The first casualties

Since we are all experiencing a good dose of global warming it might be useful to look at the list of all the things that have been claimed by warmists as being the “first casualties” of “climate change”.

Tim Blair compiled the list.

And Gavin Atkins has checked the veracity of all these “first casualties”.

Here are some examples:

The claim:

Polar bears are set to become the first casualty of global warming.

The reality:

The total number of the world’s polar bear population is still thought to be between 20,000 and 25,000.

The claim:

Losing winter: as climate change takes hold, North America’s coldest season is the first casualty.

The reality:

North America has experienced some of its biggest snow seasons on record.

The claim:

First Casualty of Global Warming? Rare breed of possum may be extinct.

The reality:

Live possums were discovered four months later.

And every single claim by the warmists on the list is proven to be false.

  • Ross

    I’m sure we could get rid of some of our 100 million possums overseas.

  • JK

    That is because the whole con was never set up to “help” the environment but simply to organize a revenue flow away from the “rich” countries and towards the UN. The excuse was to set up all sorts of “Green” projects for the developing countries. See:
    http://unfccc.int/files/press/press_releases_advisories/application/pdf/pr20110415gcfcommittee.pdf
    And this has been admitted by a UN official. See:
    http://watchmannewsletter.typepad.com/news/2010/11/un-official-admits-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-by-climate-policy.html
    There is no reason at all anymore to try to find evidence that the ICCP had it completely wrong. That has been proven beyond all doubt. What we have to try to do is to stop the politicians from signing further treaties without our consent. Treaties that are destroying our wealth and our economies for the benefit of the UN and their power hungry mob.

  • andyscrase

    The biggest casualty of “climate change” has been the loss of common sense and reason amongst our ruling classes.

  • TooRight

    The first casualty of global warming will actually be all those alarmists who will (to mix metphors) be found to be swimming naked as the tide goes out on their bogus claims.

  • Steve

    You got to be kidding. Where do you get this nonsense. Why not mention arctic ice is close to the lowest ever, or the warmest years on record have been in the last dozen years.

    • http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz Whaleoil

      Yeah that will be why the “Row to the Pole” guys are blocked in with a wall of ice and are nowhere near their goal. Al Gore said that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2012….tick tock

      • Matt

        Al Gore is a politician. And his claims are probably eight years old and based on evidence which could quite possibly be from the mid to late nineties. It would be easy to fault.

        Rowers stuck behind a wall of ice is not scientific evidence for anything – at all. Are you saying that because these rowers are stuck behind ice then obviously ice is not receding at either of the poles? If that is science and if that is logic then I guess since it has been snowing in Wellington Santa Claus must be on his way, or maybe I missed him as I don’t have a chimney and he can’t climb through my heat pump.

        We should all ignore the most recent evidence on the receding frozen lakes in Siberia and Scandinavia as well, because haven’t you heard? Rowers are stuck behind ice on their way to the pole which strangely enough is full of ice…

  • Pingback: First casualties of climate change | Kiwiblog

  • Monty

    First Casualty of Global Warming? Rare breed of possum may be extinct. This claim posted by microbiologist/geneticist blogger on his own Blogsite with a link to his source, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,461007,00.html. The Fox-news reporter writes “Scientists say a white possum native to the Daintree rainforest in the Australian state of Queensland has become the first mammal to become extinct due to man-made global warming.” What does the scientist ACTUALLY say as quoted in the same article? “It is not looking good,” researcher Steve Williams said. “If they have died out it would be first example of something that has gone extinct purely because of global warming.”
    The reality: Australian species: Professor Williams, director of the Centre for Tropical Biodiversity and Climate Change, said the white possum had been identified as highly vulnerable five years ago. But now the animal had apparently made a comeback, with the recent discovery of three, related, BROWN lemuroid ringtails a sign the WHITE possums were also surviving. “I don’t think there is any reason to believe the white ones are harder hit than the brown ones,” he said. “They are still clinging on.” So the researchers did not actually see any white possums, which they didn’t say were extinct but which a Fox-News reporter said were extinct. The researchers were hypothesising that white possums could be discovered.
    But the best effort of Gavin Atkin’s checking on the veracity of the claims he lists in his newspaper article, is the one that goes: “The Maldives are the likely first casualty in any serious increase in global warming.” The link for this claim leads not to a peer-reviewed research paper but to the Travel Section of the UK’s Daily Mail with a review of holidaying in The Maldives. Good one, Gavin!

  • arnuxii

    Looking at the history of climate on the planet the present CO2 level is very low
    Cambrian Period 4500ppm
    Ordovician Period 4200ppm
    Silurian Period 4500ppm
    Devonian Period 2200ppm
    Carboniferous Period 600ppm
    Permian Period 900ppm – mass extinction
    Triassic Period 1750ppm
    Jurassic Period 1950ppm
    Cretaceous Period 1700ppm
    Paleogene Period 500ppm – mass extinction
    Present co2 388 ppm

    The creatures we evolved from did well under those conditions, that is why we are here today. So if there is a problem I need someone to explain why life thrived on a greenhouse planet.

    • Matt

      You are assuming that the large amounts of atmospheric CO2 is an absolute indicator of Earth’s retention of heat. There were many different atmospheric conditions affecting the planet’s temperature millions of years ago. Also, we as humans did not exist millions of years ago. The planet has been through many arid stages that human civilisation as it exists now would not have survived in. We evolved from out of the sea, do you think we could easily go and live under the sea again? Next century perhaps?
      All the arguing over CO2 levels ignores the fact the planet is warming significantly regardless of the argument over its cause.

105%