Climate change is obviously a problem, but so is the climate panic

By Gunnar Schupelius

We have to face climate change with more reason and less hysteria, otherwise life will become unaffordable and unbearable, says Gunnar Schupelius.

An apocalyptic prognosis is made again and again, which is already considered a certainty by large parts of the political class. After that, climate change will irreversibly lead to global catastrophe. It is said that the end of all life on this planet is sealed if drastic countermeasures are not taken immediately.

Keywords fly around our ears and are passed on, such as “1.5 degree path” or “tipping point”. This point means the moment after which it is no longer possible to stop climate change. “Fridays for Future” and the group “Last Generation” claim that this moment will soon be reached.

They are reinforced in their faith by politicians and celebrities of all persuasions who join in the chorus of doom, whether they are informed or not. “The window for positive changes is closing rapidly,” claims Eckart von Hirschhausen, for example.

The climate glues are only the undemocratic pre-dancer of a general panic that is being spread by the elites. Politicians react to this with the so-called “transformation” and keep inventing new bans and price increases. From 2024, a new “climate tax” will be levied on truck traffic. Then the prices of all goods and services will rise again.

However, it is unclear whether climate change will actually lead to a global catastrophe. The “tipping point” theory was popularized in 2004 by the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. To this day, climate researchers and meteorologists are still debating whether such a point even exists and what it should mean.

These two examples show just how wrong climate researchers can be: In June 1989, Noel Brown, Director of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), warned that the world only had ten years to end the greenhouse effect. Otherwise, the polar ice caps would melt and the Maldives would disappear under rising sea levels, as would parts of Bangladesh and Egypt.

Eighteen years later, in December 2007, an international team from the US space agency “Nasa” claimed that the North Pole would already be “ice-free” in the summer of 2013. That would have been ten years ago.

Climate science – or what is made of it – thrives on exaggeration. It is quite possible that we can live with climate change. Much has already been achieved: CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, which are held responsible for the greenhouse effect, have fallen by more than a third in Germany over the past 30 years.

We must face climate change with more reason and less panic, otherwise life will become unaffordable and unbearable. Incidentally, according to surveys, the majority of the population sees it that way and this reasonable view was also reflected in the voting behavior for the Berlin referendum.

Is Gunnar Schupelius right? Call: 030/2591 73153 or email: [email protected]

Read all of Gunnar Schupelius’ columns here

ttn-27