Global Warming Health Threat?

[Hayen Mill]

GLOBAL WARMING HEALTH THREAT?

Despite the clear timeframe of the two following news that come from BBC, one really has to wonder if the consequences of Global Warming can have some positive side or none at all. It is ultimately up to the reader that he must look the matter by himself in order to find out the truth.

Consider the following two news:

“Climate change is “the biggest global health threat of the 21st Century”, according to a leading medical journal…

...

“The risk of a fatal heatwave in the UK within ten years is high, but overall global warming may mean fewer deaths due to temperature, a report says…

Despite the more tragic news having appeared later, it never mentions the previous one and whether the initial news report was accurate or not.

What are your thoughts on this seeming contradiction?

 

[FactFinder]

There is no contradiction because they are just theories based on AGW theory that is all but totally debunked. In case you haven't been outside lately we are in a naturally occurring cyclical cooling period. No sunspots, low solar irradiance and low solar winds.

See spaceweather.com

Sunspot number: 0
What is the sunspot number?
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 3 days
2009 total: 130 days (78%)
Since 2004: 641 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
explanation | more info
Updated 15 Jun 2009

 

[Oddball]

What are your thoughts on this seeming contradiction?

Total bunk.


More people die from extreme cold than extreme heat.

 

[Hayen Mill]

There is no contradiction because they are just theories based on AGW theory that is all but totally debunked. In case you haven't been outside lately we are in a naturally occurring cyclical cooling period. No sunspots, low solar irradiance and low solar winds.

See spaceweather.com

Sunspot number: 0
What is the sunspot number?
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 3 days
2009 total: 130 days (78%)
Since 2004: 641 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
explanation | more info
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Yeah i was only assuming it was a contradiction by ASSUMING the actual threat of global warming to be true. However, i think this counts as a nice example of how often negative alarmistic news are more often talked about in the media rather than the "heat-may-not-kill-at-all " type of news.

By the way, i've been in the skeptical GW scene for a while, and I was wondering if anyone knew any more very credible facts that come straight from scientific research, because all i've got so far is globalwarminghoax and globalwarmingswindle to go by, so a really down-to-earth website with the FACTS would be of great help. A relatively well known scientific website would do. Any help appreciated.

 

[k2skier]

There is no contradiction because they are just theories based on AGW theory that is all but totally debunked. In case you haven't been outside lately we are in a naturally occurring cyclical cooling period. No sunspots, low solar irradiance and low solar winds.

See spaceweather.com

Sunspot number: 0
What is the sunspot number?
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 3 days
2009 total: 130 days (78%)
Since 2004: 641 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
explanation | more info
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Yeah i was only assuming it was a contradiction by ASSUMING the actual threat of global warming to be true. However, i think this counts as a nice example of how often negative alarmistic news are more often talked about in the media rather than the "heat-may-not-kill-at-all " type of news.

By the way, i've been in the skeptical GW scene for a while, and I was wondering if anyone knew any more very credible facts that come straight from scientific research, because all i've got so far is globalwarminghoax and globalwarmingswindle to go by, so a really down-to-earth website with the FACTS would be of great help. A relatively well known scientific website would do. Any help appreciated.

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

 

[Tech_Esq]

There is no contradiction because they are just theories based on AGW theory that is all but totally debunked. In case you haven't been outside lately we are in a naturally occurring cyclical cooling period. No sunspots, low solar irradiance and low solar winds.

See spaceweather.com

Sunspot number: 0
What is the sunspot number?
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 3 days
2009 total: 130 days (78%)
Since 2004: 641 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
explanation | more info
Updated 15 Jun 2009

Yeah i was only assuming it was a contradiction by ASSUMING the actual threat of global warming to be true. However, i think this counts as a nice example of how often negative alarmistic news are more often talked about in the media rather than the "heat-may-not-kill-at-all " type of news.

By the way, i've been in the skeptical GW scene for a while, and I was wondering if anyone knew any more very credible facts that come straight from scientific research, because all i've got so far is globalwarminghoax and globalwarmingswindle to go by, so a really down-to-earth website with the FACTS would be of great help. A relatively well known scientific website would do. Any help appreciated.

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

You're still buying that crap?

