Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Ben Shapiro mocked for saying 4C of global warming not an ‘emergency’: ‘You better get good at swimming’

‘You better get good at swimming Ben,’ one user jokes

Louise Hall
Thursday 15 April 2021 17:35 BST
65Comments
0 of 53 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
Keyboard Shortcuts
Shortcuts Open/Close/ or ?
Play/PauseSPACE
Increase Volume
Decrease Volume
Seek Forward
Seek Backward
Captions On/Offc
Fullscreen/Exit Fullscreenf
Mute/Unmutem
Decrease Caption Size-
Increase Caption Size+ or =
Seek %0-9
Next Up
Trump claims 'nuclear warming' poses a greater global threat than the climate crisis
00:31
00:11
00:41
00:53
 
This video file cannot be played.(Error Code: 233011)
Close
Global warming of 4°C not ‘emergency’, Ben Shapiro claims

Right-wing pundit Ben Shapiro has been mocked online after saying the potential rise of global temperatures by 4C due to global warming is not an “emergency”.

In a recent clip from The Ben Shapiro Show shared on Twitter, the commentator discussed the decision of Scientific American to begin using the phrase “climate emergency” over “climate change.”

On Monday the publication said: “Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using the term ‘climate emergency’ in its coverage of climate change.”

In reaction to the announcement on Twitter on Tuesday, Mr Shapiro replied: “This sounds very, very sciency and not at all political.”

In a clip from his political podcast, Mr Shapiro reiterated his disagreement with the decision saying: “Suddenly a bunch of these quote-unquote scientific magazines suddenly have very strong political bets.”

“Now I was not aware that there is a scientific designation that amounts to an emergency,” the commentator says in the clip.

“This is a completely political designation,” he insists. “And by the way, I do not consider it a quote-unquote emergency if the climate were to warm four degrees celsius over the course of the next century.

“I consider that a gradual change that human beings are going to have to adapt to with increased technological know-how as well as innovation.”

Scientists have widely predicted that a future where global heating by 4C in comparison to the industrial age would cause catastrophic damage to the modern world.

Last year, Professor Kevin Anderson, a leading climate scientist at the University of Manchester said that “there is a widespread view that a 4C future is incompatible with an organised global community”.

He added that the increase in temperature would likely create an atmosphere that was “beyond adaptation and be devastating to the majority of ecosystems.”

Users on social media were quick to mock Mr Shapiro on Twitter for his comments regarding the climate crisis. “Shapiro with some more profound insight into climate change,” one user said.

“4 degrees Celsius??? You better get good at swimming Ben,” another added with a user responding underneath: “And less reliant on things like food and water and security and happiness.”

Another joked: “I do not consider it an emergency if the global climate, which currently supports human life, is suddenly and drastically altered.”

The United Nations has said that “If the world warms by more than 1.5 degrees, we will see more frequent, and intense, climate impacts such as the heatwaves and storms witnessed in recent years.”

NASA says that scientists have high confidence that global temperatures will continue to rise for decades to come, largely due to greenhouse gases produced by human activities.

"Taken as a whole," the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change states, "the range of published evidence indicates that the net damage costs of climate change are likely to be significant and to increase over time."

“This man has more money than most professors/scientists for the same reason Alex Jones has more money than most doctors,” one user said in criticism of Mr Shapiro’s clip.

“People want to hear that everything is fine, particularly if you just buy this one simple life hack from my list of ten best life hacks to own the libs.”

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

65Comments

Conversation

|

All Comments

    1. Hidden comment.

      Your avatar
      • Reply by HowardRK.

        Not to me.

    2. Comment by RedGuitar64.

      If all the ice on Antarctica and Greenland were to melt, that would result in a sea level rise of around 200ft. That's unlikely to happen, but 5% or 10% of that ice could well melt, which by my arithmetic would mean sea levels rising by 10 to 20 feet, which would be more than enough to cause HUGE problems for every coastal town or city around the world.

