Years of Living Dangerously Series Debunked

Part 2 of 8:

Season 2, Episode 2- Gathering Storm

Part 1 of 8: Season 2, Episode 1 – A Race Against Time
Part 2 of 8: Season 2, Episode 2 – Gathering Storm
Part 3 of 8: Season 2, Episode 3 – The Uprooted
Part 4 of 8: Season 2, Episode 4 – Fueling the Fire
Part 5 of 8: Season 2, Episode 5 – Collapse of the Oceans
Part 6 of 8: Season 2, Episode 6 – Priceless
Part 7 of 8: Season 2, Episode 7 – Safe Passage
Part 8 of 8: Season 2, Episode 8 – Uprising

By: Shawn Alli
Posted: May 31, 2017

Years of Living Dangerously Gathering Storm

Full resolution jpg

*Disclosure: I am a climate denier, albeit a more rational one.

 

*Disclosure: I am NOT funded by any oil, natural gas or coal corporations. I am NOT funded by any private interest groups (NGOs, foundations or political entities).

 

We begin with actor Jack Black in Miami, Florida talking about waterfront properties with Josh Stein (a realtor) and clients not caring about climate change or sea level rise. The directors then cut to natural disasters. Queue the suspense background music.

 

We're joined again with actor Ian Somerhalder lamenting the horrors of Hurricane Katrina and his dad. Somerhalder laments the pain of losing his beloved neighborhood. Yah, I get that, but...no one tells city officials to build massive infrastructure near the coast (which is near/at sea level). Intelligent city planners and bureaucrats would create a large barrier between an ocean and residential living. Unfortunately, New Orleans is in short supply of competent city planners, government officials, and politicians. And when disaster strikes, you get what you pay and plan for.

 

Black meets with Keren Bolter, Ben Kirtman, and Harold Wanless (climate scientists). They show Black climate model projections of Miami in 2030 and that most of the coast area will be under water. And in 2060 all of it will be under water. Maybe, maybe not.

 

Climate models are not falsifiable. Why not? Because the man-made climate change theory of a carbon/methane apocalypse is not objective science. It's unfalsifiable ideological science. And climate scientists are not exactly spot on with any of their doomsday predictions, never mind the glaring Himalayan glacier example. [1]

 

As I mention in the Years of Living Dangerous Debunked series for the first season, if cities start using desalinated ocean water instead of pumping out massive amounts of groundwater for drinking, I believe that sea level rise will become a thing of the past and that sea level drop will become the new issue (see Years of Living Dangerously Series Debunked Season 1, Part 8 - A Dangerous Future).

 

The three climate scientists paint a gloomy picture of the future due to inaction on man-made climate change. Queue the somber music. But these predictions will most likely be similar to incorrect past predictions of oil running out (see Oil, The 4th Renewable Resource).

 

Today, none of the traditional sources of energy are running out. Of course, that doesn't mean that we should exploit them. If better alternatives arise, then so be it. If solar and wind ever gets to the 70% and above efficiency rate...I'm all for it. Until then, it's just a good idea in theory. But the advent of clean and safe nuclear fusion (not fission) may trump all of the previous sources of energy (including nuclear fission).

 

I love it when environmentalists of the past provide doomsday scenarios only to be completely wrong in the future. I love it because I enjoy seeing how they spin the story and still keep a straight face. As a man of comedy I love to see and exploit humor in all phenomena, especially in the climate change cult...I mean movement.

 

Black questions what people on the coast are supposed to do when sea level rise occurs? Well, if it does occur, the people only have themselves to blame. Why are they living on the coast at sea level? Because they want to enjoy their life of luxury. This isn't a climate change problem. This is a lifestyle and social status problem.

 

And I'm not against living a life of luxury. If you have the money, to each their own within ethics. But if you're a climate change believer, you can't live a life of luxury. You have to live in an apartment, drive an electric car, enjoy a minimalist lifestyle, and be vegan (not vegetarian). If climate change believers can't do this...they're disingenuous because their actions are not an accurate reflection of their climate change ideologies.

 

If you ever get stopped or questioned by climate change believers, ask them:

1. Do you live in an apartment or condo?
2. Do have/use electric cars, to the exclusion of gas/diesel ones?
3. Do you practice a minimalist lifestyle?
4. Are you vegan?

 

If a climate change believer doesn't get all four, just walk away. They're preaching to you without practicing what they preach. For the ones that do get all four, hear them out. You may not believe in their ideologies but they're genuine people. Even though you may disagree with the content, interacting with genuine people will never be a waste of time. The conversation may lead you in new directions in your thought process or actions.

