Climate change explained: why are world leaders in denial? | FT

Okay. Okay, and then
let’s do the feet. Is climate change happening? If it is, why are some world
leaders under the delusion that it is not? Well, the overwhelming
consensus among scientists is that the climate
is indeed changing. It’s absolutely clear that over
the last half a century or so, temperatures have been
rising pretty steadily. And we know what’s
causing this warming. Since the advent of the
Industrial Revolution, we’ve burned fossil
fuels for energy, and that has increased CO2
levels in the atmosphere and warmed the planet. It looks as though the average
world temperature is not far short of 1 degree
centigrade higher than it was in
pre-industrial times. Why are some world leaders
deluded about this? Well, in some sense,
they’re paid to be. Some world leaders,
most importantly, means Donald Trump. The US president who,
I think, at one point said climate change is a
hoax invented by the Chinese. That’s partly because some
of the Republicans would say: well, yes, the
climate is changing, but that’s not man-made. It’s just kind of inevitable. But there’s also a stream
of the Republican party today in America that’s saying:
actually, the climate probably is changing, but we don’t
want to use the word ‘climate change’ because we want to
make sure that the energy sector in America and
American energy interests are still protected. There are very large interests
in favour of denying climate change. Economic interests invested
in the fossil fuels industrial system, which is,
after all, the basic backbone of our economies. But also, you have to remember
the doubts of ordinary people who think that what
they’re being asked to do is to give up their way of life. The impacts of climate change
are very, very complex. Some areas of the
world might even get cooler or rainier
at certain times, while other areas of the
planet get hotter and drier. It could bring
wildfires to California. It could also bring the
polar vortex to Chicago. So the complexity of the changes
that the planet is undergoing and the way that
scientists have spoken about the statistical range
of probabilities I think has, in the past,
contributed to some doubt. It’s a complicated picture. But right now, what’s
clear is that when it comes to things like the
Paris climate change accord, it’s essentially America against
most of the rest of the world.

43 thoughts on “Climate change explained: why are world leaders in denial? | FT

  1. Because they have a budget, by denying it they can spend it on other things than climate change.

    Would be my most best guess…

  2. Not a fan of Trump but he didn’t say climate change is a hoax… he said global warming is a hoax… not climate change.. temperature increase 1 degree celsius in 100 years… in other words, it’s virtually non-existence

  3. To be fair the people against the Paris Agreement said that in the agreement each country could choose what to do, making it useless. Right now realistically which is the country that is helping the most? France with its full nuclear energy? The US with companies like Tesla? Boyan (the Dutch guy) with his company, who I think went to the US to start that company? Maybe, the US, with its economic freedom is helping the climate more than all the countries in Europe, boasting innovation etc., and certainly it'd be worse with the Green New Deal or idiocies like that one, all in my opinion

  4. That science IS OLD.
    It's OUT OF DATE !!

    We have moved ON from that THEORY NOW !

    Even UN, SAYS THAT.

  5. Labour wants to tackle the crisis and start a green Revolution. It's our last hope. 5 years of Johnson will set us back too far. It's now. The window is closing. It's an investment and not money thrown out of the window as the media keeps saying. I don't understand the media any longer. They keep ringing the alarm bell, but when finally someone is brave enough to act they sabotage him and the cause

  6. Having the environmental movement taken over by the loony left has pretty much killed any possibility of action on climate change.

  7. Climate emergency alarmism is a fraud and a hoax perpetrated by stooges for the globalists. The globe is cooling, not warming, due to the grand solar minimum. Global sea levels are falling not rising. CO2 is too low, not too high. The emergency alarmism is a lie. It's FAKE NEWS! If you are interested in learning: Climate Carbon and Weather

  8. Overtime everything changes the planets isn't immune to that change why dont you think dinosaurs exsist anymore oh wait that right the evironment changed

  9. Calm yourselves down. The world is definitely not going to end and there is NO crisis.

    Again we start with the false authority of the imagined consensus then linking to CO2 production, and then accusations of corruption and slurs.

    Why are these people so frightened of the actual science? Why are we continually listening to these doom mongers?

    We need to democratically destroy all institutes that continue to breathe life into this doomsday cult.

  10. The parallels are intriguing: general silence/denial on the part of the Left viz Demographic Change (aka "Great Replacement") and general silence/denial on the part of the Right viz Climate Change.

    Right-wingers expect people, somehow, not to notice increasingly extreme weather, gradual ecological disruption, etc. Left-wingers expect people not to notice increasingly abundant melanin, varied languages & culture, etc.

    Everybody's lying, everybody knows that everybody's lying, and nobody wants to make the tactical error of being the first to admit to having so nakedly lied.

    Each side apparently understands that the other is telling the truth (though perhaps, exaggerating it a bit) and is preparing accordingly to (continue to) benefit from the Change.

    Hmm. 🤔

  11. I prefer a warmer earth, the tropics won't heat up due to humidity and cloud cover. But here in Australia we love a warmer earth. Plants grow better and we get more rainfall.

  12. Life flourished in the Jurassic period when co2 levels were 1500 to 2000 ppm. I say bring it on but of couse get rid of sulphur in power plants and lead in petrol and remove plastics from oceans.

  13. I'm tired of climate alarmists lying. The incidences of extreme weather has been declining over this century. More people are above the poverty line than ever before. More people are living longer, healthier lives than ever before. Less animals are going extinct compared to rates we have seen in the past century. We are seeing an exponential growth in technological innovation that is enabling us to have the capability of producing renewable energy and being more efficient in the production of goods that have less impact on the environment.
    The climate alarmists want you to believe the world is going to end because they want to rush you into an economic policy that flips society on its head. Not only that, but they want us to rely on infrastructure concepts, social models and energy technologies that either aren't robust to support the economy or don't even exist yet. The Green New Deal was a socialists wet dream however if it were enacted, it would have sent us into a long lasting depression and virtually perpetual national debt.

  14. All rhetoric, no evidence. Media should employ a few engineers and scientists. Jounos spend their uni days loathing the people who know about this stuff.

  15. The problem is that the legacy power structures we have now have never been used to tackle the issues the effects of which are stretched out to decades. Politicians can't be bothered with something that takes longer than an election cycle to come to fruition.

  16. Because scientists don’t agree on the nature, extent, and causes of climate change. And those who disagree are publicly shamed, leading to more doubt. There’s no real conversation about climate change. Only shaming in the most unhealthy of ways.

  17. Perhap,s because summers were hotter and winters colder in…….medieval times? Climate change is yet another con, a distraction from our liberal elite systems seeking to usurp the old legacy establishment systems. Scientists in medievalists times and the leading establishment systems pricked witches with pins and still arrogantly believed they knew what was best for the average Joe and janet. Sound familiar?
    I must say I find the FT'S foray into the brave new world of social media YouTube always amusing.

  18. The climate is ALWAYS changing. Human activity has almost zero per cent effect on it. The powers that be, (The real masters, not the puppets), want to fool people into believing the end is nigh. They will use this fear to bring in a whole new range of taxes and price hikes. They will use this fear to restrict our freedom of movement. They will use this fear to bring in new laws to further suppress of freedom of speech.They will use this fear to tighten their grip even harder on their mind controlled slaves (you).
    Worst of all, they will use this fear to make people believe this is all a wonderful thing and is all for our own good. If you are still capable, WAKE UP!

  19. That's because they see through the smoke screen of polical correctness that encourages poor economic policies and outcomes.

  20. Ok so as you can'ty be clear i'll ex^plain simply, Why are world leaders in denial ? Because when you people will finally realise we are all screwed, you wont go to work anymore. That's it ! End of the story ! And if ever world leaders indeed said and acknoledge the importance of changes to come, then it will be third World War, as the futur will become clear : "Only few will survive the climate changes in the 50 coming years, so lets strike first.." will think the incredible Geniuses like Trump, Kim, Xi, Poutine, etc… And in fact, they did strike. You think Russia watched Siberia burning not knowing what to expect then? C'mon …

  21. Once again a very shallow and biased reporting. It’s not only world leaders who are saying there’s no climate change caused specifically by carbon-dioxide emissions, anyone with internet access is prone to find many scientists to say so, some of which left the international climate panel exactly on the account of certain political preferences getting in the way of pure research. There’s no doubt about climate change in itself – once all you have to do is measure the temperatures – but certainly the fact that humans are entirely responsible for it, or even in any relevant way, is evidently disputed among scientists. There are not only solar cycle explanations which haven’t thus far been rebutted, but the fundamental doubt about the emissions originated in human activities vis-à-vis all other sources of greenhouse gases. The effectiveness of the distinction by means of carbon-14 screening has been challenged by the successive absurd and failed predictions about melting polar caps and the sea level. Of course the mainstream activists will hold mathematical glitches for that, even though it’s hardly the case. It’s very bad journalism to say that politicians are “paid” to deny man-enhanced global warming when there are many politicians who, in the very same fashion, get elected exactly because they defend any apocalyptical theories concerning environmental issues. Anyone who’s familiar with the scientific debate will notice that the uncertainties end up being swallowed by political preferences which have driven environmental neomalthusian studies since the 1970’s, afterall no one wants to worsen the situation and it is commonplace that capitalism can find other solutions at some cost. That cost, however, is far from small and the perspectives of problem-solving are far from realistic, it being much more likely that greenhouse effect will be replaced by some other environmental theory in the long run. It’s understandable that politicians and layman in general have certain preferences – not for scientists, not for journalists. It only drives us further away from any effective solution of the real problems…

  22. Why the ''F''or how is Donald Trump responsible when you see China or India swimming in celestial filth c'mon ,is his orange hair generating heat

  23. Why is anyone in denial about climate change? Because it's pseudoscience. It's a hoax. It's not real. Debate me on the science. I dare you.

  24. When at 19 seconds in she claims this "overwhelming consensus", I switched off and thumbed down.
    Disagree ? Then show me the list of who are this "overwhelming consensus". No list ? Then there is no consensus.

  25. And why is America against the world? Because the accord requires signatories to give wealth to end "climate change". Now the biggest violators and the producers of most of the "climate change" are not signatories to the agreement, and a great number of signatories have no money to contribute to the problem. It is, in essence is a slush fund for poor countries to modernize.

    We, who are not naive, know the administrators of the wealth distribution for climate change will no doubt siphon off money for whatever purpose they desire. So, Trump and America are not going to give sovereign wealth to people who cannot on their own provide solutions and have, up to this point, shown no inclination to even show what they will do with the money.

    So, we got these people, all fighting for climate change" with the fervent belief that the Paris Accords are the solution to the "climate change" problem. In one breath you are saying the statistics produced, sort of, put doubt on this supposed "climate change" problem, but essentially, if you choose to disbelieve that there is a problem, you are wrong.

    Not only does climate change exist, it is a dire problem and humanity today is running out of time. Wild fires here, floods there, hurricanes, tornadoes, and all kinds of natural disasters aren't really natural disasters! The Paris Accord is the solution to these natural occurring events.

    Real quick. I have been told since childhood that the Amazon rain forest is responsible for much of the climate formation around the world. Yet the forest is burning in Brazil and what is being done. Much forest has been burned and that is done, that will change the climate for a very long time, as a piece of Earth, has changed forever. How will America paying billions as a result of the Paris Accords, bring the forest back in our life times?

    I support the POTUS decision, as I believe, the Paris Accord cannot be trusted. There are simply to many crooks and all they want, all they need, is to get their hands on a lot of money to get those materiel luxuries they salivate for every second of their lives. Make no mistake, your seeming conviction, can no longer shroud the knowledge, that most high level "leaders" and politicians are no good, they are crooks, waiting for the opportunity to take a payment and not get caught.

    The Paris Accord cannot be trusted and the POTUS of America knows this, and has vowed that America won't be ripped off by a phony accord, that in essence, will not amount to a hill of beans when the major violators will do nothing to help.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *