Jessica Weinkle, Associate Professor at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, says the rationale of the media coverage on climate change and its consequences often leaves much to be desired. She cites examples of how natural disasters and extreme weather events have been communicated. Following the news, one might get the impression that the increase in extreme weather events is an undeniable fact. The fact that the damage caused by natural disasters, measured in monetary terms, has increased significantly is often offered as proof of this.
However, Weinkle explains that this is a little misleading. Of course, weather events such as hurricanes or floods caused by heavy precipitation are a major problem for a society experiencing them. However, it is misleading to attribute the associated material losses, which have increased over time, necessarily to climate change. “There’s two separate issues in that. There’s the geophysical event, and then there’s the social impact. And you might measure the social impact by cost,” Weinkle explains. This social impact, or the financial damage associated with these events, which increases over time, is importantly linked to the state of the society as a whole, she says. For example, one would have to examine how many houses are there and how much could their location be potentially affected by a disastrous event. Or how many cars would be damaged by extreme weather conditions? What kind of property is there in those houses and cars that could potentially be destroyed? It is logical that if extreme weather destroys property in, say, the United States, the amount of property destroyed and hence the financial cost of the event would be significantly greater than in a poorer country.
Inflation is another separate issue. If economic losses are increasing nominally over time, this does not automatically mean that the situation in general has gotten any worse, since the depreciation of money or inflation has to be taken into account as well.
Extreme weather events are not on the increase
And if we do take these things into account, can we say that extreme weather events have become more frequent, and more powerful and that the associated losses are increasing? “If you adjust disaster losses or economic losses from these events for changes in inflation over time, changes in population and changes in wealth, the trend is minimised. There’s no trend afterwards,” Weinkle says. In fact, she adds, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) does not detect increasing trends in the types of extreme weather events that are the leading causes of disaster losses. The finding is either an inability to detect trends or the message is so nuanced that it is of little practical meaning for understanding societal experiences with disasters.
But at the same time, Weinkle argues, it doesn’t even matter if climate change is causing slightly more heatwaves in some regions and a bit more rainfall in others. She says that linking problems to climate change does not help to create any practical solutions needed to deal with extreme weather events. She cites the example of wildfires in the U.S. state of California. Because it is hot and dry in California, the risk of wildfires is always high. This is regardless of whether or not climate change has made California a little drier. At the same time, the fact is that forest management in California has been very poor for a long time. “And so now when we have fires, they’re very bad. They’re big. But there are all sorts of reasons for them because of the policy choices that we’ve had in the past,” Weinkle explains. “So climate change makes it perhaps a bit drier, perhaps a bit hotter there. But the fires would be an issue still. They’re not necessarily more of an issue because of the overall warming,” she adds, noting that the same logic can be applied to the analysis of all other extreme weather events.
What would probably help best are practical steps, and the wealthier the society is, the easier it would be to take them. If, on the one hand, more wealth means greater potential damage from extreme weather events, on the other hand, it makes society more resilient to extreme weather. “These disaster events are incredibly challenging for individuals, communities and nations that don’t have the wealth to deal with them,” Weinkle says.
Climate science and climate industry
Losses associated with extreme weather events are just one of the topics in which Weinkle, as a scientist, has been interested in and has written extensively about. As an expert, she has also testified before the U.S. Senate on the topics of her research. Weinkle holds a PhD in Environmental Studies and is currently focusing on climate science and policy analysis and mapping conflicts of interest in the field.
It is on the conflict-of-interest front that Weinkle makes an interesting observation. One of the cornerstones of modern climate science, she says, is the “emission scenarios”, or models, that the IPCC uses as a basis for calculating the increase in the greenhouse effect and the future temperature rises. “There’s been a lot of controversy about those emissions scenarios. Not only in the extent to which they constrain the way that we understand the future, but in some of them, and the most prominent ones, being incredibly implausible, misleading,” Weinkle says.
So, according to her, the most unlikely scenarios should be discarded, but they are not. And one of the reasons they are still run is that there are commercial interests behind the retention of these models. “There is a lot of business that’s been set up on these emissions scenarios. And they work with the financial industry,” Weinkle says. She is talking about analytical firms that offer their services in assessing climate change risks. Initially used by insurance companies, these climate risk analyses based on misleading scenarios are now being sold much more widely, particularly to the financial sector. This has led to a situation where these misleading emission scenarios are already being relied on by basically the entire financial system, from central banks and insurance companies to real estate lenders who are governing mortgages. “That’s a lot of weight on the IPCC to hold on to those conceptions, because it’s holding up this entire industry that has engaged itself with the financial structures, financial institutions of the world,” Weinkle comments. “Because you have a lot of people that are deeply embedded within the IPCC, also consulting with financially oriented groups, and because the IPCC work has become embedded within and as a legitimacy for this climate analytics industry, it’s a lot of pressure to keep things the way that they are, to keep the narrative the way that it is,” Weinkle adds.
