Pass the water please
From the “You’ve got to be freakin kidding me department” comes this proof positive that EVERYTHING is caused by global warming. Yessirree folks, my cat coughed up a hairball last night, must be global warming causing him to lick off too much fur.
From the Thaindian News and here it is on Science Daily so no, I’m not making this up.
Washington, May 15 (ANI): Global warming may lead to an increase in kidney stones disease, says a new study.
Dehydration has been linked to stone disease, mainly in warmer climates, and global warming will worsen this effect, according to the researchers.
As a result, the prevalence of stone disease may increase, along with the costs of treating the condition.
Using published data to determine the temperature-dependence of stone disease, researchers applied predictions of temperature increase to determine the impact of global warming on the incidence and cost of stone disease in the United States.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicates a 1-20 C increase in temperature by 2050 for much of the United States. These findings place a greater significance on the harmful effects of global warming, an ongoing economic and political issue.
The southern United States is considered the stone belt because these states have higher incidences of kidney stones. Rising global temperatures could expand this region; the fraction of the U.S. population living in high-risk stone zones is predicted to grow from 40 percent in 2000 to 50 percent by 2050.
This could lead to an increase of one to two million lifetime cases of stone disease. The impact of climate-related changes in stone disease will be non-uniformly distributed and likely concentrated in the southern half of the country (linear model) or upper Midwest (non-linear model).
The cost associated with treating stone disease could climb as high as one 1 billion dollars annually by 2050, representing a 10-20 percent increase over present-day estimates.
The study was presented at the 103rd Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Urological Association. (ANI)
And those fools in San Franscisco city government just banned bottled water – ouch, that hurts.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Kosmos wrote: “I’m quite sure that, in a few months, if that crazy press state that: “Global Cooling is cause by Global Warming”, they will swallow it !”
I believe they’ve already said that, Kosmos! And Mike K is ample proof that a small minority has fallen for it, if for no other reason that to continue their merry journey into fantasy land.
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com
‘ know that even when May’s global mean temperature shows a rise, ‘
Guess what, mike k? Here in Southern Ontario, we are 15 degrees below average- and have been for all of the month of May so far.
Mike K, we do have open minds, but not so much that our brains fall out. It sounds like yours is made up.
Which mass extinction event are you referring to? Can you name any animals which have gone extinct in the last 20 years?
“Beer drinkers beware!!”
Climate Change, if anything, is beneficial to the growing of barley -especially the high 2 row quality barley grown in Great Britain, Benelux, Bavaria, and Moravia. The biggest threat to the barley crop is the ethanol industry. Even in Europe farmers are jumping on the corn band wagon.
The drought in Austrailia has nothing to do with AGW.
I’d like a list, please, of examples of “the massive extinction event we are witnessing”.
Please be specific. No “estimates” allowed.
Identify actual cases of species extinction within the last 30 years.
I think the earth is warming on average, 10,000 or so years ago the ice shelf came down to near Tennessee in the United states and it hasn’t returned that far at this time so it is warmer than it was then, Is CO2 driving the warming I doubt it. If the CO2 we are speaking of is the same used in carbonated cold drinks then I suspect that the oceans are much like the drinks they retain the CO2 to some extent when they are cold but release it when they are warm. To me that would indicate that as the oceans warm they not only absorb less CO2 but probably release CO2 that the warmer water will not retain. By the same token I suspect that when the oceans cool enough that we might possibly see a reduction of atmospheric CO2 due to the cooler waters of the oceans being able to absorb more of the gas. Is it possible that this would lag the heating or cooling of the oceans by some time. Just as if you open a carbonated drink that is in a calm state as it warms it will become “flat” as the CO2 is released.
Just some thoughts of a poor ole uneducated country boy
Bill Derryberry
Mike K (04:21:44) :
“Seriously though I am one of the majority that see that man’s actions are having a catastrophic effect on our once beautiful planet earth. Polution, deforestation and the massive extinction event we are witnessing are a fact.”
Pollution is a fact – if there were no global warming it would still be a fact. Here in New Hampshire we are seeing a big increase in the number of people heating with wood. Wood stoves are really dirty compared to any central utility. The local high school built a wood burning plant that produces as much smoke as a single wood stove. If global cooling has indeed taken hold, we will be burning more wood, oil, and natural gas. While pollution (especially soot on arctic snow) may have important ties to climate change, it’s a much bigger issue than “fits” here.
Deforestation – The Year without a Summer in 1816 was one of several events that triggered a westward migration away from New England. One problem was a severe energy crisis – pretty much all the forests had been cut. Even with the increase in wood burning here, deforestation is not a big issue. Elsewhere, I’m amazed at the increased conversion of tropical forest to producing biofuels – sugar cane in Brazil for ethanol, palms in Madagascar and Indonesia for biodiesel. There’s some interesting biotech work that I hope will end this nonsense. The increased demand for fuel is more due to the improving global economy and increased population. If global cooling has indeed taken hold, that will not reduce the demand for fuel. Ending Ethanol requirements and tax breaks could collapse the ethanol market, but that’s more a pollution issue than climate change issue.
