Category: Global Warming

Humans and Non-Humans Can Adapt to Global Warming

In my Openness book (Diamond 2019, 122-123), and in an earlier paper (Diamond 2018, 246-248) I argue that environmentalists overestimate the harm from global warming, in part because they underestimate the ability of human and non-human life to adapt. I recently have run across, in The New York Times, four examples that support my argument.

If global warming increases the rate of calving of arctic glaciers into icebergs, the icebergs will contain “dropstones” that will drop to the bottom of the ocean as they melt, where they:

become an important part of the deep-sea ecosystem, providing a home for corals, sponges and other marine invertebrates that live by latching onto hard structures. Those populations then help support bottom-feeding shrimps and sea lilies, with whom they form symbiotic relationships. The researchers observed this flourishing deep-sea community using images from the HAUSGARTEN observatory.  . . .  The researchers hypothesize that, as dropstones continue to proliferate in the coming decades, the number of visible fauna and the level of biodiversity in the deep ocean will also increase. (Callaway 2026, A7).

In an extensive study of changes in butterfly habitats, believed mainly due to global warming, researchers found that “Eighty percent of the butterfly species the researchers studied expanded their ranges, establishing themselves in areas that had previously been unsuitable for them to inhabit” (Roth 2026, D5).

In the Canadian subarctic global warming is allowing many plants and animals, most impactfully the beaver, to move north. From Norimitsu Onishi’s account in The New York Times:

(p. A1) Until a few years ago, a small stream meandered down a long valley flanked by sheer ridges in Umiujaq, a subarctic village in northern Quebec. The waterway had pretty much hewed to that course since the earth’s crust rebounded after the last ice age.

Newcomers from the south, though, had other ideas.

A crew of bucktoothed, paddle-tailed beavers has erected five dams, the most impressive being as tall as a city bus and even longer. The sound of cascading water is heard half a mile away. Toads paddle inside the large ponds that now pockmark the valley, beneficiaries of the hydrological attenuation engineered by the recent arrivals.

. . .

(p. A7) To be sure, beavers aren’t the only transplants heading north. Across Canada’s Arctic, people report seeing new species of birds and sea mammals in their midst. On land, moose are branching out of their traditional range, following the northward spread of ever-taller shrubs across the tundra, a phenomenon scientists call the region’s “shrubification.”

But no southerner has had a greater impact on the north than the beaver. By building dams and ponds, beavers are rewiring Arctic hydrology, scientists say.

. . .

“Beavers change their environment so much that they even end up creating habitats that are favorable to other animal species — small birds like warblers that are able to nest in the bushes,” said Isabeau Pratte, a biologist for the Kativik Regional government, which oversees the Inuit communities in northern Quebec. (Onishi 2026)

In the eastern part of the Gobi desert in China, the Tongliao area was mostly arid, but global warming has made it much wetter. “Several decades ago, only 12 percent of Tongliao had grasslands or forests and the rest was desert, according to the local government. Now 64 percent of the area is covered with crops, grass or forests” (Bradsher 2026, B5). As a result, China has greatly expanded its production of corn and beef cattle.

The examples that I describe are documented in the following articles:

Keith Bradsher. “Climate Change Helps Raise Herds.” The New York Times (Fri., August 15, 2026): B1 & B5.

(Note: the online version of the above article has the date July 30, 2026, and has the title “How Climate Change and Tariffs Help China Raise More Cattle.”)

K. R. Callaway. “Some Deep-Sea Creatures Benefit as Planet Warms.” The New York Times (Fri., July 10, 2026): A7.

(Note: the online version of the above article has the date July 7, 2026, and has the title “As Ice Melts in the Arctic, Some Deep-Sea Creatures Are Thriving.”)

Norimitsu Onishi. “In Thawing Arctic, Beavers Invade and Renovate.” The New York Times (Sat., August 15, 2026): A1 & A7.

(Note: the online version of the above article was updated Aug. 14, 2026, and has the title “The Beavers Are Coming for Canada’s Arctic, One Dam at a Time.”)

