Pants-of-dog wrote:More people died of cold than heat in past 20 years
Proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong.
You are just sad, now.
but climate change is shifting the balance. More than 5 million people die each year globally because of excessively hot or cold conditions, a 20-year study has found – and heat-related deaths are on the rise.
Which means the world will be at the right temperature when it is 50-50. So we have a ways to go before rising temperatures can be considered more of a threat than stable temperature.
Thank you for proving me right and yourself humiliatingly
It’s prompted calls for better housing insulation and more solar-powered air conditioning, as well as warnings that climate change will increase temperature-linked deaths in the future.
If by "climate change" you mean the earth getting cooler. Because clearly, if the earth gets warmer while the ratio is so wildly unbalanced, it will mean fewer
overall temperature-related deaths. Proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong.
The study found more people had died of cold than heat over the two-decade period. But heat-related deaths were increasing, while cold-linked deaths were dropping.
Which is good, as there are so many more of the latter.
Monash University’s Prof Yuming Guo, one of the study’s lead researchers, said this trend would continue because of climate change, and total mortality rates may go up.
Right: if climate changes for the colder, proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong again, total temperature-related mortality rates may indeed go up.
“In the future, cold-related mortality should continue to decrease, but because the heat-related mortality will continue to increase, that means there will be a break point,” Guo said.
Right. Which we haven't reached yet and are not close to, proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong again.
He said in Europe there had already been an overall increase in the rate of deaths associated with temperatures.
Because it got colder, and anti-fossil-fuel religious kooks stopped people from getting access to the fossil fuels they needed to survive. Anti-fossil-fuel religious kooks don't seem to mind eviscerating millions of human sacrifices on the altar of their anti-human deity every year.
“If we don’t take any action to mitigate climate change … more deaths will be caused.”
But even more will be caused if we stop climate change before the 50-50 break point is reached. So you are basically advocating the murders of millions of people every year -- human sacrifices laid on the altar of your ridiculous anti-CO2 religion. Just think: a Holocaust of excess deaths every couple of years purely because of YOUR absurd and disingenuous anti-science trash.
How will you apologize for murdering millions?
Note that all the bolded phrases indicate that heat related deaths are rising steadily from climate change,
But not as fast as the cold-related ones are falling, proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong again.
which directly contradict the claim that we have nothing to worry about in terms of climate change caused mortality.
You mean the claim that is an outright fabrication on your part? That claim? No one here has claimed that climate changing for the colder would not increase mortality.
It is also important to note that most deaths from cold are in one of the poorest regions of Earth, where there is no central heating and biomass is one of the main fuel sources.
And your anti-fossil-fuel kook religion wants to stop them from getting access to fossil fuels, so that they will keep dying by the millions from cold. Is a Holocaust every couple of years enough to satisfy you?
The heat deaths, on the other hand, occur mostly in industrialised countries with air conditioning.
No, that's of course just another baldly false claim from you. Eastern European countries do NOT generally have A/C -- they can't afford it -- and your plan is to make it even less affordable by artificially restricting the supply of energy. So your whole kook religion revolves around human sacrifice: "Anti-fossil-fuel nonscience, in its majestic equality, sacrifices millions of poor people who can't get access to fossil fuels to keep warm, just as it sacrifices thousands of somewhat less poor people by depriving them of access to fossil-fueled electric power to keep cool."
-- Truth To Power (with apologies to Anatole France)
From the link to the first study in your article source:
Overall, 7·17% (95% CI 5·81–8·50) of deaths registered in the observational period were attributed to non-optimal temperatures, cold being more harmful than heat by a factor of ten (6·51% [95% CI 5·14–7·80] vs 0·65% [0·40–0·89]), and with large regional differences across countries—eg, ranging from 4·85% (95% CI 3·75–6·00) in Germany to 9·87% (8·53–11·19) in Italy. The projection of temperature anomalies by RCP scenario depicts a progressive increase in temperatures, more exacerbated in the high-emission scenario RCP8.5 (4·54°C by 2070–2099) than in RCP6.0 (2·89°C) and RCP2.6 (1·67°C). This increase in temperatures was transformed into attributable fraction. Projections consistently indicated that the increase in heat attributable fraction will start to exceed the reduction of cold attributable fraction in the second half of the 21st century, especially in the Mediterranean and in the higher emission scenarios. The comparison between scenarios highlighted the important role of mitigation, given that the total attributable fraction will only remain stable in RCP2.6, whereas the total attributable fraction will rapidly start to increase in RCP6.0 by the end of the century and in RCP8.5 already by the middle of the century.
So this study corroborates the other study that also shows that heat related deaths are on the rise due to climate change,
But not as fast as cold-related deaths are declining. So warming climate will continue to be a positive benefit until the balance point is reached some decades in the future (assuming CO2 controls global temperature, which it does not). Proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong again.
and that the number of heat deaths will be higher than the reduction of deaths due to less cold.
No. Not "will." That is just another false claim from you. Would
if there were any plausible reason to believe that the earth will get several degrees hotter due to fossil fuel consumption, which there isn't.
So all of your evidence shows that if we want to avoid temperature related deaths, then we should deal with climate change.
By making sure the earth doesn't get any colder. Right.
Thanks for the info!
So we agree that during the last few years in Canada (one of the coldest countries on Earth), your claim is incorrect and more people died from cold.
No, my claim is objectively correct
because NINE TIMES
as many people died from cold as from heat worldwide, and I will thank you to remember it.