Could climate change trash the States of Righteousness before it destroys Florida?

Democrats love contemplating the destruction of Florida almost as much as they love reflecting on Donald Trump’s crimes and convictions.

The Democrat dream begins with a rejection of Science, i.e., saying that climate change has already resulted in more frequent and more intense hurricanes. “Changes in Atlantic major hurricane frequency since the late-19th century” (Nature magazine, 2021; by geoscientists from NOAA and Princeton) looks at data from 1851-2019 and concludes the opposite:

To evaluate past changes in frequency, we have here developed a homogenization method for Atlantic hurricane and major hurricane frequency over 1851–2019. We find that recorded century-scale increases in Atlantic hurricane and major hurricane frequency, and associated decrease in USA hurricanes strike fraction, are consistent with changes in observing practices and not likely a true climate trend. After homogenization, increases in basin-wide hurricane and major hurricane activity since the 1970s are not part of a century-scale increase, but a recovery from a deep minimum in the 1960s–1980s.

One of the most consistent expectations from projected future global warming is that there should be an increase in TC intensity, such that the fraction of [major hurricanes] MH to [Atlantic hurricanes] HU increases … there are no significant increases in either basin-wide HU or MH frequency, or in the MH/HU ratio for the Atlantic basin between 1878 and 2019 (when the U.S. Signal Corps started tracking NA HUs … The homogenized basin-wide HU and MH record does not show strong evidence of a century-scale increase in either MH frequency or MH/HU ratio associated with the century-scale, greenhouse-gas-induced warming of the planet. …Caution should be taken in connecting recent changes in Atlantic hurricane activity to the century-scale warming of our planet.

Suppose that progressives are correct and the NOAA/Princeton geoscience nerds are wrong. Let’s assume that there will be more hurricanes and that each hurricane will be more intense than in the past. Is it guaranteed that these intensified and more frequent hurricanes will hit the Deplorables in Florida? Let’s go back to Nature magazine. “Poleward expansion of tropical cyclone latitudes in warming climates” (2021):

Tropical cyclones (TCs, also known as hurricanes and typhoons) generally form at low latitudes with access to the warm waters of the tropical oceans, but far enough off the equator to allow planetary rotation to cause aggregating convection to spin up into coherent vortices. Yet, current prognostic frameworks for TC latitudes make contradictory predictions for climate change. Simulations of past warm climates, such as the Eocene and Pliocene, show that TCs can form and intensify at higher latitudes than of those during pre-industrial conditions. Observations and model projections for the twenty-first century indicate that TCs may again migrate poleward in response to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, which poses profound risks to the planet’s most populous regions. Previous studies largely neglected the complex processes that occur at temporal and spatial scales of individual storms as these are poorly resolved in numerical models. Here we review this mesoscale physics in the context of responses to climate warming of the Hadley circulation, jet streams and Intertropical Convergence Zone. We conclude that twenty-first century TCs will most probably occupy a broader range of latitudes than those of the past 3 million years as low-latitude genesis will be supplemented with increasing mid-latitude TC favourability, although precise estimates for future migration remain beyond current methodologies.

As decoded for the public in an AP News article, “Climate change could bring more storms like Hurricane Lee to New England”:

One recent study found climate change could result in hurricanes expanding their reach more often into mid-latitude regions, which includes New York, Boston and even Beijing. Factors in this, the study found, are the warmer sea surface temperatures in these regions and the shifting and weakening of the jet streams — strong bands of air currents that encircle the planet in both hemispheres.

“These jet stream changes combined with the warmer ocean temperatures are making the mid latitude more favorable to hurricanes,” Joshua Studholme, a Yale University physicist and lead author on the study. “Ultimately meaning that these regions are likely to see more storm formation, intensification and persistence.”

Another study simulated tropical cyclone tracks from pre-industrial times, modern times and a future with higher emissions. It found that hurricanes will move north and east in the Atlantic. It also found hurricanes would track closer to the coasts including Boston, New York and Norfolk, Virginia and more likely to form along the Southeast coast, giving New Englanders less time to prepare.