 

Somerhalder and his wife board a ship to learn more about hurricanes and climate change from geologist Jeffrey P. Donnelly. The directors are intelligent enough to present the Years of Living Dangerously series more as a learning experience for the celebrities. This primes the viewers as learning alongside of their favorite celebrity. Impressive manipulation. Kudos to the directors.

 

Donnelly says that a warmer world means more hurricanes. Sorry, but that's not a falsifiable claim. Claiming that warmer weather equals or causes extreme weather is not falsifiable objective science. Climate change believers are living in their unfalsifiable ideological bubble. By this rationality, a colder world implies less extreme weather? That's a nice idea, but again it's not falsifiable.

 

Donnelly then sells his mission to drill for ground sediment as some heroic mission with Somerhalder in awe of being a part of this. Really? In reality, this is a regular mission to provide data. And climate change scientists interpret this data via their climate change ideologies. In short, it's confirmation bias.

 

Back in Miami, Black is surprised that most people in Miami are so carefree about climate change. Of course they're care free. They're living a life of luxury that people in developing nations would kill for. Worrying about an unfalsifiable climate model prediction is irrational.

 

The directors show clips of Florida Governor Rick Scott banning the use of the words climate change or global warming. And it's hilarious. Aside from being against the unfalsifiable theory of man-made climate change destruction, I'm a man comedy. And I appreciate excellent comedy when I see it. And the clip that the directors provide is an example of excellent comedy. That clip is so funny that I watch it on YouTube once a week. It never gets old.

 

In all seriousness, no one should be banning the terms climate change or global warming. While the theories are incorrect, banning such terms only makes such people appear stupid.

 

To be fair, liberal media outlets and the past Obama administration ban the terms Islamic terrorism. Take a look at the terrorism incidents by Muslim extremists in liberal media outlets and you’ll find very little reference to Muslim extremism or Islamic terrorism. That's not accidental. That's intentional.

 

And now we go to Black and Mayor of Miami Beach Philip Levine. His solutions to prevent flooding are decent. The best way to prevent flooding is proper drainage. While raising the streets is overkill, we can cut Levine some slack.

 

But again, if the all cities across the US use desalinated ocean water instead of groundwater, ocean level rise will most likely become a thing of the past. And yes, it will take massive federal funding to accomplish, but it's a once in lifetime opportunity.

 

Back on the ship, Somerhalder talks to his wife about global warming causing Katrina like hurricanes. Queue the somber background music. Again, none of this is falsifiable science. Climate scientists are merely interpreting the data to fit their doomsday ideologies. Why? Because that's what the environmental and climate change movement wants. They don't want to hear about moderate reports. They need doomsday interpretations to sell to the people. The greater the fear mongering, the more the cash rolls in for research and green energy programs.

 

Black then talks to Mayor of South Miami Phil Stoddard. And Stoddard is correct about the level of income inequality in the two Miami boroughs. People in south Miami can't pay to raise the streets.

 

Stoddard claims that all of Miami in the future will be under water. He neglects to leave out the fact that Miami is pretty much at sea level. Of course everything near sea level will be under water in the future (aside from using desalinated ocean water). Building significant infrastructure on garbage limestone is not exactly the most intelligent thing to do.

 

Black meets with Nicole Hernandez Hammer (a scientist and climate change activist). Hammer says that all of Miami is going to disappear and people are in denial. I counter with the claim that the denial is rational. Most climate models are dead wrong about future predictions. Why? Because the models aren't based on falsifiable scientific theories. It's based on unfalsifiable science. Even if some of the things happen, it's just a lucky guess.

 

To be fair, Miami's Swiss cheese porous limestone foundation is a real problem. So what's the solution? I'm not a scientist, geologist, or an engineer. But thinking out loud, is it not possible to create a nanomaterial to fill the limestone holes? Something better than the current sand and clay?

 

Back on the ship, Somerhalder and the geology crew are finally successful in drilling a core from the blue hole sediment and are excited about the findings. But just like tree rings and coral drilling, yes it's nice to have a snapshot of time, but it's rarely accurate in terms of the whole picture.

 

Even when hurricanes and horrible natural disasters occur 1000 years in the past in one area, another area can be sunny and calm. Interpreting these snapshots through the lens of doomsday climate change predictions is disingenuous.

 

Back in Miami, Black talks to architect Reinaldo Borges and Sr. vice president of Swiss Re (insurance) Alex Kaplan about sea level rise. Black says that if the insurance companies stop providing insurance and the banks stop providing loans, this house of cards will collapse. Perhaps, but insurance companies will never stop providing insurance coverage for people in Miami in the foreseeable future.

