ADVERTISEMENT

Florida Bans "Global Warming" and "Climate Change"

Nov 28, 2010
84,108
37,908
113
Maryland
Florida Department of Environmental Protection... officials have been ordered not to use the term "climate change" or "global warming" in any official communications, emails, or reports, according to former DEP employees, consultants, volunteers and records obtained by the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting.

The policy goes beyond semantics and has affected reports, educational efforts and public policy in a department with about 3,200 employees and $1.4 billion budget.


Miami Herald
 
Originally posted by swagsurfer02:
Climate change should've been banned years ago, how could we have been so obtuse to allow it!
Posted from Rivals Mobile
North Carolina did that a few years ago.

Actually, if I remember correctly, they passed legislation saying something like the state cannot use climate change science when planning or preparing for beach erosion and similar things. No projections involving more extreme weather or increased flooding and such.

Pretty dumb, don't you think? I never knew that ostriches could run for political office in NC and FL. And be elected!
 
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
 
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming. This will accelerate polar ice cap melting, which is already proceeding at an alarming rate. Sh#% is getting real very fast. With this methane release, global warming will probably become a crisis in our lifetimes rather than our children's lifetimes.

I am starting to feel like we need to let Ebola and ISIS take their natural courses. Too many people. If people keep putting their heads in the sand, I fear for the human race.
 
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming. This will accelerate polar ice cap melting, which is already proceeding at an alarming rate. Sh#% is getting real very fast. With this methane release, global warming will probably become a crisis in our lifetimes rather than our children's lifetimes.

I am starting to feel like we need to let Ebola and ISIS take their natural courses. Too many people. If people keep putting their heads in the sand, I fear for the human race.
Take those mood elevators, everything will be fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lucas80
Originally posted by naturalmwa:

I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything.
The PC revolution started decades ago.
 
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming. This will accelerate polar ice cap melting, which is already proceeding at an alarming rate. Sh#% is getting real very fast. With this methane release, global warming will probably become a crisis in our lifetimes rather than our children's lifetimes.

I am starting to feel like we need to let Ebola and ISIS take their natural courses. Too many people. If people keep putting their heads in the sand, I fear for the human race.
laugh.r191677.gif
 
I hear next the conservatives plan to ban young black males. The white man's problem solved!
 
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming. This will accelerate polar ice cap melting, which is already proceeding at an alarming rate. Sh#% is getting real very fast. With this methane release, global warming will probably become a crisis in our lifetimes rather than our children's lifetimes.

I am starting to feel like we need to let Ebola and ISIS take their natural courses. Too many people. If people keep putting their heads in the sand, I fear for the human race.
I share your fears for sooner-than-expected major and wide-spread climate-related disasters. I disagree about Ebola and ISIS. I assume you were being darkly facetious. But just in case you weren't, let me point out that the victims of Ebola and ISIS don't deserve their fates. If Ebola and ISIS were preferentially taking out the exploiters and their denier lemmings, then I could get on board.
 
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming. This will accelerate polar ice cap melting, which is already proceeding at an alarming rate. Sh#% is getting real very fast. With this methane release, global warming will probably become a crisis in our lifetimes rather than our children's lifetimes.

I am starting to feel like we need to let Ebola and ISIS take their natural courses. Too many people. If people keep putting their heads in the sand, I fear for the human race.
Why fear for the human race?

If humans destroy their habitat and thus exterminate themselves, why should anybody worry about it? The human race deserves what it gets, nyet? And why should anybody regret the disappearance of such a race, anyway?

Let's get back to the OP's point, which seems to be that the phraseology used by department reports in Florida will bring about the end of the world.
 
Of course I was being a bit dark, but the ultimate answer to our problems is to reduce the birth rate. We are not on a sustainable course. Those that think this won't be a disaster of epic proportions if we don't get ahead of this are delusional. Methane in the atmosphere will accelerate global warming much more rapidly than CO2, which will cause a greater release of methane. I am afraid we may be too late to intervene.
 
