Weekly clippings #21 - extreme events, sea level, net zero refuted, backpedaling starts, fast-growing coal

 In the science category, I bring you a link to the famous article that was retracted by the published after some opposition to the conclusions of the study. Notably, the process for criticism did not follow standard peer-review publication practices and the conclusions were not actually refuted. Second, a video examining the state of knowledge about sea level change, which is a legitimate concern for humanity, where in full context the natural variations are seen to be many times larger than most people realize and are actually very complicated to understand – not simple as is often stated by the climate alarmism crowd.

In the investment/economics category, I bring you a refutation of every “net zero by 2050” myth and three articles about the furious backing away from “renewable” energy. Pay particular attention to the method of refutation as it relies on basic thinking principles including avoiding bias and placing things in full context.
 
To close, in the absurdity category we have two articles: one about the massive expansion of coal in India, the second most populous country, where 70% of electricity is provided by coal and where coal miners have boosted its mining of coal by 83% over the first half of its 2023/24 fiscal year; and the second that talks about India and adds that China is building two coal plants per week in their pursuit of energy security, progress, and of course to make all the materials the more free world is using to build expensive and vulnerable wind and solar.

 

A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming  In conclusion, although evidence of an increase in total annual precipitation is observed on a global level, this does not translate into an increase in intensity or frequency of floods. Similar conclusions seem to be reached by the draft of AR6 available today.

Nothing to sea here folks  Historian John Robson explores the science and history of sea level changes, finding a range of natural influences in different parts of the world, and relative stability over the last 6,000 years.

Every "net zero by 2050" myth, refuted.  The root problem with “net zero by 2050”: it violates a basic principle of rational thinking, which is that when evaluating what to do about a product or technology—e.g., prescription drug—you need to carefully weigh the benefits and side-effects of your alternatives.

Sunak spares public net zero pain  The Prime Minister warned that voters would revolt against making the UK a net zero carbon emitter by 2050 unless politicians were more honest and “realistic” about the costs involved.

Net Zero was always economic suicide, now let’s scrap the rest of it  The green gains from this policy are dwarfed by the considerable additional costs. The Environmental benefits from the 2030 ban add-up to £76bn. In contrast, the assessed costs add up to £400 billion. These costs, therefore, are indeed five times the benefits.  

The Great Backpedaling Is Upon Us  We have long suspected that the soft left is only willing to go so far in this regard, reasonably drawing a line to shield their standard of living. This group is now aware of the Big Lie™ sold by climate alarmists — that we can radically reduce our use of fossil fuels without meaningfully impacting our lifestyles.

Energy Transition? What Energy Transition? Someone Might Want to Read India Into the Plan 

The fast-growing energy source which will power the future: Yes, it's coal