The Welcome Demise of Climate Change Catastrophism

Is the American Left finally waking up from its decades-long climate catastrophism stupor? For years, climate alarmism has reigned as political catechism: The planet is burning, and only drastic action — deindustrialization, draconian regulation, even ceasing childbearing — could forestall certain apocalypse. Now, at least some signs are emerging that both the broader public and leading liberal voices may be recoiling from the doom and gloom.

*** The moral panic is slowly evaporating. Millions of Americans may still believe warming exists, but far fewer view it as an imminent existential threat — let alone embrace sweeping upheavals in energy policy and personal lifestyle.

The unraveling of climate catastrophism got another jolt recently with the formal retraction of a high-profile 2024 study published in the journal Nature. That study — which had predicted a calamitous 62 percent decline in global economic output by 2100 if carbon emissions were not sufficiently reduced — was widely cited by transnational bodies and progressive political activists alike as justification for the pursuit of aggressive decarbonization. But the authors withdrew the paper after peer reviewers discovered that flawed data had skewed the result. Without that data, the projected decline in output collapses dramatically to around 23 percent. Oops.

The climate alarm machine — powered by the twin engines of moral panic and groupthink homogeneity — is sputtering. When the public grows skeptical, when billionaire techno-philanthropists question the prevailing consensus, and when supposedly mainstream scientific projections reverse course, that’s a sign that the days of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth propaganda documentary and John Kerry’s “special presidential envoy for climate” globe-trotting vanity gig are officially over.

Behold the immediate double down of climate fear porn. https://hoodline.com/2025/12/noaa-sea-level-rise-map-shows-which-bay-area-blocks-go-under-first/

noaa-sea-level-rise-map-shows-which-bay-area-blocks-go-under-first

/ The headline hardly matches the article weasel word smithing.. / ...NOAA's latest 10-foot sea level "scenario"... ...wide bands of the Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific coasts slip under........ " simulated"...... ... water..... ...NOAA's Sea Level Rise Viewer lets users dial up..... " scenarios"..... , from current high tide to 10 feet above it, then layer on photo... " simulations", .... ...."estimated".... .. water depths... . ....Randall Parkinson, a coastal geologist and research associate professor at Florida International University, described a 10-foot rise in sea level as "catastrophic" in comments to Newsweek. He said a seven-foot rise by 2100 is...... ... "very likely,"..... .... and that a 10-foot rise would..... "surely" ....follow ..... ....are ..... "projected".... . to face coastal flooding.... ...The .... ..."analysis"... ... shows the threat... ..resulting harms are..... .." likely"..... .. ... to fall hardest on low-income communities and neighborhoods of color, .... .. .. the Bay Area, the 10-foot...... .." scenario"... .... pulls low-lying corridors, tidal marshes and filled former tidelands into the water, .... ...."suggesting"...... ... flooded streets .... ....These neighborhood-scale..... .." scenarios".... ... show up in NOAA's mapping tools and associated technical documentation and are echoed in Parkinson's research summary at Florida International University. ...... Confronted with maps like these, city and county officials face a blunt menu of choices: build up defenses, harden and retrofit critical infrastructure, or pursue some form of managed retreat that can include voluntary property buyouts. Federal hazard-mitigation dollars can help pay for buyouts in flood-prone areas, .. .....Several states and local governments are now studying voluntary retreat options and equity-focused frameworks as part of long-range resilience plans. Overviews of property buyouts and equity considerations are compiled by Pew, and local coverage of pilot efforts is available from WBUR... . ....Taken together, NOAA's visualizations and the peer-reviewed work on hazardous facilities make one thing uncomfortably clear: the areas at risk are largely known, and choices about whether to defend, retrofit or retreat will decide who bears the costs...... / The comments below article are replete with CCDS ( Climate Change Delusion Syndrome /-)

I am always skeptical when I see terms like “experts say” or “latest research proves”. I have first learned to wonder who paid for the study and how do they profit.

Turn a blank sheet of paper sideways. On the left write “weather event” in small letters, draw a circle around the words, and then draw a small arrow pointing to the right side. On the far right, write the words "manmade climate change” in small letters, draw a circle around the words, and then draw a small arrow pointing to the circle.

Is there not a large blank space in the middle? Have you ever seen a story which fills in this area? Have you ever read a story that uses words like sun and ocean, which are the two enormous engines determining temperature? Cannot the stories that you have seen be inserted into one or the other circles? For example consider the research of Michael Mann, et al enshrining to this day his speculation the results were “highly suggestive of man-made global warming” and leading to breathtaking fantasies freed from the rigors of scientific standards.

I will submit there is no evidence of man-made global warming because no adherent to the popular mythology will acknowledge the existence of the sun and oceans. All I have ever seen are fraudulent to accurate comments on weather events or physical phenomenon involving temperature followed by an assertion man-made global warming is the cause. I have yet to find any article which attempts to measure the influence of the sun and ocean and then ascribes an increment to human activity.

The crazies in blue states are doubling down on Climate Change(tm).

Colorado just required all Coloradans to get rid of natural gas heat and replace it with electric. Electric is 4x as expensive AND houses with gas boilers for hot water heating (many many Coloradans) will have to completely duct their homes, which were never designed for ducting. Aside from the extra money going to the utility company, that will be a 50-100 K cost for many homes to duct them.

They are not backing down one tiny bit.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.