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
 
Originally posted by jscott78:
I hear next the conservatives plan to ban young black males. The white man's problem solved!
There are some 'conservatives' who definitely wouldn't mind seeing us gone. There are also a lot of reasonable people who want the behavioral problems we have gone.

You act like a victim, you're going to treated like one. You act like a criminal, you're going to be brought down like a criminal. The black youth in this country make it very difficult for people to have sympathy for the problems they cause themselves.

Look at Ferguson for proof. That was a shameful display, despite what you think about the decision made in that ordeal. Yeah, let's just burn down stuff. That makes everything all better.
 
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Yup. White House did the same thing with "terrorism" a while back. "Man made disasters" are what they were changes to, I believe. Boom! No more terrorism!
 
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'm not sure I do get it. How would any nation go about banning imperialism domestically? Imperialism is an external action, banning it within your own borders would be pointless, maybe even rhetorically impossible.

(You did understand that my first post was in jest I assume? One has to check around here.)
 
Originally posted by naturalmwa:


Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:

Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'm not sure I do get it. How would any nation go about banning imperialism domestically? Imperialism is an external action, banning it within your own borders would be pointless, maybe even rhetorically impossible.

(You did understand that my first post was in jest I assume? One has to check around here.)
Yes, this wasn't a swipe at you believe it or not. I was more or less adding to what you said. The Parser comment was just for fun, though he did actually say that at one time.
 
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by naturalmwa:


Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:

Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant.  Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist.  Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything.  Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.  
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'm not sure I do get it.  How would any nation go about banning imperialism domestically?  Imperialism is an external action, banning it within your own borders would be pointless, maybe even rhetorically impossible.  

(You did understand that my first post was in jest I assume ?  One has to check around here.)
Yes, this wasn't a swipe at you believe it or not. I was more or less adding to what you said. The Parser comment was just for fun, though he did actually say that at one time.

He basically doubled down on that in this thread. He's ok if "ISIS and Ebola kills the exploiters AND the lemmings that follow them".

Come to think of it, we should have him tackle immigration and the war on drugs. If you kill all employers/illegal workers and dealers/drug users....I'd say problem solved, no?

WWJD for dictator!

Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by swagsurfer02:
Climate change should've been banned years ago, how could we have been so obtuse to allow it!
Posted from Rivals Mobile
North Carolina did that a few years ago.

Actually, if I remember correctly, they passed legislation saying something like the state cannot use climate change science when planning or preparing for beach erosion and similar things. No projections involving more extreme weather or increased flooding and such.

Pretty dumb, don't you think? I never knew that ostriches could run for political office in NC and FL. And be elected!
I partially agree with this.

To take an all (totally buy into the projections) or none (don't consider them at all) approach seems to be equally foolhardy.

It's about probabilities and risk management - you NEED to take them into account, even if you lower the projections and probabilities to be more in line with the entire body of evidence so far.
 
Originally posted by DanHawkPella:

Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:

Originally posted by swagsurfer02:
Climate change should've been banned years ago, how could we have been so obtuse to allow it!

Posted from Rivals Mobile
North Carolina did that a few years ago.

Actually, if I remember correctly, they passed legislation saying something like the state cannot use climate change science when planning or preparing for beach erosion and similar things. No projections involving more extreme weather or increased flooding and such.

Pretty dumb, don't you think? I never knew that ostriches could run for political office in NC and FL. And be elected!
I partially agree with this.

To take an all (totally buy into the projections) or none (don't consider them at all) approach seems to be equally foolhardy.

It's about probabilities and risk management - you NEED to take them into account, even if you lower the projections and probabilities to be more in line with the entire body of evidence so far.
Wisest post in the thread so far.
 
Originally posted by YellowSnow51:

Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Yup. White House did the same thing with "terrorism" a while back. "Man made disasters" are what they were changes to, I believe. Boom! No more terrorism!
The White House is infamous for this type of crap.
 
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming.
This is absolutely correct. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a trilogy about warming up Mars. Methane was the primary substance used. This is also why there are so many advocating for a more vegetable driven menu. Animals are the cause of a lot of methane, especially cows.
 
