Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
The climate alarmist cabal is all atwitter about a fabricated “study” that makes propaganda claims that “climate change” is responsible for 37% of global heat deaths since 1991 as published in numerous climate alarmism hyped “news-papers” like the L A Times.
WUWT has a superb article debunking this contrived study claim by Pasi Autio documenting the atrocious modeling schemes that have been used to manufacture these phony heat rate death claims.
In summary the WUWT article reveals in detail the following modeling absurdities with respect to how this phony heat related deaths outcome was concocted.
“Study claims that heat-related deaths have increased by an average of 37.0% on 732 locations in 43 countries covered. 37.0% increase between 1991 and 2018.
The make such claim you would need to establish the following:
- Extreme temperatures have indeed increased on study locations
- Temperature increase during the study period is not due to other factors such as urban heat island effect
- Deaths have really increased during high-heat periods
- The increase of deaths is not due to increase of population
- The increase of deaths is not due to population average age being higher
- No other factors have an effect on deaths such as natural disasters”
“Date, deaths and temperature. The basic assumption seems to be that high temperature directly affects the death rate. Hold on! Where is the population data or age distribution data? Such details seem to be considered as trivial information, which is not needed for state-of-art analysis.”
“Really straightforward: Just assess the temperature – death-rate relationship and then consider how much the temperature has increased by using Climate Models. End-result is the percentage of deaths caused by Climate Change.”
“The methods used in A. M. Vicedo-Cabrera et all 2021 are seriously flawed causing results and conclusion to be invalid.
This rebuttal covered just two countries (Finland and Spain), but already this proves that:
- There is no increased heat-caused mortality due to any reason and if there is no increase in mortality overall it is impossible for Climate Change to have any effect
- All increases are due to flawed methods, which rely on Climate Models instead of real mortality data
- Even then the study fails to mention any other factors affecting the mortality such as population aging and increase
- Adaptation to excess heat is ongoing everywhere automatically when the increasing income allows it”
The reliance by this badly flawed heat related “study” being based upon “Climate Models instead of real mortality data” clearly establishes the claimed outcomes as just conjecture and speculation.
The UN IPCC established 20 years ago in its AR3 Climate Review report that climate models cannot be used to establish future climate states meaning that running some hypothetical climate model from 1991 to 2018 and claiming that such a scheme can accurately distinguish the difference between actual measured temperatures with and without alleged man-made climate change variables is scientifically unsupported as highlighted below.
The AR3 report in Section 14.2.2.2 noted:
“In sum, a strategy must recognize what is possible. In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible. The most we can expect to achieve is the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by generation of ensembles model solutions.”
Additionally, the UN IPCC AR5 Climate report established that its climate model scenarios used to evaluate asserted man-made influences on climate outcomes are based not on any established probabilities associated with alleged climate change variables but are only characterized as being “plausible” and “illustrative” meaning more conjecture and speculation as noted below from the AR5 Report Technical Summary Chapter.
“The scenarios should be considered plausible and illustrative, and do not have probabilities attached to them.” (12.3.1; Box1.1)
Data addressing average number of global deaths by decade associated with all manner of global natural disasters including extreme temperatures is provided below along with an explanation of the significant decline in these deaths from 1900 to 2015.
“In the chart we show global deaths from natural disasters since 1900, but rather than reporting annual deaths, we show the annual average by decade. The data for this chart can be found in the table presented here.
As we see, over the course of the 20th century there was a significant decline in global deaths from natural disasters. In the early 1900s, the annual average was often in the range of 400,000 to 500,000 deaths. In the second half of the century and into the early 2000s, we have seen a significant decline to less than 100,000 – at least five times lower than these peaks.
This decline is even more impressive when we consider the rate of population growth over this period. When we correct for population – showing this data in terms of death rates (measured per 100,000 people) – then we see a more than 10-fold decline over the past century. This chart can be viewed here, with the data found in table form here.”
Extreme temperature related global deaths are shown below for the period 1991 through 2019.
The extreme peaks of 2003 and 2010 reflect the record heat period in Europe in the summer of 2003 where 66,000 deaths occurred and Russia in the summer of 2010 where 55,000 deaths occurred.