 

Banks will never stop financing condo development in Miami in the foreseeable future. Why not? Because there's too much money involved. Miami Beach is a trillion dollar money making machine. The only way it'll stop is if everything goes under water. But that's not likely to happen any time soon (aside from the doomsday climate model predictions).

 

Somerhalder and Donnelly meet up to talk about the sediment results. And Donelly is correct to say that humans have put themselves in harm's way in building permanent infrastructure close to sea level. Not even wild animals are dumb enough to build their permanent homes at sea level. Only humans can claim that distinction.

 

Black then talks with psychiatrist Lise Van Susteren. Susteren says that our brains are wired to deny unpleasant things and that different parts of the brain are rational and irrational. Sigh. Contrary to what you may believe, psychiatry and psychology are both unfalsifiable disciplines. They have absolutely no basis in objective falsifiable science (see Philosophy of Knowledge, Philosophy of Mind, and Philosophy of Science in Philosophy Reborn Part I: Purpose & The Mental Health Industry in Part IV: Naturally Unhealthy Big Pharma & Big Media).

 

Psychiatry and Psychology are some of the biggest scams on the planet. And no, I'm not a scientologist. I'm anti-religion (and anti-atheism). And that includes scientology.

 

Somerhalder then meets up with the whole crew to talk about the findings. He says that it's hard to live with the fact that more storms are headed this way. Hard to live? Excuse me? Somerhalder is free to trade places with someone from a developing nation to understand what a hard life is.

 

He then says that the crew is the holder of specific knowledge for our survival. Umm...what? Holders of specific knowledge? What is this man smoking? In reality, people have been making doomsday predictions for thousands of years. And remarkably, humanity continues to survive and thrive (in developed nations). What Somerhalder doesn't understand is the ability for humans to adapt to changing circumstances and then change those circumstances to a relatively comfortable living.

 

The crew is frustrated by the lack of long term vision planning after devastating hurricanes. The simple reason is the numbers. While loss of life from a natural disaster is tragic, if a few thousand die from a hurricane (less than 2000 from Hurricane Katrina), it has little quantitative impact on millions, let alone tens of millions or hundreds of millions of people.

 

If a hurricane kills more than 100,000 people, you'll see WE governments move with lightning speed. Why? Because different levels of governments can't afford to lose hundreds of thousands of taxpayers and consumers. It's bad for their bottom line.

 

Contrary to what you may believe, governments and multinational corporations only see you as cattle to milked of everything you have (see Introduction and The Cancer Industry in Philosophy Reborn Part IV: Naturally Unhealthy Big Pharma & Big Media and The War Against Natural Health in Part V: Naturally Unhealthy Big Gov't, Big Ag, Big Industry).

 

Oddly enough, Donnelly says that:

If I could prove that global warming wasn't real, I'd be the most famous scientist on the planet.  I would have more funding than anybody.

 

Umm...what?

 

That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard from the climate change movement. In reality, the numerous climate scientists and scientists in general that don't believe in climate change/global warming are ridiculed without mercy for their skepticism or denial of a carbon/methane apocalypse.

 

Finally, Black meets with 17 year old Delaney Reynolds who advocates for climate change with youth. Bless your heart dear. I'm happy that you're happy. But I can't support your actions. Reynolds is pushing vulnerable children and youth into the unfalsifiable theory of man-made climate change. While she sees her cause as just, I see the ideological science similar to eugenics and women's inferior status. In past, both issues are backed by objective science and pushed on impressionable children and youth as factual objective knowledge.

 

As I mention time and time again. You need to be able to distinguish between falsifiable objective science and unfalsifiable ideological science (see Philosophy of Knowledge, Philosophy of Mind, and Philosophy of Science in Philosophy Reborn Part I: Purpose & A Broken Peer-Reviewed Process in Part III: Science). If you can't do that, you'll never be able to understand science. Future generations who will have to sort out all of this ideological junk science has my sympathies.

 

Black talks about how everyone has to wake up for the survival of the human species. Yawn. Decades ago, objective scientists lament civil rights for visible minorities for the survival of the human species.

 

They say the same thing about women workplace. We can't have women in the workplace. It's for the survival of the human species.

 

They say the same thing for people not to procreate anymore for the survival of the human species. All of this is ideological junk science stamped as objective science at the time. And the same will be true of the theory of man-made climate change and the carbon/methane apocalypse.

 

 

References:

[1] Morello, Lauren. Climate Science Panel Apologizes for Himalayan Error. New York Times. January 21, 2010.