Annie Roth. “Climate Change Spurs Butterfly Range Shifts.” The New York Times (Tues., August 11, 2026): D5.

(Note: the online version of the above article was updated Aug. 10, 2026, and has the title “Butterflies Take Flight in Face of Climate Change and Extreme Weather.”)

(Note: ellipses added.)

Academic papers supporting The New York Times articles by Roth and by Callaway are:

Chowdhury, Shawan, Upama Aich, Laura H. Antão et al. 2026. “Extensive Climate-Induced Range Shifts in Butterflies across the Globe.” Nature Ecology & Evolution (Aug. 5) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-026-03117-y.

Krumpen, Thomas, Kirstin S. Meyer-Kaiser, Claudia Wekerle, Lars Ackermann, Deonie Castle, Melanie Bergmann, Mario Hoppmann, Shfaqat A. Khan, Autun Purser and Holger Schmithüsen. 2026. “Amplified Arctic Iceberg Traffic Reshapes Benthic Biodiversity.” Nature 654 no. 8120 (June 25): 963–70. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-10630-4.

My own publications mentioned in my initial comments are:

Diamond, Arthur M., Jr. 2018. “Innovative Dynamism Improves the Environment.” Libertarian Papers 10, no. 2: 233–75.

Diamond, Arthur M., Jr. 2019. Openness to Creative Destruction: Sustaining Innovative Dynamism. New York: Oxford University Press.

When Portugal Is Too Hot, Move to England

When their current waters warm sea creatures often migrate to cooler waters. So just noticing the fewer creatures in the warmer waters will overestimate the harm done by the warming. In the article quoted below, when Mediterranean waters warm, Octopuses migrate to English waters. Mediterranean fishermen lose, English fishermen gain, but there is no clear net loss or gain to the Octopuses or to humanity in general.

This example supports my claim that we too often ignore the benefits of global warming.

(p. A4) Expecting his normal catch of plaice, turbot and Dover sole, Arthur Dewhirst was surprised when his nets spilled their contents onto his ship’s deck earlier this year. Instead of shiny, flapping fish, hundreds of octopuses wriggled and writhed.

His first thought? “Dollar signs! Dollar signs! Dollar signs!” he recalled with a laugh, sitting in his trawler last month in the harbor at Brixham in Devon, England.

Across England’s southern coast, fishing crews reported an extraordinary boom in octopus catches this summer. Sold for around 7 pounds a kilo, it was sometimes worth an extra £10,000 ($13,475) a week to Mr. Dewhirst, he said.

. . .

There are several theories about the causes of this puzzling phenomenon, but scientists say that warming water temperatures make the region more hospitable to this species of octopus, which is normally found off the Mediterranean coast.

According to Steve Simpson, a professor of marine biology at the University of Bristol, “climate change is a likely driver” of the population boom. “We are right on the northern limit of the octopus species range, but our waters are getting warmer, so our little island of Great Britain is becoming increasingly favorable for octopus populations,” he said.

For the full story see:

Stephen Castle. “Octopuses Bring Windfalls and Anxieties to England’s Southern Coast.” The New York Times (Tues., September 30, 2025): A4.

(Note: ellipsis added.)

(Note: the online version of the story has the date Sept. 29, 2025, and has the title “Octopuses Invade the English Coast, ‘Eating Anything in Their Path’.”)

Do Not Ridicule Those Who Know How to Sew

15 years ago I ran a blog entry quoting Brian Fagan’s theory that we Homo sapiens (aka Cro-Magnons) outlasted the Neanderthals because we developed the sewing needle technology that allowed us to sew tighter fitting garments against the cold. Now added evidence elaborates and supports Fagan’s theory. Near the time when Neanderthals became extinct, the magnetic poles of the earth shifted over a few hundred years, allowing substantially more ultraviolet radiation to hit the earth than usual. With better-filling garments, due to sewing needles, Homo sapiens were better protected against that radiation.

The WSJ article summarizing the new research is:

Aylin Woodward. “New Light Shed on the Demise of Neanderthals.” The Wall Street Journal (Thurs., Aug. 7, 2025): A3.

