Guest Essay by Kip Hansen — 25 June 2024 — 1400 words
In a recent News Brief I pointed out that the major climate alarm propaganda cabals [CCNow, Inside Climate News] would be flooding the main stream media outlets all around the world with the news that in the Northern Hemisphere, where the majority of humanity lives, it is Summer and summers tend to be hot.
One of the talking points in common usage is this:
“Heat is the leading weather-related cause of mortalities in the US, outpacing deaths from hurricanes by a factor of eight to one, and this summer’s record-breaking temperatures, worsened by the human-caused climate crisis, have led to fears a new annual high death toll will be set in 2023.” [The Guardian]
Many mainstream media outlets are pointed to the NOAA data set “Weather Related Fatality and Injury Statistics”. And, there it is, irrefutable proof from a gold-standard source, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service, that heat kills far more than cold.
Only, of course, they are not counting what you or I would consider “heat deaths” and “cold deaths”, but something else. (I will expand on this later on.)
Further, encouraged by the Climate Propaganda Cabals, news outlets rely on a report from world newspaper-of-record like The Guardian [a co-founder of the climate propaganda outlet Covering Climate Now – CCNow]:
Extreme temperatures kill 5 million people a year with heat-related deaths rising, study finds [The Guardian]
Selectively quoting from that piece is common practice, despite the fact that there is a sub-headline that reads: “More people died of cold than heat in past 20 years but climate change is shifting the balance.” One has to read the piece very carefully to find that it reports on Zhao et al. 2021, which did, in fact, find that heat related deaths were rising (as population also rises) and to discover that the gentle warming of the climate is preventing more cold deaths than the increase in heat deaths — resulting in a net reduction in extreme temperature deaths.
More exactly: 9.43% of all deaths were related to non-optimum temperatures. Of the same 5 million, 8.52% were cold-related and 0.91% were heat-related. Again, over 8.5 percent of deaths are cold-related and only 0.9 were heat related — that is almost 10 times as many cold-related deaths than heat related deaths.
Oh, and the shift in death? That increase in heat-deaths? Here I quoted the paper’s Findings:
“From 2000–03 to 2016–19, the global cold-related excess death ratio [defined as “the ratio between annual excess deaths and all deaths of a year” – kh] changed by –0·51 percentage points (95% eCI –0·61 to –0·42) and the global heat-related excess death ratio increased by 0·21 percentage points (0·13–0·31), leading to a net reduction in the overall ratio.”
[Aside: There seems to be some statistical chicanery involved in reporting “excess death ratio” in place of something simpler like “change in deaths per million” or “lives saved by warmer temperatures”. What I read in this study of deaths from “non-optimal ambient temperatures” (the subject of this study), we have a comparison between half a percentage point improvement in a large number of deaths (~471,000 cold deaths) being compared to two-tenths of a percentage points worsening of a much smaller number of deaths (~45,000 heat deaths). I could well be mistaken, there maybe some Public Health reason for doing this, so, some smart guy or gal could sort this out for the readers in comments?]
This lying about heat and cold deaths is subject to a pretty good debunking by Joshua Cohen at Forbes, in his July 2023 piece Excessive Heat Can Kill, But Extreme Cold Still Causes Many More Fatalities.
[quoting below from that Forbes piece – note the author is writing about Zhao et al. 2021]
“Between 2000 and 2019, annual deaths from heat exposure increased globally. The 20-year period coincided with the earth warmed by about 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit. The heat-related fatalities disproportionately impacted Asia, Africa and Southern parts of Europe and North America.”
“Interestingly, during the 2000-2019 period examined in the study, while heat-related deaths rose, deaths from cold exposure fell. And they decreased by a larger amount than the increase in heat-related fatalities. Overall, researchers estimated that approximately 650,000 fewer people worldwide died from temperature exposure during the 2000-2019 period than in the 1980s and 1990s.”
Bluntly, in the recent twenty years studied, about 650,000 lives were saved by the slow and steady warming of the climate 2000-2019.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Let’s head back to the first point: The NOAA and NWS (National Weather Service) graphic of “Weather Fatalities”. Here again, Forbes’ Joshua Cohen tries to set the record straight:
“Moreover, the two U.S. government agencies that track heat and cold deaths—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—are diametrically opposed in their estimates.”
Say what? Aren’t facts, well….facts? How can two major U.S. Federal agencies that track weather fatalities and a wider range of deaths be “diametrically opposed” in numerical estimates? I mean, dead people are pretty easy to count, they don’t move around and try to hide, do they? (Note: But, it is tricky: see my Cause of Death and its Follow-up.]
“The NOAA’s account of what it calls “weather-related deaths” suggests that during the 30-year period 1988 to 2017, an average of 134 heat-related deaths occurred annually, while 30 per year were cold-related.
“Contrary to the NOAA, the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics Compressed Mortality Database, which is based on actual death certificates, indicates that roughly twice as many people die of cold in a given year than of heat.”
[The link is to the CDC Database tool, it is incredibly complicated to use and it is difficult to extract the deaths by heat and cold. – However, Anna Skinner, at Newsweek, managed to dig out a figure. See Late Additions section below. — kh]
Cohen offers a reasonable and possibly-right explanation:
“It wouldn’t be the first time that organizations’ estimates of what are seemingly the same observable events are so far apart. Discrepancies in definitions and assumptions around measurement underlie each organization’s calculations of cold- and heat-related deaths.”
“All things considered, it is very likely in a given year that cold causes more deaths than heat. As the planet heats up, the number of heat exposure deaths increase and fatalities due to cold decrease. The rate of decrease in deaths owing to cold is faster than the rate of increase in deaths due to heat. And so on balance there then appear to be fewer temperature exposure deaths.”
Read Cohen’s piece, he wraps up hedging his bets so he can’t be called a Climate Denier.
Then there is the European data on heat deaths vs. cold deaths, in another 2023 Lancet paper: Excess mortality attributed to heat and cold: a health impact assessment study in 854 cities in Europe and its infamous graphic. On the left is as published, copied directly from the original paper, on the right, with the numerical axes equalized, courtesy of Bjorn Lomborg:
But like I often do, Cohen wrote too soon. He should have waited a year until Zhao et al. wrote their most recent (May 2024) paper, specifically on heat-wave deaths, on : “Global, regional, and national burden of heatwave-related mortality from 1990 to 2019: A three-stage modelling study” Their findings are summarized in this simple statement:
“During 1990 to 2019 warm seasons, 153,078 deaths were associated with heatwaves (nearly half in Asia), which accounted for 0.94% of all deaths and equated 236 deaths per 10 million residents. The global heatwave-related excess death rate declined by 7.2% per decade in comparison to the 30-year average.”
# # # # #
Late additions:
Judith Curry re-tweets (can’t say re-Xs) Andy Revkin, who laments the demise of journalistic integrity of The Guardian headline and story featured in this essay — here and here.
A story in Newsweek reports that “California Water Temperatures Drop to Dangerous Levels”, 47.3 degrees Fahrenheit (8.5°C). Included in the piece is the statement: “National Institutes of Health data revealed that 1,330 people in the U.S. die from cold exposure every year.” And that’s only direct cause of death….
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
I know I didn’t answer the question asked in the title: “Why Do They Lie about Extreme Temperature Deaths?” I don’t answer because I don’t know. There is overwhelming publicly available data and published in-depth peer-reviewed studies, published even in journals known for their pro-climate-alarmist bias, that establish that cold, low temperature, even moderate cold, kills far many more people than high temperature.
This is true in the United States, in the United Kingdom, Europe and the world in general.
But, rank propaganda is based on the simple process of repeating the same lie over and over and over until it is accepted as truth.
Here are the links for use in defeating this lie:
Masselot et al. 2023 (European deaths)
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
They lie in order to manipulate. My father does this. If the truth doesn’t make us as upset/anxious/motivated as he wants us to be, he exaggerates/lies in order to get the response that he wants.
On the other hand, the truth is somewhat dependent upon viewpoint. To point out only one small example from many I’ve experienced: hearing damage.
In trying to tell my young granddaughter that such high sound levels will damage her hearing, her response was that it doesn’t hurt in the least. My attempts to explain what happens to her ear’s, and that it is cumulative over time just drew a puzzled look. It may have been possible to explain in some way she could understand at her age, but she was clearly not interested in such nonsense.
Somewhat likewise, when I had to work in a very loud circumstance for some time, the young adults there considered hearing protection poncy, nothing any self respecting macho male would consider. It could not possibly “hurt” them and they were totally uninterested in hearing any nonsense about the biophysics of what supposedly happened inside their ears. They could plainly understand the obvious and it did not in the least agreed with what I told them.
“hearing damage.”
Pardon ??!! 🙂
Having worked on a hobby basis as an audio engineer for live bands in pubs for about 15+ years…
… I can assure you that constant loud music does seem to cause a bit of hearing loss. 🙂
My father was quite deaf, from guns in the Army Reserve and working construction. Which is why I was always using hearing protection. He could understand me quite well, with my rather bass voice, but not my sisters.
While your hearing loss after those 15 years would be quite measurable with testing if you had baseline testing records to compare against, hearing loss is one of those things that has a tipping point of sorts. It tends to suddenly become severe when you become conscious of it, at which point there is no going back. You might then accept that you need to start wearing hearing protection to try to save what you have left. Or, you might have to go directly to hearing aids just to get by.
Professional rockers are a group that have, by and large, learned the lesson. Protective devices, mostly ear plug types, are now very commonly used by performing musicians. The reports and data are easy to find. But there are still many people who lack all education of general science.
OSHA workplace standards are a compromise between the needs of industry, with its noisy machinery, and an attempt to keep workers from going completely deaf by the time they retire.
