The doom and gloom, hell and high water howling seems to have hit a traffic obstacle in the form of a new paper in the UK that shows warmer weather saves lives. I really liked this part:
…they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.
From CO2 Science:
Lives Saved per Life Lost Due to Global Warming
Reference
Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553.
Background
The authors write that “the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,” citing the contribution of Confalonieri et al. (2007) to that document.
What was done
In an effort handsomely suited to evaluate this very-high-confidence contention of the IPCC, Christidis et al. extracted the numbers of daily deaths from all causes from death registration data supplied by the UK Office of National Statistics for men and women fifty years of age or older in England and Wales for the period 1976-2005, which they divided by daily estimates of population “obtained by fitting a fifth order polynomial to mid-year population estimates, to give mortality as deaths per million people,” after which they compared the death results with surface air temperature data that showed a warming trend during the same three-decade period of 0.47°C per decade. In addition, they employed a technique called optimal detection, which they describe as “a formal statistical methodology” that can be used to estimate the role played by human adaptation in the temperature-related changes in mortality they observed.
What was learned
As expected, during the hottest portion of the year, warming led to increases in death rates, while during the coldest portion of the year it lead to decreases in death rates. More specifically, the three scientists report that if no adaptation had taken place, there would have been 1.6 additional deaths per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year over the period 1976-2005, but there would have been 47 fewer deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 29.4, which represents a huge net benefit of the warming experienced in England and Wales over the three-decade period of warming. And when adaptation was included in the analysis, as was the case in the data they analyzed, they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.
What it means
Clearly, the IPCC’s “very-high-confidence” conclusion is woefully wrong. Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.
For more on this important topic, including results from all around the world, see the many items we have archived under the subheadings of Health Effects (Temperature) in our Subject Index.
Reference
Confalonieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. 2007. Human health. In: Parry, M.L. et al. (Eds.) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Lives Saved per Life Lost Due to Global Warming
Reference
Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553. Background
The authors write that “the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,” citing the contribution of Confalonieri et al. (2007) to that document.
What was done
In an effort handsomely suited to evaluate this very-high-confidence contention of the IPCC, Christidis et al. extracted the numbers of daily deaths from all causes from death registration data supplied by the UK Office of National Statistics for men and women fifty years of age or older in England and Wales for the period 1976-2005, which they divided by daily estimates of population “obtained by fitting a fifth order polynomial to mid-year population estimates, to give mortality as deaths per million people,” after which they compared the death results with surface air temperature data that showed a warming trend during the same three-decade period of 0.47°C per decade. In addition, they employed a technique called optimal detection, which they describe as “a formal statistical methodology” that can be used to estimate the role played by human adaptation in the temperature-related changes in mortality they observed.
What was learned
As expected, during the hottest portion of the year, warming led to increases in death rates, while during the coldest portion of the year it lead to decreases in death rates. More specifically, the three scientists report that if no adaptation had taken place, there would have been 1.6 additional deaths per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year over the period 1976-2005, but there would have been 47 fewer deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 29.4, which represents a huge net benefit of the warming experienced in England and Wales over the three-decade period of warming. And when adaptation was included in the analysis, as was the case in the data they analyzed, they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.
What it means
Clearly, the IPCC’s “very-high-confidence” conclusion is woefully wrong. Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.
For more on this important topic, including results from all around the world, see the many items we have archived under the subheadings of Health Effects (Temperature) in our Subject Index.
Reference
Confalonieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. 2007. Human health. In: Parry, M.L. et al. (Eds.) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Lives Saved per Life Lost Due to Global Warming
Reference
Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553. Background
The authors write that “the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,” citing the contribution of Confalonieri et al. (2007) to that document.
What was done
In an effort handsomely suited to evaluate this very-high-confidence contention of the IPCC, Christidis et al. extracted the numbers of daily deaths from all causes from death registration data supplied by the UK Office of National Statistics for men and women fifty years of age or older in England and Wales for the period 1976-2005, which they divided by daily estimates of population “obtained by fitting a fifth order polynomial to mid-year population estimates, to give mortality as deaths per million people,” after which they compared the death results with surface air temperature data that showed a warming trend during the same three-decade period of 0.47°C per decade. In addition, they employed a technique called optimal detection, which they describe as “a formal statistical methodology” that can be used to estimate the role played by human adaptation in the temperature-related changes in mortality they observed.