(Note: the online version of the NYT article has the date August 6, 2025, and has the title “Did UV Rays Doom Neanderthals?”)

The published academic paper summarized in The Wall Street Journal article mentioned and cited above is:

Mukhopadhyay, Agnit, Sanja Panovska, Raven Garvey, Michael W. Liemohn, Natalia Ganjushkina, Austin Brenner, Ilya Usoskin, Mikhail Balikhin, and Daniel T. Welling. “Wandering of the Auroral Oval 41,000 Years Ago.” Science Advances 11, no. 16 (April 16, 2025): eadq7275.

Nimble Wine Entrepreneurs Adapt Grapes, and Wine-Making Method, to Warmer Temperatures and Changing Tastes

I have argued briefly in my Openness book, and at greater length in my “Innovative Dynamism Improves the Environment” article, that we tend to overestimate the harm from global warming in part because we tend to underestimate the nimble adaptability of entrepreneurs. The essay quoted below describes how wine entrepreneurs in Spain are returning to old grape varieties and old technologies for aging the wine, varieties and technologies that both are better adapted to warmer temperatures and are better at making the lighter and less alcoholic wines that are currently in higher demand.

(p. C3) In the rolling hills of Valencia in Spain, winemaker Pablo Calatayud has joined forces with scientists and archaeologists to mount a small viticultural revolution—one that reaches back to pre-Roman times to recreate what have become known as ancestral wines.

At his Celler del Roure, Calatayud is using large, egg-shaped clay amphorae to make wine pressed from grapes native to the region. The process is reconstructed from old texts and drawings carved into archaeological finds across the Mediterranean, including an ancient Iberian settlement that overlooks his own vineyard.

This sort of winemaking is not just a stunt, and Calatayud is hardly alone. Rising temperatures in most European wine regions are changing the taste and potency of red wine. Warmer weather means that grapes ripen more quickly and more intensely, with more sugar and thus more alcohol. In Spain, the alcohol level in notable wines aged in oak barrels now routinely exceeds 15%. But many consumers are turning away from such dark, heavy, tannin-rich wines, demanding instead reds that are lighter, more refreshing and lower in alcohol.

The grape varieties used to make ancestral wines are better suited to warmer climes than such stars of modern winemaking as Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Tempranillo. The ancient varieties tend to ripen later, some even in late October, with lower sugar levels, and some have thinner skins, which makes them less tannic.

And in contrast to the oak barrels favored for aging modern red wines, which can add heavy, smoky flavors, amphorae don’t affect a wine’s taste. The clay allows for gentle micro-oxygenation—exposure to outside air—helping to preserve acidity and aromatic freshness.

As a result, the new amphora wines are breezy, light-colored and fruity on the nose—but never sweet nor exceeding 13% alcohol.

The results have pleased both critics and consumers. Wines by Celler del Roure now receive ratings as high as 96 points from top reviewers like Robert Parker Wine Advocate and are exported globally, including to the U.S.

For the full essay, see:

Bojan Pancevski. “The Growing Buzz Around Ancestral Wines.” The Wall Street Journal (Sat., July 19, 2025): C3.

(Note: the online version of the essay has the date July 17, 2025, and has the same title as the print version.)

“Nothing Is Incontrovertible in Science”

Somewhere we should start a Hall of Fame for those who had the courage to take the ill will from the enforcers of the “new religion” of global warming. Among its honorees would be Michael Crichton, Freeman Dyson, and (see below) Ivar Giaever. Science is not a body of doctrine; science is a process of inquiry.

(p. B12) Ivar Giaever might not have won the Nobel Prize in Physics if a job recruiter at General Electric had known the difference between the educational grading systems of the United States and Norway.

It was 1956, and he was applying for a position at the General Electric Research Laboratory in Schenectady, N.Y. The interviewer looked at his grades, from the Norwegian Institute of Technology in Trondheim, where Dr. Giaever had studied mechanical engineering, and was impressed: The young applicant had scored 4.0 marks in math and physics. The recruiter congratulated him.

