Years of Living Dangerously Series Debunked

Part 5 of 8:

Season 2, Episode 5 - Collapse of the Oceans

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 Season 2, Episode 5 - Collapse of the Oceans

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 open with Dawson's Creek star Joshua Jackson paddling in Deep Cove, Canada lamenting the acidification of the ocean and the negative effects on the scallop industry. Sorry, but just like with the oyster industry in Florida, it's nonsense (see Years of Living Dangerously Series Debunked Season 1, Part 4 - Ice & Brimstone).

 

Looking at one source of a global market and saying that it's going to fall apart is disingenuous. Go to your local seafood restaurant or section in the grocery store and you'll find that scallops are abundant. Nothing is running out.

 

Jackson talks to Dr. Jim Barry (a marine scientist) who says that carbon dioxide is basically killing the oceans. Sigh. Aside from real toxic pollutants in the air and water, sea life is quite capable of adapting to changes in the ocean. Contrary to what you may believe, the ocean is not a super fragile ecosystem. It has billions of years of evolution in it. It will exist long after humans perish.

 

I'm not denying ocean acidification. I'm saying that the effect is insignificant. Yes, the initial natural changes in an ocean can affect marine animals in a negative manner. But like us, they adapt. New generations adapt and thrive in the new changing ocean conditions. Yes, the corals that don't adapt will die. But that's the way it goes for everyone in nature.

 

Instead of demonizing carbon dioxide, it would be nice if humans devise innovative ways to get rid of all the toxic garbage in the ocean (nuclear radiation, illegal sewage dumping/regular garbage dumping). While Jackson and Barry paint a picture of a future sterile ocean, such an idea has no basis in reality. Marine life is thriving (as long as we don't hunt marine animals to extinction). If we overfish, that's because of our greed and dietary choices, not because of carbon dioxide.

 

While 90% of the global warming on the planet is in the oceans, for 200 years, it's been working fine. The Earth will adjust accordingly. Humans don't need to use dangerous geoengineering to tell the planet what it should be doing and how it should behave.

 

Do you remember global cooling? Prior to climate change and prior to global warming, the big ideology is global cooling in the past. What happens? Oh well...we were supposed to be cooling but humans are burning to much carbon dioxide so we're warming.

 

I love these subtle shifts in ideology. When an ideological theory turns out to be wrong, climate scientists change the conversation and create new ideological science to explain a phenomenon. Of course, none of this has any basis in objective science. It's just ideological science being made up as it goes.

 

But climate change believers and environmentalists can't recognize this. Why not? Because they're stuck in their climate change bubble, just as past scientists are stuck in their racist and sexist bubble while proclaiming that visible minorities and women are factually inferior.

 

Most climate change believers don't understand this because they don't understand the history of science or falsifiability. Even when I'm explaining this to others, some people ask me what eugenics is. And I tell them politely. But the fact that they don't initially know shows that such ideologies and issues are not part of their reality. They can choose to know. Knowledge is freely available on the planet in the digital information age. But people choose not to look at such issues because it's not part of their reality.

 

Getting back to the documentary, Barry laments the pains of the coral reef. That's complete nonsense. The coral reefs are adapting (see Leonardo DiCaprio's Before the Flood Completely Debunked).

 

Jackson heads to Australia to investigate the coral reefs. And yes, the stunning video of abundant life there is beautiful. And it's still there today. He talks with Ove Hoegh-Guldberg (a marine biologist). Hoegh-Guldberg says that all the oceans are on the brink of destruction and it's never been seen before in hundreds of millions of years. That's nonsense. The climate has been warming and cooling for millions of years naturally prior to the advent of humans and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future.

 

Hilariously, Hoegh-Guldberg shows Jackson a mini experiment of what will happen if carbon dioxide continues to increase in the ocean. I love these small scale artificial experiments. They're so far from reality yet the researchers can't see the difference. The results lead to unfalsifiable climate models based on these garbage mini experiments. Ideological science at its best. Increasing temperatures at a rate that doesn't match real ocean temperatures and saying that this will happen soon is bad science.

 

Jackson says that it's a race against time to document the reefs before they die. Queue the superhero background music. Umm...while documenting reefs is nice, it's not exactly a significant action.

 

If Jackson takes on racism and sexism in Western European (WE) culture, I'd be impressed. Too many climate change believers and environmentalists believe that they're saving the world. In reality, they're not. They're just taking action based on their unfalsifiable ideologies. Which isn't wrong. Everyone does it (even scientists). But denying that you're doing so is disingenuous.

 

Hoegh-Guldberg says that within 20-30 years we won't have corals anymore. A doomsday prediction. Only time will tell. And if it doesn't happen, scientists will justify why it doesn't happen. Whether it happens or not, climate scientists are always right. That's a red flag that man-made climate change is ideological junk science.

 

Hoegh-Guldberg mentions the Philippines as a dying coastal ecosystem. Umm...the Philippines is a developing nation. It's full of corruption, pollution, and incompetence on a mass chronic scale.

 

But again, this is what climate change believers like to do. They pick the worst geography with the poorest and say look how climate change is destroying everything. In reality, the causes are not climate change. It's corrupt politics, economics, and social systems.

