Eric Zuesse
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Eric Zuesse (blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/)
A major report from Berkeley Earth research scientist Zeke Hausfather was published as a NYT Op-Ed on October 13th headlining “I Study Climate Change. The Data Is Telling Us Something New.” This “something new” is the most-convincing evidence yet that the many in the scientific community who have been assuming that the proper equation to model global warming is linear — increasing in a straight line from year to year — are wrong, and that, instead, during the past 15 years, the data have been making increasingly clear that the global temperature-rise is actually an exponential function, by means of which the rate-of-change accelerates each year so as to become faster and faster each year. He summarily presents this evidence there.
If what he says is correct, then this “acceleration means that the effects of climate change we are already seeing — extreme heat waves, wildfires, rainfall and sea level rise — will only grow more severe in the coming years.” He places his hopes upon increased usage of improved forms of solar and wind power; but, in my recent book, I already was assuming that it’s an exponential function, and I presented this more pessimistic statement of its implications for such non-revolutionary technological fixes or improvements:
Waiting yet longer for a technological breakthrough, such as fossil-fuels corporations have always promised will happen but nobody has ever actually delivered (and such as is exemplified here), is doomed, because if and when such a real breakthrough would occur, we’d already be too late, and the uncontrollably spiraling and accelerating feedback-loops would already be out of control even if they weren’t uncontrollable back then. We’d simply be racing, then, to catch up with — and to get ahead of — an even faster rise in global temperatures than existed at that previous time. Things get exponentially worse with each and every year of delay. Consequently, something sudden, sharp, and decisive, must happen immediately, and it can happen only by a fundamental change becoming instituted in our laws, not in our technology. The solution, if it comes, will come from government, and not even possibly come from industry (technological breakthroughs). For governments to instead wait, and to hope for a “technological breakthrough,” is simply for our planet to die. It’s to doom this planet. It’s to abandon the government’s obligation to the future (its supreme obligation). The reason why is that what’s difficult to achieve now (preventing the murder of our planet), will soon be impossible to achieve.
I have also presented my basic argument online, under the heading, “The ONLY Way That Global Warming MIGHT Be Able To Be Stopped”, which article opened: “There is only one way that might work — all others (as will be documented here) can’t even possibly work: Outlaw the purchasing of any stock or bond — any investment securities — in fossil-fuel extraction companies, such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Coal: any such company at all.” That would effectively terminate further investments in exploring for more and more fossil fuels and for increasingly efficient ways to process and market them, and it would also skyrocket R&D into potentially revolutionarily cleaner and safer forms of nuclear-energy production, such as fusion power, or, maybe, thorium, or else BREST, reactors. The IAEA has been becoming increasingly supportive of escalating global R&D into the possibility that thorium-nuclear might be a viable solution to the biggest of all energy-problems, which is the very real and now emergency threat of global burnout that fossil fuels present. But the investments that are needed into this skyrocketing thorium-nuclear R&D, a potentially revolutionary technology, can come ONLY from investors who no longer can invest in fossil fuels (and who recognize the inability of solar and wind power to replace those). Ambrose Evans-Pritchard was right when he headlined on 29 August 2010, “Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium”, but nothing was done, because Obama, like the Republican Party’s Trump, was owned by billionaires who were invested into either fossil and/or solar-based ’solutions’. And then, there’s also BREST reactors, which Russia is pioneering. These are just three nuclear-future possibilities, but whatever the future will be if it won’t be global burnout, will NOT be an existing technology. And this means that all R&D into the existing technologies must immediately stop and be invested instead into possibly revolutionary new technologies. The ONLY way to achieve that is: “Outlaw the purchasing of any stock or bond — any investment securities — in fossil-fuel extraction companies.”
Right now, a huge problem is that virtually all of the developing world is located in the parts of our planet that are OUTSIDE the developed West, and THOSE underdeveloped nations are precisely the ones that will be suffering the most from global burnout. Here is an informative ranking (as-of 13 October 2023), from Notre Dame University, of the national vulnerability to global warming (ultimately could become burnout), starting with the least vulnerable nation, which today is #1 Switzerland, all the way to #185 Somalia, which is the most vulnerable:
Vulnerability rankings | ND-GAIN Index
The ND-GAIN Country Index, a project of the University of Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative (ND-GAIN), summarizes a country’s Vulnerability to climate change and other global challenges on the one hand and its Readiness to improve resilience on the other hand.