A certain amount of hearing loss of the higher frequencies is so common, almost universal in industrial societies, that it is largely considered normal and unavoidable. However, a study of people who have lived their entire lives away from industrial societies found that the youngest children and the very oldest citizens both had the same frequency range and loudness responses. There was no loss of hearing ability even in those over 90 years old. I suspect repetition of those results is not very likely, unfortunately. Isolated groups of people are becoming more and more rare in today’s world.
That’s interesting. Even 50-odd years ago, “everybody knew” that high frequency hearing response dropped with age. That just goes to show how used to ambient noise levels we have become over time.
I have worn earmuffs when driving tractors and using power tools since my teens, but there is still a lot of ambient noise even in semi-rural areas.
Yes, both noise pollution and light pollution have become very hard to avoid.
Just ask Ted Nugent… 100% hearing loss in one ear, non-reversible; and only 40% remaining in the other, also likely not reversible, but he protects it religiously now.
As someone accustomed to working on flight lines and field flying sites in the RAF Harrier Force I can say “what”. Even wearing ear defenders and plugs was not enough protection.
Most certainly. There just doesn’t seem to be any way to really block out overly loud sounds. The infrasound frequencies from jet engine operations can also lead to a condition, in addition to the loss of higher frequencies, where the natural adjustment of the ears (analgous to the adaption of the eyes to brighter and dimmer circumstances) is lost and “normal” sounds become painfully loud.
People who work directly on firing ranges are now recommending both earplugs and earmuffs, as well as limiting exposure as much as possible… i.e., just don’t go there if you don’t have to.
Active noise canceling headphones are claimed to work pretty well. These sample the sound outside the earphones and produce the inverse of that sound inside the earphones so that (mostly) only the source to the headphones, what you want to listen to, gets into your ears. I don’t know but I suspect that they don’t work very well with impulse noise which comes on very suddenly and is gone just about as fast, e.g. a pistol shot, but they are supposed to cancel general background noise so one can hear the music (or whatever) well at much safer levels.
I am puzzled by my husband’s super-acute hearing. To put himself through Uni, he worked in really loud environments. For example, grinding and chipping paint off the insides of water tanks on ships.
Not everyone is the same. I didn’t wear hearing protection until I was in my50s. I and my friends do a lot of shooting – much of it semi-auto rifle. My wife and I do concerts. I was a private pilot (without those nice headsets that blocked outside noise and piped in radio comms). We watch TV at high volumes (even my mostly deaf mother-in-law complained).
In my 20s I could catch a cricket in the dark by listening to his crawling on the carpet. I can’t do that now – partly because we don’t have carpeting. But when one gets in the house, that chirping drives me crazy. Our cats snoring wakes me up in the middle of the night and I have to nudge them to get them to quit so I can get back to sleep.
I’m in my 70s. Maybe it doesn’t occur until you get old. I’ll get back to you in 20 years.
But then they lie about so many things. It seems unlikely that the root cause/reason relates in any particular way to the cold/heat death ratio.
They are lying to promote their climate alarm agenda.
They have to lie because there is no evidence they can produce, for what they claim.
But even for evidence that exists, the activists and politicians distort things all out of proportion to reality, as evidence by examples in Kip’s essay.
They lie because that is who they are.
They lie about climate because, at this point in time, it gets them the biggest bang (emotional/monetary/politically) for their lying buck.
That Lancet graph above, that Lomborg corrected is one of the most underhanded and despicable graphical LIES perpetrated since the Mann hockey stick and the GISS et al global temperature mal-adjustments.
I agree. The graphic is a blatant lie. Something Climate Alarmists are very good at producing.
All they have are lies and distortions of reality.
bnice and others ==> The original authors use the graphic not to show relative deaths from heat vs. cold. They are trying to show national and regional deaths by age group from non-optimal temperature. The error here, in the paper’s own context, is combining them side by side instead of using separate graphics and noting the difference in scaling.
Some news outlets have show the graphic without clarification.
If it was not designed to give a false impression, that’s the way it was used.
Why do they LIE. ???
It is an in-built leftist COMPULSION !!
They lie because in their corrupt minds the ends justify the means, and the end is “Power over Others, the basis of most all crime.
In mortality and traditional religious thought, the means and the end cannot be separated.
“They lie because in their corrupt minds the ends justify the means”
Yes, I think that’s the reason.
David A,
That might be a theoretical explanation, but be practical.
Do you know quite well, any other person who puts the end ahead of the means, such as truth?
Strange outcomes in major public policy seem to be increasing. A person or person is approving or even creating them. Some read like they are s lie. Can you point to a person you know well and say “You created this alleged lie, how, why?”
I am in my 80s. I have never met a person of this type. I would love to have deep talks with such a person, but I cannot find one. Can anyone find one??
people across the political spectrum can lie- religious leaders lie- people lie to their families- lovers lie to each other- it’s built into human nature, me thinks 🙂
Lying is, on most occasions, completely unacceptable behavior.
So a person discovers they have a terminal and incurable ailment, and elect not to tell the spouse, just to put off the sadness, despair, depression, etc., etc. Still unacceptable? What would be the benefit, to anyone, especially the spouse, to tell immediately?