Massive extinction – I don’t know enough about this subject to say much about it, but if global cooling has indeed taken hold, that will not reverse the loss of habitat issues that are probably more important than climate change. Also, I’m not a good person to get involved with this. While it turns out that the Endangered Species Act does not cover bacteria and viruses, I’d probably defend protecting our stocks of Smallpox and Polio viruses. They may have as much “right to exist” as do man-eating carnivores like Polar Bears.
Overpopulation – why did you leave this off the list? Personally, I think we should do more to move off the planet, I’m rather fond of O’Neill colonies. However, do not let your guard down about Avian flu or some other influenza that has not yet evolved. That could reduce the Earth’s population by 10% in just a few weeks. However, it has little to do with climate change, though if global cooling has indeed taken hold, that could foster the spread of novel viruses.
It’s not that we don’t appreciate your concerns, its just that we tend to talk about issues more closely tied to climate here. If Anthony broadened the discussion topics here, I’d go find a different place to hang out. Just because something bad (or good!) is happening to the Earth doesn’t mean that a warming, cooling, or neutral climate is at fault.
Also, we are at a cusp in our understanding of climate forcings. The field is just as interesting now as when geologists were uncovering evidence and the reasons for plate tectonics. Once the science really does show signs of becoming settled then I’ll move on to newer, more interesting topics. Until then, blogs like this one play an important role.
Mike K: “…and the massive extinction event we are witnessing are a fact.”
I must be asleep at the wheel, could you inform me of this massive extinction event I have missed.
Not religion just science…or am I now a heretic in your eyes for not following your religion?
On the day that all the data, algorithms, codes, and operating manuals are publicly disclosed for independent review, then one may call it science. Be it correct, incorrect, accurate, flawed, whatever.
But not until that happy day.
Until then it remains mere alchemy.
Mike K says “and the massive extinction event we are witnessing are a fact.”
Mike K, Would care to provide me massive list of recently extinct species?
NOAA’s latest model:
Climate change ‘to make Atlantic hurricanes rarer’
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080516/full/news.2008.837.html
It isn’t quite “Warming will lead to cooling”, but that can’t be far behind.
Bill P, thanks for the article. It looks like after 2 years of defiance of AGW models the excuses and backtracking start.
Thanks to all of you for pointing out that rather than being deforested, America has more forested land area now than in 1900.
A snapshot of current conditions is as follows:
Being able to allow various species of animals to repopulate (because we don’t need them or their intended prey for food) and allowing land to return to timber because we don’t need the wood for our fireplaces or the fields to eke out a marginal existence is a luxury that only existed very recently in our history.
There are 785 known extinct species.
http://www.iucnredlist.org/search/search.php?freetext=&modifier=phrase&criteria=wholedb&taxa_species=1&redlistCategory%5B0%5D=EX&country%5B0%5D=all&cty_default=1&aquatic%5B0%5D=all&aqu_default=1®ions%5B0%5D=all®_default=1&habitats%5B0%5D=all&threats%5B0%5D=all&redlistAssessyear%5B0%5D=all&growths%5B0%5D=all&extendedResults=0&terrestrial=0&marine=0&freshwater=0&sortorder%5B0%5D=spcscientificname&sortorder%5B1%5D=genname&sortorder%5B2%5D=spcname&sortorder%5B3%5D=spcauthor&sortorder%5B4%5D=spcinfrarank&sortorder%5B5%5D=spcinfraepithet&sortorder%5B6%5D=spcinfrarankauthor&sortorder%5B7%5D=spcstockname&sortorder%5B8%5D=comname_comp&sortorder%5B9%5D=rlcabb&sortorder%5B10%5D=rlscriteria&sortorder%5B11%5D=poptrend_code&sortorder%5B12%5D=rlcatcrit2001&sortorder%5B13%5D=rlscaveat&sortorder%5B14%5D=rlspetition&sortorder%5B15%5D=spcrecid&sortorder%5B16%5D=kingname&newsort=&debug=0&kingname=&phyname=&claname=&ordname=&famname=&genname=&spcname=&taxa_subspc=0&taxa_stock=0&cty_intro=0&cty_vagrant=0&cty_uncert=0&aqu_intro=0&aqu_vagrant=0&aqu_uncert=0®_intro=0®_vagrant=0®_uncert=0&spc_petition=0&spc_caveat=0&offset=0
There is no acceleration in recent decades.
Many of these went extinct decades or hundreds of years ago, not having anything to do with pogification or even industrialization. Hey Anthony, that’s another site for your reference list.
