-40 in North Dakota!

[RollingThunder]

Which is why we are still here in this thread - to laugh at you retards who have no concept of what the scientific method is.
HEY GOOBER, Science dun beez consensifying... "Settled Science" iz grant takers all agreeing to take grants...
ROFL
You're a complete cretin, but good for a laugh.

What degree's within climate do you have to disrespect the field with? Honestly questioning the stall of global temperature is one thing but throwing out hundreds of years of physics is quite another.

Actually throwing out well understood physics is a trait of the climatologists there matthew. Let's go with a simple one. AGW theory states that long wave radiation is bounced back down to the Earth and warms it up again. What needs to be warmed for that to work?

I'll give you a hint it's large and filled with water... that's right it's the oceans. Now, how deep into the oceans can the long wave radiation penetrate to warm them up? Here's another hint....MICRONS.

That's right bucko, your precious global warming weapon can penetrate mere microns into the very ocean it is supposed to warm. See how that works. We KNOW these things and you guys have been ignoring that simple rule of physics for decades.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Scientists understand quite well how that works. You don't, walleyed, in spite of your Dunning-Kruger Effect inspired belief that you are smarter and know more than all of those climate scientists. All you've got are the denier cult myths, misunderstandings and deliberate distortions of the science that you scraped off of some denier cult blog.

The shortwave radiation coming from the sun heats the oceans up to several hundred feet in depth. When the ocean waters are warmer than the air, as they tend to be on average around the planet, they emit some of that heat into the atmosphere as long wave infrared radiation. Some of that heat from the sun is also transferred horizontally or vertically by currents or into the atmosphere by evaporation. There is something that scientists refer to as the 'skin layer', approximately 1mm thick, at the ocean's surface, that is in direct contact with the atmosphere and from which the longwave radiation is emitted. This skin layer controls the ocean to atmosphere (or vice-versa when the air is warmer than the water) heat transfer. Reducing the size of the temperature gradient through the skin layer reduces that flux. Therefore, when downdwelling long wave radiation from the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere strike the ocean surface, while it does only penetrate about one micron, it nevertheless is absorbed by and heats that very thin surface layer and thus reduces the flow of heat from the ocean beneath, causing more of the heat in the upper ocean to remain there to increase water temperatures. Scientists have discovered experimental evidence of this heat transfer mechanism by going out on the oceans and directly measuring the ocean skin temperatures and the upper ocean temperatures.

As usual, your understanding of physics is shallow and incomplete and largely based on the misinformation and pseudo-science that your denier cult blogs pass to you from the propagandists working for the fossil fuel industry.

 

[RollingThunder]

Which applies equally to warm weather. Which even when NOAA says a hot spell is not AGW related YOU IGNORE! Pot meet fucking kettle!

Warm and cold weather events come and go, usually in tune with the changing of the seasons. These weather events are an expression of the overall climate patterns but are not themselves equivalent to the climate. I have never said anything different. However, changes in one direction which is upward in the current situation, in the long term trend of temperature records for an area or the whole planet are indeed an indication of a changing, warming climate. A continuing pattern of rising temperatures, warming oceans, rising sea levels, melting ice caps & glaciers & and what was previously called permafrost, changing seasonal timing, etc., are, in fact, strong evidence of global warming, as the world scientific community has overwhelmingly affirmed.

Because you denier cult dimwits are always pointing at some unusually cold weather in one area, usually in the wintertime, and making the ignorant claim that it somehow 'disproves AGW', I might sometimes point to the fact that there are other places on the planet that are simultaneously unusually hot, just to give context to your retarded claims. This does not indicate that I am confusing weather with climate, as you do. I understand the difference between the two. You, on the other hand, are a bamboozled ignorant retard who has never demonstrated the slightest comprehension of that difference.

And under the permafrost are trees and other green things.

You're really getting delusional now, walleyed. Under the permafrost you often find partially decayed organic matter. There is nothing "green" there, except possibly some half frozen slime.

What does that tell you?

As always, it tells me that you're an ignorant denier cult retard who has no idea what you're talking about.

A thinking person would say hmmm, that means it was warmer then.

An actual "thinking person", which obviously is not you, would say: "warmer than" when exactly???