“on most occasions”, i.e., I allowed for some exceptions like the one you mention where the lie does no harm.
Lying to achieve your agenda is not new. P.T. Barnum had it figured out long ago.
Have you forgotten about Roman politics?
Number of deaths due to heat and cold is only one aspect of “The Climate Crisis” that is subject to manipulation by propaganda. Is there any climate related issue that isn’t lied about? Besides why do they lie, the who what where when and how of all the lies about “Global Cooling, Nuclear Winter, Global Warming, Climate Change” and now “The Climate Crisis” would fill a series of large books. It all adds up to the realization that the whole climate issue is “The Big Lie” of our time, and has nothing to do with climate and everything to do with politics.
it’s the big lie that has now become the new religion- and if you don’t go with it- you’ll be excommunicated
“Is there any climate related issue that isn’t lied about?”
No, there is not. Climate Alarmists lie about everything related to the Earth’s climate and CO2.
True Believers don’t lie, they have been duped by the Climate Alarmists and just repeat the lies of the Climate Alarmists who intentionally lie.
And, a large percentage will not hear anything that might upset their unquestioning faith.
Now you sound like George Castanza… “Jerry. If you believe it, it’s not a lie.”
If he sincerely believes it, it is not a lie to him, even if it is untrue because he doesn’t realize he is repeating a lie.. If he’s pretending to believe it, then that’s a different matter.
To be fair, there is no empirical evidence that “nuclear winter” is a falsehood. Best if we don’t get any, either, in my honest opinion…
There is evidence of volcanically caused ‘years without summer’ but there is no evidence all the A bombs set off at once equals Tambora in creation of dust and gasses.
“Heat is the leading weather-related cause of mortalities in the US, outpacing deaths from hurricanes by a factor of eight to one, and this summer’s record-breaking temperatures, worsened by the human-caused climate crisis, have led to fears a new annual high death toll will be set in 2023.” [The Guardian]
It must be hell in Alaska.
Millions of people from Florida and Texas are now pouring into Alaska and Labrador to escape the heat! 🙂
strat ==> The Guardian is a co-founder of the Columbia University’s (in New York, USA) rabid climate propaganda mill, Covering Climate Now. They intentional pervert journalism to forward the climate agenda — and brag about it.
re: “Why do they …”
“Safe and effective” anyone?
Where did I hear that one in the last 3,4 years? (And remember, Orange Man Bad was lambasted for just daring to mention HCQ in 2020 (which the press turned that into ‘fish tank cleaner’ and the rest is history.) Never mind the CNN and FDA et al termed ‘horse paste’ that cured Joe Rogan.(IVM if you need it spelled out.)
Or, “Russia Russia Russia”. And 51 signatures on a letter by certain ‘intel officials’ in effect testifying that a certain laptop was ‘Russian disinfo’. Tricks like this can and do sway elections …. Nooooo!!!
“Give me lies, sweet little lies …” as the song goes …
You may also have heard ‘Safe and Effective’ used for Thalidomide, following which use of the term to describe drugs was banned.
But of course, it wasn’t Pfizer or Moderna using the term to describe covid 19 drugs, it was our governments.
And Rachel ‘Pat’ (a Hermaphroditic character from early SNL days) Maddow said if vac’d you a) would not get sick and b) would not spread it. Words from her mouth to her audience’s brains, or what goes for brains in her audience anyway …
If Trump is elected, he ought to relieve all 51 intelligence agency liars of their security clearances. Then, the Republican congress should investigate every one of these traitors to their nation because they lied about the laptop and thus interfered in a presidential election.
In the presidential debate tomorrow night, Trump should ask Joe Biden why he lied to the American people about Hunter’s laptop during the last debate they had in 2020. Biden cited the 51 intelligence officals claiming the Hunter laptop was Russian disinformation when Biden knew good and well that it was real and belonged to Hunter.
Trump should make Biden fess up.
all 51 intelligence agency liars
That was only one incident. There’s a lot more than that.
Speaking of the debate…..I see Trump is now saying Biden will do well tomorrow. He’s changed his tune. I thought Trump was convinced Biden is a demented old fool. And what if Biden does hold his own? Does that mean the Donald is not even able to beat a demented old fool? So many questions to be answered tomorrow. I for one can’t wait.
There you go: Watch and see for yourself.
There may be 100 million people watching this debate.
I will be sooo interested. This could be the end of Biden. Some say the bar is low for Biden, but I think it is higher than for Trump. If Biden stuffs up he is demented. If Trump does, he is just kidding.
We can compare notes here in the next Open Thread. 🙂
That would be fun.
You really need a massive towel to wipe the rotten egg of your face, don’t you simpleton. !
PANIC IN DC
“Available, safe, and rare.” The big lie of my childhood. Available, unfortunately. Safe or rare, not at all.
Kip,
Great article, appreciated.
When I read this: ““Heat is the leading weather-related cause of mortalities in the US, outpacing deaths from hurricanes by a factor of eight to one, and this summer’s record-breaking temperatures, worsened by the human-caused climate crisis, have led to fears a new annual high death toll will be set in 2023.” [The Guardian] ” my immediate thought is that there must be a way to corect this alleged lie. Surely, somewhere in the structure of Acts and Regulations of the US, there must be at least one process to call out the lie.