But what the recruiter didn’t know was that in Norway, the best grade was a 1.0, not a 4.0, the top grade in American schools. In fact, a 4.0 in Norway was barely passing — something like a D on American report cards. In reality, his academic record in Norway had been anything but impressive.

He did not want to be dishonest, Dr. Giaever (pronounced JAY-ver) would say in recounting the episode with some amusement over the years, but he also did not correct the interviewer. He got the job.

He proceeded to spend the next 32 years at the laboratory, along the way developing an experiment that provided proof of a central idea in quantum physics — that subatomic particles can behave like powerful waves.

. . .

Though Dr. Giaever later earned a doctorate in theoretical physics, in 1964, from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y., he had not yet completed that degree when he came up with the experiment that would earn him his share of the Nobel. Indeed, as he admitted in his Nobel lecture, he did not fully understand the ideas behind the experiment when he first started working on it. He was, after all, a mechanical engineer, steeped in how things work in classical physics, which deals with real-world objects. Quantum physics, on the other hand, predicts what happens in the weird subatomic world.

. . .

Dr. Giaever prided himself on his common-sense approach to science, but not all his ideas were welcomed by his peers. He became a prominent denier of climate change, referring to the science around it as a “new religion.” (“I would say that, basically, global warming is a nonproblem,” he said in a 2015 speech.) He based his opposition, in part, on his belief that it is impossible to track changes in the Earth’s temperature and that, even if it could be done, the temperature changes would be insignificant.

When the American Physical Society announced in 2011 that the evidence for climate change and global warming was incontrovertible, he resigned from the society in disgust, saying: “‘Incontrovertible’ is not a scientific word. Nothing is incontrovertible in science.”

For the full obituary, see:

Dylan Loeb McClain. “Ivar Giaever, 96, ‘D’ Student Who Won Nobel Prize.” The New York Times (Thursday, July 10, 2025): B12.

(Note: ellipses added.)

(Note: the online version of the obituary was updated July 9, 2025, and has the title “Ivar Giaever, Nobel Winner in Quantum Physics, Dies at 96.”)

New York Times Says Trump “Has Waged a Multipronged Assault at Regulations” on Environment

The passages quoted below are further evidence apropos my dialogue with my libertarian friends who argue that the Trump administration’s efforts to deregulate and downsize have failed.

(p. 1) With a flurry of actions that have stretched the limits of presidential power, Mr. Trump has gutted federal climate efforts, rolled back regulations aimed at limiting pollution and given a major boost to the fossil fuel industry.

. . .

To achieve such a wholesale overhaul of the country’s climate policies in such a short time, the Trump administration has reneged on federal grants, fired workers en masse and attacked longstanding environmental regulations.

. . .

(p. 31) [Trump] has waged a multipronged assault at regulations designed to curb pollution, immediately sweeping some rules to the side and circumventing the normally lengthy rule-making processes. At the same time, Mr. Trump has declared an energy emergency, giving himself the authority to fast-track the construction of oil and gas projects as he works to stoke supply as well as demand for fossil fuels.

. . .

The administration and Republicans in Congress plan to use a legislative maneuver to quickly erase California’s authority to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars in the state by 2035. That authority has never before been challenged in this way, and critics say the maneuver is illegal. But it would be much faster than trying to overturn the California ban through the standard process that requires months of public notice and comment.

“They’re doing all the things I thought they would do, and they’re doing other things that I only dreamed they might do,” said Myron Ebell, a conservative activist who led the E.P.A. transition team during Mr. Trump’s first term.

. . .

And in a move that could have far-reaching implications for government efforts to regulate industry, Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the E.P.A., has recommended that the agency reverse its 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health and welfare, according to three people familiar with the decision. That would eliminate the legal basis for the government’s climate laws, such as limits on pollution from automobiles and power plants.

“We’re talking about undoing 50 years of environmental regulation and accelerating the extinction crisis and risking the health of the American people,” said Ben Jealous, the executive director of the Sierra Club. “There’s so much shocking news every day. People are struggling to process all of it.”

. . .

Much of the damage to the country’s environmental regulatory apparatus may be long-lasting.

