A climate expert exposed an extreme report for hyping the supposed dangers of climate change just two days before the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27) began in Egypt.
“The climate crisis is killing us. #COP27 must deliver a down-payment on climate solutions that match the scale of the problem,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres tweeted Oct. 25, promoting a doom-peddling report on climate change from The Lancet. But Hoover Institution visiting fellow and climate expert Dr. Bjorn Lomborg tore apart The Lancet’s “deliberately deceptive” climate report in a Nov. 4 Wall Street Journal op-ed.
The climate crisis is killing us.#COP27 must deliver a down-payment on climate solutions that match the scale of the problem.https://t.co/LhoXfrBZhD pic.twitter.com/cRn5gYOeQL
— António Guterres (@antonioguterres) October 26, 2022
Lomborg excoriated The Lancet for its claim that “health [was] at the mercy of fossil fuels” in an absurd Oct. 25 study. “It is hard not to see the Lancet study’s failure to adjust this figure as a deliberate act of deception,” he wrote. Lomborg also explained that The Lancet cherry-picked data by focusing on heat deaths. It was an “amateur statistical fallacy,” Lomborg added.
Worst of all, the report misses the bigger picture.
“Around the world, far more people die each year from cold than heat.” And that’s according to — get this — another report by The Lancet that Lomborg cited. [Emphasis added].
As Lomborg summarized, “the journal claims rising temperatures have killed people but ignores that they appear to have saved far more.”
So even if temperatures are rising — as billionaire Bill Gates, State Department climate cheerleader John Kerry and the rest of the eco-doom crew so often claim — that’s actually good news because “cold deaths are decreasing with rising temperatures.”
Lomborg followed The Lancet’s numbers to their logical conclusion: “Based on today’s population size, the current temperatures cause about 17,000 more heat deaths in older people, but also result in more than half a million fewer cold deaths.” [Emphasis added].
But The Lancet and other climate propaganda peddlers disguised as scientific journals do not just discredit science as an institution. “This dishonesty leads to worse policy outcomes,” Lomborg wrote, criticizing activists who “push for extreme and expensive climate policies that threaten economic growth.”
Economic growth, not government intervention, is the recipe for human flourishing, Lomborg argued. “Temperatures rose throughout the 20th century, but the U.S. nonetheless saw a decrease in heat deaths, largely thanks to air-conditioning.”
He continued: “Policies that focus on lifting people out of poverty and providing affordable, reliable sources of energy would allow the rest of the world to reduce heat deaths and live more comfortable lives. They would also help stave off the much greater threat of cold deaths.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact The Lancet at [email protected] and demand it stop using a bogus climate crisis to advance extremist, anti-energy policies.
A climate expert exposed an extreme report for hyping the supposed dangers of climate change just two days before the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27) began in Egypt.
“The climate crisis is killing us. #COP27 must deliver a down-payment on climate solutions that match the scale of the problem,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres tweeted Oct. 25, promoting a doom-peddling report on climate change from The Lancet. But Hoover Institution visiting fellow and climate expert Dr. Bjorn Lomborg tore apart The Lancet’s “deliberately deceptive” climate report in a Nov. 4 Wall Street Journal op-ed.
The climate crisis is killing us.#COP27 must deliver a down-payment on climate solutions that match the scale of the problem.https://t.co/LhoXfrBZhD pic.twitter.com/cRn5gYOeQL
— António Guterres (@antonioguterres) October 26, 2022
Lomborg excoriated The Lancet for its claim that “health [was] at the mercy of fossil fuels” in an absurd Oct. 25 study. “It is hard not to see the Lancet study’s failure to adjust this figure as a deliberate act of deception,” he wrote. Lomborg also explained that The Lancet cherry-picked data by focusing on heat deaths. It was an “amateur statistical fallacy,” Lomborg added.
Worst of all, the report misses the bigger picture.
“Around the world, far more people die each year from cold than heat.” And that’s according to — get this — another report by The Lancet that Lomborg cited. [Emphasis added].
As Lomborg summarized, “the journal claims rising temperatures have killed people but ignores that they appear to have saved far more.”
So even if temperatures are rising — as billionaire Bill Gates, State Department climate cheerleader John Kerry and the rest of the eco-doom crew so often claim — that’s actually good news because “cold deaths are decreasing with rising temperatures.”
Lomborg followed The Lancet’s numbers to their logical conclusion: “Based on today’s population size, the current temperatures cause about 17,000 more heat deaths in older people, but also result in more than half a million fewer cold deaths.” [Emphasis added].
But The Lancet and other climate propaganda peddlers disguised as scientific journals do not just discredit science as an institution. “This dishonesty leads to worse policy outcomes,” Lomborg wrote, criticizing activists who “push for extreme and expensive climate policies that threaten economic growth.”
Economic growth, not government intervention, is the recipe for human flourishing, Lomborg argued. “Temperatures rose throughout the 20th century, but the U.S. nonetheless saw a decrease in heat deaths, largely thanks to air-conditioning.”
He continued: “Policies that focus on lifting people out of poverty and providing affordable, reliable sources of energy would allow the rest of the world to reduce heat deaths and live more comfortable lives. They would also help stave off the much greater threat of cold deaths.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact The Lancet at [email protected] and demand it stop using a bogus climate crisis to advance extremist, anti-energy policies.
