Unmasking Eco-Luddites: Science Over Fear

Introduction

Eco-Luddites—environmentalists who reject technology like nuclear power and GMOs—redefine “climate change” to blame humans, ignoring natural causes and data showing nature’s resilience, like coral reefs surviving centuries of climate variability. From Southwest Virginia, where I’ve studied earth science for over 50 years, I rely on evidence, not models, to challenge their agenda. Stephen Schneider, a plasma physicist turned activist, shifted from global cooling in the 1970s to warming alarmism, inspiring the same anti-technology stance Eco-Luddites use to oppose progress. Here, I’ll highlight data on nature’s resilience and advocate for technology and reason over ideology.

Science, not activism, tells the real story.

Misleading Climate Narratives

Eco-Luddites redefine “climate change” to focus solely on human activity, ignoring natural drivers like El Niño and La Niña—weather patterns driven by ocean temperature variations in the Equatorial Pacific. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) are cyclical events spanning 20–30 years, influencing climate across vast regions. These forces shape weather patterns far more than CO2 alone, yet activists can’t predict them with computer models, undermining their claims of authority. Modern instrumentation only goes back to the 1990s, and earlier data—like centuries of thermometer records—are often altered through modeling, a practice that distorts objective science. Google searches are often biased, but I rely on textbooks, reports, and raw data to uncover the truth.

Ecosystem Resilience Over Alarmism

Data reveals coral reefs’ resilience to natural stressors and climate variability, despite limited study periods. Modern corals have existed for over 240 million years, since the Triassic period, surviving massive climate shifts, including periods far warmer than today. The Great Barrier Reef (GBR), with 13% of the world’s reefs, had a normalized coral cover of 0.34 ± 0.04 in 2022—the highest since records began in 1985—according to the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) Long Term Monitoring Program (LTMP). This 37-year dataset, starting in 1985, doubled from a low of 0.12 ± 0.03 in 2011, despite cyclones and starfish predation. Yet, AIMS surveys only 100 of the GBR’s 3,000 reefs annually, covering just 0.003% of the marine park, meaning most of the reef isn’t even dove. Globally, the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) data is reliable only since the late 1990s—less than 25 years by 2022—offering even shorter records. Bleaching events, recorded as early as 400 years ago (Irish News, August 2018), are a natural stress response where corals expel algae (zooxanthellae) and often recover by adopting new algae strains. A study I’ve archived shows coral reefs elsewhere recovered after cyclone and starfish damage, with similar events occurring 600 years ago. A 627-year-old coral from Fiji, studied in 2024, recorded sea surface temperatures from 1370 to 1997 using the strontium-to-calcium ratio, showing waters around Fiji from 1370 to 1553 were nearly as warm as in 1997, indicating natural climate variability in the Pacific.

Fossil records show corals thrived during the Cambrian Explosion (541–485.4 MYA) at 8,000 ppm CO2, compared to 420 ppm today, with ocean pH remaining alkaline at 8.1. Peter Ridd’s 2023 report notes corals adapt to temperature changes by switching zooxanthellae, with most surviving bleaching (Report 55, The Global Warming Policy Foundation: Coral in a Warming World: Causes for Optimism). For more, see my page Debunking Ocean Alarmism: Earth’s Resilience.

Bikini Atoll corals recovered after 23 nuclear detonations between 1946 and 1958.

Bikini Atoll corals recovered after 23 nuclear detonations from 1946 to 1958.
See image Bikini Atoll bomb craters from space.

Bikini Atoll experienced 23 nuclear detonations between 1946 and 1958 as part of U.S. nuclear testing programs, primarily Operation Crossroads, Operation Castle, and others. The tests included atmospheric, underwater, and surface explosions, with the most notable being the Castle Bravo test in 1954, the largest U.S. nuclear detonation at 15 megatons.

Unqualified Activism and Failed Predictions

Stephen Schneider, Paul Ehrlich, and John Holdren—none of them earth scientists—fueled decades of climate alarmism with shifting narratives. Schneider, a plasma physicist with a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, was Deputy Head of the Climate Project at NCAR in 1976 after years at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. He led the 1970s cooling scare, endorsing Lowell Ponte’s The Cooling (1976) and warning in The Genesis Strategy (p. 90): “A cooling trend has set in—perhaps one akin to the Little Ice Age.” Reid Bryson, another top scientist, echoed this fear, responding to the global cooling observed from 1945–1975. An archived exchange shows Schneider’s later shift to warming alarmism, revealing his inconsistency: Stephen Schneider and Global Cooling: An Exchange.

