Claim: Climate change increases potential for conflict and violence

From Iowa State University

192830_web

Rapid climate change and natural disasters will have a direct and indirect effect on climate change, according to new Iowa State research. Credit Christopher Gannon, Iowa State University News Service

AMES, Iowa – Images of extensive flooding or fire-ravaged communities help us see how climate change is accelerating the severity of natural disasters. The devastation is obvious, but what is not as clear is the indirect effect of these disasters, or more generally of rapid climate change, on violence and aggression.

That is what Craig Anderson sees. The Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of psychology and Andreas Miles-Novelo, an ISU graduate student and lead author, identified three ways climate change will increase the likelihood of violence, based on established models of aggression and violence. Their research is published in the journal Current Climate Change Reports.

Anderson says the first route is the most direct: higher temperatures increase irritability and hostility, which can lead to violence. The other two are more indirect and stem from the effects of climate change on natural disasters, failing crops and economic instability. A natural disaster, such as a hurricane or wildfire, does not directly increase violence, but the economic disruption, displacement of families and strain on natural resources that result are what Anderson finds problematic.

One indirect way natural disasters increase violence is through the development of babies, children and adolescents into violence-prone adults, he said. For example, poor living conditions, disrupted families and inadequate prenatal and child nutrition are risk factors for creating violence-prone adults. Anderson and Miles-Novelo noted these risk factors will become more prevalent as a result of climate change-induced disasters, such as hurricanes, droughts, floods, water shortages and changing agricultural practices for efficient production of food.

Another indirect effect: Some natural disasters are so extensive and long term that large groups of people are forced to migrate from their homeland. Anderson says this “eco-migration” creates intergroup conflicts over resources, which may result in political violence, civil wars or wars between nations.

“This is a global issue with very serious consequences. We need to plan for ways to reduce the negative impacts,” Anderson said. “An inadequate food supply and economic disparity make it difficult to raise healthy and productive citizens, which is one way to reduce long-term violence. We also need to plan for and devote resources to aid eco-migrants in their relocation to new lands and countries.”

Which is worse?

There are no data and there is no method to estimate which of the three factors will be most damaging, Anderson said. The link between heat and aggression has the potential to affect the greatest number of people, and existing research, including Anderson’s, shows hotter regions have more violent crime, poverty and unemployment.

However, Anderson fears the third effect he and Miles-Novelo identified – eco-migration and conflict – could be the most destructive. He says we are already seeing the migration of large groups in response to physical, economic or political instability resulting from ecological disasters. The conflict in Syria is one example.

Differences between migrants and the people living in areas where migrants are relocating can be a source of tension and violence, Anderson said. As the level of such conflicts escalates, combined with the availability of weapons of mass destruction, the results could be devastating.

“Although the most extreme events, such as all-out war, are relatively unlikely, the consequences are so severe that we cannot afford to ignore them,” Anderson said. “That is why the U.S. and other countries must make sure these regional conflicts and eco-migration problems don’t get out of hand. One way to do that is to provide appropriate aid to refugees and make it easier for them to migrate to regions where they can be productive, healthy and happy.”

Taking action now

Anderson and Miles-Novelo say the purpose of their research is to raise awareness among the scientific community to work on prevention efforts or ways to limit harmful consequences. The long-term goal is to educate the public on the potential for increased violence.

“From past experience with natural disasters, we should be able to prepare for future problems by setting aside emergency resources and funds,” Miles-Novelo said. “We should tear down negative stereotypes and prejudices about those who will need help and humanely assist refugees and others who are displaced. By doing all these things we can reduce conflict and hostility.”

Changing attitudes and policies about immigration also will lessen the potential for conflict, Anderson said. He points to the backlash against refugees in many European countries.

“The view that citizens of wealthy countries often have about refugees needs to change – from seeing them as a threat to a view that emphasizes humanitarian values and the benefits refugees bring when they are welcomed into the community,” Anderson said.

###

From EurekAlert! Public Release: 13-Feb-2019

HT/David B

 

Advertisements

105 thoughts on “Claim: Climate change increases potential for conflict and violence

  1. Because of all the progressive rioters in the streets?

    Lotta self-fulfilling prophecies with this band of loons, don’t ya notice?

