Personally I think if China and other AES states agree with this, we should join in as well. Right now I read these articles with healthy scepticism and I am curious on your views. These are the ones that I found interesting. Russia may present an alternate take this December, an interesting time to be alive.

https://techstartups.com/2023/08/31/over-1600-international-scientists-sign-no-climate-emergency-declaration-dismissed-the-existence-of-a-climate-crisis/

Edit: I shouldn’t have started with such a hollow article. The dismissal of increased natural disasters like hurricanes, floods, and droughts due to warming is not something I support. Here’s something better that shows that the current model fails to explain the strong cooling trend in the Southern Ocean and East Pacific.

https://thebulletin.org/2022/12/whats-wrong-with-these-climate-models/

Take, for example, ocean warming. Despite criticisms from climate change skeptics, global climate models have accurately predicted rising average sea surface temperatures, which are extremely important to predicting the intensity of climate change. But observations in recent decades show that changes in sea surface temperatures vary greatly by region. That geographic variation suggests that end of century global warming may be less severe than most climate models suggest. These observations do not invalidate climate modeling, but they do highlight the importance of regular comparisons between climate models and the real-world observations they aspire to reflect.

She adds that observed trends show a strong cooling trend in the Eastern Pacific and Southern Ocean, which goes against what the models predicted.

https://www.voltairenet.org/article219438.html

^ Explains that the Russian Academy of Sciences has a different account on climate change that will be presented this year. The IPCC has a monopoly on climate science, the IPCC was founded by Thatcher as a reaction to striking coal workers and is a political organization.

https://www.voltairenet.org/article163379.html Ecology of war

https://www.voltairenet.org/article164791.html Market ecology

https://www.voltairenet.org/article164792.html Financial ecology

  • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    I am not convinced at all by the voltairenet article. The whole basis of it is a translated telegram post of a study that has not been scrutinized. Either way it is very simple to find out whether the author is in over his head or not. When the next COO happens, we can see for ourselves whether Russian delegates put this theory forward and whether it causes a political split as the author puts its.

    Regardless the wording of the translation is very vague. “Main cause of local climate catastrophes”. It is not clear at all to what extent the author is trying to discredit anthropogenic greenhouse gas emmission.

    If you care for my opinion then I think you are mindbending incomplete information to conform to a bias that you have about the causes of climate change or maybe its existence. I am not an expert on this topic and I have my own biases but neither are voltairenet and especially CLINT. I’ll stick to the currently understood model of climate change until the consensus changes.