There might be some processes that are slow and cumbersome, like a petition signed by a required minimum number of people. There might be others that apply to people employed other than in the newspaper reporting business, here The Guardian.
But apart from these, this is a fundamental breach of the truth, type of nasty that has traditionally been nipped in the bud by wise forebears..
If this had happened to us in Aust in times gone by, colleagues and I would be talking to our corporate in-house lawyers. Are there any lawyers (Rud?) across the field who would be willing to share a possible rectification course of action here? Geoff S
sherro01 ==> ” there must be at least one process to call out the lie. ” Yes, it is called the Free Press and Freedom of Speech — which is what keeps this and other climate realism web sites from being ordered closed down by activist politicians and the bad guys in various government alphabet agencies.
In this particular case, they will just point to NOAA’s NWS graphic and say “we are quoting official government information — official data”.
Can we make NOAA/NWS correct the false impression they give with their graphic (which has been in use for decades….)? I have tried to get them to correct “Rip Current Deaths” — by which they mean “any surf zone death in any weather”.
There are other organizations counting things: “Seven hundred people experiencing or at risk of homelessness are killed from hypothermia annually in the United States.” Any journalist can use Goggles and find this data. NOT doing so is journalistic malfeasance.
The Grauniad is wedded to the climate change catastrophe. Would not surprise me if the original said heat was the leading weather related cause of mortalities in the US ‘in the summer’ but the sub editors removed the last three words to promote their agenda.
Conclusions depends almost entirely on how climate related deaths are defined.
Very few people die from very cold or very hot weather alone, but extreme heat is more deadly than extreme cold in the US.
There is a seasonal trend of flu deaths in the colder months — averaging about 36,deaths a year — and more heart related deaths in the winter months too.
If you call heart related deaths “climate related deaths”, then winters have far more deaths than summers.
But that claim makes the assumption that the heart patient would not have died prematurely if he or she lived in a warm climate, that avoided a cold winter.
That makes no sense.
A heart patient might live longer in a warm climate than in a cold climate. But in the long run, he or she will probably die from a heart attack or stroke. The cause of death is the heart / circulation problem.
I find it deceptive to call these heart patient deaths “climate related deaths”, as if slightly warmer winters from global warming would make a big difference.
No matter how you prefer to categorize deaths, you can be confident that leftists will lie about them (and everything else).
Maybe the old covid joke is pertinent…
Man on a motorcycle dies in a road traffic accident and is declared a covid death…
What if he was on the way to a doctor for Covid treatment? (doctor does nothing except to tell the patient to check into a hospital if he gets sicker)
Not so much a joke. I knew someone (second hand) killed in a car wreck declared as a covid death because he had covid at the time.
“No matter how you prefer to categorize deaths, you can be confident that leftists will lie about them (and everything else).”
I can agree with you on that.
Richard ==> You are correct that it is a matter of “how climate ( or weather) related deaths are defined”.
Almost all data used by everyone everywhere (numbers of things) depend on “exactly what they are counting”.
But you error in thinking that the count of cold deaths by the NWS is just an error in definition — hypothermia is the definition of a cold death. It is widely known in the field of care for the homeless that over 700 homeless die each year from hypothermia — getting and being too cold. But, I suppose they don’t count — their death certs are coded with other causes even though the immediate cause was exposure to cold.
Of about 3.3 million all cause US mortality in a year, maybe a few thousand are DIRECTLY related to extreme heat or extreme cold. Mainly from extreme heat.
I doubt if official statistics cover homeless people well
If you want to add 36,000 average flu deaths a year and the heart attack and stroke deaths seasonality, then cold weather deaths become perhaps 10 times larger than hot weather deaths.
In my opinion claiming there will be fewer heart patient deaths in the winter because global warming has caused warmer winters may be true, but is a minor reason to celebrate global warming.
Snow shoveling can be dangerous for heart patients. Here in SE Michigan, snow shoveling has declined from about once a week in the late 1970s winters to once for 10 minutes all last winter. That’s why we love global warming here.
I once read an entire article about motorcycles and hypothermia… It included the data that at a certain speed, wearing wet clothing is worse than wearing no clothing at all (the reason for the “wick” on an old-fashioned sling psychrometer), and then went through one of the earliest symptoms of hypothermia (shortly after shivering) is slowing the brain-functions, to the point of befuddlement. And then concluded, with, when there’s a motorcycle accident and the MC operator is wet and is known to have been wet for awhile, was it simply an accident, or did the operator become so befuddled by hypothermia they could no longer control their bike? There’s another place that a suboptimal temperature death may be recorded as something else.
Dr Hansen
The most simple explanation for ‘why the Guardian lies’ is simple: the Guardian is a hierarchical organisation and orders came from the top for them to do so. Guardian employees should be seen as wordsmiths, not journalists, as they are employed to do what their owners tell them to do and what their owners tell them to do is conveyed to them by the Editor.
So the better question to ask is: ‘Why do the owners of the Guardian feel it beneficial to lie about climate?’
As the Guardian will be a loss-making enterprise for its owners, it’s highly likely that ownership of MSM vehicles is now seen as a loss-leader/sales&marketing arm of other profitable ventures that the Guardian ownership is invested in.
So the next question is: ‘What profits do Guardian owners accrue through losing money lying about climate through their ‘newspaper’?’
Another likely question to answer is: ‘Who gives the owners of the Guardian orders and how do their enforce obedience/adherence to their orders?’
And then you get to the crux: ‘Who ultimately decides whether the climate scaremongering scam is continued, mothballed, expanded, altered and on what decision-making tree do they make their decisions?’
When I was a boy, the Guardian was a regional newspaper, headquartered in Manchester (it was orignally called the Manchester Guardian), being a leading media outlet for left-of-centre political views. As a young adult, I found that the newspaper had shifted more toward a public-sector-oriented paper with a greater emphasis on London. Now, in the 21st century, it is a neoliberal vehicle owned by Americans who push their nonsensical claptrap to a bunch of hugely uneducated (it is nowadays necessary to go to University to have the levels of uneducated thinking necessary to continue reading), dupable and ignorant readers for whatever reason that ultimately benefits them.
What the Guardian indubitably is NOT any longer is a broadsheet primarily reporting on facts.
rtj ==> First, it’s just “Kip”.
Second, The Guardian, as an organization, is the co-founder and principle force behind Covering Climate Now, a climate propaganda outfit headquartered at Columbia University in New York, that brags that its MSM partners reach 2 billion people with stories handcrafted, pre-written in some cases, to push climate alarmism, preferably in every single news story.
And I quite agree, The Guardian can no longer be considered a trusted source.
“No longer?”
The ultimate in comparing apples to oranges.
I thought so, too.
Why didn’t they compare the deaths to tornado-caused deaths?
Or terminal/fatal lightning strikes (the ultimate weather-related death – right)?
Almost happened to me. Back in ’74, I was in the Okefenokee Swamp, on the Swanee River- in a metal fishing boat. A fierce storm started with lightning. It was a miracle I got out alive. Very scary.
I suppose 1500 pilgrims dead in Mecca do not count?
Count for what?
I forgot to add….
Allah knows best, right?
That is more a Darwin event. 1500 out of 1.8 million !!!
Waiting in massive queues without sufficient H2O…. death by stupidity
Something a half runt might do.
These friends of Mohammed are very short on answers, you can’t thump people over the internet – yet, But I bet they wish they could.
islamists are there on Hajj on Allah’s account and I asked the islamists friends Allah knows best, right?
Just about every Hajj is accompanied by mass death of some sort.
Hajj disasters: stampedes, infernos and a bloody siegehttps://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20240612-hajj-disasters-stampedes-infernos-and-a-bloody-siege
Allah has work to do.
Are unearthly virgins still apportioned to martyrs for Climate Change/EXTREME HOT weather in the desert?
The pilgrims died of fraud and stupidity, not heat related to climate change.
It’s always been ridiculously hot there.
If you are old and firm and go from a moderate climate like the UK to queuing for hours in 40-50C with no shade or water…
And a lot of people couldn’t get/afford the official permits, so used unofficial tours, got dumped in the middle of a 50C desert and told to walk 10 miles that way…..
ghalfrunt ==> Massive death tolls are common in the Hajj, as you must know — too many people, too little water and shelter, far too crowed, emotions too high.
The governments could do something to prevent those deaths with enough will and money : improving their efforts at limiting crowds, providing overhead misting of crowed areas, cooling shelters, shade. It is a pending disaster every year.
Many pilgrims come near the end of their lives, trying to fit in one (or one last) pilgrimage to Mecca, many are poor and can’t afford proper accommodations, many come already in poor health.
But, climate change is not a culprit there.
count for the stupidity of having a pilgrimage in the summer? try doing it in montana in february
Are there comparable gatherings in Novosibirsk in the Winter?
From the article: “The global heatwave-related excess death rate [During 1990 to 2019 warm seasons] declined by 7.2% per decade in comparison to the 30-year average.”
So even though, according to the Climate Alarmists, the Earth is experiencing unprecedented warming, the heat-related death rate is declining.
Someting doesn’t jive here, does it.
Climate Alarmists would have nothing to scare us with if they didn’t lie all the time.
Heat-related deaths are just that – they are almost never directly heat caused deaths. People die of heat stroke, after suffering heat exhaustion, mainly because they fail to remain hydrated. In fact only moderately warm temperatures (80s deg F) can be the case with heat exhaustion and heat stroke if the body is not properly hydrated. The human body can tolerate very high atmospheric temperatures (120+ deg F) if they simply remain hydrated. Staying out of direct sunlight also helps avoid heat exhaustion. And moderating physical effort also helps. All of these mitigation measures are easy to use and can be tolerated continually. And if there is any wind at all it aids greatly in cooling the body. In very humid climates where sweating is not as effective a body cooling mechanism, it is also true that maximum temperatures are well below those in very dry areas – the humidity in the air moderates the air temperatures. That’s why it rarely hits 100 deg F in Florida and other humid eastern states in the summer, but routinely hits 100+ in dry climates of the western states.
Avoiding hypothermia, however, is much more challenging. Wearing warm clothing that is properly structured in layers, with moisture wicking underwear topped with heat trapping insulating fabric topped with wind-resistant outerlayer is the only way to avoid hypothermia in cold air. But practically speaking, most people can tolerate wearing such closing only for short periods of outdoor travel or recreation. Another caveat is that people often exert themselves heavily (such as by trudging through deep snow) and sweat, and then the sweaty clothing conducts heat away from the body very rapidly. Getting wet at all in a cold atmosphere is a killer – hypothermia can set in at moderate temperatures (50s deg F or lower) if someone gets wet in windy air and does not wear appropriate clothing. Plus it is nearly impossible for most people to protect every body part from exposure, such as fingers, toes, and faces that readily get frostbite. Wind of course is also a killer in cold temperatures.
That’s why “heat related” deaths are much more rare than deaths due to hypothermia. And “heat related deaths” are almost never “heat caused deaths”.
Duane ==> Yes, hypothermia is a huge danger to outdoor enthusiasts. Lots of deaths in healthy people.
If the Titanic had gone down in the South Pacific, how many more survivors would there have been?
(OK. Say it hit a coral reef rather than an iceberg. 😎
Sorry, but I remain skeptical about any numbers produced by anyone. Cold kills.
Slipping on wet mossy rocks into a stream that was snow the day before will get you into the tally of “cold kills.” Likewise, crashing through mineral crust into a bubbling geyser will get you marked as a “hot kill.” The only relevant numbers being ‘how fast.’
re: “And, there it is, irrefutable proof from a gold-standard source, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service, that heat kills far more than cold.”
Historically, since the beginning of man’s collective consciousness and before the discovery of literal ‘fire’ (for warmth, heating and cooking)?
Or contemporaneously (IOW, now)? Now we have HVAC, warming shelters in the cities during cold snaps, etc.
Based on their stance and their statistics, NOAA needs to wake up and start encouraging other agencies to provide cooling shelters. Taking/using the money allotted to warming shelters would be a logical tradeoff.
🙂
why do dogs lick their genitals?
because they can
re: “why do dogs lick …”
Lacking an opposable thumb with which to grab and hold a wash cloth?
They are aided in this feat though the use of interlocking vertebrae forming what effectively becomes a flexible spine too. /s
how much easier it must be for the truly spineless.
That’s bollocks
Have you ever had a dog?🐶 lol 😂
I thought it was quite a good pun 🙂
How many of these deaths from both HEAT and COLD are really attributable to homelessness? Of the massive increase in people living rough on the streets? Perhaps we need a Federal program to fly the nation’s homeless population to Montecito where Al Gore lives … and where the average daily temperature is a near constant balmy 80 deg.F
Global News regarding Quebec heat wave 2018:
“Public Health’s investigation shows that the homes of 66 per cent of people who died were located in the city’s heat Islands.
“Low income and social isolation are also important risk factors during heat waves.
” Among those who died, 72 per cent suffered from chronic diseases, 66 per cent were 65 years of age and over, 25 per cent had schizophrenic disorders and 18 per cent suffered from alcohol and addiction, according to Public Health.
” One thing is certain: we understand that it is urgent to fight climate change.” Huh???
https://globalnews.ca/news/5279502/66-montrealers-died-from-extreme-heat-during-2018-heat-wave/amp/
kenji ==> People living basically unprotected from the weather are at huge risk from almost all types of weather. They die from “exposure”….hugely exacerbated by or exacerbating other chronic conditions — substance abuse (drugs – alcohol), mal- and under-nutrition, chronic illnesses, mental/emotional illnesses, a rather long list.
Both hyper- and hypothermia can and do kill the homeless – and neither require extreme ambient temperatures.
Homelessness — “living rough” — are, to me, inexplicable failures of our society.
Global News regarding Quebec heat wave 2018:
“Public Health’s investigation shows that the homes of 66 per cent of people who died were located in the city’s heat Islands.
“Low income and social isolation are also important risk factors during heat waves.
” Among those who died, 72 per cent suffered from chronic diseases, 66 per cent were 65 years of age and over, 25 per cent had schizophrenic disorders and 18 per cent suffered from alcohol and addiction, according to Public Health.
” One thing is certain: we understand that it is urgent to fight climate change.” Huh???
https://globalnews.ca/news/5279502/66-montrealers-died-from-extreme-heat-during-2018-heat-wave/amp/
Homelessness — “living rough” — are, to me, inexplicable failures of our society.
