From "The Stupid, It Burns" Department: "Climate Change Is Already Making People Sicker"

Guest rant by David Middleton

Time Stupid

Climate change is a central issue at this year’s United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), with multiple high-level meetings on the issue happening amid several devastating natural disasters. Hurricane Irma recently swept through the Caribbean and into Florida, only to be quickly followed by Hurricane Maria.

“Climate change casts a long shadow over the development efforts of our country,” said Darren Henfield, the minster of foreign affairs of the Bahamas, during a UNGA meeting on Hurricane Irma. “The implications of rising sea levels and atmospheric temperatures signal dire consequences for low-lying island states like the Bahamas.” Henfield said that the costs of rebuilding after Irma will be “exorbitant, in the tens of millions,” and he estimates similar damage related to Hurricane Maria.

The impact of climate change on global health is also becoming increasingly clear. At the end of last week, the United Nations released a report showing that global hunger is on the rise; 38 million more people were affected in 2016 than in 2015. Climate change and the spread of violent conflicts are responsible, the report says. Other research has linked climate change to increased respiratory problemspoor nutrition, the spread of infectious disease and even anxiety.



The fact that UN bureaucrats arbitrarily insert the phrase “climate change” into every other sentence they utter doesn’t constitute one bit of evidence that “climate change is already making people sicker”… “The stupid, it burns.”

The moronic conflation of hurricanes with climate change and making people sicker, just makes the STUPID burn even brighter.

World hunger again on the rise, driven by conflict and climate change, new UN report says

815 million people now hungry – Millions of children at risk from malnutrition

News release

15 SEPTEMBER 2017 | ROME – After steadily declining for over a decade, global hunger is on the rise again, affecting 815 million people in 2016, or 11 per cent of the global population, says a new edition of the annual United Nations report on world food security and nutrition released today. At the same time, multiple forms of malnutrition are threatening the health of millions worldwide.

The increase – 38 million more people than the previous year – is largely due to the proliferation of violent conflicts and climate-related shocks, according to The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2017.


The report is the first UN global assessment on food security and nutrition to be released following the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which aims to end hunger and all forms of malnutrition by 2030 as a top international policy priority.

It singles out conflict – increasingly compounded by climate change – as one of the key drivers behind the resurgence of hunger and many forms of malnutrition.

“Over the past decade, conflicts have risen dramatically in number and become more complex and intractable in nature,” the heads of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) the World Food Programme (WFP) and the World Health Organization (WHO) said in their joint foreword to the report. They stressed that some of the highest proportions of food-insecure and malnourished children in the world are now concentrated in conflict zones.



This is even more idiotic than the Time article…

“After steadily declining for over a decade, global hunger is on the rise again… The increase… is largely due to the proliferation of violent conflicts and climate-related shocks…”

WTF is a “climate-related shock”?

So… Like the 12-year hurricane drought… More than a decade of declining global hunger wasn’t caused by climate change… But a 1-year increase is caused by climate change?

The stupid, it burns…

The report is the first UN global assessment on food security and nutrition to be released following the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which aims to end hunger and all forms of malnutrition by 2030 as a top international policy priority.

Prior to the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” global hunger was declining… And suddenly started rising in the first assessment on food security after UN bureaucrats decided to stamp out world hunger by 2030?  Due to climate change?


Temp. Anom. (°C)  Undernouriahed
UAH 6.0  Millions %
2000 -0.03                            900.0 14.7%
2001 0.04                            917.5 14.8%
2002 0.20                            936.3 14.9%
2003 0.18                            947.2 14.9%
2004 0.18                            941.7 14.6%
2005 0.10                            926.0 14.2%
2006 0.14                            890.9 13.5%
2007 0.18                            854.5 12.8%
2008 -0.04                            831.8 12.3%
2009 -0.01                            814.7 11.9%
2010 0.30                            744.6 11.5%
2011 0.11                            782.1 11.2%
2012 0.03                            779.3 11.0%
2013 0.15                            775.4 10.8%
2014 0.14                            775.4 10.7%
2015 0.20                            777.0 10.6%
2016 0.46                            815.0 11.0%
Avg                            847.6 12.7%
                             70.6 1.7%
                           141.2 3.4%
Time Stupid2
Figure 1. Number and percentage of undernourished people in the world (UN FAO) and global temperature anomaly (UAH via Wood for Trees).