In other words, if the dire predictions of the climate alarmists come true the result could be hurricanes redirected from the 20-year-old concrete houses of South Florida to the 150-year-old wooden houses of New England.

Perhaps some of this punishment of the virtuous has already happened. Scientific American, which endorsed climate warrior Joe Biden, says “Extreme Heat Threatens Student Health in Schools without Air-Conditioning”:

Yet as extreme heat affects more students and disrupts more school days, government spending to keep kids cool remains woefully inadequate, experts say, allowing an underreported health crisis to fester in school districts across the country.

One school in Rhode Island “had components of their operating HVAC systems that were nearly 100 years old,” the GAO stated. Yet few local school boards in financially strapped districts can afford to upgrade old mechanical systems.

The same is true for a school in Natick, Mass., a 36,000-person city 22 miles west of Boston, where “staff and students have suffered heat stroke and other heat-related illness due to the lack of centralized air-conditioning during high degree days,” according to a summary of the $2 million grant.

Guess where schools already have A/C… Florida! In fact, some Florida schools have fully air conditioned field houses (WPTV) to support athletic training in mid-August, the beginning of the school year here:

Circling back to hurricanes… if the NOAA and Princeton eggheads cited above are wrong, it is possible that Floridians accustomed to a hurricane every 30 years might have to endure one every 20 years and that their impact windows, impact garage doors, and 160 mph-rated roofs would therefore get tested more frequently. But if the Yale egghead cited above is correct, the folks who have been gleefully contemplating Florida’s suffering will fare worse given that their communities were never designed to withstand hurricanes.

Full post, including comments

Climate change is an existential threat, but China is a bigger threat

Joe Biden, 2023 (

You know, I’ve seen firsthand what the reports made clear: the devastating toll of climate change and its existential threat to all of us. And it is the ultimate threat to humanity: climate change.

“Biden to Quadruple Tariffs on Chinese EVs” (Wall Street Journal, May 10, 2024):

The Biden administration is preparing to raise tariffs on clean-energy goods from China in the coming days, with the levy on Chinese electric vehicles set to roughly quadruple, according to people familiar with the matter. … signs that China was ramping up exports of clean-energy goods prompted concern in Washington, where officials are trying to protect a nascent American clean-energy industry from China.

Officials are particularly focused on electric vehicles, and they are expected to raise the tariff rate to roughly 100% from 25%, according to the people. An additional 2.5% duty applies to all automobiles imported into the U.S. The existing 25% tariff on Chinese electric vehicles has so far effectively barred those models, often cheaper than Western-made cars, from the U.S. market. Biden administration officials, automakers and some lawmakers worry that wouldn’t be enough given the scale of Chinese manufacturing.

In other words, it is better for all humans to be killed by climate change (the “existential threat” turning out to be real) than it is to drive a Chinese car or use any other “clean-energy good” from China.

One might think that the cognitive dissonance would start to become apparent even to climate change alarmists themselves. Greta Thunberg has switched to pro-Hamas activism (e.g., protesting against the 20-year-old Eden Golan singing in the Eurovision contest; this reminds me to wonder if there will be a sequel to the Will Ferrell movie). Even if we accept that Palestinians are the world’s most noble people, how is the status of their war against the Israelis more important than the impending death of all humans that she previously warned us about? Of course, there are the climate change alarmists who use private jets. And we have the Biden administration, which says that climate change is on track to kill all humans and also keeps the border open so that millions of migrants from low-carbon societies can become high-carbon-output residents of the U.S. (the quickest method of accelerating CO2 emissions imaginable). Finally, we now have these huge tariffs to discourage Americans from adopting what we’ve been informed are planet-saving/humanity-saving technologies.

Separately… the YANGWANG U9 from BYD, with the 1 horsepower that is required for moving at Miami Beach traffic speed and 1,299 hp in reserve.

Full post, including comments

United Nations climate change alarmist steps out of a Gulfstream

The UN proudly displays a picture of its top executive getting out of a Gulfstream in Egypt (note the oval windows)

A first class lie-flat nonstop commercial flight from NY to Cairo was not an option, apparently. Why is it interesting that an elite spews a few trucks worth of Jet A into the atmosphere? Six days earlier, the same person characterized climate change as #1 among the “crises assaulting our planet”:

In 2023, he highlighted climate change as “killing people and devastating communities” and called for “phasing out” oil (peasants would stop using it so that elites would enjoy lower prices when topping off their Gulfstreams?):

In the comments below a reader points out that the specific Gulfstream in the photo might not have carried the Hero of Climate Change all the way from New York. I did a little digging and found that the United Nations operates its own fleet of private jets, apparently, in “UN” livery:

In case the original is memory-holed:

Full post, including comments

ChatGPT as a productive climate scientist

Some science professor friends were discussing “Surge in number of ‘extremely productive’ authors concerns scientists” (Nature Magazine):

Up to four times more researchers pump out more than 60 papers a year than less than a decade ago. Saudi Arabia and Thailand saw the sharpest uptick in the number of such scientists over the past few years, according to a preprint posted on bioRxiv on 24 November. The increase in these ‘extremely productive’ authors raises concerns that some researchers are resorting to dubious methods to publish extra papers.

Could ChatGPT enter the arena? I asked for 50 climate change paper titles:

  1. “Rapid Arctic Meltdown: Implications for Global Sea Level Rise”
  2. “Unprecedented Carbon Emissions: Nearing Irreversible Climate Tipping Points”
  3. “Global Heatwaves: Escalating Threats to Human Health and Agriculture”
  4. “Ocean Acidification: The Silent Crisis Decimating Marine Life”
  5. “Climate-Induced Mega Droughts: The New Normal?”
  6. “Vanishing Glaciers: Water Scarcity and the Impending Crisis”
  7. “Rising Sea Levels: The Looming Threat to Coastal Cities”
  8. “Extreme Weather Events: The Cost of Inaction on Climate Change”
  9. “Disappearing Coral Reefs: A Warning Sign of Ocean Health Decline”
  10. “The Methane Time Bomb: Thawing Permafrost and Climate Catastrophe”
  11. “Climate Change and Pandemics: Linking Environmental Degradation to Health Risks”
  12. “Food Security in Jeopardy: The Impact of Climate Change on Crop Yields”
  13. “Climate Refugees: The Human Cost of Environmental Displacement”
  14. “Infernos of Change: The Increasing Frequency of Wildfires”
  15. “The Thinning Ice: Polar Bear Habitats in Peril”
  16. “Floods and Famine: Climate Change’s Impact on Humanitarian Crises”
  17. “The Vanishing Amazon: Deforestation and Global Climate Effects”
  18. “Tropical Cyclones in a Warming World: Increasing Frequency and Intensity”
  19. “Toxic Air: How Climate Change Worsens Air Pollution”
  20. “Melting Mountain Snowcaps: Implications for Freshwater Resources”
  21. “The Climate Gap: Socioeconomic Disparities in Climate Change Impacts”
  22. “Lethal Heat: Surpassing Human Survival Limits”
  23. “The Greenhouse Effect: Amplifying Global Warming”
  24. “Shrinking Biodiversity: Climate Change and Species Extinction”
  25. “Rising Oceans, Sinking Cities: The Reality of Coastal Erosion”
  26. “Climate Change and Mental Health: The Unseen Toll”
  27. “Disrupted Ecosystems: The Cascading Effects of Climate Change”
  28. “The Bleak Future of Snow Sports: Impact of Warming Winters”
  29. “Unstoppable Thaw: The Fate of the World’s Glaciers”
  30. “The Disintegration of Ice Shelves: A Warning from Antarctica”
  31. “Dying Oceans: The Impact of Warming Waters on Marine Life”
  32. “Heatwave Hell: Surviving the New Climate Extremes”
  33. “Arid Earth: Desertification and the Loss of Arable Land”
  34. “Climate Catastrophe: The Economics of a Warming World”
  35. “The Climate Health Emergency: Risks to Global Public Health”
  36. “Suffocating Seas: Declining Oxygen Levels in Oceans”
  37. “Climate Wars: Resource Conflicts in a Warming World”
  38. “The Last Generation: Wildlife on the Brink in a Changing Climate”
  39. “Tipping Point: The Last Chance to Prevent Climate Catastrophe”
  40. “Collapsing Ecosystems: The Domino Effect of Climate Change”
  41. “The Acid Rain Revival: Increased Pollution from Climate Change”
  42. “Inescapable Heat: The Urban Heat Island Effect Worsens”
  43. “The Climate Migration Crisis: Predicting Mass Movements”
  44. “Warming Waters: The Threat to Global Fisheries”
  45. “Carbon’s Legacy: The Long-Term Effects of CO2 Emissions”
  46. “Climate Anxiety: Psychological Impacts of Environmental Change”
  47. “The Drowning of Cultural Heritage: Sea-Level Rise and Historical Sites”
  48. “The End of Seasons: Disrupting Natural Climate Cycles”
  49. “Climate-Induced Starvation: The Future of Global Food Supplies”
  50. “The Silent Killer: Rising CO2 Levels and Respiratory Health”

The last one is my favorite, but wouldn’t it be better as “I Can’t Breathe: Rising CO2 Levels and Respiratory Health”? I asked ChatGPT to draft it.


The rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) due to human activities have become a significant concern for global climate change and public health. This paper examines the relationship between elevated CO2 levels and respiratory health issues. Through an extensive review of existing literature and analysis of current air quality and health data, we explore the direct and indirect impacts of increased CO2 on respiratory health. Our study finds a correlation between high CO2 concentrations and a rise in respiratory ailments, particularly in urban areas. This paper contributes to the growing body of evidence suggesting that rising CO2 levels pose a considerable threat to public health, beyond their widely recognized environmental impacts. We conclude with recommendations for policy interventions and further research to mitigate the health risks associated with CO2 emissions.


1.1 Background Information

The Earth’s atmosphere is experiencing unprecedented changes due to anthropogenic activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels, leading to increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2). This increase in CO2 is a major driving force behind global climate change, with well-documented impacts on the environment. However, the implications of rising CO2 levels extend beyond climate change, posing significant challenges to public health, particularly respiratory health.

1.2 Problem Statement

While the link between air pollutants like particulate matter and respiratory health has been well established, the specific impacts of elevated CO2 levels have received less attention. High concentrations of CO2 are known to affect air quality and, by extension, respiratory health. This paper aims to address this gap by investigating the relationship between rising atmospheric CO2 levels and respiratory health outcomes.

1.3 Research Objectives

  • To review the current literature on the impacts of increased atmospheric CO2 levels.
  • To analyze the correlation between CO2 concentrations and respiratory health issues.
  • To explore the potential mechanisms through which CO2 can affect respiratory health.
  • To assess the public health implications of these findings and suggest appropriate policy responses.

1.4 Significance of the Study

Understanding the health impacts of rising CO2 levels is crucial for developing effective public health strategies and policies. This study contributes to the body of knowledge needed to address one of the most pressing issues of our time – climate change and its impact on human health. It also underscores the need for a multi-disciplinary approach to tackling environmental challenges, one that encompasses environmental science, public health, policy-making, and community engagement.

Full post, including comments

Science says to throw out all of your appliances

Planet Earth can be saved if we all throw out our 2-10-year-old appliances that are in perfect working condition. That’s the Science according to the New York Times… “The Climate Fight Will Be Won in the Appliance Aisle” (Oct 1, 2023):

Two of these [Inflation Reduction Act] programs are tax credits meant to give Americans a tax discount when they install a new rooftop solar system, a geothermal-powered heater, a heat pump or another technology that reduces demand for carbon-emitting fossil fuels. Unlike other tax credits in the law, these programs have no income cap, so they can be used by wealthy Americans who can presumably afford to pay upfront to install residential equipment like a water heater. But like other new tax credits in the law, they require Americans to have some federal tax liability in the first place. If you owe nothing on your taxes, then you can’t get a discount.