. . .

On Wednesday [Feb. 26, 2025] Trump said he believed Mr. Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, would be cutting about 65 percent of the agency’s more than 17,000 jobs. Mr. Zeldin later said that he thought the E.PA. could cut at least 65 percent of its budget and make cuts to its work force.

For the full story see:

David Gelles, Lisa Friedman and Brad Plumer. “Undoing Years of Climate Policy in a Few Weeks.” The New York Times, First Section (Sunday, March 2, 2025): 1 & 31.

(Note: ellipses, and bracketed name and date, added.)

(Note: the online version of the story has the date March 2, 2025, and has the title “‘Full on Fight Club’: How Trump Is Crushing U.S. Climate Policy.”)

Extinct Homo Erectus Could Adapt to Global Warming and “Thrived in a Harsh Desert Landscape”

In my Openness book I argue that environmentalists often exaggerate the harm from global warming because they fail to consider the extent of human adaptability. Recent evidence (see below) suggests that even our extinct ancestor, Homo erectus, was already more adaptable to climate change than other advanced primates such as chimpanzees and orangutans.

(p. D3) Chimpanzees live only in African rainforests and woodlands. Orangutans live only in the jungles of Indonesia. But humans live pretty much everywhere. Our species has spread across frozen tundras, settled on mountaintops and called other extreme environments home.

Scientists have historically seen this adaptability as one of the hallmarks of modern humans and a sign of how much our brains had evolved. But a new study hints that maybe we aren’t so special.

A million years ago, researchers have found, an extinct species of human relatives known as Homo erectus thrived in a harsh desert landscape once considered off limits before Homo sapiens came along.

“It’s a significant shift in the narrative of adaptability, expanding it beyond Homo sapiens to include their earlier relatives,” said Julio Mercader, an archaeologist at the University of Calgary and an author of the study, which was published Thursday [Jan. 2?, 2025] in the journal Communications Earth and Environment.

. . .

For hundreds of thousands of years, the researchers determined, Engaji Nanyori had been a comfortable open woodland. But around a million years ago, the climate dried up and the trees vanished. The landscape turned to a Mojave-like desert shrub land — an extremely arid place that seemed inhospitable for early hominins.

“The data led us to a pivotal question: How did Homo erectus manage to survive and even thrive under such challenging conditions?” Dr. Mercader said.

Instead of fleeing, the hominins figured out how survive in their changing home. “Their greatest asset was their adaptability,” Dr. Mercader said.

They changed the way they searched for animal carcasses to scavenge, for example. The hominins found the ponds and streams that sprang into existence after storms. They didn’t just drink at these fleeting watering holes. They hunted the animals that also showed up there, butchering their carcasses by the thousands.

The hominins also adapted by upgrading their tools. They took more care when chipping flakes from stones to give them a sharper edge. Rather than just pick up rocks wherever they were, they preferred material from particular places. And once they made a tool, they carried it with them.

For the full story see:

Carl Zimmer. “Early Human Relatives Thrived in Harsh Desert.” The New York Times (Tuesday, January 28, 2025): D3.

(Note: ellipsis, and bracketed date, added.)

(Note: the online version of the story was updated Jan. 20, 2025, and has the title “Extinct Human Species Lived in a Brutal Desert, Study Finds.”)

The academic paper in Communications Earth and Environment, mentioned above, is:

Mercader, Julio, Pamela Akuku, Nicole Boivin, Alfredo Camacho, Tristan Carter, Siobhán Clarke, Arturo Cueva Temprana, Julien Favreau, Jennifer Galloway, Raquel Hernando, Haiping Huang, Stephen Hubbard, Jed O. Kaplan, Steve Larter, Stephen Magohe, Abdallah Mohamed, Aloyce Mwambwiga, Ayoola Oladele, Michael Petraglia, Patrick Roberts, Palmira Saladié, Abel Shikoni, Renzo Silva, María Soto, Dominica Stricklin, Degsew Z. Mekonnen, Wenran Zhao, and Paul Durkin. “Homo Erectus Adapted to Steppe-Desert Climate Extremes One Million Years Ago.” Communications Earth & Environment 6, no. 1 (2025): 1-13.

