You might consider reading at least the abstract of the paper before responding with such dismissive hostility, especially when the subject relates to life-thre

You might consider reading at least the abstract of the paper before responding with such dismissive hostility, especially when the subject relates to life-threatening risks to millions of people within the foreseeable future. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0525-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0525-6 > We show that ‘TC–heat’ events are already possible along densely populated coastlines globally but, to date, only an estimated 1,000 people have been impacted. However, this number could rise markedly with over two million at risk under a storyline of the observed TCs recurring in a world 2 °C warmer than pre-industrial times. Using analogues as focusing events we show, for example, that if the catastrophic 1991 Bangladesh cyclone occurred with 2 °C global warming, there would be >70% chance of subsequent dangerous heat. This research highlights a gap in adaptation planning and a need to prepare for an emerging TC–heat compound hazard. They also cite some past work you might find informative, e.g. https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/joc.2257 https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/joc.2...