This alarming statement was compiled by a worldwide network of more than 1400 scientists and other experts. The scientific study of climate change needs to be less politicized, while climate policy ought to be more scientific. Scientists should confront errors and puffery in their projections of global warming publicly, while politicians should evaluate the actual costs in addition to the imagined advantages of their policy actions objectively and without emotion.
Warming is caused by a combination of natural and human-caused forces.
The geological record shows that the temperature of Earth has gone through natural cycles of both extreme cold and extreme heat for as far as the world has been in existence. As recently as the year 1850, the Little Ice Age came to an end. As a result, the fact that we are now going through a time of warming shouldn’t come as much of a surprise.
The warming rate is far lower than anticipated.
On the premise of estimated human forcing, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) anticipated that the planet would warm substantially more than it actually has. The disconnect between the world as it is and the world as it is modeled informs us that we have a long way to go before we can fully comprehend how climate change works.
Climate policy depends on faulty models.
Models of climate have a lot of flaws, and using them as instruments for world governance is not even close to being feasible. They amplify the influence that greenhouse gases like CO2 have on the environment. In addition, they disregard the fact that the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere has a number of positive effects.
CO2 is essential for all forms of life on Earth because it provides sustenance for plants.
CO2 is not considered to be pollution. It is necessary for the continuation of all life on the planet. The process of photosynthesis is a gift. More carbon dioxide is good for the environment and helps the planet become greener. The presence of more CO2 in the atmosphere has stimulated the development of plant biomass all over the world. In addition to this, it is beneficial to agriculture, since it may increase agricultural yields all over the globe.
The frequency of natural catastrophes has not risen due to global warming.
There isn’t any statistical evidence to support the claim that global warming is either making natural catastrophes like hurricanes, floods, droughts, and the like more common or making them more intense. Nevertheless, there is a significant body of research suggesting that CO2 mitigation efforts are just as counterproductive as they are expensive.
The climate policy must take into account the relevant scientific and economic findings.
There isn’t a climate crisis at this time. As a result, there is no need for concern or anxiety at this time. We take a firm stance against the destructive and unattainable goal of achieving net-zero CO2 emissions by the year 2050. We have plenty of time to reconsider our strategy and make necessary adjustments in the event that more effective methods become available, which is very guaranteed to do. “Prosperity for everyone” should be the goal of global policy, and this should be accomplished by consistently delivering energy that is both dependable and inexpensive. They in an affluent society have a high level of education, there are fewer children being born, and people actually care about the health of the environment.