https://web.archive.org/web/20231013184634/https://gain-new.crc.nd.edu/ranking/vulnerability
https://archive.ph/98r97 on 13 October 2023
VULNERABILITY (as measured on 13 October 2023) (U.S-&-Allied + Russia & China are the least vulnerable, scoring below 0.400; southern hemisphere except Australia & N.Z. are the most vulnerable, above 0.400; but these scores change as new studies become published):
Country Rank
Country Income group
Country Score (from 0.244 the least vulnerable, to 0.678 the most vulnerable
1
Switzerland
Upper
0.244
2
Norway
Upper
0.262
3
Czech Republic
Upper
0.268
4
Finland
Upper
0.276
5
United Kingdom
Upper
0.283
6
Germany
Upper
0.287
7
Austria
Upper
0.288
7
Canada
Upper
0.288
9
New Zealand
Upper
0.294
10
Sweden
Upper
0.296
11
Ireland
Upper
0.298
12
Spain
Upper
0.300
13
Luxembourg
Upper
0.302
14
France
Upper
0.303
15
Slovenia
Upper
0.304
16
Israel
Upper
0.305
17
Iceland
Upper
0.308
18
United States
Upper
0.309
19
Australia
Upper
0.312
20
Poland
Upper
0.313
21
Portugal
Upper
0.321
22
Kazakhstan
Upper middle
0.322
23
Italy
Upper
0.326
23
Russian Federation
Upper
0.326
25
Belgium
Upper
0.327
26
Greece
Upper middle
0.329
27
Chile
Upper middle
0.330
28
Kyrgyzstan
Low
0.331
29
Belarus
Upper middle
0.332
30
Estonia
Upper
0.340
30
Malta
Upper
0.340
32
Denmark
Upper
0.341
33
Bulgaria
Upper middle
0.342
34
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Upper middle
0.348
34
Hungary
Upper
0.348
36
Turkmenistan
Upper middle
0.349
37
Slovakia
Upper
0.350
38
Turkey
Upper middle
0.353
39
Netherlands
Upper
0.355
40
Kuwait
Upper
0.356
41
Cyprus
Upper
0.360
42
Ukraine
Lower middle
0.363
43
Uzbekistan
Lower middle
0.364
44
Latvia
Upper
0.365
44
Trinidad & Tobago
Upper middle
0.365
46
Qatar
Upper
0.366
47
Montenegro
Upper middle
0.367
48
Armenia
Upper middle
0.368
49
Jordan
Lower middle
0.369
49
Malaysia
Upper middle
0.369
51
Republic of Korea
Upper
0.370
51
Lithuania
Upper
0.370
53
United Arab Emirates
Upper
0.371
53
Paraguay
Upper middle
0.371
55
Costa Rica
Upper middle
0.372
55
Tajikistan
Low
0.372
57
Uruguay
Upper middle
0.373
58
Brazil
Upper middle
0.374
59
Mongolia
Lower middle
0.375
59
Singapore
Upper
0.375
61
Algeria
Lower middle
0.376
62
Japan
Upper
0.378
62
Macedonia
Upper middle
0.378
64
Iran
Upper middle
0.379
64
Morocco
Lower middle
0.379
66
Croatia
Upper
0.380
66
Tunisia
Lower middle
0.380
68
Azerbaijan
Upper middle
0.382
68
Grenada
Upper middle
0.382
70
Venezuela
Upper middle
0.383
71
Argentina
Upper middle
0.384
72
Mexico
Upper middle
0.385
73
Barbados
Upper middle
0.386
74
China
Upper middle
0.387
75
South Africa
Lower middle
0.390
76
Brunei Darussalam
Upper
0.391
77
Suriname
Upper middle
0.394
78
Albania
Upper middle
0.395
79
Saint Lucia
Lower middle
0.397
79
Romania
Upper
0.397
81
Georgia
Upper middle
0.400
82
Panama
Upper middle
0.401
83
Lebanon
Lower middle
0.403
84
Saudi Arabia
Upper
0.405
85
Moldova
Upper middle
0.406
86
Equatorial Guinea
Upper middle
0.413
86
Serbia
Upper middle
0.413
88
Colombia
Upper middle
0.414
89
Oman
Upper
0.416
90
Peru
Lower middle
0.418
91
Botswana
Upper middle
0.419
92
Dominican Republic
Upper middle
0.420
92
Egypt
Lower middle
0.420
94
Libya
Upper middle
0.421
94
El Salvador
Lower middle
0.421
96
Guyana
Upper middle
0.422
97
Mauritius
Upper middle
0.426
98
Cape Verde
Lower middle
0.427
99
Cuba
NA
0.428
100
Jamaica
Lower middle
0.430
101
Guatemala
Lower middle
0.432
102
Thailand
Upper middle
0.437
103
Bahrain
Upper
0.440
103
Indonesia
Lower middle
0.440
105
Iraq
Lower middle
0.441
106
Nicaragua
Lower middle
0.442
107
Bolivia
Lower middle
0.446
108
Dominica
Lower middle
0.450
108
Gabon
Upper middle
0.450
108
Ghana
Lower middle
0.450
111
Ecuador
Lower middle
0.451
112
Bahamas
Upper
0.452
113
Honduras
Lower middle
0.454
114
Belize
Lower middle
0.455
114
Fiji
Lower middle
0.455
116
Seychelles
Upper middle
0.457
117
Laos
Lower middle
0.460
118
Cameroon
Low
0.461
118
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Upper middle
0.461
120
Syria
NA
0.462
121
Philippines
Lower middle
0.463
122
Namibia
Lower middle
0.464
123
Antigua and Barbuda
Upper middle
0.467
124
Sri Lanka
Lower middle
0.468
125
Dem. People’s Rep. of Korea
NA
0.470
126
Djibouti
Low
0.471
126
Lesotho
Low
0.471
128
Viet Nam
Lower middle
0.475
129
Swaziland
Lower middle
0.476
130
Zambia
Low
0.480
131
Palau
Upper middle
0.485
132
Cambodia
Low
0.486
132
Nigeria
Lower middle
0.486
134
Côte d’Ivoire
Lower middle
0.487
135
Nepal
Low
0.490
136
Mozambique
Low
0.493
137
Togo
Low
0.496
138
India
Lower middle
0.498
139
Timor-Leste
Lower middle
