Follow the Science!

The Real Climate Denial Were you forwarded this email? [Sign-up to The Daily Reckoning here.]( [Unsubscribe]( [Daily Reckoning] Follow the Science! - “Climate alarmists wrap themselves in the blanket of climate change to distort science and discredit non-members of the climate alarm cult”… - The hidden agenda of the climate alarmists… - Then Jim Rickards shows you why politicians should “follow the science” when it comes to climate… Recommended Link [Special offer from Jim Rickards]( [Read more here...]( [Click Here To Get The Details]( Portsmouth, New Hampshire July 27, 2021 [Jim Rickards]Dear Reader, There’s a lot of hysteria right now about record heatwaves, flooding and other climate-related disasters that are supposedly proof that the climate is spiraling out of control and that immediate, drastic action is required to stop it. Climate alarmists are trying to exploit these events to ram through their radical climate initiatives. Today, we’ll see why the current hysteria is unwarranted. Climate change is measurable and real. Climate alarm is hysterical and cult-like. Unfortunately, the two exist side-by-side in the public square and are easily confused by non-experts (and many experts as well). The confusion is not accidental. Climate alarmists wrap themselves in the blanket of climate change to distort science and discredit non-members of the climate alarm cult. If you point out uncertainties or inconsistencies in the climate alarmist playbook, they label you a “climate denier” and put you in the same category as paranoids, lunatics and malefactors who deny well-established truths. Of course, the climate alarmists are the ones in denial about the truth. They always call you what they’re guilty of themselves. I’ve written a lot about climate change from a scientific perspective. There is some evidence that average global temperatures are warming slightly, although some areas are getting colder. The warming (on average) is not due to higher high temperatures but to higher low temperatures. That means that while the average is going up, the planet is not getting hotter. There is no evidence that hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires or floods are worse or more frequent today than they have been in the past. Sea levels are rising about 7 inches per 100 years, but they’ve been rising at that pace for over 100 years, so there’s no evidence this is getting worse. Seven inches will barely get your feet wet in 2121. Of course, this long period of rising sea levels means it has nothing to do with rising CO2 emissions, a relatively new phenomenon. CO2 particles do tend to trap heat, but there’s no solid evidence that any warming from these particles is due to human activity. Temperature changes are more likely to be affected by a combination of solar cycles, volcanoes, and ocean currents. In short, there is no existential climate crisis, and no radical responses are needed. If this is the case, why do climate alarmists from John Kerry to Gillian Tett to AOC yell and scream about CLIMATE CHANGE!! ?? The answer is that they have a hidden agenda. If you want to impose global policy changes, you first need a global problem. Climate change works well because wind and weather do not stop at national borders. What is the hidden agenda? It has many parts, including global government, global regulation, and global taxation. With climate alarmists now in charge of the Biden administration, the hidden agenda is coming into full view. The climate activists want to impose a “carbon tariff” on goods imported from countries that are not doing enough (as defined by activists) to reduce CO2 emissions. The idea is that it does no good if the U.S. reduces emissions and sends jobs offshore to China if we buy their products made with energy from coal-fired plants (China produces over 50% of its electricity by burning coal). The tariff will increase the cost of Chinese goods and, in theory, encourage the Chinese to reduce their dependence on coal. Of course, “tariff” is just another name for tax. U.S. consumers will pay this tax in the form of higher prices. China won’t change its ways until they’re good and ready (which could be decades from now). But China may impose tariffs on U.S. goods as retaliation (which will hurt U.S. export-related jobs). It’s just another type of trade war. Climate activists are too ideologically blind to see that. Climate activism is just a facade for more global taxation. The taxes are coming, and more will arrive soon. Below, I show you why politicians should “follow the science” when it comes to climate. Read on. Regards, Jim Rickards for The Daily Reckoning P.S. The stock market is certainly in a bubble. So are many other asset classes. It’s all part of the “everything bubble” that the Fed has inflated. But I’ve identified an [alternative that doesn’t involve the stock market or any of the other overinflated markets.]( It involves instead a massive, $6.6 trillion daily flow of capital that you can tap for potentially large gains. You see, [I recently developed a proprietary secret]( for profiting from this gigantic, yet often overlooked market. [It’s called C.O.B.R.A.]( My team and I have built a new computerized Tactical Operations Center to track this massive cross-border capital flow. I think it’s something you need to learn about. [Click here now for details.]( Recommended Link [Wall Street Legend: Move Your Money BEFORE TOMORROW]( [Read more here...]