Dr Indur Goklany, who was a member of the delegation that set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and helped developed its first assessment report, has slammed a WHO report of 250,000 deaths/year from global warming between 2030 and 2050 as preposterous.
The WHO’s released in the run up to the UN Summit on climate change in September claims that 95,000 more people would die each year from malnutrition, 60,000 from malaria, 48,000 from diarrhea and 38,000 elderly who would die from heat exposure, all because of the global warming hypothesis.
Dr. Goklany’s rebuttal published by The Global Warming Policy Foundation, called “Unhealthy Exaggeration, The Who Report On Climate Change (embedded below) points out the WHO report account for the human species’ ability to adapt. In other words, like most progressive predictions it assumes that mankind is too stupid to adapt.
The briefing sheet put out with the study does not explain the assumptions made when creating the predictions. Rather, that info is buried in a summary table in the full report. Under the column heading “potential options not included in the model” is the revelation that the diarrhea prediction does not include the possibility of “improved water, sanitation and hygiene”; that coastal flooding deaths do not include “population relocation”, and that deaths by exposure to heat aren’t avoided through “improved heat health protection measures; early warning systems”.
Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses? (1)
According to Dr. Goklany the WHO report predicting the scale of deaths from global warming in decades to come has exaggerated the threat ten-fold.
Dr Goklany writes in the report embedded below
It [the WHO] ignores the fact that people and societies are not potted plants; that they will actually take steps to reduce, if not nullify, real or perceived threats to their life, limb and well-being. Thus, if the seas rise around them, heatwaves become more prevalent, or malaria, diarrhoeal disease and hunger spread, they will undertake adaptation measures to protect themselves and reduce, if not eliminate, the adverse consequences.
The WHO study assumes, explicitly or implicitly, that in the future the most vulnerable populations – low income countries in Africa, Europe, southeast Asia and the western Pacific – will not similarly avail themselves of technology or take any commonsense steps to protect themselves. This is despite many suitable measures already existing.
The question over adaptation is not the only criticism Dr Goklany levels at the report. Also problematic is the WHO’s exaggeration on the rate of global warming – they predict a temperature increase of 0.15˚C per decade, whereas empirical evidence from the MET office shows current warming of 0.04˚C per decade. And satellite data shows there has been no global warming for over 18 years.
Dr. Goklany concludes:
Because of its willful exaggerations, he WHO study risks scaring people into taking ill-considered costly actions to limit greenhouse gases rather than focusing on higher priority global health issues such as hunger, malaria and diarrhoeal diseases, which can be addressed at a fraction of the cost.
Read the full report below: