[revelio]

> I wonder what it'll feel like looking back at that point.

It will feel like nothing, because everyone will have conveniently forgotten about these sorts of reports and predictions when the world stubbornly refuses to end. Just like everyone conveniently forgot that in the 50s and 60s scientists were writing to the US President to tell him that the consensus of scientists was that the world was entering a new ice age, and that he should prepare agriculture and industry for the transition.

You wait and see.

[barbazoo]

Well, I hope you're right.

[revelio]

Take a look at the extinction clock. It'll make you feel better (maybe)

https://extinctionclock.org/

[barbazoo]

What a fun page. Not sure how honest it is though.

> Possible 'adverse health impacts in Australia from climate change' by 2020. From Climate Commission's 'The Critical Decade: Climate Change and Health' report, quote: "We need to act now. Decisions we make from now to 2020 will determine the severity of climate change health risks that our children and grandchildren will experience. The longer we wait, the more serious the consequences. [...] Figure 8: Possible timeline of some future adverse health impacts in Australia from climate change". Graphic showing: "Extreme weather events: deaths, hospital admissions, mental health disorders", "Dengue fever", and "Gastroenteritis" to increase from 2010 to 2019 cited from an unpublished article by McMichael in 2011.

Many would say the wildfires in 2020 were one of the worst in history and definitely had adverse health impacts I would say, no? Yet the page says it didn't come true.

Many others don't consider that predictions were made waaaaay before we had the means to model the impact of climate change on a grand scale. Others are just silly, who cares what Prince Charles said. Well, I guess denialists made their point once again.

[revelio]

It's honest. You can just click through the stories to see for yourself. Of course you can try to find one you feel is weak, cherry pick it and then try to dismiss all the others, but all those false predictions are still there and won't go away.

W.R.T. the one you picked, the extinctionclock assessment is correct. The claims being made are about "deaths, hospital admissions and mental health disorders, dengue fever and gastroenteritis".

Deaths from extreme weather are down drastically over time. Very unclear why they predicted a rise in mental health disorders from climate change, but nobody outside the most extremist climate change fanatics are trying to claim a link there. Contemporary discussion about mental health problems focus on the effect of social media on teen girls.

Dengue fever in Australia is also trending down (figure 8 here https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/wpro---documents/eme...). I didn't bother checking gastroenteritis.

Finally, wildfires - not mentioned in the actual paragraph you cited. Here is a graph of wildfires in Australia over the last decade.

https://gfw.global/40a4irE

2019 and 2020 were abnormal years for Australian wildfires. As you can see, 2021 reverted to the mean which is stable. There is no increasing trend in wildfires, just a couple of bad years that the media cherry-picked to try and make you think the world is burning.

You have to be so careful when listening to climatologists, because they love to engage in data truncation and cherry picking to make deceptive claims. This video shows the problem, and I linked you directly to the part about how they do the same with wildfire data in the USA. The full data shows that wildfires have been in steep decline in the 20th century in the USA, but that the data is being truncated when shown to policy makers to make it look like it's increasing:

https://youtu.be/8455KEDitpU?t=146

If global warming caused more wildfires, then wildfires should have increased in the 20th century everywhere susceptible to them when emissions were ramping up so much, but they didn't. Thus the claim is falsified.