What was learned
As expected, during the hottest portion of the year, warming led to increases in death rates, while during the coldest portion of the year it lead to decreases in death rates. More specifically, the three scientists report that if no adaptation had taken place, there would have been 1.6 additional deaths per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year over the period 1976-2005, but there would have been 47 fewer deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 29.4, which represents a huge net benefit of the warming experienced in England and Wales over the three-decade period of warming. And when adaptation was included in the analysis, as was the case in the data they analyzed, they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.
What it means
Clearly, the IPCC’s “very-high-confidence” conclusion is woefully wrong. Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.
For more on this important topic, including results from all around the world, see the many items we have archived under the subheadings of Health Effects (Temperature) in our Subject Index.
Reference
Confalonieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. 2007. Human health. In: Parry, M.L. et al. (Eds.) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
And they write that, while their methods are more precise, this was likely to be conservative:
“The results were reported relative to the baseline period of 1961–1990. It should be noted that human activity had already had an impact on the climate during this period.”
Which is par for the course with the IPCC. They are generally very conservative, because of the political review, where politicians from fossil fuel producing and consuming nations try to ensure the profitability of those sectors, and the expense of lives in Africa and Asia, and other lives 50 years hence.
“Phil R, how about over 6 billion people will die this century? Scary, eh, ain’t it?”
It’s much worse than we expected.
With a birth rate of 15,000,000/yr., then 15 billion will die this century if we continue “business” as usual.
Someone must do something about this “business”.
Starting with you, I’m busy at the moment.
Wombat, usually your nonsense is just scroll-by stuff. But — in warming eras the poles warm most. In cooling eras they cool most. The tropics are very stable. Nothing whatsoever to do with any of the factors you mentioned.
YCLIU
You people have not been paying attention to the new climate disruption theory, colder is warmer and warmer is warmer….. pay attention!!!! The science has spoken.
Brian H is correct. Prof Richard Lindzen explains:
“There is ample evidence that the Earth’s temperature as measured at the equator has remained within +/- 1°C for more than the past billion years. Those temperatures have not changed over the past century.”
Thank you Pamela Gray for a Real World scenario- been there done that,myself
raised on a Cattle and Wheat operation, been around it some peripherally
since-helping friends and family with harvest and roundup over the years. Keep warm, Pamela, snowing now in La Grande. I have seen my Cowboy/Indian (he was 1/2 Cherokee) Pop cry over a dead newborn Calf in a cold spring snow.
Those who have never done what she is talking about will never understand…
I seriously doubt if Al Gore ever farmed with Mules….
My Pop and my Wife’s Pop did…
I have fed Cattle on a Bobsled behind Pop’s Percherons….
Warm is Good,Cold is Bad.
In other words, water is wet.
James Sexton says:
November 23, 2010 at 12:28 pm
HAHAHAHAHA, is it ok if we gloat for a minute and say “Told ya so!”? I know it isn’t very sporting to say “Told ya so!”, but maybe we can make an exception this once and say “Told ya so!” to all of the warmistas that thought we’d all die a painful death due to milder winters. OTOH, maybe we should be more gracious than to say “Told ya so!”. But, I think there may be some sorted satisfaction that comes with saying “Told ya so!” I just can’t make up my mind as to whether we should say “Told ya so!” or perhaps we shouldn’t say “Told ya so!” and just soak it in for a moment.
Now THAT is funny!!!
And I agree!
Guess what? Last year at this time, here in the north-central Puget Sound, the temp was above freezing (32ºF).
I didn’t have to run my pellet stove because the daytime temps (sunlight through the south-facing windows) heated the house to about 70º in the daytime such that evening temps didn’t get worrisome (anything below 50ºF).
When the cold spell did set in, it was –as usual– in mid December.
