I read yet another of those ‘we are all headed for doom’ newspaper articles about climate change in a national business newspaper. To make matters worse, it was written by a fellow who is the director of the environmental law division at a law firm.
The article was peppered with the word ‘may’, such as it may rain or it may not rain, there may be damage, the weather may affect the supply of resources . . . and so it went. So, the writer was totally covered, in that, no matter what ‘may’ happen in the future, he could point out that he said ‘may’.
One of his many comments concerning severe weather that may happen, which made me squirm, was this: “These impacts will also have an exponential effect as failure to or delay in providing a resource due to its unavailability or due to infrastructure damage may have a knock-on effect for a number of businesses.”
This bit really reads like it was written by a lawyer, but a bad one, with the lawyer’s ‘or’, et cetera. However, the writer says that severe weather “will” have an “exponential effect” on businesses, but then says that this “may have a knock-on effect”.
I do not think that he knows what the mathematical concept of ‘exponential’ means, but he says that it “will” happen, yet there “may” be a resultant effect. Come off it.
The lawyer-writer attempts to scare readers into believing that ‘climate change’ will devastate businesses. He repeats the mantra that ‘water scarcity’ will be a major risk to the global economy. This is bunk. The total amount of water on the entire planet is exactly the same now as it was during the age of the dinosaurs. It cannot change in the future, unless an interplanetary asteroid crashes into earth. Water moves around the planet; it does not go away . . . anywhere.
Now, for the umpteenth time, let me nail my colours to the mast. I do not believe that there is any human-induced climate change of any consequence. There is also no evidence of any severe weather events anywhere on planet earth that are out of the ordinary. The whole ‘severe weather’ drama has been conjured up as a major hoax by the warmist extreme greens.
The decade that had the highest incidence of hurricanes striking the US coastline was the 1940s. Decades ago, well before the advent of warmist fearmongers, it snowed in Pietermaritzburg and Piet Retief. In 1893, the year Mahatma Gandhi arrived in South Africa as a young lawyer, there was a massive flood in central Pretoria – it rained almost continuously from February 8 to 11. In 1904, a major storm in Bloemfontein, on January 17, caused such damage that 29 people perished in the Royal Hotel, in Fontein street. In 1921, the year the Comrades Marathon was first run, with the grand total of 48 runners, it snowed so heavily in the Spring month of September in the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands and southern Free State that snow lay over half a metre deep.
The world has always experienced extreme weather events. The only difference now is that TV and interactive technology mean that the whole world can see them in real time, or soon after their occurrence, thereby giving an illusion of greater frequency.
South African business and industry are in no danger of being overwhelmed by climate change or increased extreme weather. They have always had to contend with storms, floods and droughts, and so on. We have just been though a major drought. In fact, we are not out of it yet but, interestingly, the nation has produced a record maize crop.
There is almost zero evidence that human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2) has anything to do with any climate change. As far as I am concerned, there is essentially zero reason for anybody to reduce any CO2 emissions and definitely no need for any carbon tax of any sort. The only reason to worry about CO2 emissions is that much of the rest of the world is shouting about it. Congratulations to President Donald Trump for getting the US out of the COP 21 Paris Accord. I only wish that he had told the truth – that there is almost zero evidence that extra CO2 matters – instead of saying that he was doing it to protect US jobs.
The small temperature rise of about 1 ºC that has been observed on planet earth since well before the Boer War can be much more scientifically linked to magnetic changes in the Solar Magnetic Cycle than to any CO2 increase.
The slight climate change observed is natural and there is a link of between zero and almost zero to mankind’s activities.
Finally, why should any actual climate change lead to only negative effects, as the lawyer-writer sobbed about? Any change should be 50% good and 50% bad. Think about it.