0.501
140
Myanmar
Low
0.504
140
Tanzania
Low
0.504
142
Zimbabwe
Low
0.506
143
Samoa
Lower middle
0.507
144
Angola
Lower middle
0.510
144
Kenya
Low
0.510
146
Haiti
Low
0.514
146
Sao Tome & Principe
Low
0.514
148
Bhutan
Lower middle
0.515
149
Senegal
Low
0.520
150
Comoros
Low
0.521
150
Pakistan
Lower middle
0.521
152
Congo
Low
0.525
153
Gambia
Low
0.526
154
Rwanda
Low
0.527
155
Maldives
Upper middle
0.530
156
Bangladesh
Lower middle
0.531
157
Burkina Faso
Low
0.537
158
Malawi
Low
0.542
159
Yemen
Low
0.544
160
Papua New Guinea
Low
0.546
161
Ethiopia
Low
0.547
161
Guinea
Low
0.547
163
Benin
Low
0.552
164
Vanuatu
Low
0.556
165
Madagascar
Low
0.557
165
Mauritania
Lower middle
0.557
167
Burundi
NA
0.558
168
Sierra Leone
Low
0.561
169
Dem. Rep. of the Congo
Low
0.564
170
Marshall Islands
Lower middle
0.573
171
Nauru
Lower middle
0.581
171
Uganda
Low
0.581
173
Central African Rep.
Low
0.584
174
Afghanistan
Low
0.590
175
Mali
Low
0.596
176
Solomon Islands
Low
0.599
177
Liberia
Low
0.601
178
Sudan
Low
0.604
179
Eritrea
Low
0.605
179
Tonga
Lower middle
0.605
181
Micronesia
Low
0.616
182
Guinea-Bissau
Low
0.626
183
Niger
Low
0.632
184
Chad
Low
0.652
185
Somalia
Low
0.678
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
There were no ice caps at all for most of the earth history. Life on earth was just fine.
Working on the web pays me more than $190 to $225 per hour. I learned about this activity three months ago, and since then I have earned around $23k without having any online working skills. Copy the webpage below to test it….
.
.
.
Here———————➤ https://Rb.gy/sbuq1
Life on earth was just fine when the dinosaurs roamed the planet.
I really hope you are been paid to promote this Global Cooling/Global Warming/Climate Change hoax, (like that other 6 Million hoax), as it would be absolutely tragic, if you were so gullible and naïve, that you actually believed in such laughable fairy tales!
Fairy tales, that even teenagers can decipher with some critical analysis and moderate research.
Should I believe teenagers or leading scientists?
“..leading scientists?”
Leading in what? These snake oil salesman are only leading in fraud and racketeering.
Yeah, Trust the Science!
We are now witnessing how well that went for the gullible hypochondriacs, who have now got shit for blood, after poisoning their blood with mRNA, because they believed ‘The Science’.
What the “Global warming” theory/hysteria (time was when the scare was global cooling) needs to prove is that global warming: (1) exists (2) is man-made; (3) is man-made to a degree that it actually counts; (4) is caused by CO2 levels rising; and that (5) we are able to stop or reverse it. As for it existing, it all depends on how you chose the period under investigation. Go back to the last (geological) time climate was cooler and you’ll come to the conclusion that it has been warming ever since. Don’t look back further into the past because that… Read more »
If you have allegations, provide links.
Who pay you for that BS, jews ?
First, I didn’t mean to allege anything. All I said was that those who say that man-made climate change exists need to prove it first. Up till now, they haven’t. Second, as an “average” poster I cannot post links here. But I provided enough data to enable anyone to find the works I referenced. This is another area where “the science is settled” is not true, especially if you look at all the scares of the past 30-50 years or so, all of them started by scientists. This is not an issue you or I can resolve, it needs to… Read more »
–EDIT–
I found it searching for the title. I don’t want to start a debate here about something I know very little about. I’ll sit it out until other climatologists react to his statements.
Nobody is going to sit there examining all those numbers. They really don’t need to be there.
Eric, your worship of Climate Change is as annoying as your worship of democracy. The Romulus and Remus of dictatorial governments everywhere. The UN said that if the world didn’t “do” blah blah blah… for decades… always pushing the goal posts… always fear mongering and milking people for ever more punishing taxes to simply live. And always their “predictions” were wrong.
It is better for humanity to be safe than sorry. It is better to be on the safe side, which is why I support Eric Zuesse’s of defunding the fossil-fuel extraction companies. I have no cause to believe the climate change deniers. I do not believe in granting a sort of human rights to fossil-fuel extraction companies.