About every fourth year here, in this region, the temps get down in the low teens for about a week in December. That also coincides with major snowfall which happened last year.
Well, guess what? Here it is on the eve of Tuesday, 23 November, 2010, 2200 Hours PST, and the temperature is at +12.4ºF (-10.8ºC). The day isn’t over, and I expect that it will get colder yet before daybreak on the morrow.
We’re a bit more than a week early for the lows.
And that’s lower than last year’s low which happened on Dec. 08: 14.0ºF. I can’t recall that happening here before (this soon), and I’ve lived in the region since 1980.
I think that we’re in for some ‘interesting times.’
A few studies I came across suggested the people of the UK don’t dress appropriately for unusually cold weather, unlike the Scandinavians who live in a cooler environment.
Flu outbreaks did not increase mortality among the elderly, while cardiovascular problems had the greatest impact. It was simply the cold that killed them.
I feel a mass migration coming on – baby boomers on the march.
Dave Wendt says:
November 23, 2010 at 6:24 pm
“30,000 people dying from temperatures from temperatures that in most places were barely over 100F, in what is theoretically the developed part of the planet, is an indication of something much more ominous than changing climate. It indicates that living in a socialist nanny state, of the exact type suggested as a solution to the looming “climate catastrophe”, can result in a population that is so enfeebled that it is completely incapable of taking even the most basic steps to ensure its own survival.”
WOW! Is that the same French nanny state that boasted the best health care in the world as of 2000?
Your post is one of the most troubling I’ve read on here. (That’ s no mean feat).
http://www.who.int/whr/2000/media_centre/press_release/en/
http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/open-threads/climate/climate-science/energy-and-fuel/
please leave a message
Condolences for the Pike River victims
Send your condolences to the families of the victims of the Pike River coal mine disaster.
To leave a message for their loved ones please use the comment field at the foot of this page.
24/11/2010 – Stuff
The Pike River coal mine victims: Conrad John Adams, Malcolm Campbell, Glen Peter Cruse, Allan John Dixon, Zen Wodin Drew, Christopher Peter Duggan, Joseph Ray Dunbar, John Leonard Hale, Daniel Thomas Herk, David Mark Hoggart, Richard Bennett Holling, Andrew David Hurren, Jacobus (Koos) Albertus Jonker, William John Joynson, Riki Steve Keane, Terry David Kitchin, Samuel Peter Mackie, Francis Skiddy Marden, Michael Nolan Hanmer Monk, Stuart Gilbert Mudge, Kane Barry Nieper, Peter O’Neill, Milton John Osborne, Brendan John Palmer, Benjamin David Rockhouse, Peter James Rodger, Blair David Sims, Joshua Adam Ufer, Keith Thomas Valli.
After almost a decade in the UK, living in Berkshire near London first then moving to suburban London, we have found the public buildings in the UK are kept at too high a temperature in winter; the heat that blasts out of open department store doorways is enough to make one begin to peel layers of clothing off. Schools are also very well heated, but school uniforms here tend to be inadequate for both very warm and very cool temperatures – children as young as four begin wearing school unifor, typically long trousers and white business shirt with monogrammed sweat or pullover , tie and blazer, socks and sturdy black shoes are the norm for boys for the entire school year. A thin topcoat, minimally waterproof, can be worn outdoors in any season.
The uniform for girls, usually a skirt, white business shirt with tie plus monogrammed sweat or pullover and a monogrammed blazer, stockings or tights with thin shoes, doesn’t vary significantly either and is equally inadequate as the watchword is ‘uniform’. Kids here are usually stuck with uniforms until they are in their very late teens; it’s not unusual to see young men with mustaches and occasionally, full beards, in school uniform! The big supermarket chains all sell ultra-cheap school uniforms, some of very dubious quality. The idea of unisex uniforms, common in NZ for around 20 years, is only beginning to appear in some Primary schools here.
Most English people I have met seem to believe that the weather here in the South-East of the country is ‘awful’, when in fact it is quite mild and gentle, if a little colder in winter, but very similar to the climate in the lower North Island of New Zealand, where domestic central heating is very unusual but the locals compensate by wearing more appropriate clothes for a given temperature range.