Hey K2, wanna buy a bridge? It'll come in handy when those waters start to rise and all....

 

[Hayen Mill]

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

apologies if i expressed myself correctly; i meant Anthropogenic/man-made Global Warming.

By the way, there are some threads on this forum that show how some ice caps are not melting, but remaining stable or advancing, do you suppose these are the GW deniers?

anyway, let me re-express my wish: a scientific website with scientific data that shows, or assumes that there is little chance human beings are actually causing this, either because temperature and CO2 are not cause-effect, but correlation, or because the measures proposed by Kyoto are impossible to accomplish anything, or any other FACT that can show and demonstrate humans should not be the first to blame after all, and we should look into every possible scenario before making assumptions and engaging in measures that will change lives.

 

[Oddball]

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

"Credible" as in credible to you.

The latest statistics also show that the current temperature cycle peaked in '98, and that the last two years have cooled to the point that the increase has been nullified.

 

[k2skier]

Credible to anyone that uses logic. Yes, there are some way off the deep end that spew the world is coming to an end, which is nothing more than fear mongering.

Global warming controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On April 29, 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore revealed that a list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares"[25] distributed by the Heartland Institute included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as "coauthors" of the article, nor agreed with its contents.[26] Many of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list.

 

[code1211]

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

apologies if i expressed myself correctly; i meant Anthropogenic/man-made Global Warming.

By the way, there are some threads on this forum that show how some ice caps are not melting, but remaining stable or advancing, do you suppose these are the GW deniers?

anyway, let me re-express my wish: a scientific website with scientific data that shows, or assumes that there is little chance human beings are actually causing this, either because temperature and CO2 are not cause-effect, but correlation, or because the measures proposed by Kyoto are impossible to accomplish anything, or any other FACT that can show and demonstrate humans should not be the first to blame after all, and we should look into every possible scenario before making assumptions and engaging in measures that will change lives.

The problem with most sites is that they are mostly agenda driven. globalwarmingart.com is a good site that I think is actual a pro-AGW but one that presents data in graphic form and allows the viewer, even a scietific illiterate as myself to see what is being recorded in the way of data.

I don't know of any unbiased sites beyond that one. Real climate is a bought and paid for shill for the CO2 is bad and Mankind is worse crowd and a site from the Universtity of West Virginia is a pretty slanted one in favor of CO2 being just one of the boys in an atmospheric gas sense.

Just gather info and see what makes sense and what won't pass the smell test.

 

[FactFinder]

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

apologies if i expressed myself correctly; i meant Anthropogenic/man-made Global Warming.

By the way, there are some threads on this forum that show how some ice caps are not melting, but remaining stable or advancing, do you suppose these are the GW deniers?

anyway, let me re-express my wish: a scientific website with scientific data that shows, or assumes that there is little chance human beings are actually causing this, either because temperature and CO2 are not cause-effect, but correlation, or because the measures proposed by Kyoto are impossible to accomplish anything, or any other FACT that can show and demonstrate humans should not be the first to blame after all, and we should look into every possible scenario before making assumptions and engaging in measures that will change lives.

Here's a blog that has been by all accounts credible.
Where have all the sunspots gone? « Watts Up With That?

 

[KittenKoder]

There are no credible sites that debunk GW because it isn't bunk, AGW "MAY" be but not GW, it's statistically a fact, we're warming, and the ice melting all over the world is first hand proof it's not bunk.

apologies if i expressed myself correctly; i meant Anthropogenic/man-made Global Warming.

By the way, there are some threads on this forum that show how some ice caps are not melting, but remaining stable or advancing, do you suppose these are the GW deniers?

anyway, let me re-express my wish: a scientific website with scientific data that shows, or assumes that there is little chance human beings are actually causing this, either because temperature and CO2 are not cause-effect, but correlation, or because the measures proposed by Kyoto are impossible to accomplish anything, or any other FACT that can show and demonstrate humans should not be the first to blame after all, and we should look into every possible scenario before making assumptions and engaging in measures that will change lives.

Here's a blog that has been by all accounts credible.
Where have all the sunspots gone? « Watts Up With That?

The funny thing is, if the solar activity doesn't increase then solar power will not even be a pipe dream ... LOL