      • Hidden reply.

        Your avatar
      • Reply by davidcarpenter.

        Your comments and those of Red Guitar made me do some research. The amount of ice on land does appear to have been adequately measured and confirms your figures of 70 odd metres (200 feet) increase in sea-level. Nice to have had a civilized conversation on here and to have learnt something.

        Of course that would only occur if all the ice melted. Next question. How much energy would that take? I'll start looking!!

    3. Comment by Lap.

      Dear independent, let me give you a hand here. The news is that reputable outlets are starting to use "climate emergency" instead of "climate change". The news IS NOT that this youtube twitter bloke has whined about it. Please stop reporting right wing fantasies. Have you not done enough damage?

      • Reply by HelenR.

        The news that he was widely ridiculed is newsworthy...

    4. Comment by markkram1959.

      What he said is a 4 deg rise over 100 years is not a sudden event emergency. Mankind would adapt through scientific innovation which we have proven to be very good at. Sounds quite a reasonable assertion to me.

      • Reply by markkram1959.

        Well as it seems unlikely we will succeed in cutting down emissions in time, there will be no choice but to trust in science and technology to come again to the rescue.

      • Reply by HelenR.

        1. A rise of 4 deg C over the next 100 years is only inevitable if we continue dumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

        2. Science and technology is unlikely to be ready to make much of an impact in the short term.

        3. Solution: get to zero emissions as soon as possible.

    5. Comment by ImNotAsStupidAsYouLook.

      Mummy, mummy, I'm telling mummy. Ooh I'm so crwoss! Mummy wouldn't approve.

      • Comment by GeorgeH.

        Petulant entitled little boy, who is either too dumb to understand the absurdity of his positions, or too deep in its delusions. Denying reality seems the national sport of conservatives. Lightweights and perennial babies, who do not accept that life can be hard, things can be difficult, ugly or dangerous, and that they may need to take responsibility and make difficult choices. Like adults.

        • Comment by ImNotAsStupidAsYouLook.

          No matter what he says, he comes across as an impotent little twerp.

          He needs to work on his presentation, he just get's peals of laughter with that squeaky little voice.

          • Comment by Anonymous.

            I share the opinions of Ben Shapiro expressed in these comments. However on this occasion he is right, and the mockers are wrong. Such a rise would be an emergency if it happened overnight, but a steady rise to 4°C above pre-industrial times would not be, because we would be adapting to it as time goes on. In fact during the Holocene optimum, 8,000 to 6,000 years ago, temperatures did reach that or close to it. During that time life on the planet thrived. Also such a temperature is unlikely to occur during the remainder of the Holocene. The 4° scenario comes from a computer model of the worst case scenario, and the IPCC has recently advised scientists not to use that model as a basis for projections because it is so unlikely to happen. But of course, the mockers do not know that because they do not take Greta's advice to follow the science.

            • Reply by Sanch1011.

              As someone said. If have to make little changes to my life to prevent climate change and it helps limit it, I should be glad I did it because even if they are wrong the only way I would find that out would be if the world did not collapse. If they are correct and I do nothing then it is not something to be proud of. Why would any rationale person not want some changes in case they are correct because otherwise if it just a case of spinning the bullet in the chamber and hoping it is not there when the trigger is pulled until the time it is.

            • Reply by Anonymous.

              I'm not sure that you have understood the changes to your life, because they are certainly not small. Forget the Paris Climate Accord. That does not begin to address the problem. Using IPCC figures, it reduces global temperature by 0.1°C by the end of this century. The real plan which will work is known as The Great Reset and its slogan is "You will own nothing and be happy". If I expand on it here my comment will most likely be deactivated.

          • Comment by accrete786.

            There was a time when the village idiot was pelted with rotten vegetables and ignored, now they have their own shows and in some cases , run entire nations.

            • Reply by Sauna.

              I just love that one.

          Thank you for registering

          Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in