Time Stupid3
Figure 2. Cross plot of number and percentage of undernourished people in the world (UN FAO) vs. global temperature anomaly (UAH via Wood for Trees).


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 27, 2017 6:15 am

Well, to tell the truth, all this CAGW charade does make me sick sometimes…

Jeff Norman
Reply to  Nylo
September 27, 2017 9:11 am

Yes, I get a burning sensation in my brain.

Bryan A
Reply to  Jeff Norman
September 27, 2017 12:17 pm

Not so sure that anyone is getting “Sicker” but many of the AGW crowd are getting Thicker

September 27, 2017 6:21 am

A much better rant than your last guest rant. :))

September 27, 2017 6:27 am

I recently read an article, I have forgotten where (I’ll try to find it), that said the Kansas (just Kansas) wheat crop was capable of feeding the population of the entire world for at least 2 weeks. All 7 billion, and change, for 2 weeks… That tells me the issue with undernourishment has nothing to do with food production and everything to do with food distribution.

Reply to  SMC
September 27, 2017 6:55 am

Where local transport infrastructure is mostly nonexistent or in great disrepair,
Where there’s limited local access to large-scale food preservation,
Where local landowners take the prime cut of the harvest from their sharecroppers,
Where armed thugs, rebel guerillas, and/or government enforcers could drop by at any time to help themselves to whatever food is available,
It’s a distinct possibility that the region in question will be having a hunger crisis!

Reply to  drednicolson
September 27, 2017 7:17 am

With the exception of food preservation, everything else you listed is an impediment to distribution. If the distribution network is functional, even with poor food preservation, malnutrition would become largely nonexistent in short order.

Reply to  drednicolson
September 27, 2017 7:31 am

Right. The longer it takes to get unpreserved food to where it’s needed, the more you lose to spoilage.

Rational Db8
Reply to  drednicolson
September 27, 2017 5:46 pm

The problem clearly is one of distribution and not supply. For example, in the USA apparently on average we throw away a third of all the food we buy (that number rather amazes me – I throw away very little food). Then in other less developed nations, transport is a huge issue – particularly where refrigeration is needed. Years ago I ran across an article saying that a large percentage of food in India, for example, goes bad before it can be sold because very few farmers have access to refrigerated trucks.
I didn’t recall the percentage offhand, so I just googled (without the quotes of course) “India food spoil refrigerated transport” and the first article returned was from 2014 – it states that as much as 40% of India’s fresh produce is spoiled because of this problem.
Anyhow, any way you cut it, distribution issues are the problem, not a lack of available food – transportation, refrigeration, ability to afford to buy the food, etc., etc.

Rational Db8
Reply to  drednicolson
September 27, 2017 5:52 pm

Oh, and with regard to malnutrition – golden rice was created almost 20 years ago, and yet anti-GMO people have blocked its use regardless of the massive health improvements it would bring and the suffering it would eliminate. From a post I wrote some time ago about this issue:
In fact I’m all for it, when it means that taking a gene from corn and putting it into rice means that literally millions can be saved from death or blindness and so on every year. A Miracle Rice Could Save Millions Of Lives

Around the world, 250 million children are vitamin A-deficient, including about a third of the world’s preschool-age population. This simple deficiency kills or blinds millions of women and children each year…. without any other interventions or nutritional improvements, could prevent 1.3 to 2.5 million deaths among infants and preschoolers every year…. In fact, such a miracle crop already exists [since 1999]. It’s called “Golden Rice.”…

Reply to  SMC
September 27, 2017 7:37 am

Well lets see… the entire agricultural output of Puerto Rico is currently zero and expected to remain that was for up to a year.
The cause was the worst hurricane ever to hit Puerto Rico, one at the upper end of the scale for hurricanes.
Hurricanes are predicted to be of greater intensity due to warming.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:30 am
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:43 am

Hurricanes are also predicted to be fewer in number but of greater intensity. Puerto Rico experienced effects from two hurricanes (the first one knocked out power to 1 million people) during a period when 4 tropical storm systems were active at the same time, an unusually large number of tropical storm systems. So Puerto Rico’s problems stem from a strong hurricane (stronger hurricanes are predicted) and more hurricanes (but fewer hurricanes are predicted). So if one prediction out of two supports warmisim, let’s go with it, and not mention the contradictory prediction. Typical.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:49 am