( Chris Rowe says there’s a huge stock market event looming - and he’s revealing his #1 pick for free. [Click Here To Find Out More]( The Daily Reckoning Presents: “Unfortunately, the subject of climate change has been taken over by a group of pseudo-scientists using badly flawed models, selected data, and hyperbolic claims amplified by a largely ignorant media and opportunistic politicians looking to increase their own power”… ****************************** Politicians Should Follow the Science By Jim Rickards [Jim Rickards]Let’s take on the climate alarmist position by considering a few of the claims I mentioned above, in the light of real science: Surging sea levels will inundate the coasts. This is false. Sea levels have been rising at the same pace for 100-years, unaffected by climate change or human activity. The rate of increase is about 7-inches per 100-years. That’s barely enough to get your feet wet in 2121. Hurricanes are becoming more powerful and more frequent. This is false. The 2014 U.S. National Climate Assessment said, “There has been no significant trend in the global number of tropical cyclones nor has there been any trend identified in the number of U.S. land-falling hurricanes.” There is evidence that property damage from hurricanes is increasing. Does this mean hurricanes are getting stronger? Not at all. It just means that rich owners with subsidized insurance are building mansions on sandbars where they don’t belong. That’s not climate change. It’s stupidity. Tornadoes are more powerful and more frequent. This is false. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) records from 1954 to 2014 show the number of tornadoes in the U.S. of EF1 or greater (EF is the Enhanced Fujita Scale of tornado strength) is fairly consistent at about 400 with occasional spikes in 1973, 1982, 2008 and 2011. The number of tornadoes in the U.S. of EF3 or greater has been steady at around 40 (with spikes in 1957, 1965, 1973, and 2011). No correlation has been shown between tornado strength and CO2 emissions. Snowstorms are becoming more frequent with greater accumulation of snow. This is false. Snowstorms are highly localized, so measurements vary, with some locations getting more snow, some less. A chart of annual snowfall in Washington DC from 1889–2018 shows the annual snowfall in inches has been trending downward for the entire 130-year period. If climate change has any impact at all, it is causing less snow. And there is no correlation between climate change and an increase in CO2 emissions. Wildfires are destroying larger areas more frequently than ever before. This is false. Satellite data from NASA reveals that the global area burned annually by fires from 1998 to 2015 has declined by about 25 percent. Similar data exists for ice sheets, droughts and floods and other extreme temperature or weather-related outcomes. In short, none of the extreme outcomes that the climate alarmists like to shout about are true. And there is no conclusive evidence that any extreme weather when it does occur is caused by human activity or CO2 emissions. Fortunately, there is good science on which to base tentative conclusions. That science can be difficult to find. You have to search hard for a well-credentialed physicist, climatologist or complexity theorist willing to speak objectively on the subject of climate change. Many are afraid to speak up for fear of losing jobs or research grants. Others parrot the climate alarm party line in order to receive those research grants. Sometimes the facts are buried in a footnote on page 750 of an 800-page report otherwise crammed with misleading graphs and unsupported inference. Still, the factual resources are there if you look hard enough. Climate change is one of the most complex phenomena ever addressed by science and one of the most difficult to model and predict. The nature and causes of climate change are a worthy challenge for the best scientists using the most sophisticated modeling tools and computational power available. Unfortunately, the subject of climate change has been overtaken by a group of pseudo-scientists using badly flawed models, selected data, and hyperbolic claims amplified by a largely ignorant media and opportunistic politicians looking to increase their own power. Are there any honest scientists using solid data and robust models to make more accurate assessments of the current state and future path of climate change? Fortunately, the answer is yes. Recommended Link [The Truth? You can actually choose…to BE RICH]( [Read more here...]( I’m not talking about wishing, hoping, or believing that a miracle is coming your way. I’m talking about making a choice, setting a course of action, and then going out and making it happen. I make that choice every single day. And I believe you can actually achieve it. If you want to make the choice to be rich – here are three things you can do today: - Commit to getting financially educated. - Be ready to let go of the old-school financial advice you’ve been taught. - Join me for a free training this week. (It’s 100% FREE for you this week) [Join The FREE Training Here]( These sober voices mostly agree that slight global warming is detectable, but it’s not a crisis and will not become a crisis in the foreseeable future. They also conclude that it’s not clear that CO2 emissions are the main cause of warming, even if it is a contributing cause. They point to many other causes, including solar cycles, ocean salinity, ocean currents (such as El Niño and La Niña), cloud cover, aerosols, volcanos, agricultural practices, and natural methane release. There are also numerous official reports that reach the same conclusion (although you may have to scan the footnotes to find that out; official reports support scary headlines then are heavily diluted by the detailed content). The most important contribution of these real scientists is to demonstrate how badly flawed the models used by the climate alarmists are. This is a bit technical, but it’s necessary to have some understanding of the climate’s complexity if you want to know how limited the models are. A climate model begins by dividing the surface of the planet into a grid with squares of about 360 square miles over land surfaces and 36 square miles over the oceans. That’s about 101,000,000 grids. Each grid is