The Joys of Playing Climate Whack-A-Mole
Dealing with alarmist claims is like playing whack-a-mole. Every time you beat down one bogeyman, another one pops up in another field, and later the first one returns, needing to be confronted again. I have been playing Climate Whack-A-Mole for a while, and if you are interested, there are some hammers supplied below.
The alarmist methodology is repetitive, only the subject changes. First, create a computer model, purporting to be a physical or statistical representation of the real world. Then play with the parameters until fears are supported by the model outputs. Disregard or discount divergences from empirical observations. This pattern is described in more detail at Chameleon Climate Models
A series of posts here apply reality filters to attest climate models. The first was Temperatures According to Climate Models where both hindcasting and forecasting were seen to be flawed.
Others in the Series are:
Sea Level Rise: Just the Facts
Data vs. Models #1: Arctic Warming
Data vs. Models #2: Droughts and Floods
Data vs. Models #4: Climates Changing
Climates Don’t Start Wars, People Do
Beware getting sucked into any model, climate or otherwise.
Science Matters 
Well done. There are a wide range of other areas where the false claims of those who believe that humans are causing catastrophic global warming pop up like mushrooms after a rain in the forest. They constantly make exaggerated claims about whether GHG emissions can be drastically reduced with current technologies and within short times frames. They believe that technological breakthroughs will happen in a wide range of areas overnight, all conveniently on the side of reducing energy consumption or reducing the cost of non-hydrocarbon energy sources. They make comically exaggerated estimates of the time it will take to move a new technology from the laboratory to the market and of the speed with which new technologies can penetrate the market. They completely ignore price considerations. They assume that governments can and will provide massive subsidies to non-economic energy sources indefinitely. They assume that immensely expensive infrastructure can be replaced by even more expensive infrastructure. They assume that there is an infinite amount of money available to serve their cause. They refuse to believe that consumers and voters will resist when they have their choices taken away. Every time I have ever written an article or comment showing how exaggerated the alarmists’ view are, up pops another claim. I think they adhere to the propaganda theories of Dr. Goebbels, i.e. that it does not matter how big a lie one tells, it only matters that one retells it a hundred thousand times until those who who not know the truth accept the lie.
LikeLike
Good summary. You have listed a whole set of assumptions so contrary to life as most of us know it, that they add up to an alternate reality. What do you think lies at the root of such wishful thinking? (I heard today on the radio a psychologist who figures today’s permissive parents have fostered a generation of Peter Pans.)
LikeLike