Let me see if I have this straight. In the perverted world laughingly referred to as your mind, there is nothing currently growing on the island of Puerto Rico and won’t be for up to a year????
It really is amazing how trolls actually believe the world started the day they were born.
Worst hurricane ever???? Not even close.
A lot of things are predicted, but none of the ones predicted by the climate models has ever come true.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 9:08 am

Hurricanes are predicted to be of greater intensity due to warming.
Predicted… interesting word.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 9:49 am

Yes, Caribbean islands have never been hit by powerful hurricanes before have they Griff. Fact is there is more food per capita now than there ever has been. If even half of the money wasted on this climate scam globally had gone to making sure food was distributed to those that need it, there would be more people alive today. Same goes for Malaria. And that is why Gator constantly asked you why you hate brown people.

Curious George
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 9:52 am

Show me a single prediction. I find only projections, an important legal point.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 10:11 am

Griff doesn’t seem to want to talk much about the Arctic these days. BTW, DMI shows the SMB of Greenland is still climbing.
They already started making snow at several ski resorts in the US and it looks like there is going to be a pretty good dump of the white stuff coming for higher elevations in Oregon and N. California.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 11:15 am

Nice try, Griff, but the logic is just not there. This was the “worst hurricane ever to hit Puerto Rico”? By what metric? Does the metric compare apples to apples or apples to oranges? “One” at the upper end does not constitute a trend or anything else. You need more points of reference before a trend can even be entertained.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 11:20 am

“Predictions” are worth the price of admission to watch a guy with moons and stars on his pointy hat manipulating a Ouija board for fun and, especially, profit. All the Alinskyites have left on this issue is to yell their contention louder, shriller, more often and in more places in the hopes their useful idiots’ formation will hold. Right about now–good luck with that.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 12:13 pm

Climate Change is making people more gullible.

Bryan A
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 12:37 pm

By far, the worst hurricane to hit the area was the great hurricane of 1780.
It decimated the area from Oct 9 through Oct 20 1780. It raged accross most of the islands in the area for 12 days killing 22,000 – 27,000 people and had estimated wind gusts of more than 200mph stripping bark off of trees and flattening every tree on Barbados.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 1:02 pm

Current output of wind and solar in Puerto Rico will be zero for a long time.
What a stupid place to think wind and solar would be sustainable…… don’t you agree , griff

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 5:38 pm

Hey Griff, Earth is predicted to get hit by a large meteor with near certainty in our future. So are you leaving the planet? The term is forward planning even ancient civilizations managed the concept but it is obviously beyond the radical left.

Reply to  Griff
September 28, 2017 12:27 pm

More moronic, easily debunked lies, Skanky?
Using those lies about the misfortune of the citizens of Puerto Rico to bolster your hoax…
You’re entirely shameless and without conscience, aren’t you?

Reply to  Griff
October 7, 2017 11:28 am

@Griff September 27, 2017 at 7:37 am
And you just piled more STUPID on top of it!!! It BURNS!!!

September 27, 2017 6:37 am

This is a cut and paste of a comment I had posted on another WUWT article. Hope that’s ok. If not please feel free to moderate it to out of here.
The 1996 World Food Summit set a target for the UN to cut the number of hungry people in the developing world (NHPDW) in half by the year 2015 compared with 1990-92. They took on this project with great fanfare and large increases in their budget, size, and bureaucratic power. The NHPDW in 1990-92 was 991 million. Thus the target to be reached by 2015 was 991/2=495 million. The 2014-16 statistic shows NHPDW was reduced to 791 million, meaning that they failed to reach the 495 target set for them at the 1996 World Food Summit. They should be held accountable and heads should roll. These over-paid and coddled bureaucrats should not be allowed to get away with it by blaming the boogeyman. This kind of childish behavior is a pattern at the UN because they are allowed to get away with it.

Reply to  chaamjamal
September 27, 2017 7:04 am

The world’s population has increased since 1990.