Trapped in climate anxiety
One issue that Weinkle has also analysed is the emergence of climate anxiety, particularly among young people. It is worth pointing out that for some interest groups – such as climate activists or renewable energy developers and their associated lobbyists – the widespread dissemination of messages about climate catastrophe is useful for promoting their interests and making profits.
The emergence of climate anxiety among young people is probably an inevitable consequence of our current media environment. When the media constantly talks about natural disasters and says that they are the result of man-made climate change, it is to be expected that there will be anxiety and even guilt among the population. Or even blame put on the older generation for making the wrong choices in the past. It is also understandable that this anxiety is fuelled further when prominent political figures use particularly colourful imagery to talk about climate catastrophe. For example, UN Secretary-General António Guterres recently declared that humanity is on the highway “to climate hell”.
One of the possible consequences of such messaging and this kind of framing of the whole climate issue is the traumatisation of younger people in particular. “They’re told that they are experiencing climate change through the disasters which are traumatic. Now it’s like a cascade of trauma that’s being lumped up under climate change,” Weinkle notes.
While for some people at least, climate anxiety is a logical outcome of such an environment, something else is happening as well, Weinkle says. “If you’re anxious about it, you should become more advocacy-oriented. And so it’s kind of like breeding advocacy, it’s breeding advocates,” she says, adding that she doesn’t think it’s very fair to these young activists. The point is that young people are genuinely concerned about what they see or read in the media. For example, they are surfing on their phones and are told that climate change is to blame for extreme weather conditions when in reality there is no such direct causal connection. Or they are told that we should quickly abandon fossil fuels and use only wind and solar power to save the planet, but the problems with this choice – e.g. that such electricity can only be guaranteed when the conditions are right, i.e., when the wind blows or the sun shines – are not explained to them at all. “None of them really want to see the lights turned off, right? They need their electricity, so they need to be engaged in a more pragmatic discussion about energy and how nations need energy and you need energy, and how are we going to have this cheap energy to keep you plugged in while also addressing the other problems that you’re concerned about,” Weinkle says.
In conclusion, Weinkle’s message here is that, be it energy policies, urban planning, reactions to extreme weather or something else, the approach should always be a practical one, aiming to solve the problem rather than succumbing to emotions. All in all, it does not matter whether you experience a great storm because of climate change or something else. What matters is how you can cope with it and what kind of resources you have at your disposal.
First published by Freedom Research. Subscribe here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Wow!
We have waited a long time for someone in the Commons to find the backbone to make such a profound, well-researched and much needed statement. We now need the rest to check their offices to see if their backbones are hiding in a cupboard and if so drag them out and for once put them to use.
“the benefits of the vaccine are close to non-existent.”
“It is no surprise, when there is so much control by an entity (big Pharma) that has been described as ‘psychopathic’ for its profit-making conduct, that one analysis suggests that third most common cause of death globally after heart disease and cancer is the side-effects of prescribed medications, which were mostly avoidable.”
I suppose the likelihood is that the WEF puppets will duck and dive, go AWOL and hope that this speech will be forgotten by New Year, or engineer a suitable crisis to deflect attention elsewhere but the gauntlet has been laid down.
It is very rare I say this but,
Thank you Andrew Bridgen MP.
I am very much looking forward to the naming of the BHF merd and lots of publicity shaming yet another sham charidee.
I have just had a trawl through the BHF website. Very concerned for its staff. Full stream bloody woke. Interestingly it has enjoyed a very successful Scamdemic:
I cannot find where the income came from and it appears to be hidden within “donations and legacies.” How the hell did income increase by 148% in one year? It is difficult not to conclude that the additional monies must have arrived from the usual suspects – big pharma and Lord Bill, especially as they clearly divorced themselves from proper science with their readiness to adhere to the extremely dangerous ‘safe and effective’ narrative.
What a deplorable organisation.
From the Annual Accounts 2022 (chart, page 10):
The increase in net income principally reflected the significant bounce-back in retail trading, following the enforced closure through periods of lockdown of our shops and stores for much of the prior year and a record breaking year for legacy income.
https://www.bhf.org.uk/-/media/files/what-we-do/bhf-annual-report-2022.pdf?rev=cc73d5ab18314f8aa4d14440d4c320e6&hash=EE2F84E00B356C98419E65150702D68A
Along with increasing levels of poverty forcing people who didn’t before to use charity shops (big increase locally), perhaps the unusual and unexpected [sarc] increase in cardiac deaths is reaping benefits for them…
Thanks for that.