Originally posted by hawkitd:

Originally posted by YellowSnow51:

Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Yup. White House did the same thing with "terrorism" a while back. "Man made disasters" are what they were changes to, I believe. Boom! No more terrorism!
The White House is infamous for this type of crap.
Don't forget "workplace violence." And "outrageous video"
 
Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming. This will accelerate polar ice cap melting, which is already proceeding at an alarming rate. Sh#% is getting real very fast. With this methane release, global warming will probably become a crisis in our lifetimes rather than our children's lifetimes.

I am starting to feel like we need to let Ebola and ISIS take their natural courses. Too many people. If people keep putting their heads in the sand, I fear for the human race.
I share your fears for sooner-than-expected major and wide-spread climate-related disasters. I disagree about Ebola and ISIS. I assume you were being darkly facetious. But just in case you weren't, let me point out that the victims of Ebola and ISIS don't deserve their fates. If Ebola and ISIS were preferentially taking out the exploiters and their denier lemmings, then I could get on board.
Got em! Bit hook line and sinker. Good job HawkMD.
 
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'd appreciate you not misrepresenting my position. Unlike a lot of things that get discussed here, this is not a joking matter.
 
Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'd appreciate you not misrepresenting my position. Unlike a lot of things that get discussed here, this is not a joking matter.
Actually, it definitely is a joking matter. Not necessarily the apocalyptic vision, but the idea that banning a phrase in a government publication is something worthy of serious concern. Climate change may well be a very serious matter, but the state order is a laugher.
 
Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'd appreciate you not misrepresenting my position. Unlike a lot of things that get discussed here, this is not a joking matter.
Actually, it definitely is a joking matter. Not necessarily the apocalyptic vision, but the idea that banning a phrase in a government publication is something worthy of serious concern. Climate change may well be a very serious matter, but the state order is a laugher.
 
Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by naturalmwa:
I think this is brilliant. Think of all the problems we could solve if we just deny they exist. Lets scrub all dictionaries of words with negative meanings and make it a crime to ever complain about anything. Maybe some mood elevators should be put in the water supply.
Now if DC can do a nationwide ban on Imperialism.......well, you get it.

Hey this is no more extreme than Parser wanting people put to death for not agreeing with those words.
I'd appreciate you not misrepresenting my position. Unlike a lot of things that get discussed here, this is not a joking matter.
Actually, it definitely is a joking matter. Not necessarily the apocalyptic vision, but the idea that banning a phrase in a government publication is something worthy of serious concern. Climate change may well be a very serious matter, but the state order is a laugher.
I agree. But it's a dangerous laugher to the extent that it discourages needed discussion and action.
 
Originally posted by BrentJDiekman:
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming.
This is absolutely correct. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a trilogy about warming up Mars. Methane was the primary substance used. This is also why there are so many advocating for a more vegetable driven menu. Animals are the cause of a lot of methane, especially cows.
Unfortunately, the relatively small amount of global warming that we have seen is already accelerating the release of methane from permafrost and subsea methane calthrate deposits, especially in and near the arctic ocean. While the scientific consensus leans against the fear that this positive feedback cycle will produce runaway global warming in our lifetimes, the effect will produce worse and earlier outcomes than projected in the deliberately conservative IPCC reports. The accelerating release of methane is one of the main reasons why every IPCC update projects worse outcomes than the previous one.
 
Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by BrentJDiekman:
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming.
This is absolutely correct. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a trilogy about warming up Mars. Methane was the primary substance used. This is also why there are so many advocating for a more vegetable driven menu. Animals are the cause of a lot of methane, especially cows.
Unfortunately, the relatively small amount of global warming that we have seen is already accelerating the release of methane from permafrost and subsea methane calthrate deposits, especially in and near the arctic ocean. While the scientific consensus leans against the fear that this positive feedback cycle will produce runaway global warming in our lifetimes, the effect will produce worse and earlier outcomes than projected in the deliberately conservative IPCC reports. The accelerating release of methane is one of the main reasons why every IPCC update projects worse outcomes than the previous one.
Worse, or just different?
 