The I.R.A. introduced a pair of rebate programs meant to help working- and middle-class Americans afford to upgrade appliances and other features of their homes. These two programs, known as HOMES and HEEHRA, are important. When it’s finally put in place, HEEHRA will lower the cost of heat pumps and other climate-friendly appliances at the point of sale, making them more affordable to consumers, including those who are not even aware of the policy. More than perhaps any other programs in the law, these rebates are meant to allow low-income Americans to reduce their monthly energy costs. And because they involve direct cash grants, using the rebates will not require oweing any taxes to the federal government. That is huge for retirees and Social Security recipients, many of whom have no earned income and little to no federal tax liability.

The climate fight might be waged in the streets. But it will be won in the appliance aisle.

It is, of course, wonderful that working-class renters must pay for the new high-end air conditioning systems enjoyed by elite homeowners. But I’m confused as to how this can save the planet. If people throw out working appliances and buy new ones, which have to be manufactured, shipped, and installed, won’t that actually increase CO2 emissions? If so, should we consider New York sustainability expert William Lauder to be the greatest environmentalist of the moment? He pushed a 6-year-old house into a landfill:

The new house, presumably, will include higher-efficiency Sub-Zero refrigerators with R600a refrigerant. Our planet, then, began to heal when the excavators started work on this obsolete 6-year-old 36,000-square-foot house.

Full post, including comments

New York Times now says it is all of Florida’s coastal waters that hit 101 degrees

“What’s Next for Hurricane Season” (NYT, today):

… the heightened ocean water temperatures that grabbed headlines this summer for bleaching coral and turning Florida’s coastal waters into something akin to a hot tub. Scientists believe that climate change has contributed to the warming oceans. The abnormally hot water temperatures provide more energy to fuel hurricanes…

Loyal readers may recall Being boiled alive in the 101-degree ocean (according to NYT) in which the New York Times said that one buoy “in the Ocean Off Florida” hit 101 (it turned out to be a buoy in a 1-6′-deep puddle inside Florida, cut off from the actual ocean by the Florida Keys). Here’s the headline, complete with photo of the open ocean where the 101-degree temperature wasn’t measured:

In August, it was “a [single] high reading”. One month later, the “hot tub” temperatures have spread to most or all of the “coastal waters” surrounding Florida.

What does say?

Water temp at the most familiar Florida beach is between -1 and +1 degree of the recent historical average. A typical hot tub is at 102 degrees. The current Miami Beach water temp of 86 is about where a recreational swimming pool would be set to. Over the past 7 years, it seems that the high temp for July, August, and September has been 89. In other words, what the New York Times calls “abnormally hot temperatures” are in the middle of the recent historical range.

What have elite New Yorkers been doing recently to address the climate change that they decry? Getting into fossil fuel-powered vehicles and going to see Bruce Springsteen perform in New Jersey. Instead of spending $2000+ on decarbonizing our economy, they’re listening to a geriatric fellow Democrat sing songs that they could stream for free. (Separately, these are the same folks who say that schools should be closed and the peasantry locked down any time that a respiratory virus threatens Gotham, yet they’re gathering in a crowd of 50,000+ to spread vaccine-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants?)

Full post, including comments

The environmentalist and 40 tons of snow

2016… “Kevin Costner – “It’s time we woke up to reality””:

My Indian heritage begins in Noble County, in Cherokee Outlet, which is why I consider myself to be a true American. I love and respect my country, its Star-Spangled Banner and the idyllic vision that goes with it. I love its wide-open spaces, its history and its roots, its many resources, the opportunities it gives, and its capacity to always bounce back. If that’s what it is to be patriotic, then that’s what I am! But I’m no fool. This country is heading straight for disaster if we don’t change the way we live. Today’s society is marred by racism, greed and cynicism, and we need to fight this every single day.

