Guest Opinion by Kip Hansen
As if the latest IPCC 1.5 °-limit report wasn’t alarmist enough, a mob of 23 authors, including a couple of the usual suspects, double down on it with a Review Article in Nature Climate Change titled “Broad threat to humanity from cumulative climate hazards intensified by greenhouse gas emissions.”
The Eureka press release was covered here at WUWT in “Greenhouse gasses triggering more changes than we can handle”.
From the title, one would think that it is a review of the literature that found threats to human society being intensified by climate change.
Not so. This effort searched for papers that found negative effects on humanity from weather events and then compared these as they would or could possibly be intensified in all of the possible imaginary future scenarios of climate change in IPCC literature.
Really — they searched the literature “to find case examples of climate hazards impacting human systems.” (When they say climate, they mean the usual, average weather of a location.)
Here’s the method:
“A systematic review of observed impacts was conducted by creating a table in which ten climate hazards (warming, precipitation, floods, drought, heatwaves, fires, sea level, storms, changes in natural land cover and ocean chemistry) were listed in columns and six aspects of human systems (health, food, water, infrastructure, economy and security) were listed in rows.”
“This table was used as a guide for all possible combinations of keywords to search for publications reporting the impacts of climate hazards on key aspects of human life.”
It comes as no surprise to anyone even vaguely familiar with climate change literature that they were able to find “over 12,000 references …, we identified 3,280 relevant papers that were read in full to find case examples of climate hazards impacting human systems.”
It is important to note that they did not make any judgement as to whether “climate hazards” were caused by change of any sort — climate or otherwise. They just identified climate hazards — well, really weather hazards: warming, precipitation, floods, drought, heatwaves, fires, sea level, storms, changes in natural land cover and ocean chemistry. The only ones I see that they left out of the list are “cooling” or “severe winter weather”. Nearly every adverse impact on human systems possible has been blamed on some aspect of weather and/or climate change in the literature over the last 30 years.
They supply this chart, obviously meant to instill fear and panic:
Click HERE for full-sized image.
Among the “intensified hazards” humanity will face (according to their version of IPCC projections) are:
- Solastalgia; 2. Affective Disorder; 3. Zoonotic Envenoming (which usually refers to snakebite); 4. Toxic chemical exposure; 5. Addiction; 6. Depressions; 7. Injuries (in general); 8. Risk of Accidents; 9. PTSD; 10. Prenatal Health (I guess they mean threat to…); 11. Vector-borne disease; 12 . Mental Health (magicaly different from #s 2, 5, 6 and 9); 13. Food Poisoning; 14. Suicide; 15. Death (again, in general, death is a bad thing…must be caused by and will surely be intensified by climate change).
This ridiculous list has worn me out — I’m still in the red section of the chart. This mob of serious scientists have put together a terrific list and a totally incomprehensible colorful chart — altogether, they “found case examples for 467 interactions or pathways by which humanity has been impacted by climate hazards.” Who would have known that the weather has that many adverse effects on human systems?
The list is a lot longer than the DailyCaller’s “Global Warming Ate My Homework: 100 Things Blamed on Global Warming “ but very short of John Brignell’s “A complete list of things caused by global warming’.
Of course, there is virtually no evidence whatever in the paper that any of the adverse effects have been caused by climate change — just that someone once said in some paper that such-and-such adverse effect on a human system was associated with a weather-related hazard.
They do have some real eye openers (or maybe, better said, eye rollers): Gender Inequality. Now, that is obviously a climate hazard — to whom, I have no idea. How about Military Build-up? — another sure hazard from the changing climate. And with military build-up, there will be more Conflict or maybe the other way around.
Let’s not forget this one, which is obviously endangered by Climate Change: Democracy. Ask Tim Ball if democracy is endangered by Climate Change — he has a lot to say about it — of course, he means democracy is endangered by the UN-led Climate Change Consensus political movement. Social Order is on the list of things threatened. Tim Ball would again agree, as he points out the political leaders of the Climate Consensus repeatedly call for a total overhaul of the social order to eliminate capitalism, democracy and replace these with their own odd version of equality, social justice and ultimately to redistribute world wealth — all under their own “enlightened” direction, of course.
Favorite quotes from the paper illustrating examples of the dire “already happening” climate hazards:
“There were also impacts on hunting, such as warming and melting sea ice in the Arctic shifting the distribution of walrus, leading to the loss of subsistence hunting grounds.”
“Livestock mortality was associated with warming (for example, the livestock disease bluetongue was positively correlated with increasing temperatures in Europe)”
“Likewise, floods, heatwaves and intense rain have been related to increases in snake bites due to inhospitable conditions forcing animals to move closer to people.”