This data is also displayed in a bubble chart where the size of the bubble represents the total death count per year for each type of disaster as shown below.
The extreme temperature total death bubbles are shown for the peak years of 2003 and 2010 as 74,698 and 57,188 respectively.
These natural disaster data total number of death graphs do not reflect the huge growth of global population that has occurred during 1900 to 2019 period as shown below.
The graph below presents natural disaster death rates that account for the significant impact of the huge population growth over this period.
As shown in this graph the extreme temperature global death rate properly reflecting population growth declines from 1.2 deaths per 100,000 population in 2003 to 0.825 deaths per 100,000 in 2010 to 0.007 deaths per 100,000 in 2016 and remains at the level through 2018.
Actual recorded global death rates from extreme temperature have decline significantly since 2003 and do not support the scientifically flawed climate model driven claims that global climate change is contributing to increased global death rates from extreme temperatures. The hyped heat related death “study” is a product of alarmist driven incompetent climate science.
One cannot use the temperature at weather stations to compare with heat deaths. Sick people are often indoors, at different temperature. In many places, there are cooling fans, water devices for evaporative cooling of the sick and, importantly, air conditioning. These are just some of the covariants that need to be quantified and applied to the relation between temperature and deaths. Geoff S
It would be one thing if they suggested there might be a relationship- but to declare as fact is nuts. They’re hoping the readers are too stupid to understand how stupid it is.
(Snipped, Too far off topic) SUNMOD
(Snipped the off topic Video) SUNMOD
uh oh- at 6:50 he says we only have 5-10 years and the results may not be reversible! oooooo!
uh, but then he says this was said by an Exon scientist in the ’70s!
yet, of course, no catastrophe happened
oh, then he says we’re in the danger zone- a war, blah, blah
now we must find the tactics of the energy
oh, it’s a shape shipping liavathon
uh…. then he mentions the gun lobby- then the tobacco industry
oooo then the Koch brothers….
billions spent on a dissinformation campaign— uh, who got the billions? Anthony Watts?
we’re not witnessing the devastating results- seen on TV! I guess that proves it- sciency!
uh… right wing plutocrats….
outright denial of climate change
shiffted to a softer campaign— a new climate war
the enemy has managed a deflection campaign, blah, blah
‘enough for now
OK, fair enough that my messages were removed- but the one that wasn’t removed- it makes no sense if you don’t know what it’s about- it’s about a Youtube video about our good buddy Mickey Mann’s new book- I wrote the above while listening to it- and there is a review of the book on the Skeptical Climate web site- but enough for now- and sorry for the off topic discussion- maybe there should be an open thread for such purposes- I have sent such off topic items to the “Send News Tip” but they were ignored- but, I won’t do it again— my bad!
The point in these so-called “studies” is not to do careful science. The point is to get published in the media world and gain lots of attention and additional funding from global warmist monges, and to convince stupid people that this is science and therefore to park their brains on the side of the road instead of engaging in actual thoughtful consideration.
They don’t care that people like us debunk their studies.
The point of all propaganda is never to survive thoughtful scrutiny.
The point of all propaganda – no matter who the propagandist is, or what they’re flogging – is simply to get into people’s heads. Propagandists for and against the theory of AGM do this all the time, just as do the propagandists of right and left, of Republican and Democrat, of Russian and Chinese and North Korean and British and American.
“The point in these so-called “studies” is not to do careful science. The point is to get published in the media world and gain lots of attention and additional funding from global warmist monges, and to convince stupid people that this is science and therefore to park their brains on the side of the road instead of engaging in actual thoughtful consideration.”
Yes, I must have seen this ’37 percent” hype in a dozen different stories over the last few days.
Many people will believe this propaganda because they don’t have the benefit of a WUWT to sort all the lies out.
It is not incompetence when it is done knowingly and with intent.
It’s malicious
malicious modelling.
I believe Feynman said something akin to – computer modelling eventually becomes a game.
