2020 – THE YEAR THE SKY DIDN’T FALL IN
For some years now, highly regarded scientists have been making alarming predictions about the future of the Earth’s climate. Many of them centred on the year 2020.
The following list of ten alarming climate predictions that did NOT come true in 2020 is taken from an article in Junk Science HERE:
1. Average global temperatures were supposed to be up 3 degrees Celsius in 2020. Didn’t happen.
2. Carbon dioxide emissions were supposed to have doubled by 2020. Didn’t happen.
3. We were told to follow Communist China as they were going to reduce gases by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 figures in 2020. Didn’t happen. (Instead, they increased emissions by 168 per cent above 2005 figures.)
4. Al Gore said there would be no snow on Kilimanjaro by 2020. Didn’t happen. There’s still lots of snow up there.
5. The sea level around Florida was supposed to rise by two feet by 2020. Didn’t happen.
6. There were claims that children wouldn’t know what snow was in 2020. Didn’t happen. It’s snowing in many winter countries in the northern hemisphere and it snowed in Australia earlier this year.
7. They said Pacific Island economies would be devastated by climate change in 2020, particularly Tuvalu and Kirabati. Didn’t happen. Both countries grew their economies.
8. Climate change was supposed to cause nuclear war due to fighting over scarce resources. Didn’t happen.
9. They reckoned the Arctic would be ice free in 2020. Didn’t happen. There is 3.9 million square kilometres of ice in the Arctic.
10. They said glaciers would be gone at Glacier National Park in the USA. Didn’t happen.
Scientists and experts make predictions all the time. Prudent politicians should, of course, take these expert opinions into account. To assume, however, that these predictions are infallible and that ‘the science is settled,’ demonstrates a lack of maturity and understanding.
The Earth’s climate is highly complex, and no one fully understands all the variables, as these failed predictions demonstrate. Shutting down discussion of this subject and labelling dissenters with epithets such as ‘deniers’ is both juvenile and harmful.
Our civilisation is built on a foundation of robust scientific discussion which not only allows, but encourages dissent and scepticism. Allowing Government to mandate a specific scientific position as unchallengeable dogma sets a dangerous precedent.
To use the term ‘progressive’ for such a position is an oxymoron.