WHAT IS PERMAFROST?
THE INTERNATIONAL PERMAFROST ASSOCIATION

The thickness of permafrost varies from less than one meter to more than 1500 meters (4,900 feet). Most of the permafrost existing today formed during cold glacial periods, and has persisted through warmer interglacial periods, including the Holocene (last 10,000 years).

BTW how do you address the very real problem I enumerated above, namely your precious long wave radiation not being able to penetrate deeply enough into the oceans to warm them?

I already addressed that "very" imaginary "problem" by explaining the actual science involved and showing once again that you are a scientifically ignorant denier cult retard parroting the misinformation you dredge out the pseudo-scientific denier cult blogs.

 

[ScienceRocks]

-2f at Eugene Oregon airport last night...brrr.

-17 at my home last night. 40 degrees below normal.

wow,

-41 at horse range in eastern Oregon a few nights ago. Quite a few -20 to -30 temperature reported.

 

[westwall]

Warm and cold weather events come and go, usually in tune with the changing of the seasons. These weather events are an expression of the overall climate patterns but are not themselves equivalent to the climate. I have never said anything different. However, changes in one direction which is upward in the current situation, in the long term trend of temperature records for an area or the whole planet are indeed an indication of a changing, warming climate. A continuing pattern of rising temperatures, warming oceans, rising sea levels, melting ice caps & glaciers & and what was previously called permafrost, changing seasonal timing, etc., are, in fact, strong evidence of global warming, as the world scientific community has overwhelmingly affirmed.

Because you denier cult dimwits are always pointing at some unusually cold weather in one area, usually in the wintertime, and making the ignorant claim that it somehow 'disproves AGW', I might sometimes point to the fact that there are other places on the planet that are simultaneously unusually hot, just to give context to your retarded claims. This does not indicate that I am confusing weather with climate, as you do. I understand the difference between the two. You, on the other hand, are a bamboozled ignorant retard who has never demonstrated the slightest comprehension of that difference.

And under the permafrost are trees and other green things.

You're really getting delusional now, walleyed. Under the permafrost you often find partially decayed organic matter. There is nothing "green" there, except possibly some half frozen slime.




As always, it tells me that you're an ignorant denier cult retard who has no idea what you're talking about.

A thinking person would say hmmm, that means it was warmer then.

An actual "thinking person", which obviously is not you, would say: "warmer than" when exactly???

WHAT IS PERMAFROST?
THE INTERNATIONAL PERMAFROST ASSOCIATION

The thickness of permafrost varies from less than one meter to more than 1500 meters (4,900 feet). Most of the permafrost existing today formed during cold glacial periods, and has persisted through warmer interglacial periods, including the Holocene (last 10,000 years).

BTW how do you address the very real problem I enumerated above, namely your precious long wave radiation not being able to penetrate deeply enough into the oceans to warm them?

I already addressed that "very" imaginary "problem" by explaining the actual science involved and showing once again that you are a scientifically ignorant denier cult retard parroting the misinformation you dredge out the pseudo-scientific denier cult blogs.

Yes, permafrost is fairly young for the most part. I found this interesting... And I seem to recall them finding green plant under permafrost in the Alaska area. I could be wrong, but I think not.

From 1550 to 1580, the period of cooling known as the Little Ice Age hit Ellesmere Island, in extreme northern Nunavut, Canada. As temperatures plunged, most of the island was swallowed by the advance of glaciers. The vegetation that had blanketed the terrain—mostly mosses and lichens—was buried under dozens of feet of ice.

In recent years, the reverse has happened. As a result of climate change, glaciers around the world have retreated rapidly, and Ellesmere Island has been no exception. The island’s Teardrop Glacier has retreated more than 650 feet, revealing numerous clumps of blackened, seemingly dead vegetation such as mosses and lichens that had been frozen for centuries.

But some of the vegetation was in fact far from dead. A research team from the University of Alberta led by Catherine La Farge surveyed the area revealed by the retreat of Teardrop Glacier and noticed that some of the largely blackened plants, including several mosses, had small green stems and lateral branches growing from them, indicating that they were experiencing recent growth.


Plants Frozen Under a Glacier for 400 Years Can Come Back to Life | Surprising Science

 

[westwall]

What degree's within climate do you have to disrespect the field with? Honestly questioning the stall of global temperature is one thing but throwing out hundreds of years of physics is quite another.

