Drowning In Warmie Hysterics

In today's Times of London, there's a warmie alarm-fest under the cheery headline, "Eco-fatalism is for wimps."

In it, Camilla Cavendish runs through the latest sensational bell-ringers, then counters each with a bruttish attack on "commentators, business people, and (privately) many politicians" for suggesting that the price of fighting global warming is too high. (She didn't suggest that the cost of fighting the small percentage of global warming that might be caused by humans is too high ... but who's looking for honesty?)

She assumes humans won't and can't adapt (as if we didn't during the last cold age and the preceding warm age) and uses this illustration:

Fatalists say we can only adapt, because global warming is too costly to curb. But you can’t “adapt” to a rise in sea level that could wipe out a third of Bangladesh in 30 years.

Aparently Camilla didn't bother to read the newest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which reported:

In 2001, the scientists predicted temperature rises of between 1.4C and 5.8C on current levels by 2100, but better science has led them to adjust this to a narrower band of between 2C and 4.5C.

The new projections put paid to some of the more alarmist scenarios raised by previous modelling, which have suggested that sea levels could rise by almost 1m over the same period.

The report projects a rise in sea levels by century's end of between 14cm and 43cm, with further rises expected in following centuries caused by melting polar ice.

I'm not good with meters, but it's evident that the new projections are 14/100 to 43/100 the size of the increases Camilla used to fire up the alarmists.

Related Tags: Warmies, Global warming, Temperature change