Two trendy climate change scaremongers

The 2010 Russian heat wave that killed thousands and cut into that country's grain harvest was  due to natural variability, not human-spurred climate change. Astrophysicist and long range weather forecaster Piers Corbyn explains, why people like Epstein and Ferber are wrong.


This is how Dan Ferber (journalist at Science magazine) and Dr. Paul Epstein (Associate Director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School) describe the threat of climate change in their new book "Changing Planet, Changing Health: How the Climate Crisis Threatens Our Health and What We Can Do about It":

Climate change threatens far more than our environment. It's already led to the spread of infectious diseases and respiratory ailments across the globe and contributed to thousands of deaths through heat waves and other extreme weather events. It's even fueled recent revolts in the Middle East and North Africa.
---
Pests also target wildlife, wiping out forests and increasing the risk of fires, such as in the Rockies and Cascades, where it used to be too cool for those pests to venture to high altitudes.
Another result of a changing climate: heat and carbon dioxide magnify the effects of asthma and allergies, particularly in cities where more and more children are developing respiratory problems.
And a combination of heat waves -- such as the one that killed thousands of Russians last summer -- and droughts not only causes immediate local health crises but also threatens global public health by destroying crops and driving up food prices, the authors said.
Food availability may be the most pressing issue of all.
---
An unstable climate, Epstein explained, is directly linked to social and political unrest. "I think we're looking at increasing damages and social disruption from the climate instability and extremes," he said. "The earth itself can go to a new equilibrium, but we need to back off. We're pushing it hard."

But it´s "not all bad news", say Ferber and Epstein:

Some companies, he explained, have already figured out ways to profit and grow by switching to climate-friendly policies.

For example, Ferber said, the re-insurance company Swiss Re realized that it could insure wind farms at a lower premium than oil rigs, because entire wind farms aren't likely to be felled in a disaster

Yes, Ferber is right; quite a few companies have realized that it is possible to profit from heavily tax-payer subsidized wind and solar projects. And in e.g. Spain the companies have also realized that there is no profit left when the subsidies run out.

Here is Ferber´s list of what communities and ordinary people can do:

Planting trees, installing bike lanes and green roofs, and funding projects to help residents green their homes are all feasible steps that together could make a concrete difference, he suggested.

Read the entire article here

PS

 Here we have a leading Harvard Medical School scientist and a Science magazine journalist telling us that climate change already has lead to all kinds of catastrophic developments, from the spread of infectious diseases to the recent revolts in the Middle East and North Africa. On the other hand, these two scaremongers tell us that he earth can be saved by "switching to climate-friendly policies" and installing bike lanes and "green roofs"! If the authors were serious, they should at least - like some other global warming alarmists - demand some real tough action. But Epstein and Ferber are not to be taken seriously. They seem to be just a couple of  trendy "feel good" scaremongerers.