I didn’t want to believe your parentheses text, but I found that the author also has an article criticizing climate projections as volatile and too far into the

I didn’t want to believe your parentheses text, but I found that the author also has an article criticizing climate projections as volatile and too far into the future [1]. This is straight up climate denial. It’s very pernicious. It admits that climate is changing, it references one of the more dire predictions (3 C), and it doesn’t deny that the change is human caused. It’s pernicious because it shifts attention from an important negative implication (uncertainty with climate) towards an positive but inconsequential impact (more land area). Instead of talking about mass migrations of billions of people and food availability, we’re talking about land. These arguments are always all over the place, they vary from “it’s not happening” to “don’t worry about it if it is” Climate skepticism has never been about good faith scientific inquiry, it’s always been about insulating incumbent interests from change. [1] http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2021/11/a-prediction-we-will-get-to-test.html?m=1 http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2021/11/a-prediction-we-w...