The aged here who live alone or with an aged partner tend to become vulnerable to temperature extremes as their mobility decreases and their sensitivity to temperature change also diminishes. The English do not have positive attitudes to fitness, as evidenced by my GP, who is faintly and permanently surprised that, now I have reached my ‘threescore and ten’, continue to work out with weights every day and do other regular exercise, while I see it as quite normal for everyone, regardless of age; Teachers in Primary schools in NZ regard daily fitness routines as part of the curriculum but there is no time to fit daily fitness routines of any worth into every school day, so fitness never becomes a habit for the majority. The attitude to women’s sport here is generally quite negative and most English men seem to prefer that their womenfolk to be spectators at sport or to exercise in the kitchen! The UK has a large range of financial benefits available to the aged, but many of the needy aged are not aware of these and so suffer needlessly.
This has been painfully obvious for years. In a SINGLE exceptionally hot year it was claimed there were 2300 extra deaths. Age concern said that EACH AND EVERY YEAR there are 23000 deaths due to cold. Last year figures of 40,000 or so were being quoted.
Living in Scotland I doubt even a handful of people died due to the “heat”, whereas there will be many many more in proportion who die from cold.
OK, if warming happened, then I wouldn’t doubt there might be problems in warmer areas of the world, but the point at which warming is worse than cooling would be a long way south of the UK – if any such place existed!
This completely misses changes in temperture/precipitation patterns that affect agriculture and fresh water supply (which affects the amount of the population that starves or is impacted by inadequate water), misses human disease vectors, agricultural disease/pest vectors (can you say “wheat rust”?), for starters.
Hence, this seems to be a ploy of looking through a straw only at the data one wants to build perceptions on, instead of looking at the big picture. Not surprising coming from “C02 Science”…
OT I know, but some posters such as Solarbud make me laugh. Who will probably get cross with me for being heartless, or flippant. Or both. But this study was about the UK – get over it!
Some years ago I taught in a Roman Catholic Co-ed High School. I was chatting to one of the religius teachers out in the grounds and a senior female student, noted for being gorgeous but somewhat airheaded, bustled up to my colleauge
“Brother, Brother! I have just heard that the death statistics have gone up!”
The unflappable Brother smiled at her;
“Don’t worry, child. The statistics are the same as they they always were; one death per person!”
Particularly interesting when you think of the provenance. See the authors of this paper.
http://research.metoffice.gov.uk/research/nwp/publications/mosac/MOSAC_15.10.pdf
The UK government tacitly acknowledges the truth of this study.
We have had a “Winter Fuel Allowance” for pensioners and some other vulnerable groups (which is increased for those of 80+ years I think).
There is no word yet on a “Summer Cooling Allowance” yet though.
If we’re adapted for any climate, it is the climate of a tropical jungle, or possibly a tropical savannah. It is only in the very recent past that we have attempted to colonise more hostile environments, such as the polar regions – otherwise we would have fur, or other natural insulation, just as everything else which lives in such environments has.
You might think, from your own experience, that you cant stand it when it gets too hot, but you are wrong – you have never really given the heat a chance. I’ve lived on the edge of the tropics, in Brisbane, Queensland, and subjectively, it takes about 3 – 4 months for a body adapted to cold weather to accept the heat. Since this is about the length of a temperate Summer, most people North of say Florida or Italy never discover just how much they could come to like the heat – by the time their bodies are on the verge of adapting, the weather is turning cold, and the adaption frantically goes into reverse, to cope with the winter temperatures.
The adaption from hot to cold seems a lot quicker than the adaption from cold to hot, but maybe thats just me.
There is something wonderful about always being warm enough – quite appart from the bright sunshine and beautiful weather, being so warm all the time that you never need protection from the cold is a liberating experience. I cannot imagine retiring to a cold part of the world.
