What if they had a mass extinction and nobody died?

Apart from occasional eructations like the recent children’s crusade, you can’t escape the feeling that the wheels are slowly falling off the climate bandwagon. Public concern about global warming waxes and wanes (often suspiciously in sync with the northern summer months), but it’s one thing to say you’re concerned about global warming, quite another to be prepared to put your money where your mouth is, as the cost and reliability of “renewables” begins to bite consumers.

It seems that the globalist embiggeners of climate change scaremongering sense, too, that their bogey-man is losing its ability to frighten. So now they’re draping another bedsheet over their heads, holding another torch under their faces, and telling a new scary story. Mass extinction is the new climate change. quote.

A new United Nations report warns that “global rate of species extinction is already at least tens to hundreds of times higher than the average rate over the past 10 million years and is accelerating.” end quote.

Gosh. Lucky for us, the UN has a handy solution. Oddly, it sounds exactly like the prescription for global cooling global warming climate change. quote.

The only solution to the possible extinction of 1 million species: “Transformative change” in human society, according to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). “By transformative change, we mean…” reducing human population growth, eschewing “overconsumption,” and “addressing inequalities, especially regarding income and gender, which undermine capacity for sustainability.” end quote.

Globalism: is there any problem it can’t solve? Even made-up ones? In The Skeptical Environmentalist, Bjørn Lomborg examines how early estimates of “accelerating extinctions” were arrived at: essentially by just saying that it was so. That claim is then repeated, long after its provenance is forgotten, and thus someone’s “I just reckon…” becomes mistaken for scientific fact. quote.

How did the IPBES researchers come up with their estimate of 1 million species at risk of extinction?…Parsing those numbers [of known species] suggest that 3,680 or so species are at risk of extinction. Certainly not good, but far from 1 million. Insect extinction estimates are where the numbers really get boosted. The researchers claim that “available evidence supports a tentative estimate of 10 percent” for insect species at risk of extinction. Since insects make up around 75 percent of 8 million species, this means that 600,000 species are at risk of extinction.

The IPBES report further bolsters its estimate of species at risk by making calculations based on the species area relationship…However, some researchers counter that species area curve calculations considerably overestimate extinction rates from habitat loss. end quote.

If just making things up doesn’t work, try backwards reasoning. quote.

As noted above, another way the IPBES tries to figure out the number of future extinctions is to assert that the rate of species disappearance is accelerating…The only way to get estimates of between a half million and a million extinctions using this method is to assume the extinction rate will accelerate to  10,000 times higher than the natural background rate. end quote.

But that’s not the only bad logic the UN is guilty of. Its “transformative changes” – slowing population growth, reducing inequality and so on, are already happening. But they’re happening in spite of, not because of, the UN’s regressive agenda. The capitalist economic growth that the UN hates so much is setting people free and making a better world. quote.

Due to increasing wealth, education, and urbanization, world population will peak later this century at around 8 to 9 billion. As result of urbanization, the number of people living on the landscape will drop by half from 3.6 billion now to 1.8 billion by the end of this century. The result is more land spared for nature.

humanprogress end quote.

The Malthusian miserablists who infest the UN are addicted to doom and gloom, and they’ve been making the same, scary predictions since forever. That they never come true doesn’t bother them in the least. They have an agenda to implement, after all.