The One Statistic Climate Catastrophists Don’t Want You to Know

[Beetlegeuse]

The linked article is a review by Cato Institute writer Patrick J Michaels of Alex Epstein's new book The Moral Case For Fossil Fuels.

The upshot of the article -- and the one statistic the climate catastrophists don't want you to know -- is that since 1932, climate-related deaths world-wide are down by 99.9%.

The reason for the dramatic decline is the use of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels allow us to build structures that are strong enough to withstand strong storms, that are heated in winter and cooled in summer. Plus agriculture using nitrate fertilizers and fossil fuel-powered farm equipment dramatically boost food output. Which neutralizes the four greatest threats the environment poses to our survival. So according to the author, there is a moral case for for finding more ways to use fossil fuels to enhance our lives.

Here's the 'trailer' for his book:

[Beetlegeuse]

... And here's a 90-minute speech by the book's author, Alex Epstein:

[DocToxin8]

Hello and be merry!

Well, forgive me for being direct;
but that has to be one of the more stupid arguments I’ve heard.

Firstly; why would people concerned about climate change not wanting anyone to know that?
Yes there’s but jobs and for some this climate thing has become a religion, and that’s sad, but I see that on both sides here.

And second, and more important;
Building safer infrastructure in the future, requires the same power to do so as in the past?
Or; if we hadn’t used fossil fuel we wouldn’t be where we are technically - are anybody saying otherwise?

POWER; as in electrical or heat or anything you can use to make electricity; is vitally important for civilization. And you can set a direct link between stable power generation and f.ex industry.
Few think we should reduce, or can reduce, our power use.
Some lunatics do of course, but if you’re looking for people that hold extreme and insane views, you will find them, on any side of a debate or issue.

Nuclear power is the thing that frustrates me most; how so many so called environmentalists think we can get anything done without nuclear power.

As for fossil fuels; some are better than others; gas vs coal f.ex.
And it’s not logical to think we can avoid using fossil fuels in all instances.
We could try to shift all our industry away from using fossil fuel however.

The US is not going to build any new nuclear plants in the foreseeable future, which I think is a great shame.
And it’s not some climate nut that decided that, it’s the private industry that would rather enjoy the low prices on fossil fuels, the low prices on building a power plant on fossils vs nuclear.

Nuclear is expensive to start up, which is why private industry rarely gets involved unless it’s in conjunction with the state.



This is the problem with issues today;
People on both sides think there’s just malice, conspiracy, hatred and so on that drives the other side.

[Obs]

Hello and be merry!

Well, forgive me for being direct;
but that has to be one of the more stupid arguments I’ve heard.

Firstly; why would people concerned about climate change not wanting anyone to know that?
Yes there’s but jobs and for some this climate thing has become a religion, and that’s sad, but I see that on both sides here.

And second, and more important;
Building safer infrastructure in the future, requires the same power to do so as in the past?
Or; if we hadn’t used fossil fuel we wouldn’t be where we are technically - are anybody saying otherwise?

POWER; as in electrical or heat or anything you can use to make electricity; is vitally important for civilization. And you can set a direct link between stable power generation and f.ex industry.
Few think we should reduce, or can reduce, our power use.
Some lunatics do of course, but if you’re looking for people that hold extreme and insane views, you will find them, on any side of a debate or issue.

Nuclear power is the thing that frustrates me most; how so many so called environmentalists think we can get anything done without nuclear power.

As for fossil fuels; some are better than others; gas vs coal f.ex.
And it’s not logical to think we can avoid using fossil fuels in all instances.
We could try to shift all our industry away from using fossil fuel however.

The US is not going to build any new nuclear plants in the foreseeable future, which I think is a great shame.
And it’s not some climate nut that decided that, it’s the private industry that would rather enjoy the low prices on fossil fuels, the low prices on building a power plant on fossils vs nuclear.

Nuclear is expensive to start up, which is why private industry rarely gets involved unless it’s in conjunction with the state.



This is the problem with issues today;
People on both sides think there’s just malice, conspiracy, hatred and so on that drives the other side.

Holy crap look who it is!

I bettter message couch and tell him whos back!

[Beetlegeuse]

What's really stupid is denying that the sun is the chief reason the planet warms and cools and that there's not a damn thing man can do to change that fact.

[Obs]

What's really stupid is denying that the sun is the chief reason the planet warms and cools and that there's not a damn thing man can do to change that fact.

Lol!
I got in arguments before.
Where did the ice age go?

No shit... You set a block of ice outside in the sun wtf happens?

We are all fucked in the end.

In the end it will just be me and my lava raft and I will be pissed off as hell, until the showdown with god.

I got this.

[Beetlegeuse]

Climate Change Alarmists are lying through their fucking teeth