What does it mean to "believe in climate change"?

[Robin-H]

I provided another link just above your post and a quote from it, but here it is again and I won't be proving another.

 

Since we started doing these calculations, we have watched the wealth of the top grow at the same time as the wealth of the bottom 50% has fallen. The data tells us that the bottom 50% have approximately $1tn less wealth than they did five years ago, while the richest 62 have about $500bn more.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/apr/30/the-worlds-poorest-50-are-a-trillion-dollars-worse-off-whats-going-on

 

That's the article I read and taken quotes from (in the above reply) clearly showing that you didn't read beyond the headline..

 

So you have provided a link to an article that says exactly what I have been arguing - it says incomes of the poorest are rising (see my quote from the article above) and also suggests that the lives or the poorest are also improving (again, see the quote from the article above).

 

Are you really refusing to post any more evidence? So far you have only provided evidence for my side of the argument.

Edited November 4, 2016 by Robin-H

[Petminder]

Petminder, I'm not sure if that link was meant to be the evidence I requested.

 

Again, if you read beyond the headline you will see that it actually says that the incomes of the poorest people in the world have been rising.

 

"In fact to the contrary, the incomes of the poorest have been rising, millions of people have been escaping poverty and in 2015 it was estimated that the extreme poverty rate had fallen to less than 10%"

 

The article tries to come up with a reason why the total wealth of the bottom 50% of the world has decreased. It doesn't give a definitive answer, but one it suggests is precisely what I have been arguing - that the lives of then poorest are getting better. It seems counter intuitive to begin with, but the article explains why the could be the case, stating..

 

"In countries where social insurance mechanisms become stronger, wealth becomes less important as a safety net and people can also afford to take on larger debts. People are better off and more confident about the future, albeit making themselves more vulnerable to financial shocks where social safety nets fail."

 

It also gives a more prosaic explanation..

 

"...the data, particularly for the wealth of the bottom 50% isn’t good enough at the level of detail we want it to explain. This is especially the case for poorer countries where good quality data sources are hard to find."

 

---------- Post added 04-11-2016 at 13:43 ----------

 

 

No Petminder, we are going round in circles because you are failing to show any evidence to back up what you are saying.

 

Income and wealth are different, income can increase but if it doesn't keep up with the cost of living you become poorer.

[Robin-H]

Income and wealth are different, income can increase but if it doesn't keep up with the cost of living you become poorer.

 

Did you read the article? Shall I post the relevant quote again?

 

"In countries where social insurance mechanisms become stronger, wealth becomes less important as a safety net and people can also afford to take on larger debts. People are better off and more confident about the future, albeit making themselves more vulnerable to financial shocks where social safety nets fail."

 

Again, are you refusing to post any more evidence? So far you have only provided evidence for my side of the argument.

[Petminder]

Did you read the article? Shall I post the relevant quote again?

 

"In countries where social insurance mechanisms become stronger, wealth becomes less important as a safety net and people can also afford to take on larger debts. People are better off and more confident about the future, albeit making themselves more vulnerable to financial shocks where social safety nets fail."

 

Again, are you refusing to post any more evidence? So far you have only provided evidence for my side of the argument.

 

If you believe that every country as a insurance mechanisms and everyone in the world as an income that is rising then I can't see the point in even talking about it with you, if you want to believe that technology as made everyone better of then please feel free to believe it. I can't be bothered to waste any more of my time on you.

[Robin-H]

If you believe that every country as a insurance mechanisms and everyone in the world as an income that is rising then I can't see the point in even talking about it with you, if you want to believe that technology as made everyone better of then please feel free to believe it. I can't be bothered to waste any more of my time on you.

 

I clearly didn't say that did I.

 

Can't provide the evidence I want? There's a surprise. Post it and I'll change my mind, go on..

 

No thought not, much easier to pretend that I'm impossible to debate with (despite clearly saying I would change my mind if you can provide the evidence) as an excuse to not get your argument dismantled any further.

 

 

Good day.

[unbeliever]

 

Its getting boring now, you provide some evidence which backs up your silly claims.

 

 

You characterise reality as "silly claims" and do that despite the wealth of evidence against you. This is pointless.

[Petminder]

You characterise reality as "silly claims" and do that despite the wealth of evidence against you. This is pointless.

 

I am happy for you or anyone else to believe what ever they like.

 

---------- Post added 04-11-2016 at 15:08 ----------

 

I clearly didn't say that did I.

 

Can't provide the evidence I want? There's a surprise. Post it and I'll change my mind, go on..

 

No thought not, much easier to pretend that I'm impossible to debate with (despite clearly saying I would change my mind if you can provide the evidence) as an excuse to not get your argument dismantled any further.

 

 

Good day.

 

You believe the evidence supports your opinion, I believe it supports my opinion, you haven't posted any evidence which contradicts my opinion, I have posted evidence which supports my opinion but you don't accept it, so I will say it again, we are clearly not going to agree with each other and continuing to disagree with each other is likely to bore other users.

[spilldig]

Why is it loaded? If you don't believe in current anthropogenic climate change, then surely the option 'I'm a sceptic and I expect <1ºC per CO2 doubling' would fit your opinion. 0ºC is after all <1ºC

 

It's loaded because no matter what climate change is happening there is no opinion of whether people think it's man made or not.

[unbeliever]

It's loaded because no matter what climate change is happening there is no opinion of whether people think it's man made or not.

 

The idea is to gauge opinion on the contribution of anthropogenic CO2 to the matter. The OP was intended to make this clear.

If you are of the view the anthropogenic CO2 has zero effect, then there is an option for you.

If you object to answering the question because you think it important to mention the natural variability of the climate system in order to place any such discussion in context, I'm sympathetic, but I would say that this can be addressed in the thread.

If you like, I can update the OP to make this clearer?

[Robin-H]

 

You believe the evidence supports your opinion, I believe it supports my opinion, you haven't posted any evidence which contradicts my opinion, I have posted evidence which supports my opinion but you don't accept it, so I will say it again, we are clearly not going to agree with each other and continuing to disagree with each other is likely to bore other users.

 

I think we both agree that continuing this fruitless discussion is pointless. I would however just like to post a number of links to reports and organisations that clearly show what I, and others, are saying is indeed what has been happening on the ground. The lives of the poorest in the world are, by practically any measure you care to look into, getting better.

 

Indeed the articles you yourself have posted have said that. I do not expect you to read them, indeed you have shown yourself on numerous occasions not to be able to take in information when presented to you. I am merely posting them incase anybody else following this discussion would like some of the sources for the claims I have made.

 

INFANT MORTALITY

 

One of the biggest things we can look into when assessing quality of life is infant mortality. Things are bad when children die young. It indicates there is a lack of health care, such as access to vaccinations, access to doctors and hospitals, a lack of food, or a lack of access to clean water, amongst other things. It is usually defined as the number babies who die before they reach the age of one.

 

In the book Getting Better, by Charles Kenny it is shown that the global infant mortality (based on available data) in 1900 was 19.5%. That is 19.5% of children would die before they reached the age of one. In reality, the figure is likely to be much higher, as that was only based on the more developed countries. Indeed the average for the USA, at the time one of the most developed countries in the world, was 16% in 1900.

 

The global figure for 2012 was 3.69%. This is due to better access to vaccinations and antibiotics, increased food supplies and distribution, better nutrition, safer water supplies, and improved sanitation.

 

http://charleskenny.blogs.com/weblog/2009/06/the-success-of-development.html

 

To take some more specific and more recent example of change..

 

In 1990, out of 1000 live births, 197 children would die before they reached the age of 5 in West and Central Africa. By 2013 that had dropped to 109. In Sub Saharan Africa the drop has been from 179 to 92. Indeed, the child mortality rates have dropped, excluding in war zones, for every single region on earth.

 

https://www.gatesnotes.com/2015-Annual-Letter

 

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/Resources-and-Media/Annual-Letters-List/Annual-Letter-2014

 

Indeed, by 2035 - it is estimated that there will be practically nowhere on earth that has a higher infant mortality rate than the USA did in 1980.

 

DECLINE IN EXTREME POVERTY

 

I have already posted the graph showing the tremendous decline in extreme poverty.

 

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-population-in-extreme-poverty-absolute

 

You have to ask yourself why is this? Why are the number of people living in extreme poverty declining when the overall population is increasing so rapidly. I would posit it is because of improved access to healthcare, rising incomes, better access to food, less famine, better access to education, better access to clean water..

 

ACCESS TO EDUCATION

 

In 1900, global literacy rates were around 10%. By 2013 that had increased to 84% and they continue to improve.

http://www.unesco.org/education/GMR2006/full/chapt8_eng.pdf

 

The literacy gap has decreased from 14.8% in 1990 in Sub Saharan Africa to 11.4% today. It has dropped in East Asia and the Pacific from 5% in 1990 to 0.1% today. 0.1%

 

That is because there is much better access to education than there was in the past. 35% of the people on earth have access to the internet, and that is growing every year.

 

MOST PEACEFUL TIME IN HISTORY

 

People tend to have a low quality of life when they are surround by war. It may not seem it, but we are actually living through the most peaceful time in history.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/12/the_world_is_not_falling_apart_the_trend_lines_reveal_an_increasingly_peaceful.html

 

https://ourworldindata.org/slides/war-and-violence/#/title-slide (really worth a look).

 

INCOMES OF THE POOREST ARE RISING

 

Yes, and perhaps more shocking - the world is actually becoming MORE equal. This is a long term trend, and there may be bumps on the road, but the income gap between rich and poor countries is narrowing. There may be some very very rich people who are absorbing a lot of extra wealth, but that does not change the overall trend. I suggest anyone who is interested to take a look at this, as it presents and explains the data very clearly.

 

https://ourworldindata.org/slides/world-poverty/#/declining-world-poverty-1820-2015-step2

 

Indeed, it is the poorest countries that are economically growing the fastest. The country with the fastest growing economy in the world? ETHIOPIA. The GDP per capita (adjusted for inflation) is growing in practically every single country on earth.

 

SUMMARY

 

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Yes, there are still billions of people living on earth that are struggling in abject poverty. Yes, there are still some huge challenges that need to be faced, but things are improving. Things are improving more rapidly then they ever have before, and it is the poorest people on earth who have the most to benefit from this.

 

For further reading, I suggest the following:

 

http://www.earthdash.org/more_info_screen/longtermtrends.html

 

The Rational Optimist by Matt Ridley

 

Abundance by Peter Diamandis

 

Understanding The Science for Tomorrow: Myth vs. Reality by Jeffrey Grossman

 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/