Ah, how constructive: Climate alarmist: millions will die I point out the research showing: 1) none will die 2) very few will move And then PhD in chemistry joins —not with a substantial contribution (maybe challenging my points) but instead trying to disallow conversationhttps://twitter.com/GeraldKutney/status/1135634908263661568 …
-
So what is your definition of an "alarmist" again; is it someone that says "millions will die."
Alarmist: someone who *incorrectly* say millions will die, when right number close to ~zero Not a complicated definition, I would think
-
-
Temperatures rise about 37C wet bulb in the Ganges Valley is the recipe for million die. You, of course, are willing to risk that. As we entered June they went about 50 C and yes Bjorn people died
-
And you focus on avoiding the 4,700 extreme heat deaths, while ignoring the 200,000+ cold deaths, that need higher incomes (and cheap energy) to be avoided You literally decide to focus on the smallest death category, because it fits your preconceptions https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002619.t002 …pic.twitter.com/D3zHbaF83n
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
So if food production declines by 50%, no one dies?
-
Low food production is generally a result of cooling temperatures. Warming trends lead to longer growing seasons and ultimately more food production per acre. Famines have largely disappeared since about 1980, despite supposed global warming and growing population.pic.twitter.com/kez90zgkJ7
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.