Tim Williams says:
November 23, 2010 at 1:05 pm
….“However, even if climate change significantly
decreases cold-related mortality, this benefit should be considered alongside the
other, predominantly detrimental, health impacts discussed in Section 1″
Namely:
…Increased likelyhood of variability of food crop yields as a precursor to the detrimental health impact of malnutrition and hunger….
_________________________________________________________________
Where the heck did you ever get the idea that warmer is bad for food production???? Try telling THAT to a Mongolian Herder. After this last winter you would think that piece of propaganda would have died.
1. Warmer weather means MORE evaporation which means MORE rain. MORE CO2 means plants need LESS water (the stomata do not have to be as open and the do not lose as much moisture trying to get the CO2 they need)
2. Plants LOVE CO2 and it increase growth and production.
3. Increase in warmth has increase the area where grain crops can now grow. That is Canada and Russia.
A late spring frost or early fall frost can mean losing an entire crop. The effect of Florida citrus fruit trees last winter is proof. Not to mention the effects of cold all over the Northern Hemisphere.
11/17/2010 A … This freeze was the fifth *impact freeze recorded in Florida history, …
“…*Impact Freeze: a freeze so severe that it annihilates entire groves across the state, killing both mature and young citrus trees, while causing a profound economic impact on the citrus industry and usually prompting growers to replant farther south. “ http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20100117/ISSUE01/301179971
Freezing winter weather in the Sunshine State has wiped out nearly 70 percent of that state’s tomato crop
…another sizable industry that has suffered more than any other because of this year’s unusually long cold snap — tropical fish.
Multiple Deaths Blamed on Frigid, Below-Normal Temperatures Affecting 60 Percent of Americans
THOUSANDS of farm animals face being frozen to death as Scotland experiences its worst winter weather in almost 50 years, farmers have warned. (If you can not get hay to your animals they will die. The USA used aircraft to drop hay to herds last winter)
And if you can not use aircraft to drop hay…
Piles of carcasses have been found where Mongolian livestock have frozen to death
“The Mongolian winter catastrophe is like a slow strangulation… The early-born baby animals succumb first… then the smaller animal species like the cashmere goats …then the big ones… At this point several million animals—the livelihood for Mongolia’s nomadic herders—have perished, and the winter is beginning to take the lives of people…”
Changes in growing belts are detailed here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/15/canada-and-usa-agricultural-weather-issues-and-changes-in-our-solar-cycles/
dennis crockford says:
November 23, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Mark T and Jimmy H (Oh, and you too Anthony):
Let me see,
“the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,”…
___________________________________________-
And IPCC takes their information from the “Unbiased” reports of Greenpeace and World Wild Life Federation (Own and run by the rich)
http://nofrakkingconsensus.blogspot.com/2010/01/greenpeace-and-nobel-winning-climate_28.html
WWF ALL wealthy Whites: http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/whit-man-game-wwf.htm
Anyone who has never grown a carrot, please, stop talking about how a warming world would lead to crop failures. Cold not only freezes, it produces drought (read up on the dust bowl era). And just try, I dare you, to milk a cow in minus temperatures. Warm your hands first, if you can. When I was a little girl, my job was to milk the cows before they got hooked up, to get a pan of milk for the cats. I think it was just to keep me busy, mouth shut, and out of the way. In the warmer seasons, I liked my job. But I sure didn’t like it in the winter.
Here’s another helping of reality, back before we had electricity out to the barn and water tank, we had to carry hot water out to the tanks, one bucket at a time, more than once a day. A week of bitter cold freezing night and day time temps will leave your animals searching for water. Yes, they eat snow, but it stresses them out. If electricity prices rise beyond the ability of ranchers to make a profit, we will be back to carrying hot water to our animals again because we will have to shut off the electricity to our outbuildings and water tank heaters. And don’t tell us to sell out to big ranchers. Besides, if you are a true greenie, you don’t want to eat animals raised under feedlot conditions.
Visitor From Venus says:
November 23, 2010 at 3:49 pm
Interesting bit of doublethink. You’ll accept that the temperature is increasing if it means that the IPCC was wrong about something. Which means the temperature isn’t increasing because the IPCC is wrong. Please don’t think too hard about this because time will then start going backwards.