That research must be published too.
Thankfully, it has also just gained enormous impact and credibility.
In this paranoid world in which we live (sadly), I too salute Andrew Bridgen for his courage … but also feel this may be the start of “The Big Reveal” – whatever that is. Anyone?
I admire your optimism, but suspect the MSN will focus on Caulfield’s rebuttal rather than the meat of Bridgen’s speech!
I am not sure “optimism” is the right word in this context. My very limited understanding of The Big Reveal is that it is part of the strategy of the Global Elites (Gates, WEF et al). In order to instil despair and begin the moves towards civil unrest, certain disclosures would be made, which would reveal the fundamental breakdown in the system… but I don’t understand any more about the strategy.
I am not sure even where I heard about The Big Reveal…
And let it not be forgotten that the constant clamour from every “opposition” party in Parliament has been for “Sooner, Harder, Longer.”
Joined by a majority, perhaps, of Tory backbenchers.
There are none of them that have not been allerted to what has been going on, by some of their own constituents.
You don’t need more than just a simple fact of conspiracy to cover-up to start investigation. if there is no link (between the jabs and heart inflammation), what’s the motive? the public has to know. Let’s hope that eventually something will come out of it
I wonder how many MPs were in the chamber to hear this speech at 7.04pm yesterday evening.
I think there were about 3. Speaks volumes, but how demoralizing is that?
I’ve let my MP know he and his colleagues missed an important speech.
Kudos to Bridgen. An excellent speech despite the House being virtually empty (natch), and a couple of other MPs concurring with various points, needs to be spread far and wise. Also worth watching is Maria Caulfield MP’s rather rushed and scripted rebuttal – a truly classic example of The Narrative’s ‘jabs saved millions of lives/safe & effective’ BS plus other outright lies. Wonder how much she got for saying it. (From 19.25.22 – end):
https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d0cc6561-6ab9-46ea-8d6d-f07ac0cf136d
I emailed him recently to express support. Imagine he feels pretty lonely. Interestingly his Wikipedia page is full of references to alleged corruption- no idea whether they are true or not and don’t care, but if true pale into insignificance compared to the Covid fraud.
you have to be courageous to go against the grain and to speak up. You have to be even more courageous to publicly admit that you were wrong. that’s why the House is almost empty.
A criminal investigation needs to be started, the offices of these institutions must be raided and incriminating materials removed and placed in the hands of independent investigators. When it is proven (as it will be) that data on the clear dangers of this poison have long been available and intentionally withheld, criminal charges must be brought against those who withheld these data – and particularly against those who signed off on and allowed continuation of the poisoning. The investigation must extend to the regulatory agencies who allowed this, with full knowledge of all the damage.
MPs must front run this – someone is going to carry the can for this, one day or another, in one form or another. The regulatory agencies, health care institutions and, of course, big p-harma itself are most at fault – hold them to account.
Many people who stopped at 2 or 3 shots thought they were okay after so many months had passed. They are now undoubtedly worrying whether they may yet join the ever-increasing group of ‘died suddenly’ ‘passed peacefully in his/her sleep’. People in this position, increasingly anxious, will also increasingly feel they have little to lose. Ignoring the elephant in the room that died suddenly of cardiac arrest is nothing other than sowing the wind…
Unfortunately, we cannot even trust our own police force to investigate – even when they are presented with irrefutible evidence. When it is demanded that they close down the vaccination centres and impound the ‘vaccines’, they protect the perpetrators and arrest those seeking to stop the harms continuing.
We have a police force???…WOW, who knew?
I believe there were just 3 people in the chamber last night. I can only conclude the following points:
Covid hypocrisy and lying by western “leaders” continues relentlessly – as the likes of Trudeau, Biden, Arden, Johnson, Dan Andrews and other double-dealing tyrants condemn Putin and Xi Jinping while their behaviour is markedly worse.
And still the dopey public, led by the nose by the likes of the BBC and Daily Mail/Telegraph, continue to fall for the scam.
This corruption will not be resolved until Bill Gates is evicted from W H O, Gavi, CEPI and all other such advocacy groups where conflicts of interest lead to fatal results for the blind presuming masses
One cheer – I’ll save the other two until the arrests start and charges are brought.
Well done Andrew Bridgen and Danny Kruger in raising this vitally important matter, not just for the UK, but around the globe.
It’s devastating what the UK Boris Johnson government unleashed upon the world when it adopted the recommendations of Neil Ferguson et al’s Imperial College Report 9 in March 2020, i.e. to suppress the virus “until a vaccine becomes available”.
