"We're all going to have to be brief." - Al Gore

Climate disasters are growing in frequency, intensity and cost due to human-driven climate change, with 2025 ranking among the hottest years on record and featuring 23 distinct billion-dollar weather events in the US.

Same old Faux.

Al Gore is the antichrist and there's still plenty of petroleum crude to burn.

And climate science is the profane work of anti-social heretics, who should be tied to a post, amidst a pile of worn out tyres, then doused in petrol and burned to death.

There is plenty of of crude oil to burn till it runs out and we don’t have a million years to replenish the supply.

 with 2025 ranking among the hottest years on record

From an argument I made in a fiction novel I wrote recently [located on France, and with French characters], but my fiction contains a lot of truth, just to keep readers on their toes. The timing within the novel on the last quote is in 2021:

"I delayed telling Toulon that the Earth could not sustain a singular, ideal climate within a range of 1.5° C worldwide where it would never rain until after sundown, July and August could not be too hot, and there was a legal limit to the snow in his imagined Camelot. I did tell Mado, and she, again, gave me stern warning to never tell it to Toulon."

and:

"... what’s a standard temperature of the Earth, as if it had a single climate to measure it, and we are back to Camelot?"

and

" [Toulon said] "We are losing cash just as the real climate crisis is expanding. Last year was among the ten highest global average temperatures of all time.” Toulon was near panic.

“You mean on record,” I challenged. “A record that is… how long since these records by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the U.S. have been kept?”

“Uh…”

“Since 1970,” I answered for him. “Fifty-one years, Jean-Loup. That’s just a blink in geologic time. Less. And your top ten? A shorter blink. I’ve seen the same data from NOAA from 1997, just released in last summer’s annual report, a 23-year record. The top ten are not even consecutive, as, by all the talk, I would expect as evidence of a trend of rising temperatures. The total spread of the top 10 hottest years on record are actually from 1998 to now, and miss a total of 11 years of that total 23 years that are not in the top 10. When we miss 50% of a total of 23 years that do not count in the top 10 highest temperature years; that is not called a trend; that’s normal variation. To establish a trend, statistical data analysis needs to establish at least 90% of the data at high temperature, and reach a data confidence level of 95% - meaning 20.9 of 23 must be higher temperature years.” The NOAA data has only 12 of 23 at high temperature."

OK, off the soap box, but the data I present in this series of quotes from my novel is real data from NOAA, and I footnoted the sources. This "crisis" is non-existent, and not even totally man's fault. We have had climates of worse ranges of temperature than we have now, and the planet survived. We happen to currently be in an ice age, but all ice ages of Earth [most last about 100,000 years] have had warming trends in them, just like now, and virtually all past ice ages occurred before man was on Earth. Oops.

Climate Change is driving global economic damages into the hundreds of billions annually, With 2025 seeing top-10 disasters costing 120 billion in losses and 2024 setting records. These costs stems from increasing wildfires, floods and storms , with annual damages expected to hit 1.3 trillion globally by 2050.

And yet, the planet is experienced with damage of much higher frequency and severity in its 4B years history, and has survived them all, to date. Survival by ancient mammals with the same anatomical/biological systems man has today, and yet they survived, as I said. "ClimateChange" is nothing but a money grab from those having it and willing to buy into the nonsense sold by theorists of a "science" that has been around for less than 200 years, combating science of thousands of years of physics, geology, physiology, mathematics, astronomy, and so on. I believe the latter guys. The former are still in school, dealing with their theories and little fact.

I ask, again [still]: "... what’s a standard temperature of the Earth, as if it had a single climate to measure it?" And do we even measure around the world with the same tools, measurement techniques, and demands of accuracy, to achieve reliable results. The answer, I know by personal observation and experience with measurement tools and their applications [and I've been in 30 countries around the world to do this over 20-odd years] is NO. Standardization of measurement is the greatest flaw/thorm in the side of climate change theory. The "science" simply lacks experience. Time passing, they should acquire it, but, in the meantime... let's keep a level head on our shoulders and stop denying that other sciences have better, more complete, and accurate knowledge. One cardinal fact out of those sciences: climate changes; always has, always will, regardless of us. Full stop.

Faux is old, older than me and still lives the post war American dream...He is unlikely to change his spots now...And would rather bury his head in the sand....And for sure, if he is lucky he will be able to live the rest of his life in comfort...Who can blame him, it's the dream he was sold as a kid, and the dream he bought into.

And yes, we and other species will adapt to a changing World, and survive for as long as our fragile ecosystem allows.

Adaptation isn’t automatic; civilizations fail more often than they adapt. Survival is selective, not guaranteed.

Saying “we’ll adapt” skips the question of who pays the cost of adaptation. Historically, it’s the poor and politically weak.

Humans adapt to incentives faster than to environments; bad incentives produce bad adaptations.

Survival of a species doesn’t equal survival of a society; many societies vanished while humans persisted.

Ecosystems don’t compromise; politicians do, and when they do, they usually compromise reality for their own survival, not the species.

Past adaptation often followed catastrophic failure, not foresight; waiting around for adaptation to occur is asking for catastrophe.

"We will adapt” is a prediction, not a plan. Confusing the two is how disasters repeat.

Adaptation requires surplus; impoverishing societies in the name of adaptation reduces their ability to adapt.

Nature doesn’t reward good intentions; it rewards accurate understanding of tradeoffs.

History shows that groups of people who assume the inevitability of survival are usually the very ones least prepared to survive.

“Fragile ecosystem” is a political slogan, not an analysis. Nature has survived ice ages, asteroid impacts, and mass extinctions. What’s fragile is the human understanding of the relative scale and scope. Calling ecosystems ‘fragile’ confuses resilience with comfort. What’s really being protected is our preferred way of living, not nature itself.

I noticed he is not willing to change his mind on fossil fuel depletion or climate change. At his age they should be of little concern him because they are decades away.

Yes, but I do also try and think more outside the comfortable or not so comfortable human box.

The Earth and it's ecosystems is universally fragile by default, irrespective of human actions.

But for as long as conditions continue to facilitate life in some way, living organisms are likely to persist in some form...Such is the fundamental basis of life and adaptation. Even if that means retrograde adaptation in terms of loss of intellect and knowledge...Wherein "cost" is irrelevant

Exactly.

And who are we to deny him his brief moment in time and the relative comfort that it affords him.

Cost is always relevant. Our own solar system is littered with a very real and very ignored cosmic graveyard of actual fragile ecosystems, and not those conveniently politically created. Physics doesn’t care about narratives, and space is the ultimate cost auditor. Elon Musk is about to discover that difference firsthand.

Undeniably.

China manufactures more windmills and solar panels than any country in the world. Their green solution could save the world.

Yes, perhaps we should now look to China for global stability.

Canada has already reached out to China. Good start.