Reply to  MarkW
September 27, 2017 7:21 am

Good point

Reply to  MarkW
September 27, 2017 7:21 am

Good point

Bryan A
Reply to  MarkW
September 27, 2017 9:55 am

Agreed chaamjamal
and well worth saying twice

old engineer
Reply to  MarkW
September 27, 2017 5:34 pm

It doesn’t matter that the world population increased. The goal was exactly as chaamjamal expressed it. To quote from their final document “reducing the number of undernourished people to half their present level no later than 2015.”
Those of us who frequent this blogsite are familiar with the COP conferences every year with thousands of attendees. But the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the sponsor of the 1996 meeting, has lots of well attended conferences also. The 1996 conference attendance is given as 10,000. In 2009 there was another World Summit on Food Security with 4700 in attendance. Google “world summit on Food Security” for lots of other information. The result of all these “summits?” Lofty words, but not much progress. At least not from the U.N. FAO.

Reply to  MarkW
September 27, 2017 6:58 pm

Map the areas with food shortage to those with wars. The UN is a toothless organization with no ability to do anything it mandates from Food, AGW or fighting. There is no point replacing bureaucrats the whole organization serves no function other than a platform to talk and protest. Why we let the politicians fund it with our money should be the real discussion.

September 27, 2017 6:39 am

The report itself, “]The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2017”, (.pdf here) uses this language in the Key Messages section:
“After a prolonged decline, this recent increase could signal a reversal of trends. The food security situation has worsened in particular in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, South-Eastern Asia and Western Asia, and deteriorations have been observed most notably in situations of conflict and conflict combined with droughts or floods.”
The rest of the report only vaguely refers to climate change and climate shocks, mostly as a future risk regarding droughts, floods, and extreme weather. A passing reference is made to “climate change caused the Syrian situation”, but they note that “some question this link.” and wave their hands at concept that climate change might cause or increase the likelihood of conflict.
All in all, the report is fairly straight-forward — lack of resilience in poor societies that rely on sustenance agriculture, with no societal safety nets, increases the risk of hunger and malnutrition. Armed conflict guarantees increases in hunger. Adverse weather harms the poor who farm and ranch.
Poverty and lack of stable beneficent governments are the true cause of hunger.

September 27, 2017 6:39 am

CAGW is making people sicker which is why life expectancy is increasing almost everywhere. DOH!

Mark from the Midwest
Reply to  commieBob
September 27, 2017 7:03 am

But I’m sure there’s a model somewhere that would predict that life expectancy would increase even more if it were not for climate change

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
September 27, 2017 7:35 am

Life expectancy would increase even more if it were not for people dying. 😉

Reply to  commieBob
September 27, 2017 7:25 am

Utterly prophetic – different cabal now but same consequences in that the deprivation of humans of resources otherwise allocated to ‘fighting climate change’ leave them in precarious situations.
Goebbels with Hess & Hitler
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
-Joseph Goebbels

Clay Sanborn
Reply to  ricksanchez769
September 27, 2017 10:04 am

Agree. Today’s version of Goebbels is what President Trump now calls the “Fake News” of the MSM, which of course is simply lies. Liberals have much on the line with their CAGW lie. If they can float it on the world, they stand to gain more control and power over our lives. But what they didn’t count on was the effectiveness of the internet to ALSO shine the light of truth into the world.
Satan is the prince of the air, and the prince of lies; the truth is not in him. Likewise, the truth is not in the MSM and liberals.

Reply to  ricksanchez769
September 27, 2017 10:13 am

The what you would call Hillary?
Clinton Compares Trump to Putin: ‘Hopefully He Hasn’t Ordered the Killing of People and Journalists’

Reply to  ricksanchez769
September 27, 2017 10:15 am

Don’t know that happened there. Try again.
Clinton Compares Trump to Putin: ‘Hopefully He Hasn’t Ordered the Killing of People and Journalists’

Joe Crawford
Reply to  commieBob
September 27, 2017 8:49 am

You’re right about life expectancy increasing CB. We are spending billions of dollars on improving the health and living conditions around the world. However, the poor are still operating under the belief system that they must have multiple children in order that even one or two might survive. Without also spending the same effort on raising education levels, standard of living and awareness of birth control, populations increase and so do hunger and poverty.
In the least developed countries infant and childhood mortality, along with starvation, have always been natural limiting factors on population growth. Fixing those without replacing them with the knowledge of and availability of birth control just leads to over population and more poverty. From a systems standpoint, improved economic prosperity, which requires access to reliable and affordable energy, along with its concomitant increased education levels leads to improved health and reductions in both poverty and population growth with all their associated benefits.

Reply to  Joe Crawford
September 27, 2017 9:12 pm

Clean cheap coal or gas produced electricity would go a long way to increasing overall health in poor populations and therefore reduce family size. I think it is wicked that the UN and other agencies work against that and insist funds are used for so-called (expensive, useless) ‘renewables’.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Joe Crawford
September 29, 2017 2:56 pm

I agree,Anne. But, as some in the UN have said, Global Warming is not really about the climate but about the redistribution of wealth from the rich nations to the poor (and possibly their own pocketbooks as well).

Reply to  commieBob
September 27, 2017 11:22 am

But . . . but . . . but . . we’re all OBESE now!!! 😉

Rational Db8
Reply to  Goldrider
September 27, 2017 6:26 pm

“But . . . but . . . but . . we’re all OBESE now!!! ;-)”

See!! Proof of global warming making us sicker!!!
[ “[/sarc]” tag removed by moderator — Reason Given: Superfluous]

Tom in Florida
September 27, 2017 6:51 am

It would seem to me that after many years of the UN spending $$ trillions the world should be a better place for all. Evidence continues to prove that is not the case. Can the U.S. please just get the hell out of the UN and stop throwing good money after bad. Let the rest of the world deal with their own problems by themselves and see how they do.

September 27, 2017 7:18 am

Well, gee whiz, David Middleton, they have to say SOMETHING!!!
If they don’t, it means they don’t care…. or someone else is responsible for what’s wrong…. or human nature and all its good/bad qualities really does count….
Mostly, I think that they don’t care, but they want to find someone or something to blame for it. So what’s the most likely amorphous collective noun/phrase on the table??

Pat Frank
September 27, 2017 7:19 am

Well-timed rant, David. The Stanford University Report is just out today with a post about “A new book warns that climate change is making us sick.”
It’s got fictional characters portraying the scare story of impacts. Sandra has asthma, Andrew gets scabies. They paint a scary future world and then extrapolate contemporary stories of starvation or exposure to some local pollution to how conditions will be across the globe in their imagined climate change dystopia.
They talk about “the overwhelming scientific evidence of global warming” (meaning human-caused global warming), when in fact there is none whatever.
The book is written by Jay Lemery and Paul Auerbach, two physicians who have uncritically swallowed every single bit of nonsense put out by Climate Crew Hansen, and then uncritically elaborated their ogre tales.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  Pat Frank
September 27, 2017 8:59 am

A work of fiction, then.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 27, 2017 7:23 am

And the world’s food reserves are not being depleted entirely avoidably because the eco-terrorists are insisting on growing useless bio-fuel crops? Or are these climate alarmist criminals happy to line the pockets of their privileged cronies and get a slice of the action as well.
I never thought I’d say it, but I am beginning to wonder if the mass of humanity might not be better off in the long term if the UN disappeared and all the useless and corrupt bureaucrats it overpays with it.

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 27, 2017 7:38 am

Most bio fuel crops are grown in the US, due to an initiative aimed at pre-fracking energy independence… and are not part of any climate change or green initiative

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:23 am

Err. No. EU sustainability criteria for biofuels and bioliquids help guarantee real carbon savings and protect biodiversity.
One view on reasons for it making people sick.

Leo Smith
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:44 am

tell that to the local farmers growing rape for german biodiesel

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:47 am
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:51 am

Every acre devoted to bio-fuels is an acre not growing food for export.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 8:52 am

According to UN “Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an effective way of fighting global warming and meeting the Kyoto Protocol reduction targets.”

Curious George
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 9:56 am

Link, please. You never support your categorical statements.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 12:01 pm

For Mark W, soybeans and corn are grown both as food crops and biofuel crops. Wheat can be used for biofuels as well as its usual purpose, food. ANY grain crop can be grown for biofuels as well as food.

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 12:28 pm


Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 1:05 pm

Griff, have you EVER made a correct , backable statement.
Or is everything you say just MAKE BELIEVE. !!!