  2. Another extreme event which could result from climate change is a zombie apocalypse. Sure, it’s relatively unlikely, but the consequences are so severe that we can’t ignore it.

    • Another extreme event which could result from climate change is a zombie apocalypse. Sure, it’s relatively unlikely, but the consequences are so severe that we can’t ignore it.

      It’s OK Bruce, in the event of a zombie apocalypse, we just get all the treadmills from gyms, wire them up to generators, and put zombies on them. Instant CO2 reduction!

      Now, where’s my grant money…?

  3. Who pays people like
    Craig Anderson ,
    Iowa State University
    (un) Distinguished Professor
    of psychology
    and Andreas Miles-Novelo,
    n ISU graduate student
    and lead author,
    … to write fairy tales like this ?

    Why would anyone believe their
    wild guess predictions of the future?

    Why would anyone post their “findings”
    here ? ( the findings are nothing more
    than a steaming pile of farm animal
    digestive waste products. )

    • Nobody believes the predictions, but it’s fun in a horror movie sort of way to imagine them.

      Posting here is a form of entertainment like when the older wiser folks observe and laugh at the shenanigans of their grandchildren.

    • Goes for the whole damn UN, as well–who pays them all to crank out this nonsense, and WHY? I’d love it if they defunded the UN in Trump’s 2nd term, and made them move someplace they really belong–try Mozambique!

  4. Mr. Anderson,
    You missed by far the most dominant factor in Violence being created by Climate Change and that is the Anarchist Extremists and Socialist Extremists that have adopted the Liberal Klimate Krusade Kause. They look forward creating Havoc and disruption at every rally.
    The CONSTANT Negative Messaging in the Press causes a feeling of Hopelessness and despair

  5. Amazing how they can see all the “potential” conflict and violence resulting from IMAGINARY consequences of a NONEXISTENT “crisis,” yet are totally blind to the very REAL conflict and violence that absolutely WILL result if Eco-Nazi POLICIES are implemented, which WILL result in unreliable energy grids, lack of heating fuel, lack of food and transport, and ultimately economic collapse.

    • “Amazing how they can see all the “potential” conflict and violence resulting from IMAGINARY consequences of a NONEXISTENT “crisis,””

      There is no evidence that CO2 is causing conflict and violence. The hypothetical situations the author desribes don’t exist in reality, they only exist in his imagination.

      We are far away from being able to say anthing definitve about CO2 and Earth’s atmosphere, but this author is certain CAGW is already here and causing damage. Without any evidence. No doubt he bases his opinion on the “97 percent” meme, and has probably never actually dug into the subject in any depth.

      Way too many scientists today are assuming things not in evidence, then base predictions on these erroneous assumptions. It’s ridiculous.

      • Climate change might cause toenail fungus, restless legs and ED too, but who knows? We don’t need no stinkin’ research–let’s just SAY so! Because feelz over facts.

    • This is all an exercise in getting ahead personally with the least amount of research effort and data. Rake the system and the lax science situation while they can.

      It is the third wave in a grand cycle.

      First Wave: Find friends to get an advantage in peer review
      Second Wave: Use bad data and never ever mention or question data quality
      Third Wave: Skip the data all together and go with nonexistent crisis and imaginary consequences

  6. Have they renamed the climate zones yet. Nope. All they’re doing is taking natural events that have been happening for hundreds of years and calling them climate change.

  7. “The End Of Snow!”

    Squaw Valley ski resort has so far received 175 inches of snowfall in the two weeks starting 2 February. Season snowfall 432 inches to date already approaches the season average total 450 inches.

  8. Some climate change produces huge social upheavals with attendant violence. For sure. It’s a matter of historical record. On the other hand, it is also a matter of historical record that climate change can be hugely beneficial as was the case in the Medieval Warm Period. Warmer is Richer

    The catastrophisers totally ignore the historical evidence that we would be better off with a somewhat warmer planet.

  9. The only climate change ever documented to cause wars and genocide was global cooling. With the Roman Empire in decline, the waves of nomads being forced off the Asian Steppes due to cooling weather and famine was what brought it to an end. This is pretty well documented.

  10. So it is clear we need to move these eco-refugees to areas that are not effected by climate change. There has been no long term climate change in Venezuela or Honduras. Now that I think of it there has been no meaningful climate change in Israel and that is not so far to move the Syrian refugees. This is a no brainer.

  11. Where does one start?

    There are no data and there is no method to estimate which of the three factors will be most damaging, Anderson said.

    And there’s no data and no evidence to connect any of the scenarios Anderson discussed to global warming or climate change.

    • “And there’s no data and no evidence to connect any of the scenarios Anderson discussed to global warming or climate change.”

      That’s exactly right.

      So where do these scientist get the idea that CAGW is here and causing damage to the Earth’s environment? More than likely they didn’t get it through firsthand experiment because there have been no experiments done that establish that CAGW is real or here. That leaves hearsay. They heard Michael Mann say its real so they assume it is and proceed from there to make their extrapolations based on another’s word. This applies to *every* alarmist scientist because none of them have done an experiment to establish that CAGW is real or here. They are all depending on the word of a very few strategically placed individuals who are trying to sell this CAGW fraud as being real.

      The few have misled and defrauded the millions. And have done a pretty good job of it. Karma: As you sow, so shall you reap.

    • Aye H.R.!

      “Professor of psychology and Andreas Miles-Novelo, an ISU graduate student and lead author, identified three ways climate change will increase the likelihood of violence, based on established models of aggression and violence.”

      Oh!
      Another one of them psychology professors ranting about pseudo theories, pseudo models and pretending their hallucinations have any sort of reality.

      The last time these theories were bandied about was when the Benghazi debacle occurred.

      Now they’re floating these theories as pseudo demands for open borders based upon falsehoods, not reality.

  12. Claim: Climate change “policies” increases potential for conflict and violence

    no power, no food, no transportation

  13. Socialism always produces conflict and violence. It is never able to deliver what it promises.
    (Oh I forgot – this time it is going to be different! )

    • There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch – except when promised by a socialist government. /s

    • I dunno, Finland and Sweden seem to have policies that are more socially aligned than say, the US. They seem to be doing alright

      • Small homogenous populations have nothing to do with it?
        Regardless, both of those experiments in socialism are starting to fall apart as the social cohesion that made it possible begins it’s inevitable collapse.

        More and more people are discovering that thanks to the “safety net”, they can survive quite well without working, or at worst, working in the black market.
        Those who are honest and have to pay for the “safety net” are starting to resent it.

  14. That got published? They’re seriously linking developmental failure with climate change? If we’ve learned anything from 20th Century conflicts it’s the most of those warriors were economically irrational. In fact we fought against our own self-interests! Large-scale migration has been provojed by two major factors that have zero to do with God’s thermostat: immigration enforcement (or lack therof) and the welfare state. Please ask the millions of Turks in Germany if they came to the fatherland for the weather… I mean climate!

  15. Those warmist nuts should be very careful : a huge and scaring climate change is happening RIGHT NOW in their little brains.

  16. “higher temperatures increase irritability and hostility, which can lead to violence.”…..?
    Gee, no wonder us Canadians are so docile ! We are too cold to get angry at anything….D’OH !

  17. Gee, hurricane Harvey brought good samaritans out in force with rescue boats, drinking water, food, blankets and other needs. It was my observation that there was no violence at all. People were grateful for the outpouring of concern from good hearted strangers.

    Physician, heal thyself. Just about everything from lefty-tote anthropophobes is projection. In their minds Houston is just another deplorablopolis.

  18. caption from the image: “Rapid climate change and natural disasters will have a direct and indirect effect on climate change”

    Rapid climate change effects climate change?

    “according to new Iowa State research”

  19. “Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of psychology ”
    Strike one

    “and Andreas Miles-Novelo, an ISU graduate student” (of what pray tell)
    Strike two

    “hotter regions have more violent crime, poverty and unemployment”
    Strike three

    • He meant there are savages in the jungle and at the desert, and because it may not be race, genetics, religion, or culture, it must be oppressors and colonial temperatures.

      Welcome Singapore.

  20. I have seen that not getting their way when it comes to climate change legislation has caused leftists to get ever more violent.

  21. based on established models

    It’s always models with these people, you’d think there was no data or method to estimate to use for their claims, oh wait what’s this…

    There are no data and there is no method to estimate

    LOL

  22. “higher temperatures increase irritability and hostility, which can lead to violence. ”
    Sounds like the pronouncements of a Shaman.

  23. They are going about 5 links down the causal chain when they haven’t even firmly established the first link yet.

  24. “Rapid climate change and natural disasters will have a direct and indirect effect on climate change”

    This is the functional equivalent of saying the food I eat for supper will affect the food I eat for supper. We may not need Sherlock Holmes to divine the connection.

    The Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of pathology has identified three ways climate change will increase the likelihood of violence, based on established models of aggression and violence.

    A fourth would be the presentation of presumptions as discoveries, which is certain to incite anger.

    Do they also have in there a professor of hermeneutics so the violence model can convey their “semiotics, presuppositions, and pre-understandings” as discoveries?

    see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics for numerous ideas about beliefs.

    When it comes to models, sometimes you have to believe the outcome before you believe the prophecy. There is nothing like a mental model of what will be the outcome of a mental model.

  25. Craig Anderson – Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of psychology

    One indirect way natural disasters increase violence is through the development of babies, children and adolescents into violence-prone adults, he said. For example, poor living conditions, disrupted families and inadequate prenatal and child nutrition are risk factors for creating violence-prone adults.

    And just what was Chicago’s “natural disaster” and what year did it occur that resulted in ….. “poor living conditions, disrupted families, inadequate prenatal/child nutrition and violence-prone pistol packing teens and adults”?

    • Clearly it was the Great Chicago Fire, but that was before the post WW II diaspora from the South, so it must have been the lingering CO2 molecules that affected people almost a century later… /sarc

  26. Excerpt:
    “Images of extensive flooding or fire-ravaged communities help us see how climate change is accelerating the severity of natural disasters. The devastation is obvious, but what is not as clear is the indirect effect of these disasters, or more generally of rapid climate change, on violence and aggression.

    That is what Craig Anderson sees. The Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of psychology and Andreas Miles-Novelo, an ISU graduate student and lead author, identified three ways climate change will increase the likelihood of violence, based on established models of aggression and violence.”

    [end of excerpt]
    ___________________

    Two major natural disasters here in Alberta tend to refute Anderson’s hypothesis.

    The flooding in Calgary in 2013 was the most expensive natural disaster in Canadian history. I was evacuated from my building on the Elbow River and helped with the clean-up. So did tens of thousands of other Albertans, including most who were did not live in the flooded area. There was no looting and tens of thousands of volunteers dedicated themselves to hard, dirty work to help people they did not even know clean out their homes. Heavy equipment was donated free by oilfield companies to pump out basements.

    I helped to organize work for a crew that consisted of regular citizens, several Members of Parliament and the wife of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who worked hard in the mud for days in Calgary and later at High River.

    The firestorm in Fort McMurray in 2016 was another major disaster, that consumed thousands of homes and caused the emergency evacuation of ~88,000 people. Albertans opened their homes to the evacuees, and firemen from all over the province and the country stood fast and saved most of the city.

    Albertans did not fall apart – we grew closer together, stood strong and rebuilt our communities.

  27. “There were substantial droughts during this phase (about 3000 years ago), drier than the Millennium Drought which south-east Australia experienced from 1997-2009. In fact, from what we can ascertain, the probability of a drought worse than the Millennium Drought is much higher than the current prediction of one in 10,000 years. Our rainfall reconstruction suggests that it may be as much as 10 times more likely.”
    https://phys.org/news/2019-02-reveal-years-rainfall-drought.html

  28. I’ll tell you what will cause an uptick in violence and conflict due to Climate Change policies.. when LA goes full renewable for it’s power and the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine for 3 days. No electricity for 72 hours probably won’t go over well with the masses.

    • Berndt, you are right and I can tell you why.

      I have worked in dozens of countries, most of them considered poor. Electricity in poor regions is unreliable and I can make some universal observations where are relevant.

      If you have a refrigerator with a freezer, it works fine to put things in and take things out. If the power goes off, the freezer contains things that will perish if they thaw so to survive the outage, you keep the door shut as much as possible, and eat what ages in the cool part and what starts to thaw in the cold part.

      After three days, there is nothing left frozen and the cool part is just a cupboard. Life without refrigeration is something poor people know a lot about. Food has to be bought fresh on a daily basis, or else one has to buy staples in bulk and cook everything just before eating. As time passes the idea of “fresh” means “just picked locally” or “not at all”. Further, the water supply in most cities has about 3 days of storage so if the pumps are off, the water dribbles to a halt.

      Three days without electricity and you will see the whole population having to live like the poorest of the poor did in Maputo in the 80’s: carrying water in jugs up 15 floors and tearing out the parquet floors to cook on the balcony over an open fire.

      Alternatively, they do what people in Beirut do: buy a generator, fill the tank and start the engine, then sell power to anyone who can afford to get connected by 2 wires. There are 10’s of thousands of generators in Beirut. Did you ever wonder why? I didn’t – an unreliable power grid.

      So how can one turn LA into Beirut? Install huge amounts of PV and wind generating capacity, dismantle the backups and wait. It is only a matter of time.

      The gas turbines on the waterfront in San Francisco are apparently going to be ripped out. That is one amazing, huge installation – hardly anyone knows it is there. Most think electricity comes from the hilltops. A lawyer friend at Bechtel told me about it. The environmentalists would allow it to be built, and to run, but not to start! Ha ha ha! They blocked Bechtel from turning it on because for a few minutes the CO concentration was “too high”. Honestly, you can’t make this stuff up. I am afraid the West Coast will get what it deserves.

      • Exactly, 3 days is about what it takes to eat all your stored food, frozen, canned, fresh, etc.. What happens when that’s gone and the supermarkets aren’t stocked (or have already been looted) and the gas station can’t pump gas to fill your car, no heat or cooling in the house and standard services like trash collection, traffic lights, street lights are breaking down. That teacup dog carried around in a purse will start looking more and more like the filling of a sandwich..

        But the absolute worst thing by far.. people won’t be able to charge their phones, millennials will start killing people for a solar phone charger.

      • Crispin in Waterloo February 15, 2019 at 12:24 pm

        There are 10’s of thousands of generators in Beirut. Did you ever wonder why? I didn’t – an unreliable power grid.”

        The same in Lagos, Nigeria. And here in Australia, not only do we see ads on TV for solar sets, more recently we see ads for small, domestic, generator sets. I think someone has seen the future in Australia.

        Most Australians have never seen what living without power is like. Most Australians have never seen the way real poor people live. Australians gave up their right to defend themselves from the state in the 1990’s. When, NOT IF, the logical conclusion of this lunacy comes to pass, it will be messy, sort of like a “Mad Max” type conclusion.

    • In 1977 the lights went out in New York City.

      Around 4 p.m. lighting struck a Consolidated Edison substation in Westchester County, and for the next 25 hours, more than 7 million people were without power, 800,000 were stuck underground in subways and thousands more stranded in elevators.

      The impact of the Blackout on New York was later summed up in crime statistics: Over 3,800 arrests; 1,000 major fires; damage that exceeded $1 billon. But what the documentary Blackout decidedly does not focus the initial wave of looters who stole washing machines, cars and television sets during the first few hours after the transformers blew.
      https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-18/when-lights-went-out-new-york-city-tale-two-nights

  29. No…. Climate change PREACHERS increase potential for conflict and violence.

    Many of us do not buy into their flagellantism bullshit.

  30. The good people of Iowa and federal taxpayers are paying for this. Fire these bums and use the money to help those really in need.

    We also need to increase funding for STEM and take it from this type of lunacy. If you want to produce this rubbish do it on your own dime.

  31. This study by Craig Anderson (Distinguished Professor of psychology) and Andreas Miles-Novelo of the Iowa State University is just more vivid, incontrovertible evidence that the Social Sciences are junk science. They are junk science because their “findings/conclusions” can be manipulated to whatever the researchers want. And negative results are never published, so only when a researchers finds what they were looking for do those positive results get published. IOW, huge incentives to find positive results for publication and graduate thesis succes. That is human psychology.

    To start out to assume that human psychology under changing climate will increase the likelihood of violence, and then call changing climate as “climate change”, turns a verb into a noun to justify their publication of a positive result in a climate change journal. Junk science all the way down.

    Mr Anderson engages in pure Junk science of the kind Dr Feynman talked of. I would love to explain why that is to the distinguished professor’s face and explain why his graduate student’s paper is also junk science, and then watch his head explode, and his only recourse would be a string of Ad Homs (calling me names) to my points.

    Further absurdity of Mr Anderson’s graduate student here is highly laughable when he says, “From past experience with natural disasters, we should be able to prepare for future problems by setting aside emergency resources and funds,” Miles-Novelo said.
    I supposed the acronym “FEMA” has never occurred to him (or of the extensive stockpiles of emergency relief FEMA keeps and teams always ready)? Or states keeping rainy day funds? Or people and businesses buying insurance for natural disasters? Or insurers purchasing re-insurance policies on the international markets?

    Furthermore, this IYI grievance studies professor clearly has an agenda of refugee-immigration that clouds his work where he says, “Changing attitudes and policies about immigration also will lessen the potential for conflict, Anderson said. He points to the backlash against refugees in many European countries.”
    Apparently Mr Anderson doesn’t understand the basic idea of cause before effect, IOW, he has his causality reversed on immigration and conflict.

    Unless Mr Anderson means stopping immigration from cultures that are not compatible with their new country? The utter stupidity of Europe’s libeal leaders engaging in mass Islamic culture peoples re-settling in Judaeo-Christian cultures, while those emigres remain intently focused on bringing their political, cultural, and legal structures that are embedded in Islamic culture, and then demanding their new neighbors conform to their views once they reach some localized majority is a mistake for the Ages.

    From every historical perspective, from the Moors invasion of the Iberian peninsula, to Yugoslavia’s balkanization under religious divisions, to the never-ending wars in Mid-East, or the on-going purge of Rohingya Muslims from Buddhist Myanmar, or the perennial clashes between Hindu-and Muslims on the Indian subcontinent, the mixing (through an uncontrolled immigration) of diverse religious backgrounds into an established culture has always been the formula for war and conflict. Blaming climate change is nothing but a ‘dog-ate-my-homework’ excuse for bad policy and poor political leadership.

    As for Mr Anderson, he really should study the Moorish invasion starting in the 711 AD invasion of Iberia to the last remnants sent packing in 1609 AD. Maybe he can find some way to blame that epic conflict on changing climate, but he can’t blame it on climate change. It was basically a clash of culture and religion that could only be resolved by expulsion of one group.
    But I doubt that kind of reading and learning would do any good for Mr Anderson. That conclusion comes from his statement, “For example, poor living conditions, disrupted families and inadequate prenatal and child nutrition are risk factors for creating violence-prone adults. Anderson and Miles-Novelo noted these risk factors will become more prevalent as a result of climate change-induced disasters, such as hurricanes, droughts, floods, water shortages and changing agricultural practices for efficient production of food. (my italics)
    The lack of critical thought in that statement is astounding when you stop and realize those two Anderson and M-N) apparently think that if we somehow “turn the a (mythical) climate control knob of CO2”, that hurricanes, droughts, floods, water shortages and changing agricultural practices will magically cease to be a major problem for societies. And actually in fact, it is lack of economic resources, like affordable energy that produces the human disasters that result from always occurring natural disasters. It is affordable energy that mitigates and moderates the human disasters of natural disasters. And the climate change alarmists want to destroy affordable energy, which will immensely increase the human toll from natural disasters.

  32. ” higher temperatures increase irritability and hostility, which can lead to violence.”

    Except that it doesn’t !!!

    Take a trip to the beach in the heat of summer and check out the level of irritability and compare that with people confined inside their houses during the depths of winter, waiting for the warmth to return.

    • I agree. My buddy Jimmy is on a southern vacation while it was -43 here recently. In the pictures he sends, he doesn’t look at all like a raving lunatic.

  33. What irritates me is others telling me to stop my meat eating, fuel burning, ways of life. They really should mind their own business.

  34. Professor of psychology, I should have known. That’s as far as you need to read.

    A Professor of history would give a better analysis: Cold Climate Change causes revolutions.
    Take a look through the history of China, or almost anywhere. Cold, crop failures, starvation, revolution.
    Facts, no new social theories needed.