 

Jackson goes to the Philippines to investigate the devastation of climate change on corals. Again, the Philippines is a backwards country. Filipinos move to North America for a better quality of life. Lamenting the actions of people in a developing nation is disingenuous. Sure, you can say that their way of life is disappearing, but that's life. Technology destroys the horse and buggy industry. And Tesla is trying to do the same for gas/diesel vehicles. While the world is always the same, it's also always changing, whether it's through natural or artificial means.

 

Jackson meets up with Rene Juntereal (a scuba instructor and economics teacher) at the fish market. And yes, Asians do eat a lot of fish. And if they overfish the seas, that's on them, not man-made climate change. But again, global fish/seafood supplies are not running out. Nor are they small in size. Go to your local seafood section and you'll see huge fish in any WE grocery store. Taking a snapshot of one area and applying that to the larger picture is disingenuous and bad science/economics.

 

Jackson says that if fish supplies dwindle, there's no good/cheap source of protein. In reality, the people can choose to grow high protein crops, be it naturally or through hydroponics. Seeds cost practically nothing and the sun is free. If you're relying on one staple for food, you have bigger problems than man-made climate change.

 

Juntereal worries about the lack of corals and food for most people in the Philippines. If the Philippines government ever runs out of food, it won't be because of man-made climate change. It will be due to overfishing, pollution, incompetence, and corruption.

 

Jackson and Juntereal says that it takes centuries for coral to come back. That's false. It can take as little as a few years (see Leonardo DiCaprio's Before the Flood Completely Debunked).

 

Jackson then talks to a simple family that survives on fishing but doesn't catch any fish and are unsure of their future. While that's tragic, that's life. No one says that life is fair. And no amount of emotional manipulation from Hollywood is going to make it any more fair. Does the average consumer cry when corporations go bankrupt and have to let go of all their employees? No. Why not? Because that's life. All we can do is keep moving forward.

 

The directors show a hurricane via CNN. Visual manipulation. And it's supposedly because of man-made climate change. Sigh. Contrary to what you may believe, man-made climate change has no power to cause a hurricane. It can only influence it. And no, you can't put a percentage on the amount of influence because the climate models are not falsifiable.

 

Jackson then talks to Dr. Laura David (an oceanographer) about food security. David makes a good point that the Philippines doesn't have much land to grow crops. What's the solution? You innovate. You create a new means of growing and producing crops relative to your geography/situation (most likely hydroponics). Western-European (WE) people in general see problems as opportunities to innovate. This is an outlook that all people should have.

 

David mentions that the food security of all island nations are at risk. If innovation is not possible, come to Canada. We can support hundreds of millions of people (as long as Aboriginals forgo some of their massive land claims). For those thinking about immigrating to Canada I recommend that you do so while Justin Trudeau's Liberal party is in power with a majority government.

 

Jackson meets with Senator Loren Legarda of the Philippines government. She advocates banning coal and putting a carbon tax on people in China, India, and the US. Yah...that's not going to happen. Why not? Because we're accustomed to our current lifestyle of abundance, excess, and waste. We're not going to give that up because of carbon dioxide fear mongering. But if the climate change movement wants to be a role model they can:

1. Live in an apartment or condo.
2. Use electric cars, to the exclusion of gas/diesel cars.
3. Practice a minimalist lifestyle.
4. Change their diet to vegan (not vegetarian).

 

If a few million climate change believers can do this...there's a chance that WE people as a whole will rein in their lifestyle of excess and waste. To my climate change believer friends, the ball is in your court. I'm waiting for you to practice what you preach. No garbage half assed measures.

 

The number one reason why the climate change movement is a failure (aside from ideological science) is because the believers don't practice what they preach. That's disingenuous. And generally speaking, people don't follow disingenuous people.

 

You can say what you want about US President Donald Trump, but he's genuine (not perfect), and a lot of people respect that. They don't agree with him or his policies, but they respect his genuine character. And for a politician, that's a rare commodity.

 

Jackson again talks about the lack of seafood on the coasts (oysters, lobsters, and shellfish). In reality, seafood isn't lacking. Again, go to your local seafood section or restaurant and you'll see that nothing is in short supply. We have everything in abundance (within common sense of course).

 

Jackson then talks to Dr. Sylvia Earle (an oceanographer) about possible solutions. Earle says that we're all interconnected and have to take responsibility. Tell that to people in Silicon Valley and Hollywood who want to live forever and merge with technology (see Artificial Intelligence in Philosophy Reborn Part III: Science).

 

Earle advocates for protected marine reserves (which I support). She advocates for a carbon tax (which I don't support), and decarbonizing the world by ending traditional energy. Sure, we can do that...as long as you have a cheap, safe, and efficient alternative. Unfortunately, only nuclear fusion, or the promise of it, fits that criteria.

 

Oddly enough, Earle says that ignorance is the main problem. And this is why the climate change movement (like other movements in history) is a failure.

 

In the past, educators claim that we just have to educate the racism out of people and everything will be great. We just have to educate the sexism out of people and everything will be great. We just have to educate the skepticism and denial out of people and they'll accept climate change.

 

In reality, education is not the problem. It never has been. Ideologies (which are non-physical) are the real problems and solutions. Until the climate change movement understands this, their movement will continue to fail.

 

Jackson can advocate for a carbon tax and educate people all he wants. In the end, it's all a matter of ideologies. If you want real change in people you have to change their core ideologies.