There are 785 known extinct species.
http://www.iucnredlist.org/search/search.php?freetext=&modifier=phrase&criteria=wholedb&taxa_species=1&redlistCategory%5B0%5D=EX&country%5B0%5D=all&cty_default=1&aquatic%5B0%5D=all&aqu_default=1®ions%5B0%5D=all®_default=1&habitats%5B0%5D=all&threats%5B0%5D=all&redlistAssessyear%5B0%5D=all&growths%5B0%5D=all&extendedResults=0&terrestrial=0&marine=0&freshwater=0&sortorder%5B0%5D=spcscientificname&sortorder%5B1%5D=genname&sortorder%5B2%5D=spcname&sortorder%5B3%5D=spcauthor&sortorder%5B4%5D=spcinfrarank&sortorder%5B5%5D=spcinfraepithet&sortorder%5B6%5D=spcinfrarankauthor&sortorder%5B7%5D=spcstockname&sortorder%5B8%5D=comname_comp&sortorder%5B9%5D=rlcabb&sortorder%5B10%5D=rlscriteria&sortorder%5B11%5D=poptrend_code&sortorder%5B12%5D=rlcatcrit2001&sortorder%5B13%5D=rlscaveat&sortorder%5B14%5D=rlspetition&sortorder%5B15%5D=spcrecid&sortorder%5B16%5D=kingname&newsort=&debug=0&kingname=&phyname=&claname=&ordname=&famname=&genname=&spcname=&taxa_subspc=0&taxa_stock=0&cty_intro=0&cty_vagrant=0&cty_uncert=0&aqu_intro=0&aqu_vagrant=0&aqu_uncert=0®_intro=0®_vagrant=0®_uncert=0&spc_petition=0&spc_caveat=0&offset=0
There is no acceleration in recent decades.
Many of these went extinct decades or hundreds of years ago, not having anything to do with pogification or even industrialization. Hey Anthony, that’s another site for your reference list.
Looks like perhaps five species identified in the last ten years.
Madeiran Large White, Pieris brassicae wollastoni, 29-30 October 2007
Western Black Rhinoceros, Diceros bicornis longipes, 8 June 2006
Po’o-uli, Melamprosops phaeosoma, 28 November 2004
Miss Waldron’s Red Colobus Monkey, Procolobus badius waldronae, 2000-2001
http://extinctanimals.petermaas.nl/
Pyrenean Ibex, Capra pyrenaica pyrenaica, 6 January 2000
My kidney stone decided to “abort” itself in January, our coldest month here! I wonder if Al Gore has an explanation for this? I think this falls right in with the Hurricane projections the past 2 seasons – they are revising them downward. I believe it’s a right-wing conspiracy.
Any historian worth his carbon knows that a return to the “Good Old Days” before the internal combustion engine would be a complete and utter environmental disaster.
Europe used to be one big forest. But not for many centuries . . .
There are many more than 785 recently extinct species. The (known) birds and mammals alone are about that number. However it isn’t possible to say that there has been no acceleration in recent decades. It is very rarely possible to provide an exact date for an extinction (except when the last individual was in captivity). Normally a species isn’t classed as extinct until it has not been seen for a long time (usually decades) and thorough searches of the remainig habitat have failed to turn any up. Consequently most recent extinctions are still “in the pipeline”. Even so I can add a couple of species to that ten-year list, the Nukupu’u and the Yangtse River Dolphin have both gone extinct in the last decade.
That said, there is not the slightest evidence that climate change has caused any of the recent extinctions. They are mostly due to habitat destruction (usually deforestation) and introduction of alien predators or parasites. Indeed the biofuel hysteria will probably cause many more extinctions than any possible climate change.
Critters go extinct in undeveloped countries. Demographers have no trouble understanding this: they are well aware that every developed country protects its environment and no undeveloped country has ever sufficiently protected its environment. It’s human nature. Only when we and our families are well fed and provided for does the environment EVER become a real concern to us.
When the third and fourth world develops (it is to be hoped without wiping out too many species) they will clean up their acts. We can and should help them in their development.
Then and ONLY then will extinctions cease. If we hold down the third and fourth world with burdensome regulations and lack of assistance, we will not only create a human tragedy but, in the long run, more environmental damage, not less.
Population is not the problem. We house a hundred where ten were housed before–and with far more elbow-room per individual. I live in a railroad flat slum designed for 16 people (c. 5 per room). Today it is illegal to occupy it with more than 5. A few blocks away, there is a mammoth high-rise that houses in comfort, thousands where a hundred were jam-packed together.
Besides, birthrates have plummeted since 1990.
And the club of Rome was dead wrong: resources are virtually unlimited (don’t get me started).
Killing (or half-strangling) the golden goose isn’t going to save the environment. It is a false choice. Only by petting and cosseting that goose will we get anywhere in longterm protection of endangered species.
tty, I agree with your estimation of uncertainty and was leaving short answers. It is the computer modeled projections of extinctions of unknown species with which I have issues.
tty: Dead right about biofuels causing extinctions.
It’s simple- if you can link it to global warming/climate change you can get a grant.
[…] it`s official; absolutely everything is caused by global […]
[…] Watts reports: From the “You’ve got to be freakin kidding me department” comes this proof positive that […]