Here a good one in which drought and floods apparently conspire: “Drought was associated with outbreaks of West Nile virus, leishmaniasis and chikungunya virus, and hantavirus when interacting with floods.”
“…from 1980 to 2014, over 780 events of excess human mortality were reported during heatwaves worldwide, drowning during floods (approximately 3,000 deaths in the 1998 floods in China), starvation during droughts (approximately 800,000 famine deaths attributed to the Ethiopian drought in the 1980s), blunt injury during storms (roughly 140,000 deaths occurred in the 1991 Cyclone Gorky in Bangladesh) and asphyxiation during fires (approximately 173 deaths occurred in the 2009 Australian Black Saturday fire).”
[As we are talking here at WUWT about fires recently, let me note that the official cause of the Black Saturday Fires in Australia was “Around midday, as wind speeds were reaching their peak, an incorrectly-rigged SWER line was ripped down at Kilmore East. This sparked a bushfire that would become the deadliest and most intense firestorm ever experienced in Australia’s post-1788 history.“ The same sort of event apparently caused the Camp Fire that incinerated most of Paradise, California.]
“Direct physical losses occurred due to storms (for example, roughly 35% of bean production was lost to Hurricane Mitch in Honduras in 1998), precipitation (a 10 mm increase in rainfall caused a loss of 0.3 t ha-1 of paddy rice in the Mekong Delta), floods (over 7,600 ha of agricultural land was destroyed by floods in Vietnam in 2009), sea-level rise (agricultural land has been lost to saltwater intrusion in Bangladesh), fires and drought (approximately 33% of grain production was lost to a mixture of fires and drought in Russia in 2010).”
With 30 years for weather history from which to cherry-pick, the authors managed to find a marvelous selection of bad weather-related things that happened to someone somewhere during that period. None of the events are claimed to have been caused by climate change. Many of the quotes above are events that were caused by local political and societal forces and choices that have resulted in human disaster.
The purpose of this paper is perfectly clear — they are not doing science — they are doing politics and their conclusion ends not with a scientific assessment but with a demand for policy acceptance and enforcement:
“Overall, our analysis shows that ongoing climate change will pose a heightened threat to humanity that will be greatly aggravated if substantial and timely reductions of GHG emissions are not achieved.”
…and is timed to coincide with the upcoming 24th annual climate circus which is to be held in Poland in a couple of weeks.
To wrap-up, I quote the late Hans Rosling:
Fear plus Urgency leads to “stupid, drastic decisions with unpredictable side effects.”
And one more, Rosling’s warning to the authors of this paper, who like Al Gore, insist on exaggeration of risk and jumped up false urgency:
“Exaggeration once discovered makes people tune out altogether.”
# # # # #
Author’s Comment Policy:
This is an Opinion piece. It is my opinion and not the opinion of Anthony Watts, Charles the Moderator, or anyone else associated with this web site.
It is my carefully-moderated-for-public-consumption opinion. My raw opinions are a bit stronger.
There will be a lot of nattering in comments from Junior Climate Warriors ™ defending their sacred cows. While my replies to them are normally as patient as I can make them (sometimes, I admit, they do manage to wear me down and I get a little snippy…), I find them tiresome for the most part. Somehow they just never seem to get the main point of a column — but try to nibble the author to death over inconsequential details or contested word definitions (see the recent endless silliness over forest fire vs. wildfire vs. WUI fire.)
[A big THANK YOU to all of you who have donated, or even just wanted to donate, to the WUWT Camp Fire Relief Fund.]
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Unfortunately, El Niño does not work.
ttps:h//www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/soi/
Sorry.
https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/soi/
= The perfect description of paranoia
Brought on and exacerbated by the long term use of chemical depressants, notably refined sugar, cooked starch, alcohol and increasingly, cannabis
Trash TV also, plus the increasingly shoddy state of the interweb
And who exactly not only approves of but increasingly mandates their use if not Government and their scientists/advisers?
IOW, Don’t exaggerate, it destroys your credibility – the words any and every lawyer will tell their client just before they enter the court-room or witness-stand.
What is truly amazing is that the greatest exaggerations come from the land with the greatest per capita number of lawyers.
Well. I do declare. “Things have never been better”
What I see, and of course their is A Soundtrack to go with it (DYOH), our elders/betters/leaders do actually realise that their (gravy) train is coming off the rails.
What are the doing about it?
Attempting to buy A Stairway To Heaven – using everyone else’s money of course as they are permanently bankrupt, financially as well as morally.