My book, mentioned in my initial comments, is:

Diamond, Arthur M., Jr. Openness to Creative Destruction: Sustaining Innovative Dynamism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.

Global Warming Allows German Wine Entrepreneurs to Grow a “Superb” Chardonnay

In my Openness book, I argue that the costs of global warming have been exaggerated, partly because environmentalists forget that entrepreneurs can adapt, either lessening the costs, or sometimes even creating benefits. A case of creating benefits is apparently now the growing of “superb” chardonnay wine in Germany:

(p. D4) What accounts for the arrival of . . . German chardonnays? Certain wine regions like Rheinhessen, the Pfalz and the Obermosel have limestone soils, which chardonnay has a special affinity for, but the warming climate has made it possible to ripen chardonnay sufficiently to make superb wines.

Climate change influenced decisions to plant chardonnay in other ways as well.

“Climate change for us does not just mean it’s getting warmer and warmer, it means everything is getting more extreme — frost risk, weeks without rain, hailstorms,” said Klaus Peter Keller, . . . . “Therefore, we must spread the risk a bit more than we would 30 or 40 years ago. Rather than 100 percent riesling we have now 70 percent riesling, 15 percent pinot noir, 10 percent chardonnay and 4 percent others, and we think that will be the structure for the coming 30 or 40 years.”

Mr. Keller said he had wanted to plant pinot blanc rather than chardonnay but that their son Felix had pushed for chardonnay.

“Felix was right,” he said. “Chardonnay is much better adapted to climate change, with thicker skins, and it transmits the soil much better than pinot blanc.”

Felix Keller said by email that his grandfather had tried planting chardonnay in 1988, but that the timing had been wrong.

“Back then, it didn’t ripen every year,” he said. “It took us until 2018 to try again. We believe chardonnay has a bright future in Germany because we now have the climate that used to be in Burgundy in the early ’90s.”

For the full commentary see:

Eric Asimov. “The Pour; A Surprise From Germany: Chardonnay.” The New York Times (Weds., March 5, 2025): D1 & D4.

(Note: ellipses added.)

(Note: the online version of the commentary was updated March 4, 2025, and has the same title as the print version.)

My book mentioned in my initial comments is:

Diamond, Arthur M., Jr. Openness to Creative Destruction: Sustaining Innovative Dynamism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.

New Evidence American Indians Were Eating a Lot of Mammoth Meat During the Time When Mammoths Became Extinct

Scientists once thought that the extinction of megafauna like mammoths was due mainly to climate change. But the extinction in America coincided with the arrival of humans, leading some to argue that early indigenous American Indians killed off the mammoths. This goes against the politically correct stereotype that American Indians were mostly peace-loving environmentalists.

A recently published article provides additional evidence. Using a skull from the Clovis period, roughly during the period when mammoths became extinct, the authors were able to conclude from the young child’s “isotopic signature” that two-thirds of the child’s diet came from his mother’s breast-milk, and one third mainly from the meat of large mammals like mammoths. They could also infer that the mother had a diet high in mammoth meat. Summarizing the academic article in The New York Times, columnist Carl Zimmer says: “a study analyzing the ancient bones of a young child who lived in Montana suggests that early Americans hunted mammoths and other giant mammals to oblivion” (p. D3).

I am not criticizing the early American Indians. If I had been alive back then and I could obtain nutrition for me and my family by slaughtering a few mammoths, I would have tried to do so. But we are making a mistake if we reject American exceptionalism in part on the basis of a false and sanctimonious claim that the indigenous American Indians acted on morally superior environmental values.

My musings above are based partly on the commentary:

Carl Zimmer. “Mammoth: It’s What Was for Dinner.” The New York Times (Tuesday, December 10, 2024): D3.

(Note: the online version of the story has the date December 4, 2024, and has the title “Mammoth: It’s What Was Once for Dinner.”)

