One of our complaints about global warming alarmism here at CDN is that unlike normal science, climate science rarely puts forward testable predictions ahead of time against which we can measure the predictive power of its theories. For instance all kinds of people made a giant hoo-hah out of unusual warmth in 2023 after it happened. But how many of them told us in 2022 that 2023 would break the trend line? What have they ventured about 2024? And here we won’t even get into their citing the growing damage from a growing number of increasingly severe weather events that they not only didn’t predict in any precise and verifiable way but when it didn’t even happen they just claimed it did anyway. Or that António Guterres did not predict that the gates of hell would open beforehand and specify the time and place, he only pounced afterward. No. Wait. He made it up. Instead we’re going to thank StarInsider for a feature “Cities that could disappear by 2030 due to rising sea levels” including Venice, Savannah and Nagoya. And we’re going to put forward a duelling counter-prediction: not one city on their list will disappear.
We realize some readers will predict, or merely request, that StarInsider disappear from our newsletter. But we think it is important to discuss how climate change is presented in popular culture. And this story was peddled on MSN so it’s not exactly fringe. Moreover “reputable” alarmists do not speak up against this kind of vapid fearmongering and somebody has to.
We’re also going to admit that we’ve gone out on a bit of a limb here because their complete list of cities that “might” go gurgle whoosh consists of New Orleans, Basra, Ho Chi Minh City, Amsterdam, Savannah, Kolkata, Nagoya, Malé (Maldives), Port Said, Venice, Bangkok, Khulna, Georgetown (Guyana), Dandong and Banjarmasin. And let’s be frank: the capacity of local and indeed national authorities in many of these places to bungle land use planning, infrastructure maintenance and every other public duty spectacularly is enormous. (Including, demonstrably, New Orleans.) And if any of these cities fails to handle flooding from whatever source from it always having happened to pumping out groundwater to paving over the drainage basin, it will be blamed on climate change and not just by tabloids.
Another story on this nonsensical prediction warns of the imminent inundation of Georgetown because, it quotes the underlying report, “From 1951 to 1979, sea level off Guyana’s coast rose at a rate of some five times the global average (0.4 inch, or 10.2 millimetres per year)”. After which faster-than-global-average claim you don’t need to be told that the publication in question is based in Guyana and you will not be told how the sea could be rising faster there than in, say, Venezuela or Suriname. Though you will be told that:
“for centuries Guyana’s capital, Georgetown, has relied on sea walls – or, more accurately, one gigantic, 280-mile long sea wall, for protection. The sea walls is Georgetown’s main defence because most of the coastline is between 0.5 and one metre below high tide.”
For which we definitely blame late 20th-century warming.
Still, here’s our prediction. Not one of those cities, not even Georgetown, will be washed away in the next seven years. Not one. (And while Australian PM Albanese gets virtue-signaling points for offering residents of Tuvalu “climate visas”, their nation won’t go under either.) Oh, and we also predict that in 2030 their imminent demise will again be predicted within a decade.
P.S. Something called Dailymotion has a guy lying on the rug of his flooded living room to try to persuade us that Mexico City, Jakarta, Houston and Tianjin “could be under water by 2050”. It’s something to do with settled science. And “Love Exploring” tells us to hate exploring because Buckingham Palace will be an island “in the event of 3°C (5.4°F) warming” along with the Pentagon, the Cathedral of Our Lady in Antwerp blah blah blah splash splash splash. And Lovefood tells us climate change, with or without flooding leading to hydroponics, will wipe out bananas, almonds, blueberries and, what’s this? Also broccoli. So it’s not all bad.
P.P.S. Speaking of predictions, back in September Reuters “Sustainable Switch” unaccountably declared that “With four months left in 2023, this year is so far the second-hottest on record, only marginally behind 2016, according to data from the European Union Climate Change Service, Copernicus” rather than the de rigeur hottest ever waaah waaah waaah, and added that:
“‘Global temperature records continue to tumble in 2023,’ Copernicus deputy head Samantha Burgess said. ‘The scientific evidence is overwhelming, we will continue to see more climate records and more intense and frequent extreme weather events impacting society and ecosystems, until we stop emitting greenhouse gasses,’ Burgess said.”
Now “more climate records” is kind of vague and invites post hoc ambulance-chasing. But if she means 2024 will be hotter than 2023, well, we’ll see. And if it’s not?