Lancet Report On Temperature-Related Deaths Contradicts Its Own Study
by Paul Homewood  9 hours ago 
 

Yes, it’s the annual fraudulent Lancet report on climate change! Via The Telegraph: [emphasis, links added]

New diseases are spreading, the hayfever season is starting earlier and even the hours in which it is possible to practise sports are changing.


The common denominator behind all these and other changes to human health is climate change.

A new report in the Lancet has found that warming temperatures in Europe have far-reaching impacts on health.

It tracks the links between climate change and health across the region, exploring 42 indicators.

https://climatechangedispatch.com/lancet-report-on-temperature-related-deaths-contradicts-its-own-study/

Liberal bluestate response. It is a crisis we really can't do much.

Fl Response.  “I would tell them, if you value your life, they probably shouldn’t do that in Polk County. Because the people of Polk County like guns, they have guns, I encourage them to own guns, and they’re going to be in their homes tonight with their guns loaded, and if you try to break into their homes to steal, to set fires, I’m highly recommending they blow you back out of the house with their guns.

So was Chicken Little!

Many of the ‘Climate Experts’ Surveyed by the Guardian in Recent Propaganda Blitz Turn Out to be Emotionally-Unstable Hysterics
BY BEN PILE 13 MAY 2024 7:00 AM

The Guardian last week published its survey of ‘climate experts’. The results are a predictable mush of fire-and-brimstone predictions and emotional incontinence. This stunt may have convinced those already aligned to the newspaper’s ideological agenda to redouble their characteristically shrill rhetoric, but encouraging scientists to speculate and emote about the future of the planet looks like an act of political desperation, not scientific communication.

For the purposes of creating this story, the Guardian’s Environment Editor Damian Carrington contacted 843 ‘lead authors’ of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s reports (IPCC) and 383 responded to his questions. The actual substance of the survey does not seem to have been published by the paper, but the main response Carrington wanted to get from his respondents was an estimate of how much global warming there will be by the end of the century. “World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5ºC target,” claims one headline. A graphic in the article shows the responses:


The obvious problem this raises is that such a wide range of views on the next three quarters of a century discredits the notion that the IPCC represents a ‘scientific consensus’ on climate change. The ‘consensus’ – the putative expression of agreement by the worlds ‘top climate scientists’ – is the lynchpin of the narrative, epitomised by the Guardian, that the climate debate is between scientists and denialists. “Seventy seven per cent of climate scientists expect a rise of at least 2.5ºC,” explains the chart. Well, yeah, but 23% of climate scientists do not. And a good number of those connected to the IPCC believe that there will be just 1.5 degrees of warming – a third less warming than is anticipated by their colleagues at the other end of the spectrum. Clearly, there is, or needs to be, a debate.

https://dailysceptic.org/2024/05/13/many-of-the-climate-experts-surveyed-by-the-guardian-in-recent-propaganda-blitz-turn-out-to-be-emotionally-unstable-hysterics/

Peppermint Patty strikes again.