seems utterly ludicrous, I should be growing veg and collecting rainwater 😔#ClimateAction
— The Whole Shebang Ltd (@TheWholeShebang) March 20, 2023
The origins of doomism stretch back far — McPherson, for example, has been predicting the demise of human civilization for decades — but the mind-set seems to have become markedly more mainstream in the past five years. Jacquelyn Gill, a climate scientist at the University of Maine, says that in 2018 she started hearing different sorts of questions when she spoke at panels or did events online. “I started getting emails from people saying: ‘I’m a young person. Is there even a point in going to college? Will I ever be able to grow up and have kids?’” she said.
Can anyone doubt that the steady stream of climate change propaganda coming from the UN, western governments, and left-wing activists for more than 30 years has warped the thinking of ordinary people, especially the young?
No doubt, there are some in the climate change industry who cynically try to exploit the fears of citizens about the end of civilization. But lately, it seems that the postulates about climate change have become very specific.
The report, which focused on how an increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius from preindustrial levels might compare to 2 degrees Celsius, included grim predictions like the death of the world’s coral reefs and ice-free summers in the Arctic. But a central message many took from the report — that there were only 12 years left to save the planet — wasn’t even in the report. It came from a Guardian headline.
In three of the four pathways the report charted for limiting warming to 1.5C, the world would have to cut carbon dioxide emissions 40 to 60 percent by 2030. “We have 12 years to limit climate catastrophe,” the Guardian reported, and other outlets soon followed. The phrase soon became an activist rallying cry.
It should be noted that most climate scientists reject this kind of specificity. But it doesn’t really matter when the overwhelming media coverage informs us daily of the imminent peril we’re in from anthropogenic climate change.
The “12-years to save the planet” meme — pushed by “Green New Deal” author AOC and dozens of other non-scientific activists — had no basis in reality.
“‘Twelve years to save the planet’ was actually: We have 12 years to cut global emissions in half to stay consistent with a 1.5C scenario,” Hausfather explained. “Then ‘12 years to save the planet’ becomes interpreted by the public as: If we don’t stop climate change in 12 years, something catastrophic happens.”
“It was really a game of telephone,” he added.
We’re not going to be getting apologies or walk-backs anytime soon from AOC and the hysterical green activists who want to end industrialized civilization. But the problem as I see it is that mainstream climate scientists don’t push back against the misinformation put out by doomers. They want people to be frightened — even if it means that they will be misinformed. Better a misinformed advocate for their climate change “remedies” than a well-informed citizen who decides for themself what to believe about climate change.