Vaccines were subsequently rushed out, despite the fact the virus/disease wasn’t a serious threat to most people – how did this happen, how was a ‘vaccine solution’ evaluated and approved?
It subsequently emerged that Neil Ferguson is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, this serious conflict of interest wasn’t disclosed in Report 9.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been dominating international vaccination policy for years, and is a major funder of the World Health Organisation, as well as being instrumental in the founding of the Gavi Alliance and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation also provided funding for the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine trials.
Bill Gates was the leader of ‘the race for a coronavirus vaccine’ in 2020, see for example his GatesNotes: What you need to know about the COVID-19 vaccine, published on 30 April 2020.
Why is this software billionaire dominating international vaccination policy, and having the likes of then prime minister Boris Johnson at his beck and call?
The grossly disproportionate and ill-targeted Covid response is a diabolical shambles.
The damage wrought around the world is immense, including in my country, Australia, where millions of people have been coerced to have the Covid needles, including children. Millions of people have been mandated to have the jabs, e.g. No Jab, No Job.
Informed consent has been trashed, and personal autonomy and bodily integrity destroyed. Mandated medical interventions in a supposed free country, it’s a travesty.
This is the biggest crime of all time, bring on the investigation and the trials.
I would have thought that an NDA does not apply for the purposes of Whistleblowing when it is in the public interest.
I’ve never once caught a glimpse of my MP in the House so don’t expect he was there to hear this.
The useless great lump is still promoting the boosters, even to those who are pregnant. He reckons the unjabbed careworkers were rightfully sacked, so no chance of an apology, reinstatement or compensation from his direction. (I tried)
I look forward to his defenestration at the next election, unless he takes the coward’s way out and resigns first.
All credit to Mr Bridgen for his stance in this unpopular cause; I salute him.
Exactly the same here. Ian Liddell-Grainger, shame on him, MP for Bridgwater and West Somerset. “Useless great lump” perfectly describes him too; has completely ignored perfectly legitimate pleas to open his eyes and look more closely at all or any of this, for more than 2 years. Utter waste of space and oxygen.
Hats off to Mr Bridgen.
Thanks for printing the Bridgen speech, which I watched because the whole of it was on John Campbell’s YouTube channel as well.
I have written to my MP (Andrew Murrison), who is himself an MD, underlining the importance of Bridgen’s speech, expressing my concern and asking why none of this seems to be being investigated by our (interest-conflicted public health bodies. I shall be interested to get his reaction (if any).
So Andrew Bridgen gets it. Only another 649 MPs to go…
Christopher Chope does as well.
648…
Surely no-one is suggesting our MPs could be diverted from their duty in any way by any outside influences?
.
UK MPs defend accepting ‘lavish’ Qatari gifts before World Cup
MPs argued trips to Qatar were an opportunity to raise human rights concerns with the government.
https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-mps-defend-accepting-260000-in-qatari-gifts-before-world-cup/
.
Well done and thank you, Andrew Bridgen.
Well done Andrew Bridgen. We need a Nuremberg type trial and convictions for crimes against humanity.
Much to be wished, although I was hoping that my investment in tar and feathers futures might work out well.
Well it’s taken a very long time for any of “our” MPs to dare talk “the vaccine narrative” down and expose the corruption at the heart of Big Pharma and the National Health Bureaucracies it funds.
Are Sunak and Barclay listening?
I doubt it. They daren’t admit that the Government coerced the population to participate in a mass medical experiment and has pushed dangerous “vaccines” on people who didn’t need them and as a result has injured millions and killed thousands.
It’s mind-boggling…
There should never have been a ‘vaccine solution’ for this disease it was known from the beginning wasn’t a serious threat to most people…but at the same time the threat was beaten up to justify the ‘vaccines’.
Billions of people around the world have been deliberately misled about this virus/disease, and been set up to be exploited by the lucrative Covid industry, created out of thin air.
In Australia, millions of people have been mandated to have the jabs, e.g. No Jab, No Job. In some states such as Victoria and Western Australia, life was made very difficult for those critical thinking people who refused to consent to the jabs, being cancelled out of civil society,
It’s been the most shocking experience of my lifetime, seeing how discrimination could be so easily implemented, and for people to be manipulated to turn on each other.
Rogue governments have facilitated this most egregious assault upon the people, how do we bring them to account
“There should never have been a ‘vaccine solution’ for this disease…”
Exactly. And in those few words the whole essence of the scam and probably the greatest crime against humanity ever perpetrated is captured.
Andrew Bridgen has partially restored my faith in democracy. Hats off to you, sir.