PF I wasn't ignoring but a response required more time. Where do...

PF I wasn't ignoring but a response required more time. Where do I begin.

1987 Dr. John Holdren, director ofthe Office of Science and Technology Policy for the Obama administration then aprofessor at U.C. Berkeley was cited by Paul Ehrlich: “As University ofCalifornia physicist John Holdren has said, it is possible that carbon dioxideclimate-induced famines could kill as many as a billion people before the year2020.”

Holding someone to account for a prediction 43 years out saying 'it is possible' that famine from climate could have a massive effect on population is ludicrous. He's hardly wrong in saying that was a possibility in 1987. Current estimates, still point to increasing food insecurity due to weather. I don't know about you but I can see our weather patterns changing like they did not in our parents and grandparents time. I can see the predictions already becoming reality. My farming family is noticing early seasonal warming is causing things like avocados to throw out buds too early before a cold snap kills them, leaving the trees with poor crops. These are my 'hard observations' but you don't need to take my word. The evidence is already clear but don't take my confirmation basis, take the scientifically recorded evidence.

https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/
https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/OandA/Areas/Assessing-our-climate/Climate-change-QA/Impacts

In fact, before I continue let me just point out that your friend Art has an issue with 'cherry-picking' data which is just what this is. You have a few names that hazarded a prediction, (We can predict everything but the future...) and appear to have got it wring even when they are using words like 'possible' and 'could be'. That aside your reality checks are... not that. The fact we produce a tonne of food and have capacity to feed everyone does not mean we are doing so. As I am sure you are aware but don't clarify, most of this increase is in the developed world and most of the increase is for the developed world, or those joining it. Food security has not increased in most 3rd world countries and in fact while technological advances are continuing to drive efficiencies this will not stop the climate impacting eventually, has not stopped nutrient loss in our food, or top soil loss on our land, or the continual loss of arable land, or fish stocks plummeting world-wide or or or or or. As you are also well aware there may be more available but we also waste a sheet load more than we used to. If you are not aware, go live with your grandma for a bit and compare her habits to your kids.

Your reality check on environmental refugees just makes no sense. Saying there are none just because only one person tried to go through a bureaucratic process to claim the status is nonsensical. You can be a refugee without having to apply. I don't know how you can tell there are not 50 million environmental refugees. The figure seems high but I have no doubt that people are being forced to move because of environmental factors. You only have to see our farmers being forced off the land because of extended drought to know it's going on elsewhere too. Hard observations.

Oh and for Bourbs and others that may be interested, a client sent me this yesterday. It is US focused but an interesting reference on cost of power between different sources

https://www.lazard.com/media/450784/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-120-vfinal.pdf