Actually throwing out well understood physics is a trait of the climatologists there matthew. Let's go with a simple one. AGW theory states that long wave radiation is bounced back down to the Earth and warms it up again. What needs to be warmed for that to work?

I'll give you a hint it's large and filled with water... that's right it's the oceans. Now, how deep into the oceans can the long wave radiation penetrate to warm them up? Here's another hint....MICRONS.

That's right bucko, your precious global warming weapon can penetrate mere microns into the very ocean it is supposed to warm. See how that works. We KNOW these things and you guys have been ignoring that simple rule of physics for decades.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Scientists understand quite well how that works. You don't, walleyed, in spite of your Dunning-Kruger Effect inspired belief that you are smarter and know more than all of those climate scientists. All you've got are the denier cult myths, misunderstandings and deliberate distortions of the science that you scraped off of some denier cult blog.

The shortwave radiation coming from the sun heats the oceans up to several hundred feet in depth. When the ocean waters are warmer than the air, as they tend to be on average around the planet, they emit some of that heat into the atmosphere as long wave infrared radiation. Some of that heat from the sun is also transferred horizontally or vertically by currents or into the atmosphere by evaporation. There is something that scientists refer to as the 'skin layer', approximately 1mm thick, at the ocean's surface, that is in direct contact with the atmosphere and from which the longwave radiation is emitted. This skin layer controls the ocean to atmosphere (or vice-versa when the air is warmer than the water) heat transfer. Reducing the size of the temperature gradient through the skin layer reduces that flux. Therefore, when downdwelling long wave radiation from the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere strike the ocean surface, while it does only penetrate about one micron, it nevertheless is absorbed by and heats that very thin surface layer and thus reduces the flow of heat from the ocean beneath, causing more of the heat in the upper ocean to remain there to increase water temperatures. Scientists have discovered experimental evidence of this heat transfer mechanism by going out on the oceans and directly measuring the ocean skin temperatures and the upper ocean temperatures.

As usual, your understanding of physics is shallow and incomplete and largely based on the misinformation and pseudo-science that your denier cult blogs pass to you from the propagandists working for the fossil fuel industry.

Very good. Let's see some papers dealing with that.

 

[Kosh]

I have seen nothing but AGW propaganda that has been debunked.

CO2 does NOT drive climate, which is science fact.

 

[ScienceRocks]

What does? The sun that we're currently within one of the quietest periods since the 1910's.

 

[RollingThunder]

And under the permafrost are trees and other green things.

You're really getting delusional now, walleyed. Under the permafrost you often find partially decayed organic matter. There is nothing "green" there, except possibly some half frozen slime.

What does that tell you?

As always, it tells me that you're an ignorant denier cult retard who has no idea what you're talking about.

A thinking person would say hmmm, that means it was warmer then.

An actual "thinking person", which obviously is not you, would say: "warmer than" when exactly???

WHAT IS PERMAFROST?
THE INTERNATIONAL PERMAFROST ASSOCIATION

The thickness of permafrost varies from less than one meter to more than 1500 meters (4,900 feet). Most of the permafrost existing today formed during cold glacial periods, and has persisted through warmer interglacial periods, including the Holocene (last 10,000 years).

BTW how do you address the very real problem I enumerated above, namely your precious long wave radiation not being able to penetrate deeply enough into the oceans to warm them?

I already addressed that "very" imaginary "problem" by explaining the actual science involved and showing once again that you are a scientifically ignorant denier cult retard parroting the misinformation you dredge out the pseudo-scientific denier cult blogs.

Yes, permafrost is fairly young for the most part.

Nope, wrong again, sparky.

Most of the permafrost is hundreds of thousands of years old, as the expert source that I just quoted clearly stated. "Most of the permafrost existing today formed during cold glacial periods, and has persisted through warmer interglacial periods, including the Holocene (last 10,000 years)."

I found this interesting... And I seem to recall them finding green plant under permafrost in the Alaska area. I could be wrong, but I think not.

From 1550 to 1580, the period of cooling known as the Little Ice Age hit Ellesmere Island, in extreme northern Nunavut, Canada. As temperatures plunged, most of the island was swallowed by the advance of glaciers. The vegetation that had blanketed the terrain—mostly mosses and lichens—was buried under dozens of feet of ice.

