I’d like to write about ‘climate change’ more, but it’s one of those things where I’m not sure my outrage or skepticism is articulated better than anyone else who writes well on the subject. Tough territory!
Do note this, an article about an administration climate change report and a quote therein.
“In the long term, the combined stresses associated with climate change are expected to decrease agricultural productivity,” the report says.
Part of the effort by the warmists is to shame, cast doubt, or delegitimize anyone who’s not a credentialed scientist from expressing their skepticism of ‘climate change’.
This is extraordinarily fallacious in general. But for any given premise in particular, like decreased agricultural productivity, I’d add…. You don’t need to be a credentialed scientist to have proper skepticism for some of these assertions. Being a historian of some astuteness is enough.
And I have enough astuteness…
I’d feel comfortable betting every dollar I ever earn that agricultural productivity doesn’t decrease. Not because of ‘climate change’, not ever. Not in the 21st century. Not in the 22nd century. Not in the 23rd century.
I’m not a scientist, but I’d venture the chances of agricultural productivity decreasing are so mathematically remote that they are rightfully viewed as practically impossible. That’s history talking.