Today’s thought:
A long long time ago but still implanted within us, The Greatest Romantic Gesture/Overture that A Boy could make towards A Girl, would be to offer her a meal of saturated fat.
If The Boy was sustainable with his offers/gestures, The Girl would allow him to be the father of her baby.
Nowadays, The Modern Romantic Gesture/Gift has turned into chocolates, wine and/or flowers.
Of course, Modern Girls feign delight & surprise in the hope that this will encourage The Boy to bring something of real substance at some future time. =Courtship.
But but but, with the possible exception of the flowers, sugar, vegetable fat and alcohol destroy human minds bodies and souls.
Modern Boy is poisoning Modern Girl in his drunken and shoddy attempts to get her to make babies.
Even worse, he then goes on to poison any babies that are made by force feeding them with artificial milk based on carcinogenic vegetable oils
Meanwhile, the mother enjoys the ‘freedom’ to have every penny she earns in her work taken off her to satiate Government Cronies in the Childcare & Financial industries.
I declare again, Things Have Never Been Better.
Wonder what the girls have to say? Do they share this vision?
I think I no
A tiny glimmer, if I were 30 years younger I’d be off to Greenland.
https://www.dw.com/en/greenland-massive-31-kilometer-crater-discovered-beneath-ice/a-46301215
Certainly the bit about the crater is interesting, not a lot we can do about that, but The Really Lovely Bit is the guy in the video near the end.
He’s a bit confused about AGW Climate Change Wotsit but otherwise,
He Knows About Mud And Dirt
and is generally clued up about how plants work.
nice
I like that. We should have a fundraising page for him…….
(Isn’t English a fantastic language)
I forgot:
How much of the mud the Video Guy is talking about actually came from windblown dust off existing deserts and modern farmland?
Also soot of course, one of The Best soil conditioners there is although no-one is entirely sure why.
I think soot (and Biochar) work like our appendix does. It is a store, a backup copy if you like, of Good Bacteria. It is a water resistant shelter for them so that in the event of an epic rainstorm that washes away their free-swimming brethren, the ones hiding in the soot and Biochar can quickly recolonise the dirt and keep everything, climate included, on the right track.
Peta,
Are you related to Steven Mosher in any way?
I’m guessing not because your spelling is really good.
Enjoyed your post. Understood almost all of it.
Best,
Ron Richey
PS: My wife went on a shoe buying spree right after I offered here a meal of saturated fat.
My eye was caught by “Solastalgia” in the wagon wheel, which I’d never heard of. We’re at risk of Solastalgia? What is this condition? Related perhaps to sunshine…?
From Wiki, if anyone else is in the dark too:
Solastalgia is a neologism that describes a form of mental or existential distress caused by environmental change. In many cases this is in reference to global climate change, but more localized events such as volcanic eruptions, drought or destructive mining techniques can cause solastalgia as well. Coined by philosopher Glenn Albrecht in 2003, it was formed by the combination of the Latin words sōlācium (comfort) and the Greek root -algia (pain).
Jit ==> Thanks for clearing that up for readers. I did supply a link….I had to look it up myself!
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H. L. Mencken
Kip, I’m no expert, but aren’t most of these gloom-and-doom papers just follow-on papers that ride on the AGW coat-tails of the IPCC?
Seems like there are a very few papers that actually study climate change, mostly using models, and a huge number of papers that use those same models to predict dire consequences.
It almost seems like the publish-or-perish crowd know that all they have to do is add a frisson of fear to their otherwise mundane publications to make them instant high priority puff pieces in “respected journals”.
Say you’ve done a lot of research on butterfly migration. An interesting subject, but pretty mundane. As an academic it is time to make a splash in hopes of securing a tenured position. With reference to a few models that everyone can access, and a splashy title like “Climate Change Threatens Insect Migration Patterns” your boring paper suddenly jumps into the cool club.
With luck and some very broadly inaccurate summarizations in the NY Times or the Guardian, your fairly pedestrian paper can become a prestige item suitable for fund-raising efforts among the alumni. A situation guaranteed to put one on the short list for glory.
This makes for a high percentage of papers in the literature that have the necessary key words for a terrifying “consensus analysis” but no actual contribution to the march of human knowledge. The consensus is really “If it bleeds it leads”.
Bruce Ploetz ==> Judith Curry refers to this type of work as Climate Science Taxonomy as in : “This leaves us with the unnamed 4th quadrant, which is often characterized as ‘taxonomy’, i.e. research that is neither useful nor contributes to fundamental understanding. ” See my essay here.