The cooling scare had scientific backing. The National Academy of Sciences’ 1975 report, Understanding Climatic Change: A Program for Action, warned of a cooling trend due to natural variability, urging further research: Download climate_1975.pdf. The media amplified this fear, with little pushback from scientists—none claimed warming was the real threat until James Hansen’s 1988 pronouncement, which the climate community didn’t fully support at the time. Activists later denied a cooling consensus, but the NAS report proves otherwise. Schneider’s fear tactics, like his later “scary scenarios” (1989), mirror the Eco-Luddites’ rejection of technology, prioritizing alarmism over evidence. For more on Schneider, see his biography.

Natural Climate Drivers

Climate has always varied due to natural forces. Ocean currents, like those during the Eocene (55.8–33.9 MYA), have long controlled climate, as I explore in Debunking Ocean Alarmism and Eocene Epoch Versus Modern Climate Hysteria. During the Holocene (9,000–5,000 years ago), temperatures were 2.5–7.0°C warmer than today, with forests reaching the Arctic coastline, driven by higher solar insolation and warm North Atlantic waters, per a 2017 Cambridge University Press study: Holocene Treeline History. Giant camels roamed the Arctic during warmer periods, as I discuss in Lovelock’s Science vs. Hansen’s Venus Myth. These shifts—missed by activist models—show nature’s role in climate change.

Artist's depiction of giant camels that roamed the forests on
Canada’s islands such as Ellesmere Island 2.6 million years ago.

Artist's depiction of giant camels that roamed the forests on Canada’s islands such as Ellesmere Island above the Arctic Circle. Then the Pleistocene Ice Age settled in 2.6 million years ago and the camels and forests were gone.

Technology and Reason as Solutions

Eco-Luddites reject technologies that could solve ecological problems, driven by the same ideology Schneider perpetuated. Nuclear power, a low-carbon energy source, could reduce CO2 emissions, yet they dismiss it over radiation concerns. In Southwest Virginia, I’ve seen coal’s toll—polluted creeks, scarred land—while nuclear power offers a cleaner alternative. GMOs increase crop yields and reduce pesticide use, benefiting ecosystems and food security, but are opposed as “unnatural.” Carbon capture could mitigate climate impacts, yet Eco-Luddites shun it, favoring “pristine” nature over progress.

Technology supports nature’s resilience. Higher CO2 levels have driven global greening and increased grain production by 50% from 1971 to 2018, as shown below. Marian L. Tupy at Human Progress notes: “Nature adjusts to human activity…humans are encountering nature’s resilience.” Source Eco-Luddites push anti-human ideologies like eco-theology, as I discuss in Eco-Theology: Indoctrinating Kids, Breaking the Constitution. Their views—treating nature as sacred—are a form of religion: Environmentalism as Religion: Dogma Over Data.

Share This Article

The Cambrian Period 541 to 485 MYA marked many major animal groups appearing in the fossil record.
See detailed image Cambrian Explosion

The Cambrian Period lasted from approximately 541 to 485 million years ago. It marked the beginning of the Paleozoic Era and is known for the "Cambrian Explosion," a rapid diversification of life forms, with many major animal groups appearing in the fossil record. During the Cambrian period atmospheric CO2 levels were significantly higher than today. Estimates based on geochemical models and proxy data, such as carbon isotope records, suggest CO2 concentrations ranged from 2,000 to 8,000 ppm (parts per million). This is compared to modern levels of around 420 ppm in 2025. The high CO2 levels contributed to a warm, greenhouse climate, with global temperatures likely 5–10°C higher than today, supporting diverse marine ecosystems and the Cambrian Explosion of life. Precise measurements vary due to uncertainties in proxy data and modeling, but levels were consistently elevated compared to the modern era.

Conclusion

Eco-Luddites ignore data showing nature’s resilience—like coral reefs recovering from natural stressors and surviving climate shifts over centuries—while rejecting technological progress that could support ecosystems. From the Great Barrier Reef’s recovery to historical climate shifts in the Pacific, evidence reveals climate varies naturally, a fact activists like Schneider overlooked. In Southwest Virginia, I’ve learned to trust data over activism, using science to challenge myths. Explore my series for more: Eco-Theology in Schools, Environmentalism as Religion, Ocean Alarmism, and Hansen’s Venus Myth. Let’s embrace reason, not ideology.

Note the exchange I archived as a pdf: Stephen Schneider and Global Cooling: An Exchange

climate_1975.pdf

See Coral in a Warming World: Causes for Optimism by Peter Ridd, Report 55, The Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Eocene Epoch Versus Modern Climate Hysteria