The title of our 2015 paper says all that needs to be said:
COLD WEATHER KILLS 20 TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE AS HOT WEATHER
by Joseph d’Aleo and Allan MacRae, September 4, 2015
https://friendsofsciencecalgary.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/cold-weather-kills-macrae-daleo-4sept2015-final.pdf
That is why my wife and I moved from NH to Florida back in 2016 – in order to escape all that “terrible global warming” up north. And we did it AFTER, with a B.S. in physics, I had spent ten years reading arguments on both sides of the issue and studying the science and history of climate change!
Good move Peter – I’m getting old and hate the cold.,
Over the course of history, the most honest statements of fact are when people “vote with their feet”- that is, they move to a better place for themselves and their families.
Great paper. I remember it well and have cited it innumerable times. Needless to say it shocks many people but less so as human physiology is understood. Hypothermia can happen all year round, to anyone. Hyperthermia is restricted to a few special conditions and often already weakened people.
In 2015 the death count from extreme heat in Pakistan was reportedly about 700. I believe these deaths occurred during the festival of Ramadan, which started on June 18.
During Ramadan, Muslims are not to eat any food NOR DRINK ANYTHING AT ALL INCLUDING WATER FROM SUN-UP TO SUN-DOWN – THAT IS THE RULE!
Is it any wonder that people died from heat, combined with extreme dehydration? No
surprise there.
Temperatures in Pakistan reportedly reached 45C, but I have experienced over 50C in Luxor Egypt and we were fine.
We did drink a lot of fluids though – mostly a skunky Egyptian beer misnamed Stella – nothing like the excellent Belgian pilsner of the same name.
.
Your examples make your point better than statistics.
I’m a great fan of Finnish Sauna (I have my own) and they’re generally kept at 80 to 110 °C. To my recollection I haven’t died so far. And yes … you can cook a meal in one.
Note: beer is unimaginably good after a sauna (skunky or not).
“On Skunky Beer, Luxor, and A Streetcar named Desire”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/01/over-reliance-on-computer-models-causes-a-forecast-for-extreme-heat-to-be-retracted/#comment-2419086
Many pundits have been describing the recently warm spell, which is nothing special, as “as hot as hell”.
I’ve been to Luxor in southern Egypt in July, and it was very hot (a real ~50C), but that was only as hot as Heck.
Hell, that place where warmist fraudsters and scam artists will ultimately reside, is considerably hotter.
We visited the remarkable temples and tombs of Luxor and area in the very early mornings, and returned to our hotel by noon to sit in the pool and drink quantities of a skunky Egyptian beer, misnamed Stella.
One very large fellow luxuriated in the pool like a basking hippo, and loudly bellowed “STELLA!”, like Brando in “A Streetcar Named Desire” every time he wanted a cold one. It was very funny, at least the first few times. You had to be there…
For some reason, now I’ve got this merry picture of an older Marlon Brando bobbing about in a pool yelling for “STELLA!” with Noel Coward belting out; “Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noon day sun” in his best music hall style … a scene right out of Monty Python.
Looks like you were living the dream … but the illustration is spot on, except for extremely exigent circumstances humans have managed to cool off in warm places much easier than they can warm up in the cold. There was no such thing as air conditioning when I was a kid and we seemed to manage.
Just like the model T
Any colour you like as long as it is black
Propaganda based studies normally have lies in them, because they want to sell something that benefits them.
Gee, I wonder what percentage of the large blue blobs around 1930 under “Drought” were caused by the Stalin regime’s Holodomor famine?
First lesson in debunking BS studies is: correlation is not causality.
Second lesson: correlations are useless unless all potentially cause-related correlations are also considered and accounted for at the same time.
When it gets hot outside, people tend to go swimming. When more people go swimming, deaths due to drowning tend to increase. But hot weather does not cause drowning. Failure to swim causes drowning.
Just as when it get cold outside, it is more likely that roads will be covered with snow and/or ice. Therefore there will be more accidental road deaths due to loss of control. But cold weather does not cause loss of control – poor decision making (i.e., driving on slick roads) and poor driving skills cause loss of control accidents.
The bubble charts are particularly uninformative. How one distinguishes among “draught”, “flood”, “extreme weather” and “extreme temperature” is quite puzzling.
