How would you feel if a meteor was hurtling towards our planet and the astronomers decided not to tell us?

Tom Wigley is a respected climate scientist and a staunch supporter of the consensus. “He was named a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) for his major contributions to climate and carbon cycle modeling and to climate data analysis, and because he is “one of the world’s foremost experts on climate change and one of the most highly cited scientists in the discipline.”

So when Mr. Wigley is quoted as follows, “I asked the Australian climate scientist Tom Wigley what he thought of the claim that climate change threatens civilization. “It really does bother me because it’s wrong,” he said. “All these young people have been misinformed. And partly it’s Greta Thunberg’s fault. Not deliberately. But she’s wrong,” You would think that people everywhere would be relieved.

Ahh, but not so fast–the masterminds at And Then There’s Physics saw Wigley palm that card:.  “Okay, time for you to put up. Please quote where the IPCC says “the impacts do not threaten civilisation.”

It is actually easy to show what the IPCC thinks about future impacts of climate change will be on civilization. They list them in Chapter 19 of their report ‘AR5 Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability.’

Your humble reporter pasted the IPCC list of Key Risks from page 1044 from that report. Not to be fooled, And Then There’s Physics prudently pruned, disappeared, magicked away the offending list. Because not one of the Key Risks listed by the IPCC was Collapse of Civilization. I show them here anyways:

i) Risk of death, injury, ill-health, or disrupted livelihoods in low-lying coastal zones and small island developing states and other small islands,
due to storm surges, coastal flooding, and sea level rise. [RFC 1-5]
ii) Risk of severe ill-health and disrupted livelihoods for large urban populations due to inland flooding in some regions. [RFC 2 and 3]
iii) Systemic risks due to extreme weather events leading to breakdown of infrastructure networks and critical services such as electricity,
water supply, and health and emergency services. [RFC 2-4]
iv) Risk of mortality and morbidity during periods of extreme heat, particularly for vulnerable urban populations and those working outdoors
in urban or rural areas. [RFC 2 and 3]
v) Risk of food insecurity and the breakdown of food systems linked to warming, drought, flooding, and precipitation variability and extremes,
particularly for poorer populations in urban and rural settings. [RFC 2-4]
vi) Risk of loss of rural livelihoods and income due to insufficient access to drinking and irrigation water and reduced agricultural productivity,
particularly for farmers and pastoralists with minimal capital in semi-arid regions. [RFC 2 and 3]
vii) Risk of loss of marine and coastal ecosystems, biodiversity, and the ecosystem goods, functions, and services they provide for coastal
livelihoods, especially for fishing communities in the tropics and the Arctic. [RFC 1, 2, and 4]
viii) Risk of loss of terrestrial and inland water ecosystems, biodiversity, and the ecosystem goods, functions, and services they provide for
livelihoods. [RFC 1, 3, and 4]

After deleting two more of your humble reporter’s comments, And Then There’s Physics deigned to explain his thinking: “It’s getting rather tedious posting your comments where you claim the IPCC supports you because it doesn’t say something that it was never going to say, one way or the other. The IPCC has a number of Working Groups, one of which addresses the science, one of which discusses mitigation, and one which discusses adaptation. These largely describe what could happen, or what we might do, but don’t actually consider if climate change could be catastrophic or if it could destroy our global civilisation.”

Which exposes the entire conspiracy! Climate scientists know that climate change threatens civilization, BUT THEY REFUSE TO TELL US!

As I hypothesized at And Then There’s Physics, “ATTP, you are in effect alleging a grand conspiracy amongst climate scientists.

1. That climate change is a threat to civilization

2. That they refuse to call our attention to it.

‘Dr. Oppenheimer, my studies show that climate change threatens civilization!’

‘Sssshh… Don’t tell a soul. And for God’s sakes don’t include it in our report on the Impacts of Climate Change!’

How do you feel about the moon landings? Stephan Lewandowski awaits your reply…”

Curse that Tom Wigley! We must make him confess!

Or not. Perhaps it is better if we march to our doom unaware. For if scientists choose not to back up the hysterics like Greta Thunberg, Bill McKibben, Guy McPherson and so many others who try to warn us without the benefits of a scientific education or a functioning brain, we may ignore their entreaties and continue living a normal life.

Can’t have that now, can we?