As a Native American who loves wide-open spaces, a lesser version of Kevin Costner might question the wisdom of expanding the population by 100+ million via low-skill immigration (the previous batch of migrants had such a positive effect on Native Americans?). But the actual Kevin Costner in 2018 was all-in on welcoming as many migrants as possible, especially those with dependent children who can occupy previously open spaces in American K-12 schools and health care facilities.

Now that Costner has been sued by his wife, we discover what the carbon footprint of an environmentalist is. From the Daily Mail:

Later in the morning, Baumgartner shared further details of the family’s luxury lifestyle including Christmas parties that saw them truck 40 tons of snow to a 10-acre plot they also own close to their main California house just for the event.

Baumgartner described how they would hire ‘all the animals from the stable in Bethlehem for the children to ride, as well as a forest of fir trees and would have toboggan runs built.

She said the plot is also used for birthday camping events that would see them pitch 40 tents for their son Cayden and his friends and hire taco trucks to provide food.

Separately, the plaintiff is demonstrating that child support is the new alimony and the best way to get profits on top of whatever is provided in a prenuptial agreement:

The mom-of-three initially asked for a monthly child support total of $248,000, which Costner, 68, said he was opposed to. … [earlier in the article] During his deposition two weeks ago, the Dances with Wolves star put his monthly living expenses at $240,000 but wants to pay his ex no more than $60,000 per month.

Baumgartner, who moved out of the marital home last month following a court wrangle, said her new $40,000-a-month rental property in Montecito does not compare to the one she left behind.

A legal filing lodged with court last week said: ‘Unlike Kevin’s Beach Club Compound, the September rental is on the mountain side of the freeway.

‘It does not have beach front access, nor is it walking distance to the beach, and has no scenic view.’

Costner was not only the primary breadwinner, but the only person making money recently, and Baumgartner says in her filing that she has no income

Remember that child support revenue is tax-free. So if, in addition to whatever she makes under the prenuptial agreement, the plaintiff does get only the offered $60,000 per month, that addition will yield a spending power comparable to what a Californian earning nearly $1.5 million per year can spend.

Notice also how the newspaper makes it sound as though the decision to spend what would have been the kids’ time and money in family court was a mutual one. A subhead refers to the plaintiff and defendant as “the warring couple.” A reader would have to scroll down a few pages to learn that it was the wife who had this idea and filed the lawsuit.

Circling back to the main theme… how is someone whose carbon footprint includes multiple houses, the fuel necessary to truck in 40 tons of snow, etc. able to call himself an “environmentalist”? Also, if your own lifestyle costs $10+ million/year to maintain, is it reasonable to criticize other people for their “greed”?


Full post, including comments

Climate Change alarmist spends $68 million on a sea level barrier island teardown

2020: “Jeff Bezos Commits $10 Billion to Address Climate Change” (New York Times)…

“Climate change is the biggest threat to our planet,” he wrote. “I want to work alongside others both to amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change on this planet we all share.”

2023: “Jeff Bezos revealed as buyer of $68M Indian Creek teardown” (The Real Deal)…

Billionaire Jeff Bezos, the third richest person in the world, reportedly paid $68 million to purchase a waterfront home in Miami’s Indian Creek Village.

The mansion Bezos reportedly purchased was built in 1965 and expanded in 1985. It spans nearly 9,300 square feet with three bedrooms and three bathrooms on a 2.8-acre lot.

Last year, his parents, Mike and Jackie Bezos, purchased two waterfront homes in Coral Gables for $78 million.

Where is Indian Creek? See the top right corner:

Let’s hope that the new house is completed before sea level rise washes Miami Beach away!

Full post, including comments

Will the media end up doing more economic damage to Hawaii than the fires?

The loss of life in the Lahaina fire is sad, of course, but this post is about the economics. Folks I’ve talked to here in the Northeast (I’m traveling around via Cirrus) who’ve followed this by scanning media headlines have the impression that much or most of Maui has been destroyed and/or that all of Hawaii is a no-go zone for tourists. To the extent that they would have considered a vacation in Hawaii, therefore, they would now postpone it for at least a year or two.

Estimates of direct property damage from the Maui fires seem to be in the $3 billion range. But the big airport and the big resorts were untouched, so there wouldn’t be a rational reason for tourists to avoid Maui this winter. Hawaii’s extended lockdown was a serious self-inflicted wound from 2020-2022. About 20 percent of the state’s economy, pre-coronapanic, was tourism. Total revenue for 2019 was nearly $18 billion in pre-Biden money. If media hysteria reduces tourism by even 20 percent, therefore, the economic damage from journalists will exceed the economic damage from the fires.

Here is an example… “The Hawaii fires are a dire omen of the climate crisis’s cost to Pacific peoples” (Guardian). Note that it is not the “Lahaina fires” or the “Maui fires” but fires that have covered all of Hawaii.

From the righteous at CNN… “Survey of devastation left after Hawaii wildfires”.

If Hawaii is “devastated”, does that mean the winter of 2023-4 is a good time for a visit?

Update, September 1: “Tourists Were Told to Avoid Maui. Many Workers Want Them Back.” (NYT) Nearly a month after the fire, Maui, a tourism-dependent island with a hotel room for every seven and a half households, is hosting fewer visitors than at any point since the coronavirus pandemic. Pristine beaches sit empty, even those that are many miles from Lahaina. Hundreds of unused rental cars are parked in fields near the island’s main airport in Kahului, where planes arrive half full. … The implosion of Maui’s economy, of which tourism comprises about 40 percent, has been swift and severe. State economic officials estimate that the island is seeing about 4,250 fewer visitors each day than normal, representing a loss of $9 million a day. In South Maui, seven of every 10 hotel rooms sit empty, compared with about two in 10 during normal times.

Full post, including comments

Why are climate change alarmists also passionate about maximizing human health?

Here’s Greta Thunberg, who says that humanity is going extinct (the precise date is unclear), protecting her slender young body from attack by SARS-CoV-2:

Why worry about COVID-19 if these are the end times for humanity? When we burn up in the atmosphere will we be complaining about our Long COVID and Long Monkeypox symptoms?

I observed the same phenomenon at a two-day MIT CSAIL anniversary event. It opened with a declaration of climate alarmism (“existential threat”) and then featured talks about (1) using advanced computerized techniques, such as AI, to attack rare medical conditions (thus reducing the death rate by 1 percent?), (2) “data-driven AI Healthcare”, (3) “Can Financial Engineering and Data Science Help Cure Cancer?” (from Andrew Lo, who didn’t mention that diabetes is always ready to kill elderly cancer-free humans), (4) AI matching of humans to medical specialists for superior treatment just before the planet melts, (5) “AI for Genome Medicine”, (6) AI for equitable health care (by Marzyeh Ghassemi, whose web site explains more), (7) machine learning for clinical AI and drug discovery, (8) drug improvement via AI, and (9) “AI guidance for the future of health care”.

Staying perfectly healthy right up to the moment that Earth becomes hotter than Venus was, in fact, the most common topic.

Wouldn’t it make more sense, though, to shut down most computers due to their use of planet-warming energy? Even if a server is powered by wind or nuclear, it would make more sense to use that electricity to power a carbon capture system. Suppose that we can allow ourselves the luxury of a few hyper-efficient computers. Wouldn’t it make the most sense to use them to maximize human happiness during these twilight years (or months?)? Have software suggest parties and other in-person gatherings that people can attend, for example.

I also observed this recently in the San Francisco Bay Area. The same folks who said that they thought humanity was doomed due to climate change were also diligently wearing their N95 masks. And they’re worried about HIV because humans need a great immune system when climate doom arrives to kill us all? Rockridge BART station:

Full post, including comments