________________________________________________________-
SIGHhhhh
Climate runs in cycles. There are lots of cycles like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) that just turned cool, the Suess, de Vries, Gleissberg cycle and the Milankovitch cycle (Glaciation – the sum of all of the factors affecting insolation including Eccentricity, Precession and Obliquity)
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=8703
http://www.agu.org/journals/ABS/2001/2000GL006116.shtml
As Far as the Milankovitch cycle goes (the one that is the most scary)
Joe Romm over at Climate Progress states:
“Absent human emissions, we’d probably be in a slow long-term cooling trend due primarily by changes in the Earth’s orbit — see Human-caused Arctic warming overtakes 2,000 years of natural cooling, “seminal” study finds…”
This paper also agrees that we are at the point in the earth’s Milankovitch cycle that ushers in an ice age. The biggest question of course is why we are not covered in ice yet.
Lesson from the past: present insolation minimum holds potential for glacial inception (2007)
“Because the intensities of the 397 ka BP and present insolation minima are very similar, we conclude that under natural boundary conditions the present insolation minimum holds the potential to terminate the Holocene interglacial. Our findings support the Ruddiman hypothesis [Ruddiman, W., 2003. The Anthropogenic Greenhouse Era began thousands of years ago. Climate Change 61, 261–293], which proposes that early anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission prevented the inception of a glacial that would otherwise already have started….”
The actual data shows the earth is gradually headed downhill towards another glaciation, the only question is when and how. A quiet sun, cool ocean phases and a major volcanic eruption would be my guess as the trigger point. CO2 warming can not counteract the combined effects of the other big three. As the oceans cool the CO2 levels will increasingly drop.
Abrupt Climate Change: Should We Be Worried? – Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
“Most of the studies and debates on potential climate change, along with its ecological and economic impacts, have focused on the ongoing buildup of industrial greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and a gradual increase in global temperatures. This line of thinking, however, fails to consider another potentially disruptive climate scenario. It ignores recent and rapidly advancing evidence that Earth’s climate repeatedly has shifted abruptly and dramatically in the past, and is capable of doing so in the future.
Fossil evidence clearly demonstrates that Earthvs climate can shift gears within a decade….
But the concept remains little known and scarcely appreciated in the wider community of scientists, economists, policy makers, and world political and business leaders. Thus, world leaders may be planning for climate scenarios of global warming that are opposite to what might actually occur…“
As far as I am concerned the neglect in looking at a change towards a COOLING world is down right criminal negligence – my biggest gripe with CAGW.
Also if the earth’s climate was so all fired sensitive to CO2, not H2O, then the earth would have fried millenium ago during the Paleozoic Era when the CO2 levels were between near 7000 ppm.
Charlie A says:
November 23, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Observation #1:
This is why you see old people moving to Florida…
This obviously calls for a scientific study to see if there is a causal relationship between #2 and #1.
I just hope it doesn’t mean that it causes more old people to wear bikinis. 🙂
_________________________________________________________________
No it just means you will see more old folks in flowered shirts and baggy shorts using binoculars to study (oogle) the young folks.
Tim Williams says:
November 23, 2010 at 1:05 pm
“A well studied example is the 2003 European heatwave which cost
the lives of more than 30,000 people””
Dave Wendt says:
November 23, 2010 at 6:24 pm
…. It indicates that living in a socialist nanny state, of the exact type suggested as a solution to the looming “climate catastrophe”, can result in a population that is so enfeebled that it is completely incapable of taking even the most basic steps to ensure its own survival….
___________________________________________________________
I will agree with that. My hubby is 67 and I am 60. We lift 50 to over 100lbs for over eight hours in temperatures over 100F on the SE coast of the USA (High humidity) Biggest factor DRINK LOTS OF WATER. Dehydration is a big killer.
Controlling the worst of the next ice age may boil down to keeping large dams from forming in major water ways. It’s been done on a smaller scale already. Iced up rivers have been blown apart for decades.