In recent years, the reverse has happened. As a result of climate change, glaciers around the world have retreated rapidly, and Ellesmere Island has been no exception. The island’s Teardrop Glacier has retreated more than 650 feet, revealing numerous clumps of blackened, seemingly dead vegetation such as mosses and lichens that had been frozen for centuries.

But some of the vegetation was in fact far from dead. A research team from the University of Alberta led by Catherine La Farge surveyed the area revealed by the retreat of Teardrop Glacier and noticed that some of the largely blackened plants, including several mosses, had small green stems and lateral branches growing from them, indicating that they were experiencing recent growth.

Plants Frozen Under a Glacier for 400 Years Can Come Back to Life | Surprising Science

Now that is just plain hilarious, walleyed. You've just very clearly demonstrated to everybody reading this thread that you don't know the difference between permafrost and glaciers. So much for your delusional pretensions that you know anything about science or even understand what we're talking about.

BTW, the top line in this last quote from your post is yours but the next three paragraphs are not your words, they are from the article you're citing. You're supposed to acknowledge that difference a lot more clearly, even if it's just putting quote marks at the beginning and end. Bad walleyed.

 

[jon_berzerk]

What does? The sun that we're currently within one of the quietest periods since the 1910's.

we may be heading into a grand minimum

although i hope not

the peoples always do better in warmer years

then colder ones

 

[RollingThunder]

the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones

Perhaps you should go and explain your crackpot theory to the survivors of the 70,000 people who died in the 2003 European heat wave and the survivors of the 15,000 who died in the 2010 Russian heat wave. You might even make it back alive, you poor deluded moron.

 

[jon_berzerk]

the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones

Perhaps you should go and explain your crackpot theory to the survivors of the 70,000 people who died in the 2003 European heat wave and the survivors of the 15,000 who died in the 2010 Russian heat wave. You might even make it back alive, you poor deluded moron.

30 November 2013

It emerged this week that there were 31,000 ‘excess’ deaths in England and Wales last winter, almost a third more than the previous year. Almost all were, in effect, British pensioners who died of the cold.

It’s odd: Britain is a rich country with a massive welfare state — and we know how to heat and insulate houses. We also send millions away in overseas aid. Yet somehow we have failed to find a way to stop our own people dying of the cold. Each winter, we tolerate a death toll which runs into the tens of thousands. Worse, we seem to have become inured to it.

The 2003 heatwave was blamed for 2,000 deaths, and treated as a national emergency. Sir David King, then chief scientific officer, declared that this meant climate change was ‘more serious even than the threat of terrorism’.

Since then, some 280,000 Brits have died from the cold and barely 10,000 from the heat. We have been focusing on the wrong enemy.

Our enemy is not global warming. In Britain, people are dying of the cold » The Spectator

wake up and get your head of al gore ass

 

[ScienceRocks]

So let's throw all of climate science out the window. Because I almighty grass roots feels that they know it all.

Look out side it is fucking snowing!!!!

 

[Kosh]

So let's throw all of climate science out the window. Because I almighty grass roots feels that they know it all.

Look out side it is fucking snowing!!!!

However AGW is not science and thus throwing it out the window would be the best thing to happen in the real science community in a very long time.

 

[RollingThunder]

the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones

Perhaps you should go and explain your crackpot theory to the survivors of the 70,000 people who died in the 2003 European heat wave and the survivors of the 15,000 who died in the 2010 Russian heat wave. You might even make it back alive, you poor deluded moron.

30 November 2013l

It emerged this week that there were 31,000 ‘excess’ deaths in England and Wales last winter, almost a third more than the previous year. Almost all were, in effect, British pensioners who died of the cold.

It’s odd: Britain is a rich country with a massive welfare state — and we know how to heat and insulate houses. We also send millions away in overseas aid. Yet somehow we have failed to find a way to stop our own people dying of the cold. Each winter, we tolerate a death toll which runs into the tens of thousands. Worse, we seem to have become inured to it.

The 2003 heatwave was blamed for 2,000 deaths, and treated as a national emergency. Sir David King, then chief scientific officer, declared that this meant climate change was ‘more serious even than the threat of terrorism’.

Since then, some 280,000 Brits have died from the cold and barely 10,000 from the heat. We have been focusing on the wrong enemy.

Our enemy is not global warming. In Britain, people are dying of the cold » The Spectator

wake up and get your head of al gore ass

Your initial claim that "the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones" was completely debunked by the number of recent deaths in just a few of the heat waves that have been happening around the world. And by the fact that the human race has survived through major ice ages. It is far easier to warm up with thick clothing and fires than it is to cool down when temperatures get so hot, people start dying of heat stroke in the streets.

The Spectator is a far right wing newspaper that often prints denier cult propaganda. Wake up and jerk your head out of Rupert Murdoch's ass, JerkoffBerzerkoff.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Thank god it is starting to warm up

 

[westwall]

the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones

Perhaps you should go and explain your crackpot theory to the survivors of the 70,000 people who died in the 2003 European heat wave and the survivors of the 15,000 who died in the 2010 Russian heat wave. You might even make it back alive, you poor deluded moron.

70,000? Wow, when you lie, you go DOUBLE even the most wildly generous estimates. What's funny is only wiki has 70,000. They use the numbers from the study I provided and then doubled them and you're too fucking lazy or stupid to check them. Typical dumbshit propagandist.

So, what's the real number? Peer reviewed studies put it at 23,982 far, far from your ridiculous 70,000.



"• France – 14,802 deaths. Experienced seven consecuBve days of
temperatures above 40°C.
• UK – 2,139 deaths. Record‐breaking temperature of 38.5 °C (101.3 °F) was
recorded on August 10, 2003. Rail travel was disrupted across the country
(rails buckling), and the London Eye shut down due to excessive heat in the
ferris‐wheel pods.
• Italy – Approx. 3000 deaths. Temperatures were around 38 °C (100 °F) in
most ciBes for weeks.
• Portugal – 2100 deaths. Extensive forest fires. 1st of August recorded as
hoJest day in centuries (8 °C/118 °F).
• Holland – 1,500 deaths. Heat wave broke no records.
• Spain – 141 deaths. Records broken in mulBple ciBes.
• Germany – 300 deaths. Records broken in mulBple ciBes. Rivers were at
their lowest recorded level this century, affecBng shipping across the Elbe
and Danube river.
• Switzerland – MelBng glaciers in the Alps caused avalanches and flash
floods. NaBonwide record temperature of 41.5 °C (106.7 °F) recorded in
Grono, Graubünden."


http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2009Q1/111/ATMS111 Presentations/Folder 1/CampbellS.pdf

 

[westwall]

So let's throw all of climate science out the window. Because I almighty grass roots feels that they know it all.

Look out side it is fucking snowing!!!!

God, you sound just like my 7 year old daughter when she doesn't get her way. Seriously dude, grow up.

 

[westwall]

Perhaps you should go and explain your crackpot theory to the survivors of the 70,000 people who died in the 2003 European heat wave and the survivors of the 15,000 who died in the 2010 Russian heat wave. You might even make it back alive, you poor deluded moron.

30 November 2013l

It emerged this week that there were 31,000 ‘excess’ deaths in England and Wales last winter, almost a third more than the previous year. Almost all were, in effect, British pensioners who died of the cold.

It’s odd: Britain is a rich country with a massive welfare state — and we know how to heat and insulate houses. We also send millions away in overseas aid. Yet somehow we have failed to find a way to stop our own people dying of the cold. Each winter, we tolerate a death toll which runs into the tens of thousands. Worse, we seem to have become inured to it.

The 2003 heatwave was blamed for 2,000 deaths, and treated as a national emergency. Sir David King, then chief scientific officer, declared that this meant climate change was ‘more serious even than the threat of terrorism’.

Since then, some 280,000 Brits have died from the cold and barely 10,000 from the heat. We have been focusing on the wrong enemy.

Our enemy is not global warming. In Britain, people are dying of the cold » The Spectator

wake up and get your head of al gore ass

Your initial claim that "the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones" was completely debunked by the number of recent deaths in just a few of the heat waves that have been happening around the world. And by the fact that the human race has survived through major ice ages. It is far easier to warm up with thick clothing and fires than it is to cool down when temperatures get so hot, people start dying of heat stroke in the streets.

The Spectator is a far right wing newspaper that often prints denier cult propaganda. Wake up and jerk your head out of Rupert Murdoch's ass, JerkoffBerzerkoff.