I think we need a "potential body count" to gain the interest of the people. All this science is boring and divisive.

Ironically, I think they need to report this like they do the weather forecast. Nobody cares if the weather report is wrong, they still follow it anyway.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by BrentJDiekman:
Originally posted by HawkMD:
In a few years, Florida may be irrelevant. They may be under water. I did not see anyone posting on it, but it has been recently noted that there are numerous depressions in the ground from methane explosions in Siberia. The methane is being released into the atmosphere from the melting permafrost. Methane is like CO2 on steroids for causing global warming.
This is absolutely correct. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a trilogy about warming up Mars. Methane was the primary substance used. This is also why there are so many advocating for a more vegetable driven menu. Animals are the cause of a lot of methane, especially cows.
Unfortunately, the relatively small amount of global warming that we have seen is already accelerating the release of methane from permafrost and subsea methane calthrate deposits, especially in and near the arctic ocean. While the scientific consensus leans against the fear that this positive feedback cycle will produce runaway global warming in our lifetimes, the effect will produce worse and earlier outcomes than projected in the deliberately conservative IPCC reports. The accelerating release of methane is one of the main reasons why every IPCC update projects worse outcomes than the previous one.
Worse, or just different?
Worse.
 
Originally posted by KennyPowers_96:

I think we need a "potential body count" to gain the interest of the people.
That's a really good point. A quick googling turns up some interesting results but I didn't see anything that looked at it quite like that or looked at all the ways people could die from global warming.

So, for example, Scientific American tells us this:

The World Health Organization predicts that an additional 250,000 people will die annually between 2030 and 2050 from conditions caused or exacerbated by climate change, the Geneva-based agency reported yesterday in an update of climate mortality estimates.

But the causes of sickness and death will shift over that period as child deaths from malnutrition and diarrheal disease decline across much of the world, while mortality rises from things like mosquito-borne malaria, heat exposure and other conditions, especially in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

"Overall, climate change is projected to have substantial adverse impacts on future mortality, even considering only a subset of the expected health effects," the agency said in its latest "Quantitative Risk Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Selected Causes of Death." And those impacts are expected to be felt even "even under optimistic scenarios of future socioeconomic development."


Meanwhile Reuters tells us this:

LONDON, Sept 26 (Reuters) - More than 100 million people will die and the global economy will miss out on as much as 3.2 percent of its potential output annually by 2030 if the world fails to tackle climate change, a report commissioned by 20 governments said on Wednesday.

As global average temperatures rise due to greenhouse gas emissions, the effects on the planet, such as melting ice caps, extreme weather, drought and rising sea levels, will threaten populations and livelihoods, said the report conducted by humanitarian organisation DARA.


Elsewhere, we have already seen a couple of Pentagon reports predicting food and water wars in response to climate changes plus massive population shifts causing even more conflict. We are talking about potentially billions of people having to move and, in turn, forcing others to move and competing for dwindling resources. But I haven't seen focused numbers.

And that doesn't even take into account the likely emergence and spread of new disease agents - potential pandemics - and the spread of formerly cold-limited pestilence with serious impacts on food supplies, water safety, and parasitic infections among humans.
 
Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by KennyPowers_96:

I think we need a "potential body count" to gain the interest of the people.
That's a really good point. A quick googling turns up some interesting results but I didn't see anything that looked at it quite like that or looked at all the ways people could die from global warming.

So, for example, Scientific American tells us this:

The World Health Organization predicts that an additional 250,000 people will die annually between 2030 and 2050 from conditions caused or exacerbated by climate change, the Geneva-based agency reported yesterday in an update of climate mortality estimates.

But the causes of sickness and death will shift over that period as child deaths from malnutrition and diarrheal disease decline across much of the world, while mortality rises from things like mosquito-borne malaria, heat exposure and other conditions, especially in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

"Overall, climate change is projected to have substantial adverse impacts on future mortality, even considering only a subset of the expected health effects," the agency said in its latest "Quantitative Risk Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Selected Causes of Death." And those impacts are expected to be felt even "even under optimistic scenarios of future socioeconomic development."