What except very stringent central control of most people’s everyday life could change that: a fascist government of maximum power? We’ve already seen the examples in various places; the concrete Soviet housing, the US “projects” where life is miserable and insecure, where the plumbing and power are continuously failing and very rarely maintained, where nearly everyone is unsafe from the gangs that have the most power to claw out a place just a little bet better than everyone else?
Such housing is being sought under the guise of “climate” for everyone (except the very wealthy) in order to save resources, to save the great outdoors from the masses, to insure than any real epidemic will be passed to as many people as possible. This is a solution that Malthus promoted.
Any solution costs real wealth. Maybe one can hypothesize that the very wealthy should use as much of their wealth as it takes (and it would probably take more than even they, as a group, have but that could only happen through a totally centralized for everything government that is not, in fact, owned and controlled by those same people (not to mention that it could completely remove any incentive to create great wealth). On the other hand, a significant impact on the situation might be accomplished by circumstances that creates more wealth for nearly everyone — if such is possible in the real world.
Has there ever been any prediction more true than “the poor are always with us”?
Inexplicable because we now have clothing that is superior to what was available 100 years ago, and a better understanding of physiology and what are risk factors in extreme weather.
“… to Montecito where Al Gore lives ” For a short time in 2010.
Big Al’s home is in Nashville.
All warming is doubleplus ungood! It is an article of faith!! How dare you doubt that eternal truth!!!
Tom ==> Are we missing a /sarc tag there? Talking about some other type of “warming”? Heart warming?
I will say that it is my opinion that when talking about “global warming” — the gentle and slow general warming of the Earth’s climate that we have experienced coming up out of the Little Ice Age, warming is a net positive.
I thought I was over the top enough a sarc tag was unneeded.
Kip – I think it was implied by the Newspeak
I lived through the hottest summer I have ever seen last year and did not hear of any deaths from heat. But the Texas killer freeze had people dying from hypothermia in my area.
It is amazing how sensitive the Tropopause was to a loss of 45 billion gallons of its anthropogenic water vapor stream in 1 year.
LT3 ==> Could give us a link to the paper or other source of that image? Something that would infill the significance?
It is something I am working on, trying to find the cause of the Texas freeze. Humanity set a record of burning 95 billion gallons of jet fuel the year before the pandemic. That equates to about 4% of what HT emitted into the Stratosphere. The rapid loss of water vapor feed into the Tropopause over the lock down, caused the stratospheric heating and buckled, as well as the mid and lower troposphere responded accordingly. And amazingly before we could study the effects, the missing water vapor was replaced 10X+ in one day the next year.
The model of aviation H2O exhaust is based on a 3 year dwell time, that’s why you see a number larger than 95 billion at the peak, it’s the accumulated three-year declining average. However, a new paper is out that indicates the dwell time maybe more like 4 years for HT water vapor.
You do see the lower stratosphere spiking the same time aviation emmissions plummeted. Spike in the Stratosphere are not common and have a reason.
Stop flying and we will be back to pre-aviation temps in a few years.
Flying hydrogen powered jets will cause even more water vapor.
A fellow who had been following Texas extreme cold waves had data from over many decades, possibly far back into last century. He may have posted in WUWT but probably in a comment to some other article.
Anyway, he was interested not in temperature records but interested in those incidents such as that 2021 Valentine’s Day massacre where millions of fish, sea turtles, aquatic mammals, sea birds, and any other such animal life was killed in Texas coastal waters.
If I recall properly, 2021 was not a high point for such deaths but the real point was that they occurred fairly frequency. I think the average was about every 19 years.
Yes, I have lived here all my life, the notable kills are well documented and caused by Pinatubo 90’s, El-Chichon 80’s and now, the drop in stratospheric aviation exhaust (H2O) from the lockdown. 2021 was not nearly as damaging as El-Chichon because the duration of the below freezing weather only lasted 3 or 4 days. During the 80’s event Galveston bay was well below freezing for nearly a week. We saw large ponds freeze down to 10″ of ice over the course of a week. Never seen anything like that since. During the Texas killer freeze we did not even get any ice rings around large ponds.
Here is the model with Hunga Tonga in relation to humanities aviation H2O emissions in the stratosphere. We are in the last year of effects of HT.
Nice piece and it fits in well with the Supreme Court tossing a recent case involving
the government censoring social media.=====>
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/supreme-court-tosses-case-over-biden-coersion-social-media
As to the title? why do they lie–It’s who they are. Fascism is easy to see when you
know how they play.
They lie to advance their agenda. DUH!
They figure if it didn’t happen today, it’s sure happen tomorrow so it’s really not a ‘lie’. But, it is.
Your governments lie to you … constantly … about all matters big and small. The practice is ubiquitous in ideologically and politically driven institutions both private and public, especially “charities” of the NGOs.
“Wednesday was the hottest day of the year so far, the Met Office has said, after 30.3C was recorded at London’s Heathrow Airport.” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx882q4x7zdo
However, we only reached 25-27 degrees Celsius in an urban area 100 miles north of LHR.
why do they insist on using airports as the baseline?
Met Office said May was the hottest ever in the UK based on the lowest temperatures. For those of us in the real world May was quite cold.