US scientists ‘dont want to talk about’ climate change and climate change deniers
Scientists at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have concluded that their research into the effects of climate change on human health, and their conclusions on the impact of the carbon tax, is “not worth the time.”
The paper was published in the journal Scientific Reports, and was written by Dr. Peter H. E. Stankiewicz, a professor of environmental and occupational health sciences.
He explained in an email to Climate Central that he was writing the paper “to clarify the state of our understanding of the health effects of CO2 emissions, and to raise awareness of how much misinformation exists about the effects and causes of CO 2 emissions.”
“We do not believe the paper is relevant to climate policy,” Stankiewski told Climate Central.
“We would have loved to have a more robust and systematic review of our data to confirm or refute the paper’s conclusions.
We also don’t want to put any more pressure on people to believe our conclusions.”
The researchers concluded that, although CO2 is a greenhouse gas, it is not a primary contributor to global warming.
The researchers found that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are largely driven by human activity and that there is a “large but not statistically significant reduction” in the amount of CO₂ entering the atmosphere due to emissions.
“In contrast, CO2-induced increases in temperature are associated with significant increases in disease and mortality in the long run,” the authors wrote.
“A reduction in mortality from climate change would not result in a reduction in COℓ emissions.”
The authors concluded that climate change is a human-induced threat to human health that “is not adequately addressed by current policies.”
“Our findings are not only concerning but also controversial,” Dr. David M. Lipsman, a senior scientist at the National Institutes of Health and the director of the Division of Atmospheric Sciences at UW-Madison, said in a statement.
“Our study raises significant questions about the credibility of the global warming alarmist narrative.
It shows that climate models cannot predict the health impacts of CO emissions.”
Dr. William J. Haynes, a climate change scientist at Pennsylvania State University and co-author of the paper, told Climate Change News that the paper has important implications for the public understanding of climate science.
“It is really a wake-up call to all of us in the scientific community that climate science is in the midst of a crisis,” Haynes told Climate News.
“The current alarmist narratives, the denialism, are leading us to a dangerous place where the risks of climate action are growing and getting worse.
The reality is that we are only a couple years away from a major climate crisis.”
He continued, “The fact that these authors, the most senior climate scientists in the world, have come to this conclusion, that they’re not convinced, is really troubling and we need to look at that.”
The findings of the study come at a time of renewed concern about climate change.
As global temperatures rise, more extreme weather events are becoming more common, and the frequency of extreme weather in the United States has increased, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.