From Climate Alarmism to Climate Realism…
My passion for scientific curiosity ignited in Mr. Nelson’s AP biology class way back in 1994 at Bullard High School in Fresno, CA, and has never dwindled. It continued through my undergraduate years at UC San Diego, where biochemistry and cellular biology became my expertise. A stint as a molecular biologist in the bustling world of biotech followed, but the yearning for a connection to the natural world as opposed to only the lab called me back to further my education in Earth Science with a Ph.D. from UCLA.
Throughout this academic journey, the narrative of a warming planet, driven by human actions and looming with the specter of escalating disasters, was deeply woven into my understanding of the world. The urgency was palpable, the potential consequences terrifying. In fact, my graduate years were shrouded in a fog of anxiety, a familiar feeling in the cutthroat world of academia. Yet, with hindsight, I can’t help but wonder how much of it stemmed from the incessant climate alarmism blaring from social media and the news.
Then, in 2015, my perspective shifted in an instant. Holding my child, a fragile new life cradled in my arms, I saw the world through fresh eyes. My American childhood, forged in the crucible of post-communist immigration, had been one of abundance, fueled by cheap, reliable energy. It allowed me to explore, to wander the world, even spending a year in Somalia with my family in 1985. But as the climate apocalypse narrative reached a fever pitch, a chilling question haunted me: what experiences would my child lose due to the war on fossil fuels? If the planet truly hurtled towards catastrophe, were these sacrifices, these limitations on a young life, inevitable and necessary?
Driven by this paternal concern, I embarked on a quest not for blind belief, but for empirical truth. What I found shattered the narrative I’d held so dear. The warming trend, while undeniable, was but a whisper within the natural variability of Earth’s history, and the effects of solar activity and ocean oscillations were commonly swept under the rug. Carbon dioxide, the villain in this story, was a mere wisp (422.77 ppm) compared to the past (the vast majority of the Phanerozoic, as shown below), when life thrived under this pollutant, as classified by the EPA.
The hurricanes, floods, and droughts, painted as indicators of doom, refused to conform to the script. No clear correlation, no undeniable fingerprint of human influence, and no increase in hydrological, meteorological, and climatological disasters emerged from the data.
Contrary to the dire predictions, even human mortality painted a picture of triumph, providing examples of adaptation and resilience as natural disasters claimed even fewer lives.
And even the corals, the polar bears of the oceans, refused to succumb to the narrative of a bleaching apocalypse. Reefs pulse with life, expanding and thriving in defiance of the doom-laden pronouncements.
In the last two centuries, despite growing GHG emissions and warming of approximately 1.1°C, the human condition has experienced remarkable improvements. Advances in industrialization, technology, and medicine have elevated living standards, extended life expectancy, and reduced mortality rates. The expansion of education and literacy, coupled with social and political changes, has led to increased access to knowledge, rights, and opportunities. There was no denying that the human condition was improving along with the increase in anthropogenic GHG emissions and warming.
This wasn’t the story I’d expected—the simplistic equation of rising CO2 equaling imminent disaster crumbled under the weight of evidence. Yet, the chorus of alarmism continued, reducing the complex beauty of our dynamic planet to the singular thread of anthropogenic emissions. Any questioning was met with the chilling epithet of “denialism,” in attempts to link those that question the science with those that deny the Holocaust, silencing dissent and stifling critical analysis. Well-respected climate scientists began to attack me on social media for merely stating my expert opinion.
If the mere act of stating an opinion sparked such a firestorm of indignation from my colleagues, I shuddered to imagine the depths of toxicity festering within this field. Further observations unveiled a disturbing pattern: these so-called experts seemed to operate under a standard protocol of aggression towards any perceived challenge to their pronouncements.
When engaged in debate, I prioritize evaluating the content of ideas over critiquing the characteristics of the individuals behind them… but, if you have seen X lately the cancellation efforts continue. I’m likely not helping effort with posts like this but sometimes I just can’t resist.
Spoiler alert: each flag for plagiarism is linked back to one of my publications. Oops.
Nevertheless, the chasm between data and discourse is undeniable and exposes a narrative driven by fear-mongering rather than objective science. In academia, where I personally encountered significant professional resistance, questioning the pronouncements of self-proclaimed climate authorities was known to be career-threatening.
I began to suspect that other motivations, such as political maneuvering and financial opportunism, were quietly influencing the narrative, finding willing amplifying channels in media, influential groups, and climate scientists. And it was clear that this manufactured climate crisis narrative was having severe mental health consequences on young people.
Assuming humans are inherently detrimental to the planet is a limiting and potentially self-fulfilling prophecy of climate alarmism. By rejecting this Malthusian approach and embracing our potential for positive impact, we can break free from this pessimistic narrative and build a brighter future.
My journey from a true believer to a staunch realist doesn’t erase the reality of climate change. Our planet is changing, and responsible stewardship is paramount. But the path forward cannot be paved with fear and simplistic narratives. We must embrace scientific rigor, acknowledging the role of natural variability and the limitations of climate models. Solutions must prioritize human well-being, ensuring that the needs of developing nations and access to affordable energy are not sacrificed on the altar of future hypothetical climate states. Most importantly, we must foster open dialogue, embrace diverse perspectives, and move away from the stifling grip of dogma.
Source: Substack
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.