Extreme temperatures and health — European Environment Agency (europa.eu)
“In large parts of Europe, summertime temperature records, which are associated with prolonged heat waves, have increased substantially in recent decades. The summer of 2003 broke temperature records in large parts of western Europe; temperature records were again broken in different parts of Europe during the summers of 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2014 and 2015. The record warm summer of 2003 was an outstanding example of increased mortality during periods of extreme temperatures, with an estimated premature mortality of 70 000 people in Europe. The heat waves of the summer of 2015 caused more than 3 000 deaths in France alone”
In other words, there is actual evidence heat wave deaths in Europe have increased and the trend is likely to continue
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/06/the-gestalt-of-heat-waves/
Just because heat waves in Europe have happened, it is not proof that “the trend is likely to continue.” That is a subjective judgment on your part, with facts not in evidence.
Nonsense! Your limitless credulity is astounding.
Incredible really, you post links, but you don’t read the science just the propaganda. I guess this is why you don’t post links very often.
This is the study used in your EEA link:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)62114-0/fulltext#seccestitle120
Antonio Gasparrini et al., ‘Mortality Risk Attributable to High and Low Ambient Temperature: A Multi country Observational Study’, Lancet (London, England) 386, no. 9991 (25 July 2015).
This is what they found:
Our findings show that temperature is responsible for advancing a substantial fraction of deaths, corresponding to 7·71% of mortality in the selected countries within the study period. Most of this mortality burden was caused by days colder than the optimum temperature (7·29%), compared with days warmer than the optimum temperature (0·42%). Furthermore, most deaths were caused by exposure to moderately hot and cold temperatures, and the contribution of extreme days was comparatively low, despite increased RRs.
Despite the attention given to extreme weather events, most of the effect happened on moderately hot and moderately cold days, especially moderately cold days.
Thanks anyway for providing more proof of what everybody has been telling you, cold kills way more than heat.
Griff is also know as Barry Anthony. Barry is a fake account and says he is a electrical engineer and aerospace engineer as well as a army attack helicopter pilot. All of which he fabricated to try and impress people.😂 He also said he gets paid $300,000 per year for the wind turbines on his property in Spicewood Texas. Funny thing is spicewood doesn’t have any wind turbines.
Ha ha!
Once again, when Griff actually posts a link, it completely refutes its argument!
” … summertime temperature records, which are associated with prolonged heat waves … ” A subtle lie. Summer maximum temperatures are not increasing.
Yesterday you wrote the same nonsense and got answers proving you wrong. Why now ahain, you are wrong today as you were yesterday.
Griff (Barry Anthony) regurgitates his links everywhere and seem to expect a different result/reaction each time. If knew what repeating the same thing and expecting a different result is? It’s called insanity. And he have showcased it marvelously – I don’t think anybody could do it more effectively!
griff, thesame guys talking about a heat wave trend told us in February, we live 2021 in a drought year, but if I look outside and follow the rain radar, I should start singing
Now give us the death count Griff and lets compare them 🙂
One could easily make the argument that the implementation of green energy is going to increase heat and cold related deaths, or at the very least increase the risk. If you lose power for a week in a large portion of Texas in August, people are going to die.
This isn’t climate change, this is the sheer-stupidity in relying on unreliable power sources.
I wonder hey THAT isn’t in their report…
Very good. Only one thing left to do – name and shame the journal that claims to have peer reviewed this crud. That would be Nature Climate Change.
“Heat related deaths since 1991 propaganda study just alarmist climate science incompetence”
The rather large number of authors seem to be mostly medicos. The lead author is an epidemiologist.
In case anyone is interested to actually read the paper, it is here.
And me idiot follow the link, shame on me 😀 and you, providing that BS, thanks for nothing.
That’s the order page. Study itself is no available in free form.
And what about deaths from cold? Because “climate change” is all about extremes, right?
Always remember icy blasts are never unprecedented-
Antarctic polar blast could bring snow to Queensland (msn.com)
Just the heat waves get the- ‘Hottest 9.32am temp in April since XXXX’ treatment….take care of the old people…drink plenty of water…yada yada.
A Seth Borenstein story.
Stop reading when you see that