  35. Well I can certainly forsee,Climate Change Inc causing more violence as they trespass ever further onto other peoples property and privacy.
    The “I feel” moochers have declared war on the tool users;Because they FEEL.
    Their concerns can not be rationally discussed,there is no common ground and a reasoned solution is impossible.
    Because they FEEL.
    After decades of them expressing their feelings,I am no closer to understanding their concerns.
    There appears to be no agreed upon definition of any of the things they are concerned about.
    Global Warming Caused by man(potentially catastrophic)?How much is down to man?
    Climate Change?Of course it does.So what is meant by this term?
    Recorded temperature data?
    Historical events?
    Carbon emissions?
    Do they mean CO2?
    Or Dihydrogen Monoxide in vapour form?As their photo props most commonly imply.

    So having established by their past behaviour a deliberate dishonesty and shrieking incoherence, of course Climate Change Activists are going to cause violent reactions to their increasingly mindless interference with persons “less concerned” than themselves.
    That is just human nature.
    When threatened by a Cult,people tend to take action to preserve their own.
    The Cult of Calamitous Climate fits.

  36. What really matters is that shortage of reliable energy is a likely cause of war. Arguments over hydro-electricity threatens was between two nuclear armed historic adversaries, India and Pakistan. The greatest possible contribution to peace on the sub-continent is boosting coal-fired electricity generation for India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The enemies of civilisation are campaigning furiously in an attempt to stop and reverse this process. commodities@michaeldarby.net

  37. The idiots who did this study, left out the most obvious cause of conflict and violence.

    Alarmists are so arrogant, and sanctimonious. And tell so many lies. That skeptics constantly feel the need to kick them in their private parts. Or smash their faces in.

    Believe it or not, I am a pacifist. I would only use violence as a last resort. Or in self-defence.

    But I feel that skeptics are entitled to protect themselves from Alarmist stupidity.

    If only Alarmists would stop making up stories about imaginary “Deniers”. Then skeptics might start listening to them.

    Alarmists need to cut out all of the crap, that they constantly disgorge from their diseased minds.

    I urge Alarmists to get help NOW. Before it is too late. Skeptics only have a limited amount of patience.

    What happens next, is up to Alarmists. We gave you a chance. But you blew it.

    Alarmists must accept responsibility for their actions. You have no one to blame, but yourselves.

    You have been warned.

    Alarmists, you can see how “dangerous” global warming is, by clicking this link (I promise that there will be no violence):

    https://agree-to-disagree.com/temperature-and-population-by-country

  38. IMO, because almost everyone has an internet connected smart phone with a camera we are seeing more REPORTS of weather events not MORE severe weather.

    There are people who believe humans are responsible for the death of 83% of all animal and plant life. When I asked “Where are the bodies?” someone replied “…thousands of fish dead in second Murray-Darling basin…” This is the mentality of the brainwashed alarmists. They also believe a tax on energy and renewables will stop these events.

  39. “higher temperatures increase irritability and hostility, which can lead to violence”
    Let’s drop the author of that nonsense in antarctic or in a freezer, just so that he can verify that it makes him enjoyable and friendly

  40. Take Home Message on this paper:

    Quoting the author “There are no data and there is no method to estimate which of the three factors…” actually exist in the real world.

    There is simply data in this “study” at all — just a lot of hypothesizing about aggression and heat — based on past social science studies that in all probability are false (see John P. A. Ioannidis)

    “… uncomfortably warm temperatures increase aggressive thoughts and feelings, or what we call irritability.^ Although this increase in irritability is subtle, it can increase aggressive behavior through well known processes of priming aggressive thoughts (i.e., increasing the accessibility of aggressive ideas) and of the misattribution of emotion (i.e., increasing the likelihood of perceiving oneself to be angry).”

    Naturally, if one is crabby because it’s “too hot” this leads directly to international wars and conflict.

  41. Like we need to worry about the weather… The Armenian massacres,Belgium’s colonial administration, Stalins’s purges, Hitlers extermination programs, The Cambodian massacres, the Burundi, Guatamala, Equatorial Guinea, and Bangladesh massacres all managed to happen before climate change was even a thing… Someone needs to stop smoking the horse puckey here

Comments are closed.