Bullcrap. Recent history, you know, where man could actually WRITE about what was going on in the world around him shows you to be full of crap. The Roman Warming period was warmer than today and Roman Culture flourished. The Renaissance occurred during the MWP. China has 2000 years of records and they show that when it was cold there was war, famine and pestilence.

You see moron, when it's cold it's hard to grow food. It's not just about keeping warm. It's about eating dip shit. I am constantly amazed at the level of your stupidity...

Look up the pan-European famine of 1816-17 when severe cold (probably from volcanic activity) caused crops to fail worldwide. Here's a starter for you.

God you're dumb, I mean can't wipe your ass dumb...


"Report of the Famine and Hyperinflation of 1816 and 1817
A report by Mayor David Friedrich Lederer* of 17 August 1817. From the Bürger-und
Notabilienbuch
[Translator’s note: A powerful eruption of the Indonesian volcano Tambora (1815) was
followed by one to two years of unusually cold climate around the world. In Europe,
harvests were either late or failed altogether, grain prices peaked and famine was
widespread. During the summer of 1816, the USA experienced a widespread snowfall.
The years 1816, 1817 and 1818 had some of the coldest Northern Hemisphere summers
on record. Mayor Lederer no doubt had no idea of the underlying cause of the famine he
describes below.]
As a result of bad harvests, Southwest Germany experienced severe famine in 1816-1817.
The agricultural distress reached its high point in 1817. The worst could be averted only
by grain imports. Thousands of Wüttembergers emigrated to escape the misery. Prices
for food stuff increased two to five fold. The King and government took pains to
alleviated the need by all means. Mayor Lederer reports:"




http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~... and Hhe Hyper-Inflation of 1816 and 1817.pdf

 

[flacaltenn]

I know my grass stops growing at about 65degF...
I'd have 2 more months off the tractor if the temp dropped a couple degrees..

 

[RollingThunder]

the peoples always do better in warmer years then colder ones

Perhaps you should go and explain your crackpot theory to the survivors of the 70,000 people who died in the 2003 European heat wave and the survivors of the 15,000 who died in the 2010 Russian heat wave. You might even make it back alive, you poor deluded moron.

70,000? Wow, when you lie, you go DOUBLE even the most wildly generous estimates. What's funny is only wiki has 70,000. They use the numbers from the study I provided and then doubled them and you're too fucking lazy or stupid to check them. Typical dumbshit propagandist.
So, what's the real number? Peer reviewed studies put it at 23,982 far, far from your ridiculous 70,000.

Uh-huh....riiiiight...."only Wiki" eh? And only 24,000 deaths...wow, that hardly any at all...you dumb shit....

From a European scientific journal of biological science, here is a peer reviewed paper published in 2008, almost five years after that heat wave, after they had ample time to study the event.

Death toll exceeded 70,000 in Europe during the summer of 2003
Comptes Rendus Biologies
Volume 331, Issue 2, February 2008, Pages 171–178
Epidemiology / Épidémiologie
Jean-Marie Robinea, , , Siu Lan K. Cheunga, Sophie Le Roya, Herman Van Oyenb, Clare Griffithsc, Jean-Pierre Micheld, François Richard Herrmannd
a INSERM, Démographie et santé, CRLC, centre Val-d'Aurelle, parc Euromédecine, 34298 Montpellier cedex 5, France
b Unit of Epidemiology, Scientific Institute of Public Health, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, 1050 Bruxelles, Belgium
c Office of National Statistics, Mortality Statistics, 1 Drummond Gate, London SW1V 2QQ, London, UK
d Department of Rehabilitation and Geriatrics, Geneva Medical School and University Hospitals, 3, ch. Pont-Bochet, 1226 Thonex-Genève, Switzerland

Abstract
Daily numbers of deaths at a regional level were collected in 16 European countries. Summer mortality was analyzed for the reference period 1998–2002 and for 2003. More than 70,000 additional deaths occurred in Europe during the summer 2003. Major distortions occurred in the age distribution of the deaths, but no harvesting effect was observed in the months following August 2003. Global warming constitutes a new health threat in an aged Europe that may be difficult to detect at the country level, depending on its size. Centralizing the count of daily deaths on an operational geographical scale constitutes a priority for Public Health in Europe.