Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
It is quite remarkable, how climate-worried pundits feel free to badmouth any research that doesn't produce the 'correct' outcome
Here @Noahpinion telling us that the world's only climate economist to get the Nobel prize is "obviously bananas"
https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/why-has-climate-economics-failed …pic.twitter.com/fyFxdxMoHR
Because Grist reporter says "climate scientists believe" economic model to be untrue Let's just remember: many prominent climate scientists also believe that strong sea-level rise will lead to widespread flooding and make 187 million people homeless https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sea-level-rise-could-be-even-worse-than-weve-been-led-to-expect/2019/05/30/7eb5a7f8-7d9f-11e9-8ede-f4abf521ef17_story.html …pic.twitter.com/doEwIxfjru
Reference for 187m flooded is https://www.pnas.org/content/116/23/11195 …, only citing https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsta.2010.0291 … That reference says that adaptation costing <0.02% of GDP will fix >99.8% of the problem — "the problem of environmental refugees almost disappears"pic.twitter.com/sJ49PUoiEH
Deeply problematic to rely on climate scientists to judge *social* impact because *adaptation* makes all the difference Here is an updated version of the scare story of 187m flooded (assuming no adaptation) and the reality of virtually no flooded https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162520304157 …pic.twitter.com/0azvxAxXQu
That is why we need the estimates from climate economists
Foulmouthing eg @RichardTol for giving "wrong" answers is not helpful
Take example of failing to get sense of proportion before claiming "bad science": Figuring out deaths from increasing tempspic.twitter.com/zf1tFeSDec
Research typically shows realistic rising temps means little change in deaths, because more heat, but less cold death
But @Noahpinion tells us confidently such "bad science" neglects storms, fires and floods
Yeah, because those deaths are minuscule compared to heat/cold deathspic.twitter.com/Tu4itIYGwv
One really needs to know that when talking about impacts of rising temps on deaths heat and cold matters but — because of expanding adaptation — floods, droughts, storms, wildfire and extreme temps increasingly don't http://www.emdat.be , http://ihmeuw.org/5fyg pic.twitter.com/zdZ7ZLxwIH
You don't believe climate scientists ?
Is @IPCC_CH good enough for you ?
Don't see what you're getting at here.
What is a reasonable way to think about economic activity surrounding climate change mitigation? Is GDP alone a sufficient measure. Flood mitigation results in economic activity but diverts resources that could be used for improved human flourishing; healthcare, education etc.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