““There were also impacts on hunting, such as warming and melting sea ice in the Arctic shifting the distribution of walrus, leading to the loss of subsistence hunting grounds.”
Then I guess the sea-ice must have been really sensational back in the 18th century when there were walrus on Sable Island:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0099569
Walrus are in no way dependent on sea-ice. I’ve personally seen several thousand. One was lying on sea ice.
tty ==> From my quick survey of the papers’ abstracts that were reviewed, no effort was made to determine if the studies were valid (well designed, well carried out, statistically correct). Usually a Review finds studies on the topic, weeds out the chaff, and then reviews and combines the findings of the good, solid work. Not so this review — it is chaff about chaff.
“Exaggeration once discovered makes people tune out altogether.”
If They’ve told us once They’ve told us a billion times don’t exaggerate!
That’s my thought on their work.
James Bull
A conclusion like this which advocates policy without considering economics has nothing to do with science. Actions which have costs and benefits need to consider those costs and benefits and weigh them against each other. There is no support for advocating a mitigation strategy over one of adaptation.
But I love the format of that ridiculous circular bar chart. It confuses the presentation for no reason but it’s very scientifical-looking! (Oh, I guess that’s the reason.)
Steve O ==> I’m still mystified by the chart — haven’t a clue how to read it. Charts are supposed to clarify the data by putting it in graphic form for “visual learners”, I think. This chart just confuses the issue.
Kip,
You said, “This chart just confuses the issue.” Perhaps that was actually the intent! Present some fancy, colorful graphic, which is unintelligible, just to impress the easily impressed.
Aha! A circle/spiral chart! The new favorite way to present bogus data in the most inflammatory way possible. Automatic fail.
Now let’s go to Venezuela and chart the risk factors from socialism.
In fact, we can chart the risk factors from authoritarian government in general. That would be especially relevant, because a “temporary” suspension of democracy is often discussed as a necessary element in fighting climate change.
That’s really impressive. Marvellous what computers can do nowadays. I assume you can turn it around with the app. Sure beats the old tube kaleidoscope when I was growing up.
A calculation made determined that to stop 1.5°C would, after even an initial reduction in methane emissions, require negative methane emissions. Children in the playground at school will have to be restrained from saying to each other : “Quick, pull my finger!.”
a mob of 23 authors
Can’t say mob, so have to say a caravan of authors.
Beng ==> There is a long list to choose from at Collective Nouns for Animals.
“Mob” can be used for deer, kangaroos, and sheep AND (according to me) “climate scientists” (in quotes).
How about a “folly” of authors?
It’s raining beautifully in Chico.
Think I’ll write a paper that cites papers over the last twenty years showing all causes of indigestion. Then I will use this to write alarming headlines about how human eating habits are in peril, showing no correlation (let alone causation) between indigestion and human eating habits.
This is … “making shit up” … at its finest.
‘over 780 events of excess human mortality were reported during heatwaves worldwide, drowning during floods’
Proof they are uninformed, but not too shy to speak, anyway.
“It is better to remain silent and appear foolish, than to speak up and remove all doubt.”
The overwhelming cause of death in floods is blunt trauma. ‘Drowning’ is the
proclamation of the ignorant.
“total overhaul of the social order to eliminate capitalism, democracy and replace these with their own odd version of equality, social justice and ultimately to redistribute world wealth”
How do the climate warriors plan to force China to go to 0 emissions of CO2? Protesting in Tiananmen square just won’t cut it. In fact , just organizing a potential protest in Tiananmen square would now be impossible given the Chinese control of their social media. Greenies have no answer for the China question except to say that we have to lead by example. The Chinese have no intention of following us off the cliff.
From the report: “over 780 events of excess human mortality…”
What pray tell is excess human mortality? One, ten, 50? This is BS.
U.N. Environment Programme head Erik Solheim in a recent 22 month period spent an average of US$ 22,727/month on airfare & hotels, for a total of US$500,000. Guess the CO2 involved was for “the children” since on average he spent 80% of his time out of the office. He just resigned.
Robert==> Very cute! (Readers — click and see, you can decline to sign up).
Thank you.
Funny, I did not find “Stupidity” in the pie-wheel of listed of effects.
Physician, heal thyself.
Intelligence obviously is not a sustainable resource.
Gordon and Robert ==> The study does find that “Educational Attainment” is threatened. I mean, it’s obvious right…?
Yeah, but NOT threatened by climate. Some stupid just is and has no causation.
https://scholar.google.at/scholar?q=weather+related+gender+impacts+species&hl=de&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart