Bjorn LomborgVarmennettu tili

Climate hysteria Washington Post reporter retweeting claim that ocean acidification could lead to no more saltwater fish with 30 years Yes, problem, but absolutely no support for claim of saltwater fish eradication in UN Climate Panel Report https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WGIIAR5-Chap6_FINAL.pdf …https://twitter.com/sarahkaplan48/status/1088989791360831489 …

"...two effects range from 97 to 301 billion 2014 dollars per year (0.09 - 0.28% of current world GDP). We argue that aquaculture output would not be reduced, due to the high potential for adaptation by this young industry." Which means complete loss of corals is no big deal?

Corals are included in costs: It counts $2-49bn/yr in the report

I think that's why this is hard to keep a sense of proportion - because things that feel big, (e.g. complete loss of corals reefs), are only a "small" percent of GDP. My question: what DOES count as a big percent of GDP? It's small relative to our sense of numbers. But to build