Nate Hagens 
(Recorded September 22, 2024)
14.8% of Americans do not believe in climate change. Recently, a study mapping a 485-million-year history of Earth’s temperature and CO2 levels has been misinterpreted by some who downplay urgent climate concerns. Their argument suggests that, since the Earth has experienced much higher temperatures and CO2 concentrations in the past, the current rise of a few degrees won’t significantly affect us – and that climate concerns are being over exaggerated
What if climate change was, in fact, a “hoax”? What if all of the climate science developed in recent decades was a fraud? Could we then just generally exhale and continue humanity’s current economic trajectory unimpeded?
Exploring these questions in today’s Frankly, Nate emphasizes the limited, ‘narrow boundary’ perspective of downplaying the urgency of climate change. A more nuanced understanding of ecology reveals that the long-term stability of our planet depends on numerous environmental tipping points, with climate change being just one of them. Even if climate change was a “hoax”, we are still causing accelerating harm to the life support systems of Earth , pushing the biosphere beyond its limits in a way which will profoundly impact our future, even our near term future.
Show Notes and More:
https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/frankly-original/72-what-if-climate-change-was-a-hoax
—
Support The Institute for the Study of Energy and Our Future:
https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/support
Join our Substack newsletter:
https://natehagens.substack.com/
Join our Discord channel and connect with other listeners:
https://discord.gg/ZFfQqtqMJf
—
00:00 – Introduction
01:39 – E.J. Judd Study
03:35 – Biophysical Footprint
04:27 – Plastics
05:40 – Biodiversity
08:14 – Oceans
09:59 – Planetary Boundaries
10:34 – Closing Thoughts
source
About The Author
I agree, just want to know how much we have left
Stop the climate Change lie!
I want to get on the bandwagon if you give me money I will stop the moon from melting as is made of cheese because of climate change we have not long left
There is a climate change AND we are acting NOT in a good way. That’s all!
During this glaciation D-O cycles caused recurring global warmings of 10 deg C or more in the space of decades, making the current warming of 1 deg C in 100 years or so very mild historically. The D-O warmings were occurring every 1500 years or so until the Holocene, the first 4000 years of which were 3 -5 deg C warmer than the present.
Long term temps (250 my) average 7 deg C hotter than today, long term Co2 averages around 1500 ppm – more than 3 times higher than the current 420 ppm. The earth didn't boil or environments collapse. Instead life thrived!
Natural climate change has been far more dramatic than the industrial era, if you deny this then you are aligned with political science not actual science.
Climate Change = Natural Variation.
Thanks much for sharing this thought experiment. As far as I perceive my fellow citizens, people accepted scientific facts as long, as those facts led to more comfort, more possibilities, more profit. Nowadays scientific facts lead to unrest, discomfort and display a menace for existing economical models and thinking. As another commentator stated, the same people denying global change will doubt or ignore the other scientific facts of exceeding 6 of 9 planetary boundaries as well. One could get mad about our brains wired using emotions as a last step in decision making (Maren Urner). Even among circles of people drawing from profound knowledge, strange tendencies seem grow stronger. Instead of sharing information between science and humanities knowledge, people start arguing which perspective is the leading on. I am afraid about people´s readiness to cooperate, to merge different perspectives. As far as I understand, the problem of exceeding planetary boundaries threatens the base of our societies, hence has to be taken into account within the ecological perspective. And we need to solve puzzle of our human behaviour (at least a little bit) is needed to find ways out of this maze. I don´t consider nature, climate or our planet having a problem, we have a severe problem, which is caused by our false identity. I doubt that there will be an exit as long as we think ourselves standing outside of nature.
The graph shown (3:10) in order to claim an unprecedented rate of rise has a number of errors. First, 10C in 50 years. It is actually 1C, not 10C, as I think you correctly stated. The timescale cannot be linear, or 50 years would be invisible. Secondly, it ignores rates possible within the error/probability range. Thirdly, the caption states temperatures shown are averages for geological periods. So not valid for rate comparison with years. That omits the broader issue of types of proxies used and the minimum temporal accuracy of each type and period.
Man made CO2 induced global warming is a HOAX – Whereas as Climate Change via the Sun and the Milankovitch cycles (i.e. the collective effects of changes in the Earth's movements on its climate over thousands of years) is true. You purposely mix a lot of truths with nonsense in order to push the lie that Man made CO2 is inducing climate change.
You are a disgrace and a liar and the enemy of the people.
Humans are like bacteria on in an agar nutrient petri dish. They multiply and use up all the nutrients and then they die and some other form of life (often fugi) which can use what's left takes over. Our petri dish is almost out of nutrients!
What level of atmospheric CO2 should we strive for?
So when the Vikings grew wheat in Greenland, was that due to anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?
Your concept is flawed in so far as encompassing all human disruption as being part of climate change.. The main issue is co2 is what is disputed by most climate realists
Yes, fish species are under pressure and waste is proliferating at biblical rates but climate change is not the issue.. This is where the alternative side has lost credibility.. You openly criticise those on the fringes who wade in without scientific authority or qualifications to comment on important issues yet you profess without restraint on an unending list of varied subjects far too expansive for anyone man to be fully versed in..
The facts are simple, human greed or needs are placing excessive pressure on the earth system..However, the BS of co2 just that BS. Co2 drives nothing. Look at paleoclimatological records or the Dansgaurd oeschger oscillations or the beryllium 10 proxy data.. Governments are jumping on this co2 BS as a convenient tool to show concern to the voters while generating taxes and implementing any other controls and restrictions that serve their supporters at the expense of their constituents.. We have political overseers telling us to cut our cloth from the mansions. You have to ask why is that they have repeated failed to tackle the other problems in society with the same vigour they impart to this cash cow.
The hoax is that we can fundamentally hope in new technology to save us from the technology we've already created.
Testicule-warming is not because of climate change, its because of pants.
USA MAKING MONEY OFF GEENOCIDE DEATHS AND RUINING THE PLANT AT THE SAME TIME
Similarly, when selling climate action, it helps to avoid the demoralising idea of climate change. Instead, it can be sold by promoting healthy lifestyles, less pollution, better and cheaper mobility via public transport, the beauty of nature, better food, intentional living, community, and slow, leisurely travel.
What if consuming the earth was stupid
Thank you for another sobering reminder of the inevitable. Nature will find its way to include us into a symbiotic relation, one way or the other
Guy, thanks for telling us the good news. Hey you know what to do next with your life, the conlusion is obvious. Good luck to you man.
concise video
No eco literacy, especially among the most influential and powerful. No understanding of all of earths dynamic, interconnected systems, or earth’s deep time, and no interest in the lifelong commitment to learning about our earth, either. The hyper focus on climate has been a disaster. “Debating” cherry picked nuggets and tidbits of data and modeling from climate science has become the middle school level playground “intellect” on social media. If we’d started off with mainly ecologists as the public communicators, would it have been any different? Probably not. We are an intractably ridiculous species, inherently a cognitive mess. Wisdom lifeways help with our immaturity. No wisdom lifeways, and disaster ensues. The same pattern, over and over. I wonder if our hominid relatives alive at the same time we were, like Neanderthals, were they also prone to this kind of fuckery?
To realise the truth you need to ask WHO IS MAKING MONEY from the theory. Regardless of any research who is being PAID to do it and what is the benefit to THEM. Medical research is done by pharma companies and they gain, global warming research is done by those with a political gain and the grants given to them for the required results. Give the right answer then get the money, give the wrong answer and get thrown to the dustbin of reputation ruination. He who pays most get the results they want.
Wake up people! It is easy for mankind to control the earths climate. Earth is small and who do not understand the billions of years age. We understand these basics very well.
I doubt it will change any minds, but it's possible. In any case, we're past the point of no return, and it no longer matters. The best we can do now is to make our last years as good as possible before we go. Building community seems paramount at this point. I'm guessing most life will be gone by 2030, with wet-bulb temps, famine, and disease the most significant factors. And, frankly, given the what's to come, (aside from global heating,) I'll be glad. Glad that no more children will be born into this dystopian world men have made.
Questions: (1) Is it true that the earth's axis has changed its position? (2) Did underground atomic experiments made a few decades ago have any impact on earth's axis displacement which arguably could contribute to climate change? (3) If governments don't do anything about climate change, can the average citizen of the world do anything to revert this trend in global warming? (4) Many predictions (Al Gore style) have not come to pass (yet). What are your predictions for the next 10, 25, 50 years? (6) What pieces of advice can you give to governments that might revert the global warming trend? (7) What are you doing personally to revert global warming besides painting a bleak picture of the earth's present status (based on your expertise and the facts you have personally collected)?
Whaddya mean “What if” ?
Like all religions, the climate crisis is bs.
Glad I never had any kids. At least I got to enjoy some of the good times… planet will be unlivable for people growing up today.
What if water is a MUCH stronger and more plentiful greenhouse gas than CO2 ?
Thank you for this. I swim in a lot of libertarian/conservative/anarchist circles and there is a lot of skepticism of anthropogenic climate change. I am skeptical too, even as a trained scientist I have heard arguments on both sides and don't have the time or energy to research this topic fully.
I will say, whether its anthropogenic or not is not the point. All of the other issues you mentioned are typically glossed over or tossed out with the bathwater. There are plenty of concerns for the trajectory of humanity.
The U.S. military is the largest polluter and consumer of fossil fuels. Central banking is another institution that contributes to inflation, rampant consumerism, and waste. We cannot trust governments to do anything about this, they are a large part of the problem. These aren't the type of problems that will be solved by top down decrees that have soooo much potential to be abused by tyrants and corrupt politicians and bureaucrats who have financial incentives to exaggerate the problem if their salary and identity is based on them "helping."
There's a lot of nuance here that's missing from a lot of the conversation about this topic and I greatly appreciate your analysis and the fact that you did not resort to ad hominems or other dubious tactics.
Love you, Nate!
The hoax part is hyping CO2 beyond all reason in order to further centralize control.
Incentives to rehydrate landscapes and diversify away from monocultures and toward local production. Nobody's doomed.
It's no hoax. Political concern about it is a hoax. The biggest tree huggers are the biggest exploitationalist. According to the internet. The internet required 260 -360 Twh in 2022. Shipping for online shopping has increased the use of fuel and emissions x 100s since introduced. The earth will suffer while bought political idiots blame each other, and the real profiteers get richer.
We don't want quotes we want facts and there is no factual evidence that human induced CO2 has caused an increase in the earth's temperature.
The main problem concerning anthropogenic climate change is that this is a very bad news ! The precise kind of truth people prefer to deny:
1- we are all responsible to an extend or another, and our lifestyle is unsustainable
2- we must change which implies investing now (annoying and costly) for real benefits to come only in 50 years from now.
Guess what, only responsible people are able to accept this, all others, the childish ones, will flee into denial.
The time scales I guess are hard to grasp.
It's amazing to live through the rise and fall of this carbon pulse. Out of all the times past and future I could have been born in, how did I get here?