Bryan A
Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 2:25 pm

September 27, 2017 at 8:51 am
Every acre devoted to bio-fuels is an acre not growing food for export.

Every acre devoted to biofuels = 5 starving people

Reply to  Griff
September 27, 2017 5:41 pm

Yep he just makes it up. He really doesn’t have a clue.

Reply to  Griff
September 28, 2017 12:34 pm


Steve Zell
September 27, 2017 7:25 am

“It singles out conflict – increasingly compounded by climate change – as one of the key drivers behind the resurgence of hunger and many forms of malnutrition.”
So that means that Krazy Kim (Jong-un) is shooting rockets over Japan and starving his people because the weather got a little warmer in North Korea?
One would think that a longer growing season would increase the food production there (if Krazy Kim didn’t steal all the food for himself and his henchmen)!

September 27, 2017 7:26 am

Food waste is a major source of malnutrition when good food spoils before it is utilized. Again, lack of proper infrastructure to store or distribute, or political strife. Or just plain ignorance as many countries demonstrate. Nothing much to do with climate change although food production has always been increasing, as we have doubled the earths population in less than 50 years. In part due to beneficial CO2 greening that NASA even admits. So far, there isn’t really a global shortage of food, which even the UN states.

Leo Smith
Reply to  Earthling2
September 27, 2017 8:45 am

fist item on any africans shopping list after electrification is a fridge…

Reply to  Leo Smith
September 27, 2017 8:52 am

Wouldn’t getting a fridge prior to electrification be counter-productive?

Reply to  Leo Smith
September 27, 2017 12:18 pm

No, just good incentive.
Actually if the fridge was subsidized more people would buy the fridge, which would create a market for the electrification. Given the overwhelming need for service, the electric meters would magically appear on the sides of the mud/wood huts. Economics is simple.

Reply to  Leo Smith
September 27, 2017 7:10 pm

It’s Griffs fault, I mean his renewables are so cheap that the only reason they don’t have it yet is the Griff man is holding out on them.

September 27, 2017 7:30 am

Perhaps the increase last year was due to Nikkie Maduro in Venezuela and starvation for the rest of the world continued to decline.

Bruce Cobb
September 27, 2017 7:42 am

“Climate-related shock” is climatespeak for “weather”.

September 27, 2017 7:43 am

Poverty and bad decisions.
For exemple the Zimbabwe land grab. “Most of the grabbed properties have become derelict because the new farmers either do not have adequate resources to utilise or they lack the experience.”

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Gaetan Jobin
September 27, 2017 9:02 am

Rhodesia use to be the bread basket of central Africa. I guess he might as well complete the destruction. I did read where a few of the neighboring countries welcomed some of the farmers he ran out previously with open arms and are now better able to feed themselves.

September 27, 2017 7:53 am

Global warming. Climate change. Climate disruption. Climate-related shock?
Bad. Worse. Worst. Worsiest?

Scott Scarborough
September 27, 2017 8:14 am

The jump in the number of people who are undernourished from 2015 to 2016 is almost exactly the same as the jump from 2010 to 2011. Why did the percentage of people undernourished go up this time but not in 2011? The population growth rate cannot be that much different now than in 2011 and that would be the only factor that would yield a different response between the number and the percentage.

September 27, 2017 8:29 am

I wonder whether the fact that 127+ MILLION new people born every year might have something to do with it.
… more people being born to encounter the problems already existing and encountered by the already born.
Nah, … couldn’t be — it HAS to be the climate.
Way to go IPCC [Idiots Predisposed to Conflating Concepts]

September 27, 2017 8:32 am

Oh, yeah, I see, this was not an article directly referring to the IPCC, but rather to other arms of the United Nations, which I would rename the United Conflations [still joke worthy]

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
September 27, 2017 8:55 pm

Still a good point. Even with a growing population, the number of undernourished has been declining. It took a major El Nino to reverse that trend. What’s surprising is that in spite of the El Nino, about 40M more people got fed in 2016 than 2015. Not enough, but still more.
Every year is the hottest ever, and it’s always worse than we thought, but food production is better than ever. When that finally changes, it won’t be because of CAGW. If anything, a little extra CO2 may prolong the good times (agriculturally speaking, of course.)