The academic article that is the basis for Zimmer’s commentary is:

Chatters, James C., Ben A. Potter, Stuart J. Fiedel, Juliet E. Morrow, Christopher N. Jass, and Matthew J. Wooller. “Mammoth Featured Heavily in Western Clovis Diet.” Science Advances 10, no. 49 (2024): eadr3814.

Government Gave “40 Years of Seriously Incorrect Advice” on Trans Fats

The government’s advice often turns out to be wrong. That is an added argument for not giving the government the power to enforce its advice through mandatory regulations. (“Added” to the fundamental argument based the right to free choice.)

[In May 2021 Nicholas Wade, the author of the review quoted below, showed enormous courage in being one of the first few to risk cancelation by presenting a cogent case that Covid leaked from a Wuhan lab.]

(p. C9) Rachel Carson rightly complained in “Silent Spring” that farmers were sloshing far too many harmful pesticides into the environment. But she took aim at the wrong one. DDT, a mild and enormously effective pesticide, helped rid the United States of malaria and its benefits, if more discriminately pursued, could have outweighed its costs.

The overstrict verdict against DDT is an instance of the harms that can ensue when scientific evidence is ignored. This and other cases described by Paul A. Offit in “Pandora’s Lab: Seven Stories of Science Gone Wrong” raise provocative questions about the reasons that science is misused in modern society.

. . .

Another case of medical advice based on insufficient data is that of dietary fat. As Dr. Offit tells the story, in the 1970s the government advised cutting down on fat consumption. In the 1980s the message changed. Unsaturated fats were good; only saturated fats were bad: Eat margarine, not butter. But then it turned out that unsaturated fats came in two forms, known to chemists as “cis” and “trans,” and that “trans fats” were appallingly active promoters of heart disease. Margarine and hydrogenated vegetable cooking oils, whose use had been encouraged, were rich in trans fats. After 40 years of seriously incorrect advice, trans fats were mostly eliminated from the American diet only in 2012.

. . .

Besides his overconfidence in the checking mechanisms of science, Dr. Offit goes too easy on the motives of those who abuse science. Environmentalists, for instance, are interested in achieving political results, not in distracting scientific caveats and uncertainties, which they do their best to suppress. It is their propensity to take everything to excess that leads to obscurantist positions, such as irrational fear of genetically modified crops.

For the full review see:

Nicholas Wade. “A Little Knowledge.” The Wall Street Journal (Saturday, April 8, 2017 [sic]): C9.

(Note: ellipses added.)

(Note: the online version of the review was updated April 7, 2017 [sic], and has the same title as the print version.)

The book under review is:

Offit, Paul A. Pandora’s Lab: Seven Stories of Science Gone Wrong. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic, 2017.

Europeans Tire of Costly and Ineffective Climate Transition Policies

(p. A15) The 2015 Paris Agreement aspired to “reduce the risks and impacts of climate change” by eliminating greenhouse-gas emissions in the latter half of this century. The centerpiece of the strategy was a global transition to low-emission energy systems.

. . .

U.S. and European governments are trying to induce an energy transition by building or expanding organizations and programs favoring particular “clean” technologies, including wind and solar generation, carbon capture, hydrogen production and vehicle electrification. Promoting technological innovation is a worthy endeavor, but such efforts face serious challenges as costs and disruptions grow without tangible progress in reducing local, let alone global, emissions. Retreats from aggressive goals are already under way in Europe, with clear signs of mandate fatigue. The climbdown will be slower in the U.S., where subsidies create constituencies that make it more difficult to reverse course.

. . . It means that today’s ineffective, inefficient, and ill-considered climate-mitigation strategies will be abandoned, making room for a more thoughtful and informed approach to responsibly providing for the world’s energy needs.

For the full commentary see:

Steven E. Koonin. “The ‘Climate Crisis’ Fades Out.” The Wall Street Journal (Tuesday, June 11, 2024): A15.

(Note: ellipses added.)

(Note: the online version of the commentary has the date June 10, 2024, and has the same title as the print version.)

Koonin’s commentary, quoted above, is related to his book:

Koonin, Steven E. Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, 2021.