then extrapolated into a stack about 30 miles high, extending to the outer edge of the stratosphere. All weather occurs in this zone with most of the weather occurring within 10 miles of the earth’s surface in the troposphere. The vertical stacks are then sliced horizontally into thin layers like pancakes. Each layer is then analyzed separately for climate conditions and the impact of such conditions on adjacent pancakes in adjacent stacks, and so on. All of that goes on before we even get to feedback loops and recursive functions. You get the picture. If each pancake is one mile thick, that comes to 3.03 billion pancakes. Analyzing one pancake is tricky. Analyzing 3.03 billion pancakes is mind-boggling. Analyzing the interaction of each of the 3.03 billion pancakes with each of the other 3.03 billion pancakes borders on the impossible, in terms of computational complexity. One scientist estimates that if we had supercomputers one thousand times faster than today’s computers, the run time on the problem described above would be several months. So, how do scientists actually work with models that cannot be run with today’s computers? They make assumptions. Lots of assumptions. This process begins with a recognition that there are no direct observations of most of the pancakes! Sure we have satellites and weather stations recording temperature and precipitation, but those inputs only include a tiny fraction of the surface areas and stack heights just described. Complexity theory was discovered by a mathematician and meteorologist named Edward Lorenz in 1961. He was simulating a weather pattern on a computer (a primitive computer by today’s standards). He ran a sequence of data and got a result. Like a good scientist, he ran the sequence again with the same inputs to check his work. The second run produced a radically different result. Lorenz then reviewed all of the data to find out the reason for two different results from the same inputs. What he discovered is that the computer rounded outputs to three decimal places. His original input of 0.506127 was rounded to 0.506 by the computer when he started the second run. A difference of one-ten-thousandth of one percent caused a radically different result. This was the beginning of complexity theory and deterministic chaos theory, in which minute changes in initial conditions produce extreme differences in results. Climatology is complexity theory par excellence. The point is that climate models are so complex and so sensitive to assumptions that scientists can get almost any result they want by tweaking the inputs and running multiple scenarios. It also means that the outputs are mostly worthless because of unfounded assumptions, computational complexity and flawed model design. Most climate models are so defective that they can’t even simulate the past based on known data, let alone forecast the future. If a model of your own design can’t backtest correctly, why on earth should it be relied on to forecast? And yet, these are the models that are routinely touted as showing an “existential threat to mankind” and “climate catastrophe coming.” Thank goodness we have some honest scientists willing to point out the defects. I don’t blame scientists for trying to get this right; that’s what they do. But the results of experiments should come with a huge helping of humility and a long list of disclaimers. Good scientists do that. The pseudo-scientists run to the headline writers for publicity. Unfortunately, we all might pay the price through higher taxes and greater government control of our lives. Regards, Jim Rickards for The Daily Reckoning P.S. The stock market is certainly in a bubble. So are many other asset classes. It’s all part of the “everything bubble” that the Fed has inflated. But I’ve identified an [alternative that doesn’t involve the stock market or any of the other overinflated markets.]( It involves instead a massive, $6.6 trillion daily flow of capital that you can tap for potentially large gains. You see, [I recently developed a proprietary secret]( for profiting from this gigantic, yet often overlooked market. [It’s called C.O.B.R.A.]( My team and I have built a new computerized Tactical Operations Center to track this massive cross-border capital flow. I think it’s something you need to learn about. [Click here now for details.]( --------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for reading The Daily Reckoning! We greatly value your questions and comments. Please send all feedback to [feedback@dailyreckoning.com.](mailto:dr@dailyreckoning.com) [James Rickards][James G. Rickards]( is the editor of Strategic Intelligence. He is an American lawyer, economist, and investment banker with 35 years of experience working in capital markets on Wall Street. He is the author of The New York Times bestsellers Currency Wars and The Death of Money. Add feedback@dailyreckoning.com to your address book: [Whitelist us]( Additional Articles & Commentary: [Daily Reckoning Website]( Join the conversation! Follow us on social media: [Facebook]( [LinkedIn]( [Twitter]( [RSS Feed]( [YouTube]( The Daily Reckoning is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Daily Reckoning e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from The Daily Reckoning, feel free to [unsubscribe here.]( Please read our [Privacy Statement](. For any further comments or concerns please email us at feedback@dailyreckoning.com. If you are having trouble receiving your Daily Reckoning subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox [by whitelisting The Daily Reckoning.]( [Paradigm Press]© 2021 Paradigm Press, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We expressly forbid our writers from having a financial interest in any security they personally recommend to our readers. All of our employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. Email Reference ID: 470DRED01