Meanwhile Reuters tells us this:

LONDON, Sept 26 (Reuters) - More than 100 million people will die and the global economy will miss out on as much as 3.2 percent of its potential output annually by 2030 if the world fails to tackle climate change, a report commissioned by 20 governments said on Wednesday.

As global average temperatures rise due to greenhouse gas emissions, the effects on the planet, such as melting ice caps, extreme weather, drought and rising sea levels, will threaten populations and livelihoods, said the report conducted by humanitarian organisation DARA.


Elsewhere, we have already seen a couple of Pentagon reports predicting food and water wars in response to climate changes plus massive population shifts causing even more conflict. We are talking about potentially billions of people having to move and, in turn, forcing others to move and competing for dwindling resources. But I haven't seen focused numbers.

And that doesn't even take into account the likely emergence and spread of new disease agents - potential pandemics - and the spread of formerly cold-limited pestilence with serious impacts on food supplies, water safety, and parasitic infections among humans.
Thats a pretty big difference between those two studies. 250K is sort of a rounding error on world population, but 100 million, now thats real numbers. Should we split the difference or is there a better way to understand this numbers?
 
Originally posted by naturalmwa:

Originally posted by What Would Jesus Do?:
Originally posted by KennyPowers_96:

I think we need a "potential body count" to gain the interest of the people.
That's a really good point. A quick googling turns up some interesting results but I didn't see anything that looked at it quite like that or looked at all the ways people could die from global warming.

So, for example, Scientific American tells us this:

The World Health Organization predicts that an additional 250,000 people will die annually between 2030 and 2050 from conditions caused or exacerbated by climate change, the Geneva-based agency reported yesterday in an update of climate mortality estimates.

But the causes of sickness and death will shift over that period as child deaths from malnutrition and diarrheal disease decline across much of the world, while mortality rises from things like mosquito-borne malaria, heat exposure and other conditions, especially in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

"Overall, climate change is projected to have substantial adverse impacts on future mortality, even considering only a subset of the expected health effects," the agency said in its latest "Quantitative Risk Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Selected Causes of Death." And those impacts are expected to be felt even "even under optimistic scenarios of future socioeconomic development."


Meanwhile Reuters tells us this:

LONDON, Sept 26 (Reuters) - More than 100 million people will die and the global economy will miss out on as much as 3.2 percent of its potential output annually by 2030 if the world fails to tackle climate change, a report commissioned by 20 governments said on Wednesday.

As global average temperatures rise due to greenhouse gas emissions, the effects on the planet, such as melting ice caps, extreme weather, drought and rising sea levels, will threaten populations and livelihoods, said the report conducted by humanitarian organisation DARA.


Elsewhere, we have already seen a couple of Pentagon reports predicting food and water wars in response to climate changes plus massive population shifts causing even more conflict. We are talking about potentially billions of people having to move and, in turn, forcing others to move and competing for dwindling resources. But I haven't seen focused numbers.

And that doesn't even take into account the likely emergence and spread of new disease agents - potential pandemics - and the spread of formerly cold-limited pestilence with serious impacts on food supplies, water safety, and parasitic infections among humans.
Thats a pretty big difference between those two studies. 250K is sort of a rounding error on world population, but 100 million, now thats real numbers. Should we split the difference or is there a better way to understand this numbers?
Well that's the thing - they aren't talking about the same deaths. It's not one or the other, it's both - and more. You have to add up all the projections for the different ways people will die as a result of global warming. And, of course, that's hard to do because it's hard to project, for example, how many wars will break out over water, or food, or land for displaced people to move to.

That last one has me very concerned. Consider Syria. A country of under 20 million and more than half of them are now displaced from their homes, many in refugee camps in various other nations. No, that's not global warming, but it's a clue to what kind of population mess we could face if/when millions (billions?) have to flee flooding and devastating storms in heavily-populated coastal areas.

And where does the food come from when America's breadbasket and other fertile regions are producing substantially less?

And so on.

Add it up. You have to be a special kind of person to pretend this isn't extremely serious.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT