The doubt returned, and with it the possibility of thinking. A report from the United States Department of Energy restored the debate, after years in which any objection to the dominant climate model was treated as a sacrilege. It is not ideology or politics, they are data from within the system. And that has huge consequences.
For decades we were repeated that carbon dioxide (CO₂) was directly responsible for an imminent climate collapse. But the report shows that reality does not accompany that narrative. An accelerated increase in temperatures was projected, however, the data shows an average rise of just 1.1 ° C throughout the twentieth century, and in the United States the climatic ends, with hurricanes, fires, floods and droughts; They do not show significant increases, in frequency or intensity. The strongest was the duplication of CO₂ in the atmosphere, of pre -industrial levels of 280 ppm at current values close to 420 ppm. Meanwhile, it did not translate into any observable collapse: neither the agricultural system collapsed, nor was the rise of sea level accelerated beyond its historical rhythm (about 2 mm per year), nor was there disappearance of coastal cities.
On the contrary, the report highlights that the increase in CO₂ also had positive effects, such as the improvement in the efficiency of water use and the increase in plant biomass in many regions. What was foreseen as a global drought became, in several areas of the planet, more agricultural performance. The apocalyptic scenario was not fulfilled. What did happen was a multi -million dollar investment in “green” energies, subsidies, regulations, tariffs, new bureaucracies, unprecedented ideological persecution and social pressure. What was created was a religion: with dogmas, clergy, excommunicated, heretics and, above all, a total prohibition of doubt.
The geopolitical impact was immense. The United States and Europe imposed commercial barriers and asymmetric agreements with the excuse of climate urgency. Entire companies were reorganized to align with ESG standards, the acronym in English that represents the environmental, social and governance. Fear was used as a tool to modify power structures, and that fear, now, falls apart.
And it is not the only case, because Yeah There is a parallel clear With this mechanism of narrative construction with that of the Hambruna de Gaza. Another story that the global media repeated until it became absolute certainty, without tolerate nuances, without examining data. The UN international agencies talked about “Famine”, But today they did not present verifiable figures of starvations due to He fit the editorial line that they installed as truth.
The question is evident: how many of the current truths are simply repetition structures, created, amplified and sustained by information systems that are no longer dedicated to informing, but to build perception? Because science is not a dogma. And journalism should not be either. The media are not to define facts, but to register them. And when they fail in that, they fail in everything.
Climate change is not denied, climate change is simply analyzed. And if the damages are not immediate, if there is no current catastrophe, then the urgency disappears. And when the urgency disappears, automatic justification for extreme measures also disappears. You can think, calculate, postpone or adapt. And that is an opportunity, not a threat.
Because the real topic was never if the weather changes. The issue is whether that change is going to harm ourselves and if we can do something about it. Until now, the only accepted response was fear. Now, with this report, it is possible to respond with facts, analysis and strategy. And with the peace of mind that doubting is not a crime, it is the first step to think well.
Things as they are
Mookie Tenembaum addresses international issues like this every week with Horacio Cabak in his podcast the international observer, available in Spotify, Apple, YouTube and all platforms.
You may also interest you
