3 ms·
Without bound, exactly. OP cannot be serious or this is deep sarcasm, or another form of climate denial? Sure, you can die of cold, and given technology at som
by lb0 5y ago
Without bound, exactly. OP cannot be serious or this is deep sarcasm, or another form of climate denial?
Sure, you can die of cold, and given technology at some level it becomes really too cold for reasonable habitability, but that is quite low in relation to what we see around the world.
And even our far ancestors could already "avoid" cold by just making fire, shelters, putting on cloth. Today we have whole cities built in permafrost, enduring -40°C temperatures just fine.. with the right clothing put on you can even survive outside for a significant amount of time.
If it is getting too hot (imagine 5°C over wet bulb temperature or more) there is nothing we can do but shelter in with air condition and hope electricity keeps going (which also becomes a problem at certain temperature), no going outside anymore.
AC is only omnipresent in the US, very recent modern technology, but even in the richest countries in Europe most have none at home or even work.. (it is just normal). Sure we riches can buy one, but situation around the world is very different.
Ok clarified, I'm just being Captain Obvious here, and OP must be another form of climate change denial.
- Anunayj 5y agoMany people die of cold each year, many people die of heat. Therefore we should just cook this planet alive and die.
- SiVal 5y agoSorry, but are you saying that, now that we have fire and clothing and "whole cities in permafrost", hardly anybody really dies of cold anymore? That it's mostly a myth? That the news and weather people on television who worry every winter about what they call "dangerous conditions tonight for homeless people" are just spreading "misinformation" as "deep sarcasm or another form of climate denial"? Large numbers of people really do, even today, die of both cold and heat. That's one of the dangers for for people who are homeless or too poor to pay to heat their homes properly. If temperatures change, the change in death rates should be measured using the overall change in death rates, not just the change in heat deaths. If that statement about measuring the overall impact of climate change on death rates using net change in death rates constitutes "climate change denial" for you, then a "form of climate change denial" is a form of religious heresy for you, and there's no point arguing mere statistical matters.
- lb0 5y ago> Sorry, but are you saying that, now that we have fire and clothing and "whole cities in permafrost", hardly anybody really dies of cold anymore? No, but how & how many people die to cold right now will be significantly different to how & how many people may die due to heat in the future due to climate change. It is really just a strawman apples to oranges comparison to make here at all, because also: And I'm further saying that climate change will likely also not change due to how many people die to cold right now.. where do you have this from? We get more persistant extremes both directions, right now! > no point arguing mere statistical matters. That's cheap... so no numbers or relative scale?
- rufus_foreman 5y ago>> Sure, you can die of cold, and given technology at some level it becomes really too cold for reasonable habitability, but that is quite low in relation to what we see around the world There's an entire continent, larger than Europe or Australia, that has zero permanent residents because it is too cold for reasonable habitability.