September 27, 2017 9:08 am

The more I dig into this, the more it starts looking like “climate ate my homework and it’s taxpayers’ fault” excuse. Perhaps someone else can click on UNEP terminal evaluation reports on biofuels

September 27, 2017 9:21 am

Darren Henfield, the minster of foreign affairs of the Bahamas, is concerned about rising seas. One might think that this would lead the Bahamian Government to consider tide gauge information. Seemingly it hasn’t since the only gauge in the Bahamas, at Settlement Point, shows no change since about 1985 until the record stopped in the early 2000’s. One might think that Mr. Henfield would fire up the gauge again given his concern.

Rational Db8
Reply to  DHR
September 27, 2017 7:01 pm

“One might think that Mr. Henfield would fire up the gauge again given his concern.”

Naw, then he’d have to admit rising sea levels aren’t a problem – you’d be robbing him of his handy dandy excuse with nothing to replace it!!

Berényi Péter
September 27, 2017 9:26 am

Climate Change Is Already Making People Sicker

I see. And this is why they live longer. A bit counterintuitive, but for the Cause, anything goes.comment image

September 27, 2017 9:33 am

It’s the over hyped fear of climate change that’s makes people sick. However, this sickness is not physical, but psychological and mostly limited to those who can not think for themselves.

Reply to  co2isnotevil
September 27, 2017 11:26 am

And the cure is 8th-grade math.

Reply to  Goldrider
September 27, 2017 12:24 pm

More than math I’m afraid. What do you think the majority of people would answer if asked: What is the predominant gas in earths atmosphere?
I would bet money the majority would say oxygen.

September 27, 2017 9:48 am

My house could be hit by a missile. I better invest in defence every year. Say, Americans, can you pick up the tab? Your fault anyway.
Now, i need to think about the moleman threat, ill be in touch.

Reply to  John
September 27, 2017 7:17 pm

A plane could fall on your house, a car or truck run thru it, so I think you need to do some more investing. However the best tactic is to claim your house is in danger of going under because of sea level rise by CAGW and then demand money to move to a better suburb. There are several pacific islands that I am sure can offer advice.

September 27, 2017 9:57 am

Climate hysteria is the alternative medicine of earth sciences.

September 27, 2017 10:19 am

More “scienceyness”. It doesn’t have to be real science , it only has to sound that way.

September 27, 2017 11:19 am

I work as an Infectious Disease physician and I tell all my patients that, while we can’t say that global warming causes a fever, it make a fever much more poignant. And while climate change is not the main driver of sexually transmitted infections, it is a better excuse than a damp toilet seat.

September 27, 2017 11:29 am

Great analogy above with “alternative medicine.” The way that works (besides placebo effect) is that THEY say it works, and YOU can’t “prove” it doesn’t, since it’s tough to “prove” a negative. Especially when the “ailment” is imaginary to begin with, such as “subluxation” or “blocked chi.” As “Bill the Cat” used to say, “Aaack! Thppt!”

September 27, 2017 12:32 pm

If they’d stop spending billion$$ on climate scientists, there’d be more money to feed the poor.
Then again, the very actions they are taking to “save the world” from climate change are forcing food prices upward, starving ever more poor people.

Bruce Cobb
September 27, 2017 1:52 pm

CAGW is here, it’s now, and it’s happenin’ people! Now please pass the Pepto.

Bryan A
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 27, 2017 2:29 pm

CAGW only truely exists in the main stream media leftist skewed reporting.
AGW isn’t comfirmed at greater than 50% and is likely far less (the natural component isn’t discussed)
GW has been happening since the depth of the Little Ice Age

Yogi Bear
September 27, 2017 3:52 pm

“climate-related shock”?
That’s the 2015-2016 El Nino driving drought in eastern and southern Africa, which has nothing to do with AGW.

September 27, 2017 4:55 pm

So from 2000 to 2016, the earth was able to nourish an additional 1.37 B people. Unfortunately, the population grew by almost as much, so we weren’t able to put a huge dent in the number of undernourished. I suspect politics is what keeps that number so high though. If we could just take the likes of Mugabe, Maduro, and Kim out of the picture, everyone could be fed… for a while at least. Resources are finite, so at some point Malthus has to be right, doesn’t he?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights