It’s already impacted us economically. Mainly because the government has imposed regulations purporting to prevent climate change and the government has spent so much money studying climate change.
Send in the clowns.
If we go back instead of forwards, and assume we get all the weather events we already recorded in the past two centuries, who’s to say the unknown events of the next two centuries will be more of a challenge to the economy?
Because what this dire prediction implies is that the future will be worse than all of those events, including the 1930s dust bowls, major hurricanes that destroyed cities and killed thousands, killer tornado outbreaks, crippling blizzards, huge floods etc. As to wildfires, this is not really a weather prediction question so much as a planning issue, wildfires are going to happen no matter what the climate does, but we can plan to mitigate them (not prevent them from starting in some cases).
The only way to judge these forecasts is to assume a greater impact due to population growth and test out whether we get that greater impact.
The “science” is really junk science, it takes a political agenda and manufactures a phoney science to push that agenda. My guess is that we won’t see anything worse than what we saw in the past two centuries, on a prorated basis every 20 or 30 years going forward. Some of these scientists and a lot of the younger people who listen to them seem to be either unaware or are covering up the fact that huge impact weather events have happened in the past.
I challenge them to show between now and 2118 how many of these extremes are even matched, let alone surpassed:
— the 1936 heat waves
— the 1925 and 1974 great tornado outbreaks
— major hurricane landfalls with death tolls over 1,000
— huge snowfalls such as Blizzard of 78
— flooding on a scale of 1929 Mississippi River
and if we don’t exceed at least some of these, then
THE THEORY IS WRONG (sorry, that’s how science works)